Why you hate unions?

[Old_Liberal]

Union were needed once. Now there are laws and regulations to protect workers. Also you have things like OSHA.
If unions were needed to protect workers why is only 8% or so of the private workforce unionized?

If, as you say, only 8% of the workforce is unionized, then why all the hatred from the right?

I think it's more, but a lot of the hatred comes from the fact that many union workers work govrnment jobs, like teachers, or are contracted by the government like highway construction. Their pay comes out of everyone's pocket. If it's me, John Q. Taxpayer, essentially paying your salary, I would prefer you at least show me how you deserve more pay as opposed to a union dictating more really for no other reason than to justify their dues.

On top of that the irony of the whole thing is somewhat infuriating. Being honest, it's primarly dems and liberals that support unions. The same group of people that trust in government to solve their problems. One has to see the hypocrisy in a group of people that trusts and obligates government to make things better for people, while at the same time insisting the people must be protected from being treated unfairly as a government employee.

See that's the deal with me. I believe in unions, for the private sector, but not for the gov't sector. Since I consider myself an artifact, an old time Liberal, it is no surprise that this is in agreement with the greatest president in modern times, FDR.

I can recall a time when the pay for gov't workers was not that great, but they had really good benefits. I actually trust the federal gov't to be fair with their employees, and see no need for unions in this sector. The same applies to state gov'ts.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If you want a trade union job, yes. You have to report to the union hall to get assignments. Your name is on a list, jobs are offered to each person on the list. The worker can accept of decline the job. If they decline, they are moved to the bottom of the list to wait their turn again. At least, this is how it's supposed to work. In reality, the guys who run the lists will favor their buddies or other "friends" by offering them the best jobs or bumping them on the list. Exchange of favors is often a factor, too. If no jobs are available, the union can sanction you if you take non-union jobs. You pay dues whether you are working, or not.

Many labor unions don't even offer a list or assist their members to get jobs if they lose theirs.

And such a system never exists in a public or private company? Human nature is human nature whether a human is a public employee, a private sector employee or own their own company.

Most union members don't report to the hall and wait for work; most have demonstrated their skills and dependabilty and have been hired by private companies. Others, generally journeymen, take civil service tests and enjoy the benefits of working for a city, county or state government or in one of the many special districts which support government projects and rarely risk going out of business.

Most union members and public employees spend their earned income in the community in which they live. They pay taxes, buy durable and non durable goods, and may attend the same church as those of you who want to take from them their dreams for themselves and their children.

Do you expect to be taken serious after the garbage you spewed earlier in the thread?

You have no weight in here, you proved your just in here to be a hack already, see below

Who funded Solndra? Well, it started under President Bush and was continued under Obama. Conflicts of interest? I'm sure there was.

I'm more concerned about the amounts than the COI's myself.

Still aside from the politics of it, the fact is that most start-ups fail whether it is a coffee shop, a grocery store or an energy company. Energy companies are going to have a larger wake of failure than the others.

I think we can all agree (getting back to the politics)that Solyndra would have failed with or without our investment.

No one died as a result of Solyndra's failure; how many GI's died while taking a shower in Iraq? See the connection between Haliburton (KBR) and the Bush Administration.

Other than the one on top of your head, do you have a point you'd like to make? Is there anything factually wrong with my comments? Did anyone die at Solyndra? Did GI's die in the showers of Iraq? Did a subsidery of Haliburton - a business tied to VP Cheney - install the electrical current which ended up in the shower and not where it belonged?

Let me finish with this: Don't Tax Me Bro is a coward and a liar.

 

[Meister]

And such a system never exists in a public or private company? Human nature is human nature whether a human is a public employee, a private sector employee or own their own company.

Most union members don't report to the hall and wait for work; most have demonstrated their skills and dependabilty and have been hired by private companies. Others, generally journeymen, take civil service tests and enjoy the benefits of working for a city, county or state government or in one of the many special districts which support government projects and rarely risk going out of business.

Most union members and public employees spend their earned income in the community in which they live. They pay taxes, buy durable and non durable goods, and may attend the same church as those of you who want to take from them their dreams for themselves and their children.

