| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What Makes a Political Liberal
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... Unions may have had a place in society at one time, but they are not counterproductive. All they do is breed nepotism and interfere with free competition. How is it that someone who moves boxes around on a dock can make as much as I make with two degrees and state licensure as a Forensic Engineer? Granted, cost of living has some factor, but explain to me how the two jobs are of equal worth. Unskilled labor vs. technical and legal analysis. Huh? What happened to free competition. ? If the box movers can convince society that their services are worth more than Forensic Engineers, more power to them. Naturally, jealous Forensic Engineers will disagree. By the way, some of those guys "moving boxes" (longshore work is far more technical and dangerous than that, btw) probably have more education than many engineers. Some of them used to have white collar jobs, before "free competition" prevailed and the guys working for $2/hour US in Russia or India won the engineering and accounting jobs. Where I live, you can't do random drug testing at the fire dept. because the union won't allow it. Some stoned jackass is going to kill somebody one of these days as a direct result of union policy. When that happens, the jackass and his two immediate supervisors should be fired- or maybe jailed. You can't sit around the firehouse and get stoned without somebody knowing about it. You might find it surprising, but pee tests are almost TOTALLY defeatable. There's an OTC product called "Clean Pee" that works almost 100 percent of the time. (It's probably even sold in drug stores that require their new hires to take a pee test). For $10 bucks, a clean and sober buddy will pee in the cup for you, or pee into a test tube you cap and take into the restroom. Why would this be news to a guy working in forensics? Why do unions cry every time someone wants to put a job out for competitive bid? Because they can't compete. They are a burden to society, and anyone who is in a union is supporting the ideals, making them leftist by association. Who hires Forensic Engineers? Sounds like a civil service job to me. If so, good thing *you* are required to submit a competitive bid every time an opportunity to ply your trade arises. That should keep your income suitably suppressed. We wouldn't want some government agency to guarantee you a certain annual income and benefits (all at taxpayers expense) along with some measure of protection against unjust or politically motivated firing... those things might discourage free competition for *your* job, and make you a leftist by association. Seen on a bumper sticker: "Unions, The people who brought you the weekend." I have yet to see a lib who is anti union. Coincidence? So exactly why are you such a strong union supporter Chuck? Because you are a lib? And just how have the unions improved the lives of workers in the 21st century? Why should all union workers get the same pay increases despite their contributions to the company? Why should slackers get the same as the go-getters? What do the unions do with all those dues that members blindly pay every week? Just a few of my questions. Take you time in answering them. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
What Makes a Political Liberal
I have yet to see a lib who is anti union. Coincidence?
So exactly why are you such a strong union supporter Chuck? Because you are a lib? Because I believe stongly in reaching agreement through negotiation. Negotiation is only meaningful between two parties with equal power. If the average worker were sent to report,, individually, to a comittee of suits and explain why he thought he deserved a certain income, there would be no equity in power. The management would be in a position to influence the worker far more than an individual worker could ever influence the management. And just how have the unions improved the lives of workers in the 21st century? Puhleeze. The 21st century is two years old already. Let's look at the 20th, and compare the average worker's workweek, health benefits, standard of living, etc in 1900 vs. 1999. If you see no difference, you will never see any benefit that was provided by unions. The changes were not brought about by the magnificent generosity of employers. Unions haven't "held back" improved conditions that employers have been desperate to provide. Why should all union workers get the same pay increases despite their contributions to the company? Why should slackers get the same as the go-getters? It's called the principle of collective bargaining. All the workers, together, negotiate more powerfully. The majority of workers voluntarily agree to accept a common pay rate. The go-getters are rewarded more than the slackers. The go-getters are more likely to be promoted into management, (where they will be free of the union influence.) :-) Management has done the same thing for decades, with "Associations." A group of steel mills, mining companies, shipping companies, etc. band together to try to keep wages suppressed. When all the employers in an industry make a common wage offer to the employees, is that "leftism", or just "good business"? Why should the companies with lousy working environments get by with paying as little as companies with more progressive management? What do the unions do with all those dues that members blindly pay every week? Run the union business office. Fund a union retirement plan for union workers. Pay union death and disability benefits to the families of workers killed or injured on the job. Lobby for pro-labor legislation, just as management lobbies for anti-labor laws. Any union member is free to ask for an accounting of union income and expense. Just a few of my questions. Take you time in answering them. No time needed. Next time, try to think up some tough ones. :-) |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
