The union P.R. problem.

28 posts / 0 new

First of all they complain --- a lot.

Secondly, they deny economic reality. Last year, my company announced that all pay raises, overtime and promotions will be suspended indefinitely. Nobody, not a single employee complained that this is a "war on working families". Make no mistake we ARE working families.

That is another mistake they make. They try to leave the impression that they are the REAL working families and everyone else is somehow less worthy. I know many hard working people and very few of them belong to unions. Please don't act as if you are the only "working" people.

Public unions expect the general population to rally behind them and throw a fit if their members are asked to contribute a little more to their own retirement or health care. When my company announced our cutbacks, guess how many union people showed up to complain that this was not fair? Yet they insist that we be there for them. I have my own finances to worry about. I really don't have the time and energy to worry about yours.

They don't have it worse than the private sector as they sometimes claim. My wife is an educator. She gets about 15 weeks of vacation per year. No one else will ever admit that this is a sweet deal. But she loves sitting on the patio and reading a book while everyone else is at work. What her co-workers claim is that they work more hours and days than people realize. Of course they do! Virually every salaried employee works long hours, weekends and extra days. But most of them are not complaining that they a being worked too hard. Teachers get much, much more time off than your average Joe. They do them selves a dis service by claiming they don't.

I have some advice for union folks. If you feel you are not appreciated. If your salary, benefits and job satisfaction is not where you believe it should be, then quit. Take your skills and find a new job. That is what the rest of us do and it works quite well. Find a job that makes you happy.

Union people do not have it worse and have not had to make more concessions than the the rest of us. Stop claiming that they have.

I am not anti union. I am anti whining.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

Comments

Then stop it. You are whining on steroids. You know who has the money and the sweet lifestyle, and it ain't your wife or you. I am glad a teacher can have a break and read for pleasure. I would like to have corporate show some integrity on pensions and benefits for the non-union workers, and I would like labor laws that don't screw workers to make owners fat and happy.

Divide and conquer for the Kochs is what your post does. We do not need to divide union and non-union workers, we need to unify those who think that living wages and the ability to have the modest rewards of work should be available to all Americans. And yeah, you are paying too much of the taxes the rich are avoiding. So stop whiling about unions and get busy on corporate.

Public unions have historically traded salary for delayed benefits to help states financially during fat years. Even when the bubbles were lovely, you did not see teachers getting big raises and benefits. You did not see cops and firemen joining the country club. So, when the bubbles burst and corporate screws its employees while still pocketing big bucks, union benefits suddenly look luxurious. And we are "broke."

We have a revenue problem because the rich and corporations are not paying the taxes they once paid. Our trade policies, written and driven by the Plantation Owners, are not about a vibrant domestic market. This is labor arbitrage and state socialism at work. Of course those whose economic model is the sweatshop and plantation do not care about having a Middle Class America. They are not trying to sell us goods, they are controlling the necessities.

Fight the power, not the victims.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Great post, DRC! Thank you.

I wanted to add that, historically, unions have provided a positive "trickle-down" effect on non-unionized employers. There has been an incentive to keep wages and benefits at a certain standard in order to prevent labor organizing to occur. I can speak from personal experience, as a former FedEx driver, that the fact that UPS is unionized influenced FedEx to toe a certain line with the treatment of its labor force.

sashasue's picture
sashasue
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote DRC:

You know who has the money and the sweet lifestyle, and it ain't your wife or you. And yeah, you are paying too much of the taxes the rich are avoiding.

Public unions have historically traded salary for delayed benefits to help states financially during fat years. Even when the bubbles were lovely, you did not see teachers getting big raises and benefits. You did not see cops and firemen joining the country club. So, when the bubbles burst and corporate screws its employees while still pocketing big bucks, union benefits suddenly look luxurious. And we are "broke."

We have a revenue problem because the rich and corporations are not paying the taxes they once paid. Fight the power, not the victims.

The rich did not steal their "sweet lifestyle" from you or me. Do you realize how many people are employed at country clubs? They are employed thanks to the rich. The rich go the the country club and spread the wealth around. The people at the country club are not asking me for more money. I do not fund them. They earn their own money without my help. What about those union yacht builders? Where would they be without the rich. OUT OF A JOB. Where would most people be without the rich? OUT OF A JOB. Jobs are created by the rich. We cannot simply spend, spend, spend,spend then complain that we are not spending enough and insist that our rich sugar daddies save us from our selves.

