And why did the union workers
Posted By: gourdpainter on 2008-10-29
In Reply to: It's not really stealing a job - Kendra
walk off the job? That's right. For better benefits, health care, retirement and working conditions which ALSO benefited non-union workers, even those scabs who went in and did the jobs. Thanks to Ronald Reagan, the Great (NOT!) the unions have lost their teeth in the ability to even strike and thus to bargain. Ole Ronnie got employers the "right to permanently replace workers." Read up on the history of unions. Ever watch the movie "Jimmy Hoffa?" Yes he made deals with criminals i.e. the mafia but he did much to help workers too. Ultimately he paid with his life. Union/non-union is sort of like arguing democrat/republican. Those for/against don't want to hear any side other than their own.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Union Workers
How does your husband feel about voting out in the open; no more secret ballots? That's quite audacious!
Todd Palin is a card-carrying union guy, too.
AAMT is not a workers' union.
x
By all means give the union workers a pay cut S/M
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/ocwage_05092008.htm
Going way down the page you will find the median pay for medical transcriptionists is approximately $15.02 per hour. This being the case, if you are one of those fortunate enough to be making $20 or more per hour, I assume you will be recommending a pay cut for yourself and all others who are making more than the median in order to bring pay more in line with other workers. Translated that means leaving more in the coffers for the big CEOs. I don't know whether some of you are BDD or what.
Yesterday IBM laid off American workers but kept Indian workers, SM
and I'm sure they don't make chump change. Looks like we are becoming Zimbabwe! Thank O for that.
if you had a union....
you would have no job at all because they would have convinced you all to strike, MQ would have said "too bad for you," and you would now be unemployed. that is what unions do.
Yes, I would. These union members...
need to realize that the free ride and good ol' days are over. The days of high wages, job banks, and guaranteed employment have ended. No wonder Toyota, Honda and the like do so well as compared to their American counterparts.
What about the union busters?
We all know who they are. This was totally predictable. Start at the bottom when assigning blame and put the onus on the ones who turn the wheels of the factories and earn the LEAST, then expect them to sacrifice the most and carry the weight of the management and CEOs who earn anywhere from 10 to 100 times more than they do.
Watch them start whining if they decide to use TARP funds, thus depriving the banks of all those funds they have been hoarding, forcing workers to stage round-the-clock sit-ins just to get paid.
My husband is union....
He works for a trucking firm and told me this morning the union was talking about them taking a 10% cut in pay. The difference between him (or maybe his company?) is that he thinks no problem- his pay is good as it is and if it keeps the company going, why not? I think the car industry might think the same. Did they not say no cuts in pay??
Right and we don't have a union to stand up for us either. n/m
x
Are you SERIOUS? Here's what the European Union
The EU is a political and economic union of 27 members states, located primarily in Europe, composed of almost 500 million citizens (as compared to 710 million on the total continent of Europe), or 7.3% of the world's total population. The EU generates 30% of the wold's nominal gross domestic product ($16.8 trillion in 2007). There are 23 official and working languages. It is 100% SECULAR in nature
Criteria for membership:
1. Stable democracy which respects human rights and rule of law.
2. Functioning market economy capable of competition within the EU.
3. Acceptance of obligations of membership (EU law).
EU member countries:
1. Austria
2. Belguim
3. Bulgaria
4. Cyprus
5. Czech Rebpulic
6. Denmark
7. Estonia
8. Finland
9. France
10. Germany
11. Greece
12. Hungary
13. Republic of Ireland
14. Italy
15. Latvia
16. Lithuania
17. Luxembourg
18. Malta
19. Netherlands
20. Poland
21. Portugal
22. Romania
23. Slovakia
24. Slovenia
25. Spain
26. Sweden
27. United Kingdom
Three official candidate countries are Croatia, the Republic of Macedonia and Turkey. Western Balkan countries of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia are officially recognized potential candidates. Kosovo has been granted similar status.
Areas of common shared interests:
1. Governance of institutions, legal system and fundamental rights.
2. Foreign relations including humanitarian aid, military and defense.
3. Justice and home affairs.
4. Economy, consisting of single market, monetary union, competition and budget.
5. Development of agriculture, energy, infrastructure, regional development, environment, education and research.
For more information on its history and details of the above:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union
The union was also very strong until
the economy started really going under after 9/11. At GM, if you were "laid off" you still received 95% of your pay. They would get the regular unemployment benefits and GM would supplement the rest. This was in their contract, which to me is GMs fault, not the employee.
