Michigan becomes another Right to Work state :-)

[TheRymanChu]

Right, just {censored}ing produce stuff and buyers will emerge. Just like the former Soviet Union did!

 

 

Reading comprehension fail. I would expect no less from you.

[Eschatologist]

 

You guys notice that they lt a special provision in exempting the police and fire unions? I guess there are some socialist entities that even the Koch brothers and the like don't want to change. I wonder if it's because the police and fire departments aren't private businesses, and they therefore they can't make any money off of them, so they left them alone. Why not include fire and police officers? {censored}, if the big bad unions are ruining our country, shouldn't s socialist groups like police and fire be the first ones to be de-unionized?

 

 

Police and Fire crews are typically restricted in the kinds of strike action they can perform (can't have striking po-po or you end up with Robocop 2), plus management is increasingly being de-unionized in all public sector professions to "keep them in line". Furthermore, police and admin are compensated well by politicians who are in the pockets of the corporations that fund their campaigns. The system is designed to keep itself in check.

[NeloAngelo]

 

Ever thought that maybe the woes of the economy here aren't the fault of the unions, but poor management practices? I seem to recall our finest on Wall St and Bay St making some pretty {censored}ty decisions four years ago leading to this mess, not the middle class workers. Hostess is a great example of what should be a very profitable business being tanked by idiot management choices. As for Michigan, the line workers didn't design the {censored}ty cars that can't compete against the Asian models, they just follow instructions. I think an unwillingness to innovate because things had been so good for so long without any challenge to change and innovate (along with a lack of investment) has caused the market to stagnate. I think more companies need to look at bringing a sense of collaboration to their enterprises to incite more innovation, seeing as how the top-down model is causing less skilled and dedicated workers (and will ironically cause a lack of efficiency and innovation).

 

oh {censored}, told by a canadian.

 

 

marshallnoise, hand in your USA credentials. you are now an immigrant. a man with no country.

[Ovid9]

oh {censored}, told by a canadian. marshallnoise, hand in your USA credentials. you are now an immigrant. a man with no country.

 

[Ovid9]

oh {censored}, told by a canadian. marshallnoise, hand in your USA credentials. you are now an immigrant. a man with no country.

[Stevetemp]

Ever thought that maybe the woes of the economy here aren't the fault of the unions, but poor management practices? I seem to recall our finest on Wall St and Bay St making some pretty {censored}ty decisions four years ago leading to this mess, not the middle class workers. Hostess is a great example of what should be a very profitable business being tanked by idiot management choices. As for Michigan, the line workers didn't design the {censored}ty cars that can't compete against the Asian models, they just follow instructions. I think an unwillingness to innovate because things had been so good for so long without any challenge to change and innovate (along with a lack of investment) has caused the market to stagnate. I think more companies need to look at bringing a sense of collaboration to their enterprises to incite more innovation, seeing as how the top-down model is causing less skilled and dedicated workers (and will ironically cause a lack of efficiency and innovation).

 

Are you a committeeman by any chance?

 

 

A union member? Ever work in a UAW facility? Been involved in negotiations? A strike?

 

I'm just asking because you seem pretty smart....in fact maybe a lot smart. But the UAW....my friend...it's a different animal. Imma just saying. If you think for one second the union didn't demand high wages and benefits making those same {censored}ty cars quite expensive...you are kidding yourself. And that is only part of the story. Extremely powerful. So much so there was often little "negotiating", company just payed pretty much whatever the union wanted....plus unbelievable benefits and shop liberties. Does your company buy you shoes every year? That kind of thing for starters.

 

 

 

I only think that levity and fairness should be wielded here, right? You do make some good points though, sir.

 

 

(PS...also not saying the unions were not ESSENTIAL, at one point, to the ENTIRE country's workforce. So don't even go there)

[SteveiJobzz]

I don't buy that drinking on the job BS. That is a {censored}ing huge ass OSHA fine. No company would take that risk, no matter what the union tried to do.

