My Union was useful this week!!

[3chordcharlie]

Your student costs are on the high side, but $40k a year for FTP general labour is hardly great pay, and isn't 'way out' by any means.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
So, if you belong to your union, you're voting AGAINST your own interests? Odd way to do things...

While I don't always vote along my union's recommendations, I generally follow their advice pretty closely. I tend to vote my wallet, rather than a bunch of phony moral issues anyway...
Remember, "A working man voting Republican, is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders"...

Any working man with an ounce of sense votes R.

Unless your a lazy worthless waste of flesh, then you vote D so you can have taxes raised against the working man and the money given to you.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: BoomerD
So, if you belong to your union, you're voting AGAINST your own interests? Odd way to do things...

While I don't always vote along my union's recommendations, I generally follow their advice pretty closely. I tend to vote my wallet, rather than a bunch of phony moral issues anyway...
Remember, "A working man voting Republican, is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders"...

Any working man with an ounce of sense votes R.

Unless your a lazy worthless waste of flesh, then you vote D so you can have taxes raised against the working man and the money given to you.

You need a reality check!

1. Stunt is talking about Canada, and municipal elections at that. "D" and "R" do not apply.

2. Just because Republicans call themselves conservative, and call Democrats 'Liberals' and 'Socialists' does not make these statements true.

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Any working man with an ounce of sense votes R.

Unless your a lazy worthless waste of flesh, then you vote D so you can have taxes raised against the working man and the money given to you.

You are out of your mind. The republican party does nothing for the middle class. You think giving my family $600 5 years ago with any extra tax break and giving Bush something to the tune of $33k was a good use of my tax dollars???

The republicans have taken every dime my immediate family will pay in taxes throughout their lifetime and spent it on computers for Iraqi schools.

There may be a few select republicans who have voted for bills to help the middle class but they sponsor big business as a whole.

One thing that I consider and maybe some others dont is that if you cut my taxes by $500 tommorrow you are just going to ask me for a $1000 in a few years.

Cut corporate welfare and then you will cut my taxes.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Any working man with an ounce of sense votes R.

Unless your a lazy worthless waste of flesh, then you vote D so you can have taxes raised against the working man and the money given to you.

You are out of your mind. The republican party does nothing for the middle class. You think giving my family $600 5 years ago with any extra tax break and giving Bush something to the tune of $33k was a good use of my tax dollars???

The republicans have taken every dime my immediate family will pay in taxes throughout their lifetime and spent it on computers for Iraqi schools.

There may be a few select republicans who have voted for bills to help the middle class but they sponsor big business as a whole.

One thing that I consider and maybe some others dont is that if you cut my taxes by $500 tommorrow you are just going to ask me for a $1000 in a few years.

Cut corporate welfare and then you will cut my taxes.

That whole tax rebate was whitewash anyhow, rebate check shows up, then you got to deduct it from your tax return the following year. Sad how many fell for that. I know no one personally who actually paid less in taxes the last 5 years than the 5 years before that. Tax cuts for the middle class and lower? None that I have ever seen.

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity



That whole tax rebate was whitewash anyhow, rebate check shows up, then you got to deduct it from your tax return the following year. Sad how many fell for that. I know no one personally who actually paid less in taxes the last 5 years than the 5 years before that. Tax cuts for the middle class and lower? None that I have ever seen.

It was pathetic wasnt it. A loan, and had to be repaid like 90 days later.

Moving on next on the agenda, lets see, how about prescription drug plan. Many of the seniors I know opted out because it would cost them more each year.

 

[Colt45]

Originally posted by: Stunt
I'm with the right company then...It's a multinational with 24,000 employees.
It's all internal competition; I'll move to Europe

A. Good luck with an anti-union stance in Europe. Well, depends which country, but most of the west has fairly high prevalence of unions, especially Scandinavia [I think Sweden is ~90% union]. Except France, which is only 10% or something like that, IIRC

B. If the company can't turn a profit in Ontario, it's not going to move to Europe, it's going to move to Asia.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I didn't want to be "common."

You aren't, you're special, just like everyone else on Earth.[/sarcasm]

 

[HomeAppraiser]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity



That whole tax rebate was whitewash anyhow, rebate check shows up, then you got to deduct it from your tax return the following year. Sad how many fell for that. I know no one personally who actually paid less in taxes the last 5 years than the 5 years before that. Tax cuts for the middle class and lower? None that I have ever seen.

