PDA

View Full Version : Q for those that are so pro union



luvmylabs23139
03-11-2011, 09:55 AM
Do you believe that a person should be forced to pay to have a job?
This means do you think that a person should be forced to pay money to a union in order to have job?
Why is that not extortion?

Sue Kiefer
03-11-2011, 10:57 AM
A good question??
Why should anyone "have" to pay "if" their company is union???
That was one part of Gov. Walker's changes.
If I normally paid $1K yr. in Union dues. Now I can choose to "NOT" pay that and put that $$ someplace else.
Here's an idea put that $1K in your health care program or your retirement program.Then you can't say that you'll be losing that $$.
Just a thought.:)
Sue

luvmylabs23139
03-11-2011, 11:03 AM
How are the unions hurting you?

Today they have no effect on me. However I was forced to pay union dues as a high school student. Then the union had a contract vote that they denied the information on the vote to part timers. They told us about the vote with zero time to get to the place we could vote against the deal the full time employees cut to benefit them and screw the part time work force.
I learned when I was 16 how a union steals your money and then screws you.:confused::confused::confused:

road kill
03-11-2011, 11:04 AM
This is a time of reckoning.

If the unions are so needed, we shall see.

If they are not and have been a giant scam on we, the taxpayers, your gig is up.

Walker has been given his chance.
If he is right, unions are done, but we all win.
If he is wrong, we are going bankrupt anyways, so at least we tried something different.

To paraphrase Einstein;
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

What are you gonna say if his plan works??


We have tried it your way for years, look where it has gotten us!!!


stan b

huntinman
03-11-2011, 11:15 AM
If you don't/didn't like the unions, nobody was forcing you to work there. Go get a job somewhere else then.

Too late for sour grapes...you lost. Turn out the lights...the party's over...

duckheads
03-11-2011, 11:16 AM
Mitch did what Walker is doing several years ago. Indiana seems to be in pretty good shape financially although they all fudge the numbers in one way or another to make it look better for their administration.

ErinsEdge
03-11-2011, 11:19 AM
The unions are still going to be there-they just won't be getting all those dues collected automatically. That's what there are in a tizzy about. People will now have a choice.

luvmylabs23139
03-11-2011, 12:09 PM
If you don't/didn't like the unions, nobody was forcing you to work there. Go get a job somewhere else then.

The way I see it, these people were fighting for the unions so they must not have felt too badly about them.

The only people complaining are the people who work in the private sector and have to pay their pensions and all that jazz on their own. Boohoo, if you're feeling sorry for yourself A: go back to school, graduate with debt and work for the teachers union B: go find a union job.

All I hear is "the teachers have it so good, it's time for them to pay their way" cripes if it's so good why aren't more people doing it?

You so miss the point. This was way back when and all I wanted was a part time job in high school. I had union dues taken from me but the union then did not inform the dues paying part timers of votes while telling the full time non student members of votes. WE were denyed a voice by the union.
BUT they stole money from high school kids.

Nate_C
03-11-2011, 12:25 PM
Do you believe that a person should be forced to pay to have a job?
This means do you think that a person should be forced to pay money to a union in order to have job?
Why is that not extortion?

You have a decent point but you create a free rider issue. If you have an open shop then you have to allow for the union workers have higher wadges and benefits then non-union. This is proibited by many states in different ways ways. So workers that don't pay the union dues get to benefit from the activities of the union.

In many ways unions have gotten out of control, however, we have seen that without collective bargining companies begin striping away benefits and the distribution of income between the workers and senior managment / stockholders goes down. Over the last two decades workers share of the pie has been shrinking. More workers are temp to get around benefits...ect.. I think there are issues that Unions can help with and keep companies accountable to workers.

road kill
03-11-2011, 12:28 PM
You have a decent point but you create a free rider issue. If you have an open shop then you have to allow for the union workers have higher wadges and benefits then non-union. This is proibited by many states in different ways ways. So workers that don't pay the union dues get to benefit from the activities of the union.

In many ways unions have gotten out of control, however, we have seen that without collective bargining companies begin striping away benefits and the distribution of income between the workers and senior managment / stockholders goes down. Over the last two decades workers share of the pie has been shrinking. More workers are temp to get around benefits...ect.. I think there are issues that Unions can help with and keep companies accountable to workers.

I don't know if you are aware of this, we are talking about public & state workers unions.
And their "share of the p[ie" has been doing nothing but growing.
BTW---That PIE is mine.

There is NO Company, only we weary taxpayers.
There is NO profit to share, just the value of MY home or MY income.



RK

HPL
03-11-2011, 12:47 PM
I don't know if you are aware of this, we are talking about public & state workers unions.
And their "share of the p[ie" has been doing nothing but growing.
BTW---That PIE is mine.

There is NO Company, only we weary taxpayers.



