What exactly is it that makes everybody lose their heads when the topic of labor unions arises?

[rockymountaindem]

Last night I went to a fairly large get-together of law students because I somehow ended up on their e-mail list despite not being in law school. I was talking with another dude about the election and the economy. When the topic of the auto industry bailout arose, I said that if we're going to give taxpayer money to the big three the government needs to ask for some kind of recompense in terms of shares. I also said that I believe the reason the auto industry is in this current crunch is because they have been putting out products that are behind the times in terms of fuel efficiency and that the whole US industry has had a wrong-headed view on that topic for years.

My erstwhile debate opponent had a different tack. He immediately launched into a shaky diatribe on how labor unions are making our auto companies uncompetitive by demanding high wages. I countered with what I thought was a perfectly reasonable reply. I said that our competitors in Europe, Canada and Asia have even stronger labor unions and that the big difference in the bottom line between us and them is health care costs. I asked him why, if unions are the real problem, US firms are shifting more and more production to Canada, where unions are more plentiful and stronger. I said that the key is health care: the Canadians get it from the government, thereby reducing operating costs for the firm. So, I said, it seems obvious that the manufacturers are more willing to put up with strong unions than high health care costs.

That made no impact on him. He kept on about how unions are wrecking the companies they work for. When I presented him with more and more evidence he fell back on the old "I'll have to do more research" line. I hope he does.

My question for you fine people is, why do non-union people who will never engage in union negotiations from either side sometimes have this tendency to blame unions for *everything*. Bad schools? Unions' fault. Poor economy? Unions' fault. Cable guy was late? Unions' fault. Nevermind the fact that other industrialized countries have as strong or in most cases stronger unions than we have. I figure there must be some latent component of anti-union sentiment I'm not seeing. What is it?

[nichomachus]

1. 40 years of constant anti-union propaganda will do that n/t

[alsame]

2. Yep. I have a relative who is a member of a union and is

anti-union :crazy:

[nichomachus]

37. Same here -- my sister -- union saved her job -- she hates unions

[malaise]

66. Ditto n/t

[phantom power]

3. Here's my take....

It started with union overreaching and corruption in the 70s. The GOP leveraged that corruption during the Reagan era, and managed to embed the "unions are bad" meme pretty thoroughly into the culture. Similar to how they managed to embed the "welfare queen" meme.

Another factor was that non-union white collar jobs paid well in the last few decades. It was easy for a white collar yuppie (like myself) to look around and say "hey, I'm doing just fine without unions, what's everybody else's problem?"

As a corollary, I think that many Americans are going to re-discover the value of unions, in the hard times that are coming. We'll see.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

7. Agreed.

I predict there will be a sharp increase in support for unions.

[rockymountaindem]

11. There already is strong support for unions

It's just hard to organize in the USA. I read an excellent article for one of my grad seminars by Seymour Lipset about the strange paradox of union support in the US and Canada. In the US there is higher support for unions but lower membership relative to Canada, where public support for unions is low but membership outstrips that of the US. His conclusion is that unions received more encouragement to form from the Canadian government, and that US labor laws are harder on potential and existing unions than Canadian laws.

From that perspective, you'd think that the US would be a corporate paradise relative to all our competitors. I suppose it's possible to be fundamentally opposed on a philosophical level to collective bargaining (if Ayn Rand can be called 'philosophical'). But from a comparative perspective, we've got the most corporate-friendly labor laws of the industrialized nations. Yet, foreign auto companies still manage to out-compete our own. I think that's a strong enough signal that unions aren't the crux of the problem here.

[Greyhound]

85. Exactly why we failed to organize IT workers in the 90s. Almost without exception

we heard, nearly verbatim, "hey, I'm doing just fine without unions, what's everybody else's problem?".

Just shows that no matter how smart you are, you aren't as smart as you think you are.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

4. Decades of propaganda by business interests and a biased media

Notice how on the rare occasion the MSM covers a labor dispute there will be more corporate representatives represented than labor leaders.

I also think it's a function of the aspirational nature of our society. Many Americans honestly believe they will one day be among the owner class, even if in reality they are nowhere near it, so there's a tendency to identify with it, even if it's in direct contradiction to their own best interest.

[av8rdave]

5. Unions are one of the best examples of the right's success in using labels to defame

"Union bosses," "greedy unions," "union rules," "union breaks," "union featherbedding" are all terms that have been used to paint unions as some kind of anti-business evil empire.

The right forgets that unions are made up of tens of thousands of working people - with a lot of votes and a lot of spending power.

In my industry and at my company, my union has literally saved my company on more than one occasion. Organized labor does understand that the health of the company is the bedrock of job and income security. Unfortunately, there are many who believe that the right to organize and bargain collectively for pay, benefits, work rules and job safety is somehow unAmerican. Generally, it's those same people who have a vested interest in suppressing pay, benefits, work rules and job safety.

[reggie the dog]

44. union breaks

damn right, give me 2 breaks plus lunch, thank you unions!

[lob1]

6. Without unions, there would be no middle class.

[reggie the dog]

45. EXACTLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[gravity]

8. There are legitimate arguments against unions

as they are arguments for them. The problem is the debates become and anti/pro union argument, which offers nothing constructive.

Instead of saying that unions are good or bad, we should think about the proper role of unions in the economy. They should make sure that workers have rights and are fairly compensated, while at the same time, allow businesses to be profitable and competitive.

