Which are you?
Pro-Union or Anti-Union
|by Anonymous||reply 47||12/12/2012|
Unions bring better wages and benefits to all workers, union and nonunion (as shown by wage, benefits, and economic growth disparities between Right-to-Work states and free to collectively bargain states) and they consistently support LGBT equality both in terms of supporting pro-equality candidates as well as supporting pro-equality ballot issues. Of course I'm pro-union.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||12/11/2012|
I agree with R1, however, the only union workplace I ever experienced was the most depressing - it made me physically and mentally sick because it was full of dishonest, stupid, homophobic, bullying morons.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||12/11/2012|
I have worked both and from first hand experience unless you have unions, business will take advantage of workers. They have no reason not to especially these days when businesses and their owners are completely callous and greedy.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||12/11/2012|
The south is anti-union for some odd, mysterious reason only they seem to understand. Most right to work states are in the south.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||12/11/2012|
Michigan is now a right to work state.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||12/11/2012|
The right to work for less
|by Anonymous||reply 6||12/11/2012|
I think it would be great if everyone belonged to one big union or several large ones. The thing I don't like is control by the mafia.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||12/11/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 8||12/11/2012|
Union! Too bad I'm apart of one of the worst ones in this town. Blah!
|by Anonymous||reply 9||12/11/2012|
this is horrible. it's been like the empire strikes back ever since obama won the election. the capitalists are pissed and they're more determined than ever to destroy the democratic party.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||12/11/2012|
We need Unions very badly now.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||12/12/2012|
So glad you started this thread. I work for a union grocery store. (Please don't bash me). Anyway, there are 2 guys that are republicans, and last night I heard them talking about how great right to work is, so I said to one of them, why do you work for a union shop if you hate unions so much? He said, "I wouldn't have joined, but they made me." I said, yes, because we are union. I told him Wal-Mart was hiring, and he said, "I didn't apply at Wal-Mart, I applied here." I need a good answer for these idiots. Somebody help me, please. Just give me one that goes for the jugular.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||12/12/2012|
Can the company take away your vacation/personal/sick days if a union gets voted in? I heard this could happen and I will vote against the union if true.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||12/12/2012|
r12 I work in Hollywood and I just worked with a guy who also was talking trash about unions but he is a member of a local. It is completely lost on him that he wouldn't be making the kind of money he is if it weren't for the union. He also is a huge pot smoker, stays stoned all day but is a staunch conservative Repub. WTF?
|by Anonymous||reply 14||12/12/2012|
Of course I'm pro-union. Give back your free weekend if you're anti-union. Go work in poor working conditions, for dirt wages. Americans have the right to unionize. It's not a privilege. The Right hates unions because unions support Democrats. Eisenhower was a big union supporter. Reagan was the real bastard that wanted to destroy labor. The Right wants "Labor Day" revoked. 'Too Commie.'
|by Anonymous||reply 15||12/12/2012|
[quote] Reagan was the real bastard that wanted to destroy labor.
Reagan had himself been a union president; he headed the Screen Actors Guild. And evil bastard that he was, he sold out the union to Lew Wasserman in exchange for a TV role among other things.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||12/12/2012|
Reagan also deregulated broadcast TV, meaning he got rid of children's content. That forced the networks to produce a educational children's TV in the 70s. By the 90s it was non-insistent.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||12/12/2012|
I'm pro union in the private sector but not the public sector.
With private companies you have real negotiations. In the public sector you don't have real negotiations since the politicians have been purchased by the unions.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||12/12/2012|
Is this a trick question? Of course I'm pro-union.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||12/12/2012|
[quote]Can the company take away your vacation/personal/sick days if a union gets voted in? I heard this could happen and I will vote against the union if true.
If you don't have a union, you have no collective bargaining agreement, which means your company can take away any benefits whenever they feel like it. I'm non-union, and my company changed my health insurance and gave me one days notice. Ridiculous. If you have a union and a collective bargaining agreement, your benefits are spelled out in the CBA and the company can't touch them for the duration of the contract.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||12/12/2012|
The Republicans are the most selfish, anti-community people I have ever seen. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. They will encourage Individuals to opt out of paying dues, telling them you'll get the same benefit package the unions negotiate without the inconvenience of paying dues.
