Don't like Unions? I hope you'll be going to work tomorrow to support your opinion.

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Oct 28, 2005
2,980
25
0
40
www.myspace.com
#61
It's likely they made less.

This I dont understand also - wouldn't someone making more be more incentivized to work harder and get more done?

I think in some cases unionization leads to seniority and your ability to "get with the program" superceding the quality of work you perform.

Of course I've held the majority of my jobs in San Francisco - definitely a union stronghold and a city extremely deferential to bureacracy and whistle-blowing as opposed to results.
Bingo on the last half. For your first question....No. Have you not watched Office Space recently? Hard work that only results from a fear that, any day now, you could be fired....is not honest, hard work. It's fear-based. And generally, it tends to happen to people with a short supply of talent/resources, who would really have a tough time landing a similar job for a similar wage. Unfortunately, that statement applies to a large amount of Americans (myself included?), but that's another topic.

What leads people at Union jobs to work harder and "do the right thing" is when the Company shows an interest in its employees other than simply being capital equipment in human form. When you've got a company that stops paying for coffee, doesn't replace the broken microwave, takes away the water cooler, etc...but yet you look around and still see waste literally everywhere...where's the incentive to bust it out? Why should I be sweating bullets for what amounts to a $0 bonus for me, and who knows how much for management?

The same can be said for Teachers, Police Officers, Firefighters, and other Union employees that are far from "fat and lazy". If it were up to individual Teachers to negotiate their own salaries.....holy fuck. Talk about abuse. What would be the incentive to pay ANY teacher anywhere CLOSE to what they're worth? All the negotiators would have to do is repeatedly throw the "But don't you do it for the children?" line in their face over and over, until they finally caved. Washington would have an entire state of Teachers living in 1bd apartments with little/no job security. Is that really who you want teaching your children? People living paycheck to paycheck with no security whatsoever?

Didn't think so. You may not feel the same way about the people to build your roads, or ship your packages, or save you from burning buildings, but maybe you should. If you work "in business"--finance, accounting, stock market, etc.--then of course you don't need a Union. But for the rest of us, its a great option to have out there.
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
115
#62
i work at a union heavy job, and it's sickening to see the amount of fucking laziness from people who are basically stealing their money every day. taking fucking a cigarette pack's worth of breaks, every fucking day. i cannot wait to get out of there to a place that pays for performance, get that real cash.

unions can, and do, make businesses less profitable. unions make the end product for a business more expensive, adding labor costs. in a global economy, we cannot compete if the fat and lazy workers insist on being fat and lazy. there are mothafuckas in asia RIGHT NOW that are hungrier than you and i. and it's showing, and will continue showing for years to come.

unions, personally speaking, symbolize the bloated entitlement that has infected some Americans' mind sets. their purpose is nil in this day and age.
the same lazy fucks are wondering why all our jobs are outsourced to other countries. can you blame companies? why pay some douchebag 40 dollars an hour for subpar performance when you can get it for 38 cents an hour for someone that will bust their ass 18 hours a day.
 
Apr 25, 2002
5,314
2,065
113
42
#65
^meanwhile, we are losing jobs in America every day to countries who don't have to deal with unions and can produce a product significantly cheaper. You think corporate profits have fallen in that time period? Sure as hell not. But have we lost more jobs in Amercia during that time period? Bet your ass. So who is the dummy now?

What you people fail to realize is the corporations are smarter than you. They will stop using the US labor force as it becomes more expensive to do so. So while they continue to increase their profits, your ass aint gotta job. The companies who have to deal with unions, become extinct.
 

phil

Sicc OG
Apr 25, 2002
7,311
27
0
115
#66
^meanwhile, we are losing jobs in America every day to countries who don't have to deal with unions and can produce a product significantly cheaper. You think corporate profits have fallen in that time period? Sure as hell not. But have we lost more jobs in Amercia during that time period? Bet your ass. So who is the dummy now?

What you people fail to realize is the corporations are smarter than you. They will stop using the US labor force as it becomes more expensive to do so. So while they continue to increase their profits, your ass aint gotta job. The companies who have to deal with unions, become extinct.
hit the nail on the head. cold blooded posted that pic and showed pretty much how the need for labor unions has been phased out. labor unions were necessary and a good thing at one time. they dont really do much for the country anymore. when you weigh the pros and cons its not really a good thing anymore.
 

Timm

Banned
Sep 16, 2008
5,632
7
0
104
#69
Wasnt it dope when un employment was only 5 percent? Oh wait nvm that was the bush years fuck that evil republican
 

:ab:

blunt_hogg559
Jul 6, 2005
8,149
5,192
0
#70
Care to explain how a Union-overloaded UPS is so highly profitable and monstrously large, while non-union FedEx can barely get a foothold in Ground shipments, surviving almost exclusively on the rapidly-declining Overnight market?

And of course, there are many more examples. When companies like GM and Chrysler fail, its not so much that the Unions are driving them out of business.....it's that they are being run by complete morons. They're so infatuated with SUVs and other $30K automobiles that they've lost touch with average American consumer.

Perfect example of large corporations having absolutely no foresight. After the dot-com bubble burst in 2000 and the market took HEAVY losses, leading to a recession....they should have known then and there to start shrinking the cars/trucks making them more fuel efficient. But what did they do instead? Same ol' shit. Fast forward to the housing bubble bursting, and then they act shocked--SHOCKED!--that 2000-2001 happened all over again.

This thread isn't really about Union vs Non-Union, its about poorly-managed companies vs intelligent ones. Poorly-managed companies do infinitely better with non-union labor because they can convince people they're a part of something larger, and at the same time, pay them SUBSTANTIALLY LESS than what they are worth.

You may feel like Union jobs pay too much, but the real question you should be asking is, why don't non-Union jobs pay more? Whats the difference between a low-paying salary with performance incentives.....and a fair, guaranteed salary? You're telling me you'd rather be T.O. than Revis because it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?

Might I suggest that you, blunt_hogg559, work at a what I like to call "30 year pace", instead of being (naturally) the biggest hogg and hardest worker ever, ever in the history of the company you work for? Only a naive moron would give 150% when 60% or more will keep you from being written up. From , its up to management to convince you that working hard is good for EVERYONE....not just for their checkbook.
I'll try to make it quick:

UPS is a poor example to use to tout the success of unions; they excel in what they do because there are few other countries or companies in the world that can replicate the service they provide, on the level they provide it.

The entire auto industry's failure is a much better barometer in gauging the inefficiences that big unions bring with it. You are correct in asserting that companies failed due to poor management. Part of that poor management also allowed unions to gain the stranglehold on the labor force that they did.
 

:ab:

blunt_hogg559
Jul 6, 2005
8,149
5,192
0
#71
I'll try to make it quick:

UPS is a poor example to use to tout the success of unions; they excel in what they do because there are few other countries or companies in the world that can replicate the service they provide, on the level they provide it.

The entire auto industry's failure is a much better barometer in gauging the inefficiences that big unions bring with it. You are correct in asserting that companies failed due to poor management. Part of that poor management also allowed unions to gain the stranglehold on the labor force that they did.
And to suggest that I am stupid to put forth 150% effort when only 60% is needed....that's fine. You are entitled to that opinion.

That perspective (dumbing down myself and the level of work I do just to "get by") is exactly the type of mentality I actively plan to avoid. You don't get rich by sitting on your haunches, you have to be on your toes at all times.