Why Unions suck Follow

Which would only make a lick of sense if we actually assumed that union workers didn't earn higher salaries than their non-union counterparts.


The far more common occurrence is that after milking a company for every single penny they can afford in terms of cost of labor, the unions have to keep pushing for more in order to justify their existence to their members, so they go after higher and higher pension benefits. Take away the union and this isn't an issue.

Well, since I don't know any of the details, I just went with the most likely possibility. I could continue to guess if you'd like? Perhaps the union imposed too high a work cost on the company, so the company moved its operate offshore, resulting in the entire union fund source disappearing and the pension going belly up? Or perhaps the union leaders just embezzled it?


Or maybe you could be a bit more specific with precisely in what way the union being "weak" managed to cause the pension to disappear? Cause generally there are two things which cause pension funds to fail:

1. There aren't sufficient workers putting money into them today to pay for the benefits promised to the workers who are drawing on it.

2. Someone invested the money poorly, or embezzled it, or in some other way managed to dork up the pension fund itself.



A union being "weak" doesn't tend to cause either of those to happen. An entire industry becoming weaker over time does cause number 1. But then that's usually also the result of too much union influence in the field, not too little.

If you don't mind breaking the law, there's noting stopping you from using the buses or trains either.



Businesses don't do things that really should be illegal wherever possible?

Edited, Dec 15th 2009 11:16pm by Timelordwho

I don't think this is as clever as you think it is.


It's going to be awful hard to pay those workers without revenue.

Oddly enough, the article doesn't go into any detail about the contractual changes that the union is trying to avoid other than the vague "staff reductions and changes to their working conditions."

Another example of the failure of capitalism's tenet that self-interest creates broader good.

Because there was an error in the tenet's phrasing which omitted the first part of "As long as self interest and the common good are thusly aligned, The self interest of every member shall promote the general welfare and the greater good.". Which in context, can be omitted with respect to the properties commented on. (IE invisible hand of the market on economic growth of systems.)

You still have to go through an American airport.

Edited, Dec 16th 2009 3:14am by Sweetums

I'm usually in favour of unions, but in this particular case, I don't think they should be striking. BA is in the sh*ts already, and their cabin crew are better paid than a lot of others... I don't think it's a smart move, neither for them, nor for the company.

Having said that...



It's not the customers they are blackmailing... Come on, make an effort at least.

But this statement is nothign compared to this one:



How can you write stuff like this? Seriously, I know you're not very bright, but can you possibly be this retarded? Do you really think the *exact* reason people prefer car ownership to public transportation is because of the threat of strikes?! Really?! It couldn't possibly have anything to do with, oh I don't know, the fact that you're not dependant on some set timetable, that you can listen to your music, that the car takes you exactly where you want to go, that you don't have to stand for the whole journey, or wait for the bus in the rain or the freezing cold, or have to stand next to some fat sweating guy with music blasting from his crappy earphones... You know, it couldn't possibly be one the MILLION OF OTHER REASONS WHY PEOPLE PREFER THEIR OWN CARS OVER PUBLIC TRANSPORTS, it has to infinitely small risk that there might be a strike.

And that wouldn't be quite so bad if you didn't compound it by saying "it's a freedom thing" like a mother@#%^ing retarded parrot who doesn't even understand what the @#%^ freedom means. It's not a freedom thing you dimwit, it's a selfish convenience thing which you disguise as freedom because it's a meanginless concept which can be used to support all your retarded arguments.

Cunt.


Edited, Dec 16th 2009 11:02am by RedPhoenixxx

Through bleary, uncoffee'd eyes I thought this thread said, "Why Unicorns Suck" and I was really intrigued.

Btw, how's the Uni appliation going? Know where you're going yet?

Nope, although that reminds me that I still have to book an LNAT exam.

Unions do exactly what they were formed to do. Unions are there for the workers, not for the success of the company.