Just another example of why we need unuions - Page 2

wellfleation · 09-28-2010, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John F. Kerry

as much as those stories suck, just imagine how much worse it would be if you were a worker in the workers paradises of n korea or the former ussr?

Now, what is your logic? The shrinking middle class should be happy with the scraps they are fed by a lucky few people who own their own business (Paris Hilton, as an example of most super wealthy peeps through their family as is bush) or move? Because we should not demand that someone who makes 25k a year pay the same % of their tax as their wealthy boss? What is your rational?

You should start your own fucked up country or something.

**mothernature** · 09-29-2010, 04:07 AM

The time is ripe for stronger unions to surface.

Companies tend to forget that they would have nothing if not for the workers doing the actual work.

People should not have to put up with being disrespected, just because it wasn't a huge infraction (like the woman in the article).

**~~stateofkane~~** · 09-29-2010, 06:17 AM

Employees who tend to get sick a lot and don't show up to work, are, well, not at work. That means they are worthless. This is why I am anti-union.
^It's the worst time for them too. There is a big line of ppl that would be happy to take a job that gives them a paycheck and nothing else. It's not practical to think every employee is going to get the royal treatment. GM went down because they offered their employees too much. Even liberals agree with that.

**~~stateofkane~~** · 09-29-2010, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John F. Kerry

i dunno what the answer is. i think the number of people who really need help are vastly outnumbered by those who try to suckle and game the system

People like wheat have an easier time getting their voices heard than people who are unemployed. He is trying to play the compassion game, but he knows damn well that if his company could strip all of his benefits, they would be able to hire 2 or 3 more people.

Unions would be legit if we didn't have a minimum wage and scabs could be hired. They aren't legit. His argument is all about him.

stoneric · 09-29-2010, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stateofkane

Employees who tend to get sick a lot and don't show up to work, are, well, not at work. That means they are worthless. This is why I am anti-union.
^It's the worst time for them too. There is a big line of ppl that would be happy to take a job that gives them a paycheck and nothing else. It's not practical to think every employee is going to get the royal treatment. GM went down because they offered their employees too much. Even liberals agree with that.

Most contracts have absenteeism clauses in them where employees get fired for missing too much work. Collective bargaining involves two sides, unions don't rule the show.

Anybody would be willing to work for a paycheck only, if they could afford their benefit package with that paycheck. People get benefits in lieu of wages. Or are you against people making a living fucking wage?

GM went down because it was poorly managed. CEO's retire into multimillion dollar pensions and people bitch because some dude is making 60 grand a year. Look at GM's corporate ladder's pay scale and you'll see who is getting the "royal treatment".

**mothernature** · 09-29-2010, 02:35 PM

Well said stoneric, and I will add that it's not just GM. There's a short article here: Brief History: Executive Pay - TIME

Basically it says that, "Plato recommended that a community's highest wage should not exceed five times its lowest. By the late 1890s, the banker J.P. Morgan had increased it to 20 times the average...In 1991, CEOs earned 140 times the average worker's pay...By 2007 the median S&P 500 CEO earned in three hours what a minimum-wage worker pulled down in a year."

SmokeaJoint · 09-29-2010, 02:41 PM

That^ pisses me off

wellfleation · 09-29-2010, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stateofkane

People like wheat have an easier time getting their voices heard than people who are unemployed. He is trying to play the compassion game, but he knows damn well that if his company could strip all of his benefits, they would be able to hire 2 or 3 more people.

Unions would be legit if we didn't have a minimum wage and scabs could be hired. They aren't legit. His argument is all about him.

And your thinking dates from prior to when union were formed (mid-1950's) when workers were the commodity, not people. They were disposable as you would surely be. Many people died doing cheap labor in an an "attempt" to feed their family. Miss those days, do ya?

wellfleation · 09-29-2010, 07:17 PM

Lets go full on ass-backwards - slave labor (already happening to illegals as they are indentured servants or they disappear).

zerodown · 09-29-2010, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stoneric

But you can't have 500 people sitting around a negotiating table. It's just like our political system, we elect represenatives but unfotunately they get corrupted. The thing to do in both cases is get involved on the local level and keep your own little world clean.

Then fuck the negotiating table, get a negotiating room, or stadium if necessary, each voice counts, and a representative is just one voice that has to make decisions based on what he "interprets" those 500 voices wants. What if 250 people agree on something and 250 disagree, what side does the representative chooses?

That is just what companies and unions say to convince people and keep the gears of corruption turning, "all of you don't fit on the table", fuck that, thats just wrong, besides we live in the era of technology, we don't need tables anymore.

SmokeaJoint · 09-29-2010, 10:09 PM

Agreed. Hold a round table online. Use youtube's new live feature or something.

zerodown · 09-30-2010, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeaJoint

Agreed. Hold a round table online. Use youtube's new live feature or something.

The problem with that is that people would soon realize they don't need representatives any longer, and sooner than later groups like, Congress, would vanish simply because people would have the ability to actually input their opinion into the system without representation. That sounds all good, until you realize its the threatened groups the ones responsible for adapting the system to this kind of technology, meaning they would be committing suicide if they actually started implementing technology at the local level for taking decisions on our own instead of counting on their "good representation".

An example of this in modern politics: Homosexual laws, there are lots and lots of homosexual senators, governors, mayors, legislators, etc... and they are the first ones that vote against homosexual laws because it would be political suicide since a lot of old conservative fucks would pull away their votes.

