Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit greg-709692's column >>

GREG-709692

I come to visit the afflicted spirits
Articles Posted: 69  Links Seeded: 113
Member Since: 11/2008  Last Seen: 5/18/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

A simple fix to the Public Union Debate!

Mon Apr 4, 2011 10:45 AM EDT
politics, top-news
By greg-709692

Live Poll

Would you write your own check to the Union if you were required to?

View Results
  • 144142
    Yes
    39%
  • 144143
    No
    52%
  • 144144
    Unsure
    9%

VoteTotal Votes: 103

I have bills to pay !!!!!!

Advertise | AdChoices

Instead of the States collecting/deducting Union Dues from Public Employee's to give to the Unions, give the Employee's the money they already earned and let them write the check to the Unions, as a Member.

The Private sector writes their own checks to be a member of an organization or a club, why can't the public sector workers do the same thing?

It would be worth seeing how many public sector workers would actually write that check on their own.

Its being put out there by some States:

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2011/mar/07/071939/shades-of-wisconsin-in-florida-workers-protest-law/news-breaking/

The bill "simply states that the state is not going to collect dues. It's as simple as that," the Republican from Jacksonville said after the hearing. "Taxpayers of the state of Florida are basically saying, Let's get out of the business of collecting dues from union members and let the unions do it themselves.' "

Union members "will lose their voice to the legislative process if this bill passes," said Jayne Walker, a supervisor with the Lynx bus system in Orlando and an official of the Amalgamated Transit Workers there.

My question to Jayne Walker ( with the always in the "Red" Lynx Bus System) is; "If the Unions are so good, and the members love them, why would you say you would loose your voice in the legislation process? The Members would "Willingly" write those checks every month, wouldn't they?

It's a human nature thing.

When you have to write that check from your own account, even if you got that pay raise, but you could use the money, would you?.

TO SUMMARIZE:

It's funny how the Union doesn't like that idea, AT ALL! Right now, the Public employee's don't see that money in the Bank, so they think nothing of it. This is where the overall "viability" of a Union could be looked at by the Members. Are they really worth your money this day and age.

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • greg-709692's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: Counterterrorism, Democrat Watch, Down With Tin Horn Dictators, Dumb Dumb Dumb, FOX NEWS, Grounded for Life, Heated Debate, Me, Al Franken, Outraged Americans For Justice, Power to The People!, Reagan Conservatives, The Conservative Vine, The Newsvine Tea Party, The Tea Party
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (168)
greg-709692

Would be interesting to see how much "Moxie" Unions really have with their members, if they had to do the money collecting thing on their own.

  • 21 votes
Reply#1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 10:49 AM EDT
Chuck1968

All the corporations must give up their subsidies and quit hiding their profits off shore to evade taxes.

they can collect on their own too..

but hell they'll just raise prices on things so you dont have a choice but to pay for their "moxie"...these pussies never fight on their own they just gather up the pathetically stupid do their bidding for them.

  • 7 votes
#1.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:03 PM EDT
hvymtl83

greg,

I quite agree. Union members should write the check themselves. They should very visably see how much they are paying and how little support they actually get for their money. I was in the Teamsters (hated it). Lazy fat-cat union officials sat around with their thumbs up their butts while we supported them. Maybe if the members saw what they were paying, they just might require some acutal work out of the bums.

  • 9 votes
#1.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:20 PM EDT
greg-709692

I know some of the dues can be small per month, but if you have to write that check every month, people can get sick and tired of doing that, real quick. It would seem it would create a question and answer session for new members, before they start paying their dues.

"What do I get for my Dues/month"?

  • 13 votes
#1.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:26 PM EDT
Spikegary

You'd think the union bosses wouldn't mind so much-they can hire more nieces/nephews/sons/daughters to do the accounting and collections!

  • 5 votes
#1.4 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:36 PM EDT
Walt42

Greg...obviously, you are onboard with the GOP's nationwide effort to destroy unions, thereby severely weakening the Democrats. So, the GOP, using the TPers has managed to get some union-busting legislation in 5 or 6 states, and of course the GOP (deviser of 'dirty tactics') will push to damage unions and their supporters as much as possible.

But, fear not, should your dumb idea get well received, unions would merely have their banks lift it from checking accounts by Electronic Fund Transfer.

  • 2 votes
#1.5 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:54 PM EDT
Rick Orlando

Yes.. a real simple starting point. Do not do the automatic deductions for the Unions. Let them do their own money collecting. Members have to pay their dues on their own. My work takes my Union dues directly out of my check and gives it straight to the Union. How convenient for them...

Would they have to use Union workers to do the bill collecting? =)

  • 5 votes
#1.6 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:59 PM EDT
greg-709692

@ Walt:

Are you saying that "Letting" People write their own dues checks, will kill Unions?

Are you saying the Unions can only survive if it "takes" the money from peoples paychecks?

But, fear not, should your dumb idea get well received, unions would merely have their banks lift it from checking accounts by Electronic Fund Transfer.

If they get permission from the Union Member!

  • 10 votes
#1.7 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 3:11 PM EDT
Walt42

Would they have to use Union workers to do the bill collecting?

YES, and increase your dues to pay for it. Great idea. Done by the employer, who has a payroll office, much easier and costs far less.

  • 2 votes
#1.8 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 3:12 PM EDT
Rick Orlando

So the employer should foot the bill for collecting money for the Unions?

  • 7 votes
#1.9 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 3:17 PM EDT
Robert in Ohio

The union workers should remit their dues directly to the union, no need for the employer (state, local or federal government) to be involved at all

I am a member of several professional associations and I must send checks for the dues to each of them and my employer would not even if I asked

  • 8 votes
#1.10 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:27 PM EDT
Walt42

Actually, however it is done, would be part of the negotiated contract. Whether the employer took care of it, or the union office.

  • 1 vote
#1.11 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 10:12 PM EDT
Robert in Ohio

Walt

Thanks for the clarification

I got that and am saying that at least in the public sector it should be settled that no government entity or public employer will remit dues to unions and that the members will have to pay their own dues.

  • 5 votes
#1.12 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 8:31 AM EDT
Reply
Boudicea

There may be some negative feedback to unions if and when those employees start stroking that check themselves. I'm assuming the union dues are around $30 a month or so - based on my husband's USWA dues. That's $360 a year. Not that much really, BUT substantial when workers have their paychecks frozen

  • 13 votes
Reply#2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:02 AM EDT
V. Bevis

kjmgirl: Did you know that WAY back in the 1960's, the USWA negotiated contracts giving "rank & file" 13 wks. PAID vacations every 5 yrs.? I lived in the middle of it when we actually still HAD a steel industry.

Don't be so sure about what is & isn't "going away."

  • 4 votes
#2.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:57 AM EDT
Boudicea

V Bevis - my cousin still works in the mill. He STILL gets that 13 weeks vacation. And would it be so terrible for THAT to go away?

  • 6 votes
#2.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:24 PM EDT
Reply
AmericaRepublic

A simple fix would be to outlaw Unions, and forgetting about what is not worth remembering.

  • 10 votes
#3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:05 AM EDT
douglasq

Such as all the worker's rights we now all take for granted because of union efforts in our past? You know...things like overtime pay, 40 hour work weeks, vacation and sick benefits, etc. You know...all those things we've come to EXPECT from a typical job?

  • 9 votes
#3.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:27 AM EDT
Boudicea

douglasq - for crying out loud, that was in the PAST!!!!! Those things we might expect now but they're damned sure not going away!

The whole "what they did in the past" crap is like keeping around a 1974 Pinto and paying for it every month just so we remember that we've come a long way about auto safety!

  • 14 votes
#3.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:37 AM EDT
Darkdonnie

Such as all the worker's rights we now all take for granted because of union efforts in our past?

