Unions WIN!!

[The Man]

I find it interesting that people here are talking shit about unions. Especially Accountable - a fucking union GOVERNMENT teacher. You got yours so fuck everybody else right? When the last union is busted and your gleeful asses get your pay reduced because there is no one left to represent your arrogant asses, you'll be the first to piss and moan. Just because you are "management" or work for a non union company does not mean you have not benefited from unionization. Many companies have good pay and benefits to keep the unions out. When the last union is busted and your gleeful asses get your pay reduced because there is no one left to represent your arrogant asses, you'll be the first to piss and moan.

Americans are so fucking short sighted. Read some labor movement history and actually learn why unions came about in the first place. I know not a damned one of you will, so we are bound to repeat history.

You should have some respect for teachers john..without them you wouldnt be that rich arse you are today being able to take the large sums of money you do John.

How does it feel to be paying for part of accountable wages?
Why do you support unions but not Accountables?

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

:nanajig: YAAYYY!! That'll show those greedy bastages that run, erm, ran Hostess Bakeries. The union went on strike and refused to go back to work until Hostess met their demands ... and the cowards declared bankruptcy. VICTORY FOR THE UNION!!


Let these other mega-corporations beware. The unions are in control here. They'd better step in line or face union wrath .... which union members will have plenty of time to do now ... since they don't have jobs. :unsure:

How wonderfully simplistic. If only life were that clear-cut.

Biggest exporter here is unionized. Has recorded consistent raises in profits since it was formed in 2001. Why? Because it makes product that sells, even during a recession. Given that so many Americans are feeling the financial pinch,fatty snack foods may not be a priority for the budget any more.
Hostess themselves have acknowledged that their customers are migrating to healthier foods.
Twinkies have had a good run, but they date back to the 1930's. Hostess failed to recognise that one of their best sellers was past its sell-by date, and didn't move to meet the market.
They filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in January,but could not come up with saleable products for their under-utilised plant and staff to make. Quite simply, they have not invested enough money in keeping up with trends, have already cut wages and conditions, and still couldn't make it work.

The union accounts for just one-third of the staff. The company had started implementing an 8 percent pay cut, a 20 percent increase in healthcare costs, and changes to pension and workday provisions when workers went on strike on November 9. A week later, Hostess has pulled the pin on its whole American operation.Seems far too swift to make commercial sense - unless you've been profit-taking for years at the expense of plant and product development.

Expect to see Hostess Brands being made "under licence"in Mexico or Costa Rica by cheap labour. The new company will use the same formulations and processes on machines purchased from Hostess for a knockdown price. Hostess will go under, taking its tax bills and pension obligations with it, and the directors will move on to another old-school company, run that into the ground in much the same way.

It's easy to point the finger at the union. Before you do, get hold of the company's capital and advertising spensding figures for the last few years. I'd wager that they taper off as sharply as the payments to [FONT=Georgia, Times, Times New Roman, serif]director-owned subsidiaries have grown.[/FONT]

 

[The Man]

KD

What do you know about American junk food?
Well it did take a recent hike.
But for some reason the companies are suffering and not reaping large profits.

Union expert now?
They crush a company with benefits.
And no "multitasking"...fuckers are allowed to do anything outside their job description.

 

[The Man]

Expect to see Hostess Brands being made "under licence"in Mexico or Costa Rica by cheap labour. The new company will use the same formulations and processes on machines purchased from Hostess for a knockdown price. Hostess will go under, taking its tax bills and pension obligations with it, and the directors will move on to another old-school company, run that into the ground in much the same way.
]

So unions do make a company force to relocate to cheaper labor?

 

[Accountable]

How's that union teachers job working for ya?

Seems somewhere along the way, you would have actually studied some labor history on your way to your second government paycheck. Why is it guys like you, with union negotiated benefits, socialized health care, vacation time, et al, begrudge others the very organizations that won those benefits for you?

You remind me of a chicken with her head cut off, except that instead of running, for you it's posting. You have a mindless compulsion to respond, but you have no idea what to post or what your point is. Try addressing my points, if you can.

 

[Johnfromokc]

You should have some respect for teachers john..without them you wouldnt be that rich arse you are today being able to take the large sums of money you do John.

How does it feel to be paying for part of accountable wages?
Why do you support unions but not Accountables?

Damn TM - you drunk or what? Your reading comprehension sucks terribly this evening. You should have listened to your teachers, lol.

 

[Johnfromokc]

You remind me of a chicken with her head cut off, except that instead of running, for you it's posting. You have a mindless compulsion to respond, but you have no idea what to post or what your point is. Try addressing my points, if you can.

I'd be delighted to address your point if you actually had one. Dude - you are an anti-union union teacher. And you can't see the irony?

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

KD

What do you know about American junk food?
.

I've dumped you on your ass with this line of argument before.
Come back when you have something worth listening to.