Do you expect to be taken serious after the garbage you spewed earlier in the thread?

You have no weight in here, you proved your just in here to be a hack already, see below

No one died as a result of Solyndra's failure; how many GI's died while taking a shower in Iraq? See the connection between Haliburton (KBR) and the Bush Administration.

Other than the one on top of your head, do you have a point you'd like to make? Is there anything factually wrong with my comments? Did anyone die at Solyndra? Did GI's die in the showers of Iraq? Did a subsidery of Haliburton - a business tied to VP Cheney - install the electrical current which ended up in the shower and not where it belonged?

Let me finish with this: Don't Tax Me Bro is a coward and a liar.

Solyndra and the Iraq war....really wry?
You need to start saying no to drugs....it's frying your brain.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Unions are corrupt, partisan, and have the basic purpose of getting their members (labor) the most money possible.

Corporations are corrupt, partisan, and have the basic purpose getting their members (shareholders) the most money possible.

They are equally necessary, in our current system.

 

[Wry Catcher]

If you want a trade union job, yes. You have to report to the union hall to get assignments. Your name is on a list, jobs are offered to each person on the list. The worker can accept of decline the job. If they decline, they are moved to the bottom of the list to wait their turn again. At least, this is how it's supposed to work. In reality, the guys who run the lists will favor their buddies or other "friends" by offering them the best jobs or bumping them on the list. Exchange of favors is often a factor, too. If no jobs are available, the union can sanction you if you take non-union jobs. You pay dues whether you are working, or not.

Many labor unions don't even offer a list or assist their members to get jobs if they lose theirs.

And such a system never exists in a public or private company? Human nature is human nature whether a human is a public employee, a private sector employee or own their own company.

Most union members don't report to the hall and wait for work; most have demonstrated their skills and dependabilty and have been hired by private companies. Others, generally journeymen, take civil service tests and enjoy the benefits of working for a city, county or state government or in one of the many special districts which support government projects and rarely risk going out of business.

Most union members and public employees spend their earned income in the community in which they live. They pay taxes, buy durable and non durable goods, and may attend the same church as those of you who want to take from them their dreams for themselves and their children.

Wow! Just like non-union workers! Imagine that?

Of course - that was the point Watson.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Do you expect to be taken serious after the garbage you spewed earlier in the thread?

You have no weight in here, you proved your just in here to be a hack already, see below

Other than the one on top of your head, do you have a point you'd like to make? Is there anything factually wrong with my comments? Did anyone die at Solyndra? Did GI's die in the showers of Iraq? Did a subsidery of Haliburton - a business tied to VP Cheney - install the electrical current which ended up in the shower and not where it belonged?

Let me finish with this: Don't Tax Me Bro is a coward and a liar.

Solyndra and the Iraq war....really wry?
You need to start saying no to drugs....it's frying your brain.

Weren't they both an investment in energy? I have a vague recollection that Haliburton is in same way engaged in energy production or exploration or exploitation, and that the VP of the US under GWB was somehow involved with Haliburton, and, someone once said, I believe, the invasion and occupation of Iraq would be paid for by the oil in Iraq's ground. Am I wrong? Are you too going to call me a liar as did the lying coward Don't Taz Me Bro?

 

[Meister]

Other than the one on top of your head, do you have a point you'd like to make? Is there anything factually wrong with my comments? Did anyone die at Solyndra? Did GI's die in the showers of Iraq? Did a subsidery of Haliburton - a business tied to VP Cheney - install the electrical current which ended up in the shower and not where it belonged?

Let me finish with this: Don't Tax Me Bro is a coward and a liar.

Solyndra and the Iraq war....really wry?
You need to start saying no to drugs....it's frying your brain.

Weren't they both an investment in energy? I have a vague recollection that Haliburton is in same way engaged in energy production or exploration or exploitation, and that the VP of the US under GWB was somehow involved with Haliburton, and, someone once said, I believe, the invasion and occupation of Iraq would be paid for by the oil in Iraq's ground. Am I wrong? Are you too going to call me a liar as did the lying coward Don't Taz Me Bro?

