What's wrong with Unions?

What is wrong with unions. Well Besides Corruption and connections to organized crime.

OK, calling for references as evidence of your claim.

The real problem is they Push for more and more benefits and pay for their workers at any cost.

That is the capitalist aim, yes? The idea behind capitalists to is rise up above the guy ahead of you. So are you a socialist who wants workers to all be paid the same?

In cases like the UAW to the point that the companies they rely on for their jobs, can not compete and be competitive in the market because of Ridicules operating costs and outrageous Union Demands.

Did the company negotiate contracts with the union? Why would they do that if they are not competitive? In otherwords you are not making any sense.


Unions are a classic case of a good thing gone bad. Something started for the most noble and Real Reasons that has now become detrimental to entire industries and therefore the people they represent.

I see nothing going bad because of unions, and what "entire industries" are you refering to? Provide a reference.
 
Oh believe me I am not saying Business has clean hands. I am simply pointing out that many Unions seem to ignore that what they demand of their Industries has an effect on the ability of that industry to compete in the global Market.

LOL! The only way you can compete in the global market is pay wages that reflect the global market. So regardles of union or scab, you cannot compete 1 on 1.


The UAW is but one example but it is a good one. The left tries to blame the Car companies problems on poor decision on their part. Yes they made some and it did not help, but anyone with a clear head can see that the Main Problem with the US car companies is How much of the cost of each care is eaten up by Pension plans, Health care and wages that are the TOP in the world.

So you are saying, workers should have living wages, benefits or retirement pensions, and that is the problem for globalization. So you want Americans to earn the global wage rate, somewhere between a chinese labor and a Mexican pottery maker.

Look at the public Sector unions. Why do you think Federal Government employees make twice as much as their Private sector counter parts. If the Government was a for profit business it would go out of business and a large part of the reason why would be the Unrealistic demands of the Public Sector unions.

I don't see them making twice as much as the private sector. Have references? And once again, contracts are negotiated and agreed by both sides, not just one.
 
I am not sure why conservatives fear and dislike unions. It seems they operate in a conservative fashion, and continue building America and making it a better place. What's wrong with Unions?
This conservative isn't a fan of corruption. That's why.

Where is the corruption? Have a reference?
 
Translation: Shintao is a functional illiterate regarding history, economics, philosophy, sociology, and political systems.
 
I am not sure why conservatives fear and dislike unions. It seems they operate in a conservative fashion, and continue building America and making it a better place. What's wrong with Unions?
This conservative isn't a fan of corruption. That's why.

Where is the corruption? Have a reference?

If we produced evidence of union corruption, would you come back and say "yes, as you say unions have corruption"? Or would you impugn the source, make sweeping generalizations, say the evidence doesnt cover every union that has ever existed from the beginning of time or just walk away?
If someone does the work, will you actually respond appropriately?
 
Since you say it is crap, that proves it is absolutely true.
Thank you.

Here is an example of the pay scale for a software engineer by employer. Obviously government jobs do not pay double private sector jobs when you compare the SAME JOB in each sector. If you notice some private sector SW engineers earn more and some earn less but nowhere do gov SW engineers earn double the private sector!!!!

by_Employer_Type.png


You only say it's crap because your MessiahRushie told you and you are STUPID enough to believe him.

Federal Worker Compensation Doubles Private Sector Salaries
August 10, 2010
RUSH: The average compensation 2009, federal civilian, meaning non-uniform military, is $123,049."* Of that $81,000 is salary, $41,000 is benefits.* Benefits are health care, pension, whatever the hell else the benefits are.* In the private sector, the amount is $61,000: $50,000 of it in salary and 10,000 in benefits.

hey Eddie....you were talking about how CONSERVATIVES determine pay.....i said BULLSHIT.....it had nothing to do with who makes how much.....they do it the same way Democrat big shots do it......here is your twisted post...
""The way the dishonest GOP think tanks generated that deliberately misleading stat was by comparing all jobs combined. In reality there is a very different mix of jobs in the government and private sectors.

