philly transit union workers go on strike...

[Genx87]

Yep the workers would be more disposable thus lowering wages and benefits. A win win for businesses

Why hasnt this happened in the private sector then? Because skilled labor doesnt grow on trees.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

See you are talking out your ass as usual. I was good and made over scale, the Union never got in the way. I never met a scab that made as much as a Union Carpenter because all the good Carpenters were in the Union. I also never had to get a job out of the hall as my set of skills were always in demand. I also never seen a shitty worker get protected by the Union, if they didn't cut it they were sent packing.

Regarding Seniority, that usually never comes into play in residential construction as you usually have to go out and look for work when the job is finished if the company you worked for didn't have anything else going on which would happen ever once in a while

Yet I just lived through a summer of hell due to a Union... but yeah, there might have been a union that you describe back then or even today but they are few and far between.
My customer will NEVER use union labor again if they have a choice in the matter. The project went WAY over in hours and the workmanship was pitiful at best. After we finally got rid of the last of the local crew onsite, myself and my company's electricians spent 2 weeks finding and fixing their crap. I know that my 4 guys could have done the whole job in the same time it took the local guys to do it and we had about 30 onsite at peak.

But keep on slobbing the union knob if you must...

 

[PokerGuy]

I'm not delusional- although you may be. Have you checked the unemployment figures lately? almost 10%, 16% if you go by the total un- and under- employed. Nobody with enough sense to pour piss out of a boot is quitting anytime RSN... Now is a great time for employers to beat down the workforce... and for workers in critical positions to stand up and be counted...

Indeed, when times are tough, employers are in a better position to force concessions from workers. During good times, workers are in better positions to force employers to provide more salary/benefits. It's a normal market balance. Unions just screw it up by extorting more salary and benefit from employers than the skillset of their members warrant.

 

[Red Dawn]

Why hasnt this happened in the private sector then? Because skilled labor doesnt grow on trees.

And how do you become skilled? If you are in a Trade Union they provide the schooling.

 

[PokerGuy]

And how do you become skilled? If you are in a Trade Union they provide the schooling.

So the only way to become "skilled" is by union provided schooling? There are many ways to gain skills, the unions are not needed for any of them.

 

[Red Dawn]

So the only way to become "skilled" is by union provided schooling? There are many ways to gain skills, the unions are not needed for any of them.

Well if you are in the Union you get class room schooling plus on the job training. Would any non Union Companies off that?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Well if you are in the Union you get class room schooling plus on the job training. Would any non Union Companies off that?

They can and do.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

And how do you become skilled? If you are in a Trade Union they provide the schooling.

So, people are entirely unable to get any skills or education unless they are in a union?

LOL...

 

[PokerGuy]

Well if you are in the Union you get class room schooling plus on the job training. Would any non Union Companies off that?

Of course they do.

My point is that talent is a resource just like any other. Companies pay whatever they must to get it, and they will spend money to develop it. In a competitive marketplace, the price for talent is set by supply and demand. If have a talent that is bountiful, then you can't expect to get paid a lot for it. Unions distort that marketplace by artificially changing the price for a resource.

Unions are needed to protect workers in certain scenarios where there is no competitive marketplace for their resource. Those situations used to exist all over the place, but over the years most of those situations have disappeared.

My father worked in a mine for a few years when I was younger. It was the ONLY job available for him and everyone else in that area at the time. In that situation, there is no marketplace for his resource, so a union is needed to protect workers from abuse.

If you work at McDonalds and you don't like how they treat you, what's to stop you from quitting and taking one of 50 other similar jobs? Nothing. Your skill set is likely such that you don't have much leverage, but no employer is going to have much leverage either because you can leave any time you want.

 

[StageLeft]

52k to drive a bus with awesome benefits, fvcking ridiculous.

 

[seepy83]

That is a load of shit. The majority of unions have been pushed into govt sector jobs. The private market is majority non-unionized and does fine.

Genx87, you aren't looking at it from the same perspective that I am. I know that the majority of the private sector is non-unionized. But if we all of a sudden removed Unions from existance, the employers would no longer have to worry about providing adequate benefits, compensation, etc.