Most if not all of these past efforts are now protected by law, the union has outlived its usefulness in the public sector.

  • 15 votes
#3.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:41 AM EDT
douglasq

douglasq - for crying out loud, that was in the PAST!!!!! Those things we might expect now but they're damned sure not going away!

Ummm, how on earth can you guarantee that?

Most if not all of these past efforts are now protected by law, the union has outlived its usefulness in the public sector.

Yes, because the GOP never talks about repealing laws they do not like. Never ever.

  • 7 votes
#3.4 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:51 AM EDT
Andrew-1162039

Those things we might expect now but they're damned sure not going away!

Pensions went away, 401K matching has gone away at plenty of companies, the average household income hasn't grown to match inflation. Corporations are still screwing the worker and there is still a need for unions. I agree with the general premise of this article, that they should always be voluntary, but we should never seek to criminalize the ability of people to collectively bargain.

I'll never begrudge someone asking for more money - it's what capitalism is all about after all. I'll take issue with a dumb politician or a dumb employer for agreeing to pay more money they can't afford though. Don't blame the unions for politicians having no balls and not knowing how to write a budget, blame the politicians we all elected.

  • 9 votes
#3.5 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:55 AM EDT
ebookout

Such as all the worker's rights we now all take for granted because of union efforts in our past?

Like forcing people to use union labor or burning your business down? Organize crime? Unions had their place but now have pushed to the point people are finding there is no need for them and are now pushing back.

  • 8 votes
#3.6 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:55 AM EDT
Chuck1968

they wont be protected by law if the Repubs have their way.

Its best to remember the past kjm and learn from it. Your post proves douglas correct. you do take those rights for granted.

Do you know those rights arent going away? Right now the GOP is doing everything in their power to take bargaining rights away.

  • 3 votes
#3.7 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:56 AM EDT
douglasq

Organize crime?

There are many service industries in the NYC area that are mob controlled. Commercial and hotel linen laundering, garbage collection, etc. If you own a restaurant, you are going to deal with the Mafia. Is that an indictment of those industries or the Mafia.

On the flip side, there's a reason the Feds have used some of the same laws (RICO) to go after white collar criminals on Wall Street as they have mobsters.

Your problem is not with the unions but with the mob.

  • 5 votes
#3.8 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:05 PM EDT
Chuck1968

Like this kjm:

http://www.endicottalliance.org/wfovertimecutsbeginmonday.htm

But each time the White House, working with Republican leaders in Congress, has blocked the legislation that would have saved workers' right to overtime pay.

On Monday, Aug. 23, the overtime pay take-away—the biggest pay cut in America's history—goes into effect. Employers will begin to decide who loses the right to overtime pay at their workplaces. Unfortunately, they'll have some help from Uncle Sam. The U.S. Department of Labor will be using your tax dollars to offer "assistance" to companies trying to figure this out.

thereby pretty much eliminating the 40 hr work week....but you just said:.

"Those things we might expect now but they're damned sure not going away!"

  • 6 votes
#3.9 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:09 PM EDT
hvymtl83

A simple fix would be to outlaw Unions, and forgetting about what is not worth remembering.

Oh, I take it you are not a fan of the US Constitution. You know, the first amendment right of free assembly and all that silly stuff. It never ceases to amaze me that the right-wing always hollers about the Constitution and then are the first ones to suggest violating it. I guess you just want a Constitution with only the parts YOU like, right?

  • 7 votes
#3.10 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:17 PM EDT
Boudicea

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!. OMG can you IMAGINE the HORROR of giving the employer the right to decide who gets overtime!

  • 9 votes
#3.11 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:27 PM EDT
douglasq

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!. OMG can you IMAGINE the HORROR of giving the employer the right to decide who gets overtime!

Why would an employer allow ANYONE overtime? Why would an employer stick to a 40 hour week without laws outlining overtime?

But, kjmgirl, one minute you are saying how silly I am for thinking that they would over go away and the next you are questioning why we even need them.

  • 3 votes
#3.12 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:30 PM EDT
Boudicea

well, my husband just got off 24 consecutive weeks MANDATORY overtime. Employers require overtime for lots of reasons. And last year he was laid off for 6 months when business was slow and the union had REQUIRED overtime for some people.

  • 6 votes
#3.13 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:34 PM EDT
douglasq

well, my husband just got off 24 consecutive weeks MANDATORY overtime.

Hopefully, he was compensated apporopriately.

  • 3 votes
#3.14 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:41 PM EDT
Boudicea

No, not really. Oh he was paid time and a half, but since it kicked him into another tax bracket and increased his union dues, it came out to about $7 an hour

  • 6 votes
#3.15 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:43 PM EDT
Chuck1968

It was probably in the union contract , which allows your hubby to make more than minimum wage, plus other benefits I'm sure.

At least with over time pay you got MANDATORY time and a half...until Repubs @!$%#ed it all up.

why should an employer be able to use employees at will? are you into indentured servitude? You act as if an employer owns his employees like property.

How about mandatory overtime for 52 weeks straight for which ever worker will produce for least? 18 hours a day.

Why should you fools get time off? I mean after all you and your husband are just peons, petty little workers , right?

Hell the company CEO needs another house in the Bahamas...get back to work little girl!

there should be no rules in a free market... otherwise become self employed and fend for yourself you ungrateful baby.

These companies NEED these worker...and that's the whole point.

These employers take their workers for granted....and your blaming the people who fought for good pay and benefits. How backwards is that?

The average worker is already grossly under paid because someone who owns the rights to a company but couldn't produce dick without his employees thinks he is entitled to decide how much of their work they should get paid for.

  • 4 votes
#3.16 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:50 PM EDT
Boudicea

Chuck - everything you said is so ridiculous that I don't even know where to start. In a free market there ARE rules. The first rule is treat your employees well or they will go somewhere else.

Here's the list of 100 best places in America to work and it doesn't look like a list of union shops to me.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2011/full_list/

  • 9 votes
#3.17 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:55 PM EDT
douglasq

In a free market there ARE rules.

Actually, in a truly free market, there are NO rules. So, be careful what you wish for.

  • 7 votes
#3.18 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:24 PM EDT
douglasq

Here's the list of 100 best places in America to work and it doesn't look like a list of union shops to me.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2011/full_list/

The majority of companies on that list are predominately white collar. Not a good example.

  • 4 votes
#3.19 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:26 PM EDT
Boudicea

That was an unbelievably naive remark. Yes, there are "rules" to running a business. They might not be written down, but anybody who ever run a business knows there are "rules". Actually, if you went to college and got a degree in Business you learned the WRITTEN rules. Don't be so friggin literal. Rules are not Regulations.

  • 5 votes
#3.20 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:27 PM EDT
Chuck1968

Chuck - everything you said is so ridiculous that I don't even know where to start. In a free market there ARE rules. The first rule is treat your employees well or they will go somewhere else.

It is not a free market if there are rules. And the rules of today's "free market" are skewed to favor the employers.

You don't know where to start, either because you aren't capable of understanding how the capitalists "free market" works or have no coherent rebuttal.

THAT's #3.16 exactly the way it was before and at the beginning of the 2oth century before the labor union fought for those rights you have today that keep your hubby from earning less than $7.25 per hours.

We are not talking about all companies or all CEOs ..there are some who actually have some gratitude and pay well and treat their employees great.

Walmart is a great example of a corporation using the crap out of people.

Wellpoint

Not too mention the ever popular use the recession "you're lucky to have a job" threat as an excuse to not pay people while giving yourself and your buddies on your board ( of which all are on each others boards of directors) huge pay raises.

  • 3 votes
#3.21 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:28 PM EDT
douglasq

Yes, there are "rules" to running a business.

You didn't say in "running a business." You said "in a free market."

