Forum Post: I have a suggestion as to how to put construction workers back to work
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 6, 2011, 11:51 a.m. EST by MikeInOhio
(13)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Instead of stipulating that all government-funded construction projects be union/ prevailing-wage jobs, they could use private companies instead!! Now that's radical.
Most people don't understand that all of our schools, government buildings, highways are constructed almost exclusively by unions or prevailing-wage shops. This means an increase in cost, funded by "we the taxpayers", of 10% - 50%. Where is the logic behind such an idiotic and immoral system? In Ohio a prevailing-wage highway laborer makes over $48 per hour plus benefits. And that's for unskilled labor!
In arizona the construction workers get paid about $5 an hour and don't pay taxes on it.
No, that's undocumented workers. Every dime spent on public works in AZ goes to prevailing wage/union shops.
that was more of joke than an argument, half way a joke anyways cause it's true, because for labor companies to be able to afford to win a bid they have to hire illegals
I'm all for unions, I just feel that the union heads forgot what a union is about. In the early 19th century unionism was about creating a better workplace, reasonable hours, benefits, etc. Giving a voice to the workers. Now its about pockets getting fatter.
The thing is that the majority of private companies that work for the government are union. They have contracts with the gov that makes the workers appear to have government jobs. Their paychecks do not come from the government.
The problem is that private companies that contract with the gov ask for WAY to much. Simply cause they know they can get it. The unions, well they are just there to entertain the law makers and make sure that the gov picks the union shops for the job (lobbyist). After all their pockets are lined by those companies. The same goes for defense contractors as well.
In reality we need a more responsible government and not one that is easily walked over or muscled around. If Washington had the balls to put their foot down, we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with. The unions aren't the problem. It's the spineless politicians looking to make a gain and an endorsement.
Lets imagine that Washington bans all political contributions (far fetched I know) to politicians from big business, unions and banks. Who would be left in Washington? Maybe then the real political figures would have a shot.
I feel there needs to be an understanding of the job market or job creators. It's a huge difference from what is a job and what is a career. Lately the speculation is how new jobs are going to open up for retail to meet the Christmas Shopping Season. That doesn't help those unemployed who hold college degrees and worked in a career fields.
Very true.
Because the system is setup for the benefit of rent seekers, whether they are bankers, large corps or union's. They all want a government provided monopoly afforded to them that would never happen if they actually had to compete on their own merits. I am not against people organizing but I am against organized labor using the same monopoly seeking tactics that Wall Street and Corporate America have used for decades.
I agree, Jerry.
Great point, Jerry. Thank you!
You realize that union workers also work for private companies, right.
You sound a bit daft.
Aren't you ever going to respond to me?
Daft? I'm sorry, should I leave?
Of course union workers work for private companies, but they are paid much higher wages for the prevailing wage jobs. Why are people payed far more when they work on a job that is partially financed by public money? This makes absolutely no sense. $48 per hour for the union, $16 per hour in the private sector? I'd love to hear any justification for this outrageous graft.