How labor unions prolonged the great depression.

#26
#26
BigPapaVol said:
The vast majority of people work non-union and amazingly, stick with it. The unions only retain their power in areas where they can force open voting and cram it in employees' throats.

Why don't you tell me how unions help corporations in the long run? I get that they steal money from the company for individuals, but I want to know what they do for the company?
Click to expand...

The figure is 60,000,000 that would work for a union if given a choice to do so.They do not stick with it ,in so mush as they are stuck with it.

If done correctly with profit sharing and cost reduction sharing based on idea's from the ones actually doing the work both can benefit.

And don't think I haven't noticed I am the only one here answering questions.

I do agree that their needs to be a middle ground.
But as far as either of us being able to succeed figuring that out we are wasting time and breath.
 
Last edited:
#27
#27
orangeblooded2 said:
The figure is 60,000,000 that would work for a union if given a choice to do so.They do not stick with it ,in so mush as they are stuck with it.

If done correctly with profit sharing and cost reduction sharing based on idea's from the ones actually doing the work both can benefit.

And don't think I haven't noticed I am the only one here answering questions.

I do agree that their needs to be a middle ground.
But as far as either of us being able to succeed figuring that out we are wasting time a breath.
Click to expand...
what an absolutely ridiculous statistic and absolutely unverifiable. Hell, we can't get 60 million people to vote, much less answer a survey legitimately about their desire to be unionized.

Don't tell me, the union funded a huge nationwide survey and by golly, 60 million people answered in the affirmative that they are being screwed every day by their employers and want to be unionized ASAP.
 
#28
#28
orangeblooded2 said:
The figure is 60,000,000 that would work for a union if given a choice to do so.They do not stick with it ,in so mush as they are stuck with it.

If done correctly with profit sharing and cost reduction sharing based on idea's from the ones actually doing the work both can benefit.

And don't think I haven't noticed I am the only one here answering questions.

I do agree that their needs to be a middle ground.
But as far as either of us being able to succeed figuring that out we are wasting time a breath.
Click to expand...

60 million want to belong to a union? BS

if GM, Ford, and Chrysler didn't have to deal with a monopolistic union, they would at least have a chance at being competitive with Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen, Nissan, Kia, Hyundai and so on.

Ron Gettlefinger couldn't design a car if he had to. He probably couldn't operate a welding machine, and probably has no clue what bore and stroke mean and he is dictating to the US Big 3 what they can and can't do with THEIR money and THEIR jobs.

Unions operate from the premise that jobs belong to the employees and that's simply not true.
 
#29
#29
gsvol said:
1. How do you mean still paying for?

2. Well I have. What was funny was that a young Puerto Rican worker took my side, stuck his hand in his pocket and threatened to to put a couple of holes in the head of the thug and the guy decided to retreat.
I asked him afterwards if he really had a pistol and he said no but the other guy didn't know that. That had to do with corrupt union, mob connected workers working in unison to commit large scale theft. For instance one corporation was losing a million dollars worth of merchandise a day in New York alone.

1A. They already have taken it that far, however I am not personally totally against the right of workers to unionize, I am just against giving the unions too much power and some of the bigger ones already have that.

Emotional distress?? Elaborate por favor.

The only way to combat off shoring is by tariffs as far as I can see, and that isn't going to happen.

It would be nice if all employers would do their best toward their workers.

However you can't go to far the other way either, or you will have no companies to provide jobs.

A good for instance is liberal socialist France that is now realizing the error of it's ways and trying to retreat to a more free business friendly atmosphere in the work place.

Japan did well to listen to Deming post WWII, he said there are four entities that have to be treated equally for business to succeed, those are;

1. the company itself
2. it's workers
3. it's customers
4. it's suppliers

If any of the four don't balance with the others, then the business is doomed to failure eventually.
Click to expand...


From it would be nice on.
Lets say I agree in principal.excluding france for which i don't have enough info to form an opinion.
What do you think a good model for a median ground would be between my very pro union and PBV's to hell with the union approach should be?
 
#30
#30
orangeblooded2 said:
What do you think a good model for a median ground would be between my very pro union and PBV's to hell with the union approach should be?
Click to expand...
I think the auto plants now springing up in the South have shown the perfect middle ground - absolutely no unions within a 5,000 mile radius of the plant or its supply train.
 