 

[Kakapo Dundee]

So unions do make a company force to relocate to cheaper labor?

You didn't read what I wrote. Your ignorance is of no interest to me.

 

[The Man]

Damn TM - you drunk or what? Your reading comprehension sucks terribly this evening. You should have listened to your teachers, lol.

Are you not paying your fair share of taxes john?...you know to pay for accountable wages.

 

[Accountable]

I'd be delighted to address your point if you actually had one.

Translation:


As expected.

Dude - you are an anti-union union teacher. And you can't see the irony?

You'd be really pitiful if you weren't such a dick. While unionizing has done a lot of good, unions have done great harm.

Yes, teachers' unions offer legal assistance to their membership to prevent administrators from abusing their power. They also offer legal assistance to keep bad teachers in classrooms for the sole reason that they are union members. In other words, union work to keep union members employed, no matter whether they are effective.

Teachers' unions fight against any attempts at holding teachers to a performance standard. But to the point of this thread, teachers' unions have driven compensation costs to ridiculous heights. I googled for a random school district's budget pie chart:

Personnel costs (salaries and benefits) account for 88 percent of the 2010-2011 general fund budget. These salaries include not only teachers but also the support personnel whose jobs ensure teachers can focus their attention on students.

http://www.adams12.org/budget_cuts/pie_chart

I'm done with this derail. Back to Twinkie-Gate!

 

[Johnfromokc]

You'd be really pitiful if you weren't such a dick. While unionizing has done a lot of good, unions have done great harm.

That's pretty funny coming from a guy who willingliy cashes every UNION negotiated paycheck you get and takes your UNION negotiated PAID 3-MONTH summer vacation.

It's not real bright to only look at one side of any story - and you are teaching the children of San Antonio with that conservatard attutude? Perhaps YOU are one of those teachers the union should throw under the bus.

Back in my union steward and officer days, some of the sorriest fucks were the ones who complained about unions the most and refused to join and pay dues, but expected full representation. Methinks you fit that bill.

Yes, teachers' unions offer legal assistance to their membership to prevent administrators from abusing their power.

A VERY good thing no? Especially in your case.

They also offer legal assistance to keep bad teachers in classrooms for the sole reason that they are union members. In other words, union work to keep union members employed, no matter whether they are effective.

Wrong. Administrative INCOMPETENCE keeps bad teachers in the classroom. Unions are like lawyers. They are LEGALLY required to privide a vigorous defense to their members, AND non members in most states.

Teachers' unions fight against any attempts at holding teachers to a performance standard. But to the point of this thread, teachers' unions have driven compensation costs to ridiculous heights. I googled for a random school district's budget pie chart:

So volunteer for a pay-cut you greedy ass scab. Most of the performance standards these incompetent fuckwit BOE administrators come up with is inneffective bullshit that does not help the students at all. I just put my two kids through Edmond OK public school - these schools are in the top 20% in the nation. My son, a senior and a newspaper reporter for his school interviewed both teachers and administration on their new "performance standards" that came from the state BOE. Keep in mind that OK as a red state has an overall dismal academic record. To a person, all interviewees agreed that these new standards dreamed up by administrators puts a huge paperwork burden on the teachers and takes away instructional time from the students. Once again, administrative incompetence prevails, and scabs like you will blame the union.

There's always multiple sides to any story - so your anti-union bullshit is just that - bullshit, sprinkled with a heaping helping of scab hypocrisy.

 

[The Man]

John.
Its obvious he doesn't approve of unions.
With his job...he probably doesn't have a choice.

Perhaps he approved of them at one time...but after seeing the damage they cause he shifted his position.
I dont know.
But its obvious he doesnt approve of them.

 

[Accountable]

John.
Its obvious he doesn't approve of unions.
With his job...he probably doesn't have a choice.

Perhaps he approved of them at one time...but after seeing the damage they cause he shifted his position.
I dont know.
But its obvious he doesnt approve of them.

Like I've said, there's a huge difference between unionizing and unions. Unionizing made tremendous advancements for workers. The resultant parasite that calls itself "labor union" lobbies for harmful legislation, fights for workforce stagnation, and is antithetical to innovation.

People cry that there is a movement to ban unions. That's a good thing. Our US Constitution protects unionizing (freedom of speech, freedom of assembly). The problem with permanent unions is the same problem with full-time professional politicians: once they've done what they were chartered to do, they feel compelled to keep doing more so as to justify their existence.

 

[hart]

I agree with Accountable.:homo: I'm not against Unions, per se. It's what I've seen of UNION OFFICERS, by and large emphasis on LARGE, they get fat and lazy in many cases, don't work for their members and have stopped working for their constituents.

 

[Johnfromokc]

I agree with Accountable.:homo: I'm not against Unions, per se. It's what I've seen of UNION OFFICERS, by and large emphasis on LARGE, they get fat and lazy in many cases, don't work for their members and have stopped working for their constituents.

