Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Why Unions suck Follow

#52 Dec 16 2009 at 10:28 AM Rating: Decent
****
5,372 posts
Quote:
You mean British Airways is going to have their bottom line hurt by the strike? I can't imagine that's part of the strikers' plans, given that they chose to strike at the holidays.


We know that is the plan. It is just a bad plan in this case. British Airways is badly losing money. Striking against BAs attempts to get back to viable financial situation is clearly going to make matters worse.
#53 Dec 16 2009 at 10:34 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
4,042 posts
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
How is it Wal-Mart can treat thrie staff so sh*tty and not get unionized?

Edited, Dec 16th 2009 8:26am by Uglysasquatch


Wal-mart goes above and beyond to squash even any hint of union uprising. Take a look at "Wal-mart: The High Cost of Low Price". Kind of old documentary, but I'm sure most of it still rings true.
#54 Dec 16 2009 at 10:41 AM Rating: Good
Uglysasquatch, Mercenary Major wrote:
Annabella of Future Fabulous! wrote:
Of course, gbaji, that might mean that unions are effective and everyone else is just getting screwed.


Or more likely, a middle ground somewhere in between.


How is it Wal-Mart can treat thrie staff so sh*tty and not get unionized?

Edited, Dec 16th 2009 8:26am by Uglysasquatch


When a Wal-Mart store employees unionize, Wal-Mart closes that store. I have 0 respect for the Wal-Mart executives, and will not shop there for any reason.
#55 Dec 16 2009 at 10:45 AM Rating: Good
@#%^
*****
15,953 posts
With respect to Wal-Mart, it's a perfect example of unskilled workers failing to manipulate the system. Really, how hard is it to stock shelves and run a bar code over a scanner? Do you really think those people deserve much more than minimum wage? Are you willing to pay more out of your pocket for it? Personally, I'm not... but that's a question everyone has to decide for themselves.
____________________________
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"

#56 Dec 16 2009 at 10:57 AM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
sixgauge wrote:
Unions do exactly what they were formed to do. Unions are there for the workers, not for the success of the company.
FUcking ******.

In this circumstance, and in the current economic melancholy, their actions 'on behalf of the workers' are likely to damage the company to the extent that jobs are threatened.

As a passionate proponent of Trades Unions and the right of workers to withdraw their labour, I will defend strike action as a last resort to defend against unfair employment practice.

In this circumstance, BA's proposals sound reasonable as a means of staying competitive, cutting back their losses and mitigating the risk of making the workers redundant.

IMHO this has more about Trades Union leaders feathering the nest of their political futures at the expense of the workforce.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#57 Dec 16 2009 at 12:31 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts

I keep glancing at this thread title and thinking it says "Why Unicorns Suck."

#58 Dec 16 2009 at 12:32 PM Rating: Good
****
5,372 posts
Quote:
I keep glancing at this thread title and thinking it says "Why Unicorns Suck."


Because they are horny?

Woah. Major deja vu there.
#59 Dec 16 2009 at 1:10 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,416 posts
Quote:
IMHO

Your opinion of whats happening is exactly what this is.

This doesn't make the statement I made false now does it?
#60 Dec 16 2009 at 1:12 PM Rating: Decent
****
5,159 posts
sixgauge wrote:
Quote:
IMHO

Your opinion of whats happening is exactly what this is.

This doesn't make the statement I made false now does it?

Except that what's happening here pretty obviously benefits the workers not at all, making your quote blatantly false.
#61 Dec 16 2009 at 1:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Majivo wrote:
Except that what's happening here pretty obviously benefits the workers not at all, making your quote blatantly false.
It benefits them. Only short term though.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#62 Dec 16 2009 at 1:15 PM Rating: Good
***
1,416 posts
One ****** Union does not make all unions ******.
#63 Dec 16 2009 at 1:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Quote:
At the risk of creating cross thread shenanigans, this is *exactly* why people prefer private car ownership to public transportation. You're no longer at the whim of the unions. It's a freedom thing...


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


Marry me.
#64 Dec 16 2009 at 1:19 PM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
sixgauge wrote:
One sh*tty Union does not make all unions sh*tty.


Won't someone think of the unicorns??
#65gbaji, Posted: Dec 16 2009 at 4:22 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Within the context of the mentioned cross-thread shenanigans, yes. I was referring to a broader ideological comment she made in another thread in which she was speaking of city infrastructure for people driving cars versus infrastructure for public transportation.
#66 Dec 16 2009 at 4:29 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Nobby wrote:
As a passionate proponent of Trades Unions and the right of workers to withdraw their labour, I will defend strike action as a last resort to defend against unfair employment practice.

In this circumstance, BA's proposals sound reasonable as a means of staying competitive, cutting back their losses and mitigating the risk of making the workers redundant.


You do understand that there's a sort of Peter Principle at work here through, right? Your passionate support of trade unions ensures that the issues they end up striking over will be the very ones you think are over the line. Not saying that's a reason to support or oppose them, just something to be aware of. At the very least, you shouldn't be surprised when this sort of thing happens.


When was the last time a union went on strike over something that was a clear case of workplace hazard or actual substandard pay or benefits? Have you seen a case of this in your country in your lifetime? They kinda all end out being the marginal cases, don't they?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#67 Dec 16 2009 at 6:11 PM Rating: Excellent
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
gbaj wrote:
iWhen was the last time a union went on strike over something that was a clear case of workplace hazard or actual substandard pay or benefits? Have you seen a case of this in your country in your lifetime? They kinda all end out being the marginal cases, don't they?
I frequently see cases where companies try to use the workforce as cannon-fodder for the incompetence of their own management decisions.

Not marginal at all.

