Why I dislike unions.

[a27]

Unions played a vital and import role in our history. However' date=' their time is now over. IMHO they do far more damage than aid and should be done away with.

[/quote']

 

Said it better than I could. While they played a direct role in enacting laws on how the working class is treated, people are no longer getting beat by their foremen or fired without cause. Instead they serve as a means to abuse the system to where non-union workers have to pick up their slack.

[gregathit]

If you build a successful company off the work of your employees (which is the only reason a company can survive is because of the workers)' date=' then you have an obligation to atleast offer them affordable health insurance.

 

But I guess this is because of my view that if you're wealthy, you have a social obligation to help those less fortunate then yourself.

[/quote']

 

 

You are forgetting something very important here. Walmart's only responsibility is to keep its shareholders happy. Not coddle employee's. Do you think shareholders (many of which are normal middle class folk) are going to vote to forgo dividends to provide healthcare to employees? Seriously? You know what the shareholders response is going to be don't you: "F' that!" Folks need to stop with this communistic idea of wealthy equals evil.

 

Instead let's embrace the truth: Politicians equals evil!

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

people are no longer getting [...] fired without cause.

 

I wouldn't bet on that.

[gregathit]

people are no longer getting [...] fired without cause.

 

I wouldn't bet on that.

 

 

Employers "should" have the right to fire employees at will. If you don't cut the mustard, your out the door. I don't see the problem with this at all. Now if the employer behaves in a legally right but morally wrong way, then soon folks will stop applying for work there. This is how a free market society should work. In the end, behaving like a jerk will generally catch up with you.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

Employers "should" have the right to fire employees at will. If you don't cut the mustard' date=' your out the door.

[/quote']

 

And that's a valid reason to fire somebody. What we're talking about is just firing somebody without a valid reason, like they're black or a woman or have AIDS or any other manner of bullshit that has nothing to do with the ability or actions of the person being fired.

[gregathit]

Employers "should" have the right to fire employees at will. If you don't cut the mustard' date=' your out the door.

[/quote']

 

And that's a valid reason to fire somebody. What we're talking about is just firing somebody without a valid reason, like they're black or a woman or have AIDS or any other manner of bullshit that has nothing to do with the ability or actions of the person being fired.

 

Unfortunately while sad that should not be enforced. An employer should have the right to dismiss any employee that he feels does not represent the company in the manner that he/she desires. That is what I would like to see (currently that is not the way the law is written).

 

Right now you can't fire someone for their sex or color. If you do then you are going to be writing a rather large check to them after they take you to civil court. The employer does have to come up with a valid excuse for firing someone even if it is not the "real" reason.

 

Aids is a very serious deal and for safety reasons I am perfectly fine with someone being dismissed. While aids is not as contagious as fear mongers might make out, at the end of the day it still is contagious and constitutes a health risk to other co-workers in many jobs. I don't know how the current statutes read on AIDS so I can't tell you one way or the other how the law is written or being enforced.

[GSBmodders]

Walmart is a huge company that rakes in billions of dollars; they should be able to offer their workers affordable health insurance' date=' rather than tell them to go to the US government state and see if they can get Medicaid.

[/quote']

 

That is against the nature of the beast, Walmart is retail and retail jobs. Retailer's do not care about retaining employee's, that hurts the bottom line. the nature of the retail beast is to over work the and under pay the employee burn them out and replace them as needed to avoid paying more then minimum wage.

 

This is where unions have the power to do some good, union's are not all about corruption despite what others may say and believe. They have consistently stepped up to the plate and ensured that the labor force is treated fairly and provided with safe working condition's.

 

Ah' date=' but you are smart enough to realize that things are not so cut and dried as you are making out here. Nike shoes (and every other product they make) sells at the price the public will pay. It has nothing at all to do with unions versus non-union.[/quote']

 

you are correct but this has been the line most fired out by union busters across the nation. If you want lower prices do away with labor union's. As we saw with G.W.Bush they will repeat a lie until it is regarded as truth.

 

Also' date=' I noticed everyone avoided the bit about teachers and tenure. You are aware that short of sexually molesting someone or engaging in criminal activity they can't be fired? Utter nonsense.

[/quote']

 

Teacher's are an entirely other ball game. They are public employee's and IMO should not be permitted to unionize, the same for firemen, police officer's and dispatcher's.

