|
If you have been following the news lately, you would know about the labor protests in Wisconsin. Well, in Michigan, the same thing is happening.
+ Show Spoiler [article] +In a scene similar to protests in Madison, Wisc., hundreds of firefighters and union members from around the state have jammed the rotunda of the Michigan Capitol building protesting what they call anti-union legislation percolating in the Legislature.
Loudly chanting, "Shame on you" and "We are union," the protesters can be heard loudly in the Senate chamber, where bills to strengthen the powers of emergency financial managers for distressed cities and school districts were expected to be acted upon today.
It is the first time a union-led protest -- several in recent weeks -- has spilled into the Capitol and caused a ruckus. The Senate continued its agenda, but the shouts from the lobby were a distraction.
"They've awakened a sleeping giant," said Bill Black, a lobbyist for the Teamsters union who stood in the crowd closest to the Senate chamber.
Pro-union demonstrators in the Wisconsin Capitol building have occupied it to protest Republican Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walkter's push to eliminate collective bargaining for public employees there.
The Michigan Senate sergeants-at-arms were watching the crowd warily to assure it did not attempt to enter the chamber, where decorum is strictly enforced.
Several dozen union supporters sat quietly in the Senate gallery, while the protesters shouted outside the chamber.
The emergency financial manager legislation is viewed by unionists as a plot to take over communities and school districts with state-appointed managers that could nullify employee union contracts and even dissolve councils and school boards to regain financial solvency.
Firefighters and police have led the opposition to the bills.
"We're here to show our support and solidarity for our brothers," said Tom Zalwacki, a member of United Steelworkers Local 8339 in Jackson, who was among the protesters in the Capitol rotunda.
Source
Now, I understand why labor unions were made in the first place. It was a necessity because of how workers were mistreated in the nineteenth century. And unions have been the base of things like fair wages, employee benefits, etc.. But do we still need them today? Should public occupations (like firefighters mentioned in the article) be allowed to have unions? If we get rid of them, what should we do?
To me, it seems like unions abuse their power in the modern world. I do not believe that unions are inherently bad, but maybe it's just that the people in them are bad. Could we replace the things they fight for with simple legislation?
What do you guys think?
|
Yes, they are necessary, I think. While I won't disagree that unions are abusing their power, if unions didn't exist, it probably wouldn't be long until employers got to "have their way" with their employees again, regardless of legislation. Governments make rules in favour of big companies all the time, I don't see why this would be any different.
If anything, I think unions shouldn't be allowed to abuse their powers in the ways that they do, rather than banning them outright or whatever.
|
LMAO. I read this as "Are onions necessary in the modern world?"
I was like: "whats wrong with onions?
I just woke up 
|
unions necessary: to an extent yes.
the point of unions is noble, it is to protect the workers from "corrupt capitalism" ie robber barons (note us history 19th/early 20th century) and what not. however, as of recent, unions have become more of the "mommy or daddy" for ALL issues of the worker rather than helping when something is truly wrong. most notably seen through the UAW (united autoworkers)--they are the most successful union, workers at the Arlington, Texas GMC plant (where pickup-trucks are made) workers are paid $40/hour to screw on bolts in an assembly line. Yes $40. This doesn't include benefits. When GM was failing several months back, they actually closed the facility AND still paid the workers, because it was cheaper than actually operating it.
If you look at the SEA countries, there aren't unions. you may be wondering why, the reason is, there is an abundant supply of labor for every person they get rid of they have 10 more waiting in line. Hence why their cars are cheaper.
as for the wisconsin teachers protesting, they honestly are stupid [i could use more vulgar words which better describe them]. In stark contrasts, texas teachers make $45k base WITHOUT the benefits covered fully like they are. The wisconsin teachers are making more base and EVERYTHING covered. moreover, lets be honest, the cost of living in wisconsin can't be that high... it is snow. and more snow. and a little bit more snow. as opposed to texas which isn't snow at all.
tldr; unions necessary: yes to an extent to make sure workers aren't fully taken advantage. have they become too powerful? in some cases yes.
|
The threat of unions is necessary, the unions themselves are detrimental to most companies that they are involved with, while the "spillover effect" onto companies w/o unions is less detrimental while providing the same benefits to the work force. Outlawing unions would cause labor inequalities just like pre-union business was at the turn of the century.
|
Do you think that large businesses care about their employees enough so that unions aren't necessary? Do you really think that without unions typical human greed won't take over and lead to the freezing of worker wages despite increase in company profits (to an even greater extent than is happening already)?
|
On March 09 2011 03:27 majestouch wrote:
lets be honest, the cost of living in wisconsin can't be that high... it is snow. and more snow. and a little bit more snow. as opposed to texas which isn't snow at all.
Colder climates have a higher cost of living than warmer climates.
|
I'd argue unions are more necessary than ever. Companies are larger and more faceless than they used to be. Governments are just as if not more bureaucratic and inept. Unions force those great powers to contend with the conditions of the workers they employ.
Working conditions on average are bad enough without those protections being removed.
That being said, many unions are stupid and have made changes that do more damage than good. I prefer to work jobs that are not unionized personally. Still, I believe they are necessary.
|
yes. Greed and selfishness is a human trait, now people just do it while smiling and wearing suits. Unions are totally necessary, and they really always will be.
|
Unions used to mean more than they do in modern day US. To answer your question, they should be.
On March 09 2011 03:27 majestouch wrote:
lets be honest, the cost of living in wisconsin can't be that high... it is snow. and more snow. and a little bit more snow. as opposed to texas which isn't snow at all.