It was pathetic wasnt it. A loan, and had to be repaid like 90 days later.

Moving on next on the agenda, lets see, how about prescription drug plan. Many of the seniors I know opted out because it would cost them more each year.

I paid quarterly so I didn't get a rebate check.

The largest tax cut for the middle/lower class has been the Child Tax Credit which was started under Clinton and the Dems in Congress. In a rare post presidential interview Bill said he wanted to give the full $1000 tax credit right away but Alan Greenspan threatend to raise the Fed rates it that happened. The compromise with the Rebublicans was a phase in of the credit. All Bush Jr. did was accelerate the phase in by a year.

The prescription drug plan, my dad is retired so I have to hear about it every week. First it was "sign up or it will cost you more later" so he did. Now they doubled the monthly cost and he still does not use it! More like cost more if you signed up or not. Yea he is pissed.

 

[Mucho]

You should move to Alberta you will be happy in Redneck country.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
Having worked union construction for most of my adult life, we never tolerated slackers. It always seemed like the only slackers on a job were those who had their jobs through company nepotism, NOT union seniority. in my trade, it has been proven many times that we are better trained, and far more efficient at what we do than our non-union counterparts, and we generally bring jobs in under budget, and under schedule. The city I live in, did away with the "little Davis-Bacon law a few years ago.(filed charter city or something similar) Contractors no longer have to pay their workers prevailing wage on city projects. Funny enough, the union contractors get the lion's share of the city jobs. Huh...imagine that...a company paying those high union wages still outbids the rats, and makes money..whodah thunk it?

I also work in management in construction and we've tried both ways. Or experience is that we come out better when we use union workers. (We're a full union shop). Jobs get done better and faster because for the most part the guys know what they are doing.

Like in any workforce there are some who are better than others and some who are there because of who they know rather than what they know. But slackers don;t last long. It's not just us who try to get rid of them it's the other workers themselves who don't want them around. I can assure you we have excellent relations with they workers. It's not for nothing that most of them would rather sit at home and wait for the next job with us than return to the hiring hall when we are slow or between contracts.

Stunt is young and just starting out. When I was there I thought the same as he did (even though I was in the union). Today I'm older (and hopefully wiser), not a union member - heck not even in the industry that I started out in, and I understand the role union plays and how to deal with them and in the overall picture I'm glad they're around.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Stunt
I'm with the right company then...It's a multinational with 24,000 employees.
It's all internal competition; I'll move to Europe

and yes...our losses are all related to our unions. Not allowing us to man effectively and paying enormous sums of money. The plant with a $1m loss to budget pays their mechanics $45/hr. Ridiculous...a little?

So what's your answer?

You believe highly skilled mechanics should make your $7.75 minimum wage while you make your management salary because your getting away with raping the common man?

If a highly skilled mechanic agreed to $7.75 an hour then they probably are not that highly skilled, or their need to work on their negotiating skills a little. Pesky free market paying people what they are worth.

Thank you for solidifying my point.

Without checks and balances ( in this case unions) all the Employers would get away with $7.75 for the jobs, where would the highly skilled mechanics go???

WOW,
I take it you went thru the public education system, seeing as you have absolutely no grasp of economics.

Unions are monopolies on labor supply and by definition distort the forces that push the market into an equilibrium. So in your own example, if all companies that need mechanics decide to cut their wage by half, they would find themselves in a shortage of mechanics. How do you solve this shortage? You increase the wage.

 

[1EZduzit]

So if there is the exact number of mechanics available to fill all the positions and the employers decide to cut the wages, then what is the mechainic supoosed to do? Switch jobs? Go backl top school? Wait around 10 years until enough people switch jobs or go into other fields because the pay is so poor and the shortage creates enough demand to raise wages? Meanwhile the emplolyers are laughing all the way to the bank.

Hey, maybe you could unionize and fight back!! What a concept, take responsibility for you lot in life and try to change it for the better.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
So if there is the exact number of mechanics available to fill all the positions and the employers decide to cut the wages, then what is the mechainic supoosed to do? Switch jobs? Go backl top school? Wait around 10 years until enough people switch jobs or go into other fields because the pay is so poor and the shortage creates enough demand to raise wages? Meanwhile the emplolyers are laughing all the way to the bank.