I won't call you a liar, but you just fell for the left echo chamber's talking points.
If Iraq was all about energy...what the hell happened to the energy? So it must not have been about the oil in Iraq.
Haliburton's chief production has to do with infrastructure.
Several presidents, both democrats and republicans used Haliburton because of their global exposure. If you want to go with the non bid contract thingy.....How many years would it take to get the job done going through that process....very few companies are set up for what Haliburton is set up for.

 

[Oddball]

Why you hate unions?

Because they protect perverted douchebags, like this perverted douchebag:

Authorities reveal past complaint about LA teacher - Yahoo! News

He's going to get full pension because he resigned before he got fired.

The CTA is pure scum.

 

[freedombecki]

I don't hate unions, but I am disappointed in their using class warfare as grounds for making such high demands for such a marginal business it closes down.

 

[Cuyo]

Why do people hate unions? Will corporations do right by the workers if not mandated to? I am still looking online and see no benefit to workers not being union.

My personal experience with Union Workers is they're generally lazy and don't take pride in their work.

What else you want to know.

Well that's a pantload.

Idiot.

 

[JoeB131]

Why do people hate unions? Will corporations do right by the workers if not mandated to? I am still looking online and see no benefit to workers not being union.

I've got mixed feelings on this subject.

I grew up in a union household, and frankly, was glad that the union had my family's back, especially in those last few years when my dad was dying of the lung cancer from the asbestos his employers told him was totally safe to work with.

But I also think Unions have lost their way. They've become inflexible, they don't recognize merit- in fact, in some ways, they discourage it.

Union membership is a sweet deal for someone who lucks into it, but so is a rent controlled apartment. The problem is a deal has to work for everyone involved, not just one party.

Ideally, a relationship between employer and employee should be win-win. The employee gets a good paycheck, the employer gets the employees a-game and enhancement to his business. It doesn't work that way, with or without a union, because one side or the other will try to take advantage.

 

[Cuyo]

Unions are an exercise in pure capitalism. They're a manifestation of workers reminding the boss that he can't do it without them. Unions' overwhelming support for Democrats is an indicator of which party they believe best serves their members' interests. Rabid Republican opposition is an indication of exactly who they advocate for.

 

[freedombecki]

Why do people hate unions? Will corporations do right by the workers if not mandated to? I am still looking online and see no benefit to workers not being union.

I've got mixed feelings on this subject.

I grew up in a union household, and frankly, was glad that the union had my family's back, especially in those last few years when my dad was dying of the lung cancer from the asbestos his employers told him was totally safe to work with.

But I also think Unions have lost their way. They've become inflexible, they don't recognize merit- in fact, in some ways, they discourage it.

Union membership is a sweet deal for someone who lucks into it, but so is a rent controlled apartment. The problem is a deal has to work for everyone involved, not just one party.

Ideally, a relationship between employer and employee should be win-win. The employee gets a good paycheck, the employer gets the employees a-game and enhancement to his business. It doesn't work that way, with or without a union, because one side or the other will try to take advantage.

I agree with you, JoeB131. It's too bad businesses are dependent on what they can get for their product and services from a fickle public. There just aren't any guarantees in thin times, either.

 

[freedombecki]

Unions are an exercise in pure capitalism. They're a manifestation of workers reminding the boss that he can't do it without them. Unions' overwhelming support for Democrats is an indicator of which party they believe best serves their members' interests. Rabid Republican opposition is an indication of exactly who they advocate for.

I am for human beings, Cuyo. But I am not for human beings who use unions to commit unspeakable acts. Striking is punishment enough for any company.

 

[JoeB131]

Unions are an exercise in pure capitalism. They're a manifestation of workers reminding the boss that he can't do it without them. Unions' overwhelming support for Democrats is an indicator of which party they believe best serves their members' interests. Rabid Republican opposition is an indication of exactly who they advocate for.

Shame on them for alienating one party, then.

The end result is that the Democrats take unions for granted, and the Republicans try to confound them at every oppurtunity.

What was the last really good thing private sector unions got for their unflagging support of Democrats? (not Public Sector, mind you but private sector.)