[TheFarseer]

83. you're so right

Unions have been very important in the development of this country. What unions accomplished at the start of this century is the difference between the USA being a clusterf*ck like Mexico or what we are today. However, I see a problem when unskilled labor makes more than people who have masters degrees, especially when the companies they work for are not turning a profit. I firmly believe that workers AND management will need to take a sizable paycut and cut in benefits for the auto industry to survive in this country.

[Mojambo]

9. 28 years of Reaganomics and the douchebag rightwing radio that propped it up. n/t

[ipfilter]

10. It's a divisive issue.

One of the nastiest campaigns I ever saw was the Right to Work issue her in Oklahoma a few years ago. The rhetoric from both sides was disgusting. There was so much rhetoric I doubt anyone who didn't read up on Right to Work had any idea what it really means.

Unions are the antithesis to capitalists. Unions gain power through union dues and political lobbying and the capitalists have power because they create the jobs. They oppose each other politically and there is a great deal of class warfare as well.

[Turbineguy]

12. After having been

in a Union for over 25 years and having been a senior supervisor, I can state unequivocally: It's Management.

Management decides what the employees do with their time. Management pays for that time. Management pays for the overtime.

Management does not come out and say "I want you to waste your time today". But Management gives employees tasks that waste time or use employee talents poorly.

After Management stops wasting employees time, then your friend can argue "It's the Unions."

And to take it one step further, Management knows exactly what their Unionized labor force costs will be because it's spelled out in a contract. Management never knows what Management costs will be. That is why a well-negotiated Labor contract can be an asset to a company. Most contracts are negotiated with the same short-sightedness as the rest of the way a company is run. Keep the assembly line going and hope for a miracle.

Obviously, to the Union, making demands that put the company out of business is counter productive. But it's Management's responsibility to run the company.

If Management couldn't play the "health-care cost" card it would be some other lame excuse.

[rockymountaindem]

13. Interesting point

I'll remember that the next time this comes up.

[guitar man]

15. ding ding ding!!

I agree 100%. and I'm in management now! :P

[erinlough]

51. Add to that Union presence allowed management to hide

their inefficiencies and bloated salaries which pillage many companies and blame it on the guy on the line. I too have been a union member for the past 30 years and management has always had the ability to hire and fire and discipline. What they do have to adhere to is doing that fairly.

My husband worked with the auto industry but is non-union and he is at the whim of every supervisor he sees and there is no fairness in it at all. He owned a business before we met and was very anti-union, but in his present situation and observing how a union can help the worker he wishes he had a union to join.

[varelse]

74. Agreed

Management wastes a fairly large proportion of a company's resources - when not outright diverting them to friends & family (vendors & contractors chosen for personal rather than business reasons).

[Joe Chi Minh]

77. It is not a secret that it was poor management that destroyed our car industry in the UK.

But when we had car manufacturers which made cars with 4 wheels and not just 3, the trade unions and their leaders were the ones demonised by the media.

Everything they have exalted has been massively discredited, everything and everyone they demonised have been vindicated. Brown is just a weeeee bit slow at catching on.

[guitar man]

14. I run into that all the time

There was a guy in here yesterday saying the same shit. I said "well maybe your experience when you worked in a factory was" different. His reply, "well, I've never worked in a factory..." I cut him off midstream with "then you obviously have no fucking idea of what you're talking about then, do you?"

I love it when those with lily whit manacured hands start talking shit about people who actually work for a living. I will jump straight off into their shit with no apologies. ;)

[NoGOPZone]

16. An economic class with an interest in suppressing unions, a media complicit in spreading

lies about unions, and a public too willing to believe what they're told. Many people don't realize how unions made the middle class possible.

[Hubert Flottz]

17. American children before the UMWA became a force...

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/childlabor/

*************



American children after the UMWA became a force in America...

[ipfilter]

21. Good pics.

We can get rid of unions and go back to the time of sweat shops, robber barons, and company stores. Maybe some of the wealth of the robber barons will trickle down to the peons living in the company houses.

[Hubert Flottz]

40. Before labor laws and the unionization of the American work force...

Georgia & Virginia: "Dinner Toters"

Child Labor in the American South: Georgia & Virginia: “Dinner Toters”

Joshua Gazo

Shortly after the turn of the 20th century, child labor was one of the most controversial issues in Industrial America. As awareness of the plight of children in factories grew in fervor, activist groups were formed to advocate legislation that would police—if not end—child labor in factories. The most notable and famous of these groups was the National Child Labor Committee, officially organized in New York City in 1904 (History of NCLC). The NCLC immediately jumped to the forefront of the movement against child labor, publishing numerous pamphlets detailing various aspects of the problem of child labor, ranging from the hazardous conditions in the factories to the social dilemmas presented by the labor of children in the factories.