 

I worked at the power company this summer and I was an IBEW member. The unions are pretty powerful and they keep a LOT of incompetent people their jobs, but I saw no less than 7 people fired in a 3 month span for safety violations and the union couldn't do jack about it. If you put someone's safety in danger, no union will keep you your job.

[Stonedtone]

The whole point of this bill is to ALLOW people to take lower wages. Some people can't see the big picture.

 

That's all of it. Same GOP strategy to harm mid class

[Eschatologist]

Are you a committeeman by any chance? A union member? Ever work in a UAW facility? Been involved in negotiations? A strike? I'm just asking because you seem pretty smart....in fact maybe a lot smart. But the UAW....my friend...it's a different animal. Imma just saying. If you think for one second the union didn't demand high wages and benefits making those same {censored}ty cars quite expensive...you are kidding yourself. And that is only part of the story. Extremely powerful. So much so there was often little "negotiating", company just payed pretty much whatever the union wanted....plus unbelievable benefits and shop liberties. Does your company buy you shoes every year? That kind of thing for starters. I only think that levity and fairness should be wielded here, right? You do make some good points though, sir. (PS...also not saying the unions were not ESSENTIAL, at one point, to the ENTIRE country's workforce. So don't even go there)

 

I am VP of my local (Elementary Teachers of Ontario), and coincidentally I am going on strike tomorrow over our problems here. Our government introduced legislation in September that restricts our collective bargaining.

 

I don't apologize for the excesses of other labour organizations, right now there's enough blame and finger-pointing to go around, that's always the case in hard times. I don't know what the average UAW labourer makes, I tend to be cautious about numbers thrown around by the media since they tend to be inflated. I'm sure they make a comfortable living because that's the point! Why else would you organize if not to make middle class folks a little bit more comfortable and less cash in the CEOs and board members. Do unionists look for the best deals for their members? Absolutely, that's their job and that's why I pay {censored}loads of dues! But every benefit they have was given by the corporate negotiators (the government sure as {censored} didn't step in and force them to pay medical or long term disability benefits!), so why not blame them for mismanagement? If members get free shoes for useless reasons, blame the corporate negotiating team for giving in to that. The idea that a union can just go on strike at any time over excessive greed is nonsense; why would we risk going out when we could lose any gains through job action? Furthermore, all decisions and executives in a union are elected, and most unions are far more transparent with funds and their decision making processes than any corporation or government for that matter. The last point I'd make is that unions do raise the standard for all over private companies, it's true across all professional fields. Private companies will raise their compensation packages to remain competitive, otherwise they'll risk bleeding their workers to other companies. Lastly, unions are at the forefront of promoting social justice and progression for all people. We do tons of outreach work in the community, charity and non-partisan lobbying for things like poverty and equal rights. This last point is a largely-hush reason why rich social conservatives really want to see unions crushed.

 

I don't proclaim unions to be free of scandal and excess, but I honestly believe restricting labour organization ultimately worsens, not bolsters, the economy. I know it is hard for non-unionized workers to see that, there is a huge feeling of resentment out there ("I don't have it, why should he?"), but the goal is always to organize and equalize the playing field for everyone. I know that's easier said than done, but...democracy is messy. Thanks for giving a serious response though, it's nice to have an intelligent and respectful response instead of "{censored} those greedy bastards" lol

[Eschatologist]

Are you a committeeman by any chance? A union member? Ever work in a UAW facility? Been involved in negotiations? A strike? I'm just asking because you seem pretty smart....in fact maybe a lot smart. But the UAW....my friend...it's a different animal. Imma just saying. If you think for one second the union didn't demand high wages and benefits making those same {censored}ty cars quite expensive...you are kidding yourself. And that is only part of the story. Extremely powerful. So much so there was often little "negotiating", company just payed pretty much whatever the union wanted....plus unbelievable benefits and shop liberties. Does your company buy you shoes every year? That kind of thing for starters. I only think that levity and fairness should be wielded here, right? You do make some good points though, sir. (PS...also not saying the unions were not ESSENTIAL, at one point, to the ENTIRE country's workforce. So don't even go there)

 

I am VP of my local (Elementary Teachers of Ontario), and coincidentally I am going on strike tomorrow over our problems here. Our government introduced legislation in September that restricts our collective bargaining.

