Right to work?

[rich8483]

A friend of mine is union.
He has the mentality that union politics is unnecessary and evil, but unions are somewhat needed because, as soon as they're gone completely, you will need them again.

Also, he views the union as a simple pension and insurance plan, nothing else, and works side jobs for cash to get around it anyways.
His union is probably one of the simplest unions in concept, but is bogged down with Chicago politics. Dan ryan closed down to a strike? Probably his union. What does he do? Works in Indiana where the union in Illinois can't shut him down. If you learn to play the game, you can win vs. the unions.
So then the debate becomes one of whether or not the unions are a necessary evil?

Remember, police, firefighters and the like are mostly union nation-wide. Especially in your bigger cities. They work with a No-Strike clause.

 

[bigg cheese]

The whole forcing people into it is what ticks me off. But the "hey we're making life better for you so we're taking your money is BS." Understand the notion, but don't care.

If I improve my house and it causes my neighbor's property value to rise, he shouldn't have to pay me for that increase.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Also, the whole point of Right To Work is so a company DOESN'T have to pay out $300/hr labor costs in benefits and pensions and health care and vacation and blah blah blah.

So, the whole "I'm fighting for your benefits" argument doesn't hold water.

A non union employee would have less benefits, and probably make a lower wage than his union counter-part.

 

[TheWabbit]

A non union employee would have less benefits, and probably make a lower wage than his union counter-part.

I think Toyota and Honda employees might disagree with you.

What is the union for? Health and Safety? Then we can disband OSHA. For worker rights? Then we can disband the NLRB. The unions exist to serve the union machine first.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

DEar Santa,

I'd like to know who the 8 communists are that said no and to have my neg rep button back please. I promise I'll be a good boy.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I think Toyota and Honda employees might disagree with you.

What is the union for? Health and Safety? Then we can disband OSHA. For worker rights? Then we can disband the NLRB. The unions exist to serve the union machine first.

Well, if they did, they'd be wrong. Pay, holidays, vacation, may all be equal.

Insurance, pension, TAP, breaks, productivity, overhead, profit sharing, etc etc etc are not. Compare labor rates. UAW labor rates are in the $300/hr range. Non UAW is about $150, give or take.

The guys we've hired from Toyota say it's a joke to work here. At Toyota they expect you to WORK the whole time you're there. Here, we basically just require you to be present.

From what I've seen visiting multiple non-union suppliers around the country, and having worked in two UAW shops, I feel qualified to make these statements.

 

[Jetrefz]

It could result in more people on the dole...i have read the bill of rights and the right to work is not on there

 

[ATOMonkey]

It could result in more people on the dole...i have read the bill of rights and the right to work is not on there

lolz... the right to be allowed to work then. It's inherrent in your creation.

 

[Sigasaurus]

The whole forcing people into it is what ticks me off. But the "hey we're making life better for you so we're taking your money is BS." Understand the notion, but don't care.

If I improve my house and it causes my neighbor's property value to rise, he shouldn't have to pay me for that increase.

I have never seen anyone forced to take a union job. You may be required to pay dues, but it is a personal choice to take the job. IMHO the only people I ever hear complaining about union dues are individualls that have no affiliation or "have held union jobs and quit"

 

[ATOMonkey]

I agree. Unions dues are a very very small percentage of the total labor cost to the company.

 

[Sigasaurus]

In my opinion I feel that Right to Work is placing moral reponsibility upon the companies. Honestly the outcome of right to work is the abolishment of unions and in turn this places buisness and individuals in the position to do what is right. IMHO I reallly don't see things working out in the end. I mean does anyone think that companies will pay a fare wage? The price of government jobs will decrease helping the states save money? I tend to look at things rationally in my eyes, and I think this all just leads to more profits for companies and less for the workers.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I have never seen anyone forced to take a union job. You may be required to pay dues, but it is a personal choice to take the job. IMHO the only people I ever hear complaining about union dues are individualls that have no affiliation or "have held union jobs and quit"

Is Ford in the car business or union business? If they're not in the union business, why are they "union" jobs?

In my opinion I feel that Right to Work is placing moral reponsibility upon the companies. Honestly the outcome of right to work is the abolishment of unions and in turn this places buisness and individuals in the position to do what is right. IMHO I reallly don't see things working out in the end. I mean does anyone think that companies will pay a fare wage? The price of government jobs will decrease helping the states save money? I tend to look at things rationally in my eyes, and I think this all just leads to more profits for companies and less for the workers.

