Leno supports the union

[Oregonhunter5]

The fools that denigrate all Unions with a broad brush are equally as ignorant as those that talk about 'The Gun Lobby' as if it were a singular, top down organization. The term 'Union Thug' is as stupid as the term 'Inbred, Mouth Breathing Tea-Partier.' There may be a Union thug somewhere..I've never met one, and I spend a lot of time around Union folks. Both examples are incendiary and have little constructive value.

My Union is a democracy, an association of Tradesmen who have banded together to fund our own training and the training of the apprentices coming up behind us, to collectively bargain with our contractors to work out a mutually beneficial wage and benefit package, and to have a co-op where we have banded together and funded our own pensions and medical plans.

The biggest smoke and mirror trick ever executed was the far right and the radio talking heads somehow turning middle class, blue collar working folks against one of the only organizations looking out for their financial best interests. It constantly amazes me.

True...
I'm feeling over worked , I'm calling my union rep. That's kinda what gets people fired up. But yes thy do at times provide help. Now if there was only a salesman union id be golden.
Sorry boss won't hit the quota this year. What your mad, sorry doing my best boss..

 

[KalamaMark]

I live and die by my performance and the amount of value I bring to my employer. My employment can be terminated at any time for poor performance or misconduct. I earn a wage significantly higher than scale that I have negotiated with my employer based upon my skill sets and performance.

I am a proud member of my union and I'm tired of being denigrated based on a few examples.

The political contributions of the unions are based solely on how a politician supports the interests of labor. If the candidate is a friend of labor, labor supports them... Much like the NRA bases it's support of a candidate based solely upon that candidates position on gun rights.

My union has supported pro-labor Republican candidates.

Unfortunately, the Republican Party has taken an actively AntiUnion stance, incorporating it into their party platform. This makes it hard for a reasonable Republican to break ranks and support labor.

Trust me... I hate election time. I'm often forced to chose between those who would attack my livelihood and my association of fellow tradesmen and those who would erode the second amendment.

I think the two party system is inherently broken, corrupt, and neither Party represents the interest of the average, middle class working man or woman.

 

[Dunerunner]

Do you actually believe that you as an individual would not be able to negotiate the same deal with your employer based upon your work ethic and job skills? Talk to me about how you feel about those in your union who do not have the best work ethic and marginal job skills, but earn the same negotiated compensation as you.

As for a broken government, I submit this.... although it is mis-titled.

[video=youtube_share;Ochid3cz1I0]http://youtu.be/Ochid3cz1I0[/video]

 

[Certaindeaf]

Unions are the cause of what's wrong with this country.

 

[Certaindeaf]

The largest and most corrupt union boondoggles are likely the teachers and police unions. The unions are what's wrong with this country.
If you haven't watched Waiting For Superman, I'd recommend you do.. it's about our educational system.. and unions.
Waiting For Superman 2010 part 1 of 11 - YouTube

 

[Ligito]

If one can be replaced by a random stranger off the street for 80% of the wage you were making then either your job is not a great one, or you don't have the skills to retain it.

That is a poor representation of life and conditions.
Many factors, few answers.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

Talk to me about how you feel about those in your union who do not have the best work ethic and marginal job skills, but earn the same negotiated compensation as you.

I am married to and friends with union members who express disdain at the people who need to be fired but the union makes it difficult, or the petty selfish grievances that are brought up at the worst time by the same people who are the least productive.

 

[Ligito]

The largest and most corrupt union boondoggles are likely the teachers and police unions. The unions are what's wrong with this country.
If you haven't watched Waiting For Superman, I'd recommend you do.. it's about our educational system.. and unions.
Waiting For Superman 2010 part 1 of 11 - YouTube

Sheeple applies here.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

The largest and most corrupt union boondoggles are likely the teachers and police unions. The unions are what's wrong with this country.
If you haven't watched Waiting For Superman, I'd recommend you do.. it's about our educational system.. and unions.
Waiting For Superman 2010 part 1 of 11 - YouTube

I'm always amused talking to Teachers and people who strongly advocate for them and their union. They never have an answer when I ask "How many Teachers were fired this year in the U.S.?". What other profession has that low a rate of terminations? Only a handful of other Union dominated industries I'd guess. I mean all my working life I've not gone a year without a fellow employee being fired. They all seemed to deserve it too IMO. Maybe Teaching attracts a better level of person than other professions?

