A Different Topic - We need UNIONS!

[Unkotare]

Some day brains will get some balls. Manning up, with fists clenched, they will unionize and demand, "Pay us or we will make you pay. We will use our minds to focus on hacking into your wealth, all of which was stolen from people with brains but without balls
enough to stand up to you.".

Yeah sure you will, big mouth. YOU will continue to do what you are qualified to do - NOTHING, you worthless gasbag.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I truly think he has serious mental problems. Layman's terms: he's batshit insane.

 

[FA_Q2]

I truly think he has serious mental problems. Layman's terms: he's batshit insane.

He has no problem at all. Obvious troll is obvious. YOU actually have a problem – the inability to ignore the overly idiotic. I know, I know; sometimes the stupid dust burns into your head and you just feel like you MUST respond. I know, I used to be there as well. It took a while for me to accept the trolls as nothing more than white noise, one day you will get there too He is getting exactly what he came her for – the personal belief that he has caused you aggravation. It does not matter if it was actually successful BTW. Only that he believe he has achieved such and any claims that you have not only feed the delusion.


Long story short don’t feed ‘em

 

[MikeK]

And none of that has squat to do with the topic or posts in this thread at all. Unions had a core and very valuable place years ago. That is generally not disputed. They have raised working conditions and wages for years. That is generally not in contention. The problem is not what they have done. You do NOT keep broken processes around because of what they accomplished decades ago. That would simply be dumb. The problem is what unions have BECOME. With their current size and scope they have forgotten the worker and the company. They have moved into political realms and most only exist to collect their dues from a workforce that has no other option but to pay them even if they think that the unions no longer represent their interests. This has become the norm (but not the case at all union shops) across most unions because many of the legal protections that they receive. Essentially (just like many of the captivated workers) they do not actually have to produce in order to continue to get paid. That is completely wrong.

Unions still have a valuable and important role to play but as Flat has been pointing out they are going to HAVE to change with the times and come up with a better process in order to survive. If they do not, all the bloviating about what might have been the circumstances in the post you responded to or the points about what we have to ‘thank’ the unions for will mean nothing. They will still cease to exist. Unfortunately, that means that they will do so by obliterating the American worker.

Your complaint refers to corruption and misfeasance in the management of some (not all) unions and there is no question that your complaint is valid. This is not a new problem but it might seem different and in some ways unique only because of the level it has reached. You are talking about corruption and ineffective management and the root cause of union corruption and/or ineffectiveness is no different from the root causes of the same problems in government, which are ignorance, complacency and laziness on the part of members (citizens).

When the union movement emerged in America its power derived from vigorous participation of the various memberships all of whom were intensely interested in the issues, all of whom attended meetings, paid attention to the various candidates for shop Steward and Business Agent positions, read the literature, talked about the issues and -- most important, they voted. Not for their buddies but for the most convincingly honest and dedicated candidates. That attentiveness, concern, and motivated participation in union politics resulted in such satisfactory working conditions and exceptional wages that the memberships eventually grew fat and lazy. They stopped paying attention to union issues, they stopped voting, union management became apathetic and, inevitably, incompetent management and corruption set in.

What we're seeing today is backlash by those who have become generally disillusioned with union performance, by others who are too young to have experienced the dramatically positive effect the union movement has had on the quality of life for the American working class, and by those who are bitterly resentful at being unable to join a particular union. These individuals are collectively receptive to anti-union propaganda put forth by corporate water-carriers. But the bottom line is any union is as good as its membership is willing and able to make it.

 

[TooTall]

You are on the right track.. Unions as they exist today are fossilized dinosaurs..

They don't recognize the changing definition of "a job", don't allow flexible labor regs, and most importantly --- they don't give a rip about an individual CAREER..

Professional Orgs offer some insight for a new model.. Focus on CAREER training, advancement, and (as you mentioned) acquiring MULTIPLE SKILLS to make the overall company work efficiently.. Much different than embracing the stinky old anti-corporate, anti-capitalist paradigms that are killing them AND US..

