Are unions feasible today?

Started by Daemon Seed12 pages

Originally posted by inimalist
"other countries don't believe in basic human rights and a living wage, thus, our companies must be allowed to exploit our own citizens such that we can compete with, essentially, slave labour"

man, I love your utopia

good post.

Originally posted by inimalist
or, they needed to feed their children?
People can always create their own system.

The bottom line fact is that:

As a business owner, my job is to get as much production as possible for the least cost.

As an employee your incentive is to get as much pay as possible for the least work.

As a consumer we want the best product for the least price possible.

As investors, they want they want the best return on their investment as possible.

The money doesn't come from the sky. The higher pay means higher costs for consumers, who will look elsewhere.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Unions are much like the feminist movement. They started off with a good idea and then lost their way and became a monster.
Not a bad way to put it.

It burns me up when I read in the paper how people retire with massive pensions because they knew how to play the system. It makes the whole system look bad, just like, eg, when a cop sodomizes a perp. But these are very much the exceptions. Certainly I know of no one who has ever or will be retiring with so much loot. And as well, times are tough. Unions need to do their share...as long as the wealthy do theirs. 😉

If the Supreme Court is indeed curtailing class-action lawsuits, I would think now more than ever unions are a necessary protection.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
People can always create their own system.

The bottom line fact is that:

As a business owner, my job is to get as much production as possible for the least cost.

As an employee your incentive is to get as much pay as possible for the least work.

As a consumer we want the best product for the least price possible.

As investors, they want they want the best return on their investment as possible.

The money doesn't come from the sky. The higher pay means higher costs for consumers, who will look elsewhere.

I'm a civil servant, so my employers don't have this concern. But I can see how unions can adversely effect business.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
[blather]

ok, but you do see that people might be upset more about not being able to provide for their family, rather than some entitlement to work?

you do see this basic relationship most people have between work and survival, right? you get that?

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
What do you mean exactly, a more powerful government?

I think local communities should have more power to defend themselves from national or international businesses.

Originally posted by Mindship
Not a bad way to put it.

It burns me up when I read in the paper how people retire with massive pensions because they knew how to play the system. It makes the whole system look bad, just like, eg, when a cop sodomizes a perp. But these are very much the exceptions. Certainly I know of no one who has ever or will be retiring with so much loot. And as well, times are tough. Unions need to do their share...as long as the wealthy do theirs. 😉

If the Supreme Court is indeed curtailing class-action lawsuits, I would think now more than ever unions are a necessary protection.

They shouldn't do anything illegal, company or person. Anybody who does should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. It gives everybody a bad name. The problem is we have more job takers and not enough job makers. Making phony jobs that aren't in demand and then printing out phony money isn't helping anything; it's destroying.

Originally posted by inimalist
ok, but you do see that people might be upset more about not being able to provide for their family, rather than some entitlement to work?

you do see this basic relationship most people have between work and survival, right? you get that?

Red herring.

Yes, I do, most people have been trained to rely on a job to survive and are like a fish out of water when things change. Anybody can invest, start their own business, work somewhere else, etc. Vote with your feet.

People do feel entitled to work. That has been shown when they drain a company out of their money. You know if the company is broke, nobody has a job.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I think local communities should have more power to defend themselves from national or international businesses.

In what ways? I'm just moving the discussion along.

Originally posted by inimalist
ok, but you do see that people might be upset more about not being able to provide for their family, rather than some entitlement to work?

you do see this basic relationship most people have between work and survival, right? you get that?

True enough, or even there own self esteem etc, that a job provides.

Originally posted by Daemon Seed
True enough, or even there own self esteem etc, that a job provides.
The self esteem is flailing though, no job is guaranteed or permanent. Placing an entire future on a company keeping you and then drowning in debt was what Americans did in their "American Dream" That dream is coming to an end though.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
People can always create their own system.

The bottom line fact is that:

As a business owner, my job is to get as much production as possible for the least cost.

As an employee your incentive is to get as much pay as possible for the least work.

As a consumer we want the best product for the least price possible.

As investors, they want they want the best return on their investment as possible.

The money doesn't come from the sky. The higher pay means higher costs for consumers, who will look elsewhere.

Exactly, and there's no reason the Employee should just be like "well, I do think I deserve more money, need more money and can get more money, but I rather shouldn't cause of my employer, investors and customers, who'd rather have the money for themselves", no, they are out to get the best deal they can, and it's their right to do so, including by grouping up and leveraging their numbers.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Anybody can invest, start their own business, work somewhere else, etc. Vote with your feet.

seriously, I'm glad your life has been such that you think this is true

Originally posted by Bardock42
Exactly, and there's no reason the Employee should just be like "well, I do think I deserve more money, need more money and can get more money, but I rather shouldn't cause of my employer, investors and customers", no, they are out to get the best deal they can, and it's their right to do so, including by grouping up and leveraging their numbers.