What Makes a Political Liberal
"noah" wrote in message ... On 08 Aug 2003 00:28:19 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote: I have yet to see a lib who is anti union. Coincidence? So exactly why are you such a strong union supporter Chuck? Because you are a lib? Because I believe stongly in reaching agreement through negotiation. Negotiation is only meaningful between two parties with equal power. If the average worker were sent to report,, individually, to a comittee of suits and explain why he thought he deserved a certain income, there would be no equity in power. The management would be in a position to influence the worker far more than an individual worker could ever influence the management. And just how have the unions improved the lives of workers in the 21st century? Puhleeze. The 21st century is two years old already. Let's look at the 20th, and compare the average worker's workweek, health benefits, standard of living, etc in 1900 vs. 1999. If you see no difference, you will never see any benefit that was provided by unions. The changes were not brought about by the magnificent generosity of employers. Unions haven't "held back" improved conditions that employers have been desperate to provide. Why should all union workers get the same pay increases despite their contributions to the company? Why should slackers get the same as the go-getters? It's called the principle of collective bargaining. All the workers, together, negotiate more powerfully. The majority of workers voluntarily agree to accept a common pay rate. The go-getters are rewarded more than the slackers. The go-getters are more likely to be promoted into management, (where they will be free of the union influence.) :-) Management has done the same thing for decades, with "Associations." A group of steel mills, mining companies, shipping companies, etc. band together to try to keep wages suppressed. When all the employers in an industry make a common wage offer to the employees, is that "leftism", or just "good business"? Why should the companies with lousy working environments get by with paying as little as companies with more progressive management? What do the unions do with all those dues that members blindly pay every week? Run the union business office. Fund a union retirement plan for union workers. Pay union death and disability benefits to the families of workers killed or injured on the job. Lobby for pro-labor legislation, just as management lobbies for anti-labor laws. Any union member is free to ask for an accounting of union income and expense. Just a few of my questions. Take you time in answering them. No time needed. Next time, try to think up some tough ones. :-) When you're good, you're damned good.  )My previous job (14 years) was management. I was laid off, and took a temporary job in a construction crew in my field. It has been a long time since I went home that tired. Any management or professional jackass that thinks that blue collar workers "push boxes around", doesn't have a clue. Most "professionals" (in my experience) are far removed from the reality of hard work. Egotism and stupidity set in, and the "whine" is heard from coast to coast. I know it's cliche, but every "anti-union whiner" should slip on a pair of steel-toed mocassins and try to keep up. They couldn't. What the heck does being able to do a hard days work have to do with unions? I worked as a garbage collector for 2 summers and as a factory worker for 3 summers in high school and college. Hard work. Long days. No union. Imagine that. But I can tell you countless stories of auto workers (union) sleeping on the job. But we won't get into that, OK? It's interesting to me that you don't hear union or labor workers begrudging the life-style of management or professionals, but the reverse is not true. They don't have a clue, and don't want one. It would upset their lifestyle. Exactly where did anyone begrudge the lifestyles of union workers? The next time your toilet doesn't flush, your car won't start, or you want to build an office building- call your proctologist. Maybe he can help, but he's not cheap. Actually I will call a non union plumber, mechanic or GC. I will get good work at a fair price. Are you a union worker Noah? Did I strike a nerve? |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
What Makes a Political Liberal
noah wrote:
My previous job (14 years) was management. I was laid off, and took a temporary job in a construction crew in my field. It has been a long time since I went home that tired. Any management or professional jackass that thinks that blue collar workers "push boxes around", doesn't have a clue. That's all that many do. While "pushing boxes around", may be overly simplistic, it does underscore the depth of education and knowlege the typical worker needs to have. It's the difference between working with your mind, and working with your body. Since far more people can work with their body, than can work with their minds, there is a greater demand (And hence a higher salary paid) for professionals. Most "professionals" (in my experience) are far removed from the reality of hard work. The term "Hard work" is subjective. Why should the degree of "difficulty" only be defined by physical parameters? Egotism and stupidity set in, and the "whine" is heard from coast to coast. This sounds like an opinion based on a personal bias, rather than an objecive observation. I know it's cliche, but every "anti-union whiner" should slip on a pair of steel-toed mocassins and try to keep up. They couldn't. And conversely, I would wager that a much higher percentage of blue collar workers could not even begin to fathom the job of a professional. Tell me honestly, would it be easier for a brain surgeon to sub on a construction crew, or the opposite? It's interesting to me that you don't hear union or labor workers begrudging the life-style of management or professionals, but the reverse is not true. That's funny, when I worked at my one and only union job, I was constantly exposed to the "Us vs. Them" attitude of the workers as compared to management. Many of the "rank and file" would make all sort of groundless comments about what they thought management did to earn their money, and how they "flaunted" it in front of the workers. They don't have a clue, and don't want one. It would upset their lifestyle. You really need to come to terms with your bitterness. It's clouding your objectivity. The next time your toilet doesn't flush, your car won't start, I'll get out the tools and fix it myself. Such is the advantage of having a multitude of skills. Dave |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
What Makes a Political Liberal
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... I have yet to see a lib who is anti union. Coincidence? So exactly why are you such a strong union supporter Chuck? Because you are a lib? Because I believe stongly in reaching agreement through negotiation. Negotiation is only meaningful between two parties with equal power. If the average worker were sent to report,, individually, to a comittee of suits and explain why he thought he deserved a certain income, there would be no equity in power. The management would be in a position to influence the worker far more than an individual worker could ever influence the management. I guess you don't have too much faith in your abilities or you are just a poor performer. I have never had a problem negotiating pay increases based on my contributions. Most hard workers who contribute to the bottom line do not have problems either. They negotiate one on one based on their skills and contributions. Unions lead to mediocrity. Why work hard or perform over and beyond? You will get the same pay increase no matter what. And just how have the unions improved the lives of workers in the 21st century? Puhleeze. The 21st century is two years old already. So how have they improved the lives of the workers in the 21st century? And Chuck, don't tell anyone but it is actually 2.5 years old. Let's look at the 20th, and compare the average worker's workweek, health benefits, standard of living, etc in 1900 vs. 1999. If you see no difference, you will never see any benefit that was provided by unions. The changes were not brought about by the magnificent generosity of employers. Unions haven't "held back" improved conditions that employers have been desperate to provide. Continue living in the past Chuck. Not me though. But if you want to, provide some facts on how the unions have improved the lives of workers in the late 20th century, say from 1985 on. Why should all union workers get the same pay increases despite their contributions to the company? Why should slackers get the same as the go-getters? It's called the principle of collective bargaining. All the workers, together, negotiate more powerfully. The majority of workers voluntarily agree to accept a common pay rate. The go-getters are rewarded more than the slackers. The go-getters are more likely to be promoted into management, (where they will be free of the union influence.) :-) And the collective bargaining leads to lower productivity and mediocrity. If you need it, fine. Most people with skills and talent don't need a group to bargain for them. Management has done the same thing for decades, with "Associations." A group of steel mills, mining companies, shipping companies, etc. band together to try to keep wages suppressed. When all the employers in an industry make a common wage offer to the employees, is that "leftism", or just "good business"? Why should the companies with lousy working environments get by with paying as little as companies with more progressive management? What do the unions do with all those dues that members blindly pay every week? Run the union business office. Fund a union retirement plan for union workers. Pay union death and disability benefits to the families of workers killed or injured on the job. Lobby for pro-labor legislation, just as management lobbies for anti-labor laws. Any union member is free to ask for an accounting of union income and expense. You forgot the part about padding their pockets. That is where most of the money goes. Just a few of my questions. Take you time in answering them. No time needed. Next time, try to think up some tough ones. :-) Perhaps if you took your time you could have provided some better answers. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
What Makes a Political Liberal
I guess you don't have too much faith in your abilities or you are just a
poor performer. Wouldn't know. For 90% of my career to date I have been either self employed or in management. I haven't worked for wages since 1973. My income has always been from partnership and corporate income, royalties, sales commissions, rents, etc. How well do I do? Let's just say I routinely make subtantially more than those folks who "move boxes around." Very few people can do what I have done, and can do, to earn a living. I personally don't need a union, but others might. WE should all be aware of what needs may be present in society beyond our own personal sphere. Look at your next two paragraphs and consider how they unintentionally contradict one another: I have never had a problem negotiating pay increases based on my contributions. Most hard workers who contribute to the bottom line do not have problems either. They negotiate one on one based on their skills and contributions. Unions lead to mediocrity. Why work hard or perform over and beyond? You will get the same pay increase no matter what. In one paragraph you detail how you take pride in doing a good job and making a contribution. In the next, you surmise that union workers are incapable of being motivated by the same factors. And the collective bargaining leads to lower productivity and mediocrity. If you need it, fine. Most people with skills and talent don't need a group to bargain for them. Slave wages lead to low productivity, too. You forgot the part about padding their pockets. That is where most of the money goes. Got a specific example, or just a quick sound byte? Just a few of my questions. Take you time in answering them. No time needed. Next time, try to think up some tough ones. :-) Perhaps if you took your time you could have provided some better answers. And if Jesus, Buddha, and Vishnu all knocked on your front door and told you that unions have some useful purposes these days, you'd still remain unconvinced and take up atheism. :-) |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
What Makes a Political Liberal
gould,
there may be problems (much of them overhyped) with some unions in the modern economy. but, what our idealogical friends here fail to understand is that non-union blue collar labor needs the unions. for example, i live in houston and have friends that work as operators in the refineries. some are union, some are non-union......it depends on the refinery. "amazingly", total compensation is roughly the same between the two. i dont think this total compensation for non-union would stay constant or increase at the same rate/year if the union ceased to exist. of course, there is no way to really prove this, but it is a hunch i am inflicted with. im sure there are some in here that would beg to differ........and it is all theoretical. they would say the equal compensation is proof that unions are not required anymore. i disagree; i dont trust corporate management, and i think generally history is on my side. non-union wages would fall like a rock without the union setting the bar...... chris Subject: What Makes a Political Liberal From: (Gould 0738) Date: 8/7/03 7:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time Message-id: I guess you don't have too much faith in your abilities or you are just a poor performer. Wouldn't know. For 90% of my career to date I have been either self employed or in management. I haven't worked for wages since 1973. My income has always been from partnership and corporate income, royalties, sales commissions, rents, etc. How well do I do? Let's just say I routinely make subtantially more than those folks who "move boxes around." Very few people can do what I have done, and can do, to earn a living. I personally don't need a union, but others might. WE should all be aware of what needs may be present in society beyond our own personal sphere. Look at your next two paragraphs and consider how they unintentionally contradict one another: I have never had a problem negotiating pay increases based on my contributions. Most hard workers who contribute to the bottom line do not have problems either. They negotiate one on one based on their skills and contributions. Unions lead to mediocrity. Why work hard or perform over and beyond? You will get the same pay increase no matter what. In one paragraph you detail how you take pride in doing a good job and