Global competition is a whole OTHER issue.. NOT SOLVED by the methods which workers decide to organize. THAT is an issue of getting capital to flow to INNOVATION and RISK so that America does what the rest of the world CAN'T DO better and cheaper..

Unions actually don't really even EXIST anymore. When the government became authoritarian and anti-labor under the Reagan regime, labor unions essentially were outlawed. There is no appreciable labor movement allowed in the U.S. today.

This was done to suppress wages, and national health care has been resisted to reduce worker mobility.

The U.S. is a nation of wage slaves.

When the Air Traffic Controllers went out on strike they were breaking federal law. Reagan gave them fair warning and they ignored him. The President has to swear an oath to uphold the laws of the US and Reagan did exactly that.

Reagan was President of the Screen Actors Guild at one time, which is a union, so he wasn't anti-union.

 

[TooTall]

Now, before those of you who have me conveniently pigeon-holed into a certain category vapor lock, I have something that I want to discuss with those INTELLIGENT individuals on the board from the left and right (knee-jerk political hacks can leave now) about the status of the country and where we are heading. Specifically, companies and their relationship with American workers.

Here are the problems: American workers are being paid less and less (ties in with the last issue of illegal aliens). American jobs (those in manufacturing and other sectors of the economy) are moving overseas. It used to be (as in the 50's and 60's) that when you got a job, you stayed at that job and you could retire from it. Now, it is so rare to see a worker who has stayed at the same job for 35 years. Another issue is the fact that with the influx of illegal aliens, American workers and their jobs are 'throw away.' Why pay a middle class worker $30.00 an hour when you can get someone here illegally to do it for $15.00 an hour?

My solution, after looking at what occured at that time when the American manufacturing sector was strong and what WORKED is that we need American workers to form a type of union. NOT the SEIU or the AFL-CIO political hack unions. But unions that actually help companies make and then maintain market share. Course, that would also require that CEO's actually take interest in how their companies fared, other than worrying about their 'golden parachutes' and their own personal bottom line. That is the concern of the board of directors though.

What would these new unions look like? Not sure. Thus the reason for the topic. But let me make this clear. The unions that we have now have been hijacked. Either by thugs or political hacks of the same sort we have seen on this forum. I was forced once to join a union by three guys who followed me into a bathroom. It wasn't a request. I really dislike the unions as they stand now, but have come somewhat to the conclusion that the function that they served at one time was an honorable one and did help get and maintain American jobs BECAUSE they worked FOR the companies as well.

Now, what do you think?

The first thing that needs to be done is to abolish public sector unions. All they do is provide a union dues slush fund for Democrats.

Private sector unions have always been adversarial in nature and old habits are hard to break. You would need the younger generation to take charge and use a little common sense when they negotiate a contract.

My experience with the unions was brief, but I did attend a few meetings and noticed it was ran by a few radicals and wannabe lawyers. All I did was pay the dues in the one I was required to join in California.

 

[flacaltenn]

When you pay our best scientists and engineers on the par with what second string linebackers make in the NFL, you will see a lot more engineers and scientists. Right now, even little South Korea graduates more engineers than the US does.

I've got a daughter in college right now --- so I'm familiar with the costs. I told her if she did her undergrad at a state school, I'd treat her like a princess and get her through mostly debt free and then we could discuss grad school. OR -- she could go to an elite school, get neglected for 4 yrs and live like a pauper and have a debt.

My point was --- technology drives us OUT of danger of losing standard of living.. OUR KIDS need to be filling those STEM (science, tech, eng, math) slots --- not foreigners. Not everyone is gonna be a chemist or engineer, but new ventures will create jobs at all levels.. While you're at it -- bring back secondary vocational training and apprenticeships.. Because THOSE service jobs can be good careers as well.. Craftsmen and journeymen are STILL required.