  • 2 votes
#3.22 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:41 PM EDT
Boudicea

Chuck, FYI, there IS no "free market" in America today. But I guess with my college degree AND having my own business for the last 16 years I'm just too stupid to know what I'm talking about.

  • 6 votes
#3.23 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:48 PM EDT
Chuck1968

Chuck, FYI, there IS no "free market" in America today

Ummm.. this is what I've been saying. ...and if there was a free market we'd have Robber Barron problems all over again. Collusion, predatory pricing... No thanks.

You seem pretty sharp, yet stuck to certain philosophy regardless of any evidence that opposes the view.

...and since we're apparently aiming for the one up-manship

I also have my own biz of 13 years 16 employees. as well as Degrees in Economics and Business . Graduated Magna Cum Laude.

I served my country and I've worked for two large corporations full of shady @!$%#s, as well as the Federal Reserve.

.

.

I also have an adorable daughter and an awesome son... both straight A students.

..

U

  • 3 votes
#3.24 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:23 PM EDT
Boudicea

had to do the one upsmanship didn't you ? Well, I'll have you know I graduated summa! (Well I'm not the one who insinuated the other party was too STUPID to debate the issue)

IF there was a free market with no government involvement, I believe things would be better. How could there POSSIBLY be any evidence that a "free" market actually works - when the govt won't allow anyone to try it - so there is NO EVIDENCE supporting your view.

  • 5 votes
#3.25 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:37 PM EDT
thelopes

Chuck - everything you said is so ridiculous that I don't even know where to start. In a free market there ARE rules. The first rule is treat your employees well or they will go somewhere else.

The trick to that rule seems to be that there first must be somewhere else to go.

There are scores of people that are currently doing something they don't want much to do because a) they don't see anywhere else to go, or b) they can't afford to rock the boat of their lives due to us having a debt economy.

The rules of how to treat your customer kind of depends on the options available to the customer, and the rules on how to treat your employee depends on their options as well.

  • 1 vote
#3.26 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:43 PM EDT
Walt42

All of you criticizing unions and saying they are not longer needed are blind. Go look at the World Almanac and see that, within the US, workers whether M/F, B/W etc ALL enjoy higher pay when BELONGING to a union. Of course, being good conservatives, you follow the RNC line that unions are no longer needed; as if all US corporations would give pay raises each year to all workers. When, we know that the only raises they would give each year, without unions, would be to the CEOs.

  • 2 votes
#3.27 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 3:02 PM EDT
ebookout

Right now the GOP is doing everything in their power to take bargaining rights away.

In public office were it should be history.It's called a conflict of interest. The buying of public officials to grant there every wish. Sorry all for it.

All of you criticizing unions and saying they are not longer needed are blind

Now that's funny! I don't need you and I never have!And why do you needa pay raise every year? Do you produce more every year to warrant it? That's why GM is broke because you guys did such a bang up job building crap for years.

  • 7 votes
#3.28 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 5:43 PM EDT
ebookout

The trick to that rule seems to be that there first must be somewhere else to go.

There is alway some were else to go. It's just that you don't want to.

  • 4 votes
#3.29 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 5:47 PM EDT
Walt42

You seem to ignore that GM management agreed to the contract. Oh, wait, blame the workers, anyway.

  • 1 vote
#3.30 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 10:16 PM EDT
ebookout

Your problem is not with the unions but with the mob

Than as just happened in Wisconsin , Vote for the union or we will boycott your business. I think that's called blackmail? AKA organise crime. What next ?Burn your business down?

  • 5 votes
#3.31 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 7:24 AM EDT
ebookout

You seem to ignore that GM management agreed to the contract. Oh, wait, blame the workers, anyway.

Did you give them a choice? Could they say no and hire new workers? It called strong arming a company. So who ran the business into the ground? The management or the union worker who think they should get anything they want until the company can't survive. Personally I would have shut the damn thing down and told everyone to have fun looking for a job.But again I don't have share holder to worry about. But they got screwed anyway ,Didn't they?

But we seem to ingore that aspect also.

  • 4 votes
#3.32 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 7:30 AM EDT
Rob-LVNevada

Maybe the fact that they made 3-5 different cars competing with each other at virtually every price point had something to do with it? No union blame there. Maybe when car companies that offered financing became finance companies that built cars that had something to do with it? I don't think the unions had much to do with that one. @!$%#ty management? Aye, finding it hard to blame the union here. The inability to deliver any sort of "cutting edge" hybrid or alternative technology (uh, the Volt still has a hole you put gas in, right)? That's also not one we blame on the unions.

Crippling union labor contracts that left similar cars priced higher than other alternatives from outside the US (or from companies outside the US that built plants here)? For certain the unions had something to do with that. GM was a frigging disaster, and deserved the fate the marketplace was poised to deliver it...sigh

But again, as always, this has nothing (zip, zero, nada, zilch) to do with public sector employee unions, which should be legislated out of existence.

  • 4 votes
#3.33 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 11:54 AM EDT
Boudicea

Rob - as usual, nothing you said is incorrect

  • 4 votes
#3.34 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 11:57 AM EDT
Rob-LVNevada

Whew, that was definitely before the first diet mountain dew of the day...:)

Buy American! Buy Ford!

  • 3 votes
#3.35 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 12:44 PM EDT
Walt42

ebook...

It called strong arming a company

That is a great oversimplification of the negotiating process. That reads like a statement from the 'anti-union handbook'. If you read 1.33, you will see many more REAL reasons why GM went into bankruptcy. Oh, and if you look at what some of the financial journals had to say, you would probably find more reasons to hold corporate mismanagement responsible. But, don't let educated opinions interfere with your opinions; however, should you be willing to educate yourself, check this out:

www.flowingdata.com/2009/01/05/visual-guide-to-general-motors-financial-woes/

kmjgirl...1.34. WONDERFUL comment. NOW, if you could provide some justification for you wonderful comment !!! (Oh, the CoH won't let me tell me what I really think of 1.34.)

  • 1 vote
#3.36 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 5:43 PM EDT
Boudicea

There IS NO comment 1.34. CoH doesn't allow a lot of things. Neither is there a comment 1.33. So I guess you voted up your OWN remarks

  • 5 votes
#3.37 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 6:59 PM EDT
Rob-LVNevada

lol - he was addressing my #3.33 I think...:)

I'm finding it hard to agree with #3.33, and not agree with #3.34, though. Maybe I'm biased...lmao

  • 3 votes
#3.38 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 7:04 PM EDT
Boudicea

I always have to wonder about the mental capacity of people who want links to an opinion.

  • 6 votes
#3.39 - Wed Apr 6, 2011 9:03 AM EDT
Walt42

AND, I have to wonder about statements that are insulting and have not validity.

BTW...wrote 1.33 and 1.34 but, obviously, since my comments was not under the 1.00 comments, it referred to comments 3.33 an 3.34. So nice that you could think that through.

  • 1 vote
#3.40 - Wed Apr 6, 2011 9:41 AM EDT
greg-709692

It was your comment.

As the Liberals always say, "Just the facts" and your facts on that issue were false.

Doesn't matter "What you meant". We're not mind readers!

  • 5 votes
#3.41 - Wed Apr 6, 2011 9:45 AM EDT
Rob-LVNevada

As long as I'm still right, it's all good...lmfao.

  • 2 votes
#3.42 - Wed Apr 6, 2011 12:44 PM EDT
ebookout

That is a great oversimplification of the negotiating process

So what you are saying that if they don't like your terms you want strike and cost the company millions why you negotiate as you call it? Right! That's called strong arming , Just as they are doing in Wisconsin now.

  • 5 votes
#3.43 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 10:11 AM EDT
Boudicea

sometimes it's call "coersion" and it's generally illegal

  • 6 votes
#3.44 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 10:49 AM EDT
crispy2000

Such as all the worker's rights we now all take for granted because of union efforts in our past?

