Do you support unions?

[Rumpole]

All the result of decisions THEY made, not decisions by their employer.

The libertarian 'individual responsibility' concept does not have to conflict with the concept that people in their employment have a reasonable expectation to not be exploited, or forced to be put into a position where they only way they can get a pay raise is to quit. In my view, your attitude stems from a neoliberal/libertarian pro-corporation exploitation policy point of view which, in a civilized society, does not belong if it doesn't, at the minimum, factor in the aforementioned concept. Corporations often get sweetheart arrangements form the government, corporate welfare and such, which prompted Noam Chomsky's famous line, 'Socialism for corporations, rugged individualism for everyone else".

 

[Grumblenuts]

Are you so stupid to not know there is no such thing as food stamps anymore?

Oh, SNAP!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The libertarian 'individual responsibility' concept does not have to conflict with the concept that people in their employment have a reasonable expectation to not be exploited, or forced to be put into a position where they only way they can get a pay raise is to quit. In my view, your attitude stems from a neoliberal/libertarian pro-corporation exploitation policy point of view which, in a civilized society, does not belong if it doesn't, at the minimum, factor in the aforementioned concept. Corporations often get sweetheart arrangements form the government, corporate welfare and such, which prompted Noam Chomsky's famous line, 'Socialism for corporations, rugged individualism for everyone else".

That's simply what you do if you don't get that raise you wanted. If you didn't get that raise, you're obviously not worth it to the company paying you. Either you are asking more money than the job is worth or your performance is lagging. An employer that values that employees work will increase pay if possible. It takes too much time and money to hire a newbie and perhaps train them.

What unions have done in this country is force employers to overpay workers. That's why as time went on, companies packed up and left the state or country altogether. I know because my former employer lost a lot of businesses from companies that did just that.

 

[jc456]

That's simply what you do if you don't get that raise you wanted. If you didn't get that raise, you're obviously not worth it to the company paying you. Either you are asking more money than the job is worth or your performance is lagging. An employer that values that employees work will increase pay if possible. It takes too much time and money to hire a newbie and perhaps train them.

What unions have done in this country is force employers to overpay workers. That's why as time went on, companies packed up and left the state or country altogether. I know because my former employer lost a lot of businesses from companies that did just that.

In a union no growth possibilities

 

[task0778]

You left the argument! You don’t remember the chip shortages supply shortages. Stay ignorant

I remember that the chip shortage had nothing whatsoever to do with a tariff, which was what we were talking about. And you left the argument completely when you called me ignorant. Fuck you BTW.

 

[initforme]

That's simply what you do if you don't get that raise you wanted. If you didn't get that raise, you're obviously not worth it to the company paying you. Either you are asking more money than the job is worth or your performance is lagging. An employer that values that employees work will increase pay if possible. It takes too much time and money to hire a newbie and perhaps train them.

What unions have done in this country is force employers to overpay workers. That's why as time went on, companies packed up and left the state or country altogether. I know because my former employer lost a lot of businesses from companies that did just that.

Employers have never had an easier time finding skilled workers. So it's easy for them to underpay people.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Employers have never had an easier time finding skilled workers. So it's easy for them to underpay people.

That makes zero sense. Menial jobs never paid better than today because of the labor shortage. Just because you don't want to believe it doesn't mean it's not happening. It's the same with skilled labor. Industry can't find workers either.

 

[task0778]

Employers have never had an easier time finding skilled workers. So it's easy for them to underpay people.

Yeah, and it's easier these days for skilled workers to quit and get a better job too. I doubt there are that many underpaid skilled workers out there, the cost to replace them is high.

 

[Rumpole]

That's simply what you do if you don't get that raise you wanted. If you didn't get that raise, you're obviously not worth it to the company paying you.

'Worth', in my experience, is almost an elusive quantity, though true some, but is not the overriding factor, it's the relative bargaining position of the parties. With a union behind you, you will achieve bargain parity with the large corporation. Bargaining power determines 'worth', though intrinsic worth is a part of it, of course.

Either you are asking more money than the job is worth or your performance is lagging.

That's an assumption. Not necessarily accurate. Depends on the circumstances and facts of the situation.

An employer that values that employees work will increase pay if possible.

One would hope, but such is not always the case. It depends on the employer.

It takes too much time and money to hire a newbie and perhaps train them.

That depends on circumstances of supply and demand.

What unions have done in this country is force employers to overpay workers.

I don't buy that argument at all. Values are achieved through bargaining. When you go to market, you have your relative bargaining position with the seller. In a one and one situation, the seller determines the demand, and if the supply is low, knows he or she can raise prices and demand will accommodate it, until it doesn't, then they will back off. It's no different with employee and employer; But, the difference is, with employer and employee it's not one on one, it's not parity. The large corporation has a much greater advantage over a single employee, who cannot act with others who fear to join in, for being fired. With a union, an employee now has bargain parity with the employer, which is much more fairer, and the values achieved are truer to their worth and will not be distorted by virtue of lack of bargaining parity.

That's why as time went on, companies packed up and left the state or country altogether. I know because my former employer lost a lot of businesses from companies that did just that.

That fact can be cured with legislation (for shipping jobs overseas).