If it was a permanent layoff, then you went to the job banks, where you would sit for 40 hours a week, receive full pay and schooling if you wanted it. They only allowed so many people in the job banks, but it was numbering in the thousands at one point. These people also had the option of volunteering in the community instead of just sitting there. I know 3 that went on to get their degrees in other lines of work and about 10 that waited there until retirement.
This was set up in the 70s when the first massive layoff hit. This guaranteed that GM would hire back the employees that were laid off instead of hiring people off the streets. Another union thing.
I think Amanda is right from below. They made a lot of money over time and now that things are bad again, they didn't plan ahead and budget their money. No one is going to bail me out, pay my mortgage, feed my family, electric bill, etc. I know that having them go down is going to hurt many people and that is not what I want, but the bailouts that have already happened have not shown the execs to be responsible in any way. My father will be one of those losing their health benefits as well and he has medical conditions too as well as my mom. My husband works for one of their suppliers so we are affected as well. My husband busts his rear day in and day out for $17 an hour with no benefits. Overtime is not allowed. I guess I just want them to show responsibility.
No. I just wish we could get some union control
nm
it doesn't take a union to get a pay raise
puhleez lighten up. I do not and will not support unions. At first unions were good. then they got too large and too powerful, corrupt and greedy, and unions were no longer a good thing. They stopped working for the people they were supposed to represent and started working for the benefit of the union itself. My father worked for a company where he had to be in the union. That union wanted more and more of the company (as they always did). Even though many, many of the employees voted against strike, some people did, and the union declared the strike and people walked off their jobs. My dad wanted to work; he was physically assaulted and our car destroyed when he tried to work. Don't call my father a "scab." He was a fine man raising three kids and wanting to work at his own job, which he loved and was proud of. Period. The strike lasted a long time, and the company finally closed its doors when the union would not concede to anything. All of the employees lost their jobs whether they were union supporters or not because of the actions of that union. Now that's why I don't like unions and never will. There used to be a large manufacturing sector here in the midwest. Unions destroyed much of it. They just keep demanding more and more, and many companies simply closed, thus placing 1000s on unemployment. And do you honestly think corruption in the union is okay as long as "he also benefitted American workers?" I never belonged to a union as an MT for 30'some years, and do you think I never got a raise? The hospitals and companies I worked for always paid well and we didn't need a union to do it for us. Actually, I think fear of unions was one of the reasons why. But let's not forget this, union membership is often mandatory so people who work for the organization are forced to be members whether they want to or not. That right there is just wrong. People outside of the union are denied the right to work in many areas. So don't tell me what to "b**ch about." The two items are no mutually inclusive. One can say that their pay has fallen behind and still not want a union involved. Have a little respect for opinions other than yours.
The Real State of the Union sm
http://www.rstu.org/index.php/about/
union people will still get paid for doing nothing.
NORTH AMERICAN UNION
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T74VA3xU0EA
marriage vs civil union
As a nation, we did not used to spend so much time splitting hairs over words.
What if back when the 19th amendment was enacted, they had said: Women having the right to 'vote' would upset men. So instead of 'voting' we're going to call it 'ballot casting.' That way, women can have the same rights as men, but only men can be 'voters' and won't feel they're losing their special status.
How about if during the civil rights movement, when segregation was eliminated, instead of integration they had called it: 'The right to attend the same schools and go to the same restaurants and ride in the front of the bus'? Calling institutions 'integrated' would upset the southern states.
How about when women began to demand 'equal pay for equal work'? What if they had said: Okay, you can have the money and the responsibility, maybe even the corner office, but only a man can be called VP of Sales. Instead, your title will have to be something else, maybe Sales Coordinator, othewise the men who are VPs will get angry.
I suppose a fair number of women or blacks would have considered this a win, because they were gaining the benefit, if not the exact status of the changes. But a fair number of folks rightly would have said: Huh? Aren't these silly distinctions? A lot of people would have wondered why they didn't just shut up and 'settle.'