making a contribution. In the next, you surmise that union workers are incapable of being motivated by the same factors. And the collective bargaining leads to lower productivity and mediocrity. If you need it, fine. Most people with skills and talent don't need a group to bargain for them. Slave wages lead to low productivity, too. You forgot the part about padding their pockets. That is where most of the money goes. Got a specific example, or just a quick sound byte? Just a few of my questions. Take you time in answering them. No time needed. Next time, try to think up some tough ones. :-) Perhaps if you took your time you could have provided some better answers. And if Jesus, Buddha, and Vishnu all knocked on your front door and told you that unions have some useful purposes these days, you'd still remain unconvinced and take up atheism. :-) |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
What Makes a Political Liberal
Gould 0738 wrote:
I have yet to see a lib who is anti union. Coincidence? So exactly why are you such a strong union supporter Chuck? Because you are a lib? Because I believe stongly in reaching agreement through negotiation. Negotiation is only meaningful between two parties with equal power. If the average worker were sent to report,, individually, to a comittee of suits and explain why he thought he deserved a certain income, there would be no equity in power. The management would be in a position to influence the worker far more than an individual worker could ever influence the management. A valid concept. But like power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, such is the same in the union world. Where unions were once the savior of the worker, they are now the cancer of industry. There are many stories of industries (like steel) which have closed down thanks to the unions strangling unreasonable salaries and benefits from management, and preventing them from competing in the global economy. What good is it to be saying that you USED to be a $30/hr steelworker, who is BTW, unemployed now. And just how have the unions improved the lives of workers in the 21st century? Puhleeze. The 21st century is two years old already. Let's look at the 20th, and compare the average worker's workweek, health benefits, standard of living, etc in 1900 vs. 1999. There is a big difference if you split the last century in half. The first half of the century saw the union in its most favorable light. Equality for workers, and the establishment of labor standards which were eventually written into federal law. By the end of the second half of the century the union has pretty much outlived its original purpose, and its usefulness as well. Today, the union is nothing more than a bloated beaurocracy in itself. It preaches uniformity in work. Those who strive to do better, are "encouraged" to not "make the other guys look bad". Al the while the whole process of grievances, union stewards, and the like, do little more than allow the union to prevent the company from firing a worker who is unproductive. This is little more than a microcosm of socialism, which dos little more than foster an air of mediocrity. Today the union is little more than the bastion of unskilled labor. They are the last remnants of the industrial age, which has all but gone from this country (and people wonder why?). In the professional skilled trades, there is little need for a union, as the demand for skilled jobs usually exceeds the supply of qualified candidates. Companies actually compete with attractive salary and benefit packages in order to attract the brightest and best candidates. Why should all union workers get the same pay increases despite their contributions to the company? Why should slackers get the same as the go-getters? It's called the principle of collective bargaining. All the workers, together, negotiate more powerfully. The majority of workers voluntarily agree to accept a common pay rate. The go-getters are rewarded more than the slackers. And how is that exactly? You said it yourself, it's a "collective" bargaining unit. No stars are rewarded, and no slackers are punished. They all get a "common" (your words) pay grade. The go-getters are more likely to be promoted into management, (where they will be free of the union influence.) :-) It used to be a common joke among union workers, that the best way for a company to get rid of someone, was to promote them to management ;-). Management has done the same thing for decades, with "Associations." A group of steel mills, mining companies, shipping companies, etc. band together to try to keep wages suppressed. Actually they just try to stifle competition, in oprder to keep prices up. Sort of like OPEC. When all the employers in an industry make a common wage offer to the employees, is that "leftism", or just "good business"? That depends on which side of the table that you're on. I tend to look at it as "dirty pool". Competition is one of the key pieces of a free market economy. Dave |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
What Makes a Political Liberal
Apologies in advance for responding to Gould in Jim's response - Gould is