(I actually think that most inner city kids in poor academic situations CAN prepare for tech related jobs and innovation.. If they can put together a MIDI audio system to be a D.J. --- they can do robotic scripting.. )

Robosourcing is not all doom and gloom. With flexible robotics and 3D printing small lines can reconfigure products in days or hours. And people can make a living building NICHE goods that couldn't be customized or done efficiently before. Nothing wrong with moving from lever puller to robotic trainer.

If you look at examples of labor evolution like "self-checkout" lanes at the market, you see that the labor hasn't vanished.. It's be re-purposed to an in-store bakery or actual meat market or floral section or even a prescription counter. Same at Home Depot where labor is re-purposed to holding customer "How to" seminars or doing installations.

But EVERY laborer needs to be willing to flex and learn.. And the unions are NOT MODELED for this kind of accomodation.. They NEED to evolve or die...

You people deserve your fate if you continue listening only to the proposals of the professional opinionators. What if your daughter were a son with football talent? Would you say, "If he went to a major college team, he'd have to 'live like a pauper,' but if he went to a minor college in Division II, I could finance his lifestyle so he'd live like a prince"?

Apologists for college slavery will say that the football team makes money for the university, but they forget that grateful alumni endow the university with far more money than it makes from sports. Also, making money from dumb jock bullies is as inappropriate as the college giving "scholarships" to bimbos who will work at a college-owned titty bar.

If I had somehow put up with the childish, depressing, and insulting college lifestyle and become a billionaire, I wouldn't give one penny to the university because of bitterness over the permanent psychological damage that experience would have caused.

An oncologist is just a childish escapist freak who didn't earn a living until he was 30 years old. Losers like that will never cure cancer, and you all deserve to die from it because of your insulting attitude towards non-athletic talent.

For a person carrying a 152 brain for "a new species of human" --- your anger outpaces your logic, reason and ability to construct a coherent argument. First you imply that I should ENCOURAGE my pretend son to go to a school based solely on his ability to play a game. And then you refer to him as dumb jock.. Gladly have you pay the diff for his "education" if you think denying him access to a well-funded football program is parental abuse..

So when are you gonna cure cancer without an education or smash the next Tet Offensive before it happens?? Do you have any friends who are not sad, angry anarchists?

 

[flacaltenn]

I truly think he has serious mental problems. Layman's terms: he's batshit insane.

He has no problem at all. Obvious troll is obvious. YOU actually have a problem – the inability to ignore the overly idiotic. I know, I know; sometimes the stupid dust burns into your head and you just feel like you MUST respond. I know, I used to be there as well. It took a while for me to accept the trolls as nothing more than white noise, one day you will get there too He is getting exactly what he came her for – the personal belief that he has caused you aggravation. It does not matter if it was actually successful BTW. Only that he believe he has achieved such and any claims that you have not only feed the delusion.


Long story short don’t feed ‘em

I don't totally disagree.. But there's been times when engaging a Skin-Head or a potentially dangerous anarchist is quite revealing. You SHOULD put them on ignore, but then again -- they ought to pay some price for coming to the party...

Make them WORK a little in exchange for the exposure..
If I learn something out of the experience --- it's not a bad deal. Even if what I learn is how delusion or hate actually works..

 

[FA_Q2]

And none of that has squat to do with the topic or posts in this thread at all. Unions had a core and very valuable place years ago. That is generally not disputed. They have raised working conditions and wages for years. That is generally not in contention. The problem is not what they have done. You do NOT keep broken processes around because of what they accomplished decades ago. That would simply be dumb. The problem is what unions have BECOME. With their current size and scope they have forgotten the worker and the company. They have moved into political realms and most only exist to collect their dues from a workforce that has no other option but to pay them even if they think that the unions no longer represent their interests. This has become the norm (but not the case at all union shops) across most unions because many of the legal protections that they receive. Essentially (just like many of the captivated workers) they do not actually have to produce in order to continue to get paid. That is completely wrong.