If a civil union conveys such benefits as inheritance rights, parental rights, credit rights, insurance rights, the right to make medical decisions for a spouse then, really, what's in a name?
Civil union rights.
"If a civil union conveys such benefits as inheritance rights, parental rights, credit rights, insurance rights, the right to make medical decisions for a spouse then, really, what's in a name?"
I understand your point.
But why, then, is so important for same-sex couples to use the word "marriage" if - as you pointed out - it's just a word.
Why aren't people fighting to have all the rights of marriage applied to civil unions? Seems to me that, while most Americans are against gay marriage, most Americans are actually FOR civil unions.
Marriage is supposed to be a sacred union
but unfortunately many see it as a temporary situation. Some people honestly cannot help their marriages dissolve, however, even if you throw the religion aspect out of it homosexuality doesn't even make sense in Darwin's theory. Homosexuals would naturally die out, because they aren't procreating.
I've not had children either, but just because I haven't and you haven't doesn't make a case for homosexual marriages.
Misstatement of the Union - Fact Check
The President burnishes the State of the Union through selective facts and strategic omissions.
February 1, 2006
Modified: February 1, 2006
The President left out a few things when surveying the State of the Union:
He proudly spoke of writing a new chapter in the story of self-government in Iraq and Afghanistan and said the number of democracies in the world is growing. He failed to mention that neither Iraq nor Afghanistan yet qualify as democracies according to the very group whose statistics he cited.
Bush called for Congress to pass a line-item veto, failing to mention that the Supreme Court struck down a line-item veto as unconstitutional in 1998. Bills now in Congress would propose a Constitutional amendment, but none have shown signs of life.
The President said the economy gained 4.6 million jobs in the past two-and-a-half years, failing to note that it had lost 2.6 million jobs in his first two-and-a-half years in office. The net gain since Bush took office is just a little more than 2 million.
He talked of cutting spending, but only non-security discretionary spending. Actually, total federal spending has increased 42 percent since Bush took office.
He spoke of being on track to cut the federal deficit in half by 2009. But the deficit is increasing this year, and according to the Congressional Budget Office it will decline by considerably less than half even if Bush's tax cuts are allowed to lapse.
Bush spoke of a goal of cutting dependence on Middle Eastern oil, failing to mention that US dependence on imported oil and petroleum products increased substantially during his first five years in office, reaching 60 per cent of consumption last year.
Analysis
We found nothing that was factually incorrect in the President's Jan. 31 State of the Union address to Congress and the nation. However, we did note some selective use of statistics. We also found that Bush omitted some relevant facts that tended to make the state of the union look less rosy than he presented.
it was 1973, Union Square Park in NYC..
as were all these Pro-Lifers kept back behind Bob's Barricade wooden horses....I was there, hundreds were there on 14th Street that day prior to Roe vs Wade being passed....
I was very young....and I remember having this thought....If they are SOOOO interested in what is going on in my and other's uteruses/uteri....why do they NOT take some responsibility for the orphaned/fostered/forgotten children left in this country? Again, I had that thought in 1973....and 35 years have passed and I STILL have the same thought.......my politics never changed......I am that same person I was then, only more mature, somewhat wiser, and very thankful....and I HAVE taken responsibility for MANY children in this country as I adore children....always have...
wonder just how many prolifers have adopted or fostered children left in fostercare/orphanages in this country.....over the same 35-40 year time frame......
that's not to them, they are entitled to feel what they feel...even though I just reread my post and it could be interpreted that way (and sorry for that) -
just get out of our bodies......our bodies, ourselves....(and Our Bodies, Ourselves is a book read way back then too)...and try to think about kids already here, abandoned or given up with no mentoring.....there are thousands of them in the USA.
Peace to all.....
the folly is in giving all the power to a union...
The union may not be a thing of the past but their concern for the average worker is and their usefulness is. Now they are greedy and selfish entities in and of themselves.
Okay, WORKERS.
30-40% of WORKERS don't pay income taxes. Is that better? And only recently has he started saying workers. No one was ever counting children or people who did not work. Of course, you realize, you are classifed as a "worker" if you work one day a year, right?
The same question...if he is going to give a tax cut or break or whatever he wants to call it for 95% of WORKERS...30-40% of whom do not pay federal income taxes NOW...HOW is he going to do that without cutting someone a check. How else is he going to get the money to them? Please explain.