 

I don't apologize for the excesses of other labour organizations, right now there's enough blame and finger-pointing to go around, that's always the case in hard times. I don't know what the average UAW labourer makes, I tend to be cautious about numbers thrown around by the media since they tend to be inflated. I'm sure they make a comfortable living because that's the point! Why else would you organize if not to make middle class folks a little bit more comfortable and less cash in the CEOs and board members. Do unionists look for the best deals for their members? Absolutely, that's their job and that's why I pay {censored}loads of dues! But every benefit they have was given by the corporate negotiators (the government sure as {censored} didn't step in and force them to pay medical or long term disability benefits!), so why not blame them for mismanagement? If members get free shoes for useless reasons, blame the corporate negotiating team for giving in to that. The idea that a union can just go on strike at any time over excessive greed is nonsense; why would we risk going out when we could lose any gains through job action? Furthermore, all decisions and executives in a union are elected, and most unions are far more transparent with funds and their decision making processes than any corporation or government for that matter. The last point I'd make is that unions do raise the standard for all over private companies, it's true across all professional fields. Private companies will raise their compensation packages to remain competitive, otherwise they'll risk bleeding their workers to other companies. Lastly, unions are at the forefront of promoting social justice and progression for all people. We do tons of outreach work in the community, charity and non-partisan lobbying for things like poverty and equal rights. This last point is a largely-hush reason why rich social conservatives really want to see unions crushed.

 

I don't proclaim unions to be free of scandal and excess, but I honestly believe restricting labour organization ultimately worsens, not bolsters, the economy. I know it is hard for non-unionized workers to see that, there is a huge feeling of resentment out there ("I don't have it, why should he?"), but the goal is always to organize and equalize the playing field for everyone. I know that's easier said than done, but...democracy is messy. Thanks for giving a serious response though, it's nice to have an intelligent and respectful response instead of "{censored} those greedy bastards" lol

[eyeball987]

 

I don't buy that drinking on the job BS. That is a {censored}ing huge ass OSHA fine. No company would take that risk, no matter what the union tried to do.

 

 

I wouldn't either if I didn't hear it first hand from actual employees. Also from the recent Chrysler rehire of the employees busted on camera. It's almost to unreal to even comprehend for me but the facts are there.

 

I used to work for a company with union mechanics. Whenever there was a grievance, which happened fairly often for usually the most ridiculous of reasons, an overweight aging man in a track suit would show up in a big black Cadillac as the union rep. Organized crime ties? Historically, it has happened. YMMV.

[NeloAngelo]

 

I don't buy that drinking on the job BS. That is a {censored}ing huge ass OSHA fine. No company would take that risk, no matter what the union tried to do.

 

go ANYWHERE that reposts news online. you'll find the story with video. they had been out of jobs for something like 2 years, and it was overturned recently.

[eyeball987]

On another note, I will say that execs are vastly overpaid and tend to live in their own version of "organized white collar crime".

[Stonedtone]

Recall the lying bastard

[***1776***]

Unions were needed at 1 time many moons ago ---- fastfoward to current times and Unions are now greedy and power hungry and INNEFICIENT summmbitches


Good for the states trying to fix some of the issues in these states, just look at unions from blue states (California is a {censored}ing disgrace), the unions have the stateiover the barrel with legacy costs, my own county where i live has BIG BIG legacy costs due to sweetheart deals from politicians.


Honestly the Unions dont give 2 {censored}s about any fiscal issues with the states or taxes, they really dont! ----- there motto is "{censored} you, pay me"...