Unions still have a valuable and important role to play but as Flat has been pointing out they are going to HAVE to change with the times and come up with a better process in order to survive. If they do not, all the bloviating about what might have been the circumstances in the post you responded to or the points about what we have to ‘thank’ the unions for will mean nothing. They will still cease to exist. Unfortunately, that means that they will do so by obliterating the American worker.

Your complaint refers to corruption and misfeasance in the management of some (not all) unions and there is no question that your complaint is valid. This is not a new problem but it might seem different and in some ways unique only because of the level it has reached. You are talking about corruption and ineffective management and the root cause of union corruption and/or ineffectiveness is no different from the root causes of the same problems in government, which are ignorance, complacency and laziness on the part of members (citizens).

When the union movement emerged in America its power derived from vigorous participation of the various memberships all of whom were intensely interested in the issues, all of whom attended meetings, paid attention to the various candidates for shop Steward and Business Agent positions, read the literature, talked about the issues and -- most important, they voted. Not for their buddies but for the most convincingly honest and dedicated candidates. That attentiveness, concern, and motivated participation in union politics resulted in such satisfactory working conditions and exceptional wages that the memberships eventually grew fat and lazy. They stopped paying attention to union issues, they stopped voting, union management became apathetic and, inevitably, incompetent management and corruption set in.

What we're seeing today is backlash by those who have become generally disillusioned with union performance, by others who are too young to have experienced the dramatically positive effect the union movement has had on the quality of life for the American working class, and by those who are bitterly resentful at being unable to join a particular union. These individuals are collectively receptive to anti-union propaganda put forth by corporate water-carriers. But the bottom line is any union is as good as its membership is willing and able to make it.

That is only half the problem though. You see, the lazy membership allowing the union to veer off course is irrelevant unless such unions are forced upon companies and workers alike. That is the current situation that we are now in. There are entire career fields where union membership is compulsory. That type of existence (legal protections as I was referring to) is what ensures that no level of participation is going to make a lick of difference because you are required to pay no matter what. Take those protections away and you force unions to stand on their own 2 feet. Workers will either get involved or the union will die. Suddenly it becomes important for the union itself to not only fight for their interests but make the workers damn well aware of what they are doing and how it ensures better working conditions.

I think we are moving in the right direction. It is why I support the right to work; it weakens the union’s ability to syphon off the workers without cause. All that is really left is like flat mentioned – allow flexibility and provide training to their members.

 

[flacaltenn]

And none of that has squat to do with the topic or posts in this thread at all. Unions had a core and very valuable place years ago. That is generally not disputed. They have raised working conditions and wages for years. That is generally not in contention. The problem is not what they have done. You do NOT keep broken processes around because of what they accomplished decades ago. That would simply be dumb. The problem is what unions have BECOME. With their current size and scope they have forgotten the worker and the company. They have moved into political realms and most only exist to collect their dues from a workforce that has no other option but to pay them even if they think that the unions no longer represent their interests. This has become the norm (but not the case at all union shops) across most unions because many of the legal protections that they receive. Essentially (just like many of the captivated workers) they do not actually have to produce in order to continue to get paid. That is completely wrong.

Unions still have a valuable and important role to play but as Flat has been pointing out they are going to HAVE to change with the times and come up with a better process in order to survive. If they do not, all the bloviating about what might have been the circumstances in the post you responded to or the points about what we have to ‘thank’ the unions for will mean nothing. They will still cease to exist. Unfortunately, that means that they will do so by obliterating the American worker.

Your complaint refers to corruption and misfeasance in the management of some (not all) unions and there is no question that your complaint is valid. This is not a new problem but it might seem different and in some ways unique only because of the level it has reached. You are talking about corruption and ineffective management and the root cause of union corruption and/or ineffectiveness is no different from the root causes of the same problems in government, which are ignorance, complacency and laziness on the part of members (citizens).