I wonder how many people will go that route, not fully appreciating that a weak union can't negotiate anything for anyone. I hate the GOP. The Koch brothers are the financial backers of the "right to work" campaign. They are imposing their world views on people just liike they have been biying Republican governors.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||12/12/2012|
R21 employers CAN meet the demands, they instead choose to give the CEO massive amounts of money.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||12/12/2012|
[quote]Unions were very necessary back in the day. Now they are lining the pockets of a few. Employers can't meet most of the unreasonable demands by labor leaders.
BULL-FUCKING-SHIT! Get lost Freeper!
I'm from a union family, made up of different generations. I know firsthand what's going on in their jobs, especially in government jobs. If there wasn't a union, they'd be treated like cattle.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||12/12/2012|
[quote][R21] employers CAN meet the demands, they instead choose to give the CEO massive amounts of money.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||12/12/2012|
Unfortunately poor behavior by some union leaders gives unions a bad name in some people's minds.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||12/12/2012|
Unions are a hold over from a bygone era. Yes, they did serve a purpose then, especially in the area of workers rights and safety issues.
But they are now self serving money machines for the leadership that exploit the workers for the leadership's own personal gain. I am also not a fan of the entire seniority concept unions cherish, whereby someone who has been in a job longer than another is entitled to bump a less senior person out of a role.
I have seen it time and time again where greedy union workers have fucked over their own fellow union employees for miniscule pay raises. Union people would rather take a 50 cent raise personally and see others laid off to fund this raise - how is that "brotherhood"?
One just has to look at the Hostess situation to understand how unions are actually hurting employees. The bakers union refused to accept the offer from the company, thereby leading to 18k people becoming unemployed, and most likely many will never find jobs again (over capacity in the baking industry, along with a very specific skill set that is not in much demand outside the Hostess factory environment).
Seniority hurts employers - the best employees are not promoted over people with more seniority. So purely by the nature of being on the job longer than another, an employee can move into another role. I beleive in promoting people based on merit and performance, not just because someone as been around a long time. It would be incredibly discouraging to be an employee in that sort of environment.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||12/12/2012|
R28, just a question i had, as i have noticed the same thing at my shop. but what i also noticed is the people who are willing to fuck over fellow union brothers and sister are the shop republicans. they bitch about the union all day and never attend meetings where as the democrats in my shop all try to help other people, volunteer on committees and coordinate community service. unions represent diverse groups of people and a few self serving assholes shouldn't represent the union standard. seniority also prevents a lot of fucked up behavior by management, most often the cases ive seen are people who are a year or two away from retirement get let go to avoid the full pay out. as for hostess, they had already filed for bankruptcy a few years ago and the union gave major concessions to help the company. they knew the company was going to go under eventually, they had just bought some extra time. they union probably didn't foresee the 200% raises the top execs gave themselves, that was managements "concession"
|by Anonymous||reply 29||12/12/2012|
r29, regarding Hostess.... are you for real? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
When the companies assets are sold (and they WILL be sold, for hundreds of millions of dollars), do you think any of the union people will see a penny?
They would rather have nothing than a lower wage. Good luck with that.
Let me know how they are making out a year from now after they can't find jobs and their unemployment runs out.
I always laugh when I see people refer to "management" derisively. It speaks volumes about them.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||12/12/2012|
R30, this company was going under anyway and they already took almost 20% in pay cuts the last time around. would you want your pay cut year after year because your boss can run his company effectively (yet still gives himself a raise every year)
i would love to know what volumes it speaks about using the term management. management is just a term used to describe the higher executives who make essential decisions about the companies future, i don't mean every non union person.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||12/12/2012|
Approx. 9% of workers are union. Most of the companies that have gone under or going to go under are in trouble due to labor costs. Most of these involve pensions. People are getting sick of it. This is the tip of the iceberg.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||12/12/2012|
Yet, the CEO's are able to pocket millions and millions.
