All Unions Should Be Abolished.

What I said is true and to say otherwise speaks to a profound ignorance of labor history in this country. AND, to believe that ANYTHING I said had ANYTHING to do with strikes is to pull "meaning" out of your buttcrack.

Strikes occur when management makes the unilateral decision to impose a settlement or violates terms of a contract. The only coin labor has is labor and it it only valuable in unison.

It's called a lockout and management has used it for 160 years. The theory is "we can wait longer than them."

Which serves who? The workers? the customers? Wal Mart employees can walk out today, all of them, without representation of a union. But, tell me. What is Wal Mart if not a UNION of people with money pooling their resources to acquire the means of production? Should corporations and stock be illegal because of the threat that stockholders might sell their stock?

Back to the NFL? Sports franchises are a special case because the owner has a contract with the individual player . Try sticking to labor.

WRONG. Labor is the backbone of commerce because manufacturing on any scale is IMPOSSIBLE without lots and lots of labor. Management has an interest in minimizing the unit cost of labor. Labor wants to maximize its own returns and, just as people with money unionize to pool that money to form corporations whose duty it is to maximize return people with labor to sell pool that labor form their own unions whose duty it is to maximize THEIR returns.

Ahhh. The new "capitalism. Privatize the profits and socialize the losses.

"Imply? I didn't imply anything unless you're trying to pull "meaning" out of thin air. There is no legislation anywhere that forbids management from firing striking workers.

Unions in the workplace is an entirely democratic process. The workers vote on whether to unionize, vote on certification, recertify on a regular basis, and elect union representatives. Competitive unions are not needed. Union labor is already in competition with non-union labor."

 

Um, yes they should if they are public sector. The gov't is the boss. The gov is the CEO. Workers follow company/gov't policy. If they don't like policy the are free to see employment elsewhere.

 

No, they would not suddenly disappear. But over time they will. It is large corps that help make our laws and reguations.
We would not be able to compete with China if we have to pay all those fringe benefits.

 

Kinda of surprised to see this someone arguing through an exultionary argument on the right side of the poltical spectrum. I myself am a pro dawrin and believe in evolution. However the simple fact is that evoltuion can not most any sort of species or though un advanced ( unless your cells are not using glucose and the kreb cycle for power).
UNions in private business.
this here is a application of a union that is perfectly fine. If employees want to much money then the business can not function. So to an extent what is good for the company is good for the employee.
Unions in government
this is a tricky thing as you must look at both ends of the spectrum. Public unions can get a bit out of hand because the school is likely going to function no matter. So say they want a pay raise where a private company could only give them as much money as they could while maintaining a decent profit, a government is already in det so why care. The other end of this problem is that when you look at test scores the 5 states that have out lawed unions are all in the bottom 7 of national test scores.

 

You're so convinced I'm the enemy it is impossible to have a dialogue with you. On any subject, when one thinks his side is perfect and the other is purely evil, that individual has moved into the realm of irrational. Like Johnny C, you assume I am anti-Union. I am the only 1 on this thread who has talked about abolishing right to work. I am the only 1 who has talked about protectionism. With off shoring, you have no pull as a worker. None of us do. Nothing to take to the table. Period. All gains made for a century wiped out. I talk about the government controlling currency and you call me a socialist? LOL. I guess our founders were as well, right? No one should ever be locked into a station in the united state of America, No rich man should be forever rich free from competition, and no one capable of moving on to the owner class should be stuck as a worker for life. The inflation of the private fiat has created the wealth gap that leaves people stuck as a worker for life, begging for better handouts like dogs, instead of having a system that is truly based upon merit. All you are doing is supporting the status quo which has gotten us to where we are. Whether you know you are is irrelevant. I would like to see America return to an employees market, with the majority in unions. I just argue unions being included in anti-trust to curb the problems of old that led to the stripping of unions power. I would much rather see unions training workers to be the best than a nation indebted to universities for life, through federal loans one can't escape from, learning such viable careers as underwater basket weaving.

 

Employees are the people who have not yet proven themselves high enough in the evolutionary totem pole to be employers. We can't let them get their way. EVER.

 

we can, if we can still make a profit and do so, and if we want to retain their skill sets in our enterprises. Skilled labor is an asset, not a commodity.

 

I could go on and on down the list. State law doesn't equal union gain, and true union gains only effect those in the union. Though this post truly helps me understand why globalists have been able to subvert worker gains as a whole through globalism, and why unions shrink every day without any of those in unions actually attacking the true reasons why unions are shrinking.

 

Skilled labor is a portfolio killer for fat cats. You don't need RN's any more in hospitals. Did you know that? Nope. You only need 2 years of school and how to put on latex gloves. Skills no longer required in lieu of profit. Meanwhile, CEO's cut and chop their way to economic success for the here and now. That's all it's really about. Don't think it's about anything more permanent.

 

Do away with right to work and free trade to get power back. This will get the majority in unions, with higher pay scales than the state can muster with wage laws, or the individual can barter for by their self. Establish anti-trust as to unions so many must exist for any type of labor. This will allow workers to change unions even though in the exact same field, for everything from dues to not liking the people controlling the one they used to be in. This will also give employers a choice at bringing in a different union so no one of them can have so much power that their demands are simply unreasonable, and the workers coming in won't be scabs destroying overall gains like the Chinese work force does to Americans as a whole right now.

 

I didn't make that claim. But there are real concerns nevertheless. Can you think of some yourself? (I can.)