Abolitionists haven't been around for over 100 years. Somehow slavery didn't return.

  • 6 votes
#3.45 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 3:03 PM EDT
TheAntiObama

It was Unions that gave us the Weekends, Holidays off and 40 hour workweeks. Medical coverage.

I dont see any bosses feeling any pain regarding their personal situations. The Wisconsin Governor still has his personal jet, and stewardess with a full wet bar to send him on his fact finding mission in the Bahamas.

  • 2 votes
#3.46 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 4:49 PM EDT
Boudicea

Really?

Accident insurance was first offered in the United States by the Franklin Health Assurance Company of Massachusetts. This firm, founded in 1850, offered insurance against injuries arising from railroad and steamboat accidents. Sixty organizations were offering accident insurance in the US by 1866,

Unions gave us medical coverage?

Unions gave us weekends? I thought that was God - you know on the 7th day he rested?

Thank you so much for the education. How was I to know Unions were so important!

  • 6 votes
#3.47 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 6:23 PM EDT
belle42

I believe he/she meant having 2 days off at the end of the week (what most of us call a "weekend")

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workweek

The American concept of the weekend has its roots in labor union attempts to accommodate Jewish workers who took Saturday instead of Sunday as their Sabbath. The first five-day work week was instituted by a New England cotton mill for this reason.

  • 3 votes
#3.48 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 6:33 PM EDT
Boudicea

I know Belle. I'm just really tired of people claiming the unions were solely responsible for everything including sliced bread. We're not a country of stupid people. The unions were not the ONLY people who ever advocated workers rights and I'm just sick of hearing it. It's like a friggin broken record.

The present-day concept of the weekend first arose from the Dies Solis (Day of the Sun) decreed by Constantine, and the Biblical Sabbath

You forgot that part, hon!

  • 5 votes
#3.49 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 6:59 PM EDT
TheAntiObama

The Unions were responsible for those rights being put in place in America. Not a long dead Roman Emperor.

  • 2 votes
#3.50 - Fri Apr 8, 2011 5:49 AM EDT
ebookout

The Wisconsin Governor still has his personal jet, and stewardess with a full wet bar to send him on his fact finding mission in the Bahamas.

As did the democrat before him,or does that count because he's a democrat you guys put in office.

  • 2 votes
#3.51 - Fri Apr 8, 2011 6:52 AM EDT
ebookout

It was Unions that gave us the Weekends, Holidays off and 40 hour workweeks. Medical coverage.

It was the union who cost the US jobs , and billions in tax dollar bailouts. So whats the point.

And who gets to work 40 hours, that's got to only be the unions although I know few who actually work 40 hours. Most of that is just standing around bitching they ain't making enough.

  • 2 votes
#3.52 - Fri Apr 8, 2011 6:58 AM EDT
TheAntiObama

I agree, its the membership that allows its boards to promote the BOARDS, choice to support for election. I disagree, that its the average rank and file who got conned into believing the officials promise that they would seek the election of those that would benefit the membership.

Most Union Boards have just become collection agencies for their ruling councils. They send the councils their taste, then its blackberries, training vacations in Hawaii, paid mileage, and time off for union business galore.

[Wow ebookout, let me finish a reply before you start the next one]

Before Prez Clinton and the Enviromental High Priest Sex Poodle Al Gore pushed Nafta and Gatt via buddist temple election funds, 40 hour work weeks were the norm.

Unions didnt cost jobs in the U.S. they couldnt compete with slave labor, and the subsidies that were being given Corporations at Taxpayer expense for moving their operations overseas.

  • 2 votes
#3.53 - Fri Apr 8, 2011 6:58 AM EDT
Boudicea

Slave labor? Why don't you just recognize that the salaries being paid to employees in other countries are only "slave labor" by YOUR standards. To the people actually receiving that money, it's a fair wage. Should companies pay $16 an hour in a country with an average hourly wage of $2? How about blaming some of it on the good old USA?

  • 4 votes
#3.54 - Fri Apr 8, 2011 8:02 AM EDT
Reply
Jim-789449

Morning Greg,

Very interesting question, my guess would be there would be a lot of non-payments, right now it’s one of those “I don’t see it, I don’t miss it” things.

I think you have a good idea here, I did not know their money was taken out and then given to the unions through the state government, my question is how much does the unions pay the government for doing their collections work.

  • 9 votes
Reply#4 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:33 AM EDT
greg-709692

my question is how much does the unions pay the government for doing their collections work.

That's an interseting question. Do they receive a "Kick Back" for doing that.

Anyone know?

  • 3 votes
#4.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:48 AM EDT
V. Bevis

greg: What I'd like to see is a PUBLIC ability for all the unions workers to examine the salaries, bennies, etc. of their local & national union officers & their assistants. This include their expense accts.

  • 6 votes
#4.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:02 PM EDT
Chuck1968

and so all private employees can do the same ..wtf is wrong with you?

    #4.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:22 PM EDT
    Rob-LVNevada

    If they're a publicly traded company...salaries, benefits, and other information is certainly known via the SEC filings and thanks to recent disclocures made mandatory by Sarbanes-Oxley.

    • 4 votes
    #4.4 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 4:38 PM EDT
    Reply
    Darkdonnie

    I have no problem with business withholding the dues, making it easier for those that need someone else to advocate for their position because of their lack of ability to do it themselves (unions are the best hope for the mediocre). But by no means should it ever be mandatory and withheld without the affirmation of the employee and have the ability to discontinue at any time.

    As far as public unions..................there should not be any, so the write the check is moot. hmmmm

    • 11 votes
    Reply#5 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:37 AM EDT
    ebookout

    Dark, Why should business or the Government with hold unions dues?Why should that expense be there for them?

    The only reason is the unions know they will not get any dues if they don't. But the bottom line is why should business and tax payers have to be responsible for collecting something that not there problem for private use.

    • 6 votes
    #5.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:50 AM EDT
    Darkdonnie

    Dark, Why should business or the Government with hold unions dues?Why should that expense be there for them?

    I am saying they could as a benefit to their employees who feel they need the crutch (union), if they (business) want to. I do direct deposit for my employees, it is a benefit to them. Nothing more!

    Of course I am only talking about the private sector. Again, there should not be public sector unions!

    • 7 votes
    #5.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:33 PM EDT
    ebookout

    it is a benefit to them

    Why is it a benefit to them? Now if you are talking about depositing into a bank account their payroll it saving you some money in processing time.

    Again, there should not be public sector unions!

    Agree!! And that's the problem.

    • 5 votes
    #5.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 5:51 PM EDT
    Reply
    Jim-789449

    I have never been much for unions, I have always seen them sort of like the old protection racket, pay up of your shop might be burned down for the businesses.

    Others see it as job insurance, I have no problem with people liking the unions, that is their business, I do have a problem with public service people like ambulance, fire and police being union, there is always that question in the back of my mind, did they respond like they should have because their fighting for more money.

    • 10 votes
    Reply#6 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:41 AM EDT
    douglasq

    My biggest wake up call came when my wife went from a position with a unionized company to a position in a non-unionized company in the same industry. It was amazing some of the things the management at the non-unionized company could get away with. I, too, thought that unions had outlived their usefullness until my wife's experience with that company.

    She left the non-unionized company but not before her reputation in her industry (everyone knows everyone) had suffered due to management lying about her to cover their own asses and incompetency.

    • 5 votes
    #6.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:58 AM EDT
    owlsview

    You could say the same about Arizona, but in both cases saying that the unions don't have much clout is really not true.

    Are you convinced that the Teamsters don't control which truckers get the good loads and which ones don't? Major grocery store chains? The entertainment industry? Dock workers? If you stop and take a hard look you will find a considerable amount of union influence in non-union states.

