Why the GOP Really Hates Unions

[Gunny]

Fuckin-A I'm serious.

We are enjoying, right now, the long term benefits of the short sighted greed of those who sold out the American workers for a few trillion dollars more.

It comes to us as underemployment and unemployment and never-having been-employed-in-the-first place! middle class people who can no longer kept the economic engine of America (and as we are now discovering the whole damned world) going.

Scabs, and the managment who hire them, are nothing but ******* tools who are, whether they know it or not, allowing this world, (not just America) to become a neofuedal international one world of K-K-KAPITALISTs.

I've been witnessing the dismantling of what had been the wealthiest fairest, and by fare most benign Empire in human history, indeed the light of democracy, actually, being violated by the rapacious greed of sociopathic capitalism and the tools that suck its ass upon command.

And that beautiful thing, America, was sold out so formerly American industrialists (who had, let's face, it become richer than anyone on earth had ever been BECAUSE OF AMERICANS) could invest in third world nations where being a trade unionist means some tool (perhaps like our chum Gunnen, there) comes in the night like the ******* cowardly assassin pukes they are, to kill them.

That is what the MOTU want, and I am not especially sympathetic to the class traitors (and traitors to our nation) who have helped facilitate that decline in American power and wealth.

Just as you tell people that would rather not work at a union shop, that they should go some other place......

if you don't like the "K-K-KAPITALIST." way........freekin' MOVE !

Not going anywhere, fellow. We will just change a few rules. A little re-distribution of the wealth to those that create it.

GMAFB. The money isn't redistributed to those that create it. Get your head out of your ass, huh? *I* create the shit by going out and EARNING it. Stealing it from my wallet is just the opposite of that crap you're preaching.

 

[oreo]

By Art Levine, Huffington Post
Posted on February 23, 2009, Printed on February 24, 2009
Why the GOP Really Hates Unions | | AlterNet

The Hoover-like GOP has been working overtime to oppose President Obama's stimulus package while hoping he fails. Meanwhile, a report released yesterday by the Center for American Progress Action Fund essentially underscores the real reasons Republicans and the business community have taken another equally short-sighted economic stance: fighting workers' right to organize. As Unions Are Good For the American Economy points out with irrefutable statistics, unionization raises wages and boosts the economy because it puts more money in the pockets of American workers.

(The report itself, of course, doesn't directly accuse the GOP and corporate interests of opposing economic growth and recovery, but reading its measured analysis of the economic benefit of unions leads to the inescapable conclusion that anti-union business leaders have a misguided zeal for low wages at all cost -- regardless of the impact on their own workers, their firms' productivity, their own long-term profits or the broader economy.)

full story here; Why the GOP Really Hates Unions | Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace | AlterNet

There's always a double edged sword to unions. Take the AWG union that we essentially just bailed out with tax-payer dollars. Toyota a non-union auto maker actually paid their employees more than the AWG. In fact $2.00 more per hour. The AWG union became so powerful that it basically banrupted the American Auto manufacturers they worked for. One actually has to have a job to go to, to expect that higher pay & benefits.

Now--if you're in favor of unions--I would also assume that you do not mind paying much more for the goods & services you desire that a non-union organization could supply at a much cheaper price? Or are you a shopper looking for the best price on goods & services? If you're this person--then the union would not be the place you would call looking for a plumber, electrician, a homebuilder, a restauranteer, an auto dealer, or a clothing store.

 

[Diuretic]

I blame Gompers

 

[KittenKoder]

No! It's all ... Mr. Rogers fault ... *sage nod*

 

[Diuretic]

No! It's all ... Mr. Rogers fault ... *sage nod*

I thought Mr Rogers did a brilliant job in that presentation he gave to the a Senate Committee. It was superb.

Gompers, bah.

We sent you Harry Bridges and you still couldn't get it right

 

[chopcrazy]

When the economy is great, workers benefit as wages increase dramatically, with or without unions. If companies don't pay enough, then they will not prosper. On the other hand, when the economy takes a downturn, unions tend to keep businesses from being competitive. This is not to say unions have no good purpose. The reason they came about was due to the fact that business took advantage of their labor for so long. The problem now is that the unions have gone too far, hurting not only the businesses they work for but also themselves directly.