There are a few liberal companies such as GE and people such as Tim Geithner and Charlie Rangel who pay little or no taxes. But generally speaking the rich use less government services and pay more taxes for it. I know it's not fair, but its true.

How much more money would union people have if they did not have to pay off union bosses?

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

We must live in two different worlds. Specifically, that bizzaro "opposite" world from the SCFI shows.. Project much? The first line of your post says it all. Yes unions complain a lot, because thats their job.. If companies operated ethically, there would be no need for unions..

Quote rigel1:

First of all they complain --- a lot.

Secondly, they deny economic reality. Last year, my company announced that all pay raises, overtime and promotions will be suspended indefinitely. Nobody, not a single employee complained that this is a "war on working families". Make no mistake we ARE working families.

That is another mistake they make. They try to leave the impression that they are the REAL working families and everyone else is somehow less worthy. I know many hard working people and very few of them belong to unions. Please don't act as if you are the only "working" people.

Public unions expect the general population to rally behind them and throw a fit if their members are asked to contribute a little more to their own retirement or health care. When my company announced our cutbacks, guess how many union people showed up to complain that this was not fair? Yet they insist that we be there for them. I have my own finances to worry about. I really don't have the time and energy to worry about yours.

They don't have it worse than the private sector as they sometimes claim. My wife is an educator. She gets about 15 weeks of vacation per year. No one else will ever admit that this is a sweet deal. But she loves sitting on the patio and reading a book while everyone else is at work. What her co-workers claim is that they work more hours and days than people realize. Of course they do! Virually every salaried employee works long hours, weekends and extra days. But most of them are not complaining that they a being worked too hard. Teachers get much, much more time off than your average Joe. They do them selves a dis service by claiming they don't.

I have some advice for union folks. If you feel you are not appreciated. If your salary, benefits and job satisfaction is not where you believe it should be, then quit. Take your skills and find a new job. That is what the rest of us do and it works quite well. Find a job that makes you happy.

Union people do not have it worse and have not had to make more concessions than the the rest of us. Stop claiming that they have.

I am not anti union. I am anti whining.

bobbler's picture
bobbler
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote bobbler:

We must live in two different worlds. Specifically, that bizzaro "opposite" world from the SCFI shows.. Project much? The first line of your post says it all. Yes unions complain a lot, because thats their job.. If companies operated ethically, there would be no need for unions..

Quote rigel1:

First of all they complain --- a lot.

Secondly, they deny economic reality. Last year, my company announced that all pay raises, overtime and promotions will be suspended indefinitely. Nobody, not a single employee complained that this is a "war on working families". Make no mistake we ARE working families.

That is another mistake they make. They try to leave the impression that they are the REAL working families and everyone else is somehow less worthy. I know many hard working people and very few of them belong to unions. Please don't act as if you are the only "working" people.

Public unions expect the general population to rally behind them and throw a fit if their members are asked to contribute a little more to their own retirement or health care. When my company announced our cutbacks, guess how many union people showed up to complain that this was not fair? Yet they insist that we be there for them. I have my own finances to worry about. I really don't have the time and energy to worry about yours.

They don't have it worse than the private sector as they sometimes claim. My wife is an educator. She gets about 15 weeks of vacation per year. No one else will ever admit that this is a sweet deal. But she loves sitting on the patio and reading a book while everyone else is at work. What her co-workers claim is that they work more hours and days than people realize. Of course they do! Virually every salaried employee works long hours, weekends and extra days. But most of them are not complaining that they a being worked too hard. Teachers get much, much more time off than your average Joe. They do them selves a dis service by claiming they don't.

I have some advice for union folks. If you feel you are not appreciated. If your salary, benefits and job satisfaction is not where you believe it should be, then quit. Take your skills and find a new job. That is what the rest of us do and it works quite well. Find a job that makes you happy.

Union people do not have it worse and have not had to make more concessions than the the rest of us. Stop claiming that they have.

I am not anti union. I am anti whining.