 

[JoeB131]

Why do people hate unions? Will corporations do right by the workers if not mandated to? I am still looking online and see no benefit to workers not being union.

I've got mixed feelings on this subject.

I grew up in a union household, and frankly, was glad that the union had my family's back, especially in those last few years when my dad was dying of the lung cancer from the asbestos his employers told him was totally safe to work with.

But I also think Unions have lost their way. They've become inflexible, they don't recognize merit- in fact, in some ways, they discourage it.

Union membership is a sweet deal for someone who lucks into it, but so is a rent controlled apartment. The problem is a deal has to work for everyone involved, not just one party.

Ideally, a relationship between employer and employee should be win-win. The employee gets a good paycheck, the employer gets the employees a-game and enhancement to his business. It doesn't work that way, with or without a union, because one side or the other will try to take advantage.

I agree with you, JoeB131. It's too bad businesses are dependent on what they can get for their product and services from a fickle public. There just aren't any guarantees in thin times, either.

No, but in thin times, there should be shared sacrifice. You don't keep paying the CEO's 8 figures when you are laying people off. Maybe taking him down to six figures won't save that many jobs, but it shows that we are all taking a beating here.

The fat cats got their bailouts, they got their bonuses, their stocks have bounced back, and none of them are looking at the inside of a jail cell even though more than a few deserve to be. The only folks who are still in a recession are the working class schlubs like me who have seen minimal raises in the last three years after taking a hit when the recession started.

 

[Cuyo]

Unions are an exercise in pure capitalism. They're a manifestation of workers reminding the boss that he can't do it without them. Unions' overwhelming support for Democrats is an indicator of which party they believe best serves their members' interests. Rabid Republican opposition is an indication of exactly who they advocate for.

Shame on them for alienating one party, then.

The end result is that the Democrats take unions for granted, and the Republicans try to confound them at every oppurtunity.

What was the last really good thing private sector unions got for their unflagging support of Democrats? (not Public Sector, mind you but private sector.)

Perhaps they're not trying to play political "Chess." Perhaps if they did they'd be more successful to their ends. I'll stipulate that either is possible.

Of course, it really doesn't address my post at all.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Unions are an exercise in pure capitalism. They're a manifestation of workers reminding the boss that he can't do it without them. Unions' overwhelming support for Democrats is an indicator of which party they believe best serves their members' interests. Rabid Republican opposition is an indication of exactly who they advocate for.

Shame on them for alienating one party, then.

The end result is that the Democrats take unions for granted, and the Republicans try to confound them at every oppurtunity.

What was the last really good thing private sector unions got for their unflagging support of Democrats? (not Public Sector, mind you but private sector.)

The unions didn't "alienate" the Republican Party.

The Republican party "alienated" the unions.

 

[JoeB131]

Unions are an exercise in pure capitalism. They're a manifestation of workers reminding the boss that he can't do it without them. Unions' overwhelming support for Democrats is an indicator of which party they believe best serves their members' interests. Rabid Republican opposition is an indication of exactly who they advocate for.

Shame on them for alienating one party, then.

The end result is that the Democrats take unions for granted, and the Republicans try to confound them at every oppurtunity.

What was the last really good thing private sector unions got for their unflagging support of Democrats? (not Public Sector, mind you but private sector.)

Perhaps they're not trying to play political "Chess." Perhaps if they did they'd be more successful to their ends. I'll stipulate that either is possible.

Of course, it really doesn't address my post at all.

Well, actually, it does.

If Democrats serve their best interests, then you should have fine, shining examples of how they've benefitted.

I don't limit this criticism to just the unions. I think the Christian Right has precious little to show for their unflagging support of the GOP.

Elections should be exactly that, a bidding for your vote. But some groups take the first bid and don't get what their vote is worth.

 

[JoeB131]

The unions didn't "alienate" the Republican Party.

The Republican party "alienated" the unions.

That's debatable. In 1984, 60% of union households voted for Ronald Reagan. But their leadership (except for the Teamsters) all got behind Mondale. Even in 2008, 40% of union guys still voted for McCain.