    • 7 votes
    #6.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:18 PM EDT
    owlsview

    I am curious dougslaq, why did your wife leave her union job? Did she do any investigation of the new company? Most of all, did this new company break any laws? If so did you file a legal complaint? Did she rescind her union membership when she joined the new company? Has she returned to the same business field? Union or non-union?

    • 6 votes
    #6.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:39 PM EDT
    douglasq

    I am curious dougslaq, why did your wife leave her union job?

    Her company had been run into the ground by the spoiled son of the founder and she left to take what would have been a promotion with more responsibility with a competitor.

    Most of all, did this new company break any laws? If so did you file a legal complaint?

    We consulted an employment lawyer and found that we would have a very tough time proving that the wrongs were part of company policy rather than the actions of individuals. In other words, if we had deep enough pockets, we could have pursued it. We didn'th have deep enough pockets.

    Did she rescind her union membership when she joined the new company?

    The new company was a non-union worksite. I'm not sure I understand your question.

    Has she returned to the same business field? Union or non-union?

    Same industry but now she's wholesale rather than retail, so non-union.

    • 2 votes
    #6.4 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:47 PM EDT
    Reply
    tesla013

    Strange to me. When I was in the Teamsters the rep came round each month with his book and got that money straight from me. Same when I was in the GCIU. But hell Greg you know in FLA that any union is nothing more than a joke. They represent a possible speed bump in any kind of dealings with them. The have less than no teeth they have no gums.

    Jim; insurance itself is a racket. First practiced by the mafia.

    • 9 votes
    #7 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:49 AM EDT
    Boudicea

    Don't know where you got the idea that insurance was first practiced by the mafia. In fact, the first insurance company in AMERICA was the Philadelphia Contributionship started by Ben Franklin in 1752.

    • 8 votes
    #7.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:54 AM EDT
    tesla013

    Like I said mafia. I do not hold our founding Godlets in the same holy esteem that some do ma'am. They was rich folk that used poor folk to fight a war for 'em. But hey we got a pretty good deal that one time.

    Morning kjm. :-)

    • 3 votes
    #7.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:58 AM EDT
    greg-709692

    you know in FLA that any union is nothing more than a joke

    Makes me wonder why people would want to pay dues to a Union that doesn't have much clout in Florida.

    Florida is a "Right to Work" State after all.

    • 7 votes
    #7.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 11:59 AM EDT
    tesla013

    Kind of a contradiction in terms. Eh Greg?

    • 6 votes
    #7.4 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:05 PM EDT
    greg-709692

    LOL!

    • 5 votes
    #7.5 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:29 PM EDT
    Boudicea

    tesla - Ben Franklin WAS poor folk and a self-made man

    • 6 votes
    #7.6 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:29 PM EDT
    tesla013

    Really? By what standards? Hey Ben was cool but still just a guy and how do we know he didn't pick it up from the mafia in knickers?

    • 4 votes
    #7.7 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:39 PM EDT
    owlsview

    Alright Tesla and KJM (hey girl long time no see) let us put to rest this insurance birth thing. The whole protection racket started long before recorded history. Thugs have always enjoyed taking from people who didn't want to get beaten up. Peasants would swear loyalty to land barons for protection from bandits long before double-indemnity ever got into the dictionary.

    • 7 votes
    #7.8 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:44 PM EDT
    Boudicea

    Hey owlsview, where you been? I have it on good authority that it was the SIRENS (see ancient mythology) who began the thuggery.

    • 6 votes
    #7.9 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:59 PM EDT
    tesla013

    Spoilsport. :-)

    • 7 votes
    #7.10 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:59 PM EDT
    owlsview

    You are probably right KJM, every time I hear sirens I wonder what the thugs are up to now.

    Been off of the Vine more than on lately dear girl and every time I get on it takes forever to muddle through the mud slinging to find a half-way decent conversation. Feel lucky to have found this one today. Good to see you are still strongly supporting libertarian values, get rid of your leadership and who knows you might win me over LOL. Another time for that.

    A distinct difference between Democracy and Communism. The UNITED States of America -- the UNION of Soviet Socialists Republics.

    • 6 votes
    #7.11 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:20 PM EDT
    tesla013

    Ben Franklin ate crackers in bed.

    • 5 votes
    #7.12 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 12:54 PM EDT
    Boudicea

    so what? your mother wears army boots!

    • 6 votes
    #7.13 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 12:55 PM EDT
    AmericaRepublic

    lol

    • 5 votes
    #7.14 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 12:56 PM EDT
    belle42

    ...and your father smelled of elderberries :P

    • 6 votes
    #7.15 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 12:56 PM EDT
    tesla013

    She looks damn good in 'em too.

    My father however has never been befouled with the fragrance of the elderberry thank you. My brothers and I bought that man enough English Leather and Old Spice to last him several lifetimes.

    :-)

    • 4 votes
    #7.16 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 1:20 PM EDT
    Reply
    owlsview

    Greg, this is a good idea. However in my own experience over the years I have had no choice but to join a union just to be able to work. With the exception of SAG (Screen Actors Guild) I have never made a direct payment to a Union myself, they have always come out of my pay.

    Do you really think that these unions would have so many members if people had freedom of choice and were allowed to handle their own money? The loudmouthed union chest beaters are actually in the minority, most just need their jobs to support their families and keep their mouths shut.

    I can understand the older generation still being loyal, the unions of yesterday did a lot of good for the American worker in general, but what they don't seem to realize is that the unions have morphed from being workers rights organizations into big business itself.

    No, companies and states do not get reimbursed by the unions for collecting dues. For businesses it raises the overhead and for the states the taxpayers absorb the cost.

    • 9 votes
    Reply#8 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:04 PM EDT
    greg-709692

    Would seem to put pressure on the Unions if they went with this idea. Unions only have to go Downtown to pickup there paychecks right now. What will they do if they have to go to thousands of places to get the paychecks?

    Unions were a good thing back in the day, but with the news media the way they are (Hunting for any story) Unions aren't the end all for employee's anymore.

    Heck, Kathy Lee Gifford was in the news for her clothing line being produced overseas by children in sweat shops?

    If that happened in the U.S. this day and age, someone would be at the media toot sweet!

    Somebodies always willing to tell on someone for even minute problems in business's.

    • 2 votes
    #8.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:17 PM EDT
    douglasq

    If that happened in the U.S. this day and age, someone would be at the media toot sweet!

    Until the Right manages to overturn laws protecting whistleblowers, that is.

    • 1 vote
    #8.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:32 PM EDT
    owlsview

    Tesla, I can see where the Teamsters would have the need to collect directly, however, assuming you were pushing a rig yourself, what kind of loads would you have gotten if you hadn't paid your dues? My union experiences were with the steelworkers, retail workers. teamsters as a local delivery driver(dues came out of my pay) and SAG.

    Ever ask yourself why the media seems to be so top heavy with left wing attitudes? The answer is very simple. SAG is running the industry. If unions were to be recognized as the businesses they are, a good argument could be made to sue SAG for anti-trust violations.

    • 6 votes
    #8.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:32 PM EDT
    tesla013

    Hell nearly half the membership was in arears at any given time Owl. Same with the printers union. I paid my dues cause my Xwife put it in an envelope oncsta month. And stuck it in my lunch suitcase. It might make a difference if folks had to make out the check themselves but join a union you sign a contract........ Here come the lawyers.

    • 5 votes
    #8.4 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:42 PM EDT
    greg-709692

    There's always a "What IF" isn't there douglasq.

    I've always thought the "Anonymous" complaint should be thrown out. If you ain't got the guts to say who you are, you ain't got no guts.

    Besides, when your anonymous, you could be from another state with no stake in the claim, other than to create trouble.

    • 5 votes
    #8.5 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:44 PM EDT
    douglasq

    There's always a "What IF" isn't there douglasq.