#31
#31
orangeblooded2 said:
What do you think a good model for a median ground would be between my very pro union and PBV's to hell with the union approach should be?
Click to expand...

make every state in the union a right to work state, let union members work alongside non-union members and let them compare paychecks. When the union worker sees how much money he or she pisses away to the union along with the forfeiture of any right to deal one on one with management, the labor union will find itself in trouble.

I refuse to believe that rank and file union members believe in gay marriage, abortion on demand, a pervasive welfare state, high taxes, etc. yet they are forced to contribute billions to a union structure that supports liberal politicians and their liberal agendas.
 
#32
#32
BigPapaVol said:
I think the auto plants now springing up in the South have shown the perfect middle ground - absolutely no unions within a 5,000 mile radius of the plant or its supply train.
Click to expand...

And no right to bargain for anything the company deems unnecessary.

But probably still better places to work than most.
 
#35
#35
orangeblooded2 said:
I am not going to recite a whole union book or contractual agreement between the union and company.:no: Find an example on line.
Click to expand...

Again, like what? Impossible to fire? Overpaid? Too much vacation? Stupidity clause? Whiner doctrine?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#36
#36
orangeblooded2 said:
I am not going to recite a whole union book or contractual agreement between the union and company.:no: Find an example on line.
Click to expand...

I'm as anti-union as BPV, and thus far you've not made a convincing case for the labor unions.

there is NOTHING that a labor union can offer that a company, without the filter of some idiot like Ron Gettlefinger, can't offer as a result of a free market economy.
 
#37
#37
orangeblooded2 said:
I stand by my opinions.

As far as the highlighted paragraph.Something tells me that you are out of touch with any knowledge about a union,as far as personal experience.That you arguments are from a finical management position and straight out of a business course seminar or something very similar.
Click to expand...

I have a ton of first hand experience with unions. I don't think I can think of a worse parasite that exists in the workplace.
 
#39
#39
MG1968 said:
I'm as anti-union as BPV, and thus far you've not made a convincing case for the labor unions.

there is NOTHING that a labor union can offer that a company, without the filter of some idiot like Ron Gettlefinger, can't offer as a result of a free market economy.
Click to expand...
.

Congratulations.But,neither have you for your opinions.





Then why do they not exist?_QUESTION?



At least i have the vision to see the need for a middle ground.Something that we are not going to come up with here in this bastion of business barons.
 
#40
#40
"They do not stick with it ,in so mush as they are stuck with it."


Toyota has a very good business model going, in terms of keeping the unions out. The pay scale for skilled trades, while not in line with the unions, is very good. The pay scale for secondary positions (press operators, fork truck drivers) is also very good, although you probably won't find a wire runner making $25/hr. Benefits are outstanding, the employees are taken care. And in return for a good wage and benefits, the employees don't unionize. Makes sense, doesn't it?

Orangeblooded, just out of curiosity, what was your job in a union shop? I think that would be interesting, if you wouldn't mind sharing that info...
 
#41
#41
beergood said:
"They do not stick with it ,in so mush as they are stuck with it."


Toyota has a very good business model going, in terms of keeping the unions out. The pay scale for skilled trades, while not in line with the unions, is very good. The pay scale for secondary positions (press operators, fork truck drivers) is also very good, although you probably won't find a wire runner making $25/hr. Benefits are outstanding, the employees are taken care. And in return for a good wage and benefits, the employees don't unionize. Makes sense, doesn't it?

Orangeblooded, just out of curiosity, what was your job in a union shop? I think that would be interesting, if you wouldn't mind sharing that info...
Click to expand...



I'm not willing to say but it was a highly skilled trade.One that I can bring unique experience too.

If you reread one of my post I said Toyota was a good company and that I would work for them union or not.
 
#42
#42
orangeblooded2 said:
I'm not willing to say but it was a highly skilled trade.One that I can bring unique experience too.

If you reread one of my post I said Toyota was a good company and that I would work for them union or not.
Click to expand...

If it took such skill along with your unique experience, why the need for the union membership?
 
Last edited:
#43
#43
orangeblooded2 said:
I think after the big three retool they will be better off.

Toyota's business model is far different that most u.s. companies and i would work for them union or not.

As far as being able to see the need for a union.Drop your masters and go work for a non-union company for six months and I guarantee you a different perspective.
Click to expand...

Philosophically, I don't agree with the "seniority first" mentality. Blue collar or white collar, you need the most capable people running things. Competitve edge drops when this isn't the case, it's a fact.

