Temp America
- Thread starter WATU2
- Start date
Here's how its supposed to work.
You get a low wage job. Since we don't have a "controlled economy", you can, through hard work and perserverence, work your way up to a better job and then a better one. You are free to work for whoever you wish or even work for yourself. We don't have a controlled economy. Then you can have a chance to live whats called "the american dream". A house of your own, the ability to pay others back in the same way you were. We don't have a controlled economy. Your freedom to work and produce has only one "limiter" and that is the possible interference by the govt. We don't have a controlled economy. But if we did have a controlled ecnomy, what would happen to those who work hard? Would they really do that out of the goodness of their own heart? Shouldn't the most prosperity come to those with either the ablity to be successful or the work ethic that is required to succeed? We don't have a controlled economy - at least not yet. When/if we do, what is that called?
You get a low wage job. Since we don't have a "controlled economy", you can, through hard work and perserverence, work your way up to a better job and then a better one. You are free to work for whoever you wish or even work for yourself. We don't have a controlled economy. Then you can have a chance to live whats called "the american dream". A house of your own, the ability to pay others back in the same way you were. We don't have a controlled economy. Your freedom to work and produce has only one "limiter" and that is the possible interference by the govt. We don't have a controlled economy. But if we did have a controlled ecnomy, what would happen to those who work hard? Would they really do that out of the goodness of their own heart? Shouldn't the most prosperity come to those with either the ablity to be successful or the work ethic that is required to succeed? We don't have a controlled economy - at least not yet. When/if we do, what is that called?
As a management side labor lawyer, yes they do.
But, only because the government allows them.
What you have witnessed over the past 20 years is forced unionization in a variety of sectors (particularly the public sector) and the free market colliding. The free market would crush unionization --- making it irrelevant and meaningless (because forced labor controls under a CBA - especially forced labor controls under a multi-employer CBA - is the antithesis of a free market designed to allow and reward hard work, initiative, risk and lawful/ethical behavior). BUT... the government is there to prevent (or, at best, significantly control) this.
Examples that I deal with on a daily basis:
Control and prevention of employers from talking freely to workers and truly educating workers on how to deauthorize or decertify from a union;
Forcing unionization through card check -- in the public sector; and
Implementing laws and regulations that are designed to adopt or reward forced unionization (i.e. PLAs, Prevailing Wage, Responsible Bidder, "Quickie" Elections, Micro-Units/Cherry Picking and Neutrality Agreements).
This post was edited on 3/1 10:26 AM by bigzit
This post was edited on 3/1 3:50 PM by bigzit
But, only because the government allows them.
What you have witnessed over the past 20 years is forced unionization in a variety of sectors (particularly the public sector) and the free market colliding. The free market would crush unionization --- making it irrelevant and meaningless (because forced labor controls under a CBA - especially forced labor controls under a multi-employer CBA - is the antithesis of a free market designed to allow and reward hard work, initiative, risk and lawful/ethical behavior). BUT... the government is there to prevent (or, at best, significantly control) this.
Examples that I deal with on a daily basis:
Control and prevention of employers from talking freely to workers and truly educating workers on how to deauthorize or decertify from a union;
Forcing unionization through card check -- in the public sector; and
Implementing laws and regulations that are designed to adopt or reward forced unionization (i.e. PLAs, Prevailing Wage, Responsible Bidder, "Quickie" Elections, Micro-Units/Cherry Picking and Neutrality Agreements).
This post was edited on 3/1 10:26 AM by bigzit
This post was edited on 3/1 3:50 PM by bigzit
Unions have a huge role in this country. I think of it as a Balance of Power. Without the threat of a Union with the ability to strike, we wouldn't have much of a middle class.
Alot of worker safety issues were first raised by Unions. Owners could care less if a worker was injured or killed. They just haul 'em off and bring another guy in.
Before Unions, 2-week vacations were unheard of. Now, they are so common, most of you probably think there are required by law.
Alot of worker safety issues were first raised by Unions. Owners could care less if a worker was injured or killed. They just haul 'em off and bring another guy in.
Before Unions, 2-week vacations were unheard of. Now, they are so common, most of you probably think there are required by law.
With unions there is no incentive for an individual walker to excel. The loafer and the person who works hard both earn the same and get the same promotions.
It’s all about seniority, not personal productivity.
This post was edited on 8/28 12:25 AM by aTUfan
It’s all about seniority, not personal productivity.
This post was edited on 8/28 12:25 AM by aTUfan
Unions have had their place, there is no denying it. Outside of government unions, unions have been most wide spread in heavy industry. Government, the supposed friend of union workers, has greatly weakened heavy industry in this country. In the late 1990's government pushed a service economy and that is the very kind of jobs that are not, in general, union jobs.
Not only do workers in steel, coal, oil, teamsters, and manufacturing make more than many service jobs, but the are the kind of jobs where a young man right out of school can walk into a company and work up, even with just a high school education and a lot of energy and smarts.
Many of the 1 per cent that is so disliked by liberals didn't start out that way. Yes, there were the Rockefellers and so on, and there fight have been a few Jed Clampetts who have oil bumble up in his back 40, but the majority of the rich went broke a couple of times before they hit the big time or at least came up with something that nobody else did.
Not only do workers in steel, coal, oil, teamsters, and manufacturing make more than many service jobs, but the are the kind of jobs where a young man right out of school can walk into a company and work up, even with just a high school education and a lot of energy and smarts.
Many of the 1 per cent that is so disliked by liberals didn't start out that way. Yes, there were the Rockefellers and so on, and there fight have been a few Jed Clampetts who have oil bumble up in his back 40, but the majority of the rich went broke a couple of times before they hit the big time or at least came up with something that nobody else did.
There comes a point when unions no longer advocate better wages and better working conditions, but a more oppulant lifestyle for underperforming, overpayed people with tenured jobs who just plunder their bosses. In govt jobs, those bosses are the american people they profess to serve, but who cannot fire them. There has to be balance between the employees and employers, but the bottom line is whether they are producing a needed good or service for a reasonable expense.
But when we reach a point where a college football player is considered a school employee and allowed some sort of revenue sharing status, there needs to be a redefinition of the system we have. People shouldn't be paid for everything they do. Playing a game is not a job for instance. But the mentality today under our socialist in the wh is that its a good thing to make playing a sport a paid job. After all, playing a game is an important part of his job isn't it?
But when we reach a point where a college football player is considered a school employee and allowed some sort of revenue sharing status, there needs to be a redefinition of the system we have. People shouldn't be paid for everything they do. Playing a game is not a job for instance. But the mentality today under our socialist in the wh is that its a good thing to make playing a sport a paid job. After all, playing a game is an important part of his job isn't it?
Unions are all about the group; not the Individual.
SO?
I have never understood then why Actors, Professional ball players, . . . who have Attorneys, agents, accounts, ... negotiating their own INDIVIDUAL contracts, need a union.
SO?
I have never understood then why Actors, Professional ball players, . . . who have Attorneys, agents, accounts, ... negotiating their own INDIVIDUAL contracts, need a union.