 

[odanny]

I haven't read the entire thread but has anyone commenting on it ever spent time in a union? I spent 29 years in one. I support unions, but am aware that there can be drawbacks, not only for employers but also sometimes the employees in them. But overall, the good far outweighs the bad.

 

[mak2]

I haven't read the entire thread but has anyone commenting on it ever spent time in a union? I spent 29 years in one. I support unions, but am aware that there can be drawbacks, not only for employers but also sometimes the employees in them. But overall, the good far outweighs the bad.

I have been union, management in a union shop and non union shops and an employee with out a union.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

'Worth', in my experience, is almost an elusive quantity, though true some, but is not the overriding factor, it's the relative bargaining position of the parties. With a union behind you, you will achieve bargain parity with the large corporation. Bargaining power determines 'worth', though intrinsic worth is a part of it, of course.

That's an assumption. Not necessarily accurate. Depends on the circumstances and facts of the situation.

One would hope, but such is not always the case. It depends on the employer.

That depends on circumstances of supply and demand.

I don't buy that argument at all. Values are achieved through bargaining. When you go to market, you have your relative bargaining position with the seller. In a one and one situation, the seller determines the demand, and if the supply is low, knows he or she can raise prices and demand will accommodate it, until it doesn't, then they will back off. It's no different with employee and employer; But, the difference is, with employer and employee it's not one on one, it's not parity. The large corporation has a much greater advantage over a single employee, who cannot act with others who fear to join in, for being fired. With a union, an employee now has bargain parity with the employer, which is much more fairer, and the values achieved are truer to their worth and will not be distorted by virtue of lack of bargaining parity.


That fact can be cured with legislation (for shipping jobs overseas).

Unfortunately for you we are not a Communist country yet. The government doesn't have the power (nor should) of forcing employers to stay where they are at. Might want to try Cuba or someplace like that.

No, unions do not determine value of any employee. What determines your worth is what your employer can pay another to do the same job and same quality of work as you do. If you quit a job paying $20.00 an hour because you did not get a raise, and your employer replaces you for another at the same rate of pay, that's all you were worth in the free market. If he has to pay more, you were correct, you were underpaid. If he can pay less, you were being overpaid.

Again, what unions have done is force employers to overpay employees, ergo they could easily find non-union workers for the same money. That's what helped inflate us out of the world market along with high taxation and expensive regulations. That's why China is the main supplier of most of our goods.

 

[jc456]

I remember that the chip shortage had nothing whatsoever to do with a tariff, which was what we were talking about. And you left the argument completely when you called me ignorant. Fuck you BTW.

LOL, tarrifs weren’t in place, should have been and forced manufacturers here to make them. Again, you’re ignorant

 

[initforme]

Unfortunately for you we are not a Communist country yet. The government doesn't have the power (nor should) of forcing employers to stay where they are at. Might want to try Cuba or someplace like that.

No, unions do not determine value of any employee. What determines your worth is what your employer can pay another to do the same job and same quality of work as you do. If you quit a job paying $20.00 an hour because you did not get a raise, and your employer replaces you for another at the same rate of pay, that's all you were worth in the free market. If he has to pay more, you were correct, you were underpaid. If he can pay less, you were being overpaid.

Again, what unions have done is force employers to overpay employees, ergo they could easily find non-union workers for the same money. That's what helped inflate us out of the world market along with high taxation and expensive regulations. That's why China is the main supplier of most of our goods.

So what is the answer? Have people work for lower wages so we can compete with china?

 

[task0778]

LOL, tarrifs weren’t in place, should have been and forced manufacturers here to make them. Again, you’re ignorant

Geez, and this guy thinks I'm ignorant. In this country we do not force anybody to make chips or anything else. And BTW, the word tariff is spelled with one "r" and 2 "f"s.

 

[initforme]

Yeah, and it's easier these days for skilled workers to quit and get a better job too. I doubt there are that many underpaid skilled workers out there, the cost to replace them is high.

The fact is the economy does the best when workers are able to bounce from job to job.

 

[task0778]

The fact is the economy does the best when workers are able to bounce from job to job.

Actually, that is an opinion rather than a fact. What you are describing is inflationary, higher wages lead to higher prices to cover the higher labor costs for the same productivity. Eventually, jobs get moved overseas or across the border, leading to fewer jobs and an economic slowdown if not a recession. Imports become even more attractive due to lower prices, and automation becomes more attractive too. It sounds good but I question the efficacy of that scenario over the long run.

 

[jc456]

So what is the answer? Have people work for lower wages so we can compete with china?

Tarrifs

 

[jc456]

Geez, and this guy thinks I'm ignorant. In this country we do not force anybody to make chips or anything else. And BTW, the word tariff is spelled with one "r" and 2 "f"s.

Ignorance your middle name? We didn’t make chips China did, they froze us out. Again, you don’t understand.

 

[mak2]

Ignorance your middle name? We didn’t make chips China did, they froze us out. Again, you don’t understand.

They froze us out with slave labor, which hurt profit. I think it might be you who doesn't understand why our manufacturing was off shored. It was not regulations, it was that Americans would not work for 2 bucks and hour. China kids would.