Thoughts on Unions

[Deleted]

It - surprisingly - depends. In countries with 12-hour days, paltry pay and children work, they are absolutely necessary. In western Europe however, they are often cartels led by dumb gangsters. Guys like the french farmer's unionists who attack transports carrying cheaper wine from other european countries or mcdonalds restaurants over their choice of meat are just highly subsidized thugs.

[Raeph]

It - surprisingly - depends. In countries with 12-hour days, paltry pay and children work, they are absolutely necessary.

Which is representative of their high point in the United States as well. Union's were essential during the late 19th and early 20th century due to no worker protections and malicious activity by rail, mining and logging companies, like using political influence to get National Guard forces to break up striking workers by force or using the Pinkerton's Investigators to drum up false charges against union leaders and groups.

Unions have a lot of good work in their history, though at the same time every thing they fought for in the past, with regard to workers rights and safety has largely been achieved. This taken with the fact, that in western cultures at least, we have a much better educated workforce, individuals now have some of the skills and know-how to bargain for their own well being.

If only ten percent, or less, of your workforce is literate, then they need to be the ones bargaining for everyone, however if all or nearly all of your workforce is literate, what is to stop all the workers from reading their contracts and saying "I want to discuss a better deal."?

[Masark]

what is to stop all the workers from reading their contracts and saying "I want to discuss a better deal."?

The minor fact that individuals have approximately zero bargaining power (especially in a high labour surplus situation) compared to a corporation with thousands/millions of times their financial resources?

- - - Updated - - -

However, shit like this Really pisses me off. A "paltry" 2.75% pay increase? So what isn't paltry?

Yes, that is paltry. According to the BoE, inflation has been around 3% lately, so a raise of only 2.75% is effectively a 0.25% pay cut.

A non-paltry increase would be one that at least matches the inflation that has occurred since the last increase.

[Deleted]

Unions are great. If you aren't in one, join one.

[Hraklea]

Ah hah, so its another one of them "US version is the default on an international forum" things...

I'm from Brazil.

[Templar 331]

You are under the assumption that a person with a marketable vocational skill equals a person who dumped 60k on getting a worthless unmarketable degree.

An art major isn't equal to a electrical engineer, large engine mechanic, CDL driver or network specialist. The sooner that society stops lying to teenagers and college students the better.

There are other jobs that need college degrees besides art majors. Engineers, doctors, lawyers, business accounting and I'm sure others. Now I agree with you most people should get trade skills, but not everyone can or has the aptitude for it.

Then 1 company would raise their wages, hire the best employees from the competitors (who pay less) and get a higher profit due a higher quality product.

I understand that Hobby Lobby pays better than Wal-Mart. So why doesn't everyone work at Hobby Lobby? Because Hobby Lobby only needs so many employees. The rest have to work at Wal-Mart.

And then why is Wal-Mart so much more successful than Hobby Lobby?

[Gavilrain]

There's nothing better than being a member of a Good Union...

Here's what mine has negotiated for the $175/month I pay in dues...

-Cost of Living Raises: Every year for the next 5 years I will see a 3% increase to my annual salary. If the minimum wage of the State is raised to $10.10 during this 5 year period and additional 10% will be added to my salary over 4-5 years. If the wage increases to $15/hour I will receive a 12% raise.

-Unlimited Dependent Health Insurance: My PPO through United Healthcare costs me $200/month and stays at that rate if I add one or ten more people to the policy.

-Guaranteed Time Off: If I work six consecutive days I'm given 48 Hours off from the time I leave work on that 6th Day. It's basically forcing the Company to follow the "One Day Rest in Seven" law that many places choose to ignore.

-Termination("Can") Insurance: If by some fluke I get temporarily suspended from duty due to a rules violation or accident I have a 60 days before my Investigation Hearing with the Union and the Company...If I purchased this insurance I will still receive 90% of my daily rate while I'm out of service awaiting the investigation.