    Right. That's what the laws are in place to protect against. They are there to ensure that if an employee does encounter illegal practices at their worksite, they can report them without fear of reprisal. How many employees are going to report abuses if they know they will lose their job?

    • 1 vote
    #8.6 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:22 PM EDT
    greg-709692

    I'm not arguing there's a problem with the "Protection Law", we just don't need the unions to do it for us anymore. Anonymous complaint letters to the Feds need to be thrown in the trash. The Feds wouldn't tell on you,if you sent a letter, would they?

    I think we've evolved enough to know right from wrong by now. Like I said, the reporters will be on the doorstep quickly, whether the companies did right or wrong.

    • 4 votes
    #8.7 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:29 PM EDT
    douglasq

    I think we've evolved enough to know right from wrong by now.

    Really? Did that evolution occur before or after Enron? WorldCom? The recent bank meltdowns?

    What about the coal sludge spill? Or the BP spill?

    How about the suit against Wal-Mart?

    How about Google and censorship in China?

    Halliburton and the rape and imprisonment of one of its female employees?

    All of these involved situation where apparently the saintly corporations DIDN'T know right from wrong.

    Never trust a corporation to do the right thing. Because, time and time again, they do not.

    • 3 votes
    #8.8 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:47 PM EDT
    Boudicea

    AND, douglasq - the government in it's infinite wisdom and with its usual regulatory efficiency, didn't stop ANY OF IT. So what friggin good are they?

    • 5 votes
    #8.9 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:49 PM EDT
    greg-709692

    douglasq, concentrate. I was talking about the Public Union Members knowing what's right and wrong in the work place.

    On all those you listed, did they not get dealt with ?

    Weren't at least 6 of those regulated and watched by government? What happened with the Over sight agencies.

    How about Google and censorship in China?

    What about it?

    How about the suit against Wal-Mart?

    Yet people keep trying to get a job and shopping there.

    • 1 vote
    #8.10 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:03 PM EDT
    douglasq

    On all those you listed, did they not get dealt with ?

    Light slaps on the wrists are all I've seen.

    The reason I brought up Google and China is that it is a prime example of a business putting making profit before doing what is right.

    • 2 votes
    #8.11 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:11 PM EDT
    greg-709692

    BP was charged/fined billions. I know to them it's pocket change, but to me, the standard ol' guy, billions is a lot. I know that type of thinking isn't normal anymore. Billions, and even trillions, to some people, isn't a lot or enough.

    What would you have concidered just? Putting them out of business?

    Think about that question.

    Now, back to the article. Do you douglasq, think it would be a bad thing for Public Union Members to write their own checks to the Unions, which is basically a mandatory Club.

    • 5 votes
    #8.12 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:19 PM EDT
    tesla013

    Hey I would have cut the fines in half had we been able to drop all the BP executives about a mile offshore in the thick of the slick and let them swim it on in. But that's just me.

    • 6 votes
    #8.13 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 3:03 PM EDT
    peapod

    That visual was priceless, thank you. I'm picturing 10-20 old, rotund, bald, white guys tredding black water, all of them oily and glistening in the sun.

    • 2 votes
    #8.14 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 11:11 AM EDT
    Reply
    V. Bevis

    owlsview: My post @ #2.1 essentially says the same thing.

    The reason State, Federal & Local government unions exist at all is that the unions of yesterday were getting so much for their people that no one wanted to work in government.

    But that was when the USA was "Fat, Dumb & Happy." We also had far less competition from other countries!

    • 6 votes
    Reply#9 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:34 PM EDT
    owlsview

    V.Bevis, getting people to take a hard look and realize that there is a difference between yesterday's and today's unions, is what we need. Taking that hard look is what motivates the media to keep people from having coherent discussion on site like this. They don't want people taking a hard look at anything, especially the unions.

    The unions are the single biggest socialist movement in this country comparable to the Muslim Brotherhood when you get right down to it.

    • 6 votes
    #9.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:54 PM EDT
    Reply
    Jeff in Houston

    Logically, on this one issue, I must agree with you Greg. I would not like my employer to pay my bills for me. I should be in charge of this activity. I think forcing an employer to pay the union dues electronically as a function of payroll is out of line.

    I do, however, see the need for involvement with the deduction of health care costs. In most cases, that is a bill being paid for by the employee and employer together. That makes it BOTH our business if something gets paid.

    On most of the other union related issues, i side with the union. The larger the American Corporation, the less i trust them. The smaller they are, the more likely I can attempt to determine the character of the owner.

    On this one point, the unions just need to shut up.

    • 1 vote
    Reply#10 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:47 PM EDT
    owlsview

    Jeff in Houston. Switch union with American Corporation in your third paragraph and you will be telling the same truth.

    • 4 votes
    #10.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 12:57 PM EDT
    greg-709692

    I do, however, see the need for involvement with the deduction of health care costs. In most cases, that is a bill being paid for by the employee and employer together. That makes it BOTH our business if something gets paid.

    I do like that part myself.

    One thing though, You have a choice to opt in or opt out of the health care plan and still get a job.

    On Union Run Sectors, you have no choice, in order to get that job. If Union, You will join.

    • 3 votes
    #10.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:00 PM EDT
    owlsview

    Freedom of choice is an anti-union activity. Freedom of choice is an inalienable right, guess that alone makes unions anti-America.

    • 6 votes
    #10.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:22 PM EDT
    douglasq

    Freedom of choice is an anti-union activity.

    And union busting activities on the part of an employer run counter to freedom of choice.

    • 2 votes
    #10.4 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:28 PM EDT
    Boudicea

    where is the "choice" when you HAVE to join a union to work for a company? The only choice is to NOT work there

    • 4 votes
    #10.5 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 1:50 PM EDT
    Jeff in Houston

    {I'm only getting deeper here with my progressive friends}

    No one should be forced to join a union. Further, i can see the employer's point of view in that the company cannot operate with two sets of rules for two different kinds of employees.

    However, if a company is faced with a growing movement to unionize, i would think it would be smart to find out what the employees are annoyed about, head it off, deal with the problem, before the union becomes necessary. There negative feelings on the part of employees do not just come from out of the sky. They are frequently based in fact.

    Treat your employees fairly, and the whole union question goes away.

    • 5 votes
    #10.6 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:10 PM EDT
    douglasq

    Treat your employees fairly, and the whole union question goes away.

    Intimidate them and lie to them and the whole union question goes away, too.

    • 1 vote
    #10.7 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:12 PM EDT
    Andrew-1162039

    where is the "choice" when you HAVE to join a union to work for a company?

    The choice is the employer's. They are under no obligation to sign onto a union security agreement. The whole justification behind a closed shop operation is the employer is so lazy that he would be unable to manage bargaining between union and non-union members. If that's not the case the employer should damned well stand up for himself and say so and not sign onto an agreement he doesn't believe in.

      #10.8 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:20 PM EDT
      Boudicea

      Don't know where you live, but in PA if there is a union you have to pay dues. Granted you do not have to be a MEMBER of the union - but you sitll have to pay dues.

      Jeff in Houston - you're obviously one progressive I can get along with! Kudos to you and your thought process

      • 3 votes
      #10.9 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:41 PM EDT
      tesla013

      In most instances where I have been involved in it the union rules and some of the benefits applied to all who worked there. It was representation in the event of a dispute between you and management that was not available to all. One of the probs with this debate is that most folks do not argue from a reality arena.

      • 5 votes
      #10.10 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 3:05 PM EDT
      Andrew-1162039

      Don't know where you live, but in PA if there is a union you have to pay dues. Granted you do not have to be a MEMBER of the union - but you sitll have to pay dues.

