Forum Post: Labor Unions
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 14, 2011, 2:58 p.m. EST by IWantFreeStuff
(119)
from New Orleans, LA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Since Labor Unions unduly use their influence and money to affect elections and buy politicians.
Since Labor Unions drive up the price of manufacturing, causing jobs to go overseas.
Since Labor Union executives have been convicted of numerous felonies ranging from bribery to murder.
I proclaim that a major tenet of the OWS platform should be the outlawing of Labor Unions.
That is a ridiculous notion. All persons should have the right to collectively bargain. The problem is not the private sector unions where both sides , labor and management, have skin in the game. If there is a problem it is public sector unions where the side supposedly representing the taxpayers ( including those taxpayers who do not belong to public sector unions) bargain with our, not their own, money . All municipal labor contracts should be subject to voter referendum and ratification. Those who must burden the costs should have a say.
[Removed]
Nope. We should welcome the people but not the billionaire unions that suck the blood from their temporary workers that they refuse benefits to. Temps deserve benefits too, rich guys!
The OP made it clear that he wanted to BAN unions in principal. What does the subject of whether or not temps should receive benefits have to do with whether or not people have the RIGHT to form unions or other organizations and bargain as a group?
Unions reward their richest at the expense of their poorest. "Casual" workers pay the same union dues, and do the same work, but get no benefits for their labor. Meanwhile union bosses retired just last week with $500,000/yr pensions! How is that fair?
It’s not. But repealing laws which make it possible for workers to organize and collectively bargain won’t result in casual workers getting benefits. If , as you say, you belong to the same union and pay the same union dues and you feel it’s a waste, maybe you and the other casual workers should explore decertification of that union as your representative.
Collective bargaining does not include spending union member's money to influence the outcome of elections. Nor does it encompass the bullying that unions use to ensure their members vote for 'their' candidates.
Outlaw them all I say. If people want to come together to collectively bargain wages, then let them do so on a case by case basis.
The OP did not advocate putting limits on lobbying or campaign finance or PAC activity by unions, he advocated outlawing unions altogether. I can't support that.
I am the OP, and I say ban all unions. Make it illegal for unions to mandate workers pay union dues. Pass right to work laws. Outlaw PAC/Union political contributions. In essence, outlaw unions.
corporations should be transparent
those that labor for corporations
should be able to openly discuss their wages
and the profits and losses of the business
Labor unions have their faults, of course. But worker-led industry with complete voting rights would never vote to send their own jobs overseas...that is done by the top who only see the bottom line and fair pay for fair work as an intrusion on their profit margins!
Collective bargaining is a right and should be a right since it is your freedom of speech. The corporate Koch funded wing of the tea party is on here trying to sabotage. They hate unions more than anything. That is the sign of a corportist. I agree that there are many bad players in the unions but the union movement is good for the USA. Unions need to get rid of the greedy leadership, not ban our right to organize in both public and private sectors. When unions were the strongest (1930's-1970's) our country was booming. With the decline of unions, so has our wealth and middle class. Don't fall for Koch kollaid on here.
Public sector should absolutely have the right to unionize, but wages, benefits, work rules --basically the whole employment package---should be subject to ratification by the voters who are required to foot the bill as governments can be "bought"by union influence
Unions have no power in public sector negotiations anymore, see NY. NYS employees only received raises in less than 50% of the years from the past 20. Unions are just trying to hang on. Its the rich and corps that are buy politicians. IBM keeps receiving corporate welfare while outsourcing jobs. The voters do ratify the contract, they vote for their representative mayor or governor.
That is not ratification by the taxpayer. A system of putting municipal contracts up for referendum and ratification is the only fair method. By your definition, you voted for everyone that is in power now, be they democrat or republican, so you should be happy with everything our leaders do.
thats what we hear from the republicans everyday!
That's news to me. I've never heard of a republican or democrat proposing putting any major contract, law or expenditure up to a vote from the people. Could you cite your sources?
we here that we elected them to do something like their tea party platform. so if thats the case then we elect them to negotiate with civil servants. I believe that is part of their jobs?
Doesn't mean they are doing their job correctly, or doing it without undue influence from special interest groups. Like I said, if that were the case then no one should question any decision made by any elected official while in office because-after all-they were voted in.
Then by logical deduction the union(corporation) is the individual.
class action kind of like the Chamber of Commerce, a union of businesses. Want to get rid of unions, then so should any business union.
I agree, but part of this movement chants "corporations are not the individual". just saying that what is good for one is good for the other. Unions take their grievances as collective, why can't a business?
In most cases, the business is already a collective with lots of power and staff to fight the worker and the union.
By the same token a union acts as a collective for political issues as well. My point is that if you allow one, you must allow the other.
we all have different opinions of how we see things. Businesses and unions should work together and our country and people should come first, not excessive profits and outsourcing.