When the union movement emerged in America its power derived from vigorous participation of the various memberships all of whom were intensely interested in the issues, all of whom attended meetings, paid attention to the various candidates for shop Steward and Business Agent positions, read the literature, talked about the issues and -- most important, they voted. Not for their buddies but for the most convincingly honest and dedicated candidates. That attentiveness, concern, and motivated participation in union politics resulted in such satisfactory working conditions and exceptional wages that the memberships eventually grew fat and lazy. They stopped paying attention to union issues, they stopped voting, union management became apathetic and, inevitably, incompetent management and corruption set in.

What we're seeing today is backlash by those who have become generally disillusioned with union performance, by others who are too young to have experienced the dramatically positive effect the union movement has had on the quality of life for the American working class, and by those who are bitterly resentful at being unable to join a particular union. These individuals are collectively receptive to anti-union propaganda put forth by corporate water-carriers. But the bottom line is any union is as good as its membership is willing and able to make it.

That is only half the problem though. You see, the lazy membership allowing the union to veer off course is irrelevant unless such unions are forced upon companies and workers alike. That is the current situation that we are now in. There are entire career fields where union membership is compulsory. That type of existence (legal protections as I was referring to) is what ensures that no level of participation is going to make a lick of difference because you are required to pay no matter what. Take those protections away and you force unions to stand on their own 2 feet. Workers will either get involved or the union will die. Suddenly it becomes important for the union itself to not only fight for their interests but make the workers damn well aware of what they are doing and how it ensures better working conditions.

I think we are moving in the right direction. It is why I support the right to work; it weakens the union’s ability to syphon off the workers without cause. All that is really left is like flat mentioned – allow flexibility and provide training to their members.

There are entire career fields where union membership is compulsory.

Only comment here is that what's equally ominous for the unions is that there are DECREASING occupations where the current union work model even applies.. Pretty soon, if the unions dont evolve, all the fighting is gonna be about only 4 or 5 occupations.. Look for an automated McDonalds near you if the Unions force their way in...

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

I have read each and every comment posted here and some were very good. Some, the rantings of knee-jerk party hacks on both sides.

One of the issues that I see with unions is somewhat along the lines of the inability of the union to work for the 'worker'. It seems like the unions have become reactionary arms for a particular political party, getting involved in issues that have no correlation to their very existance. How many steel workers sit at the kitchen table and talk about 'reproductive rights' as a union issue with their families? I would think that insurance, pay, retirement are more the perview of a union and where that union member wants the full attention of the union focused. The 'workers', feeling that their concerns and issues are not important to the union that is supposed to represent them, does only what they have to by paying dues and not getting involved in telling the union leadership where they want emphasis placed. A vicious circle because as less and less members become active in the union except to pay dues, it moves more and more into the political circle.

To say that a union MUST become political denies its original intent. It is there to negotiate for the worker with the corporation, not destroy the corporation or influence national elections or agendas. Yes, the relationship does have an adversarial bent by its very nature, but when it becomes 'us against them at all levels', you have exactly what happened to the US Steel industry, the auto industry, and others. The death of a major industry that is unionized is bad for the unions as well. As in the steel meltdown, it was the unions that were identified as the reason behind the destruction and unions become the 'bad guy.'

It is clear that even in the age of Barry and his cronies, where the National Labor Relations Board is stacked with unlawful appointments (as ruled by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals) that union membership is on a steady decline still. I believe that the this decline is bad for American industry but only IF unions can reclaim their rightful place in American business. To do this, unions MUST go back to their original intent. It would require the creation of an entirely different organization to represent workers in a new light. One that would champion the American worker, their families AND promote the very business that pays those workers wages.

 

[PrometheusBound]

I truly think he has serious mental problems. Layman's terms: he's batshit insane.

He has no problem at all. Obvious troll is obvious. YOU actually have a problem – the inability to ignore the overly idiotic. I know, I know; sometimes the stupid dust burns into your head and you just feel like you MUST respond. I know, I used to be there as well. It took a while for me to accept the trolls as nothing more than white noise, one day you will get there too He is getting exactly what he came her for – the personal belief that he has caused you aggravation. It does not matter if it was actually successful BTW. Only that he believe he has achieved such and any claims that you have not only feed the delusion.