SmokeaJoint · 09-30-2010, 09:52 AM

I agree, but imagine how wonderful it would be if the actual people could make their voting decisions based on what they want instead of a senator's political agenda? I do understand that as long as we have people in power due to the current system, this wonderful idea will never happen. Just wishful thinking right now.

stoneric · 09-30-2010, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerodown

Then fuck the negotiating table, get a negotiating room, or stadium if necessary, each voice counts, and a representative is just one voice that has to make decisions based on what he "interprets" those 500 voices wants. What if 250 people agree on something and 250 disagree, what side does the representative chooses?

That is just what companies and unions say to convince people and keep the gears of corruption turning, "all of you don't fit on the table", fuck that, thats just wrong, besides we live in the era of technology, we don't need tables anymore.

I wasn't even talking about logistics. I was talking about what a cluster fuck you'd have negotiating a contract with the entire union workforce participating in negotiations. You'd never get one issue resolved. Obviously you've never worked in a union shop before. Where I work, when contract time comes around, the members make up a wish list and give it to the shop stewards. The stewards then meet with our local business agent to prioritize the list based on the most mentioned issues from the employee's lists. We then have meetings with the entire membership and VOTE on our priorities. Then negotiations start and our ELECTED commitee, who are fellow employees, along with our business agent, do the negotiating. So everbodies voice is indeed heard if they want it to be heard. The corruption is at the upper levels of unions, not the local level. And your idea of pure democracy would mean minorities would have no say in anything. Shit, we'd probably still have slaves with the amount of red necks we have in this country.
.

zerodown · 09-30-2010, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stoneric

I wasn't even talking about logistics. I was talking about what a cluster fuck you'd have negotiating a contract with the entire union workforce participating in negotiations. You'd never get one issue resolved. Obviously you've never worked in a union shop before. Where I work, when contract time comes around, the members make up a wish list and give it to the shop stewards. The stewards then meet with our local business agent to prioritize the list based on the most mentioned issues from the employee's lists. We then have meetings with the entire membership and VOTE on our priorities. Then negotiations start and our ELECTED commitee, who are fellow employees, along with our business agent, do the negotiating. So everbodies voice is indeed heard if they want it to be heard. The corruption is at the upper levels of unions, not the local level. And your idea of pure democracy would mean minorities would have no say in anything. Shit, we'd probably still have slaves with the amount of red necks we have in this country.
.

Minorities don't have a say in anything on our current system, only the illusion of choice, I mean, we still have slaves, got a S.S. number?

stoneric · 09-30-2010, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zerodown

Minorities don't have a say in anything on our current system, only the illusion of choice, I mean, we still have slaves, got a S.S. number?

No doubt. But I hate to see a staight up vote on whether a black man can marry a white woman, even today. My s.s number doesn't make me a slave, I can leave anytime I like.

zerodown · 10-01-2010, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stoneric

No doubt. But I hate to see a staight up vote on whether a black man can marry a white woman, even today. My s.s number doesn't make me a slave, I can leave anytime I like.

But do you know the consequences of doing so?

stoneric · 10-02-2010, 12:55 AM

clive · 10-02-2010, 02:44 AM

sup wellfleation's got dyslexia

kamikazi89 · 10-04-2010, 04:41 AM

i hope we can negotiate some sick days into the next contract, a simple flu shouldn't bring someone this close to bankruptcy

09-29-2010, 07:17 PM	#29 (permalink)
wellfleation Old School Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Methuen, MASSHOLE Posts: 3,854 Thanks: 196 Thanked 601 Times in 427 Posts	Lets go full on ass-backwards - slave labor (already happening to illegals as they are indentured servants or they disappear). __________________ FIGHTPOWER

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

09-29-2010, 04:07 AM	#22 (permalink)
mothernature ancientbongmaster Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Kentucky Posts: 1,232 Thanks: 1,201 Thanked 809 Times in 487 Posts	The time is ripe for stronger unions to surface. Companies tend to forget that they would have nothing if not for the workers doing the actual work. People should not have to put up with being disrespected, just because it wasn't a huge infraction (like the woman in the article).

09-29-2010, 06:17 AM	#23 (permalink)
~~stateofkane~~ Banned Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 557 Thanks: 20 Thanked 92 Times in 82 Posts	Employees who tend to get sick a lot and don't show up to work, are, well, not at work. That means they are worthless. This is why I am anti-union. ^It's the worst time for them too. There is a big line of ppl that would be happy to take a job that gives them a paycheck and nothing else. It's not practical to think every employee is going to get the royal treatment. GM went down because they offered their employees too much. Even liberals agree with that.

09-29-2010, 02:35 PM	#26 (permalink)
mothernature ancientbongmaster Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Kentucky Posts: 1,232 Thanks: 1,201 Thanked 809 Times in 487 Posts	Well said stoneric, and I will add that it's not just GM. There's a short article here: Brief History: Executive Pay - TIME Basically it says that, "Plato recommended that a community's highest wage should not exceed five times its lowest. By the late 1890s, the banker J.P. Morgan had increased it to 20 times the average...In 1991, CEOs earned 140 times the average worker's pay...By 2007 the median S&P 500 CEO earned in three hours what a minimum-wage worker pulled down in a year."

10-02-2010, 12:55 AM	#38 (permalink)
stoneric bougeman Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 5,646 Thanks: 704 Thanked 1,512 Times in 1,067 Posts

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)