If you go into any Post office you will see union posters that state "Join The Fight" Who is fighting against whom? I do not see the PO posting "fight against the union".
unions are at a disadvantage. Corps do not want want you to know that. Everytime we try to organize, people get fired. Thats against the law but they still get away with it. All we ask is for fairness. we fight the greedy corps (not all) who attack us and fund attacks on us through think tanks and Chamber of Commerce
Who is providing the job that you took voluntarily? I honestly do not understand the logic behind agreeing to work for someone and then begin making demands. I know it gets tiresome, but if you really do not like where you work, you are free to leave. If you are forced to stay then you have a grievance ans I would support action against the company.
Collective bargaining is fine, on a case by case basis. Maintaining huge unions simply for political leverage is ruining our country, and costing us jobs. Jobs we need here at home to feed our families are going overseas due to outrageous union demands. Our wives and children deserve better.
THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! THE POOR HUNGRY CHILDREN!!!
And who should judge on a case by case basis? A politician? Unions did not cost us jobs before 30 years ago before Reagan union busting. Unions give the workers a voice. Without that voice no one can speak up about problems in the workplace or issues that need management attention. Sometimes its the workers on the ground that know more, not someone in an office far away. Who is going to stand up to the companies outrageous demands. Collective bargaining is supposed to moderate outrageous demands on both sides. I think from your response that you are not serious and are just a saboteur.
Workers have always had a voice. They have the option of not going to work.
If enough workers refuse to go to work, the business will suffer and pay attention to the issues. It's called a strike.
There is no need for organized unions, with paid employees, mandatory dues and the political gerrymandering that occurs.
not all unions give to politicians. some unions are by choice of the member only. I don't believe a strike is necessary unless all options fail. The business and union should work together for the benefit of everyone kind of like the UAW has done in recent years. This should be a model. When things get bad union, mgmt and company sacrifice. when things are good, profits are shared not just for mgmt. If we work together, it beenefits everyone and in turn happiness.
Then there is Eastern Airlines. The pilots specifically stated that if there avtion kills the company, then so be it. Lorenzo shut it down and all the pilots started crying that it was unfair. Pity, it was a great airline but the employees felt they knew what was best for the company.
Unions are not the problem. Corporations are. First they got their Reaganomic tax breaks to bolster their supposed trickle down effect. Then they paid our politicians to get import quotas lifted and tariffs adjusted. They took their business over seas to get AWAY from unions, kept their tax breaks and took their jobs with them. This has been unfolding for decades. Unions made possible living wages and safe working environments. Eugene Debbs was an American hero! We are blessed to live in an America that doesn't remember a sweat shop. We have unions to thank. Take a look into the garment industry if you think they don't exist anymore. As people here have already said: they need to be kept out of politics but they need to stay in our businesses. Where I live, the Verizon unions just organized walk outs and picketing due to benefits stripping of their employees in contracts. Unions have, and still do, protect the worker from corporate greed. No one here seems to have said much about how much unions have given the American worker. And I thought it was important. No one's mother won't come home form work today because she was locked into a building that caught fire. Work place safety is a direct result of unions! Research triangle shirtwaist factory fire of 1911 in new york where 160 died and how that incident catapulted the social change towards unions who enforced fire safety. Fast forward to 2010 in Bangladesh, now a primary source of garments globally: where unions and minimum wages are finally being fought for and see the amount of lives lost in fires at these plants. History has a strange way of repeating itself. Learn from it.
they should both save their lobbying money!
Labor is made of people, it has a soul. Corporations aren't people, they are obsessed with $. What makes businesses add value to society, caused them to be cancerous to policy making. Because eventually they will try to make $$ while adding no value at all... hence the market crash in 2008.
If your union is corrupt--that's your problem.
Get off your fat asses and retake your unions.
Labor Union have the same problems of greed and abuse from the top that Corporations do. Just like we need Corporations, we need labor unions, but the rules need to be designed so that a third honest broker limits each from going too far, but the Government is owned by the corporations to the balance of power is dysfunctional and cannot operate correctly
http://www.uniondemocracy.org/
I've seen bad union presidents voted out. The union I belonged to helped to organize so it worked.
I wish I could vote out K Street.
Labor Unions should be world wide
Unions reward their richest at the expense of their poorest. "Casual" workers pay the same union dues, and do the same work, but get no benefits for their labor. Meanwhile union bosses retired just last week with $500,000/yr pensions! How is that fair?
I do agree. This is why the south is getting much of the manufacturing jobs now. The only people that benefit of labor unions are the people taking your money so that you can be apart of the labor union. You work so they get paid and benefits rarely any better then the same job with out a labor union.
A word from Adam smith, 1776
“In other universities, the teacher is prohibited from receiving any honorary or fee from his pupils, and his salary constitutes the whole of the revenue which he derives from his office. His interest is, in this case, set as directly in opposition to his duty as it is possible to set it. It is the interest of every man to live as much at his ease as he can; and if his emoluments are to be precisely the same, whether he does or does not perform some very laborious duty, it is certainly his interest, at least as interest is vulgarly understood, either to neglect it altogether, or, if he is subject to some authority which will not suffer him to do this, to perform it in as careless and slovenly a manner as that authority will permit. If he is naturally active and a lover of labour, it is his interest to employ that activity in any way from which he can derive some advantage, rather than in the performance of his duty, from which he can derive none.