As more investigation was done, it became apparent that industrial child labor was a formidable problem in the South, especially in Georgia. It also became apparent that any attempt to change the status quo of child labor would be a daunting task. Georgia had been the last state in the Union to pass a child labor law in 1906, having long skirted the issue through a “gentlemen’s agreement” between the state and its mill owners and managers, represented by the Georgia Industrial Association. The industrialists and legislators held that as long as the terms of this agreement were kept, a law regarding child labor was unnecessary. As can be expected, the terms of the “gentleman’s agreement” were very slack, with no means by which the state could persecute any mill found in violation of the agreement. The terms adopted by the Georgia Industrial Association under the agreement were that no child was to work more than 66 hours in factories, and that no child under the age of 12 was to work unless deemed necessary, such as in instances of an invalid father or a widow mother. The law enacted in 1906 echoed the terms of the “gentlemen’s agreement”, with some additional restrictions. In brief, the state law forbade the employment of any child under 10 years of age, children under 12 unless in instances of dependent parents, and finally requiring that children between 14 and 18 years of age attend school for 12 weeks of the previous year. Official affidavits granted by County Ordinaries for child employees were required to be given to factory managers by parents of child laborers, in order to confirm the child’s age. Any violation of the law was punishable by a misdemeanor charge (NCLC Pamphlets, No. 138). While a step in the right direction for the state of Georgia, the child labor law still left ample room for factory managers to find ways around the law, not to mention its less-than-adequate enforcement.

In most cases, overt corruption was the preferred method of avoiding the stipulations of the child labor law. Evidence of crooked or apathetic County Ordinaries abounded, and accordingly the arbitrary issuance of “official” affidavits was quite common. Often very little proof of actual necessity for underage labor (in instances of a widow mother or an invalid father, in which circumstances the law allowed underage children to work) was needed for an underage child to gain permission from the County Ordinary to work in the local factories (NCLC Pamphlets, No. 185).

Dinner Toters

One of the more famous methods of dodging the labor law was known as “Dinner Toting.” At first, dinner toting seems little more than a way for younger members of mill families to contribute to the well-being of their elders. However, investigation below the seemingly innocent purpose reveals that dinner toting was merely a piece of the “helper system” ...More...

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://userpages.umbc.edu/~arubin/HIST402_SP2007/EAC8B9745E34B73D80377FAEFB41FDB3.html&usg=__-RsBoLrYxtP7tXY4ARQGMClp_Y8=&h=647&w=473&sz=102&hl=en&start=3&um=1&tbnid=cBh_LuGQS4SkIM:&tbnh=137&tbnw=100&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpublic%2Bschool%2Bchildren%2Bafter%2Bchild%2Blabor%2Blaws%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

Before the unions the world was a sad place for American children. The same thing is happening today in other parts of the world where American companies have set up shop in order to avoid labor laws, unionization of the work force and health and safety regulations in the work place. The GOP's corporate benefactors want to turn back the clock in America too.

Ever wonder why your grandfather or grandmother or maybe even if you're a bit older, even maybe your parents couldn't read or write?


Growing Up on Cabin Creek

An Interview with Arnold Miller

Snip...

Arnold Miller: My daddy was born in Bell County, in Pineville in East Kentucky, and was forced to migrate out of Kentucky to West Virginia at the age of 14, ostensibly for his organizing activity. He was a veteran miner at the age of 14, had five years in the mines. It's not common for people to understand today that years ago they worked children in the mines. I had a group picture I could show you somewhere here in Charleston. Showed about 30 miners, only two of which were adults. It's odious from looking at the picture that children did work in the mines in the early days. They worked them like slaves. They didn't pay them but damn little, and they dogged them around. Mining is far different today than it was then. Much more...

http://www.wvgenweb.org/wvcoal/miller.html

[Bozita]

22. "Harlan County, USA" -- It's MUST SEE stuff for all Americans.

1976 | 103 min. | Director: Barbara Kopple | TV14

Director Barbara Kopple's look at a 13-month coal miners' strike that took place between 1973 and 1974 in Harlan County, KY, is one of the great films about labor troubles, though not for a sense of objectivity. Kopple lived among the miners and their families off and on during the four years the entire story played out, and it's clear in every frame of the film that her sympathies lie with the miners and not their bosses at Eastover Mining, owned by Duke Power Company. Kopple's camera focuses on the desperate plight of people still living in shacks with no indoor plumbing and working dangerous jobs with little security and few safety rules. The miners are determined to join the United Mine Workers, and the company is determined to break the strike with scabs, who are even more desperate than the men with jobs. The miners eventually win a new contract, though it turns out that some of the benefits they had fought for were not included in the final deal. The filmmaker's strong identification with one side of a labor struggle doesn't make for a balanced historical record, but it did provide the right stuff for a powerfully dramatic film.

[HughBeaumont]

41. That photo below is from the 40s.

Unbelievable quality. I remember seeing it in a Library of Congress gallery.

[depakid]

18. Americans love to have their scapegoats

laying one sided blame is easier than critically thinking about the root causes of complictated problems or cases- and resolutions.

In my experience, law students are particularly prone to this- probably due to their ongoing training (and lack of experience with) the adversarial system.

[Aslanspal]

19. Because in somebodies past their has been a stinker Local

I have been one good Union and one that would have been great imho.

UAW 848

and the CWA.

The CWA was part of an American Airlines drive back in 1997 we had the card check(65%?) then came the general election and it got ugly with lots of money coming in to defeat us. They imho are the most progressive people out there with development of leadership and on the cutting edge of what is real.

My UAW local dealt with defense and we pretty much had an easy time of it, but I would notice leadership being packed with family and friends if you were in you were fine but if you went against them it was hard but overall it was a good local but it was not growing and reaching for the future.