Obviously, some unions are much stronger than others. I think we need to ask ourselves what makes an auto worker worth $45.00 per hour (wages and benefits included), while the butcher at your local union grocery store is only worth $22.50 per hour. Adding to that, we should ask ourselves another question; could those jobs (autoworkers) that are paid $45.00 per hour be filled by people making $30.00 per hour? Would people stand in line for those same jobs at $30.00 per hour?

People constantly complain that we have lost all of our manufacturing jobs. Well, we have priced ourselves out of the market. It is that simple. I'm not against employees making a fair living wage. However, it needs to be competitive on a global basis, within reason.

The claim that American workers have priced themselves out of the market is nothing but pathetic jargonism that ignores the fact that even at their zenith in the 1950’s unions never had more than 35% penetration in the workforce. If one is to accept your argument one has to believe that 1/3 of the workers ( less than 10% of today’s workforce) priced the entire workforce out of the market! The very notion is laughable.

The reason that manufacturing jobs have fled the nation is that we have had a government that has encouraged and even financed the practice. Many billions of our tax dollars have paid for the construction of plants for American corporations overseas that have caused the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs in the U.S.

The U.S. Economy has moved from Farming to Manufactoring to Service. We are in the era of globalization. Our products must compete on the world stage. We no longer sell products made at home only to people who live here. People that live here want to stretch there wages as far as possible.

An example of mfg jobs going to another country is will airplane mfg. Boeing wants to sell airplanes to Chinese airline. For them to get the deal, Boeing has to have a certain % of parts come from Chinese mfg.

 

[GHook93]

Look should unions be around? Of course. But should they have the power they currently do? Absolutely not! For example, the UAW have strong armed the Big 3 into benefit programs and wages that were unsustainable even in a good auto market! Unions have a place, but if they are built into a giant, the giant will eventually eat the children and bring down the house!

Union's should never be able to strong arm the employer to the point where their arms are tied in dealing with lazy, ineffective or inefficient workers. If an employer does have his hands tied then it will breed lazy, ineffective and inefficient workers.

 

[GHook93]

Why would unions oppose a secret ballot for workers to organize or not organize.....???
Why do they feel they must confront and intimidate a worker face to face with a open vote???

Very true! I thought then and I think now that this had the stench of special interests all over it!

THATS what the GOP is opposed to ...... nothing more?

No the GOP is right in believing that the Unions have too much part and are a prime reason that so much US manufacturing jobs have left for overseas.

And the rest is strawman type bullshit lies from the left ..... as usual..

Amen!

 

[sealybobo]

Look should unions be around? Of course. But should they have the power they currently do? Absolutely not! For example, the UAW have strong armed the Big 3 into benefit programs and wages that were unsustainable even in a good auto market! Unions have a place, but if they are built into a giant, the giant will eventually eat the children and bring down the house!

Union's should never be able to strong arm the employer to the point where their arms are tied in dealing with lazy, ineffective or inefficient workers. If an employer does have his hands tied then it will breed lazy, ineffective and inefficient workers.

Maybe the corporations gave the unions these things during good times when their ceo's were taking home $20 million a year. How do you say no to labor when they do all the work and management is paying themselves so handsomely?

Also keep in mind that American NON UNION corporations are starting to take back from us too. We aren't in unions. So stop letting them bash unions, when really what they are attacking is American labor.

Also, it was a lot easier for the Big 3 to promise pensions (future payments), than it was to give the unions what they originally asked for, and that was RAISES!

So the corporation fucked up. They promised too much, and now you want them to be able to renig? **** that!

 

[sealybobo]

When the economy is great, workers benefit as wages increase dramatically, with or without unions. If companies don't pay enough, then they will not prosper. On the other hand, when the economy takes a downturn, unions tend to keep businesses from being competitive. This is not to say unions have no good purpose. The reason they came about was due to the fact that business took advantage of their labor for so long. The problem now is that the unions have gone too far, hurting not only the businesses they work for but also themselves directly.

Obviously, some unions are much stronger than others. I think we need to ask ourselves what makes an auto worker worth $45.00 per hour (wages and benefits included), while the butcher at your local union grocery store is only worth $22.50 per hour. Adding to that, we should ask ourselves another question; could those jobs (autoworkers) that are paid $45.00 per hour be filled by people making $30.00 per hour? Would people stand in line for those same jobs at $30.00 per hour?

People constantly complain that we have lost all of our manufacturing jobs. Well, we have priced ourselves out of the market. It is that simple. I'm not against employees making a fair living wage. However, it needs to be competitive on a global basis, within reason.