Hey, maybe you could unionize and fight back!! What a concept, take responsibility for you lot in life and try to change it for the better.

The number of people changing employment is a function of the wage cut, so the exact outcome would depend on the side of the cut.

What would you expect the mechanics would do if you cut their wage from $25/hr to $7.50? I can guarantee you a good number if not most will leave their positions. If your own employer cut your salary by 25%, what would you do?

 

[TheSlamma]

Unions protect the lazy from getting fired and don't protect the good workers from being laid-off.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
So if there is the exact number of mechanics available to fill all the positions and the employers decide to cut the wages, then what is the mechainic supoosed to do? Switch jobs? Go backl top school? Wait around 10 years until enough people switch jobs or go into other fields because the pay is so poor and the shortage creates enough demand to raise wages? Meanwhile the emplolyers are laughing all the way to the bank.

Hey, maybe you could unionize and fight back!! What a concept, take responsibility for you lot in life and try to change it for the better.

The number of people changing employment is a function of the wage cut, so the exact outcome would depend on the side of the cut.

What would you expect the mechanics would do if you cut their wage from $25/hr to $7.50? I can guarantee you a good number if not most will leave their positions. If your own employer cut your salary by 25%, what would you do?

Leave their position to do what exactly, create an over supply of labor in whatever field they go into so the employers can cut wages there also? Don't try and tell me they businesses would do that. One of their main functions is to get their labor as cheap as possible. It's as plain as the nose on your face, unions are a necessay and do the average worker more good then harm..

 

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: BoomerD
Ah, he wants to keep his foot on the neck of the workers under him... After all, unions are for the working man...

Unions are for the unions. They don't care any more about the "average working man" than managment does. They exist to extort money from low wage employees and consolidate power.

<--- Former UFCW worker.

What turned you from working side by side with the common man to hating the common man?

Your idiocy is truly astounding.

 

[trenchfoot]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
So if there is the exact number of mechanics available to fill all the positions and the employers decide to cut the wages, then what is the mechainic supoosed to do? Switch jobs? Go backl top school? Wait around 10 years until enough people switch jobs or go into other fields because the pay is so poor and the shortage creates enough demand to raise wages? Meanwhile the emplolyers are laughing all the way to the bank.

Hey, maybe you could unionize and fight back!! What a concept, take responsibility for you lot in life and try to change it for the better.

The number of people changing employment is a function of the wage cut, so the exact outcome would depend on the side of the cut.

What would you expect the mechanics would do if you cut their wage from $25/hr to $7.50? I can guarantee you a good number if not most will leave their positions. If your own employer cut your salary by 25%, what would you do?

Leave their position to do what exactly, create an over supply of labor in whatever field they go into so the employers can cut wages there also? Don't try and tell me they businesses would do that. One of their main functions is to get their labor as cheap as possible. It's as plain as the nose on your face, unions are a necessay and do the average worker more good then harm..

1EZduzit, allow me to throw in a few words of support to your thoughts on this issue.

there are numerous companies in the US with a solid business model that have as their top priorities establishing and maintaining a mutually beneficial working relationship with its employees, where all who work there are paid fair wages and benefits commensurate with their overall value to the business, and being sincerely concerned with the morale and welfare of their employees. in return, their employees are willing to put in a 110% effort to ensure the survival and growth of those companies and their individual careers there, whether those companies are unionized or not.

in companies like these, the function of the unions that are established there are geared more toward self-policing its members to insure that a good working relationship with the employer is maintained.

it's these businesses and its employees that form the backbone of the success stories in the business world here in the US.

however, those firms in the US that view themselves as being necessarily predatory and tyrannical toward its employees to maximize profits will invariably have an adversarial relationship with the unions that were formed out of necessity to protect the rights of the employees that work there. what's not to understand about that?

we have labor laws in the US that protects workers rights. one of the highest priorities of any union worth its salt is to be an ever-vigil watchdog for those rights. in this regard, unions are essential, and only because there are businesses in the US that would happily abridge or completely ignore those rights in an effort to exploit its employees to their maximum potential.