Thankfully, I'm debating with someone who sees cites as a luxury for unicorns and zombies.

Edited, Dec 16th 2009 7:19pm by Nobby
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#69 Dec 16 2009 at 7:19 PM Rating: Excellent
My mum's union also was a great place to build connections and find a nice job inside the country (and those are rare) if you were looking to work in research and unemployed.

Also, my dad is seriously damaged from his mining days. He wouldn't even get the little compensation he gets (90% which is taken straight out of his pocket again) without his union.

Okay, no striking involved in either, but they can be helpful in other ways.
#70 Dec 16 2009 at 7:42 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Nobby wrote:
gbaj wrote:
When was the last time a union went on strike over something that was a clear case of workplace hazard or actual substandard pay or benefits? Have you seen a case of this in your country in your lifetime? They kinda all end out being the marginal cases, don't they?
I frequently see cases where companies try to use the workforce as cannon-fodder for the incompetence of their own management decisions.


What does that mean though? A company makes bad decisions and does poorly and people may get laid off? Yeah. That happens. Does having a union prevent this? It prevents the lay offs, but that just means that the company continues to lose money and has to cut elsewhere. Perhaps causing the very pension disaster which started this.

IMO, it's healthy and normal for folks to get laid off if the company they work for can't afford to pay them. While it may seem like a great idea in the short term to force them not to, it's usually worse for labor in the long run.

Unless you meant something else?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#71 Dec 17 2009 at 6:01 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,212 posts
Proud to be a Union member!
Live free work Union!
My Union protected its workers from the capricious whims of a greedy management, more concerned about their yearly bonus money than worker safety and well being.
#72 Dec 18 2009 at 4:25 PM Rating: Decent
**
548 posts
I'm not currently in a Union. I don't really plan on being in one either.

The carpenters union around these parts is total bogus. Many of the Union workers I've been exposed to in this Carpenters union are quite terrible. They emphasize 'milking' the job by taking a long time to do anything.. (Cut 25 gauge steel with a chopsaw wtf?)

You have to work at least 26 weeks to qualify for the benefits that you are paying $13 an hour of your wages to receive. Also, you might get laid off randomly before that 26 weeks of work. This does happen, and it happens often. We have employed union members temporarily while they were laid off, and sometimes they were forced to picket outside the jobsite because the union ordered them to.

At one point, the Union employed the efforts of the Break Truck girl to tell workers to sign a card to be put into a drawing for free food for a week. We found out later that she was actually paid by the Union to hand out cards to sign people up! (Construction workers are kind of low-brow by the way..)

I'm not saying all Unions are terrible, sure the pipefitters union, tinknockers and electricians union are great to their members! These Unions are great examples of how a union can protect your rights.


So yes, -some- unions are great. Some of them, however, decide to hold a strike on the week of Christmas and cause their company to lose thousands/millions of dollars, lose out on one of the biggest markets of the fiscal year, and ultimately make the red ink appear on the spreadsheets. That's a perfect way to get your point across!


P.S.I also have no idea how anyone can say the Automotive Union has protected their member's jobs. Instead of taking a simple healthcare cut or benefit cut, you'd rather picket and have the entire factory closed down. I don't believe a person that sweeps refuse for 8 hours a day deserves to make $20.00 an hour.
#73 Dec 18 2009 at 11:16 PM Rating: Good
I just read that a union in my hometown got banned. Unfortunately, the only English-language websites covering it are really quite far to the political left. So are the German ones, to be fair, but at least the newspaper my grandma used to read covered this.

Not focusing on the fact that this happened at all, the way it happened according to these articles was really unfair.
#74 Dec 18 2009 at 11:51 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
P.S.I also have no idea how anyone can say the Automotive Union has protected their member's jobs. Instead of taking a simple healthcare cut or benefit cut, you'd rather picket and have the entire factory closed down. I don't believe a person that sweeps refuse for 8 hours a day deserves to make $20.00 an hour.


It's not the Union's fault that instead of getting a raise now, they agreed to the managements terms of increased benefits at a future date. You can't *just* blame the Union, the management is at fault as well.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#75 Dec 19 2009 at 12:00 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Quote:
P.S.I also have no idea how anyone can say the Automotive Union has protected their member's jobs. Instead of taking a simple healthcare cut or benefit cut, you'd rather picket and have the entire factory closed down. I don't believe a person that sweeps refuse for 8 hours a day deserves to make $20.00 an hour.


It's not the Union's fault that instead of getting a raise now, they agreed to the managements terms of increased benefits at a future date. You can't *just* blame the Union, the management is at fault as well.


But the Union is the one that puts the workers on the street to strike for a year, fighting a losing battle, just to end up having the company hire all new employees which vote out the Union, leaving the original workers without a job.

(Teamsters, UAW, close enough).

You can't put all the blame on the management for not wanting to pay more. Right now the company I work for (non-Unionized) is getting rid of all overtime, and instead paying for temporary employees to work the weekend, on straight time. This is because by working the regular employees at time and a half or double time, all the profits for the previous 3-4 weeks are lost. But a Union would fight this decision to the very end (many employees are very angry about the decision). That end likely being the end of the company because they can't even break even.

Edited, Dec 19th 2009 1:13am by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#76 Dec 19 2009 at 12:41 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Quote:
You can't put all the blame on the management for not wanting to pay more. Right now the company I work for (non-Unionized) is getting rid of all overtime, and instead paying for temporary employees to work the weekend, on straight time. This is because by working the regular employees at time and a half or double time, all the profits for the previous 3-4 weeks are lost. But a Union would fight this decision to the very end (many employees are very angry about the decision). That end likely being the end of the company because they can't even break even.


What do you work in?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 282 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (282)