The claim that American workers have priced themselves out of the market is nothing but pathetic jargonism that ignores the fact that even at their zenith in the 1950’s unions never had more than 35% penetration in the workforce. If one is to accept your argument one has to believe that 1/3 of the workers ( less than 10% of today’s workforce) priced the entire workforce out of the market! The very notion is laughable.

The reason that manufacturing jobs have fled the nation is that we have had a government that has encouraged and even financed the practice. Many billions of our tax dollars have paid for the construction of plants for American corporations overseas that have caused the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs in the U.S.

The U.S. Economy has moved from Farming to Manufactoring to Service. We are in the era of globalization. Our products must compete on the world stage. We no longer sell products made at home only to people who live here. People that live here want to stretch there wages as far as possible.

An example of mfg jobs going to another country is will airplane mfg. Boeing wants to sell airplanes to Chinese airline. For them to get the deal, Boeing has to have a certain % of parts come from Chinese mfg.

We aren't manufacturing anything. That's the problem. No superpower has ever maintained their position in the world by outsourcing everything. This is exactly what happened to England.

This is a great op ed I hope you read.

ThomHartmann.com - McKinley or Roosevelt? This Election is as Much About the Past as the Future

From the Gilded Age to the Great Depression to today, the economic agenda of conservatives has been easily summarized in two words: "cheap labor."

None of this could have been possible without generous corporate "reforms" to bankruptcy laws pushed through Congress in the last few years by conservatives, and the lifetime appointment of conservative judges to seats on federal courts by conservative administrations. Judge Howard, for example, was appointed during the reign of George H.W. Bush, and his decisions continue to destroy union jobs and reduce labor costs for mining companies under the reign of George W. Bush.

Following the Wagner Act's implementation, and Roosevelt’s raising of the top marginal income tax rate on multi-millionaires to 90 percent, however, the first true American middle class came into being.

But in 1947 the cheap-labor conservatives fought back. In the elections of 1946, Democrats lost control of both the U.S. House and the Senate, allowing Republican legislators to push through the Taft-Hartley bill, which essentially allowed individual states to opt out of portions of the Wagner act. It was an early domestic version of the "free trade" disaster we're seeing now with NAFTA and GATT/WTO - a race to the cheap labor bottom - that started to take root in the American south right after passage of Taft-Hartley. Although President Harry Truman vetoed the Taft-Hartley assault on labor, Republicans in the House and Senate overrode his veto and it became law.

From then until the end of the Jimmy Carter presidency, unionization - and, thus, average worker wages in the United States - only gradually declined. When Ronald Reagan came into office, a quarter of the American workforce was unionized, meaning half of Americans could raise a middle-class family on a single salary.

But then Reagan declared war on the middle class, starting with the air traffic controller's union (PATCO) during his first year in office. The conservative assault on labor has been unrelenting since then: Today only about 8 percent of the private-sector American workforce is unionized, and at the same time Education Secretary Rod Paige described the teachers' union as a "terrorist organization," George W. Bush announced plans to lay off over 700,000 unionized government employees and replace them with non-union "contractors."

While gutting the American middle class, conservatives also launched a well-funded propaganda campaign - using right-wing "think tanks" and talk radio - to convince workers that their growing economic woes were the fault of minorities ("affirmative action") and the poor ("welfare queens"). At the same time, they began stacking federal benches with conservative judges, and passing thousands of federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations that further weakened the powers of organized labor and their ability to unionize.

It's just fine, they said, for capital to organize in the form of a corporation. It's great when corporations organize into trade associations, chambers of commerce, industry groups, and lobbying consortiums. But to have workers organize to level the playing field? Inconceivable.

The result has been an explosion in CEO and executive pay, a rush of wealth to the conservative elite (the top 10 percent of Americans now own 71 percent of the nation’s wealth), and this year's cut in taxes to a maximum 15 percent for those who "earn their living" by sitting around the pool waiting for their dividend checks to arrive.