      Unions typically try to impose some type of union security agreement, whereby the company either doesn't hire any non-union members or non-union members pay some fee which goes to the union. The company, however, is under no obligation to agree to this type of system. I've worked in a union shop where we weren't obligated to join the union and we didn't pay a fee for being non-union, but the company maintained collective and non-collective bargaining payscales and had additional agreements with the union which made non-union workers end up with crappy shifts and little over time. The company ultimately has all the power. Just because everybody else agrees to certain union contract desires doesn't mean your company has to.

      • 1 vote
      #10.11 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 3:30 PM EDT
      ebookout

      And union busting activities on the part of an employer run counter to freedom of choice.

      The freedom of choice is you don't have to work for them. Go some palce else. Or is that the problem?

      • 1 vote
      #10.12 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:03 PM EDT
      ebookout

      The company, however, is under no obligation to agree to this type of system.

      Right ! picking feet up!

      • 1 vote
      #10.13 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:13 PM EDT
      Reply
      Borncorn

      My 401 (K) deduction comes out of my pay. Should I have to also write a check for that? Why should we subsidize Wall Street?

        Reply#11 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:01 PM EDT
        greg-709692

        Do you have to have the 401K to keep your job?

        • 3 votes
        #11.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:05 PM EDT
        Boudicea

        Big difference. A 401K is a COMPANY SPONSORED PROGRAM. The "customer" is the employer, not you. It's not Joe Schmo's 401K plan, it is the American Corporation 401K plan and Joe Schmo is the participant.

        • 2 votes
        #11.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:43 PM EDT
        Borncorn

        No, the customer is me. I own the 401 (K), the Company can't touch it.

          #11.3 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 9:31 AM EDT
          Boudicea

          Borncorn - take a look at your 401K booklet. The COMPANY sets up your 401K plan. They can end their contributions any time they want. They can change their contribution any time they want. You can't MAKE THEM keep it in force. Try calling your 401K service company and ask them to change the plan. You'll find I'm right. The benefits might be yours, but the PLAN is theirs. They even have to name it. You look at your latest statement and you'll see something like "The ABC Company Pension and Profit Sharing Plan"

          • 3 votes
          #11.4 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 9:41 AM EDT
          Reply
          belle42

          Why not go one step further -- everyone gets their gross pay completely and has to write a check to pay OASDI, Medicare, Federal, State, and Local taxes, plus all the other deductions on their paychecks, including medical, dental, vision, and life insurances. Makes life LOTS easier for your payroll people!

          • 5 votes
          Reply#12 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:14 PM EDT
          ebookout

          Sorry , I have to do the now with my payroll check. I complained to myself but it didn't go very far. Maybe I should create a union of one!

          • 2 votes
          #12.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:11 PM EDT
          belle42

          Don't forget to go on strike against yourself!!

          • 4 votes
          #12.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:29 PM EDT
          ebookout

          You think I could get paid more than?

          • 1 vote
          #12.3 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 7:15 AM EDT
          belle42

          You could argue for better working conditions...like not having to bring work home with you!

          • 1 vote
          #12.4 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 11:27 AM EDT
          ebookout

          That will never happen, I just like to get down to 55 hours a week. But you know the nice part is , on friday when I have had enough i fire myself and head to the tavern and have a cold one. Then I just hire myself back the next day.

          • 1 vote
          #12.5 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 11:59 AM EDT
          belle42

          So negotiate a 50 hour work week then...I'm sure your boss would understand

          • 2 votes
          #12.6 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 12:06 PM EDT
          Reply
          Robert in Ohio

          Greg

          100% agree

          The unions should collect dues from their members

          And the members will pay those dues as long as they are satisfied with the representation they are receiving from the union

          The government should not be collecting dues for the unions

          Good article

          • 7 votes
          Reply#13 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 2:59 PM EDT
          greg-709692

          The government should not be collecting dues for the unions

          I never understood why someone else needed to do the collecting. People should be flocking to write a check, if it's so great today.

          • 5 votes
          #13.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 3:18 PM EDT
          Robert in Ohio

          greg

          My thoughts exactly

          As good as the union worker has it, I would think they would want to write the check each month, so they could add a little something something for the great work the union is doing

          Certainly no union worker would ever forget to pay his or her dues, the union is the first thing they think about when they wake and the last thing they think about when they go to bed

          s/

          • 4 votes
          #13.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:30 PM EDT
          Reply
          lifeisgood43

          Tell you what. Why don't you people who hate Unions stay out of it. Isn't that better. Why don't you people who hate Unions go ahead and live your lives. Why don't you people who hate Unions mind your own business. The Unions are not bother you people.

          WHY DO YOU UNION HATING PEOPLE CARE AT ALL.

            Reply#14 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 4:51 PM EDT
            Boudicea

            lifeisgood I care for a lot of reasons. I care because unions are BUYING the politicians. I care because employees in union shops are required to pay dues even if they are not members of the unions. I care because UNIONS aren't willing to be satisfied with their status quo - they want to impose their beliefs on everybody else. I care because with respect to public unions, it's MY TAX DOLLARS supporting you!

            Here's a question - why don't you union LOVING people keep it to yourselves?

            • 6 votes
            #14.1 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:26 PM EDT
            Dave - Twin Cities

            I care because it's my tax dollars that are paying for the "top shelf" pensions, benefits, and salaries for the public unions.

            I have a choice whether to support private companies that use union labor.

            I don't have that same choice when public unions are involved ... Except for my vote at the poll. And, now that has happened and the politicians leave the table and/or turn it over to the courts simply because they didn't like the new law.

            • 6 votes
            #14.2 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:53 PM EDT
            Rob-LVNevada

            A lot of us that want public sector unions outlawed have no issue with labor unions in the private sector.

            That point is often missed when the crickets come out on these threads.

            • 5 votes
            #14.3 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:56 PM EDT
            Reply
            ebookout

            Tell you what. Why don't you people who hate Unions stay out of it. Isn't that better. Why don't you people who hate Unions go ahead and live your lives. Why don't you people who hate Unions mind your own business. The Unions are not bother you people.

            WHY DO YOU UNION HATING PEOPLE CARE AT ALL.

            Because us non union people have to keep bailing you sorry asses out. So that make it my business doesn't it? If you run your business into the ground stop coming around with your hand out crying poor me,poor me. Than I want care what the hell you do.

            But then you will starve wouldn't you.

            • 4 votes
            Reply#15 - Mon Apr 4, 2011 6:07 PM EDT
            owlsview

            Greg how do you mange to draw so many uneducated youngsters to your site? They must be youngsters.

            "If that's not the case the employer should damned well stand up for himself and say so and not sign onto an agreement he doesn't believe in."

            Then the employer gets slammed by the union, picketed and quite often gets shut down especially when supplies start getting delivered or picked up late, sabotage, intimidation of non-union workers. To say these things don't happen is to be totally ignorant or an outright liar. When unions first started they had to turn to thuggery to succeed. Once the thugs moved in, they never moved out, just took control. Any union leader that didn't cave in to them just disappeared and got replaced.

            Tell you what. Why don't you people who hate Unions stay out of it. Isn't that better. Why don't you people who hate Unions go ahead and live your lives. Why don't you people who hate Unions mind your own business. The Unions are not bother you people.

            WHY DO YOU UNION HATING PEOPLE CARE AT ALL

            Union demands drove business out of the industrial mid-west and northeast. Followed them into the central south and drove them out of the country. It's the high cost of doing business with a union that runs companies into bankruptcy not taxes.New union contracts equals higher prices for consumers. The market can only bear so much.

            Would they have to use Union workers to do the bill collecting?

            Yes, and increase your dues to pay for it. Great idea. Done by the employer, who has a payroll office, much easier and costs far less.

            Costs the union less and the employer more. Typical Dem/Prog/ Lib attitude. Let the other guy pay the tab and do my work for me.