My last Union the IAM for airlines, did not even send anyone to talk to us when we started a new station for Air Wisconsin, they just took my dues and they were full dues at $31.00 a month and I was only working 21 hours a week at 9 dollars an hour. I asked if they could be reduced they gave me the run around on how that would have to be in the next contract and to bring it up...wow! I had the feeling of tough luck buster. To be fair to them I think Air Wisconsin was playing games with them the whole time they were breaking contract rules all the time. A lot of time a Union such as IAM for airlines does not have the leadership of resources to keep up with corporate shenanigans.
*btw as a part timer no benefits but flight benefits, that was odd..."I was in a UNION"

All that said there are some good unions but I really believe it is time for reform and the CWA is a great blueprint for any Union to reform to.

Solutions:

1. Longer contracts 4 to 7 years
2. Get rid of seniority to a degree and let the best of best rise to the top and have the Union tap these talented people.
3. Living wage plus 1 be open to lower wages if the company is honest with their books and the Union can help them survive.
4. Pass laws to keep companies in USA for 2 years before they can move offshore, the Union and community could come up with a package to keep them here.
5. Union and company work hand in hand in drumming up business, UAW in the defense area did this by lobbying congress, the same with airlines they helped the company with congress.
6. Unions should be demanding 50 percent of all jobs sent to India for customer service come home at living wage jobs..in fact all people should be screaming this...this is customer service within our own nation for Jesus sake!
7. Yes, card check get out of the long bureaucracy of secret ballot and the ugliness that ensues with outside consultants.
8. Be quick and flexible to help a company stay afloat but keeping the core of safety and pension. Get people on the board of directors....buy up company stock to have influence that it be run without waste.

there were a few more but I have forgotten over the years, now in a non-union job programming Robots for production, so far so good it is not perfect but my expectations were low to begin with and just using them to get out one day. Even in this job this company has enormous temp help(bad) and continually moving people around they bought into 5S+1 that can run you down to the bare knuckles. And still they are moving tons of work to China.

[NNN0LHI]

24. Get rid of seniority to any degree and only the bosses kids will "rise to the top"

Been there. Done that.

You either are not living in the real world or you are a bosses kid.

Don

[Aslanspal]

49. Is that all you have???

Yes, living in the real world and most of it was under Union contracts which was overall good.

Now do you have any solutions or just a short quip of ignorance, of course you can incorporate anti-nepotism into contract...duh!

you are either a troll trying to stir things up or you really think things should remain as they are, not gonna happen, things must change even for Unions.

[Hannah Bell]

58. "let the 'talented' rise to the top" = codespeak for divide the workers.

Once you do it, the young sell out the old, the highly paid sell out the lowly paid & vice-versa.

Your "solution" shows you don't get it.

[unblock]

20. unions are like lawyers. everyone hates them until they need them.

[1776Forever]

23. I think it started in Reagan's time frame. Lots of people thought that Unions ask too much...

Found this on the web that says it all:

Labor - And A Whole Lot More
Ronald Reagan's War on Labor
by Dick Meister

http://www.dickmeister.com/id89.html

Amidst the continued outpouring of praise for Ronald Reagan, let's not forget that he was one of the most anti-labor presidents in U.S. history, a role model for the virulently anti-labor George W. Bush.

Republican presidents never have had much regard for unions, which almost invariably have opposed their election. But until Reagan, no GOP president had dared to challenge labor's firm legal standing, gained through Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the mid-1930s.

Reagan's Republican predecessors treated union leaders much as they treated Democratic members of Congress -- as people to be fought with at times, but also as people to be bargained with at other times. But Reagan engaged in precious little bargaining. He waged almost continuous war against organized labor.

(snip)

Reagan,in any case, was a true ideologue of the anti-labor political right. Yes, he had been president of the Screen Actors Guild, but he was notoriously pro-management, leading the way to a strike-ending agreement in 1959 that greatly weakened the union and finally resigning under membership pressure before his term ended.

Reagan's war on labor began in the summer of 1981, when he fired 13,000 striking air traffic controllers and destroyed their union. As Washington Post columnist Harold Meyerson noted, that was "an unambiguous signal that employers need feel little or no obligation to their workers, and employers got that message loud and clear -- illegally firing workers who sought to unionize, replacing permanent employees who could collect benefits with temps who could not, shipping factories and jobs abroad."

Reagan gave dedicated union foes direct control of the federal agencies that were designed originally to protect and further the rights and interests of workers and their unions.

Most important was Reagan's appointment of three management representatives to the five-member National Labor Relations Board which oversees union representation elections and labor-management bargaining, They included NLRB Chairman Donald Dotson, who believed that "unionized labor relations have been the major contributors to the decline and failure of once-healthy industries" and have caused "destruction of individual freedom."

(snip)

The Reagan administration all but dismantled programs that required affirmative action and other steps against discrimination by federal contractors, and seriously undermined worker safety. It closed one-third of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's field offices, trimmed its staff by more than one-fourth and decreased the number of penalties assessed against employers by almost three-fourths.

Rather than enforce the law, the administration sought "voluntary compliance" from employers on safety matters - and generally didn't get or expect it. The administration had so tilted the job safety laws in favor of employers that union safety experts found them virtually useless.

The same could have been said of all other labor laws in the Reagan era. A statement issued at the time by the presidents of several major unions concluded it would have been more advantageous for those who worked for a living to ignore the laws and return "to the law of the jungle" that prevailed a half-century before.

Their suggestion came a little late. Ronald Reagan had already plunged labor-management relations deep into the jungle.