Long story short don’t feed ‘em

I'd rather be a troll than a trollop. Who's your pimp?

 

[PrometheusBound]

I've got a daughter in college right now --- so I'm familiar with the costs. I told her if she did her undergrad at a state school, I'd treat her like a princess and get her through mostly debt free and then we could discuss grad school. OR -- she could go to an elite school, get neglected for 4 yrs and live like a pauper and have a debt.

My point was --- technology drives us OUT of danger of losing standard of living.. OUR KIDS need to be filling those STEM (science, tech, eng, math) slots --- not foreigners. Not everyone is gonna be a chemist or engineer, but new ventures will create jobs at all levels.. While you're at it -- bring back secondary vocational training and apprenticeships.. Because THOSE service jobs can be good careers as well.. Craftsmen and journeymen are STILL required.

(I actually think that most inner city kids in poor academic situations CAN prepare for tech related jobs and innovation.. If they can put together a MIDI audio system to be a D.J. --- they can do robotic scripting.. )

Robosourcing is not all doom and gloom. With flexible robotics and 3D printing small lines can reconfigure products in days or hours. And people can make a living building NICHE goods that couldn't be customized or done efficiently before. Nothing wrong with moving from lever puller to robotic trainer.

If you look at examples of labor evolution like "self-checkout" lanes at the market, you see that the labor hasn't vanished.. It's be re-purposed to an in-store bakery or actual meat market or floral section or even a prescription counter. Same at Home Depot where labor is re-purposed to holding customer "How to" seminars or doing installations.

But EVERY laborer needs to be willing to flex and learn.. And the unions are NOT MODELED for this kind of accomodation.. They NEED to evolve or die...

You people deserve your fate if you continue listening only to the proposals of the professional opinionators. What if your daughter were a son with football talent? Would you say, "If he went to a major college team, he'd have to 'live like a pauper,' but if he went to a minor college in Division II, I could finance his lifestyle so he'd live like a prince"?

Apologists for college slavery will say that the football team makes money for the university, but they forget that grateful alumni endow the university with far more money than it makes from sports. Also, making money from dumb jock bullies is as inappropriate as the college giving "scholarships" to bimbos who will work at a college-owned titty bar.

If I had somehow put up with the childish, depressing, and insulting college lifestyle and become a billionaire, I wouldn't give one penny to the university because of bitterness over the permanent psychological damage that experience would have caused.

An oncologist is just a childish escapist freak who didn't earn a living until he was 30 years old. Losers like that will never cure cancer, and you all deserve to die from it because of your insulting attitude towards non-athletic talent.

For a person carrying a 152 brain for "a new species of human" --- your anger outpaces your logic, reason and ability to construct a coherent argument. First you imply that I should ENCOURAGE my pretend son to go to a school based solely on his ability to play a game. And then you refer to him as dumb jock.. Gladly have you pay the diff for his "education" if you think denying him access to a well-funded football program is parental abuse..

So when are you gonna cure cancer without an education or smash the next Tet Offensive before it happens?? Do you have any friends who are not sad, angry anarchists?

Your slave education makes you unable to understand analogies. The point is that your son would get recruited for whatever college team he had the talent for. Your own ability to finance him having an adult lifestyle instead of student poverty would be irrelevant; the university would pay him $500 a week in the form of expensive housing, expensive food, and expensive entertainment, plus free tuition.

In college, you lived like a child, so you wound up with the mind of a child. Your confused objection is proof of that.

My talent does not obligate me to benefit insulting and ungrateful people who would have no problem with the fact that I would have to sacrifice my youth working without pay in college in order to save them from cancer. We can destroy you slaves of the plutocracy merely through neglect; you are not responsible for your submission to our real enemies and we shouldn't take your programmed insults personally. In fact, the plutocracy designs things so we will be distracted by you and not focus on confiscating the wealth they extorted from our predecessors.