I don't think that there is any evidence that companies are any less ethical then unions. Ever heard of Jimmy Hofffa? There is no doubt there is some heavy duty corruption in the unions. Hence the term "union goons." Unions would be a lot better without the greedy, corrupt union bosses. I once worked for an highly unethical company. We'll call them Prictor and Gumble. I got fed up, gave them the finger and left for a different job. They did not deserve me. Their loss! We all have choices and corruption is everywhere. Especially amoung the union elite.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

rigel1 wrote,"I have my own finances to worry about. I really don't have the time and energy to worry about yours."

The fundamental delusion of humanity is to suppose that I am here and you are out there.

We do not learn by experience but by our capacity for experience. Loosen up a little dude.

Demand creates jobs. Money in consumers pockets creates demand.

bamboo's picture
bamboo
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

rigel, I have tried to keep my responses to you pretty civil but here you have struck a nerve and I must call it as it is - you are full of shit.

1. I have been in the education profession for about 10 years now. While teacher salaries are state by state and district by district, most teachers across the country have been taking pay cuts for the last decade every single year. I have seen teachers get almost $10,000 taken off their paychecks right before they retire which reflects upon their pension payout. I have seen teachers in the middle of their careers PAY BACK money to their district for the previous year's work. Have you ever had a company come to you and say, "Yeah you know all that money we paid you last year? Well, it turns out we didn't like your work as much as we thought we did so you are gonna have to give us about $5000 of that back over the next 6 months". And I have seen educators come out of a 5 year degree program (that's right 5 years because most teachers complete a 4 year degree, a certification program, AND an internship as part of their degree) and then get paid barely enough wages to be considered lower middle class to start their careers. While you have someone who completes an IT certificate in 3 and then gets paid $60,000 a year for sitting around in an office all day playing spider solitaire for 8 hours. Most teachers I know have summer jobs and don't have summers off. If your wife leeches off you all summer so she can read and drink pina coladas on the porch that is YOUR problem not a systemic reality. Most teachers are required to do professional development to maintain their licensure and THEY PAY FOR IT out of pocket. When was the last time your work said to you - "By the way, you have to take these 3 college courses by theend of the year. It will cost $7,000 all together and, guess what, you get to pay for it."?

2. As a teacher, I worked 60 hour work weeks during the school year. I think I've earned a little time off to pick up a second job to supplement my $28,000/year income don't you?

3. As a non-umion employee you clearly have no idea how collective bargaining works. I don't really blame you for this because Fox News and Walker and the rest of the (R) Gov.-Goons have been intentionally misinforming the public to leverage their view point. Collective bargaining negotiates the entire compensation package as one collective unit - all the employees, a pay schedule, a benefits package, and a penion are all rolled into one big friggin lump. So, when Walker turns to the citizens of Wisconsin and says wepay nothing into our pensions he is LYING HIS ASS OFF. We pay ALLLLLLLLL of our pensions. The difference is simply where you put the damn number in the collective contract. When the state "pays" our pensions, it gets taken off what would have been included in our salaries. It is simply a hell of a lot easier to book keep if they just never roll it into the paycheck AND it saves them on legacy costs because our pension payout is a function of our salary. So, riddle me this professor: If you have the option to pay a teacher $50,000 and then make them pay $10,000 into their pension and then later you had to pay out 80% of the $50,000 as option A... OR you could pay a teacher $40,000 and pay the $10,000 yourself into their pension but then you only had to pay 80% of the $40.000 out for their pension as option B, which would you do? hmm? If you selected option B you are smarter than you let on and that is exactly what state employees typically do FOR THE TAXPAYER to save the state some money. They get the same wage but less pension later on, the state pays the same amount now and less out in pensions later. It is really that simple but all you brilliant economic conservatives can't seem to wrap your damn head around it.

4. Unions don't just fight for their own jobs and benefits. We prop up wages and benefits of non-union workers AND we lobby for pro-labor issues in the government so that YOU can have a better lot in life. How about you say THANK YOU or STFU.

5. If you want to complain about Hoffa why don't you go back to the 1950s and bitch. Labor laws regarding unions have changed. Name the modern day Jimma Hoffa and give evidence as to why you consider him/her a "goon" and might actually consider it a valid argument.