Copyright © Dick Meister

[Hubert Flottz]

48. Nazi Conspiracy & Aggression

Volume I Chapter VII

Means Used by the Nazi Conspiractors in Gaining Control of the German State

snip...

1) Before the Nazis took control, organized labor held a well established and influential position in Germany. Most of the trade unions of Germany were joined together in two large congresses or federations, the Free Trade Unions (Freie Gewerk schaften) and Christian Trade Unions (Christlichen Gewerk-

Snip...

2) The Nazi conspirators conceived that the free trade unions were incompatible with their objectives.

snip...

(3) Soon after coming to power the Nazi conspirators took drastic action to convert the Factory Representative Councils into Nazi controlled organizations. The Nazi conspirators eliminated the independence of the Factory Representative Councils by giving the Governors of the Laender authority to cancel the membership of labor representatives in the councils; by abrogating the right of the councils to oppose the dismissal of a worker when he was "suspected of an unfriendly attitude toward the state" (1770-PS); and finally by limiting membership in all Factory Representative Councils to Nazis (2336-PS). (After 7 April 1933, the Governors of the Laender were appointed by the Reich President "upon the proposal of the Reich Chancellor," Hitler,

snip...

(4) Soon after coming to power the Nazi conspirators proceeded to destroy the independent unions. In mid-April 1933, Hitler directed Dr. Robert Ley, then staff director of the PO (Political Organization) of the NSDAP, to take over the trade unions. MORE...

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/imt/nca/nca-01/nca-01-07-means-27.html

About the time Hitler was doing away with the unions in Nazi Germany American Corporations were busy trying to do the same things in this country and they still are to this day.

[1776Forever]

54. Thank you for the post - I had read some on this but this is very clear -

It does seem like a War on the Middle Class which was brought to birth by the Unions.

:hi:

[Hannah Bell]

59. Reagan was just the agent of his funders. He did similar things

as governor of California, for the same masters.

[newtothegame]

25. My father stopped paying dues and withdrew from his union...

when his non-union friends were physically and verbally harassed when trying to work during a strike by union workers (midnight phone calls, blocking access to car doors when leaving at night, etc.). That kind of behavior is completely unacceptable in my opinion; just because someone doesn't agree with being in a union they deserve this? Unfortuneatly, bad eggs like these create people like my father who will never tell anyone the GOOD side of unions.

[mitchum]

26. There's a reason they call them "scabs"...

and scabs get what they deserve

[newtothegame]

29. We wouldn't approve of that behavior when we disagree with someone's politics...

Why is it ok in a work setting? And I said BAD EGGS, you make it sound like this should be acceptable behavior for all union members.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

30. No They Don't. It Is UNACCEPTABLE How They Are Harrassed.

Some union members are nothing more than bully thugs.

[slackmaster]

27. I have to plead profound ignorance on the subject

Neither I nor any member of my immediate family, or any of my grandparents, aunts, or uncles or cousins have ever been a member of a union AFAIK. My mom's sister was a school teacher for a while in Colorado. She may be an exception, but I really don't know.

We've all been either non-union professionals like me, or doctors (and the AMA doesn't count as a union in my view), or in the military.

Other than what I have read in history books and gleaned from the news, the subject of labor unions is totally outside of my personal experience.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

28. I Can't Totally Disagree With You Or Your Friend. Fact Is, The UAW Is Definitely A Part Of All This

The UAW and the costs associated with them are a huge hindrance to GM, and any plan to get GM going again absolutely needs to take that into account. There are a ton of concessions and re-contracting that would need to be done on their part and they absolutely share some of the blame in all this. But regardless of that fact, the management and piss poor business plan are to blame even more. But it's not one side or the other. All of them are to blame, UAW included.

[whathehell]

31. I have a couple of great bumper stickers...Educational, too.

1. Unions. The anti-theft device for working people.

2. Labor: The people who brought you The Weekend!

[madrchsod]

32. i take it this student forgot econ 101 or

he has`t figured out exchange rates....sometimes it`s just a waste of time to talk to people.

[depakid]

38. What do exchange rates have to do with it?

:shrug:

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[undeterred]

34. Because people have bad experiences with unions.

I have never been a member of a union, but I have worked in several places where there were clerical workers unions. As a computer technician I can be fired for no reason at all, but the jobs of people in unions seem to be protected no matter how poorly they perform. I have seen employees who had substance abuse problems, who were consistently difficult to work with, or who did virtually no work at all persist in jobs for years, sometimes being shuffled from one job to another. Meanwhile the rest of us are held to a much higher standard. It doesn't seem fair.

[Kokonoe]

43. In order survive a lifetime on a menial job.

People sometimes need help.

Nobody wants to grow up in a factory.

[undeterred]

68. Everyone needs help- not just the people in menial jobs.

Its a very demoralizing situation to have some employees whose jobs are bulletproof from bad behavior that is harmful to the workplace while others are held to a different standard. All the jobs in a company should be union or none of the jobs.

[NNN0LHI]

65. In a non-union shop it will only be the bosses kids and their friends who get the cush jobs

The rest of us non-relatives get the shit jobs.

Is that the system you would prefer?

Seems like your bad experience with unions mainly consists of you not being smart enough to figure this out and organize yourself.

Don

[undeterred]

67. I answered the OP question with my experience

which is actually very common, so I get slammed with "not being smart enough" and your projection that I am anti unions?