 

[cbi0090]

Anyone with an ounce of self-determination about them does not like unions. It's not just the GOP.
Unions just aren't needed any more. Back when the government had no oversite ability they were needed because there were those who did take advantage of workers. The coal mine wars are a very specific example. But governmental regulation has evolved over the years that they just aren't needed.
They don't provide or assure benefits, training, etc. that they say they do for the workers anymore. They don't even represent the workers anymore, they are political power brokers with little oversite or transparency.
I watched a farmer's barn burn down one summer because he and his sons built it on his property over the protests of the carpenter's union. The man needed a barn but he couldn't afford to hire union carpenters, so he and his sons built it themselves. They waited till he was finished and burnt it down, then wouldn't let the unionized firemen put it out.
The fight is not between big corporations and unions, as they like to portray. Big corporations manage one way or another. The fight is between small business and unions. Small business employs far more people than big corporations do in this country. They are the backbone and the people who start, own and run them take far more risks than most can imagine. They do it to do something better, something different, something entirely new, because they see opportunity. People will not take risks without substantial opportunity setting on the other end.
Unions smother those who would otherwise take risks. They want control, so they stand between progress with absolutes, judged by people who have rarely worked or taken a risk once in their useless lives. I grew up in a union town and I know it, I saw it, I lived it, and ran away from it as quickly as I could.

 

[sealybobo]

Anyone with an ounce of self-determination about them does not like unions. It's not just the GOP.
Unions just aren't needed any more. Back when the government had no oversite ability they were needed because there were those who did take advantage of workers. The coal mine wars are a very specific example. But governmental regulation has evolved over the years that they just aren't needed.
They don't provide or assure benefits, training, etc. that they say they do for the workers anymore. They don't even represent the workers anymore, they are political power brokers with little oversite or transparency.
I watched a farmer's barn burn down one summer because he and his sons built it on his property over the protests of the carpenter's union. The man needed a barn but he couldn't afford to hire union carpenters, so he and his sons built it themselves. They waited till he was finished and burnt it down, then wouldn't let the unionized firemen put it out.
The fight is not between big corporations and unions, as they like to portray. Big corporations manage one way or another. The fight is between small business and unions. Small business employs far more people than big corporations do in this country. They are the backbone and the people who start, own and run them take far more risks than most can imagine. They do it to do something better, something different, something entirely new, because they see opportunity. People will not take risks without substantial opportunity setting on the other end.
Unions smother those who would otherwise take risks. They want control, so they stand between progress with absolutes, judged by people who have rarely worked or taken a risk once in their useless lives. I grew up in a union town and I know it, I saw it, I lived it, and ran away from it as quickly as I could.

So I take it you didn't look at the link I provided below.

Here is the part of the story that contradicts your assumption that unions aren't needed anymore.


From the Gilded Age to the Great Depression to today, the economic agenda of conservatives has been easily summarized in two words: "cheap labor." Nowhere was that more clearly on display than in the recent decision by Judge William S. Howard that "relieved" coal companies from having to pay already-earned retirement benefits to coal miners in Kentucky, West Virginia, Indiana, and Illinois.

While the coal industry spends millions on feel-good TV advertisements featuring an eagle impressed by how they're (ahem) cleaning up the air, coal companies are cleaning up their balance sheets to give stockholders and CEOs better returns, and using bankruptcy laws to bust unions. The newest scheme is for unionized companies with pension liabilities to declare bankruptcy - during a boom time in the coal business, particularly given coal's attractiveness compared to $55/barrel oil - and then sell their operations to each other to re-open with non-union labor.

Thousands of miners - many with serious health problems – were forced to watch helplessly this month as their pensions and health benefits evaporated into thin air with, as New York Times writer James Dao noted, "a swipe of Judge William S. Howard's pen..."

None of this could have been possible without generous corporate "reforms" to bankruptcy laws pushed through Congress in the last few years by conservatives, and the lifetime appointment of conservative judges to seats on federal courts by conservative administrations. Judge Howard, for example, was appointed during the reign of George H.W. Bush, and his decisions continue to destroy union jobs and reduce labor costs for mining companies under the reign of George W. Bush.

 

[KittenKoder]

Sorry Sealy, but the first part of what you quoted just proves it's from a partisan source anyway, even I wouldn't touch the link.

 

[sealybobo]

Anyone with an ounce of self-determination about them does not like unions. It's not just the GOP.
Unions just aren't needed any more. Back when the government had no oversite ability they were needed because there were those who did take advantage of workers. The coal mine wars are a very specific example. But governmental regulation has evolved over the years that they just aren't needed.
They don't provide or assure benefits, training, etc. that they say they do for the workers anymore. They don't even represent the workers anymore, they are political power brokers with little oversite or transparency.
I watched a farmer's barn burn down one summer because he and his sons built it on his property over the protests of the carpenter's union. The man needed a barn but he couldn't afford to hire union carpenters, so he and his sons built it themselves. They waited till he was finished and burnt it down, then wouldn't let the unionized firemen put it out.
The fight is not between big corporations and unions, as they like to portray. Big corporations manage one way or another. The fight is between small business and unions. Small business employs far more people than big corporations do in this country. They are the backbone and the people who start, own and run them take far more risks than most can imagine. They do it to do something better, something different, something entirely new, because they see opportunity. People will not take risks without substantial opportunity setting on the other end.
Unions smother those who would otherwise take risks. They want control, so they stand between progress with absolutes, judged by people who have rarely worked or taken a risk once in their useless lives. I grew up in a union town and I know it, I saw it, I lived it, and ran away from it as quickly as I could.