In about 20 years of working for other organizations I never made less than $100K a year. Most years was more than that. I haven't held a single job that was a union position. I never needed a pimp to sell me or my value. I chose a career path that didn't include being cattle following everyone else around the shop floor. I did my own thing, dem onstrated my worth, and got paid for it. All by myself.

Yeah, companies will pay a fair wage, if you actually provide value. If you don't, they won't. Inserting a gang of thugs into the employment contract doesn't increase your value.

Oh, and workers aren't entitled to profit. They are entitled to compensation. If you want more compensation, you have choices. Better education, working harder, or finding a different job are among them.

 

[TheWabbit]

Well, if they did, they'd be wrong. Pay, holidays, vacation, may all be equal.

Insurance, pension, TAP, breaks, productivity, overhead, profit sharing, etc etc etc are not. Compare labor rates. UAW labor rates are in the $300/hr range. Non UAW is about $150, give or take.

The only reason UAW still has a defined pension and PSRP at the moment was from their buddy in DC giving them our money and screwing the GM shareholders.

I don't believe Toyota and Honda have ever had a layoff and their take home pay (since they don't have to pay the Union masters) is better than their counterparts. I think job security trumps everything else in this economy.

But you are absolutely correct on the 'working' vs 'present' thing. My wife is a former teacher (now a lawyer) and it was the same thing with Los Angeles and Indianapolis public school teachers.

 

[firehawk1]

The unions exist to serve the union machine first.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner! Only thing I'd add is, serving the Democratic Party machine too, and IT might actually be first, union machine second.

 

[Sigasaurus]

Because they had pitiful working conditions, no benefits, safety standards, or basically anything to offer besides a job originally. The people organized to keep the comapny in check. I agree not all unioms are serving a valid purpose, but people should be careful what they wish for. Unions were not created on a whim, they were created to control greed and inhumane conditions for workers. Yes the workplace is a bright and shiny place today, but how long do you think it will last? The majority of non-union companies pay a fair wage and offer benefits to keep the workers from organizing. How long will the wages last when the threat of solidarity is gone?

 

[Sigasaurus]

Everyone on this site tends to associate every union with the UAW. That is one union and a bad one at that in the publics eyes. Not every union is evil and terrible. Unions actually work with companies and participate in organized discussions to benefit the whole entity. People need to research a bit before basing their whole outlook of unions on the UAW.

 

[RockofStrength]

Because they had pitiful working conditions, no benefits, safety standards, or basically anything to offer besides a job originally. The people organized to keep the comapny in check. I agree not all unioms are serving a valid purpose, but people should be careful what they wish for. Unions were not created on a whim, they were created to control greed and inhumane conditions for workers. Yes the workplace is a bright and shiny place today, but how long do you think it will last? The majority of non-union companies pay a fair wage and offer benefits to keep the workers from organizing. How long will the wages last when the threat of solidarity is gone?

About as long as it takes for the company(ies) to realize that their factory or office will remain empty unless they pay X or higher per hour? I mean, there many competitive industries that lack any meaningful union presence yet the people there are paid well because their services, skills and/or technical knowledge are worth a great deal of money. Businesses compete with each other for skilled employees, and not only for positions like CEO.

Heck, look at Wal-Mart. They absolutely refuse to permit unionization of their workforce (leaving entire market areas, like Germany, because of it) so as to remain the low-cost market leader yet their workers are paid reasonably and those who advance past the cashier level can make a reasonable wage.

I have no problem with unions, or the fact that they protect their own. That's kinda the point. I do, however, think that it is hilariously hypocritical to say that they are protecting workers on the one hand but refuse to let someone undermine their precious power base by working outside of the union contract with a given business.

 

[Wild Deuce]

Unions are like vacuum tubes. There's no denying their place in history but they've outlived their usefulness. In their present day incarnation, they exist for the most part, to maintain power and privilege for a select few.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Also, factories are clean and safe because it's profitable.

Dirty unsafe factories produce a lot of scrap and have a lot of down time. Neither of which is desirable.

We promote HS&E because it makes us money, bottom line.

 

[MAJB Retired]

The right to work legislation is not forcing unions to disband, it is onlychanging the way unions will need to operate. Union membership will be basedupon the perceived value to the members, not decree. If the union is providinga valid service to the members, then membership will reflect that, if not thenthe union will eventually self destruct. Also, not requiring the government topay union wages for every project will eventually result in better competitionfor projects and a better return on the taxpayers money. Hopefully, with areduction in taxes and therefore, more money in the pockets of the public.