 

[Phather]

I've been in several unions/guilds in my working life, some of them have been good and some of them have not. The problem with unions is that they are run by humans, and humans are greedy by nature. Union leaders must play politics. The reason why we cannot find an honest politician is because they only way to get elected is to get your hands dirty, and if you are willing to do that, you wouldn't make an honest politician.

Without unions, our working conditions would be similar to China and other Asian countries. Those that think they can be offered a living wage simply on their own merits don't realize that the reason they are able to earn what they do while not being unionized is because their employer doesn't want their workers to unionize, and so the employer is fair to it's employees. Even with unions our standard of living has been slowly eroded by big business and we don't even realize it.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

I've been in several unions/guilds in my working life, some of them have been good and some of them have not. The problem with unions is that they are run by humans, and humans are greedy by nature. Union leaders must play politics. The reason why we cannot find an honest politician is because they only way to get elected is to get your hands dirty, and if you are willing to do that, you wouldn't make an honest politician.

Without unions, our working conditions would be similar to China and other Asian countries. Those that think they can be offered a living wage simply on their own merits don't realize that the reason they are able to earn what they do while not being unionized is because their employer doesn't want their workers to unionize, and so the employer is fair to it's employees. Even with unions our standard of living has been slowly eroded by big business and we don't even realize it.

You make some good points, would you concede that voting an election cycle or two against the Union interests would not send us spiraling back to the sweat shops and child labor that was seen in America of the early 1900s? Would you ever concede that unions are getting too powerful and might be detrimental to this country at some point?

 

[peetar]

Without unions, our working conditions would be similar to China and other Asian countries. Those that think they can be offered a living wage simply on their own merits don't realize that the reason they are able to earn what they do while not being unionized is because their employer doesn't want their workers to unionize, and so the employer is fair to it's employees. Even with unions our standard of living has been slowly eroded by big business and we don't even realize it.

Our standard of living has absolutely not been eroded. There are literally ALMOST NO poor people in the United States today. the problem is that we have become soft and we have re-defined poverty. Poverty in America means a big screen TV and AC and every family owns at least one car.

We have eliminated hunger in this country for the most part. I would rather be poor in this time period than rich during the 60s. You have instant access to information. Cell phone technology for everyone. Ultra reliable transportation and fresh groceries 24/7/365.

The problem is that most people see poverty as a relative term. As if their neighbors wealth somehow has bearing on their wealth. It is not a zero sum game and our true standard of living has never been better. Even in these "hard" times.

You want to see a poor standard of living? Go to a socialist country (that isn't racially or culturally homogenous)

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

 

[Phather]

You make some good points, would you concede that voting an election cycle or two against the Union interests would not send us spiraling back to the sweat shops and child labor that was seen in America of the early 1900s? Would you ever concede that unions are getting too powerful and might be detrimental to this country at some point?

On the contrary, I feel that unions are losing power. Look at public opinion of them. The majority opinion is that unions are nothing but leeches that are bleeding our country dry. Big businesses are crying that unions are killing their companies, yet they turn around and claim record profits to their shareholders. Wages, adjusted for inflation, have remained fairly flat since the late 60's, while productivity has continued to increase. A recent study found that if a minimum wage worker were compensated proportionally for the amount of production they provide to a company as those working in the 60's, the minimum wage today would be over $20 an hour.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

On the contrary, I feel that unions are losing power. Look at public opinion of them. The majority opinion is that unions are nothing but leeches that are bleeding our country dry. Big businesses are crying that unions are killing their companies, yet they turn around and claim record profits to their shareholders. Wages, adjusted for inflation, have remained fairly flat since the late 60's, while productivity has continued to increase. A recent study found that if a minimum wage worker were compensated proportionally for the amount of production they provide to a company as those working in the 60's, the minimum wage today would be over $20 an hour.

That would be a No, the unions could never get too powerful? When everyone is in a union how will that work? Will we still have our Gun rights we have today? And what does minimum wage got to do with it?

 

[peetar]

On the contrary, I feel that unions are losing power. Look at public opinion of them. The majority opinion is that unions are nothing but leeches that are bleeding our country dry. Big businesses are crying that unions are killing their companies, yet they turn around and claim record profits to their shareholders. Wages, adjusted for inflation, have remained fairly flat since the late 60's, while productivity has continued to increase. A recent study found that if a minimum wage worker were compensated proportionally for the amount of production they provide to a company as those working in the 60's, the minimum wage today would be over $20 an hour.