already filtered but I can't let some of his uninformed responses go unanswered... "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... Unions may have had a place in society at one time, but they are not counterproductive. All they do is breed nepotism and interfere with free competition. How is it that someone who moves boxes around on a dock can make as much as I make with two degrees and state licensure as a Forensic Engineer? Granted, cost of living has some factor, but explain to me how the two jobs are of equal worth. Unskilled labor vs. technical and legal analysis. Huh? What happened to free competition. ? If the box movers can convince society that their services are worth more than Forensic Engineers, more power to them. Naturally, jealous Forensic Engineers will disagree. By the way, some of those guys "moving boxes" (longshore work is far more technical and dangerous than that, btw) probably have more education than many engineers. Some of them used to have white collar jobs, before "free competition" prevailed and the guys working for $2/hour US in Russia or India won the engineering and accounting jobs. No. my problem was the fact that the longshoremen making 90K a year were fighting the implementation of the technology used by UPS and FedEx every day - a lot of their practices are yesterday's technology. In addition, I don't think it was a coincidenct that the timing of the work stoppage coincided with election time... Where I live, you can't do random drug testing at the fire dept. because the union won't allow it. Some stoned jackass is going to kill somebody one of these days as a direct result of union policy. When that happens, the jackass and his two immediate supervisors should be fired- or maybe jailed. You can't sit around the firehouse and get stoned without somebody knowing about it. You might find it surprising, but pee tests are almost TOTALLY defeatable. There's an OTC product called "Clean Pee" that works almost 100 percent of the time. (It's probably even sold in drug stores that require their new hires to take a pee test). For $10 bucks, a clean and sober buddy will pee in the cup for you, or pee into a test tube you cap and take into the restroom. Why would this be news to a guy working in forensics? Exactly the reason that I don't even acknowlege urine tests - I use blood evidence. The fact that you talk about them as if they would be used in a forensic investigation shows that you are the one who does not know procedures. Blood evidence is required, and immediately after the incident or at random if applicable. And BTW, one of the firemen has a patch growing in his yard, and everyone at the firehouse knows about it, but no one will do anything about it... Why do unions cry every time someone wants to put a job out for competitive bid? Because they can't compete. They are a burden to society, and anyone who is in a union is supporting the ideals, making them leftist by association. Who hires Forensic Engineers? Sounds like a civil service job to me. If so, good thing *you* are required to submit a competitive bid every time an opportunity to ply your trade arises. That should keep your income suitably suppressed. We wouldn't want some government agency to guarantee you a certain annual income and benefits (all at taxpayers expense) along with some measure of protection against unjust or politically motivated firing... those things might discourage free competition for *your* job, and make you a leftist by association. Attorneys, insurance companies, and large corporations are my primary clients, although I will occasionally work for an individual if they want to foot the bill. And yes, I also do work for many government agencies and municipalities. I am in the private sector, and woek 60 to 80 hours per week, thank you. And once again, you are showing your ignorance to the engineering practice. It is illegal for an entity to retain my services on the basis of price. Engineers are required to submit a statement of qualifications, and are chosen on that basis. Once the firm has been selected, then we negotiate a fee for services. Granted, I can't charge twice what my competitor does, but I will say that my firm is the most expensive in our region, and we still manage to hold an 80% market share. Furthermore, unions are not necessary for protection from unjust firings...there is federal legislation in place for that already, and our so-effective court system if you wish to pursue it in civil court... and for the record, yes I am a white collar worker now, with a salary and a bonus dependent on the company's profitability. I do not get raises or bonuses on the basis of a predetermined schedule (unions) and if I quit producing, I'm out on my can, as it should be...when others around me quit producing, I toss them out so they don't sponge my profits... however, I put myself through college, working 45 hours a week on average, doing things like roughnecking, road construction, concrete formwork, framing, and carpentry, so don't tell me I don't know what it's like to work for a living...what I do know is that it's the best motivation to get a white collar career... |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| OT The Conservative Brain | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