Do you know that under Bush, coal miner owners were put in charge of regulating their own coal mines? And when they were found to not be following the rules, the fines were rediculously low.

AND, keep in mind the coal mines that collapsed last year were not union coal mines.

Those god damn regulations, costing the poor coal mine owners their precious profits. So a few miners die. What's the big deal, right?

Safetly costs too much!!!

 

[KittenKoder]

Again ... I have said this before in other topics ... mining coal is inherently dangerous, even deadly. No matter the precautions taken they do not live long.

 

[sealybobo]

Sorry Sealy, but the first part of what you quoted just proves it's from a partisan source anyway, even I wouldn't touch the link.

Do you expect conservatives/republicans to admit this is going on?

coal companies are cleaning up their balance sheets to give stockholders and CEOs better returns, and using bankruptcy laws to bust unions. The newest scheme is for unionized companies with pension liabilities to declare bankruptcy - during a boom time in the coal business, particularly given coal's attractiveness compared to $55/barrel oil - and then sell their operations to each other to re-open with non-union labor.

Thousands of miners - many with serious health problems – were forced to watch helplessly this month as their pensions and health benefits evaporated into thin air

This I suspect is what the Big 3 will be doing very soon.

Suckers!!!

 

[Patriot2009]

Then dont work at a place with unions.

not possible in san francisco.....

What a load of crap!

Only 16.7% of the workforce in California is unionized, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. And, then there’s the fact that even though California isn’t a so-called right-to-work state, not all union employers have closed shops.

If you can't get a job in California in a non-union shop, its only because you haven't applied or business is down and the companies simply aren't hiring.

 

[KittenKoder]

Sealy, there are non-partisan sources of information, ones that show the stories from both sides and the facts of them as well. They can be hard to find buried under all the crap but they are there. I have found them at random, wish I would save the links more but once I read something I don't have to read it again so I don't think to save em. Just look for them, it gives more strength to your argument since it seems a habit of people to completely ignore anything that disagrees with their idea anyway. You may as well at least make it interesting enough for us with brains to read.

 

[sealybobo]

Again ... I have said this before in other topics ... mining coal is inherently dangerous, even deadly. No matter the precautions taken they do not live long.

What the **** is wrong with you? The GOP deregulated the industry to make it less safe or MORE Dangerous because making it safe costs them profits.

Why don't you care that the mine owners made things less safe so they could make more money?

Apparently you do not come from a mining family.

So do you approve of mine owners slacking off on keeping their mines safe?

I don't think you understand what you are saying. So you are saying, "because it is an unsafe job, its ok if mine owners slack off on making their mines safer because they are unsafe so why bother"?????

Would it change your opinion if you found out that because of the slacking off of mine safety, that is why those mines caved in last year?

 

[elvis]

By Art Levine, Huffington Post
Posted on February 23, 2009, Printed on February 24, 2009
Why the GOP Really Hates Unions | | AlterNet

The Hoover-like GOP has been working overtime to oppose President Obama's stimulus package while hoping he fails. Meanwhile, a report released yesterday by the Center for American Progress Action Fund essentially underscores the real reasons Republicans and the business community have taken another equally short-sighted economic stance: fighting workers' right to organize. As Unions Are Good For the American Economy points out with irrefutable statistics, unionization raises wages and boosts the economy because it puts more money in the pockets of American workers.

(The report itself, of course, doesn't directly accuse the GOP and corporate interests of opposing economic growth and recovery, but reading its measured analysis of the economic benefit of unions leads to the inescapable conclusion that anti-union business leaders have a misguided zeal for low wages at all cost -- regardless of the impact on their own workers, their firms' productivity, their own long-term profits or the broader economy.)

full story here; Why the GOP Really Hates Unions | Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace | AlterNet

unionization can also help send jobs overseas.