Government jobs have more high paying white collar jobs and the private sector has more low paying blue collar jobs, so it is dishonest to compare total jobs between both sectors, which is exactly why CON$ use only that comparison. The only honest way to compare the two sectors is to compare the SAME JOB in one sector to the SAME JOB in the other sector, which dishonest CON$ will never do.""

and if what you say about the money White Collar guys make was true....the PMG would be making well into the millions for the kinda money the PO brings in.....he doesnt even hit a million.....the UPS guy makes 27-28 hr...i do 24.....
 
I am not sure why conservatives fear and dislike unions. It seems they operate in a conservative fashion, and continue building America and making it a better place. What's wrong with Unions?

There was nothing initially wrong with unions. What has gone awry is that unions have turned into a political strong-arm, and, in part, put American workers in the manufacturing industry out of business by making it impossible to be competitive in a global economy.

You have to understand, that unions =/= global economy. It has nothing to do with it when you realize NO American worker can compete with global wages, union or scab.
 
I am not sure why conservatives fear and dislike unions. It seems they operate in a conservative fashion, and continue building America and making it a better place. What's wrong with Unions?

There was nothing initially wrong with unions. What has gone awry is that unions have turned into a political strong-arm, and, in part, put American workers in the manufacturing industry out of business by making it impossible to be competitive in a global economy.

You have to understand, that unions =/= global economy. It has nothing to do with it when you realize NO American worker can compete with global wages, union or scab.

Well, German workers are better paid than American ones. And they seem to be doing fine, relatively speaking, with Germany one of the top exporting countries in the world.
Do you make this shit up or just repeat what the voices in your head tell you?
 
i'm not sure if this is a conservative/liberal issue. it is more a partisan one because of the democratic party's traditional alignment with union leadership. the younger union guys/gals i know are pretty conservative/neoconservative. the older guys are old-school democrats.

my concern with unions is that they have been isolated and sheltered from the competitive environment which has made american businesses in tune with the business environment. legislation aimed at protecting union privilege has afforded them this position which in the end does not seem to render them a service to their clients -- neither their employees nor the companies which contract them.

another presumption from the OP which i think is out of line with reality is that unions have played a role in bettering america. i think history shows unions as bettering america for themselves. the evolution of labor and equality for the rest of americans is entirely independent.

i dont believe that unions should be destroyed. i think that unions, their clients, and america will benefit from revisiting union legislation to reinvent organized skilled labor for this century, rather than the last. the overriding goal will be greater exposure to competition which i feel will improve unions over time.
 
What is wrong with unions. Well Besides Corruption and connections to organized crime.

OK, calling for references as evidence of your claim.

The real problem is they Push for more and more benefits and pay for their workers at any cost.

That is the capitalist aim, yes? The idea behind capitalists to is rise up above the guy ahead of you. So are you a socialist who wants workers to all be paid the same?

In cases like the UAW to the point that the companies they rely on for their jobs, can not compete and be competitive in the market because of Ridicules operating costs and outrageous Union Demands.

Did the company negotiate contracts with the union? Why would they do that if they are not competitive? In otherwords you are not making any sense.


Unions are a classic case of a good thing gone bad. Something started for the most noble and Real Reasons that has now become detrimental to entire industries and therefore the people they represent.

I see nothing going bad because of unions, and what "entire industries" are you refering to? Provide a reference.

I provided answers to all your questions in my post. You just do not want to hear them.
 
Seniority.

Seniority is what's wrong with unions?

Seniority in unions? Not sure what you mean. There is pay scale difference between an apprentice and a journeyman.


Actually, it's protecting workers who don't deserve to have the job.

Really? Why don't they deserve a job?



Pushing work onto others that have a good work ethic.

And does this happen among scabs? In otherwords, is it a common human behavior you are complaining about here? You would find that where ever two humans work together.


I've worked around companies that are union and from what I've seen, the ones with seniority are the ones that have the good work ethic and do their job.

So I assume you are referring to journeymen and apprentices on a job.

Actually the thing wrong with unions is that they are the ATM for the democratic party.

That is probably the most honest answer I will get on this thread. Now, ask yourself why that is true? Because the corporate leadership is the ATM of the Republican party. Now, ask yourself why that is true, and draw a conclusion to your two answers.
 