I work for an Aerospace Engineering company. The company I work for has a defense and commercial sector. I work in defense...and the commercial sector based out on the west coast has an engineer union that you have to join. There is no way we win some of the defense contracts we do while being unionized. Our competitors would eat our lunch, literally. We simply can't be price competitive and the threat of production shutting down doesn't sit too well with the governement when we are supplying weapon systems the warfighter needs.

I can categorically tell you that there is no way in the pit of hades would I ever transfer to commercial, no matter the promotion, simply because I don't want to be unionized. It is that simple. I have heard horror stories from guys that work out there.

Just so you know, most on here would consider me one of the more liberal and democratic leaning posters. But with this issue, the dems have it all wrong. Again, I don't see the need for it in today's business world. Anybody not treating their employees right will go out of business.

I appreciate what you are saying, but it just doesn't add up to a defensible argument.
 
Last edited:
#44
#44
orangeblooded2 said:
I'm not willing to say but it was a highly skilled trade.One that I can bring unique experience too.

If you reread one of my post I said Toyota was a good company and that I would work for them union or not.
Click to expand...

Why would you work for Toyota if they aren't unionized? What makes Toyota attractive to a union man? Is it because, for all intents and purposes, Toyota is a union shop in terms of pay and benefits?

Let me ask you this...do you see any reason to pay a fork truck driver or press operator between 25-30 dollars an hour? Grossing 6 figures? Because that, to me, is a prime example of why the Big 3 are hurting right now. Also, paying for the health insurance and retirement of a million plus people who don't even punch the clock anymore probably isn't good for the finances...
 
#47
#47
rjd970 said:
Philosophically, I don't agree with the "seniority first" mentality. Blue collar or white collar, you need the most capable running things. Competitve edge drops when this isn't the case, it's a fact.

I work for an Aerospace Engineering company. The company I work for has a defense and commercial sector. I work in defense...and the commercial sector based out on the west coast has an engineer union that you have to join. There is no way we win some of the defense contracts we do while being unionized. Our competitors would eat our lunch, literally. We simply can't be price competitive and the threat of production shutting down doesn't sit too well with the governement when we are supplying weapon systems the warfighter needs.

I can categorically tell you that there is no way in the pit of hades would I ever transfer to commercial, no matter the promotion, simply because I don't want to be unionized. It is that simple. I have heard horror stories from guys that work out there.

Just so you know, most on here would consider me one of the more liberal and democratic leaning posters. But with this issue, the dems have it all wrong. Again, I don't see the need for it in today's business world. Anybody not treating their employees right will go out of business.

I appreciate what you are saying, but it just doesn't add up to a defensible argument.
Click to expand...

My experience too comes from a defense contractor were each product costs between 4 billion dollars and 8 billion dollars and takes 5 to 7 years to build.It to was a private company.My skills would transfer perfectly to defense. In a situtaion like yours were skill and ability were the rule of the day,and i could probally live with no union under those cicumstances.
 
#48
#48
orangeblooded2 said:
My experience too comes from a defense contractor were each product costs between 4 billion dollars and 8 billion dollars and takes 5 to 7 years to build.It to was a private company. My skills would transfer perfectly to defense. In a situtaion like yours were skill and ability were the rule of the day,and i could probally live with no union under those cicumstances.
Click to expand...

Seems to me if that is your answer you would not want to work for a union anywhere. Like you said, skill should come first, not seniority.

Then why in favor of unions? Why would you think that a union is going to look out for your best interest if they want seniority first? You think it is fair that somebody not as skilled as you gets the better job first because they were hired 6 months before you? That is typically the way unions work.
 
#49
#49
rjd970 said:
Seems to me if that is your answer you would not want to work for a union anywhere. Like you said, skill should come first, not seniority.

Then why in favor of unions? Why would you think that a union is going to look out for your best interest if they want seniority first? You think it is fair that somebody not as skilled as you gets the better job first because they were hired 6 months before you? That is typically the way unions work.
Click to expand...

The short answers.

1.It would be dependent on the job and the company.

2.Arbitration.typicaly more benefits.Some unions do operate that way,not all.
 
#50
#50
orangeblooded2 said:
The short answers.

1.It would be dependent on the job and the company.

2.Arbitration.typicaly more benefits.Some unions do operate that way,not all.
Click to expand...

again, why is it about "benefits"? Why should a company be forced to pay 95% of an employee's health insurance premiums? And why would a union go on strike when the company wants the employee to pay 5% more?

again, there isn't a single benefit a union can negotiate by force that an employer can't offer simply as a means of attracting and retaining the best and most qualified applicants.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top