And thats sad but, true

[Gary Cohn]

 

Originally Posted by TheRymanChu

The unions spent decades of blood, sweat and tears to make the gains to advance the quality of life, pay and work conditions for the average american worker. The Koch brothers and their money have been able to erase many of these gains in a few simple years, as Americans sit back and watch their power to negotiate slip away. Apathy at the voting booth is eroding worker's rights as we sit idly by and watch it happen. In a few more decades it will take another generation willing to fight, years to regain the loses fought so hard for and so easily given up. I will remind you that American production and profits are at an all-time high. People are working longer hours for less pay, and the Republican establishments are taking rights away, by instilling a belief that America is faltering at the hands of the middle class and union members. No doubt, Michigan's economy is faltering as foreign companies choose to set up shop where they can pay less. Lower wages are never beneficial to anyone but shareholders and top executives. I submit that we have an artificially created seller's market for employment, because companies are not hiring or even laying off in the face of record profits. This is turn is perpetuating a recession to which companies can point to, to continue their behavior. I have a grand idea: hire, raise wages and benefits and let's see if the economy turns around.

 

lol

[marshallnoise]

 

Originally Posted by Eschatologist

I am VP of my local (Elementary Teachers of Ontario), and coincidentally I am going on strike tomorrow over our problems here. Our government introduced legislation in September that restricts our collective bargaining.

I don't apologize for the excesses of other labour organizations, right now there's enough blame and finger-pointing to go around, that's always the case in hard times. I don't know what the average UAW labourer makes, I tend to be cautious about numbers thrown around by the media since they tend to be inflated. I'm sure they make a comfortable living because that's the point! Why else would you organize if not to make middle class folks a little bit more comfortable and less cash in the CEOs and board members. Do unionists look for the best deals for their members? Absolutely, that's their job and that's why I pay {censored}loads of dues! But every benefit they have was given by the corporate negotiators (the government sure as {censored} didn't step in and force them to pay medical or long term disability benefits!), so why not blame them for mismanagement? If members get free shoes for useless reasons, blame the corporate negotiating team for giving in to that. The idea that a union can just go on strike at any time over excessive greed is nonsense; why would we risk going out when we could lose any gains through job action? Furthermore, all decisions and executives in a union are elected, and most unions are far more transparent with funds and their decision making processes than any corporation or government for that matter. The last point I'd make is that unions do raise the standard for all over private companies, it's true across all professional fields. Private companies will raise their compensation packages to remain competitive, otherwise they'll risk bleeding their workers to other companies. Lastly, unions are at the forefront of promoting social justice and progression for all people. We do tons of outreach work in the community, charity and non-partisan lobbying for things like poverty and equal rights. This last point is a largely-hush reason why rich social conservatives really want to see unions crushed.

I don't proclaim unions to be free of scandal and excess, but I honestly believe restricting labour organization ultimately worsens, not bolsters, the economy. I know it is hard for non-unionized workers to see that, there is a huge feeling of resentment out there ("I don't have it, why should he?"), but the goal is always to organize and equalize the playing field for everyone. I know that's easier said than done, but...democracy is messy. Thanks for giving a serious response though, it's nice to have an intelligent and respectful response instead of "{censored} those greedy bastards" lol

 

I fail to see how allowing a worker to opt out of a union membership is infringing on the right of a union to exist.

It seems your government is trying to make ends meet and unions not wanting to realize that fact and holding fast to unsustainable deals is exactly the same kind of greed you would accuse executives of huge corporations of. Two sides of the exact same coin if you ask me.

Unions try to create a communist utopia in its own microcosm. All the language is there: Fairness, equality, higher wages for same work load, all workers benefit, etc.

And to answer your other comment:

 

Originally Posted by Eschatologist

 

Ever thought that maybe the woes of the economy here aren't the fault of the unions, but poor management practices? I seem to recall our finest on Wall St and Bay St making some pretty {censored}ty decisions four years ago leading to this mess, not the middle class workers. Hostess is a great example of what should be a very profitable business being tanked by idiot management choices. As for Michigan, the line workers didn't design the {censored}ty cars that can't compete against the Asian models, they just follow instructions. I think an unwillingness to innovate because things had been so good for so long without any challenge to change and innovate (along with a lack of investment) has caused the market to stagnate. I think more companies need to look at bringing a sense of collaboration to their enterprises to incite more innovation, seeing as how the top-down model is causing less skilled and dedicated workers (and will ironically cause a lack of efficiency and innovation).