 

Yeah' date=' I also wouldn't pick on Walmart. They really don't seem that bad to me.[/quote']

 

That's how it look's on the outside, it's when you take a look inside that you get to see the shit smeared. Walmart was busted twice in hiring and under paying illegal immigrants on a large scale in the united state's. While I could careless about how a person come's to this country I do care about proliferating those who smuggle them in and in most cases rob these immigrants blind hold family member's hostage and commit a wide range of other crime's against humanity.

 

let's not get into the bit about Chinese import's, and how walmart for decades embraced a policy of killing small business enterprises throughout america

 

Now if the employer behaves in a legally right but morally wrong way' date=' then soon folks will stop applying for work there. This is how a free market society should work. In the end, behaving like a jerk will generally catch up with you.

[/quote']

 

If this bit of idealism were true many fortune 500 companies would no longer exist today. The sad reality is that employer's can fire off worker's simply because a new ceo decide's that by removing the top wage earner's from the labor force will save the company millions over a period of x amount of year's. a nonspecific reason is then provided (such as restructuring.) and everyone sit's back and say's damn sucks to be them

[gregathit]

Well GSB we do agree on some things, but clearly not on others

 

I am not painting all unions as the boogeyman, but state or national unions are what I have in my cross hairs. At the individual business level at each location I am fine with folks banding together. It is when the beast gets too large that corruption begins to sap it of any good it may be doing.

 

As to safe working conditions....that is no longer within the realm of the union as OSHA has taken this over. Between them and civil courts working conditions are covered as well as they can be. Now once upon a time they were instrumental in this area but that is long passed.

 

Hey I do hear you on the restructuring bit and I have even been there and been laid of due to it. It sucked but that is the breaks. In the same token, if an employee finds a better job than he has is he obligated to pass it up and stay where he was at? Of course not. I have left companies to go to better paying jobs just the same as everyone else.

 

What are you saying here that the company should risk going bankrupt to keep workers on, that it no longer needs? Would you pass up double your current salary to stick with your current employer? If it is ok for one side to do something, it should be ok for the other.

 

This one sided, companies are evil rhetoric, that unions and politicians spout is just nonsense. The company is looking out for itself and the employee looks out for him/her self. Yea, I wish the days of working for one company for your career were still the norm, but it isn't, and it won't be coming back anytime soon.

 

On the small business thing. Yea, Walmart did kill them off. While it was sad, it was also necessary. If a business can't compete it dies. This is our wild west free market system at both its good and bad. The funny thing is that mom and pop shops have made a come back in recent years....why? Because they look for a niche and filled it. Again that is what it is all about. Sure it sucked for the mom and pop shops. I have friends who had relatives in the sticks that lost darn near everything due to this. However, in darn near every single case they are better off today for it. How could they be better off today....simple they moved on and looked for something better. Mom and pop shops were not the cash cow that politicians and Walmart haters made them out to be. Most were barely getting by and did not have the capital to stay current. In other words many were dying a slow death that Walmart just "sped up". I am pretty sure you know the failure rate for businesses. It is a dog eat dog realm and that will never change.

 

Oh, and as to shady practices....add pretty much all of the big box stores to your list cause they all have been busted at one time or another on the same things. Target, Kohl's, Toy'R'Us and on and on. Pretty much every toy on the planet is made in china today which is quite frightening with all the lead based paint deals that have happened.

 

Bottom line is you just can't regulate morality (at least I hope this doesn't happen in my life time anyway) so I am not sure there is any answer to the big business gripes. I am sure that we both agree that any government involvement is by far the worst possible solution.

[Kashiwaba Tomoe]

Unions are for the most part all that stands between earning a fair wage and 20 cents an hour.

 

Actually they're what stands between being laid off (IE: fired) or making a huge payday.

 

Look at California for example' date=' the teacher unions there have a last in first out rule.

 

Basically, the most recently hired teacher is first to be laid off.

 

Performance is not allowed to play a role, and they threaten to strike if performance becomes an issue.

 

Unions have fought the man until they became the man.

 

 

Also' date=' I noticed everyone avoided the bit about teachers and tenure. You are aware that short of sexually molesting someone or engaging in criminal activity they can't be fired? Utter nonsense.

[/quote']

 

Are you talking about PUBLIC school teachers? Aren't they unions who work for the government? Worst of both worlds!

 

 

You mean GOVERMENT school teachers and their unions.