Right. A friend of mine belonged to a union recently.
nm
Think gain.... Soviet Union went waaaay past
--
Especially the power workers
God bless those people who came all the way down there, slept in their trucks in stifiling weather (because the media and gawking politicians hogged all the hotels that were left) and helped string line and get our power back on. They are heros, as well as all those who donated time and goods.
On the other hand, SHAME on the people from Indiana who printed up a bunch of Katrina T-shirts and had the nerve to come down there to sell them! Those who survived Katrina need no darn T-shirt proclaiming they did!
Instead of cutting the workers' pay, they should
cutting THEIR pay. After all, they're the ones who aren't doing their jobs very well (if at all). Same with AIG - they get the cash, and then give their company *pets* huge *retention* checks. (Yeah, right. Sounds like a big fat bonus, to me.) The big companies' CEOs just don't get it. They want more money, more money, more money, and no matter how you cut it, bailout or no bailout, the one who loses is the little guy. There's no way they're going to completely restructure and retool if they get the money, they'll just keep on doing like they're doing. The Big Three need to die a natural death, no more artificial life support or resuscitation measures - DNR, DNI !!! Then, let a NEW, leaner-meaner-greener American car industry be born in their place. Same goes for the banks. And the insurance companies. And healthcare (mis)management. Let the sick and the weak ones die, and healthier ones grow in their place. Kind of like the forests. If wildfires are prevented for too long a time, the forest gets choked with dead/sick trees and overcrowding, and when a fire finally does roar through (like at Yellowstone in the late 1980's), it's a WHOPPER. Same thing is happening in American business right now.
What? The workers work for nothing?
That's news to me. I thought the workers got paid.
But you see which auto workers are
handouts, and the workers are not complaining about their jobs. I am talking about the ones mentioned recently in the news here in the Southeastern US. Those workers are making(including all their benefits) around $35 an hour. The unionized big 3 workers making $70+ an hour for the same work. Is that contract worth that much?
I took it as we are unskilled workers
sent overseas and basically there is nothing that can be done about it. This has been going on for years, but to be called unskilled? We need to now be better educated for other work opportunities in the United States. So I might as well pack it in and go back to school to do something else, even though I have an AA degree with Medical Transcription skills and schooling.
GOP alert memo states intent to bust the union
With 3 million jobs hanging in the balance.
Countdown has obtained a memo entitled "Action Alert - Auto Bailout," and sent Wednesday at 9:12am, to Senate Republicans. The names of the sender(s) and recipient(s) have been redacted in the copy Countdown obtained. The Los Angeles Times reported that it was circulated among Senate Republicans. The brief memo outlines internal political strategy on the bailout, including the view that defeating the bailout represents a "first shot against organized labor." Senate Republicans blocked passage of the bailout late Thursday night, over its insistence on an immediate union pay cut. See the entire memo after the jump.
Subject: Action Alert -- Auto Bailout
Today at noon, Senators Ensign, Shelby, Coburn and DeMint will hold a press conference in the Senate Radio/TV Gallery. They would appreciate our support through messaging and attending the press conference, if possible. The message they want us to deliver is:
1. This is the democrats first opportunity to payoff organized labor after the election. This is a precursor to card check and other items. Republicans should stand firm and take their first shot against organized labor, instead of taking their first blow from it.
2. This rush to judgment is the same thing that happened with the TARP. Members did not have an opportunity to read or digest the legislation and therefore could not understand the consequences of it. We should not rush to pass this because Detroit says the sky is falling.
The sooner you can have press releases and documents like this in the hands of members and the press, the better. Please contact me if you need additional information. Again, the hardest thing for the democrats to do is get 60 votes. If we can hold the Republicans, we can beat this.
http://thenewshole.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/12/12/1713569.aspx
Here is an article about the poll workers. sm
It is from the Boston Globe. They only give a brief description. There was more discussion on it in one of the grassroots forums.