6. I have NEVER heard anyone from a union worker claim that we have it harder off or that we make more concessions than non-union workers. In fact, if anything characterizes these conversation regarding unionized labor it is exactly the OPPOSITE of what you are saying. Basically what I hear you doing in this thread is exaclty what you are crying about that you percieve in the unions. But I haven't seen union workers on here doing what you are doing now. I put some of my own experiences in here in response to you but, to my knowledge, most of us have basically kept that crap to ourselves and focused on this as a civil rights issue. YOU ON THE OTHER HAND, have done nothing but cry and whine and bitch and moan about how hard you non-union workers have had it and how much you've sacrificed and how much you have had to give up and that all us union folks just need to suck it up. All the while you have NO FRIGGIN CLUE WHAT THE HELL ALL OF US UNION WORKERS HAVE BEEN THROUGH, HAVE SACRIFICED, OR DEALT WITH over the past decade of Republican policy bullcrap.

Tell you what rigel, if you are so pissed off about the economic situation, stop voting Republican, stop making Republican talking points, and stop buying Republican bullshit BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ONES THAT BENT YOU OVER AND TOOK YOUR WAGES AND BENEFITS. YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW. I voted for pro-labor candidates my friend, I have a right to complain when I see happen what all of us KNEW would happen when Bush got elected into office. All of you who put him there thinking it was the greatest idea since sliced bread need to STFU AND SIT IN THE CORNER. You are DONE telling all of us to suck it up because of something the people YOU VOTED FOR did. If you want to elect people to ruin our economy, that is your perogative but don't turn around after they've done it and tell me that I have to pick up the slack for a dumbass decision YOU made.

Good day.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

As far as corruption goes, trying to compare worker unions, to corporate crooks, is like comparing a 10 speed bike to a space rocket (but nice try anyway).. Unions purpose is a fair days pay for a fair days work.. Crooks are everywhere the money is, so its possible there were some crroked union bosses (I dont know).. What I do know is crooked CEO's are commonplace, and are stealing vast sums of money from the Anmerican economy.. As well as subverting free elections in America (from corproate money bribes to politicians)..

Quote rigel1:

I don't think that there is any evidence that companies are any less ethical then unions. Ever heard of Jimmy Hofffa? There is no doubt there is some heavy duty corruption in the unions. Hence the term "union goons." Unions would be a lot better without the greedy, corrupt union bosses. I once worked for an highly unethical company. We'll call them Prictor and Gumble. I got fed up, gave them the finger and left for a different job. They did not deserve me. Their loss! We all have choices and corruption is everywhere. Especially amoung the union elite.

bobbler's picture
bobbler
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

rigel1 is absolutely correct about one thing: unions do have a PR problem. The only question is whether it is deserved or not.

I've been a union member for about 20 years and can offer up my completely empirical study of the PR issue. I can comfortably say that 8 out of every 10 people I've entered into a conversation about work and divulged my union membership have a negative view of unions. Is this deserved or not? It probably has a lot to do with dwindling union membership which produces fewer people who have a first hand knowledge of unions.

Are union thugs any different than corporate thugs? The union thugs have lost much of their power over the past few decades while the corporate thugs have gained. There is no question that union membership is down from decades ago, but is it because workers do not want to be in unions or is it because the unions simply are not there to join any more? If you give too much power to either side, bad things happen. That is undeniable.

"Power corrupts, absolute Power corrupts absolutely" Lord Acton

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

American labor laws are a bad joke. The PR against unions has been unrelenting forever. The actual dynamics of unions and management would not be a problem if management did not have an attitude. Unions cannot get more than there is, and getting enough is not something "right to work for less' will ever produce.

When people are involved in large production or service organizations, neither side is operating on a "personal" basis. Collective bargaining works for both sides of the table, and when management sees labor as a valuable business asset instead of a cost overhead, the issue is not how little can be squeezed from the workers to increase the profits of the investors and managers. It is what will get the job done right.