This is why people leave DU, because its impossible to have constructive discussions.

[NNN0LHI]

69. Well let me ask you something then

Is it part of your job duties and are you in a position to be keeping an eye on the union people there and judging their performance?

Sounds to me like you have way too much time on your hands standing around keeping track of what everyone else is doing. Have you ever thought about that? Just imagine how much more productive you could be if you were only concerned with your own duties.

Maybe you are the one who is doing the fucking off and are only projecting? Because in all the years I have worked and belonged to a union there was never one time I ever felt I was qualified to give an accurate assessment of someone else's work. I was too busy doing my own work. I didn't have time to be long necking my fellow employees.

And another thing if you post bullshit here don't act all surprised when someone calls you on it.

Thats the way it has always worked here.

Don

[undeterred]

70. You aren't even 1% capable of having a rational

discussion with someone whose opinion differs from your own. If someone's work experience and point of view doesn't match yours that gives you the right to be an abusive asshole? You obviously have extremely limited life and work experience. You've never worked in a team environment where one persons performance dragged down the rest. I feel sorry for you, you pathetic white male bully.

Now go on and bully some other people and see how well it works at getting them to agree with you. Loser.

[NNN0LHI]

82. My normal response would have been to call you a suckass and write you off as a company man

Shit I thought I was being real sweet with you.

Touchy.

Don

[bertman]

89. NNNOLHI, in undeterred's original post he made a legitimate point that any worker in any

type of industry or workplace can observe. There are few areas of employment where workers are not able to observe how their coworkers perform. I'm pretty sure that this is not something that is exclusive to union workplaces.

Where have you been working for all these years that you could not work and observe your fellow workers' work habits at the same time?

P.S. undeterred wasn't being touchy. You were being a jerk.

[NNN0LHI]

90. Another longnecker more worried about "observing" someone else rather than themselves

Longneckers and suckasses are the jerks friend.

As I said I was always too busy doing my job to be worried what everyone else was doing.

You ought to try it sometime.

I bet you guys are a real blast to work around. Not only would I have the boss watching me I would also have the "observers" keeping an eye on me too. Glad I am retired and away from the creeps like you guys.

Don

[bertman]

91. NNNOLHI, where are you getting this information? Is it from personal experience or are you

just going on what you have heard?

I have worked for many different non-union jobs, know many people who work for other non-union companies, and have business associates who I work with who are non-union, and my experience has shown that only a very few companies promote family and friends to the "cushy" jobs. Of course, it does happen in some workplaces, but the owners certainly have the right to promote whomever they want to whatever jobs they want. After all, they are the ones in charge.

If you don't like working for a company that does that, you have the option of leaving. Or of being so good at what you do that they cannot ignore you for someone less qualified. And, if they still do that, I would ask myself why I would want to stay at a company that has such bad business practices because inevitably they are going to have problems created by their poor promotion practices.

[GrantDem]

71. Sounds like you should have joined a union...

[undeterred]

72. There has never been a union for the fields of work that I have

been in. If I'd had the option, I would have joined one. But typically there are only 2 or 3 people doing the kind of work I do at a given place, so its not likely to happen.

In a given work environment it makes sense for all workers to be unionized or none of them. It creates a lot of problems in the workplace when some employees have extensive protection and benefits and others have practically none. Typically management is trying to get rid of the union in these environments, so anyone trying to start another union is going to be out the door in two seconds flat.

[w4rma]

35. brainwashing / propaganda. (nt)

[mimitabby]

36. union member for almost 30 years

We've come a long ways, and it's been a hard battle. The younger employees come in with really negative attitudes about unions, but they don't mind the benefits that we've fought for.
not only did unions bring you weekends, but they also brought you the 8 hour day.

and yes, it's harder to fire a union employee, and you know why? because people used to get fired "just
because" now your boss had better have a good reason.

We might be going on strike VERY Soon and I don't look forward to it. But i'll do it.

[madmom]

39. I think there's a lot of people who need to read up on the history of unions and learn just

exactly what they have accomplished and what you (and your children) have to thank them for!

[mitchum]

52. But that's...hard when they would prefer to be spoonfed all of the half-baked propaganda...

about those "greedy, lazy unions"

[PassingFair]

42. I get the "they FALL ASLEEP ON THE JOB!!11!!" crap.

That and they don't deserve to make more than
$11.00/hour because they don't have college
degrees.

Oh, don't forget, they're ALWAYS DRUNK!

:crazy:

I actually had a "team member" throw down
her napkin and announce that she'd "heard
enough" and SPLIT from my meeting today.

(She was extolling the virtues of capitalism
and the Walmart way, and three of us DARED
to voice a different opinion.)

It was LITERALLY the first time in my life
someone just walked away from a discussion
like that. Shocked everybody.

[Usrename]

46. Joe six-pack wants to bring back slavery and child labor...

... just in case he ends up owning his own plantation some day.

[mitchum]

47. I can not believe that I am reading ANTI-UNION BULLSHIT on a Democratic board

Your corporate masters really appreciate the brainwashing that you dupes have so willingly and lovingly embraced, you fucking idiots

[Aslanspal]

50. It is not so much anti-union but people wanting change in unions

Look at CWA they are modern they are progressive they develope their people, that is all I am saying look at a good Union and try to be like them.

[rockymountaindem]

55. I hope you're not talking to me

Maybe I wasn't clear but I was being supportive of unions.

