Do you think Unions are partly responsible for this economic disaster?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: TehMac
Unions are the new exploiters. I worked a blue collar job for a couple months before the union terminated me because I refused to pay them half my paycheck in order to work where I did. They're nothing but leeches, and hopefully we'll see the last of them after this crap.

Was the job in a place that had a closed-shop agreement? If so, the problem is YOURS, not the union's. The EMPLOYEES negotiated that closed shop agreement.

Why should you get the benefits of the many things the union negotiated for its paying members and things the members gave up wage increases to get?

Don't like it? Work somewhere else.
He's lying.there's no union that requires a worker to pay anywhere near half their paycheck in dues.
 

SSSnail

Lifer
Nov 29, 2006
17,458
82
86
Damn, are you really this dumb?

How did it start? With people BORROW to buy SHITS THEY COULD NOT AFFORD.

GM + No money + Sluggish vehicle sales + Unions liabilities + BORROW FROM BANKS (oh right, you think they were given the money) = shit storm.

Seriously dude, get the fuck off the internet. In every thread, there will be some fucking idiots that come in and call people names without honestly discussing the OP. You're one of those tool.

I never said Unions were wholly responsible, but they do play a part (how big of a part is being discussed). A large liability, or part in weighing down the manufacturers when there were no profits, forced them to borrow. Can I be any clearer?

And yes, you're the idiot here, take a good look in the mirror buddy.


Edit: either you're really stupid, in which case my condolences, or you're just fishing for semantics. Either way, I'm done wasting my time with your idiocy.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Originally posted by: SSSnail

GM + No money + Sluggish vehicle sales + Unions liabilities + BORROW FROM BANKS (oh right, you think they were given the money) = shit storm.

Please provide me a single piece of evidence showing that this had ANYTHING to do with the current global financial crisis. I mean, did I miss out on news that GM some how caused Bear Stearns to go under? Or, was AIG's problem that they invested too heavily in Chrysler?

lol
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,174
28,827
136
Originally posted by: SSSnail
Damn, are you really this dumb?... Either way, I'm done wasting my time with your idiocy.

Anger management is a legitimate pastime.
 

moshquerade

No Lifer
Nov 1, 2001
61,504
12
56
Yes


Originally posted by: Ns1
Only in regards to the auto industry

No.

Union greed has made us unable to compete in other markets too which has opened up markets in China, for example, who can produce the goods much cheaper.

I can site the paper industry for example. My father worked in that industry and the unions were ruthless. It wasn't about getting cost of living raises and good working conditions. It was about getting more and more and not looking to see that in the process they were having to eliminate jobs and shut down mills. There was no cooperation between the unions and the company. It became an Us versus Them and not working together/cooperating for the good of the company.


 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Originally posted by: SSSnail


Edit: either you're really stupid, in which case my condolences, or you're just fishing for semantics. Either way, I'm done wasting my time with your idiocy.

Yay! I killed a Troll!
 

SSSnail

Lifer
Nov 29, 2006
17,458
82
86
Oh, you must have missed the S behind manufactures when I mentioned land yacht. Or, wait, you think they operate on their own currencies and have their own mint. Or, is it when banks loan money to the big 3 they thought they'd make it back by other means (real estates, anybody?). Or, they never thought that everything would turn to shit and spill the bucket that we all pissed in?... Or, nvm... You know, I'm beginning to question your existence because it's just unbelievable. I demand links. Wait... you're Jimmy Hoffa? :shocked:

Ironwing, notice how I don't answer to you? You should take the hint.

Billions of dollar is no small amount.

Anybody wants to join me for some Halo3? Same game tag.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Originally posted by: SSSnail
Oh, you must have missed the S behind manufactures when I mentioned land yacht. Or, wait, you think they operate on their own currencies and have their own mint. Or, is it when banks loan money to the big 3 they thought they'd make it back by other means (real estates, anybody?). Or, they never thought that everything would turn to shit and spill the bucket that we all pissed in?... Or, nvm... You know, I'm beginning to question your existence because it's just unbelievable. I demand links. Wait... you're Jimmy Hoffa? :shocked:

Ironwing, notice how I don't answer to you? You should take the hint.

Billions of dollar is no small amount.

Anybody wants to join me for some Halo3? Same game tag.

Wait, I thought you conceded?

Again, you have not provided a single credible link between the US auto industry's troubles and the collapse of the financial markets. I mean, GM hasn't even defaulted on its loans, yet.