I AM NOT saying that every company in existance should employ Union workers. I AM saying that employees should have the right to Organize in a union if thy are not receiving adequate compensation for the job they are doing.

 

[Genx87]

And how do you become skilled? If you are in a Trade Union they provide the schooling.

Is this supposed to be rhetorical? How does anybody become skilled? They go to school, get out, and work in their field. It is amazing the majority of the private sector has been able to do this without the help of Unions.

But that is neither here nor there. The bottom line is skilled labor doesnt grow on tree's. Thus your whole theory without unions everybody will be working for min wage is bunk.

 

[Genx87]

Genx87, you aren't looking at it from the same perspective that I am. I know that the majority of the private sector is non-unionized. But if we all of a sudden removed Unions from existance, the employers would no longer have to worry about providing adequate benefits, compensation, etc.

I AM NOT saying that every company in existance should employ Union workers. I AM saying that employees should have the right to Organize in a union if thy are not receiving adequate compensation for the job they are doing.

Where are you coming up with this theory without any Unions the corps will force people to work for slave wages? It isnt based in any reality that I know.

And I am not arguing Unions should be illegal. Far from it. I just dont buy into the fear mongering without Unions all skilled labor suddenly gets tossed into third world status and working for min wage with no benefits. The private market has proven this wrong time after time.

 

[seepy83]

Where are you coming up with this theory without any Unions the corps will force people to work for slave wages? It isnt based in any reality that I know.

8-Hour Work Day, 5-Day Work Week, Overtime Pay, Child Labor Laws, Prevailing Wage, workers rights, etc...all of these exist because of the Union/Organized Labor Movement. That is the reality that I know, and if you don't know that reality then maybe you should check your history books. The fact is that if Unions did not exist, you (as a worker) would not enjoy many of the benefits that you take for granted today.

You take the option for workers to organize out of the equation, and down the road (30, 50, 100, how ever many years from today) people are going to be wondering why they lost many of the benefits that their parents/grandparents/etc had.

 

[Darwin333]

Genx87, you aren't looking at it from the same perspective that I am. I know that the majority of the private sector is non-unionized. But if we all of a sudden removed Unions from existance, the employers would no longer have to worry about providing adequate benefits, compensation, etc.

I AM NOT saying that every company in existance should employ Union workers. I AM saying that employees should have the right to Organize in a union if thy are not receiving adequate compensation for the job they are doing.

I agree with what you said but the problem I see is the unions have usurped far to much power. I have seen unions run companies out of town simply because they didn't employ union work, I have seen unions succesfully lobby to have projects canceled because union workers were not being used, unions extorting companies for wildly unjustified "benefits" and the list goes on.

There are certain areas of the country that if you want to start a business or build a project you MUST use union labor or it will never get off the ground. It has nothing to do with the wages the non-union workers are being paid or workplace safety (which is handled quite well by OSHA now) or any other reason unions use for their existance. OTOH, I can cut the local union a check and do whatever the hell I please without them interfering including using grossly underpaid illegal workers. There is a word for that, its called extortion and just because it is sometimes within the law doesn't make it any less wrong.

I have also seen unions do plenty of good for their workers, employers and their communities but by and large they have become way to powerful.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

8-Hour Work Day, 5-Day Work Week, Overtime Pay, Child Labor Laws, Prevailing Wage, workers rights, etc...all of these exist because of the Union/Organized Labor Movement. That is the reality that I know, and if you don't know that reality then maybe you should check your history books. The fact is that if Unions did not exist, you (as a worker) would not enjoy many of the benefits that you take for granted today.

You take the option for workers to organize out of the equation, and down the road (30, 50, 100, how ever many years from today) people are going to be wondering why they lost many of the benefits that their parents/grandparents/etc had.

You ASSume they'd be gone but reality suggests that wouldn't be the case. The more educated, mobile, and have access to more information than they had back in the days when companies were able to control employees. In every thread about unions one of you lappers brings up that same old tired list as if it's recent and ALL good. I'd suggest some of that list is not exactly "good", but regardless the unions don't fight for those things anymore as they are already in place - they fight for control over employees now - something they used to fight against. Yes, the unions once had a place in the employment market but now they are a drag on the market.