Oh of course. I never said otherwise about their ability to negotiate. We all get paid what we're worth. If you negotiate $15/hr with me, then that is what you chose to take. You didn't have to take it, if you don't like it, leave.

Like I said the concept of a Union is fine, it's the abuse nowadays and the drain on resources. If a company crashes, all the employees lose their job anyways.

Originally posted by inimalist
seriously, I'm glad your life has been such that you think this is true
Yep. It takes financial education and a lot of work, but it is possible. People who were terrible at school did it, and do it all of the time. In fact most people were entrepreneurs before the industrial age.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Exactly, and there's no reason the Employee should just be like "well, I do think I deserve more money, need more money and can get more money, but I rather shouldn't cause of my employer, investors and customers, who'd rather have the money for themselves", no, they are out to get the best deal they can, and it's their right to do so, including by grouping up and leveraging their numbers.

True enough, work is about negotiation and responsibility.

Originally posted by Daemon Seed
True enough, work is about negotiation and responsibility.
That's life in general.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
In fact most people were entrepreneurs before the industrial age.

how telling, you are looking for working conditions that existed in the 1600s

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Oh of course. I never said otherwise about their ability to negotiate. We all get paid what we're worth. If you negotiate $15/hr with me, then that is what you chose to take. You didn't have to take it, if you don't like it, leave.

Like I said the concept of a Union is fine, it's the abuse nowadays and the drain on resources. If a company crashes, all the employees lose their job anyways. Yep. It takes financial education and a lot of work, but it is possible. People who were terrible at school did it, and do it all of the time. In fact most people were entrepreneurs before the industrial age.

I think people are more often outraged by companies earning record profits while laying off huge amounts of their workforce, but even that I don't begrudge them generally.

I think either side of the equation is bad when the government is involved for unfair privileges, both on the side of the employees (via unions) as well as on the side of the employers (as big corporations so very often do). Though my trouble is more with the system that allows the abuse (and really makes it necessary since if you won't take it, someone else just will and screw you over) rather than with the businesses and unions using the system.

Originally posted by inimalist
how telling, you are looking for working conditions that existed in the 1600s
Not really, I'm looking at the future and the current, the information age. Where technology is taking over and jobs can be done anywhere, much potential for people who wish to expand.

Many people are wanting things to be in the past. It is now easier than ever to start your own business and invest. It doesn't even cost much, many people sell things online, hell my mom even does it for a few bucks. She only has basic computer skills. I recommend everybody to have more than one stream of income. Relying on one is risky, even a "government job".

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think people are more often outraged by companies earning record profits while laying off huge amounts of their workforce, but even that I don't begrudge them generally.

I think either side of the equation is bad when the government is involved for unfair privileges, both on the side of the employees (via unions) as well as on the side of the employers (as big corporations so very often do). Though my trouble is more with the system that allows the abuse (and really makes it necessary since if you won't take it, someone else just will and screw you over) rather than with the businesses and unions using the system.

The reason that happens is because of investors. Investors like when the overhead is cut down, because it means more profits for them. The board of directors pressure that, which starts layoffs.

Less overhead means more profits and higher profit margins. It's part of the relationship I mentioned above.

The government really causes more problems than they fix, look at schools for example.

Often personal feelings come into it. We've all had 'that' boss, when that happens we need a Union. Particularly important in harassment, constructive dismissal etc.

Originally posted by Daemon Seed
Often personal feelings come into it. We've all had 'that' boss, when that happens we need a Union. Particularly important in harassment, constructive dismissal etc.
How many lousy workers have benefited from a union though? Came to work, did nothing, and were nigh impossible to fire.

And yes, money is a very personal subject, like drugs, religion, sex, etc.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master

As an employee your incentive is to get as much pay as possible for the least work.

Says who? Those people are called crooks and cheapskates. Many states have a crime on the books called time theft: not working whille on the clock/being sedentary and draining the employer's money while giving nothing in return.

I understand that employees are just there for the money and not for a love of the company, but they still have to earn their keep. An "incentive" to be a leech? I don't think so.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
As an employee your incentive is to get as much pay as possible for the least work.

Only if you hate your job...

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
As a consumer we want the best product for the least price possible.

Well no actually, I also want a product that was produced with humane conditions, including good wages for employees...