You really have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: MetalMat
Originally posted by: ironwing
Originally posted by: MetalMat
Look how good the Soviet Union worked out, everyone was rich beyond their wildest dreams.

You do know that independent unions were illegal in the Soviet Union, don't you?

Edit: You also know that it was a labor union that led Poland out of communism?

Yes because independent unions would not be what the government wanted, im just making a dumb comparrison. What Im saying is that unions are a bad idea for the most part nowadays and is a big reason to why we have to keep bailing out American auto manufacturers.
I wouldn't want to be at the mercy of Construction Companies being a non Union member and I wouldn't want to buy a house built by scabs.

lol, typical union mindset... "scabs" , victim mindset, and perceived inferior work. All hallmarks of union group think. In reality a house is built by many different "skilled"(if you can call them that anymore) trades so it really only matters who the "builder" is and their reputation - not if they hire union or not.
That's why all the large Construction Companies with good reputations are Union.


lol, you mean they the large ones are union because local and state gov't seem to like to write Unions into the specs(in a round about way)?
But since I'm sure you'll take issue with the above - please name/specify what you mean by "large". Most of the "large" companies I deal with are Union but if they weren't union, they wouldn't get gov't work. :shrug; We've been over this before- you won't budge from your fluffer position and I won't budge from my position of them outliving their usefullness.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Originally posted by: SSSnail
You're a troll, here's a link http://communitiesonline.homes....com/files/troll_2.jpg.

Did you get butt hurt because I call you... I mean Unions leeches, and have erased all good that they've done?

I'm not hurt, or even angry.

Hell, I'm not even a fan of the UAW. Yes, they share a lot of the responsibility in the US automakers' troubles, but to say that have anything to do with the current global financial crisis is preposterous and ignorant.

Again, you are an idiot.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: sactoking
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
That's why all the large Construction Companies with good reputations are Union.

As an underwriter in construction bonds and subdivision work, I would STRONGLY disagree.

Having worked in the industry for over 30 years, I agree with Red. The union companies do the job better, faster, safer, and generally under budget and under schedule. The non-union companies tend to have more "re-do's" to fix things they fucked up than the union companies and thus go over schedule more often.

While that may not apply in all areas, it sure does here. All too often, a project owner will hire a union contractor to come in and fix what the scab contractor fucked up...

If non-union contractors are so dammed good, why does the lion's share of work go to the union contractors, even in municipalities like Modesto that have no "Little Davis-Bacon" laws? The union contractors who pay about double the wages (triple if you count benefits) of the non-union contractors, STILL manage to outbid them on 90% of the jobs.
Sounds to me like the BIG difference is in how much goes to the owner's pocket and how much goes to the employees' pockets...

I've seen it the other way in the industries I've worked in. Grain, Food and Bev, Manufacturing - pretty much any that has automated equipment. Large multinationals down to the mom and pop place. If I have a choice in subcontracting the electrical, mechanical, plumbing - I choose non-union if the bids process comes in right. In my experience they are much more flexible on work scheduling and effort when crunch time(start-up) hits.
 

sactoking

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2007
7,582
2,817
136
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: sactoking
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
That's why all the large Construction Companies with good reputations are Union.

As an underwriter in construction bonds and subdivision work, I would STRONGLY disagree.

Having worked in the industry for over 30 years, I agree with Red. The union companies do the job better, faster, safer, and generally under budget and under schedule. The non-union companies tend to have more "re-do's" to fix things they fucked up than the union companies and thus go over schedule more often.

While that may not apply in all areas, it sure does here. All too often, a project owner will hire a union contractor to come in and fix what the scab contractor fucked up...

If non-union contractors are so dammed good, why does the lion's share of work go to the union contractors, even in municipalities like Modesto that have no "Little Davis-Bacon" laws? The union contractors who pay about double the wages (triple if you count benefits) of the non-union contractors, STILL manage to outbid them on 90% of the jobs.
Sounds to me like the BIG difference is in how much goes to the owner's pocket and how much goes to the employees' pockets...

That alone tells me what your bias is. It's not personal. I'm just saying that as someone who looks at both union and non-union contractors of all sizes across pretty much every construction trade, there is no appreciable difference in financial presentation, build quality, timeliness, claim frequency, or claim severity between the two categories. Non-union contractors aren't better, they aren't worse.