 

Also, in California (because that state is great at being shit) there is a teacher who (last I checked) is still on payroll......... he's also been convicted for groping students, but the union won't let him be fired.

 

 

The unions are pretty much an extension of the "Socialdemocratic workers party" which has had the power in Sweden for most of the 20th century' date=' and in the past there were even forced joining, in order to be socially accepted on many workplaces you had to join the union, and by joining the union you joined the party as well, wheter you wanted to or not. This has been banned now though...

 

[/quote']

 

For those that caught the news in the past few months from the US, in the state of Wisconson, there was a massive drama (and teachers strike) over the governor lessening the power of the unions.

Among the things he did away with was the ability of the goverment to automatically subtract union dues (what the workers pay the union) from the workers paycheck and send it to the union.

 

Needless to say the unions were quite upset over this, as well as the politicians (mostly in the democrat party) that they give a lot of that cash to.

 

Unions in the US are a political group, these days.

 

 

LOLz if you think you're unions are bad' date=' please try ours in the UK. You'll find communism is alive and well (seriously)and they make absolutely no bones that THEY should be running the country because only THEY really understand right from wrong.

Now not all them are in this frame of mind but during the olympics there's going to be a strike over a minor point that's been blown into mountain sized proportions. I knew they were going to do it because all the noises for it started last year but they hadn't had any reason until now to call for one

[/quote']

 

Don't forget the govt healthcare system letting people die regularly, rioters on the streets not being stopped (a few platoons of soldiers, automatic weapons, your country looses a lot of filth if that offended anyone good), and my personal favorite, a UK military veteran found a shotgun in his backyard that someone had tossed over a fence.

He goes to turn it in to the cops, and gets arrested for touching it.

 

Personally I think he shoulda just shot the police chief, would have saved himself some jailtime.

 

 

 

Teachers being required to pass the same exams they are going to be giving their students. The horror. This is obviously unfair to them.. I'm sure we can find a way to claim it's bigoted' date=' racist, and discriminatory as well..

[/quote']

 

 

 

If they can't, ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS, and the other big news groups will just lie about it as usual.

 

 

 

Walmart is a huge company that rakes in billions of dollars; they should be able to offer their workers affordable health insurance' date=' rather than tell them to go to the US government state and see if they can get Medicaid.

[/quote']

 

Or the workers can realize they're in an entry level job.

 

That means its pay is not the best.

 

That means they should get any nessacary education, and use that job as a place to be while getting ready for a career.

 

And I'm sure it'll all boil down to "because it'll make us richer".

 

 

Here's an idea.

 

Try to run a buisness without making money.

 

Good luck' date=' lol.

 

 

 

 

If you build a successful company off the work of your employees (which is the only reason a company can survive is because of the workers), then you have an obligation to atleast offer them affordable health insurance.

 

But I guess this is because of my view that if you're wealthy, you have a social obligation to help those less fortunate then yourself.

 

 

 

Total bunk, in the US at least.

 

In the US (where Im from) company issued insurance only started during the second world war, when price/wage controls were instituted to protect the economy during the war.

With wages fixed at a specific rate, the companies decided to offer healthcare instead

 

Of course that also helped (among many other factors) drive the price up to the rate it's at now.

 

 

That is against the nature of the beast' date=' Walmart is retail and retail jobs. Retailer's do not care about retaining employee's, that hurts the bottom line. the nature of the retail beast is to over work the and under pay the employee burn them out and replace them as needed to avoid paying more then minimum wage.

[/quote']

 

It's called an ENTRY LEVEL job for a reason.

 

It's for kids still in or just out of high school.

 

Of COURSE The pay is going to be low, the people they hire are not required to be qualified for about anything most of the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am not painting all unions as the boogeyman' date=' but state or national unions are what I have in my cross hairs. At the individual business level at each location I am fine with folks banding together. It is when the beast gets too large that corruption begins to sap it of any good it may be doing.

[/quote']

 

 

 

Goverment sector unions should, in my opinion, be illegal.

 

If you work for the goverment there is no employer to deal with, but rather the people.

 

And the ballot box and elections could settle any further issues.

 

 

As for strikes over stupid stuff (like all the threats of strikes in the US over wages not going up as much as they did before the recession) I say just fire them all.

[prideslayer]

If you build a successful company off the work of your employees (which is the only reason a company can survive is because of the workers)' date=' then you have an obligation to atleast offer them affordable health insurance.

