|
someone educate me on labor unions
|
View this Thread in Original format
| rizen |
| one friend hates them while the other loves them. the friend thats them, says he got screwed, etc. I believe him, becuase his not all there, and not well educated, his union most likely took advantage of this. The friend that likes unions is very well educated, has had a nice job for the past 2yrs, makes good money (about two and half times more than minimum wage, which is $6.75) and has health/dentist insurance. I have no clue about unions, but would some info on them. google didnt help much :( |
|
|
| Shakka |
In theory they're good because they give power to the working man to stand up to the system. Gives collective bargaining power, leading to better wages/benefits, etc.
In reality, they're the scourge of the earth--run by ruthlessly corrupt people like Jimmy Hoffa of the Teamsters Union.
There are pros and cons. I tend to not view them favorably. |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
In theory they're good because they give power to the working man to stand up to the system. Gives collective bargaining power, leading to better wages/benefits, etc.
In reality, they're the scourge of the earth--run by ruthlessly corrupt people like Jimmy Hoffa of the Teamsters Union.
There are pros and cons. I tend to not view them favorably. |
I think that they were needed back in the 50s and 60s because they truly campaigned for the worker. Nowadays they can be just as bad and just as political as the companies they fight against. I think unions are generally a more European thing. However, even in Europe unions are losing more and more power as governments are making massive labor reforms in order to save money. |
|
|
| marcus82 |
i think it depends totally on the nature of the union...
i find that unions that serve private businesses screw you over big time...i mnean, i work part time and every pay check they take off 5 dollars at least (for union dues)!!! now, if they would negotiate better wages then i wouldn't really mind, but negotiating a wage deal that starts off 20 cents above minimum and changing raises from every 650 hours to every year is ridiculous!!!
however, my mom's union and my dad's union (both work for the gov't of ontario and gov't of toronto respectively) enjoy ridiculous coverage and benefits! my brother and i are covered 100% on all medical expenses till we are both 25!!! on top of that my mom get's 75 sick days!!!
so again, it depends on the union, most gov't jobs have great unions, while private sector union just suck ! |
|
|
| Shakka |
| I might add that the 75 days your mother gets for sick days maybe good for her, but is most likely not a good thing for overall productivity and efficiency--though there's not much the company can do about it since she's got a union contract. |
|
|
| DrummeRaver86 |
| Unions can be good, but they can always be hell. If you get someone stupid and corrupt making your decisions for you, you're screwed. Butif you have someone smart, clean and intelligent like the guy that heads up the Public Transportation Union in NYC that got them through that crisis, you should be okay. We can always rely on unions, tho, to cause some kind of trouble when they aren't gettin what they want...there's a sacrifice foe everything. You want the liberty of a union, you gotta deal with whatever they dish out. |
|
|
| rupert |
Studies have shown repeatedly, (in Australia at least) that employees that have Unions representing them in wage negotiations get better wage deals than employees who represent themselves in wage negotiations.
Unions are the equivalent of work insurance, you dont own a house without having home insurance and if you want protection at work, if you have a dispute with the employer without a Union you are on your own.
Although the saying is trite it is still true "United we bargain, divided we beg"
From an economic point of view Unions or the right to collective bargain is absolutely essential in alleviating or helping address income disparities which are very bad for the long term success of a society. Also by pushing wages up there is incentive on business to find means of improving productivity in other ways. |
|
|
| Heatscore |
I agree that unions don't really have a place in most of todays business sectors compared to back when North America was becoming industrialized and workers were exploited and made to feel thankful that they even had a job.
For the most part, unions represent equality between management and workers but they really don't see the 'big' picture when it comes to running a business. In the company I work for, I constantly have to deal with different unions with different attitudes towards the strategy of the business and I find that the unions are much like a business in themselves. They take a portion out of the employee's paycheque and more often than not, the employees don't get anything out of it. Our company treats employees fairly and has an open-book policy towards our national business practices, hence there's really no need for a union.
A lot of unions have become too powerful and too greedy, which has changed their sole purpose to self-perpetuation so that they can make more money from their "brothers" and "sisters". |
|
|
| DrummeRaver86 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Heatscore
I agree that unions don't really have a place in most of todays business sectors compared to back when North America was becoming industrialized and workers were exploited and made to feel thankful that they even had a job.
For the most part, unions represent equality between management and workers but they really don't see the 'big' picture when it comes to running a business. In the company I work for, I constantly have to deal with different unions with different attitudes towards the strategy of the business and I find that the unions are much like a business in themselves. They take a portion out of the employee's paycheque and more often than not, the employees don't get anything out of it. Our company treats employees fairly and has an open-book policy towards our national business practices, hence there's really no need for a union.
A lot of unions have become too powerful and too greedy, which has changed their sole purpose to self-perpetuation so that they can make more money from their "brothers" and "sisters". |
Agreed. The unions these days have a distorted view of what exactly a Union is. The problem is if anybody picks a fight with a union, they're ed. |
|
|
| Konijn Island |
It's a common fallacy that unions are no longer necessary in today's global, service-oriented economy (and yes, the bad rap that unions get is partially rooted in their own corruption and inefficiency).
Popular attitudes today, at least in America, tend to view unions as either a necessary evil or a completely useless anachronism--both negative viewpoints. One of my old co-workers succinctly summed up the attitude of the contemporary American worker by saying, "I can see why we need unions, but I believe that whatever I need I can ultimately get on my own."
Large-scale unions first appeared in America in the 1870s following the consolidation of the oil and steel industries by the 'robber barrons' of historical lore. After nearly two generations of violent and bloody confrontations, the unions won both official recognition and a series of concessions (the closed shop, collective bargaining, etc.) Many of these gains were short-lived as the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 pared many of them down. Government's anti-union collusion with big business reached its apotheosis when Reagan fired striking air-traffic controllers in 1981, dealing a crippling blow to union authority. Union membership has either stagnated or declined during the past twenty years with naturally comensurate losses in authority.
Unions, for a number of reasons--some their own fault, most a result of corporate American attitudes at large--have failed to make inroads among the service sector and have thus (wrongly) become associated with antiquated Industry.
Those who would write unions off into the dustbin of American history should consider the following. Enron collapses, taking not only thousands of jobs along with it, but wiping out the pensions that people had worked decades accumulating. Without union-protected pensions and backing, workers are left with little or no options in the face of corporate collapse. That same summer, longshoremen in California, backed by one of the most powerful unions in the country, wage a succesful strike that both industry and the bush administration tried to brake. Longshoremen, whose union-scale salaries have a median of $77,000, may not make as much as the upper echelons of Enron did, but they make decent money and more importantly keep their generous pensions intact.
Unions are vital and necessary because at the point of produxtion, they are the only thing standing between workers and the tenets of naked capitalism. Despite what my friend (most gung-ho Americans) thinks, he really can't get whatever he needs on his own--at least not in the long run and certainly not as long as workers operate within the vicissitudes of capitalist cycles.
I won't even mention the abstract benefits that unions bring (promoting cross-class unity, solidarity, brotherhood) except to say that countries with powerful traditions of unionism--many in western europe--also have a strong correlation toward democratic forms. |
|
|
| rupert |
| well said, a man after my own heart |
|
|
|
|
