Boatdrinks Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 My current employer seems to be leaning toward putting all manufacturing down in NC where the union is not as strong. I have two science degrees and some guy with a HS eqiv. gets paid more than me over in the plant to play cards in the break room because the lines are running smoothly. They get production bonuses, I don't. In order to keep people from being laid off because we didn't meet our production quota, instead of making the workers actually accountable for it, take a guess at what the Union cried about and got??? They lowered the production quota. Yep, Unions rock! When we move our manufacturing to NC, the Union folks will have only themselves to blame. Not that they will accept any of it, it will be more like that South Park episode...THEY TOOK OUR JOBS!!!!! 287783[/snapback] Exactly as I thought. This illustrates perfectly what I suspected is the root of anti unionism. "I have two science degrees" In other words, I am "superior". How dare someone make MORE THAN ME when he only has a HS equiv. It's not FAIR! Are you absolutely sure everyone at the plant has only a HS equiv? As I've said, I have a college degree. Yet I found I could make more in a job that did not require it. You seem to have made the same discovery. Maybe you should have gotten a job at the plant and saved a lot of money. This is about jealousy and a feeling of "purchased" superiority that some feel when they finish college. They played by the "rules" then find someone else is making more playing by different rules. It's also humorous that every union employee has been depicted as playing cards or doing crossword puzzles. Talk about your narrow views. As far as the quota, perhaps it was unrealistically high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 Love your posts. You accuse me of clinging to soundbytes and end your post with "Business as he points out will not act fairly when faced with paying its labor." & "Strength in numbers is the issue." Uh, OK. The problem with folks in labor is they generally don't see the big picture. Things like "workman's comp" etc fly completely by the radar. But rant on... 287373[/snapback] Thanks... You are finally getting it? I have a choice to join a union or not... I choose to join. Some of my fellow co-workers are not union members, the union will still represent them. My choice to pay dues is to have a voice heard locally and in Congress. Like I said before, that voice is important to me. Do you not join organizations such as the NRA for such a voice? Until the system changes, why is it foolish to play within the rules or operate within the system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 Exactly as I thought. This illustrates perfectly what I suspected is the root of anti unionism. "I have two science degrees" In other words, I am "superior". How dare someone make MORE THAN ME when he only has a HS equiv. It's not FAIR! Are you absolutely sure everyone at the plant has only a HS equiv? As I've said, I have a college degree. Yet I found I could make more in a job that did not require it. You seem to have made the same discovery. Maybe you should have gotten a job at the plant and saved a lot of money. This is about jealousy and a feeling of "purchased" superiority that some feel when they finish college. They played by the "rules" then find someone else is making more playing by different rules. It's also humorous that every union employee has been depicted as playing cards or doing crossword puzzles. Talk about your narrow views. As far as the quota, perhaps it was unrealistically high. 288059[/snapback] It is all about jealousy and worrying what other people have "over" you. You can apply that to everything. It is funny, some people really can't get past these issues. WARNING, GENERALIZATION: Americans in general will find blame in everybody except themselves... It is a very vindicative country. I lose my job tommorrow... What am I gonna do? Cry? No. Move on and make a better life. You can do that when you are paid well, the potential for more savings is greater. In the ever changing business climates, isn't this key? ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 God forbid that anyone who does work for a living and doesn't sit around a board room trading golf stories and smoking $100 Montecristo's should benefit from the profits of the company they work for 288059[/snapback] It's also humorous that every union employee has been depicted as playing cards or doing crossword puzzles. Talk about your narrow views. 288059[/snapback] No commentary necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 No commentary necessary. 288112[/snapback] Game. Set. Match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 Exactly as I thought. This illustrates perfectly what I suspected is the root of anti unionism. "I have two science degrees" In other words, I am "superior". How dare someone make MORE THAN ME when he only has a HS equiv. It's not FAIR! Are you absolutely sure everyone at the plant has only a HS equiv? As I've said, I have a college degree. Yet I found I could make more in a job that did not require it. You seem to have made the same discovery. Maybe you should have gotten a job at the plant and saved a lot of money. This is about jealousy and a feeling of "purchased" superiority that some feel when they finish college. They played by the "rules" then find someone else is making more playing by different rules. It's also humorous that every union employee has been depicted as playing cards or doing crossword puzzles. Talk about your narrow views. As far as the quota, perhaps it was unrealistically high. 288059[/snapback] Well, I don't feel superior to anyone, thanks for implying that. I am not worried that people make more than me, in a fortune 500 company that goes without saying. WHat irritates me, is the mentality of quotes like that of my sig line, taken from the earlier thread. The point, in case you missed it, is that soon the entire plant could get laid off, simply because of unrealistic demands. It costs too much to do business in VA, we can do it cheaper in NC. The nature of our business has changed, the mentality has not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TracyLee Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 Exactly as I thought. This illustrates perfectly what I suspected is the root of anti unionism. "I have two science degrees" In other words, I am "superior". How dare someone make MORE THAN ME when he only has a HS equiv. It's not FAIR! Are you absolutely sure everyone at the plant has only a HS equiv? As I've said, I have a college degree. Yet I found I could make more in a job that did not require it. You seem to have made the same discovery. Maybe you should have gotten a job at the plant and saved a lot of money. This is about jealousy and a feeling of "purchased" superiority that some feel when they finish college. They played by the "rules" then find someone else is making more playing by different rules. It's also humorous that every union employee has been depicted as playing cards or doing crossword puzzles. Talk about your narrow views. As far as the quota, perhaps it was unrealistically high. 288059[/snapback] I call it "Union Envy" . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 I call it "Union Envy" . 288223[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 27, 2005 Author Share Posted March 27, 2005 I call it "Union Envy" . 288223[/snapback] Yes. Right. I call it "CAPITALISM". Unionism=Socialism=Communism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 I call it "Union Envy" . 