User avatar
Aaron747
Topic Author
Posts: 8560
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 1:55 am

A federal appeals court on Friday upheld Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s contentious law stripping most public workers of nearly all of their collective bargaining rights in a decision hailed by Republicans but not undoing a state court ruling keeping much of the law from being in effect.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...-11e2-a2bd-7e4099229686_story.html

Symbolically, this is pretty huge and hopefully the start of a trend throughout the US.

Public unions have put a stranglehold on budgets across the 50 states with bloated pension schemes, inflated pay and the like. I'm not saying for a second that legislators don't share the blame since they signed off on such agreements - but the impetus came from public unions in most cases if you ask labor experts.

Law enforcement personnel, teachers, ATCs, etc do have difficult jobs that should be well-paid, but these individuals should be on the hook to adequately prepare for their retirement needs the same as anyone in the private sector. This is just plain common sense. Pension obligations that pay these workers 1/2 or even up to 3/4 of their final salaries in public service are flat out unsustainable.

Let's put aside for the moment the idea that individuals in public service jobs don't even need unions when looking at the original purpose of unionization in America. The bottom line is something needs to be done about out of control budgets, and this is a good step in that direction.

[Edited 2013-01-19 17:57:12]
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Newark727
Posts: 1426
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:09 am

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
Law enforcement personnel, teachers, ATCs, etc do have difficult jobs that should be well-paid, but these individuals should be on the hook to adequately prepare for their retirement needs the same as anyone in the private sector.

It might be just as reasonable to ask why private sector workers don't have these same protections. Sometimes it almost feels spiteful- "these people have secured a decent job and financial future, we'd better put a stop to that."

Also, California is getting ready to turn a surplus and they are crazy with public sector unions, while many other states, including those with these anti-union measures, are deep in the red, so I don't think you've adequately proven your point.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6148
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:14 am

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
Symbolically, this is pretty huge and hopefully the start of a trend throughout the US.

Public unions have put a stranglehold on budgets across the 50 states with bloated pension schemes, inflated pay and the like. I'm not saying for a second that legislators don't share the blame since they signed off on such agreements - but the impetus came from public unions in most cases if you ask labor experts.

  
Public employee unions are not a good thing, they essentially get to vote for the people they will be negotiating with. And add to that, unlike a private corporation, in general municipalities will not go bankrupt as they have "the power of the purse" with access to tax revenue. Politicians often (have) sweetened benefits that will come due "down the road" in order to secure votes now. This is what has gotten so many municipalities into trouble. Because of this I am very much against PEU's and what happened in Wisconsin addressed the most egregious elements of them.

In truth I do not ever remember hearing of horrible working conditions for public employees that would have needed a union to correct. Today they really just extract more wages and benefits rather than redress detrimental working conditions.


Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
Law enforcement personnel,

The one comment I will make is that I do not mind properly/well compensated law enforcement as it makes it more difficult for a pervasive culture of bribery to become established (I did not say it could happen, just that it is more difficult). We all know that if law enforcement does not pay then crime will, it is a problem in much of the world.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5288
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:20 am

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
Law enforcement personnel, teachers, ATCs, etc do have difficult jobs that should be well-paid

The problem is that many of those positions aren't well-paid. The pension was supposed to help make up for the fact that the pay was sub-par. And in some careers, like fire/law enforcement, the pension makes up for the shorter than average career expectancy due to the nature of the work. So, if you kill the pension, you make these careers less desirable.

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
Pension obligations that pay these workers 1/2 or even up to 3/4 of their final salaries in public service are flat out unsustainable.

Not necessarily. If the pensions are properly funded and administered, there wouldn't be such a problem. However, many states chose to underfund their pensions even when they had the money to fund them. You forget that during the boom economic times, many of the states contributed almost NOTHING to their pension plans. Unfortunately, this came back to bite them when times got tough.

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
individuals should be on the hook to adequately prepare for their retirement needs the same as anyone in the private sector.

Unfortunately, early evidence is showing that few people are doing this successfully. Most people have next to nothing in their 401k's. They get eaten alive by fees. They don't understand the funds they have available to them and/or are offered terrible funds by their employer. And when they get desperate, say after losing a job, they tend to raid their 401k's only making matters worse in the long run. Barring an unlikely change, the 401k will go down in history as one of the biggest failures in economics.
 
Newark727
Posts: 1426
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:22 am

Also, budgetary requirements and conflicts of interests are reasonable concerns, but I really don't like the argument that collective bargaining ability, in the public or the private sectors, should be defined by whether or not the workers in question "need" it. Who the heck sets that standard?
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:14 am

Quoting tugger (Reply 2):
Public employee unions are not a good thing, they essentially get to vote for the people they will be negotiating with.

So do private businesses.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Topic Author
Posts: 8560
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:35 am

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 1):
It might be just as reasonable to ask why private sector workers don't have these same protections. Sometimes it almost feels spiteful- "these people have secured a decent job and financial future, we'd better put a stop to that."

Are you suggesting working folks should be guaranteed enough money to live on when they are no longer working, without any responsibility for how they conduct their own spending?

In other words, do you replace all the allowance money your kid wasted when they come asking to have it back?

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 1):
Also, California is getting ready to turn a surplus and they are crazy with public sector unions, while many other states, including those with these anti-union measures, are deep in the red, so I don't think you've adequately proven your point.

Ask yourself how California got out of its $16 billion hole. Mostly by deferring interest payments on some $40 billion in state debt that is still due. Putting state employees on furlough and increasing university fees 30% in 5 years has helped a bit too. The pension problem remains a huge part of this.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
The problem is that many of those positions aren't well-paid. The pension was supposed to help make up for the fact that the pay was sub-par.

The way government jobs usually pay based on locality makes sense to me. Why should a cop in Butte, CA make anywhere near what one in San Diego does?

