Do you believe unions have a place in America anymore?

chambersc

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2005
6,247
0
0
I believe Unions had a noble beginning protecting the uneducated but with the advent of better education and common sense they aren't needed primarily. Maybe under extremely rare circumstances they are good but the majority such as AFL CIO and teamsters aren't needed and are hurting industries bad.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
I'm not against unions, just monopolistic unions.
 

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
Stupid (unnamed ploitical group) . Notice none of them (unnamed political group) Voted for Unions yet!
 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
How do you even dare ask this with all the problems your country has with illegal immigrants? Yes very much america needs unions.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,396
6,075
126
Unions must be destroyed so people will have to work for nothing. They are also irrelevant since China will do all our work.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
as a worker, I see their benefit.

but at the same time, they're also an impediment to the communist dream :(
 

Stunt

Diamond Member
Jul 17, 2002
9,717
2
0
Unions protect the lazy on the backs of the hard workers; the vast majority of union members however are hard workers, it's just the few bad apples that drag everyone else down.

Unions can play a role in top down management style, they can have input and involvement in things such as safety, hours, work environment.

That being said, I hate the union at my work, nothing but a pain in the a$$ :D
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Unions were in the past needed to lookout for the nterests of the worker.
That has been repalced by the Union as a vehicle to keep gangsters and thugs, like Mafia and Organized Crime, in a position of power.
 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Unions were in the past needed to lookout for the nterests of the worker.
That has been repalced by the Union as a vehicle to keep gangsters and thugs, like Mafia and Organized Crime, in a position of power.

That it's being exploited, i don't know if it is, doesn't mean it's not needed.
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Originally posted by: Forsythe
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Unions were in the past needed to lookout for the nterests of the worker.
That has been repalced by the Union as a vehicle to keep gangsters and thugs, like Mafia and Organized Crime, in a position of power.

That it's being exploited, i don't know if it is, doesn't mean it's not needed.

Every place I've ever worked in a Union Vs Non-Union shop, the Non-Union shop had better benefits and treated their employees better.
Without an element of strife, the Union serves no purpose. The Union had to keep the conflict alive in order to function.

 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Originally posted by: Forsythe
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Unions were in the past needed to lookout for the nterests of the worker.
That has been repalced by the Union as a vehicle to keep gangsters and thugs, like Mafia and Organized Crime, in a position of power.

That it's being exploited, i don't know if it is, doesn't mean it's not needed.

Every place I've ever worked in a Union Vs Non-Union shop, the Non-Union shop had better benefits and treated their employees better.
Without an element of strife, the Union serves no purpose. The Union had to keep the conflict alive in order to function.

I think it's wrong to generalize the whole country by your personal and undoubtedly limited amount of workforce experience.
All i know is, that people when they jump together, has more power than when they jump individually.
Unions are a major part of why the danish economy is booming, and why bigger european countries are looking towards sweden norway and denmark for inspiration for the reform of their union system.
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
undoubtedly limited amount of workforce experience

In the Defense Industry since 1964, 10 companies, worked in 5 states - yeah, right, 'limited experience'.

Everyones 'experience' is that in which they have personally engaged.

 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
undoubtedly limited amount of workforce experience

In the Defense Industry since 1964, 10 companies, worked in 5 states - yeah, right, 'limited experience'.

Everyones 'experience' is that in which they have personally engaged.

Yes, but looking at 10k employees instead of just looking at your, most likely biased, view would be more objective, would you not agree?

I'm saying limited experience as you only have had a maximum of like 50 years of experience.
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
10k employees

Most companies I worked for had in excess ot 250,000 people on staff.

I've been on both side of the formula, & find the Unions to be self serving.
Non-Union shops always offered better everything to the work force.
Managemnet gets abusive when the Union presents them no options.
 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
10k employees

Most companies I worked for had in excess ot 250,000 people on staff.

I've been on both side of the formula, & find the Unions to be self serving.
Non-Union shops always offered better everything to the work force.
Managemnet gets abusive when the Union presents them no options.

Yes, that's your opinion, and i noted that.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
There is absolutely a place for unions, but perhaps smaller/less monopolizing unions. Cap the size?
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
Originally posted by: yllus
There is absolutely a place for unions, but perhaps smaller/less monopolizing unions. Cap the size?

I don't know about capping the size, but I do agree with your overall statement (suprising, isn't it! :D).

Unions need to understand that non-union companies are doing it better and thriving (or at least surviving). Look at the automotive industry:

From Jan. to June: Profit per vehicle

GM: -$1,277.00 (yes, negative)
Ford: -$187 (Yes, negative)
Nissan: $1,800
Toyota: $1,400
Honda: $1,200

Do the workers at Nissan, Toyota and Honda not get paid well? Hell yes they get paid well. They might not have the fatass pension, but they do have 401k, etc.

Unions are more about power at the top than the worker on the ladder rung, IMO.
 

EatSpam

Diamond Member
May 1, 2005
6,423
0
0
Capital has a right to organize for their benefit in the form of a corporation. Likewise, labor should also retain the right to organize for the workers' mutual benefit.

In this day of "Offshoring GOOD" and "Losing your job to China is good for you because your crap is 1 cent cheaper at Wal-mart", its time for American Unions to export their 40 hour work weeks, overtime pay, and other worker protections to China, Mexico, and India, among other places.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Unions are a lot like corporations, they've just got too much more than orginally intended.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
Originally posted by: zendari
They do in professional sports I suppose.

Hell, they're more greedy there than any other union. Talk about greed....now that's a union with greed!!!

(Not saying that the teams themselves aren't greedy too....both are greedy, and I hate it when tax money is spent on new arenas, etc. but that's for another thread)
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
Originally posted by: EatSpam
Capital has a right to organize for their benefit in the form of a corporation. Likewise, labor should also retain the right to organize for the workers' mutual benefit.

In this day of "Offshoring GOOD" and "Losing your job to China is good for you because your crap is 1 cent cheaper at Wal-mart", its time for American Unions to export their 40 hour work weeks, overtime pay, and other worker protections to China, Mexico, and India, among other places.
I think you miss the issue. Capital has the right to organize for their benefit in the form of a corporation, but may not became a monopoly. Likewise, labor should also retain the right to organize for the workers' mutual benefit, but with no such restriction. Thus, a single labor union can control 100% of a corporation's labor force, with devastating effects to the corporation. Hence the moves offshore.

I think the issue regarding unions is that we have looked at them wrong all along. Unions are corporations. They are for-profit organizations established with capital that sell a product -- labor. A temp agency with bargaining power.