[Trajan]

53. IF all workers belonged to unions, they could all afford to buy new cars

The problem is NOT autoworkers making 'too much' ....

The problem is not enough workers making enough income to buy cars ...

GM, Ford and Chrysler would be flying high if we had stronger unions ....

[bertman]

56. I was a charter member of a transit workers union in '74. The first thing the union officers

did was start talking about demanding higher wages. Which in and of itself is not a bad thing except these folks were some of the slackest bunch of fuckoffs I have ever worked with. They thought that just being in a union entitled them to get paid more money. We had some heated discussions about whether we should first push the concept of professionalism, following regulations (including safety rules), and doing our jobs well OR demand more money.

That was very discouraging to me, but I didn't have to deal with it for long because I got promoted into a management position. Eventually many of those original union members became very professional and quite proud of their jobs and would whip the newbies into line so they didn't bring the quality level down.

Now I am a small business owner and have absolutely no affiliation with unions. My only knowledge of them other than my first experience in the transit local has been through my reading about the labor movement and the history of big business' influence in government. I recognize the many advances in basic rights and fair treatment of workers that have been earned through the shed blood and the determination of union members to secure better lives for all workers.

Interestingly enough, in our building company we have hired many carpenters who came south from states where they worked as union workers. To a man they speak disparagingly of unions except where it comes to apprenticeship programs. Here are the things I have heard from them: 1) the unions are crony networks where the actual working guys are paying for a bloated union administrative staff whose primary concern is keeping their cushy jobs. 2) motivated, ambitious apprentices who want to learn quickly and move up in their skills and responsibility are stifled by the established senior guys who view them as upstarts. 3) Inefficiencies are rampant due to union work regs that keep every class of worker from doing anything but what is directly related to his job description. As in, a carpenter cannot drill a hole in a stud where an electrical wire is going to be run because an electrician is only allowed to do that. 4) Guys are constantly told "Don't kill the job." Meaning slow down you're working too fast. 5) Lots of people cannot afford to hire union carpenters because they cost too much.

Please remember that I am only relating what I have been told by some very skilled and conscientious carpenters. These guys did say that the union wages were great and the benefits were very good but they felt that they could not advance in the system quickly enough to suit them. And these guys eventually moved into managerial positions in our company or went into business for themselves, so they are not slouches.

Here in the south many people have a knee-jerk anti-union bias for many of the reasons that have been touched on by others in the responses to the post. I think a big part of it is the paternalistic cultural view of many workers here. Even in industries where there have been unions, such as textiles, the roots were not deep. One of the other negative rants I used to hear when I was growing up was that the unions were controlled by the mob bosses.

But I have never understood why people who work their asses off for shitty wages and no benefits do not try to unionize. I guess they can't see through the propaganda or they are content to accept their place in the scheme of things.


I hope this alternate perspective has been helpful in answering your question, rockymountaindem.

[Hannah Bell]

60. Some truth to the mob-affiliation charge, for some unions. Long history there, & some of

it to do with under-the-table complicity with owners - to take out more radical worker-driven unions. The leadership rakes off graft & the rank & file get symbolic 1-day strikes & repeated concessions & capitulations.

Lots of "captive" unions too, not necessarily mob-linked.

[1Hippiechick]

61. How do unions promote productivity? Here is an example of union mentality in moving 3 file cabinets

(1) 3 lateral file cabinets are to be moved from one building to another
(2) complete paperwork describing work to be done and VOWING by signature that the file cabinets have been emptied
(3) after a couple of days, call and ask why the movers haven't shown up to move file cabinets
(4) file cabinets were not moved because a phone call was mot returned to "schedule" the move. They have the paperwork, but it has not been put "on the schedule." Another delay
(5) Movers arrive to move the file cabinets.
(6) Movers cannot move cabinets because it is discovered that the file cabinets are bolted to the wall. Movers are not allowed to unbolt the cabinets - only move. Delay
(7) Complete paperwork to the Facilities Department, describing in full the job to be performed, and wait until it can be put on the schedule.
(8) Facilities comes and unbolts the file cabinets which can now be moved - 5 minute job.
(9) Repeate step 2 above, but stay in constant contact with movers to ensure that job is going to get done.

Total turnaround time to move 3 file cabinets: almost 2 weeks.

This is an actual example that happened about two weeks ago, and went to the 11th hour before a construction project was to begin. Had the cabinets not been moved by the project start date, the project would have been delayed. Had I had tools at work, I would have unbolted the damn cabinets myself.

The problem for me? Union mentality. It's not my job, so I'm not going to do it, or I'm "not allowed" to do it. Bullshit!

Two weeks to move 3 file cabinets?

Anyone interested in explaining to me how unionization promotes productivity? Or how unionization motivates workers to improve their skills or "get ahead"? Looks more to be that it is all about CONTROL of the workforce. I guess it guarantees that these workers will continue to stand here, sit here and do the same repetitive task over and over, like mindless robots.

[NNN0LHI]

87. Who scheduled that job to be done the union or management?

My guess would be management. Right? I wonder why didn't management schedule the right people to do the job in an orderly fashion at the start? Your management sounds like a bunch of half ass goof balls who are incapable of scheduling work to be done. Management always had a bad habit of blaming their own incompetence on the union whenever possible where I worked.

And if it was such a simple job why didn't you just move these filing cabinets yourself and be done with it as you said you could have?