-Work Where I Want When I Want: Because the Union is seniority based I can move around to any job my craft is qualified for as long as I have more time than the person currently on it. If I need Tuesday/Wednesday Off and the guy on X Job with those Off Days is Younger than I am...I can take over his job and obtain the off days for myself.


This is just what my Union does...Your results may vary.

[Hraklea]

So why doesn't everyone work at Hobby Lobby? Because Hobby Lobby only needs so many employees. The rest have to work at Wal-Mart.

As I said, Hobby Lobby would hire the best ones, in my hypothesis. So yes, the rest of them would have to work on Wal-Mart. It is expected that the less skilled would be in a worse situation that the more skilled. The problem is that unions makes the problem worse, by forcing companies to fire the less skilled (or not even hiring them) because paying an unskilled worker their value is "against the minimum wage law".

Unions protect the workers. I'm more worried about the unemployed. Feel free to judge me.

And then why is Wal-Mart so much more successful than Hobby Lobby?

I'm not american, and I've never heard about Hobby Lobby before, so I can't give you an accurate answer.

It sounds like you had the impression that I think any company that offers higher wages are destined to be successful. You have to look the context. My argument to your previous post was about what happens if all companies decide to offer wages that are below the market equilibrium wage - and only in that case. For instance, if Wal-Mart is offering the market equilibrium wage and Hobby Lobby is offering a higher wage, it is expected that Wal-Mart is doing better than the competitor.

[Masark]

As I said, Hobby Lobby would hire the best ones, in my hypothesis.

Aside from them having a slight case of being hypocritical dicks, sure.

[imabanana]

My thought is that unions would be much better with a "c" and a "r" added in the right places.

[Raeph]

There are other jobs that need college degrees besides art majors. Engineers, doctors, lawyers, business accounting and I'm sure others. Now I agree with you most people should get trade skills, but not everyone can or has the aptitude for it.

Without question. My comment was simply to state that some people have this idea that all college educated and degree carrying people have the same worth in the economy, and that because some study fields have issues with high unemployment, its a sign that everyone is suffering. Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, Accountants are fields with low unemployment. Political Science, Philosophy, Art, Language(English, Spanish, etc) and Sociological (Women's studies) degrees have unemployment higher than the national average.

If all you are doing in college is getting an art or philosophy degree, spending about 15k a year for a four year degree (in state tuition average, out of state is like 25k a year, Ivy league is in the 40k range I think), then you are better off saving your money, and getting a CDL license, or getting some other vocational skill. Unless you are going to school for the personal enrichment; if so then have at it, just don't *expect* to make a career out of it, though it's possible.

[Deleted]

im not in my work union, don't see any reason for me to be at the moment, also no reason for me not to be, i am just to lazy to join it. we got union reps at work we can speak to if we have an issue.

- - - Updated - - -

They used to be a great force for good and were requried. They are stillr equried now, but the fact that they force you to pay for political donations out of your dues to a party you might not support is despicable.

what?? why on earth would you have to pay political donations?

[Deleted]

Private sector unions I have no problems with. I loathe public sector unions though.

absolutely

[Deleted]

They dont seem to be much of an issue here, apart from the occasional bus or train service bitching at oppertune times.

occasional? the tube staff seem to always be on strike over one thing or another!

[Raeph]

what?? why on earth would you have to pay political donations?

The United State system works slightly differently that other countries with unions.

In the United States a union can take dues and use a portion for non-union organizing (read political) activities. In states that aren't right to work, the union at the end of the year is forced to refund that portion of the dues back to the non-members (right to work states, non-members don't pay dues though they may benefit from union organizing and collective bargaining), that was used for organizing, but the union members have no choice in the matter. For non-union members its like they are giving the union a zero percent interest loan for political activities, which they are paid back at the end of the year.

There was a court case in California about in a year or two ago.

Here we go: found it http://www.scpr.org/news/2012/06/21/...ployee-unions/