It does snow in texas...
|
It's funny that as the rich get richer, the poor, who could unionize, get more and more anti-union because of crap like Fox News and the Republican Party.
I've never seen a situation where unions were actually power hungry, I just hear rhetoric from American sources that says "unions lose jobs" and bs like that.
America, if you want to get rid of unions, at least institute minimum wage and better job security. Until then, every group of lower-mid class jobs should unionize.
PS I say this as someone who is not part of a union, because I make a very good living.
|
On March 09 2011 03:27 majestouch wrote:
as for the wisconsin teachers protesting, they honestly are stupid [i could use more vulgar words which better describe them]. In stark contrasts, texas teachers make $45k base WITHOUT the benefits covered fully like they are. The wisconsin teachers are making more base and EVERYTHING covered. moreover, lets be honest, the cost of living in wisconsin can't be that high... it is snow. and more snow. and a little bit more snow. as opposed to texas which isn't snow at all.
Uhhh what do teachers in Texas have to do with ones in Wisconsin?
|
Russian Federation4447 Posts
You guys don't get it.
The more you unionize, the less competitive your economy becomes, and the more corporations will outsource.
|
United States7481 Posts
On March 09 2011 03:27 majestouch wrote:
as for the wisconsin teachers protesting, they honestly are stupid [i could use more vulgar words which better describe them]. In stark contrasts, texas teachers make $45k base WITHOUT the benefits covered fully like they are. The wisconsin teachers are making more base and EVERYTHING covered. moreover, lets be honest, the cost of living in wisconsin can't be that high... it is snow. and more snow. and a little bit more snow. as opposed to texas which isn't snow at all.
let's get some things straight
first of all, the wisconsin teachers are not protesting because they think they're not getting paid enough, or because they think they don't have enough benefits. they actually accepted a cut in pay and benefits. they're protesting because the governor wants to remove completely the ability of the union to collectively bargain for benefits.
second of all, have you ever considered the fact that maybe the higher pay for wisconsin teachers than texas teachers is one of the prime reasons for the disparity in quality of public school education in the two states?
|
On March 09 2011 03:39 Shai wrote:
It's funny that as the rich get richer, the poor, who could unionize, get more and more anti-union because of crap like Fox News and the Republican Party.
I've never seen a situation where unions were actually power hungry, I just hear rhetoric from American sources that says "unions lose jobs" and bs like that.
America, if you want to get rid of unions, at least institute minimum wage and better job security.
The United States has a minimum wage. Since 1938.
On March 09 2011 03:43 Antoine wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2011 03:27 majestouch wrote:
as for the wisconsin teachers protesting, they honestly are stupid [i could use more vulgar words which better describe them]. In stark contrasts, texas teachers make $45k base WITHOUT the benefits covered fully like they are. The wisconsin teachers are making more base and EVERYTHING covered. moreover, lets be honest, the cost of living in wisconsin can't be that high... it is snow. and more snow. and a little bit more snow. as opposed to texas which isn't snow at all.
second of all, have you ever considered the fact that maybe the higher pay for wisconsin teachers than texas teachers is one of the prime reasons for the disparity in quality of public school education in the two states?
Educational spending is obviously one of the prime reasons the educational system is shitty in the south. And the fact that the school board re-writes history on a whim.
|
As a member of a union, unions are crap. They lower your wages down the the lowest common denominator, and keep worthless pos people in good jobs because companies are too afraid to fire them.
|
60% of Americans oppose taking away the right of collective bargaining, so yeah the unions sure are power greedy when taking the fight.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Unions are bad for competition and the economy, period.
However, our society has morally chosen to create 'safety nets' and 'minimum quality of life standards'.
You can either do that by unions, or by increasing programs that will boost workers' quality of life. It's all just moving around assets. Somebody will still pay the taxes.
Personally, I'd prefer they let corporations be totally free to compete, then tax the system as a whole to make up for what the workers lose via loss of unions.
But in the end, you're just trading one drain on the system for another. It's all about opportunity costs... and unions get votes. Taxes don't.
|
Unions are necessary to the extent that every single corporation will take more advantage of their workers than they already do. My question, however, is are unions actually effective at what they're supposed to do? I started at Wal-Mart in 2000 for $8.75/hr. At my current employer, doing the same thing, for a different large corporation in the same city and state, I make $8.64/hr in 2011, although I'm supposed to get that increased through showing my work history soon. And that's another giant pain in my side--using TheWorkNumber and their phone tag fun just to get proof of my past employment. What can the union do to help? I'm not even sure.
A recent political cartoon showed an angry Republican elephant telling a union worker in Wisconsin "We all have to sacrifice!" with a nearby rich man cradling his wine glass labeled "tax cuts" cheering on the elephant "You tell him, my man." I felt that cartoon accurately described a certain level of hypocrisy from the right.
Additionally, I keep hearing that the Wisconsin public labor unions are actually well aware of the need for cuts, and they keep emphasizing that they are protesting the governor's proposal to strip their bargaining rights. They were actually okay, albeit not entirely happy, about taking pay cuts! But some conservatives are still calling them out for being greedy.
TL;DR My union has never exactly felt good at what it's supposed to do, but I'd rather have some protection than none, which is what Wisconsin's governor is trying to accomplish.
|
On March 09 2011 03:43 Tien wrote:
You guys don't get it.
The more you unionize, the less competitive your economy becomes, and the more corporations will outsource.
I completely change my original post and adopt this guy as my teacher.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/_VgJQTp0Bsf0/TWzwx7aXK6I/AAAAAAAAARY/AaXWyCHY720/unionsupport.jpg)