 

Woes of the economy aren't held only on the shoulders of the unions, and I never implied that. Too much government involvement and too much union collusion is to blame for our economic woes. Chrysler is largely held by Fiatnow but was originally 55% owned by the UAW. One of GM's largest stock holders is the US Taxpayer. Did you know that President's Day in the US was moved from being on George Washington's birthday to the 3rd Monday in February by the government employee unions demands? They get to write their own rules while the rest of us do not. Uniform Monday Act They get to vote themselves a pay check and better benefits while the rest of us do not.

The Community Reinvestment Act in the US was enacted by Jimmy Carter and ramped up under Clinton. Bankers were legislatively forced to make subprime (aka, inherently risky) loans under penalty of law. When warnings about the FHA, Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac were brought up, there was nothing but

. Banks might have been accomplices, sure, but none of it would have happened if

hadn't decided that the American Dream universally included home ownership.

It is super easy to sit from the VP position of a union and expect the government to keep paying and providing benefits no matter what. It is also easy to sit from a VP position at the UAW and demand high wages for less work while telling management to just {censored}ing find a way to keep the unionized hogs fed at the trough and never actually participate in the innovation & R&D that is required to move the company along.

So the businesses do innovate; they move their operations out of unionized {censored}holes. If the government will let them that is. Fortunately for Boeing, they were able to make the move.

When people realize that unionization has become a method to rig the system in one's favor, unions will finally die.

[Gary Cohn]

Unions

lol

[Rear Naked]

 

Originally Posted by Stonedtone

That's all of it. Same GOP strategy to harm mid class

 

That is pretty much the opposite of what I meant

[HKSblade1]

 

Originally Posted by eyeball987

Chrysler just had to rehire 13 union workers fired a couple years ago for getting caught on tape drinking 40's and smoking pot at lunch for 10 days in a row by a news reporter. Union arbitration.

Here in Northern Ohio, a worker was killed at the GM plant in June after getting crushed by a crane operators mistake. As far as I know, the operator was never tested for drugs or booze because he immediately said he had a problem and needed rehab. He is now back to work. Union protection.

I have had family members that have worked at Ford plants where it is very common to drink all day at work. They started to frown upon that so bars opened up directly outside the plant gates. Those bars are packed at every lunch break and shift change. The workers leave the bar and go directly back to work. Union again.

Just saying.

 

This is imo where the Unions {censored}ing fail. They should not protect workers who abuse substances while on the job.

Why have US automakers and other manufacturers lost the edge? For those same reasons above. As many know here and I have said, I grew up in a UAW household. I have two brothers UAW as well as my father who retired. They consistently bragged about work stoppages, {censored}ing up parts on purpose to take more breaks. Mgt took issue with them but all they did was call their stewards.

While my old man was playing cards with his buddies and getting $24/hr plus OT, US cars were turning into pieces of {censored}. Sales {censored}ing fell, the whole "we put our blood sweat and tears" into those things proved worthless in the marketplace.

I worked at a TV shop right down the street from the Chevy plant where my brothers and my dad and his union friends worked. Beverage stores and bars opened at 9AM. You would see many GM employees drunk off their ass, but headed right back to the factory. My dad used to punch their time cards for them and brag.

Of course, my dad was not keen on my opinion of his union ideology. My Dad said of late, what about the come back?? I said it's called scaling back 2/3 of your 70's workforce and having automation replace a lot of those workers. It's called not marketing 8 versions of the same car under as many divisions with just with different headlights and interiors. What the competitors did with automation and less employees, GM and Ford learned to adopt the same procedures in their manufacturing business. Foreign co's have not experienced the rash of retirees that will have to accounted for in their pricing structures.