288223[/snapback] It is! Funny how things are working at my job. When they talk about contracting out, site management looks to the union to do something even know they aren't in the bargaining unit. It is funny that they want it both ways. Yet, they seem to miss the point that without a union there would be no A-76 (cost analysis, etc...) study pushed. The union is keeping competitive outsourcing on the up and up... That is all I ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 27, 2005 Share Posted March 27, 2005 I call it "Union Envy" . 288223[/snapback] I guess the good news for us jealous types is that unions reached their peak in the mid-1950's and are circling the drain here in the 21st century. Globalism is a B word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 No commentary necessary. 288112[/snapback] So you ARE paying attention! Now you see the hypocrisy. When I use "their" logic with obvious eggagerations, it is pointed out immediately as the simplistic steroetype that it is. Then they continue to paint "union labor" as a bunch of card playing do nothings. You know, "undereducated" "less abilities" "lazy man.." "wrench turner".Interesting how what is ok for one is not ok for the other. Thank you for illustrating my point for me perfectly. It's so much more effective when caught in it by one of "their own". If it was me just pointing it out, it would be ignored as pro- union blathering and drivel. An unrealistic protrayal of top management in quickly dismissed, but union bashing in the same manner is lauded as gospel. Did you honestly think this was unintentional? Game, set, match indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 I guess the good news for us jealous types is that unions reached their peak in the mid-1950's and are circling the drain here in the 21st century. Globalism is a B word. 288495[/snapback] Again, it is not a good thing for the vast majority of US citizens. The cost of living has gone down due to the demise of unions. By your logic, the middle class would be growing and its share of the wealth increasing with the unions demise. Newsflash..it isn't happening. Why is this the case?Why is it good news for anyone except the elite? Where is all the money that these companies are "saving"by paying less generous benefits going? It certainly isn't translating into lower prices for the customer. Unchecked management benefits only a very few. So keep buying the kool aid. The middle class will be living in straw huts and eating tree bark if things continue in the direction they're going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 The cost of living has gone down due to the demise of unions. 289344[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 289347[/snapback] OOPS Sorry! I meant to type "standard" I get a little excited when I'm really pissed off. Thanks for pointing it out to me though. I'm sure you must have been confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 289347[/snapback] Like clockwork! I wondered how long before you added the patented AD smiley on that statement... For the record, I don't have to paint anyone as anything. All I have to do is observe the majority at my place of employment. Fact is, not everyone is like that, but most are. That's the fact. Good thing I have my "purchased" degrees, so when I need a new job, I'll be more competetive than the next guy... This thread needs to die.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Again, it is not a good thing for the vast majority of US citizens. The cost of living has gone down due to the demise of unions. By your logic, the middle class would be growing and its share of the wealth increasing with the unions demise. Newsflash..it isn't happening. Why is this the case?Why is it good news for anyone except the elite? Where is all the money that these companies are "saving"by paying less generous benefits going? It certainly isn't translating into lower prices for the customer. Unchecked management benefits only a very few. So keep buying the kool aid. The middle class will be living in straw huts and eating tree bark if things continue in the direction they're going. 289344[/snapback] Yes, the standard of living is a real mess here in the United States. If unions were such a great thing, wouldn't they be growing? Wouldn't their influence be increasing? Wouldn't they be helpful to productivity, and wouldn't companies want to work with them? Yeah, we'll all be eating tree bark and being held down by the "elite" soon the way things are going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 31, 2005 Author Share Posted March 31, 2005 Take a look at This! It's proof positive that heavy industry doesn't need unionism and that individual initiative is the way to success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Many of the other things, beyond money, that unions started with - like safer working conditions, less work hours - have been taken over at the govt level reducing the need for unions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OGTEleven Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Here's my take (general, I did not read all 10 pages): Labor and management both will always act in their own self interests, both collectively and as individuals. This creates a permanent tension between the two groups and often between two individuals. That is perfectly healthy. In the "old days" management had power that was out of balance with labor. This was primarily because there was a lack of information available to labor (Remember Smith's rules of perfect competition? There was one about all consumers having full knowledge of the marketplace. In the ideal world this would be true, as it would in labor/management issues.) Unions helped, and continue to help, fill this gap. Over time, more information has become available to the individual worker so the imbalance has narrowed. This has lessened the "need" for unions but it has not eliminated it. There are two "new" problems on the landscape since the development of unions. First, indivduals within unions (the union organization itself, not union members) have acted in their own self interest, which at times is at odds with their membership. This goes for the unions collectively too. Could we ever realistically expect a union to say: "The balance of power at XYZ corp has evened out over the years and there is no longer a need for the ABC union. We are disbanding."? That's not going to happen. Unions have also been deceptive in their public relations. The director of the NEA has been quoted as saying "I'll look after the interests of schoolchildren when schoolchildren start paying dues." Fair enough, but their advertisements use children as pawns to scare the public. This should not be surprising because the union is acting in its own self interest. On the mangement side, the availablity of foreign workers has exploded in the past few decades. Some of this is fair game, but some of it is dirty pool. These people portray themselves and think of themselves as "capitalists" but are perfectly willing to circumvent the capitalist system that got them their success for a few extra bucks. They'll "hire" slaves in China as quickly as they'd hire someone in a free country if the price is right. They are acting in their own self interest so this shouldn't be surprising either. As time proceeds, it is my hope that the capitalist system that has enriched both management and the unions will continue to progress (albeit too gradually). As it does, more and more information will becaome available to management, labor and the general public. As that happens, the light will shine on the cockroaches from both sides and they will be forced to scurry under the tiles where they belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts