-Fightnfire-
Member
My pops and I agree completely but my mother on the other hand disagrees with our views. How do you guys feel about unions ?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What's your stance on Unions, as in labor unions ?
- Thread starter -Fightnfire-
- Start date
- Status
-Fightnfire-
Member
NOT trying to put down anyone who may be in a union. I have always felt that they CAN promote certain types of bad work ethics.
-Fightnfire-
Member
Ecrofirt said:
lol, Its late and I'm tired. I had to check the title 3 or 4 times to make sure I didn't mispell anything.
samus4ever
Banned
unions to me are bad. I had a chance to join them twice and not wanting my money taken out of a paycheck I told them no. I don't care about them, and will never care to much about the mob, errrr I mean unions.
-Fightnfire-
Member
Unicorn horns make great glue.
shoplifter
Member
Bjork said:
Oh I've seen this...in his union contract he only had to work 6 hrs a day, but was paid for 8. He read a book for the other two.
White Man said:
Depends entirely on the union. I've seen unionized places where people are still perfectly good (and in there cases, the union was usually needed to keep the corporation from robbing them blind). OTOH, the last place I worked at actually ran better when the union folk walked out. And even worse, the union guys were technicians - responsible for testing, repairing, and so forth of various items. The secretaries were doing a better job than they were.
They need to maintain their focus, and be populated with well thought, well intentioned people so as to avoid corruption or being ineffective at what should be their charter of best serving the workers rights.
I think they can be powerful allies in the face of unfair practices, reducing wages, reducing benefits and increasing hours. Markets, supposedly, are going to be ultimately responsive, but sometimes when the market can accelerate itself at the expensive of people and workers it will do that, and that is when you need an organization of bargaining to respond.
while not a "union" per say take this as an example. Medicare is not legally able to negotiate prices for drugs with drug companies, it can not buy in bulk and work out a lower price point. A miliotary veterans association can. This group of veterans, on average, gets drugs 50% cheaper than seniors on medicare programs. Since Medicare is, in some peoples eyes, neutered of its ability to negotiate, the drug companies are able to dictate pace and price with little checks. These companies are not "hurt" when bargaining groups like the veteran's association collectivley negotiate a cheaper price, they are still making a profit, they just aren't raking in decidedly ridiculous profits on them.
If the corporation is fully organized within itself and focussed with a single vision of what it wants in the way of wages, benefits, rules etc, why can't the workers have a similar strategy? I don't think it is unreasonable. But it certainly needs some work in certain cases.
I think they can be powerful allies in the face of unfair practices, reducing wages, reducing benefits and increasing hours. Markets, supposedly, are going to be ultimately responsive, but sometimes when the market can accelerate itself at the expensive of people and workers it will do that, and that is when you need an organization of bargaining to respond.
while not a "union" per say take this as an example. Medicare is not legally able to negotiate prices for drugs with drug companies, it can not buy in bulk and work out a lower price point. A miliotary veterans association can. This group of veterans, on average, gets drugs 50% cheaper than seniors on medicare programs. Since Medicare is, in some peoples eyes, neutered of its ability to negotiate, the drug companies are able to dictate pace and price with little checks. These companies are not "hurt" when bargaining groups like the veteran's association collectivley negotiate a cheaper price, they are still making a profit, they just aren't raking in decidedly ridiculous profits on them.
If the corporation is fully organized within itself and focussed with a single vision of what it wants in the way of wages, benefits, rules etc, why can't the workers have a similar strategy? I don't think it is unreasonable. But it certainly needs some work in certain cases.
But this is impossible to guarantee. Corruption is, however, guarantee-able with the way current unions are set up. The most charismatic, vocal, and likeable people will tend to rise to the top of unions, not necessarily the most true or well-intentioned. The most well-intentioned person may by the quiet lad sitting in the corner, and surely he wouldn't be an adequate negotiator.
The good ol' boys tend to rise to the top, and then they take care of their buddies and make sure things are suitably cushy for them. Anyone not friendly with those on the higher rungs won't see as much benefit, but they'll pay the same dues.
norinrad21
Banned
They are like the OPEC, bunch of corrupted pricks. They are the reason why Europe is in deep shit right now, they promote laziness.
LOL
LOL
Depends on the company too. Some take a great deal of pride in being able to be responsive, respectful, and accomodating to their employees, while most think of them as nothing more than a necessary evil on their balance sheet.
At any rate, while unions may have their own problems, they are the thing that prevents workers from getting the shaft when their employers feel they can cut all four corners and get away with it.
At any rate, while unions may have their own problems, they are the thing that prevents workers from getting the shaft when their employers feel they can cut all four corners and get away with it.
i used to hate unions, as i thought they had outlived ther usefullness. but the longer i worked ...the more i came to realize they were a necessary counterweight to all the coporate fuckery that goes on.
i hope one day the workers at wallmart unionize...that shit would be great
i hope one day the workers at wallmart unionize...that shit would be great
Can you prove this? This is would be similar if I had said that the way corporations are run guarantees coruption, slashing of wages, benefits, jobs etc. It just isn't true in all cases even if the climate is right for it. My step-father has worked in the grocery industry for about 25 years. In his time he moved from bagging groceries (all store employees at this chain are unionized) to working in the purchasing department of the head office. The employees enjoy good wages and benefits, the store enjoys healthy profits and national awards, and there has not been a strike in his time working there. Sometimes the good guys win, the business and the worker can be symbiotic. Both sides of the system need to move to change for the better.White Man said:
My girlfriend's father, however, had a bad experience with their union, they are in the process of disbanding it, which should happen when things go wrong. Yes corruption occurs, I doubt it is "guaranteed"
Charisma and a "good" intentionality are not mutually exclsusive. You have presented one possible, hypothetical, scenario. There are likely tens of thousands more possible scenarios.White Man said:
Hmm... These Unions sounds like Corprate America and Politics. Frankly they could all use some re-adjustment.White Man said:
"If the corporation is fully organized within itself and focussed with a single vision of what it wants in the way of wages, benefits, rules etc, why can't the workers have a similar strategy? I don't think it is unreasonable. But it certainly needs some work in certain cases."
I agree with the post from the man with the dodgy avatar!
I'm sort of surprised (and yet not) at the reaction to Unions from the US folk here. There's a lot less resistance to them here (UK), I'm for them. Some people may point to the rail unions (Tube) - I think they get the shaft in what's just a pass-the-buck political game... Sure some would disagree with me (cja?). The other big one is the fire brigade union... they've been getting the shaft for a while and I think that worked for them last time (public support) but there's new talk of strikes now... I expect someone's backed down on an offer somewhere but that may not matter to the public. Like I say, it's a political game
I agree with the post from the man with the dodgy avatar!
I'm sort of surprised (and yet not) at the reaction to Unions from the US folk here. There's a lot less resistance to them here (UK), I'm for them. Some people may point to the rail unions (Tube) - I think they get the shaft in what's just a pass-the-buck political game... Sure some would disagree with me (cja?). The other big one is the fire brigade union... they've been getting the shaft for a while and I think that worked for them last time (public support) but there's new talk of strikes now... I expect someone's backed down on an offer somewhere but that may not matter to the public. Like I say, it's a political game
In non hollywood unions, there is really no need for it anymore. Most of america is turning towards a service industry, and if managers outbid the uninons by offering a nice benefits package then it will be ok. If u look at saturn they decided to move away from the union culture in detroit and open their plant in springfield tennessee. With the new plant they were able to build a HEALTHY RELATIONSHIP WITH MANAGEMENT and not have that culture of "us vs them".
I could go on, but there are new ways of management and with that the decreased membership of unions in manufacturing.
I could go on, but there are new ways of management and with that the decreased membership of unions in manufacturing.
I'm unionized, but while they do provide valuable services in case I need them I doubt I'll ever need them. But I don't mind paying my dues because I know *I* wouldn't be comfortable fighting for a raise every year or trying on my own to lobby for better pension or health benefits.
But, as others are saying, for every example of lazy/corrupt unions (or unionized workers) you can name, there is probably as many greedy/corrupt companies who would fuck over their workers to the nth degree if they could.
I can ruefully think back to a few employees I've known who milked the system for years to keep their jobs despite being extremely incompetent. Everytime work got "hard" (because they didn't do their job) they'd go on stress leave and someone else would have to fix their messes. Sure it sucks they were able to abuse the collective agreement to do that, but if not for the collective agreement and the union behind it a hard-working, smart employee I know would likely have been forced from her job by a bitter, mean-spirited supervisor who just hated her for personal reasons and tried to get her fired. I think it works both ways in the end.
But, as others are saying, for every example of lazy/corrupt unions (or unionized workers) you can name, there is probably as many greedy/corrupt companies who would fuck over their workers to the nth degree if they could.
I can ruefully think back to a few employees I've known who milked the system for years to keep their jobs despite being extremely incompetent. Everytime work got "hard" (because they didn't do their job) they'd go on stress leave and someone else would have to fix their messes. Sure it sucks they were able to abuse the collective agreement to do that, but if not for the collective agreement and the union behind it a hard-working, smart employee I know would likely have been forced from her job by a bitter, mean-spirited supervisor who just hated her for personal reasons and tried to get her fired. I think it works both ways in the end.
reggieandTFE
Member
I could write a 40-page manifesto on this topic, but I don't have the time. In their purest form, unions are necessary and many things people now take for granted were fought and died for by union members: 40 hour work week, over time pay, OSHA, a two-day weekend, employer-provided health care, social security, NLRB and on and on. On the other hand, power corrupts and the stronger unions (UMW, Teamsters, well most of the AFL-CIO actually before the 90s) were appropriated by the post-war accord. This led to a labor aristocracy where a unionized factory worker in Detroit would be making three or four times as much as most laborers.
That being said, a lot of the stereotypes about union workers are exactly that: stereotypes. Corporations started an anti-union campaign in the 1970s that tried and succeeded in making Americans feel stronger ties to a abstract corporate logo than the people they live and work with and portraying every union member as a lazy free-rider.
You've fallen prey to the euphemisms. A healthy relationship with management usually means that a few workers will be placed on some token work council board that has no power or say and is used to weed out the dissidents. Yearly raises, guaranteed vacaction, healthcare for all, etc. will not be part of the healthy relationship.
That being said, a lot of the stereotypes about union workers are exactly that: stereotypes. Corporations started an anti-union campaign in the 1970s that tried and succeeded in making Americans feel stronger ties to a abstract corporate logo than the people they live and work with and portraying every union member as a lazy free-rider.
You've fallen prey to the euphemisms. A healthy relationship with management usually means that a few workers will be placed on some token work council board that has no power or say and is used to weed out the dissidents. Yearly raises, guaranteed vacaction, healthcare for all, etc. will not be part of the healthy relationship.
The truth is, unions cost jobs. Everytime a union wins a wage increase, there will be less jobs available for hire. Right now, in my area, there is no need for a union as jobs are plentiful, and employers bend over backwards for their employees. Also, it's nice not having to pay union dues on every pay check. If your area of work has a scarce job market, I guess unions would be a good way to help protect your precious job, and secure some good benefits. If the job was scarce, and the employer wanted 60 hour work weeks at the same pay rate per hour, a union is very useful, so it depends on the situation.
I'm talking about minimum wage work for me, when it comes to plentiful jobs, maybe I'd care for a union more if I started working a real job.
I'm talking about minimum wage work for me, when it comes to plentiful jobs, maybe I'd care for a union more if I started working a real job.
Unions are a great idea that are rarely executed or operated properly. Take the teachers union for instance. They bully people into joining their ranks. Unionized teachers want to feed you a line every minute about how you're gonna be screwed by not joining, and this and that. Fuck 'em. Why the hell do you need to pay dues to join some organization that's just gonna barter for you? Can't people join a union without the money, and collaborate for free? The fact that they want to bill you for a service that should be free (the whole point of a union is to collect numbers that create strength, not money) is what pisses me off. Unions that spend money on politicians are just a slight step above corporate sponsors in my book. They're all corrupted by money. I doubt I'll ever join a union. It's herd mentality at its worst. PEACE.
Unions were great back in the day. When people were being exploited and forced into very dangerous work. Now a days were I am any way the government insures safety and does 90% of the Unions job. Unions are about the union as a coperation now they don't give a shit about workers. They care about collecting dues. WHy is it the unions themseleves never have to take cuts or lay off bt all the workers they represent do.
I worded that badly. I meant that human nature would always guarantee that there'd be at least a few bad unions amongst all the good, uncorrupt ones.