You seem to be very unaware of human nature and general American history. Please... find out something more than what you are showing you already know.

Really, you are MISSING A LOT of the obvious!!

 

Talk about jaw-dropping stupidity. There are many RN's in hospitals...they are CRYING for more, in fact!

 

*Only read/only responding to opening thread.*

I disagree. The recall results are a big step in getting things under control. However, as a constitutional conservative i have a natural aversion to words like ban, abolish, boycott, mandate, etc. The answer is to be logical and come to the consensus that we can't have public sector unions. We can have citizens negotiating against themselves with one side being represented by elected officials who are all too likely to kick the can down the road if they can and at the same are too vulnerable to smear campaigns and fear tactics like saying they are endangering the public by threatening strikes by cops and firemen. This is really a no-brainer. It never should have been allowed in the first place.

Private sector unions are a different animal. The problem isn't that unions exist. The problem is that progressives in our govt have given them too much power. They have been artificially powerful for too long. People should remain free at all times to organize if they wish. The labor unions that result from this should have no more power than the natural strength that comes with organisation and solidarity. That said, every state should essentially be a right to work state. Companies should be equally free to say "okay","we have received your notice that you have decided to organize and we have received your proposal regarding wages and working conditions in general and we have decided to inform you that anyone who doesn't report to work at the customary time tomorrow at the previously agreed compensation will be terminated immediately." "Thank You" Simple.

It's perfect. You are free to unionize, and employers are free to fire you. If they can't get the caliber of employee they need at the rates they are offering, their business will fail. If you feel you are worth more, you are free to go pursue it elsewhere. If you can't get it, that means you aren't worth it.


SH0

 

Ummm...you obviously do not know what you say. LPN's are all the rage. RN's are OUT. They cost too much now. (The bill for services still charge you for RN class care but, it's only a little green no nothing making next to nothing taking care of you. Isn't that comforting?

 

I can sympathize. Your thread is a diarrhea of ignorant, intolerant nonsense. It should make anyone want to vomit.
Unions are especially important in today's society because the rich want to turn the clock back to the days of slavery.

http://www.businessinsider.com/well-it-may-be-time-to-face-the-fact-that-we-need-labor-unions-2012-6

 

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

I'm not one of those "anti-unions" telling you all you're wrong supporting them. You all aren't supporting the structure for them to exist. As companies close their doors, with no new union type industries opening, the number of unionized workers will shrink to nothing. I don't understand how supporting unions at 11%, and then at 8%, and then at 5% until they're 1% and fall off the earth is a solid battle plan. It's like arguing constantly for buffalo while never addressing hunting. The great majority of the reasons unions are shrinking are outside of the typical union argument. You must argue against these things or kiss unions goodbye.

 

I argue against unions all the time, but argue against union excess and like crony capitalism, against government protection for forced union participation.

Unions have had a place protecting workers, mostly in workplace conditions. Many laws have been made since then taking care of this issue. Labor unions (not public unions) should also have the ability to fight for fair pay for wages, unfortunately, that has also been abused. When you have a high school dropout making more then some people do after finishing college, there is a disconnect with reality.

 

I can see what you're saying, but higher eduction has turned into quite the scam as far as academics go, so not really a fair analogy. There simply isn't enough cushy paper pushing jobs to go around for all the people graduating with toilet paper degrees. A person going into a trade will have a far better life, especially when all the baby boomers have retired and all the real jobs open up, from foreman positions on down.

 

You will notice that I do not include public unions in my statement. The reason for that is that I believe they should have the same rights as Federal unions.

Cannot strike.
Cannot collective bargain for wages.
Cannot force people to pay union dues.

There is still a place for unions in the public sector for thinks like workplace disputes and working conditions, but that is about all.

 

Unless people who claim to support labor start vocally attacking free trade and the FED, all gains are history. In the scheme of things public unions have far less power than private. I don't know if they're just more of the "do what you're told" types, inherently statist, or what. But when the state puts its foot down, they cave typically. A really smart move to destroy private unions before public as far as the owner class goes, as it's all down hill from here.

 

If you believe that unions should not exist because the "poor business owners" cannot possibly survive in an environment where people are allowed to pool their labor to maximize their return just like ownership pools their money then, yes, you are the enemy. You are the enemy of every working person. You are the enemy of a growing economy. You are the enemy of good jobs, good education, good benefits.

Whether a public or private union government has no place in dictating union membership, union rules, or even the issues about which the union's membership can demand its leadership negotiate. Whether it is a government or private business MANAGEMENT has the responsibility for the contracts signed.

Would you accept a law that says only 40 Republicans can be elected to the US Senate?
Would you accept a law that prohibits the Chamber of Commerce from collecting membership dues?
Would you accept a law that dictates who can or cannot join the NRA?

 

READ MY POSTS. (*)(*)(*)(*). Reading comprehension, people. A valuable asset.

 

Honestly, I don't think any laws should be created, nor should the government act to dissolve private-sector unions. On the other hand, they also shouldn't provide special protections to unions, such as laws to force non-members to pay union fees, or laws requiring that the business not fire or replace striking union workers.

What the government should do is protect individuals rights to freely assemble - keeping anyone from preventing workers from forming a union, but also keeping anyone from forcing workers to join a union.

 

Private sector unions are as destructive as public ones. Destroy 'em all, I say. FORCEFULLY.

 

So you hate the free market I see.

Knew it. You're a fascist through and through.