Among many criticisms I have of our education in business technique instead of commerce in society is the bad accounting that results from seeing labor in an adversarial light. It is not the way to long term prosperity. It is about more than creating the consumers for products, it is about the whole picture of investing in value.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote ah2:

rigel, I have tried to keep my responses to you pretty civil but here you have struck a nerve and I must call it as it is - you are full of shit.

ah2, I have tried to keep my responses to you civil as well. The only difference is that I have suceeded. I may disagree with your point of view or politics, but I won't insult you. When we do that, we lower ourselves to the level of Sean Hannity.

By the my wife is an educator as well. I know the drill. That is why you will never hear me say anything negative about teachers. Thanks for your hard work. But my union comment stands.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am

I could sit here all night and go on about how unions are bad for USA but I'll spare you.I will however tell a quick story about how they are bad for workers incentive to work. Many years ago my wife was a Safeway checker, a "good union job".She worked hard and was one of the fastest checkers they had. Her reward for this was the worst hours in the store,nights and weekends.The slow checkers with bad attitudes and worse work ethic got the best hours, 8-5 monday - friday because thats when things were slow.Union contracts dont reward work, they reward years on the job, show up goof off or show up bust your ass, it all pays the same.Sounds a bit like communisim and old Soviet Union doesn't it.

snowmaniac's picture
snowmaniac
Joined:
Mar. 25, 2011 5:58 am

Snowmaniac: So, if we completely abolished collective bargaining rights in the private and public sector, you think our country would be better off? That sounds like America around the turn of the century 1900. The good old days.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

There's an old British movie with Peter Sellers as the union steward in a manufacturing plant. He has a relative (I think) come live with him and go to work at the same plant. The relative then proceeds to upset the whole balance of things, and cause all kinds of problems for Peter Sellers' character. I can't remember the title. It's pretty funny. I suppose there is always going to be that dynamic, human nature being what it is. However, unions are such a small percentage of the workforce now that the pendulum has swung too far towards higher and higher productivity for the same or less pay, and if you complain, well, there's this long line of people waiting to take your place.

rmunson0
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote ah2:

I have seen teachers in the middle of their careers PAY BACK money to their district for the previous year's work. Have you ever had a company come to you and say, "Yeah you know all that money we paid you last year? Well, it turns out we didn't like your work as much as we thought we did so you are gonna have to give us about $5000 of that back over the next 6 months". And I have seen educators come out of a 5 year degree program (that's right 5 years because most teachers complete a 4 year degree, a certification program, AND an internship as part of their degree) and then get paid barely enough wages to be considered lower middle class to start their careers. While you have someone who completes an IT certificate in 3 and then gets paid $60,000 a year for sitting around in an office all day playing spider solitaire for 8 hours. Most teachers I know have summer jobs and don't have summers off.

2. As a teacher, I worked 60 hour work weeks during the school year. I think I've earned a little time off to pick up a second job to supplement my $28,000/year income don't you?

This is what your union has done for you and you STILL support them? Why ? I will bet your union bosses are doing much better than you are. I got news for you friend. You should stop sending them your hard earned money. Most private school non-union teachers are earning far more than you. And they don't have to send ANY of their money to union goons.

There are very few unhappy private school teachers. And the results show.

rigel1's picture
rigel1
Joined:
Jan. 31, 2011 7:49 am
Quote snowmaniac:

(unions) are bad for workers incentive to work ..... Union contracts dont reward work, they reward years on the job, show up goof off or show up bust your ass, it all pays the same.

I am not a union apologist. Nothing in this world is perfect. However, you are wrong in assuming that all union contracts reward years on the job and not work. I'm in a trade union and your work is about all you have to pave the way for more work tomorrow.

I've always felt that union contracts that bargain for a pecking order based on seniority are wrongheaded. I believe when unions bargain for tenure and seniority, they do so at their own peril. There is a real possibility that any union with those type of rules can become very top heavy if they do not have a forward thinking strategy that brings younger members through the ranks. I believe seniority rules are one of the most corrosive union rules and are rightfully looked upon badly by most people except those who directly benefit from those rules.

Perhaps you can argue that construction trades and teachers are different in that an older construction worker might be less useful due to age, but a teacher who is not doing physical labor that is not necessarily true. I for one, have always thought the tenure thing to be unfair as well as other seniority rules.