Apparently,the poll workers did have permission to be there, and the NH GOP told them to stand their ground.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/politics/primarysource/2008/01/obama_and_paul.html
I might have to if your man gets elected. Maybe we'll be co workers nm
x
Here's hoping Chicago workers' sit-in and
good things to come. As Bank of America acquires Merrill-Lynch (whose CEO has the utter gall to request a $10 million bonus pay-out after the ML sell-out) they are refusing credit to Republic Windows and Doors out of Chicago after receiving $15 billion in TARP funds. The workers are fighting back to recover the pay and benefits they have already earned and their governor is backing them up. Now that's what I'm talkin' about !
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aw5QzWC86Vl8&refer=home
not 95% of Americans - 95% of American WORKERS -
From Barackobama.com/taxes:
Obama’s Comprehensive Tax Policy Plan for America will:
Cut taxes for 95 percent of WORKERS and their families with a tax cut of $500 for WORKERS or $1,000 for WORKING couples.
Provide generous tax cuts for low- and middle-income seniors, homeowners, the uninsured, and families sending a child to college or looking to save and accumulate wealth.
Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses, cut corporate taxes for firms that invest and create jobs in the United States, and provide tax credits to reduce the cost of healthcare and to reward investments in innovation.
Dramatically simplify taxes by consolidating existing tax credits, eliminating the need for millions of senior citizens to file tax forms, and enabling as many as 40 million middle-class Americans to do their own taxes in less than five minutes without an accountant.
unemployed auto workers' pay
per their contract, if unemployed they receive FULL pay. The loss would be benefits, but they get full pay for not working if they are laid off. That should give them time for re-education.
Most employers are cutting workers because they want
Money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-money-money-money-money-
money-money-money-money-money-money-money-money!
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Maybe they should tax offshore workers doing OUR work.
Right on! If we workers made more money, we'd
I think you misunderstand government workers
The people who are getting the benefits are not really the people with constituents (they're not members of congress). These are the ones who work for the federal government, like people who work for the dept of agriculture, for the VA, for the dept of state, etc.
NYC using fed millions to fight sick WTC workers. sm
Shame on them. Looks like the articles by the Daily News is finally getting them some much needed attention.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/438101p-369136c.html
she said her experience was w/ minimum wage workers
she said it herself what they were paid - minimum wage -duh
then why were you referring to "minimum wage" workers
I never said I'm for giving them a handout...don't know where that's coming from. I was just pointing out the quality of employee you get when you pay minimum wage...why would you refer to minimum wage if you paid them well and didn't pay min wage? I wouldn't expect to get the most reliable people if I were paying minimum.
I said typical minimimum wage workers
I paid well above minimum wage...I guess reading my post it looks like I paid minimum. That was my mistake.
I refer to minimum wage workers because...
This type of work normally paid minimum wage. I, however, did not...
Please comment on the OP...about minimum wage workers
x
The practices of healthcare workers do need work - sm
Healthcare workers fail to take the time with patients to discuss disease prevention and health promotion.
If you are going to give money to re-educate the auto workers....... sm
then it would follow that money should be given to sustain and re-educate the people in other industries (MT comes to mind) that are suffering because of big suit mismanagement and jobs going overseas. What about the thousands upon thousands of other displaced workers in the public sector that have lost their jobs? Will they need to be re-educated as well? Will there be jobs available to them, even if they are re-educated?
Maybe that's what all those re-education centers all over America are for. hmmmmmmm
Workers walk off job rather than read McCain script.
Some three dozen workers at a telemarketing call center in Indiana walked off the job rather than read an incendiary McCain campaign script attacking Barack Obama, according to two workers at the center and one of their parents.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/dozens_of_call_center_workers.php
For crying out loud. His target group IS workers
are so low that they come up not owing tax at the end of the year, then it would not be possible to give them a tax cut or a tax credit, unless it is a refundable tax credit. So far, you have not provided any evidence that Obama is proposing a REFUNDABLE tax credit. As a matter of fact, why do you supposed he call this tax credit "Making WORK pay." The credit will zero out at zero tax liability unless it is a refundable tax credit. Again, it seems like you cannot produce any evidence that this is the case. Or can you? What about the socialist question with regard to progressive tax reform proposals only being socialist at Obama's hands, an no other president in history since 1913, including the 7 republicans who raise the top income bracket rates to as high as 63% to 94%, as opposed to Obama, whose intent is to restore that rate back to 39.6% as it was in 2000 when Bush took office?
proposed tax policies which include granting rebates to most US workers.
That statement jumped out at me.
|