RK

Bingo! That is directly on point! Mark McKinnon gives an excellent analysis of the situation on page 19 of the March 7 issue of Newsweek. Not only do public worker unions extort money from workers, they then use that money to help elect the people with whom they then will be negotiating basically in collusion against the "weary taxpayer".

Gerry Clinchy
03-11-2011, 01:03 PM
Another difference between private & public sector.

If a private company decides that it cannot afford to do business in one state, it can move. It is not possible for the govt of Ohio to move to Wisconsin :-) Thus, whatever the cost of running the business of govt, they ain't moving out of state or overseas.

A private company does not have an unlimited option of raising its price to cover increased costs. At some point, it will no longer be competitive with other similar products/services in the marketplace. It can move or close its business. The govt, when faced with costs increasing, just raises taxes. Taxpayers have no chance to "opt out" as they do with other products/services.

Just read in the NYT that NJ state income tax is 8.97% ... add that to FIT; and property taxes; sales tax ... and one really doesn't have to wonder if the "rich" are paying their fair share of the taxes.

Interestingly, the states with the highest tax profile (like NJ, NY, and CA) are the ones who have the largest financial mess. Seems like the more $ the govt has to spend, the less wisely they spend it.

Franco
03-11-2011, 02:09 PM
Seems like the more $ the govt has to spend, the less wisely they spend it.



No doubt about it! Best way to cure our economic ills is by shrinking the size of the Federal Government.

Just look at the companies that have had to move mfg. overseas because of unions.

One can thank the unions for the term, "rust belt", in the states they control. They have made us uncompetitve in every area.

luvmylabs23139
03-11-2011, 02:15 PM
You have a decent point but you create a free rider issue. If you have an open shop then you have to allow for the union workers have higher wadges and benefits then non-union. This is proibited by many states in different ways ways. So workers that don't pay the union dues get to benefit from the activities of the union.

In many ways unions have gotten out of control, however, we have seen that without collective bargining companies begin striping away benefits and the distribution of income between the workers and senior managment / stockholders goes down. Over the last two decades workers share of the pie has been shrinking. More workers are temp to get around benefits...ect.. I think there are issues that Unions can help with and keep companies accountable to workers.
Ha! WE got paid slighlty more than min wage but after union dues we were making less than a non union place. As a part time high schooler we got zero benefits. THe union stole from the high school kids.

Buzz
03-11-2011, 04:59 PM
No doubt about it! Best way to cure our economic ills is by shrinking the size of the Federal Government.

Just look at the companies that have had to move mfg. overseas because of unions.

One can thank the unions for the term, "rust belt", in the states they control. They have made us uncompetitve in every area.

I helped move two factories overseas. Both were located in The South. Neither was union. But they just plain could not compete with workers making less than $2/hr, no benefits, few environmental concerns, and almost zero protections of worker safety. Then the funny thing was, even those workers could not compete with Chinese Labor. They started importing all steel and cast iron parts from China, pre-machined. So all they ended up doing was assembling parts. If they are even doing that now, I've been out of that business for almost 10 years. They might be even doing the assembly in China now.

Franco
03-11-2011, 05:08 PM
I helped move two factories overseas. Both were located in The South. Neither was union. But they just plain could not compete with workers making less than $2/hr, no benefits, few environmental concerns, and almost zero protections of worker safety. Then the funny thing was, even those workers could not compete with Chinese Labor. They started importing all steel and cast iron parts from China, pre-machined. So all they ended up doing was assembling parts. If they are even doing that now, I've been out of that business for almost 10 years. They might be even doing the assembly in China now.

Those are the kind of buisnesses that need to move overseas.

The reason companies like Mercedes Benz, Nissan and Toyota chose the south to build thier factories is because they wouldn't be blackmailed by the UAW. Add the fact that pay at these factories are better then what is paid in Detroit.

The list goes on and on of companies moving to areas that are more buisness friendly than the unionized "rust belt".

Nate_C
03-13-2011, 01:22 AM
I don't know if you are aware of this, we are talking about public & state workers unions.
And their "share of the p[ie" has been doing nothing but growing.
BTW---That PIE is mine.

There is NO Company, only we weary taxpayers.
There is NO profit to share, just the value of MY home or MY income.



RK

The original question was:

"Do you believe that a person should be forced to pay to have a job? This means do you think that a person should be forced to pay money to a union in order to have job? Why is that not extortion?"

To me this question doesn't reference government unions but is a general statement about closed shops. I agree, unions based on government employees are different because the employer is not incented in the same way. So the union has had an advantage for so long and now their benefits are out of whack. However, I don't think unions alone are to blame. The public and our representatives are to blame. We are the other side of the table and we have to protect our interests too. We have to find a medium.

Unfortunately, for too long many locations have been electing representatives that are beholden to the unions which is much more common in the Democratic party but happens on both sides of the isle.