Nobody should be guaranteed a job for life except a supreme court justice and lately I've been questioning that one.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Labor I think we pretty much agree. Unions have become bloated over reaching entities, not the unions of the past that seriously protected workers’ rights. They have morphed into something else. They now are damn near as bad as the companies they were originally founded to protect workers from. Ok maybe I have gone too far for you but I do agree on tenure thing.

snowmaniac's picture
snowmaniac
Joined:
Mar. 25, 2011 5:58 am

We may agree on that, but I still believe unions are a necessary counterbalance to capital. When you remove or lighten that counterbalance, the middle class loses. The middle class has been losing ground in lockstep with the decline of organized labor over the past few decades.

There are just as many stories about abuses on the capital side of the ledger as there are on the union side. So, your comment about bloated unions applies as well to bloated corporations. It's an equilibrium thing.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Interesting discussion on the morphing of unions, from being a force to create and protect the workplace of its members to becoming a political tool that uses the dues of their members to do things to sustain their own existence. I always wondered if the ultimate goal of big UNION was socialist in nature---the problem with socialism, however, is eventually you run out of other people's money.

FreeThinkingIndependent's picture
FreeThinkingInd...
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

The only "morphing" has been the anti-union pr fed by constant media interests in undermining the power of labor in Commerce. It also makes unions less powerful politically for the advocates of labor v. Corporate, so Corporate Money dwarfs the ability of labor unions to compete.

This is why the attack on public unions has any legs at all. Divide and conquer should be more obvious to the whiners who complain that the union people get larger crumbs from the corporate feast. Aim at the feasters you idiots! Stop doing their work for them.

Teachers' Unions and nurses strike to get good education and healthcare when the managers try to speed up the workplace and cut staff. Teachers want to teach and nurses want to heal. They did not go into these professions with money as the lead value, and their unions do not argue for money as their chief interest. The money does matter because it has a lot to do with quality in schools and hospitals. Management has become the problem because it is money driven rather than education or healthcare driven.

Stop blaming the unions for this.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote rigel1:
Quote ah2:

I have seen teachers in the middle of their careers PAY BACK money to their district for the previous year's work. Have you ever had a company come to you and say, "Yeah you know all that money we paid you last year? Well, it turns out we didn't like your work as much as we thought we did so you are gonna have to give us about $5000 of that back over the next 6 months". And I have seen educators come out of a 5 year degree program (that's right 5 years because most teachers complete a 4 year degree, a certification program, AND an internship as part of their degree) and then get paid barely enough wages to be considered lower middle class to start their careers. While you have someone who completes an IT certificate in 3 and then gets paid $60,000 a year for sitting around in an office all day playing spider solitaire for 8 hours. Most teachers I know have summer jobs and don't have summers off.

2. As a teacher, I worked 60 hour work weeks during the school year. I think I've earned a little time off to pick up a second job to supplement my $28,000/year income don't you?

This is what your union has done for you and you STILL support them? Why ? I will bet your union bosses are doing much better than you are. I got news for you friend. You should stop sending them your hard earned money. Most private school non-union teachers are earning far more than you. And they don't have to send ANY of their money to union goons.

There are very few unhappy private school teachers. And the results show.

Actually, this is what happened when Wisconsin took away our bargaining right the first time with the Qualified Economic Offer law. The union did the best they could with what they had. The point was, in any case, that unions do not blindly milk tax payers for every cent they can. Typically, it is the other way around. Unions tend to try to find reasonable compensation packages that, in general, are merely trying to recover ground that we have progressively lost over the last 70 years.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 10:00 pm

My last 2 contracts have provided 0% increase in wages while taking all of the compensation bargained for to keep the healthcare and pension funded. For that I am grateful. There are a whole lot of people who have gone with no raises or very meager wage increases for years while their healthcare costs have eroded their total income not to mention the Wall Street theft of their 410k funds.

It's amazing how these very same people getting screwed by the corporations have been convinced that the unions are to blame. The unions aren't the cause of your stagnant wages, rising healthcare costs and stock market crash. Instead of grabbing your pitchforks and torches against the unions with some foolish notion that a non-union world will be more fair, you ought to be organizing your fellow workers to keep the corporations from sucking every last nickel from your pocket.

Laborisgood's picture
Laborisgood
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote "rigel-1":But generally speaking the rich use less government services and pay more taxes for it. I know it's not fair, but its true.