It comes down to personal responsibility on both sides, labor and management. Incompetent management is responsible, period. If management were competent, they could enforce collective bargaining agreements - they did, afterall AGREE to the terms.

As to union members, it is their responsibility to elect their leaders and vote out those not getting the job done. If you are an uninvolved union member, you are part of the problem. If you are an incompetent manager that blames the union for your incompetence, then you are the entire cause of the problem.

 

[The Man]

It comes down to personal responsibility on both sides, labor and management. Incompetent management is responsible, period. If management were competent, they could enforce collective bargaining agreements - they did, afterall AGREE to the terms.

As to union members, it is their responsibility to elect their leaders and vote out those not getting the job done. If you are an uninvolved union member, you are part of the problem. If you are an incompetent manager that blames the union for your incompetence, then you are the entire cause of the problem.

Incompetent management is not being able to keep the union out to begin with John.
We dont need unions....we have labor laws for safety, wages, and slave hours.
The govt is in a way a "union" protecting the workforce from abuse.

A union presses for more wages and benefits from the company....as well as restricted work duties.
They are pricks....an example being during the last big storm out east.
We had 40 volunteers{lineman} here that went out east to help.
They were turned away and had to go elsewhere...why?...because they weren't part of their union.

I have seen large machinery sit john {in other job fields} as the foreman cant even move it due to union rules.
Big fits thrown as someone went 50 yards to go take a fast piss while using a dozer for cover.
They were in "someone elses area"....mind you they arent working the area he is out there by himself.
So john I guess the guy is supposed to "drive" this huge dozer a mile on a haul road holding up production of scrapers
Its doing such makes that piss cost several thousand dollars john...its just one example.

You will find stupid union rules wherever you find a union.
Wages and benefits should be determined by the company....if turnover rate is to high then increase the wages and or benefits.
If a worker is unhappy with the wages etc...then go work elsewhere...or better yet why even apply there to begin with.

Unions increase the price of goods or services...which in effect make it tough to live for the actual poor man,the elderly etc...those on fixed incomes.

I guess if everyplace a had unions that had outrageous wages and benefits it would be fair for all...but then again everything would be so high those wages wouldnt be good wages anymore...the ones that prosper are those receiving the dues.

Which brings me to this point....a third party making money off of an employee...just doesnt seem right does it john.
How about we start a union for say your job...and you start paying me dues.
I do your negotiations in the future as far as wages etc...rather than you do your own.
Oh and john dont touch the windows for some fresh air during good weather...thats the job of maintenance...nor put a fresh roll of toilet paper out when its empty..thats the janitors job.

I think I will go find a local place with one employee and talk union...he or she will agree I am sure..I will be skimming their wages...I will push for more wages..as there is more to skim...and also push for another employee as to skim theirs as well...they will love me as the workload is reduced..the wages are more..and they will be difficult to fire....its win win for everybody.
The owner can raise the price of his service...business will go down as a result..thus the workers have to do less work.Lets lay one off
No problem...he gets 90 percent of pay and benefits continue....Sucks for the owner.

Fuck unions they are out to line their own pocket...not yours...the perfect example is the UAW....after acquiring ownership of Chrysler...they pay the workers common factory wages.
How do they even get to own it to begin with?
I think I will get a union going at the local donut shop...impose 80 bucks an hour with wage and benefits.
When they go bankrupt I acquire the company ...keep the employees and pay em 9 bucks an hour.
Its win win...but since we are already union and I am owner and union CEO all in one negotiations will be rather easy.

 

[Johnfromokc]

All this blaming of unions TM and there is no possibility of incompetent management anywhere in the picture?

You really don't stop and think ever do you? How would you operate if Limbaugh, Hannity and FOX did not tell you what to think?

 

[The Man]

All this blaming of unions TM and there is no possibility of incompetent management anywhere in the picture?

You really don't stop and think ever do you? How would you operate if Limbaugh, Hannity and FOX did not tell you what to think?

I already stated incompetent management is present by allowing unions to form, its in the first sentence.

 

[Johnfromokc]

Incompetent management is not being able to keep the union out to begin with John.
We dont need unions....we have labor laws for safety, wages, and slave hours.
The govt is in a way a "union" protecting the workforce from abuse.

When the last union is busted TM, whatever it is you do for a living you will do it for less. Corporations have been lobbying to weaken unions ever since day one of the NRLA. We have all the labor and worker safety laws BECAUSE of unions. Corporations lobby EVERY DAY to rescind environmental and worker safety laws, yet you say we don't need unions? Really?

Wages in the United States are stagnated at 1978 levels as a direct result of union busting. A tiny percentage of the workforce is unionized today, but you listen to idiots on FOX et al tell you this tiny percentage of the workforce is the cause of 100% of our problems. That's just more proof that right wingers have surrendered their ablity to think for themselves.

You hate union wages and working conditions TM? Go to work for Walmart - that's your conservotard utopia in action.