I'm no fan of unions for public employees. Civil service should be enough to shield them from nepotism,


:lol:.....your kidding right?.....you have never seen the inner workings of a Govt agency have you?.....Post Masters and the higher ups in the PO still play the Nepotism game in management.....we have a daughter of a district manager who has never worked in the PO who was given a station managers job pulling in around 80-85 thou a yr over dozens of qualified managers from around the country.....our PM aint happy,because the front line supervisors are carrying her.....but he cant do nothing.....if he wants to stay PM that is....
 
If you want to see exactly what's wrong with unions, look at the state of our K-12 education. Crappy educators are protected, tenure is more important than ability.

I suppose you would find crappy eductors where ever you look, and not just tied to a union, but tied to human behavior in general.


They are also a huge political machine that promotes itself as being non-partisan, but actually generates tens of MILLIONS of dollars for exclusively dem political candidates and policies.

Honestly, I wouldn't have a problem with unions at all...if they weren't a cash cow for politians.

And this is the real issue for you against unions. The ATM of the democrat arm.

Because I doubt you have a problem with tenure of crappy Boardmembers and CEOs who make mistakes and are protected, make more money & benefits, and are the ATM of the republican arm.
 
I don't see them making twice as much as the private sector. Have references? And once again, contracts are negotiated and agreed by both sides, not just one.

They don't make twice but its something like 30%-40% more. It was in the Wall Street Journal a few months ago. I was going to start a thread about it but didn't get around to it.

The problem with public sector unions is that the other side of the table is often on the same side of the union. The politicians have incentives to curry votes from government employees. So they give them what they want.
 
Unions distort the market for labor by imposing artificial constraints, in this case an artificial floor on total wages.

Nothing artificial about it, union members earn a negotiated wage for their labor, just as a CEO, or board member or football player, singer, actor, or sm business scab brick layer who signs a contract with a homeowner.

When workers are productive they earn more money. Regardless of union affiliation they will do so. Less productive and they earn less. Except in a union shop, they cannot earn, less by agreement. The result is non-competitive industries that eventually either need government subsidies to survive (e.g. GM) or go out of business (e.g. Penn Central).

The industry would be noncompetitive regardless of union or scab worker, because American workers cannot compete with global wages. So industries need subsidies to hide this fact and to survive.


There is not an industry in the U.S. where unions have played a big role that that industry has not experienced numerous bankruptcies and obsolescence. Not one.

Of course, you forgot to mention that the union had nothing to do with the bankruptcies, or the bankrupties of scab industries like ENRON.


The only saving grace for unions (which were all but extinct 10 years ago) has been government jobs, because there is no profit motive. So whatever unions can strong arm from the gov't the gov't will have to pay them.


Strongarm? LOL! You mean negotiate between two parties by contract, like a scab brick layer signing a contract with a private home owner, or big oil signing a contract with the government. Strong arm? LMAO!!!


And while unions have artificially raised wages within industries, they have lowered wages outside their own industries. This is called the drawbridge effect. Workers not covered by union agreement get treated less well simply because there is less money available for labor costs once unions have taken their cut. Higher unemployment and lower wages are the result.

Hmm, sounds like the people on the draw bridge should be union, huh?
 
Last edited:
I am not sure why conservatives fear and dislike unions. It seems they operate in a conservative fashion, and continue building America and making it a better place. What's wrong with Unions?

Conservatives do?.....i belong to a Union with many guys in it who are Conservative Republicans......so i guess you misspoke....:eusa_eh:

Go through this thread and see what your "Conservative Republicans" are saying about unions. Looks like they may not have a very high opinion of you.
 
Translation: Shintao is a functional illiterate regarding history, economics, philosophy, sociology, and political systems.

Translation: I just humped a clam, and haven't a clue what this thread is about.
 
Hmm, sounds like the people on the draw bridge should be union, huh?

No. Sounds like your whiny ignorant ass needs to be on ignore.

I've challenged you numerous times with facts and requests for what would constitute an acceptable argument. Silence.
You are a troll. Buh bye.
 

Forum List

Back
Top