If superior minds unionize, like superior athletes did, we can destroy the tyranny of mindless capital. Investment is static, invention is dynamic--to use a term that the parasites monopolize. The obstruction of dynamic growth benefits the stagnant regime; one of their tricks to protect their dead monopoly is to make A students isolated losers among their classmates, which inhibits the talented even when they are finally thrown in with other A students. Creating autism is a way to divide and conquer.

 

[PrometheusBound]

I truly think he has serious mental problems. Layman's terms: he's batshit insane.

He has no problem at all. Obvious troll is obvious. YOU actually have a problem – the inability to ignore the overly idiotic. I know, I know; sometimes the stupid dust burns into your head and you just feel like you MUST respond. I know, I used to be there as well. It took a while for me to accept the trolls as nothing more than white noise, one day you will get there too He is getting exactly what he came her for – the personal belief that he has caused you aggravation. It does not matter if it was actually successful BTW. Only that he believe he has achieved such and any claims that you have not only feed the delusion.


Long story short don’t feed ‘em

I don't totally disagree.. But there's been times when engaging a Skin-Head or a potentially dangerous anarchist is quite revealing. You SHOULD put them on ignore, but then again -- they ought to pay some price for coming to the party...

Make them WORK a little in exchange for the exposure..
If I learn something out of the experience --- it's not a bad deal. Even if what I learn is how delusion or hate actually works..

Your jealousy of people with High IQs and your self-destructive desire to be dominated by King Ape plutocrats creates the fear that throws you into a paranoiac demonization of anyone who threaten your Masters. Your smugness about your silly accusations against anyone who doesn't goosestep beside you is just whistling in the dark.

 

[Avorysuds]

Unions never really worked. What happened to create manufacturing was wwII and the destruction of every society on earth except the USA. Demand for US goods was at historic high because no one else could produce goods. Unions had 0 to do with that. As the world healed, slowly manufacturing moved over seas.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

That is only half the problem though. You see, the lazy membership allowing the union to veer off course is irrelevant unless such unions are forced upon companies and workers alike. That is the current situation that we are now in. There are entire career fields where union membership is compulsory. That type of existence (legal protections as I was referring to) is what ensures that no level of participation is going to make a lick of difference because you are required to pay no matter what. Take those protections away and you force unions to stand on their own 2 feet. Workers will either get involved or the union will die. Suddenly it becomes important for the union itself to not only fight for their interests but make the workers damn well aware of what they are doing and how it ensures better working conditions.

In this you seem to be ignoring the critically important factor of the vote, the effect of which is precisely analogous to voting for political candidates. When union members become complacent, when they fail to attend meetings and pay attention to issues, they either don't vote or their elective ignorance and/or apathy causes them to vote for the wrong candidates thereby inviting misfeasance and corruption.

I think we are moving in the right direction. It is why I support the right to work; it weakens the union’s ability to syphon off the workers without cause. All that is really left is like flat mentioned – allow flexibility and provide training to their members.

Right-To-Work is crippling to unions. It is precisely comparable to making the income tax optional. Imagine the inevitable outcome of that.

Right-To-Work will unquestionably eliminate unions. It's just a matter of time. And when the unions are gone there will be an incremental decline in wages and employee benefits. Can you think of a reason why such a decline will not take place? There is none!

Unions, in spite of their warts, are the best friend of the American working class. Failure to acknowledge that is inviting disaster!

 

[FA_Q2]

Unions never really worked. What happened to create manufacturing was wwII and the destruction of every society on earth except the USA. Demand for US goods was at historic high because no one else could produce goods. Unions had 0 to do with that. As the world healed, slowly manufacturing moved over seas.

That supposition relies on the false idea that unions have anything to do with brining manufacturing here or creating jobs. That is not the purview of the union and where unions lose their way they harm those industries. They never really help but they don’t need to because that is not their purpose.