IMO, unions were fine and a necessity until they started protecting individual workers that cared less about their jobs or the products they created.

[Rock Hardness]

I just got home from my job, and am to tired to read this thread, so let me just say

{censored} YOU!!!!!

[marshallnoise]

 

Originally Posted by Rock Hardness

I just got home from my job, and am to tired to read this thread, so let me just say

{censored} YOU!!!!!

 

Bitter?

[Krank'N]

Many folks died for labor rights. Some on here are just repeating the FOX media BS without actually looking into historical facts. In michigan ,Henry Ford hired a private police force that killed striking workers. This is the same Ford who thought Hitler was a great guy!. You are not forced to join the unions(thats a federal law) however you are still given union rights and protections under all circumstances. This right to work (for less) law just allows the leeches to not pay for those services. This is the UNITED states of america and Gov Sheisster and his tea-baggers will answer to the voters for this bill.

[Booker]

 

Originally Posted by Eschatologist

I am VP of my local (Elementary Teachers of Ontario), and coincidentally I am going on strike tomorrow over our problems here. Our government introduced legislation in September that restricts our collective bargaining.

I don't apologize for the excesses of other labour organizations, right now there's enough blame and finger-pointing to go around, that's always the case in hard times. I don't know what the average UAW labourer makes, I tend to be cautious about numbers thrown around by the media since they tend to be inflated. I'm sure they make a comfortable living because that's the point! Why else would you organize if not to make middle class folks a little bit more comfortable and less cash in the CEOs and board members. Do unionists look for the best deals for their members? Absolutely, that's their job and that's why I pay {censored}loads of dues! But every benefit they have was given by the corporate negotiators (the government sure as {censored} didn't step in and force them to pay medical or long term disability benefits!), so why not blame them for mismanagement? If members get free shoes for useless reasons, blame the corporate negotiating team for giving in to that. The idea that a union can just go on strike at any time over excessive greed is nonsense; why would we risk going out when we could lose any gains through job action? Furthermore, all decisions and executives in a union are elected, and most unions are far more transparent with funds and their decision making processes than any corporation or government for that matter. The last point I'd make is that unions do raise the standard for all over private companies, it's true across all professional fields. Private companies will raise their compensation packages to remain competitive, otherwise they'll risk bleeding their workers to other companies. Lastly, unions are at the forefront of promoting social justice and progression for all people. We do tons of outreach work in the community, charity and non-partisan lobbying for things like poverty and equal rights. This last point is a largely-hush reason why rich social conservatives really want to see unions crushed.

I don't proclaim unions to be free of scandal and excess, but I honestly believe restricting labour organization ultimately worsens, not bolsters, the economy. I know it is hard for non-unionized workers to see that, there is a huge feeling of resentment out there ("I don't have it, why should he?"), but the goal is always to organize and equalize the playing field for everyone. I know that's easier said than done, but...democracy is messy. Thanks for giving a serious response though, it's nice to have an intelligent and respectful response instead of "{censored} those greedy bastards" lol

 

Very well said

[Stevetemp]

 

Originally Posted by SteveiJobzz

I don't buy that drinking on the job BS. That is a {censored}ing huge ass OSHA fine. No company would take that risk, no matter what the union tried to do.

I worked at the power company this summer and I was an IBEW member. The unions are pretty powerful and they keep a LOT of incompetent people their jobs, but I saw no less than 7 people fired in a 3 month span for safety violations and the union couldn't do jack about it. If you put someone's safety in danger, no union will keep you your job.

 

There's VERY little drinking at the facility. The story referenced here, I believe, involves going out on breaks/lunch to a park. I also know...for a FACT...the workers have arrived drunk, sent home for three days, appeal to the union, get those days paid, and come back to work.

I am not saying this, in and of itself, is enough to ruin a car company...but it might be enough to ruin a few cars (= lemon ?), and call into question the authority of the company. Who's running the show here?