We need to bring unions back, with a vengeance.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||12/12/2012|
This question is as dumb as asking if someone is pro-business or anti-business.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||12/12/2012|
I seleected anti-union because I think they have outlived their usefullness. In the early years of unions, my at my grandmother's place of employement, the unbions helped workers to get things like bathroom breaks and in some cases a better wage. But these days, the union heads look after their own interests at the expense of the employees' Look at what happened to Hostess - the union fought the company and now the company is out of business and the union has NO workers and can't collect union dues from them.
In the 1990s I worked for a company where the factory workers were union and the office (I was an office worker) was no union. The union went of strike for better benefits (they didn't want to pay towards health insurance, they wanted the company to absorb all costs). The compnay quickly hired replacement workers (scabs!!!) and within a year or the company outsourced all the manufacturing to non-union companies. So the union ultimately lost all those jobs. They were greedy idiots. And frankly, union leadership still are greedy idiots!
|by Anonymous||reply 35||12/12/2012|
All these anti-union posters have very short attention spans. Within the last thirty years middle employee wages have stagnated and gone down, yet executive compensation has risen by 112%.
it's all part of the corporate plan, to enslave America to low wages, low benefits all to give the 1% all the money.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||12/12/2012|
[quote]Unions are a hold over from a bygone era. Yes, they did serve a purpose then, especially in the area of workers rights and safety issues.
CEO pay spiked 725 percent between 1978 and 2011. Worker pay rose 5.7 percent.
Yeah, no need for unions anymore.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||12/12/2012|
You keep bringing up hostess but still don't acknowledge that the union already took major pay cuts and the executives used the union employees penions fund to give themselves enormous raise. You don't have to like everything about a union but companies would be treating people a lot worse without them. Hell i remember a strike that started because the company decided to give everyone a $5/hr pay cut because, as the company president said "you people are a commodity, like soy beans and oil, we can find people who will work for less." God forbid we treat employees like you know, human.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||12/12/2012|
What exactly are people getting sick of, r32? Livable wages? Healthcare? Job security? A guaranteed income in old age that isn't threatened by Republican greed and chicanery? Protection from unfair labor practices? Sick days? Well earned vacation days? Political clout? I gladly pay my union dues every month. The people who will take without giving back deserve every shitty thing management will do to them when there are no longer any unions. I wonder if you asked the workers at Papa John's, Dominos and Walmart if they would be willing to pay union dues for the right to a decent living and benefits what they would say?
|by Anonymous||reply 39||12/12/2012|
I'm pro-union. But like most institutions, they can get bloated and be in need of regulations. When I was in college, I worked for a grocery store that was union run. The benefits and pay were amazing and wonderful, but the workers who had seniority were so fucking lazy and horrible to customers. Unless they were caught stealing or on drugs, they quite literally could not be fired. So they didn't try or put forth any effort. Job security is so wonderful, but I wish there was a way to make jobs secure from vendetta driven owners, but not for lazy workers.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||12/12/2012|
r35. Just the kind of dumb fuck management loves to exploit. How's that Happy Meal?
|by Anonymous||reply 41||12/12/2012|
If you want a shitty, low-paying job with no benefits, move to a right-to-work state.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||12/12/2012|
The unions negotiate pay and benefits for the union members. Now the non union members will be payed the same. They will not work for less and the employers know it. The result is the repugs are funneling jobs to non union workers that supported them and the bonus for them is they don't have to pay their share. Just like with taxes the repugs do not want to pay their share when they can tax you. They will encourage these same non union employees to contribute to the repugs because they made these jobs possible. So what should be union dues goes to the repugs. Over time the union loses all influence the employers end up with control of the employees and they are in a position to pay what they want to.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||12/12/2012|
Does anyone else suspect R2 has a case full of problems that have nothing to do with where it works?
|by Anonymous||reply 44||12/12/2012|
Pro-Union obviously.. I vote for The Worker's Party in my country. Although lately I've become more and more extreme in my views because the rich assholes are making me sick. I'll probably vote for the communist party in the next election.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||12/12/2012|
In principle, pro union. In experience, more towards anti union.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||12/12/2012|
Just because there are some bad union leaders and/or practices doesn't mean unions are bad. Fuck, people are stupid. By that logic, every single employer is evil because EVERYONE has had a shitty boss.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||12/12/2012|