Actually, we can argue the fairness of true things but not that statement.The wealthy do not pay as much taxes on the wealth they control as a percentage of the total wealth as the poor do. In fact the Republican party is well known to invent new ways to transfer the tax burdon from the poor to the rich.

When you say the rich use less government services, are you kidding? All the court cases at any given time are usually one rich person suing another. Probate too is the domain of the wealthy more than the poor. The roads and bridges sustain more wear and tear from heavy trucks hauling corporate goods than from Thom's Prius or my Jeep. The wealthy use the government more in their business dealings as well. The regulations and agencies that enforce them are used much more by the wealthy. The military, which uses half of our discretionary income, is used more to defend corporate interests than human interests. And, the national debt, the interest payments on which are killing this nation, is something the poor are indebted to repay but was overwhelmingly created through programs that have made defecit spending "normal" so that we can cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

Frankly, Rigel-1, I dont' know what you're thinking. Is this another case of a righty misrepresenting the truth? I don't think so. I believe this is just another case of righties forgetting how much the government actually does for them. You guys are quick to call Wellfare a government program but when the government runs a deliberate defecit so that the top one percent can get "tax relief" -a bullshit term- that is called something else. What we have here is a failure to communicate.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

Then STOP WHINING ABOUT UNIONS!

mstaggerlee's picture
mstaggerlee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote rigel1:

First of all they complain --- a lot.

Secondly, they deny economic reality. Last year, my company announced that all pay raises, overtime and promotions will be suspended indefinitely. Nobody, not a single employee complained that this is a "war on working families". Make no mistake we ARE working families.

That is another mistake they make. They try to leave the impression that they are the REAL working families and everyone else is somehow less worthy. I know many hard working people and very few of them belong to unions. Please don't act as if you are the only "working" people.

Public unions expect the general population to rally behind them and throw a fit if their members are asked to contribute a little more to their own retirement or health care. When my company announced our cutbacks, guess how many union people showed up to complain that this was not fair? Yet they insist that we be there for them. I have my own finances to worry about. I really don't have the time and energy to worry about yours.

They don't have it worse than the private sector as they sometimes claim. My wife is an educator. She gets about 15 weeks of vacation per year. No one else will ever admit that this is a sweet deal. But she loves sitting on the patio and reading a book while everyone else is at work. What her co-workers claim is that they work more hours and days than people realize. Of course they do! Virually every salaried employee works long hours, weekends and extra days. But most of them are not complaining that they a being worked too hard. Teachers get much, much more time off than your average Joe. They do them selves a dis service by claiming they don't.

I have some advice for union folks. If you feel you are not appreciated. If your salary, benefits and job satisfaction is not where you believe it should be, then quit. Take your skills and find a new job. That is what the rest of us do and it works quite well. Find a job that makes you happy.

Union people do not have it worse and have not had to make more concessions than the the rest of us. Stop claiming that they have.

I am not anti union. I am anti whining.

Fine - then QUIT YOUR WHINING ABOUT UNIONS!

mstaggerlee's picture
mstaggerlee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

First of all, union pensions are a part of their agreed-upon compensation package. Their take-home pay has been decreased over the years because they DO contribute to their pension plan. If the employer (or the state) has failed to actually MAKE the contribution of the amount by which their employee's take-home pay has been decreased, then they have STOLEN from the pension fund, plain & simple.

Same for their health care plan - part of the compensation package & reduces their take-home.

THE UNIONS GET NOTHING FOR FREE!

mstaggerlee's picture
mstaggerlee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

My wife was a private school PRINCIPAL, rigel - and, in her BEST YEAR, she did NOT make as much as a tenured, public high school teacher.

Don't make assertions that you can't support. There are enough people here that we'll ALWAYS catch you at it!

Instead of complaining about what the union members GET, why are you not, instead, complaining about what YOU DON'T GET? Back when I was young, Union shops essentially set the base wage for an employment sector - non-union employers HAD to compensate on-par with unions in order to attract qualified workers. The fact that this is no longer the case is the crime, NOT that the unions try to get what their members need.

Wise up, rigel!

mstaggerlee's picture
mstaggerlee
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Currently Chatting

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system