The only time I REALLY get concerned about union issues is when a non-union specialist gets a subcontract under a union GC. Union GCs work well with union subs, non-union GCs work well with union and non-union subs, but generally (and especially in SoCal) having a non-union sub get a temp. union exemption to work for a union GC is asking to have your sub be frivolously terminated or 'sub busted'.
 

SSSnail

Lifer
Nov 29, 2006
17,458
82
86
Originally posted by: preslove
Originally posted by: SSSnail
You're a troll, here's a link http://communitiesonline.homes....com/files/troll_2.jpg.

Did you get butt hurt because I call you... I mean Unions leeches, and have erased all good that they've done?

I'm not hurt, or even angry.

Hell, I'm not even a fan of the UAW. Yes, they share a lot of the responsibility in the US automakers' troubles, but to say that have anything to do with the current global financial crisis is preposterous and ignorant.

Again, you are an idiot.

Originally posted by: preslove
You really have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
Originally posted by: preslove
Again, you are an idiot.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,060
1
0
most countries still have very high union rates compared to the united states, and do just fine for the most part.

Unfortunately americas second rate healthcare system, increasing life expectancies, short sighted management, and crappy products in killing the auto industry, but while we criticize the costs of labor pensions on gm, it should be kept in mind that the retirement benefits of management and other white collar workers are actually a greater cost to GM than blue-collar pensions and other retirement benefits.

On top of it, right-wing think tanks and popular culture in general have been spreading anti-union garbage for a generation, while they have their faults, particularly the large ones, in general they are a positive for workers.
 

miketheidiot

Lifer
Sep 3, 2004
11,060
1
0
Originally posted by: dartworth
Lets see...

Group forms a union and begins to negotiate wages and benefits with a company. The company and the employees come to an agreement and sign a contact. The company makes money and the employees make money.

I don't see a problem with that.

this is how it should, and often does work.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Originally posted by: SSSnail
Originally posted by: preslove
Originally posted by: SSSnail
You're a troll, here's a link http://communitiesonline.homes....com/files/troll_2.jpg.

Did you get butt hurt because I call you... I mean Unions leeches, and have erased all good that they've done?

I'm not hurt, or even angry.

Hell, I'm not even a fan of the UAW. Yes, they share a lot of the responsibility in the US automakers' troubles, but to say that have anything to do with the current global financial crisis is preposterous and ignorant.

Again, you are an idiot.

Originally posted by: preslove
You really have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
Originally posted by: preslove
Again, you are an idiot.

I don't have to be angry to recognize your idiocy. I enjoy killing trolls.
 

Squisher

Lifer
Aug 17, 2000
21,204
66
91
Originally posted by: sactoking
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: sactoking
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
That's why all the large Construction Companies with good reputations are Union.

As an underwriter in construction bonds and subdivision work, I would STRONGLY disagree.

Having worked in the industry for over 30 years, I agree with Red. The union companies do the job better, faster, safer, and generally under budget and under schedule. The non-union companies tend to have more "re-do's" to fix things they fucked up than the union companies and thus go over schedule more often.

While that may not apply in all areas, it sure does here. All too often, a project owner will hire a union contractor to come in and fix what the scab contractor fucked up...

If non-union contractors are so dammed good, why does the lion's share of work go to the union contractors, even in municipalities like Modesto that have no "Little Davis-Bacon" laws? The union contractors who pay about double the wages (triple if you count benefits) of the non-union contractors, STILL manage to outbid them on 90% of the jobs.
Sounds to me like the BIG difference is in how much goes to the owner's pocket and how much goes to the employees' pockets...

That alone tells me what your bias is. It's not personal. I'm just saying that as someone who looks at both union and non-union contractors of all sizes across pretty much every construction trade, there is no appreciable difference in financial presentation, build quality, timeliness, claim frequency, or claim severity between the two categories. Non-union contractors aren't better, they aren't worse.

The only time I REALLY get concerned about union issues is when a non-union specialist gets a subcontract under a union GC. Union GCs work well with union subs, non-union GCs work well with union and non-union subs, but generally (and especially in SoCal) having a non-union sub get a temp. union exemption to work for a union GC is asking to have your sub be frivolously terminated or 'sub busted'.

I worked in a union shop that competed with non-union shops for jobs for EVERY job we did. Most we beat, some we didn't. This happened for two reasons.
  • 1. We forced management long ago to make our machinist also programmers. Management fought us, but it gave a level of autonomy and flexibility to the guy running the machine. In the end it was super efficient.
  • 2. Because we paid a higher wage we attracted the best and the brightest. People are a company's greatest resource.