[/quote']

 

Bullshit on all counts. Companies are built off the foresight of the owner and the money of investors (even if that's the owners own money). They are not built "off the work" of the employee. Employees are compensated for their work. If they feel that compensation isn't fair, they can work for someone else.

 

If they feel that NONE of the companies is offering fair compensation, then they're simply wrong. You get paid what your work is worth, not what you feel it's worth.

 

This is just nonsense from another person who thinks that owners and managers are "nothing special" and that "anyone can do what they do."

 

But I guess this is because of my view that if you're wealthy, you have a social obligation to help those less fortunate then yourself.

 

Of course you don't.

 

And that's a valid reason to fire somebody. What we're talking about is just firing somebody without a valid reason' date=' like they're black or a woman or have AIDS or any other manner of bullshit that has nothing to do with the ability or actions of the person being fired.

[/quote']

 

Who decides what is a "valid reason?" Your bleeding heart? Who is being fired without reason based in their ability or actions? Nobody. No employer fires people "for no reason." They fire for a reason, which you might not think is a good one, but it's not your choice.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

 

 

Bullshit on all counts. Companies are built off the foresight of the owner and the money of investors (even if that's the owners own money). They are not built "off the work" of the employee. Employees are compensated for their work. If they feel that compensation isn't fair' date=' they can work for someone else.

 

If they feel that NONE of the companies is offering fair compensation, then they're simply wrong. You get paid what your work is worth, not what you feel it's worth.

 

This is just nonsense from another person who thinks that owners and managers are "nothing special" and that "anyone can do what they do."

[/quote']

 

If they didn't have a work force, there wouldn't be a company at all, no matter how much foresight or money investor throw at it. So yes, companies are build off the work of the employee.

 

And yes, while managers and owners are important, the employee is more important than they are. At the end of the day, the employee does everything the owner or manager cannot due to their own duties; without the employee, they wouldn't have a company to own or manage in the first place.

 

Who decides what is a "valid reason?" Your bleeding heart? Who is being fired without reason based in their ability or actions? Nobody. No employer fires people "for no reason." They fire for a reason, which you might not think is a good one, but it's not your choice.

 

For something to be valid, you have to properly justify it. There is no justification in firing somebody for the reasons I have given. Except maybe the AIDS part. That gets iffy.

[prideslayer]

If they didn't have a work force' date=' there wouldn't be a company at all, no matter how much foresight or money investor throw at it. So yes, companies are build off the work of the employee.

 

And yes, while managers and owners are important, the employee is more important than they are. At the end of the day, the employee does everything the owner or manager cannot due to their own duties; without the employee, they wouldn't have a company to own or manage in the first place.

[/quote']

 

Wrong.

 

Plenty of companies are independant businesses with exactly one employee: the owner. As they grow, the employer hires help. That help is compensated. "At the end of the day", without employers, we'd have a bunch of little one man businesses, and even more "unemployed" people who don't have the business chops to start a company and make it successful.

 

I've worked for companies of every size, from huge fortune 500 companies everyone here knows the name of, down to working strictly for myself as an independent contractor. I have no illusions about exactly who is responsible for the successes and failures of a business.

 

You, apparently, have many.

 

For something to be valid, you have to properly justify it. There is no justification in firing somebody for the reasons I have given. Except maybe the AIDS part. That gets iffy.

 

Still wrong.

 

For you to be fired, the only thing needed to make it "valid" is the will of your employer. If I want to fire you because I just don't like you or your opinion, you don't (or at least, shouldn't) have a "right" to keep your job.

 

The idea that you think you do, or should, is laughable.

[Fyrecontroll]

If the employees are more important, why do they not start their own business in direct competition with their employer? In fact, many business owners and entrepreneurs in the US started out as employees in their field. That is the beauty of the free market system (even though we do not, nor have had one in the last century). Anyone with the drive and intelligence can, barring government intervention, can rise through the ranks or strike out on their own to provide a better product or service and become wealthy.

 

If your answer is, "it is too expensive and onerous to compete with the established companies," and "health care is too expensive for most people to afford without help from the government," ask yourself this: How did it become this way?

[Kashiwaba Tomoe]

It became that way because people got the goverment to give handouts and get involved.

 

This drove up the cost of doing buisness.

[Fyrecontroll]

SHHHH.....

 

You gave it away too fast!