Couldn't you have brought the tools from home and have done it yourself within two weeks time as you said you would have liked to? Why didn't you? Wasn't it that important?

Your "actual example" story stinks to high heaven.

And are you in management by any chance?

Don

[McCamy Taylor]

57. The bosses pit different sectors of the working classes against each other.

Blue collar against white collar.

Men against women.

White versus nonwhite.

Salaried versus hourly.

"Management" (which isn't) versus union.

It is called divide and conquer and it is the reason why we still do not have Western European style socialism in this country. Back in the 19th century, Engels said that the US would never have a socialist workers revolution as long as the employers could divide workers on the basis of their immigrant status. They still do that, but they have found new ways to do it. For instance, a nurse who supervises a nurse's aid is now "management" and can not join a union or get any of the benefits a regular employee can in some places. Lawyers and physicians as "professionals" are also prevented from unionizing even if they work for wages.

Particularly in parts of the south, white employees have traditionally been treated as "management" even if they are really just regular employees, because they are supposed to be superior to the minority employees. So, the whites are supposed to have solidarity with the bosses (who are white). In the old days they were told that union organizers, often from out of state, would force them to work with minorities or would even take their jobs away and give them to minorities.

[1Hippiechick]

62. I LOVE your posts, McCamy Taylor. They resonate soundly with me!

It is definitely about divide and conquer, which is CONTROL, imo.

[1Hippiechick]

63. Keyboard hiccup. Double post.

[tom_paine]

64. I think not only is it the anti-Union propaganda, but the Mafia's early influences on the Unions

that likely still continues today, at least they do in popular culture like "The Sopranos", and perception can be as powerful as reality.

I will admit I, too, still think there is some residual Mafia influence on the Unions, and I suspect it increases when Bushification of the FBi takes place and union cries for help are met with deaf Bushie ears.

But I think it is this lingering association, more than anything else, in the Public's Mind that means that anti-union propaganda, true or false, will always find fertile "mental soil" in which to take root.

Of course, I also strongly suspect THAT comes ultimately from that Bushie J. Edgar Hoover's persistent refusal to look into the Mafia AT ALL for two decades, which allowed them to wax immeasureably in power.

Finally, I cannot help but wonder, Bushies being Bushies, if the Mafia's infiltration and intimidation of the unions wasn't old J. Edgar's "anthrax case" where he PURPOSEFULLY ignored it because the Mafia was doing work HE approved of, and that Lefty Commie Bastards didn't deserve the FBI's protection.

"Serves the socialist union jerks right," J. Edgar's Freepy Brain might have thought to itself...

Or so I suspect.

[Joe Chi Minh]

73. It's the normal right-wing tack. Strikers asking for a fair wage are striking at the

heart of the nation's welfare; bosses who won't pay the workers a fair wage, have the nation's good at heart. Stikers are always the problem, never the bosses who resist their call for a fair wage and conditions of employment. Our beloved coproate media.

I remember the look of incredulity on the part of one of our TV interviewers in the UK, when he asked a female school-teacher if the striking lorry drivers were causing her/the French people a lot of problems. Yes, she said. But next time, it could be us on strike. Actually, I like to think it was sneaked in by one of our "subversive" TV people!

[GrantDem]

75. Say what you want..

I'll take my union and any negatives (perceived or otherwise) over the corrupt anti-worker practices of corporate America any day. I grew up in a Union household and my household today is proudly union. The Union has provided me and my family with a living wage, affordable benefits, and a comfortable life. Remember the words of Molly Ivins

“Although it is true that only about 20 percent of American workers are in unions, that 20 percent sets the standards across the board in salaries, benefits and working conditions. If you are making a decent salary in a non-union company, you owe that to the unions. One thing that corporations do not do is give out money out of the goodness of their hearts.”

[Taverner]

76. Labor Unions are such a complex issue

Labor in America is a complex issue - it can't be compared to other countries' labor movements. Especially since our labor movement was cut short, and is in a state of arrested development.

[Joe Chi Minh]

79. But there is one bottom line. Without them, destitution beckons.

[Taverner]

86. Exactly - and not just that

If the labor unions aren't there, production suffers. Workers get sick, die - new ones have to be retrained. Lost money all around. Unions are good for business.

The guy who started Costco did a thesis on that

It's a complex issue where there are no black or white answers

[ourbluenation]

78. fyi - there is a union avatar here at DU.

and you are correct. health care in this country is the problem for the auto makers, not the unions.

[Waiting For Everyman]

80. What about the bloated and overpaid middle to upper management level?

There's too many of them, and they're paid too much compared to the bottom rungs of the ladder.

What, that's not expensive? What about ridiculous media advertizing? That's nothing? Seems to me there's a whole lot of "fat" in the equation, which has nothing to do with the workers who build the cars.

[Greyhound]

81. Every American under the age of about 45 has been brainwashed their entire conscious life

that unions are evil.

Profits = Good

People = Bad

[yardwork]

84. I'm hearing everywhere that the labor unions are to blame for GM's problems.

I'm getting into quite a few testy conversations with supposedly liberal people who have swallowed this anti-union crap hook, line, and sinker.

[annabanana]

88. Cheers to Unca Ronnie Reagan for that . . .

When he fired the air traffic controllers he sent a signal that Unions were on the "outs".. and that laws supporting unions and good faith bargaining would no longer be enforced..

And away they went...