 

[Red Dawn]

Unions are a necessity for those in the building trade . A Tradesman would lose a hefty amount of wages and most of their benefits if they were to abandon the Unions. How else can someone get a pension if they have to go from job site to job site as is the nature for residential construction, trust the contractors? Fucking please, that's be a joke.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Unions are a necessity for those in the building trade . A Tradesman would lose a hefty amount of wages and most of their benefits if they were to abandon the Unions. How else can someone get a pension if they have to go from job site to job site as is the nature for residential construction, trust the contractors? Fucking please, that's be a joke.

pension? :biggrin: Why don't you save for your own retirement instead of sucking off the company that already paid your wages? Pensions are almost nonexistent anymore - and with good reason - it bankrupts businesses.

And just why would a tradesman lose wages? Maybe because their union wages are artificially inflated and can't stand up to market pressures. :biggrin:

 

[Red Dawn]

pension? :biggrin: Why don't you save for your own retirement instead of sucking off the company that already paid your wages? Pensions are almost nonexistent anymore - and with good reason - it bankrupts businesses.

And just why would a tradesman lose wages? Maybe because their union wages aren't artificially inflated and can't stand up to market pressures. :biggrin:

Ah now it comes out, you are envious that they make a good wage and have great benefits which you can't have.Their wages aren't over inflated, Contractors make great profits paying those wages and benefits. How you ask, they make their money on the material, they always have and it works well for them. Sure small time contractors can't because they don't do enough volume, that's why most of them are non union and use lessor quality trades people.

 

[Jhhnn]

Pensions don't bankrupt companies, CSG- it's the executives who offer pie in the sky pension perks in exchange for wage freezes and non-strikes. their motto? IBG! (I'll be gone!) with their multimillion dollar bonuses and golden parachutes when it actually comes time to pay those benefits...

Save for retirement? heh. I notice you didn't say "invest"... gee, why not? Maybe because seniors who retired on their investments are competing with illegals for work at MickyD's... their investments having gone to hell in a handbasket...

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

Unions are a necessity for those in the building trade . A Tradesman would lose a hefty amount of wages and most of their benefits if they were to abandon the Unions. How else can someone get a pension if they have to go from job site to job site as is the nature for residential construction, trust the contractors? Fucking please, that's be a joke.

by pension, you mean relying on some other entity to provide you income when you retire?

i do that on my own, with a 401k.
if my company didn't offer a 401k, i would open up an IRA, max it out every year.
any left over money i make would go into some sort of an interest bearing account, or managed fund, etc.
anything extra (pension, SS) is icing on the cake for me, but i'm not relying on those for my retirement.

 

[Red Dawn]

by pension, you mean relying on some other entity to provide you income when you retire?

i do that on my own, with a 401k.
if my company didn't offer a 401k, i would open up an IRA, max it out every year.
any left over money i make would go into some sort of an interest bearing account, or managed fund, etc.
anything extra (pension, SS) is icing on the cake for me, but i'm not relying on those for my retirement.

Well it seems they have it better than you. Must piss you off.

 

[dartworth]

old argument is old

its the same union haters in every union thread...

 

[Darwin333]

Well it seems they have it better than you. Must piss you off.

Are you at all familiar with the law of exponents? I know it was taught way back in 6th grade math but just because you have forgotten it doesn't mean its wrong. The math is never wrong.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Pensions don't bankrupt companies, CSG- it's the executives who offer pie in the sky pension perks in exchange for wage freezes and non-strikes. their motto? IBG! (I'll be gone!) with their multimillion dollar bonuses and golden parachutes when it actually comes time to pay those benefits...

Save for retirement? heh. I notice you didn't say "invest"... gee, why not? Maybe because seniors who retired on their investments are competing with illegals for work at MickyD's... their investments having gone to hell in a handbasket...

Your retirement is your choice. "Save" allows you the choice of how you want to do it. I personally have some "savings" and some "investments". It is not the responsibility of an employer to provide for you when you no longer provide for them. Stop being a leech.