Well aware.
Sometimes both sides are on the same ethically shaky ground. My experiences with unions have been less than ideal, but in general, I'm pro-worker's rights. I'm all for unions in theory, but the greed and laziness inherent in (spoiled) human nature make the execution hit or miss.
I agree with most of the posts in this thread about the being good in theory while in practice they often fail. Unions are not inherently bad as a concpet, but they are only as good as the people runnnig them. Greed can overcome them as much as they can overcome the business they try take on.
I'm torn on the issue. My dad was in the laborers union and I benefited greatly from it. If he hadn't been unionized he would likely have been out of work much more often, gotten a much lower wage, and had less health care coverage, and no pension. As it stands he can retire as early as 52, and after 30 years of manual labor his body may force him to do so. As a family, we were much better off for it.
On the other hand, I'm generally against unskilled workers making a "skilled" worker's wage. Not only does it devalue the skillsets of those of us who made the effort to become skilled workers in the first place, but it causes inflation and ends up having no real effect. If the people at Walmart or McDonalds unionize and start making $18/hour with a dental plan, then I'm going to be paying $10 for a Big Mac and $10 a role for toilet paper in order to cover labor costs. To compensate, engineers, doctors and lawyers will all give themselves a raise as well, and poor people end up staying poor because they still have the same income/expense ratio.
I dunno.
On the other hand, I'm generally against unskilled workers making a "skilled" worker's wage. Not only does it devalue the skillsets of those of us who made the effort to become skilled workers in the first place, but it causes inflation and ends up having no real effect. If the people at Walmart or McDonalds unionize and start making $18/hour with a dental plan, then I'm going to be paying $10 for a Big Mac and $10 a role for toilet paper in order to cover labor costs. To compensate, engineers, doctors and lawyers will all give themselves a raise as well, and poor people end up staying poor because they still have the same income/expense ratio.
I dunno.
Slo: Agree with half your post. I think the "skilled" and "unskilled" thing is a load of bunk now. I'm one of those intellectual elitists who think education and knowledge are the be all and end all. But even I've learned to accept that every job needs to be done. No matter how "unskilled" it may be. Without the dishwashers and janitors and maintenance guys, our society would probably resemble a shanty-town of inconvenience. The way I see it, "skilled" workers just happen to be better equipped to do certain type of jobs, but it doesn't make them more important or worthy of higher pay. I'd say the janitor at my school is worth more than 90% of lawyers out there. But he doesn't make a fraction of what half of them will make. B/c their profession is somehow more skilled than his. All I know is I'm not cleaning any kids puke or crap off the bathroom floor, but someone else will. That person deserves to be paid the same as me for making it comfortable for me to go to the bathroom without fear of entering a biohazard. Anyway, not trying to derail the thread, but this is part of the problem with unions. The people who really deserve the protection often get left out in the cold. PEACE.
PEACE.That's an interesting point. I'm not sure I agree with it but it is thought provoking. In an ideal world, people would be compensated according to how demanding their job is and how well they perform it. But that's not how supply and demand works. In reality, janitors make jack squat because every hobo and carnival attendant on the planet can do the job of sweeping up a hallway. The demand for that skill just isn't there to justify high wages. On the other hand, qualified and competent neuro surgeons provide a service that cannot be easily duplicated, and they should be compensated for their expertise.
You see, if a janitor and a surgeon make comparable wages and live comparable life styles, then why the heck would anyone go to school for 8 years and put themselves $100k in debt to become a surgeon? Likewise, my job is considered "cushy" compared to most manual labor jobs, but some days I wish I was just running a cash register at Home Depot instead of giving myself grey hair and an ulcer doing what I'm currently doing. I certainly wouldn't take on as much responsiblity here at the office if I knew the guys sweeping the flow made the same wage as I do.
You see, if a janitor and a surgeon make comparable wages and live comparable life styles, then why the heck would anyone go to school for 8 years and put themselves $100k in debt to become a surgeon? Likewise, my job is considered "cushy" compared to most manual labor jobs, but some days I wish I was just running a cash register at Home Depot instead of giving myself grey hair and an ulcer doing what I'm currently doing. I certainly wouldn't take on as much responsiblity here at the office if I knew the guys sweeping the flow made the same wage as I do.
- Status