If the authority to which he is subject resides in the body corporate, the college, or university, of which he himself is a member, and in which the greater part of the other members are, like himself, persons who either are, or ought to be teachers, they are likely to make a common cause, to be all very indulgent to one another, and every man to consent that his neighbour may neglect his duty, provided he himself is allowed to neglect his own. In the university of Oxford, the greater part of the public professors have, for these many years, given up altogether even the pretence of teaching.”
iwantfreestuff, this is a silly idea and a waste of time.i haven't seen any posts about demanding the abolition of corporations. they just want them out of politics which would also be fair in the case of unions.
(btw. saw your grilled cholesterol photo. man, if you eat that regularly you're gonna have problems with your heart before you're 50.)
I call those 'turtles'. They're a big hit. Not as much cholesterol as it appears. They're mostly venison. Very lean. The bacon adds some needed fat, otherwise they'd be dry. Oh. I'll be fifty in a couple of weeks.
banning unions is not a very realistic idea. even discussing it is a waste of time
Loser, jobs went oversees because of the GATT Treaty. I'm sure you have no clue what that is. Are you suggesting Americans make 50 cents an hour to compete with China? Here's a little retro knowledge. It's important to have knowledge before you open you mouth. Debate on GATT 1990 something: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YW6KkF6aa_A&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Steve:
Why do you resort to name calling? Is it because you have nothing intelligent to say. Also you assume that I know nothing of trade agreements. You are again mistaken. Thank-You for responding. Please try again when you can have a polite discourse.
and real laws need to be enacted that will not let employees who try to form a union to be harassed, fired and intimidated by an employer. The NLRB and OSHA have been weakened to a point where they are irrelevant.
"Outlaw public sector unions. Private sector unions should be allowed, but terms of employment should not have to require joining a union. A national "right to work" law should be enacted." LOL. Sure so the union movement can be destroyed permanently since private sector union are all but decimated currently and labor laws are in corps favor.
Yes. That is an accurate description of my goals.
Just like businesses, there are good labor unions and bad ones--ethical ones and unethical ones. Sadly, the United States' largest corporations are led by unions whose leadership is as suspicious as the leadership of the corporations criticized by unions on behalf of members. If a company is operating ethically and considering the value and worth of its employees, unions should not be necessary. Workers who are exploited by corporations should be protected by fellow citizens in a democracy where the laws adequately protect labor abuse.
However; In many states a worker has NO CHOICE. He/She MUST join a union to get a job. That is blackmail.
I agree ... Unions are evil
Thank You.
I agree with iwantfreestuff. A voice of intelligence in this sea of ignorance.
Well. I wouldn't presume everyone here to be ignorant. There are a few though.
We can still have labor unions we would just place the same lobbying restrictions on them as we would on financial institutions.
. . . and right to work laws. Ban the requirement for union dues. Let them survive on donations alone.
no its their right to do that not your right to stop them especially when you aren't even relevant to the debate. If you were a member of a union and had a problem with the fees then you have a right to raise the issue with your fellow member but if you are just someone who hates unions you have no right to make that qualm.
What if I am denied employment because I refuse to join a union. Don't I then have a say in how laws should be crafted to ban unions?
Who are you to say I am not relevant to the debate? Are you the self proclaimed leader of OWS?
If you refuse to join a union look for work elsewhere. You're not wanted you just sound like sour grapes.
So you are saying that I have no right to work. Work at a job for which I am more than qualified. Work that would feed my family.
You are saying that if I want to work, I MUST, join a political party that will spend my money to further THEIR political goals, even if I disagree with them?
Sour grapes are used to make the finest wines.
It's supposed to be a free market. If corporations' existing contracts prevent you from being employed, get a job elsewhere or start your own company. [now lets see the trolls argue about public vs private sector jobs and the argue for the ability to discriminate by race when hiring]
You wish to deny employment through coersion becasue someone does not believe what you believe? And you have the audacity to protest against Wall Street?
No I am saying if you don't want to join a union whose primary purpose is to care for its members and its political affiliation is merely a side show then you should find work either in an area where there is no union requirement or find another industry. They shouldn't have to change just for you.
sure get rid of all the unions that way we can all work for a dollar a week thats a sixty hour week, just like the third world great idea lets go backward who needs a living wage. ditto head thats the issue here blue collar people are making a living wage and throwing the country in dept,big corps are sending their work overseas because kids there will make it for nothing.and you dont have that pesty e.p,a to worry about
aaa: Please cite sources for your assertions.
Also. I am NOT a ditto head. I strongly dislike the pompous one.
All true, come on OWS, are you pure or not?
The gauntlet has been cast.