            On and on. One of the dumbest repeated lies here is that Republicans will eliminate our labor laws. Get real people, stop lying there has been no attempt to change labor laws and any attempt to do so would meet unilateral resistance.

            Unions do not operate as separate entities either. Dock workers go on strike meet resistance and the Teamsters join them, shutting down a major part of the economy. This has never happened has it? A production plant in California using union members has a disagreement with the union, the union strikes, has a tough time and the union then calls for other union members at other companies to go on a unity strike. Never mind the fact that this so called unity strike causes businesses that do everything the union asks them to, to miss deadlines, fail to meet contracts and suffer enormous losses.

            You have to join a union to get a job at an already unionized shop, the unions are constantly sending people to non-union shops to get hired (no problem hiding memberships) just for the express purpose of creating dissent and trying to start a union movement.

            Oh no no, you say those saintly union leaders would never to such a thing. Right, get a life.


            • 6 votes
            Reply#16 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 12:53 AM EDT
            ebookout

            Well put!

            • 2 votes
            #16.1 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 7:34 AM EDT
            Boudicea

            You know, when an employer has to withhold and remit child support payments, they get 2.5% (here in PA) extra paid by the employee to take care of the extra cost. How do you think a union employee would like having an extra 2.5% of their check GONE to cut Union Costs? How do you think a union would appreciate 2.5% reduction in their checks? NO, neither side would like it a bit, but they just LOVE the idea of screwing the employer - because EMPLOYERS ARE VILE. EMPLOYERS ARE BAD. If you ask me, it's like kicking a gift horse in the mouth.

            When are you brain -dead people going to realize that without EMPLOYERS you don't have friggin jobs?

            • 4 votes
            #16.2 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 7:37 AM EDT
            greg-709692

            without EMPLOYERS you don't have friggin jobs?

            Liberals will worry about that later. First they have to do the deed of getting rid of employers. They have one track minds. What is needed for the here and now, not what the future may bring from the Deed.

            It's kinda like the Healthscare bill. You have to vote for it before you know what's in it! You'd think Liberals would have learned from that mistake. Even Weiner wants a waiver for an entire city from Healthscare.

            • 3 votes
            #16.3 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 7:44 AM EDT
            Boudicea

            It's not even a "Liberal" thing. It's this absurd Union mindset that is so ridiculous that I shake my head. I can't even think of a good comparison. It's just so bizarre! How in the hell do you spend a lifetime vilifying corporations and expect them to play nice at contract time?

            • 4 votes
            #16.4 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 7:50 AM EDT
            greg-709692

            It's this absurd Union mindset

            That too!

            I don't understand how the Union Mindset would think coporations would be nice, period.

            They vilify them for being. They vilify them if they stay and cut cost. They vilify them for making their own money (They ignore someone started that business for themself) then, when the corporations have no more to cut, they shut down or move, and they still get vilified.

            It's a no win situation for business in general, period.

            • 3 votes
            #16.5 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 8:09 AM EDT
            Boudicea

            The Business of Business is BUSINESS - not "providing a living wage" for anybody. That's just a really great bonus for the employees

            • 4 votes
            #16.6 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 8:13 AM EDT
            Robert in Ohio

            kjmgirl

            You are absolutely correct

            • 3 votes
            #16.7 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 8:32 AM EDT
            ebookout

            You are absolutely correct

            kjmgirl and Robert , Both of you are correct.

            I'm an employer and I had people who have told me that I owe them a job. These are the same people who are less productive and keep telling you you can't do that. They don't last long.

            I can't understand were they come to think that I take the risk and put up the funds to create a business just so I can have the privilege to have them work for me. Thank God, I also have employee who appreciate their job and they usually run these others off because they know they hurt the company as a whole .

            But this is the same attitude the unions have." I work here and I should share in the profits but want no risk."

            • 1 vote
            #16.8 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 11:55 AM EDT
            Robert in Ohio

            ebookout

            The "you owe me" attitude is a major problem on our society and something that needs to change as the recovery continues and the economy rebounds or we will end up right back where we are now

            No one is owed anything but the opportunity to succeed and support if they are disabled or ill, if someone is able to work and advance themselves and chooses not you, well that is a different story to me at least.

            • 4 votes
            #16.9 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 1:33 PM EDT
            Reply
            Desert Storm Black Vet

            People in Unions are stupid, lazy and Unamerican. They are so stupid that they hurt america.

            Hey trust me.

            You are a skilled laborer (snicker). You use collective bargaining but your so bad at it that you get rolled. You have hired no PR firms (come on). Dang Merry Maids does a better job than you.

            You want you want and you want! the game has changed.

            Instead of being in Unions. you need to be "Consulant firms"

            Look at what consultant firms are doing in Iraq and Afganistan! go into every Corp in America and you will find several Consultant firms.

            True a half hour after you convert half of you will be downsized and a quarter outsourced. but when all is said and done, those who still have a job will be, smarter, stronger and be able to hold your head up in public.

            Just think about it. "I work for a consultant firm" or "I am a member of local 123"

            • 2 votes
            Reply#17 - Tue Apr 5, 2011 9:49 AM EDT
            Libertarian y2k

            No one should be required to be in the union. That should be a choice. If you choose to allot a payroll deduction then no need for the check issue. A properly run union would sell itself. Their dues would cause minimal financial sacrifice and their actions on behalf of constituents would be their selling point. To force employees to pay and set the dues high in order to pay high salaries to union officials and buy politicians is corrupt.

            • 6 votes
            Reply#18 - Wed Apr 6, 2011 9:03 AM EDT
            ebookout

            No one is owed anything but the opportunity to succeed and support if they are disabled or ill

            Robert, Again agree 100 percent.

            But for some reason a lot of kids today and adults think they are owed something and don't feel they need to work or sweat for it. I just don't get it.

            • 4 votes
            Reply#19 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 6:48 AM EDT
            Spikegary

            It's the culture of otday-first there were 'My kid is an honor student' bumper stickers, then 'my kid is a really good student' bumper stickers, because we don't want the kids (or is it their parents?) to think they aren't a 'winner'-we teach them this because that's how the real world is, right?

            I was raised to understand that you do your best, some do better than others-there's a winner and a loser, if you don't like being a loser, you work harder to become a winner. There is no shame in losing as long as you've done your best

            • 5 votes
            #19.1 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 7:26 AM EDT
            ebookout

            Spikegary,

            I coached soccer for 9 years and I saw a lot of what you are taking about. I don't have a problem with being proud of your kids but I think some times we take it to far. Like letting them fall and pick themselves up on there own. You can be there but you let them do it.
            I was like you, always do the best that you can and if you fail get over it and figure out how to do it better if that's what you want.It is no one problem but your own so why blame others? But first you should enjoy what you are doing or why do it?
            I agree there is no shame in losing if that's the best you can do. But the problem is I see more and more of the parents think it is a shame to finish second and yell at their kids for doing it when they did the best they could or they go and teach them how to screw someone just to be first.
            It just to bad we think we always must be top dog or think if you are not rich that you have failed. To many like this . It's the me attitude that has spread to much.
            As long as anyone trys their best they are winners in themselves.
            Now what do we do with the one 's who just want it for free and think they should get it.

            • 2 votes
            #19.2 - Thu Apr 7, 2011 10:02 AM EDT
            Reply
            Leave a Comment:
            You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
            You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
            (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
            Newsvine Privacy Statement
            As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
            FUN STUFF:
            • Leaderboard |
            • E-Mail Alerts |
            • Top of the Vine |
            • Newsvine Live |
            • Newsvine Archives |
            • The Greenhouse |
            COMPANY STUFF:
            • Code of Honor |
            • Company Info |
            • Contact Us |
            • Jobs |
            • User Agreement |
            • Privacy Policy |
            • About our ads
            LEGAL STUFF:
            • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
            • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
            • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com