That is because of technology, not because we have workers digging ditches with shovels. Those jobs no longer exist. Jobs today are easy compared to the 1960s. People also have WAY more leisure and entertainment than they did then.

Jobs today are fantastically easy. Just take feminists, they didn't whine about equality in the workforce and wanting to enter the workforce so badly when the jobs were all physically hard and involved manual labor.
Only when office work became the norm do women want to be a part of it so badly. I don't see them crying to be let into the construction field.

 

[Phather]

Our standard of living has absolutely not been eroded. There are literally ALMOST NO poor people in the United States today. the problem is that we have become soft and we have re-defined poverty. Poverty in America means a big screen TV and AC and every family owns at least one car.

We have eliminated hunger in this country for the most part. I would rather be poor in this time period than rich during the 60s. You have instant access to information. Cell phone technology for everyone. Ultra reliable transportation and fresh groceries 24/7/365.

The problem is that most people see poverty as a relative term. As if their neighbors wealth somehow has bearing on their wealth. It is not a zero sum game and our true standard of living has never been better. Even in these "hard" times.

You want to see a poor standard of living? Go to a socialist country (that isn't racially or culturally homogenous)

Technology has improved our quality of life, that is true. How many families are single income? I would think that if families in the 50's and 60's managed alright on single incomes, they'd be truly well off making double as a two income family. I do not disagree that life is better in general than in the past because of the so many advancements in technology. What I see is that the powerful people use that to their advantage to keep us distracted while our wealth is stripped.

As far as socialist/communist countries go, it's not the philosophy that is a problem, its the fact that humans run the system, and humans are greedy.

 

[Phather]

That would be a No, the unions could never get too powerful? When everyone is in a union how will that work? Will we still have our Gun rights we have today? And what does minimum wage got to do with it?

I didn't state that unions could never become too powerful, I said that unions are not becoming too powerful, but are weakening.

 

[jluck]

I live and die by my performance and the amount of value I bring to my employer. My employment can be terminated at any time for poor performance or misconduct. I earn a wage significantly higher than scale that I have negotiated with my employer based upon my skill sets and performance.

I am a proud member of my union and I'm tired of being denigrated based on a few examples.

The political contributions of the unions are based solely on how a politician supports the interests of labor. If the candidate is a friend of labor, labor supports them... Much like the NRA bases it's support of a candidate based solely upon that candidates position on gun rights.

My union has supported pro-labor Republican candidates.

Unfortunately, the Republican Party has taken an actively AntiUnion stance, incorporating it into their party platform. This makes it hard for a reasonable Republican to break ranks and support labor.

Trust me... I hate election time. I'm often forced to chose between those who would attack my livelihood and my association of fellow tradesmen and those who would erode the second amendment.

I think the two party system is inherently broken, corrupt, and neither Party represents the interest of the average, middle class working man or woman.

Mark, Thank you for adding some logic and common sense to a otherwise text book love/hate "The Union" thread.

Funny how most of the Union haters are not in one and have no real clue or Union experience, Just saying what they think (Or reciting what there favorite radio head thinks) Good 'ole hard right programming. There are sheep on both the right and left side of the pasture only willing to ride the fence line, And a alarming few that can see the grass is greener and better when you are willing to look just a tiny,tiny bit another direction.

I have worked (See: WORKED) Union and non-Union jobs and will not hold it against someone for taking a better job if its union to support there family.

My Union earned two cents....

 

[peetar]

Technology has improved our quality of life, that is true. How many families are single income? I would think that if families in the 50's and 60's managed alright on single incomes, they'd be truly well off making double as a two income family. I do not disagree that live is better in general than in the past because of the so many advancements in technology. What I see is that the powerful people use that to their advantage to keep us distracted while our wealth is stripped.

As far as socialist/communist countries go, it's not the philosophy that is a problem, its the fact that humans run the system, and humans are greedy.

Ah contraire, it is precisely because the philosophy is the problem that these socialist schemes fail.

How can one have a social policy (even call it socialism) that does not take into account the human element? Isn't that what the word social means? Isn't soci the root term itself indicative of humanity?

I submit to you and anyone else with eyes to see that these schemes are hatched with the full knowlege of what they will achieve. That is unless you expect me to believe these people can not READ history.