The SOLE purpose of unions is to represent the workers interests. In that light, they have been wildly successful throughout the growing pains that we experienced during the industrial revolution. There was a point when labor law was entirely non-existent and the vacuum was abused throughout this nation. Unions were integral in establishing much of labor law. They also tend to raise wages throughout a carrier field. That is not always a bad or good thing. Sometimes it meets market demands (good) and others it exceeds them (bad).

 

[MikeK]

Only comment here is that what's equally ominous for the unions is that there are DECREASING occupations where the current union work model even applies.. Pretty soon, if the unions dont evolve, all the fighting is gonna be about only 4 or 5 occupations.. Look for an automated McDonalds near you if the Unions force their way in...

Whether or not unions "evolve" depends entirely upon active membership participation. The alternative is to toss out the baby with the bathwater. And precisely that alternative is being facilitated by Right-To-Work laws.

The principle of the union movement is very simply stated: United we stand, divided we fall. Right-To-Work has very deviously succeeded in dividing the working class

 

[MikeK]

[...]

That supposition relies on the false idea that unions have anything to do with brining manufacturing here or creating jobs. That is not the purview of the union and where unions lose their way they harm those industries. They never really help but they don’t need to because that is not their purpose.

[...]

Unions lose their way only when and only because their members become complacent and fail to participate in determining direction. The situation is precisely analogous to the mechanism of federal, state, and local governments.

 

[oldfart]

What would these new unions look like? Not sure. Thus the reason for the topic. But let me make this clear. The unions that we have now have been hijacked. Either by thugs or political hacks of the same sort we have seen on this forum. I was forced once to join a union by three guys who followed me into a bathroom. It wasn't a request. I really dislike the unions as they stand now, but have come somewhat to the conclusion that the function that they served at one time was an honorable one and did help get and maintain American jobs BECAUSE they worked FOR the companies as well.

Now, what do you think?

I'm sure that we disagree on a lot of things about unions, but I appreciate your position and willingness to approach what a revitalized union movement would look like. Here are my suggestions:

1. Job training and apprenticeship programs jointly run by industry and unions make a lot of sense. I prefer that to the community college model popular today. Apprentices should start at minimum wage and scale up to prevailing wage as they progress. Non-paying "internship" programs should be made illegal as a violation of minimum wage laws. Both employers and unions have a vested interest in maintaining the quality of these programs and the unions have a strong interest in avoiding the overproduction of narrowly trained technical workers so often seen today at for-profit technical schools which prey on the students and taxpayers. These programs should also contain continuing education components and retraining for when jobs become obsolete.

2. The traditional union function of representing workers in grievance procedures needs to be emphasized. Management too often thinks they know what is happening on the shop floor when they do not, and only become aware of supervisor abuses when they lose multi-million dollar lawsuits or incur huge fines. Union grievance systems give smart businesses a "back-door" to information about what is really going on in their operations.

3. Industry-wide collective bargaining can control the race to the bottom. Each employer may fear making certain changes, from worker safety to benefits, for fear of being at a competitive disadvantage. But if most of the industry is covered by the same provisions, non-compliant firms can be marginalized and everyone can benefit from the lower long run costs many of these changes engender.

4. The complaints about union shops could be addressed by allowing collective bargaining to discriminate between union and non-union workers. Suppose the union offered to pay half of the cost of short term disability out of union dues, with only union members eligible. This eliminates the free rider problem. If you don't want to pay union dues, just forgo some of the union benefits and don't go crying that union members get more benefits, they pay for them.

5. I like the idea of transferring programs that effect unit labor cost as much as possible out of employer discretion or government mandate, especially health care. Union industry-wide plans are superior to individual employer plans. Among other things, they cannot be raided or defunded. When labor directly bears part of the cost and has a voice in administration, better economic decisions will be made and workers will have more knowledge of the programs and sense of participation.

I have stayed away from ideas that I am sure could not be common ground. What do you think of the forgoing?