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
However, many states chose to underfund their pensions even when they had the money to fund them.

That legislators squarely deserve blame for.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
Unfortunately, early evidence is showing that few people are doing this successfully. Most people have next to nothing in their 401k's.

It's not only 401Ks. Despite far less job security than in the 1950s and 60s, middle class Americans are still hell bent on spending above their means, evidenced by $200 monthly cable+smartphone bills, foreclosures, and the like. Pensions wouldn't be necessary if people were exercising more household restraint.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:43 am

I wonder what Mike (the Crying Man) is going through now. He had some very strong opinions after the failed recall election.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy8FSyI_Djg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbwnQIxPBcE

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
Symbolically, this is pretty huge and hopefully the start of a trend throughout the US.


Already is happening. The Democratic mayor of San Jose, California did the same thing and there were no protest, riots, media attention or recall elections.
Bring back the Concorde
 
Newark727
Posts: 1426
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:05 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 6):
Are you suggesting working folks should be guaranteed enough money to live on when they are no longer working, without any responsibility for how they conduct their own spending?

To live? For sure. I don't want the elderly starving in the streets. My point was this: part of the reason these anti-union measures have taken off has been the high cost of pensions, but part of it has on occasion been punishing public employee unions for existing, sometimes using rhetoric that begrudges the very idea that they should get the benefits that they do. Before the Wisconsin measures came to pass, the unions that they were opposed to were offering major concessions.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 6):
Ask yourself how California got out of its $16 billion hole. Mostly by deferring interest payments on some $40 billion in state debt that is still due. Putting state employees on furlough and increasing university fees 30% in 5 years has helped a bit too. The pension problem remains a huge part of this.

This is what has happened for several years in the state. Deep cuts to very important public services, and moving around payments to make temporary situations more appealing. Certainly some of the more intransigent unions have something to do with this (the prison guards come to mind) but I feel it owes more to a gradual economic recovery than to most of what our policymakers have been able to accomplish that we're moving towards the black. On a local level, you also have to factor in the cost of providing public services versus the temporary revenue of granting new development and the growing and shrinking of the property tax take, which is very much based on the strength of the local economy. Though on the local level you also find some of the largest excesses of workers finding ways to game the system.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:08 pm

Quoting tugger (Reply 2):
Public employee unions are not a good thing,

Unlike private sector?

Doesnt the NFL and the NHL and have unions too? Its all fun and games when they strike. - Less people care -
Step into my office, baby
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5288
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:18 pm

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 6):
Pensions wouldn't be necessary if people were exercising more household restraint.

Even if you cut down on spending, it wouldn't be enough. Most middle/lower income American's don't make enough. To make a 401k really work, you need to be saving 20% of your income....not really feasible when much of the population makes between 20k-40k.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 6):
Pensions wouldn't be necessary if people were exercising more household restraint.

Even WWII era folks (who grew up in the Depression and were notoriously frugal) would have struggled to retire if not for pensions. My grandmother was very frugal and never wasted a dime, but without a pension her retirement would have been pretty bleak...particularly since she has lived far longer than expected (she's 91).
 
Flighty
Posts: 7881
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:31 pm

Mostly, it is about the rate of return promised by pensions. This high promised rate of return gives a big promised pension with hardly any contribution by the worker. This is the explosive part of the contracts.

In California or Illinois, there are plenty of cops making $300k per year when you include pensions, amortized at more realistic rates of return. That is more than some cardiologists make. Is is flat out stupid. It is wrong to tax people just because government workers have the power to tax via their cronies in local government. It is a model destined to fail. Wisconsin is showing a healthy survival instinct here.

If I don't have the power to tax and get rich, I don't want joe down the street to have that power over me.
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 6:53 pm

Quoting Flighty (Reply 11):
In California or Illinois, there are plenty of cops making $300k per year when you include pensions, amortized at more realistic rates of return. That is more than some cardiologists make. Is is flat out stupid.

It absolutely is. But remember that police and firefighters unions are often untouched by government cuts for some inexplicable reason, so instead the budget is balanced on the backs of those other unions whose members don't make that much. Maybe some school administrators make $300k, but I'm not aware of any teachers that do. So the government would seem to be barking up the wrong tree if they want to cut pension costs.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 11):
It is wrong to tax people just because government workers have the power to tax via their cronies in local government. It is a model destined to fail.

Government workers aren't the only ones with cronies in local government.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Flighty
Posts: 7881
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:42 pm

Mir, the guts of what I said is that govt workers should be paid like everybody else. No games. If cops want $300k a year, let them put that on the table just like we (non pension) workers do. Then let's see if we can replace those cops with more qualified individuals for $150k per year. And so on. That is how these problems get solved...


Union teachers are typically around $100k when you include pensions. In Milwaukee during the Scott Walker protests, the cost per teacher was >$100k when you include even the very low pension allocations and health care. The real HR cost is probably a good deal higher than $100k by the time the pensions go out.

Not saying teachers should get paid poorly. But let's offer a $100k cash package to every new applicant. Will there be a shortage of qualified teachers? Nope. Even at $90k and no pension, you could get fabulous applicants in Milwaukee. So, why aren't they doing that?

Because the union would never go for that. Their interest is in protecting the existing club of union members, not society.

[Edited 2013-01-20 11:45:54]
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4087
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:07 pm

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 1):
It might be just as reasonable to ask why private sector workers don't have these same protections.

Because the employers of private sector workers don't have the power to send someone to jail if they fail to purchase their widgets?

Quoting tugger (Reply 2):
Politicians often (have) sweetened benefits that will come due "down the road" in order to secure votes now. This is what has gotten so many municipalities into trouble

I work with many life insurance companies. If any of my clients ran their business as the trustees of municipal, state or federal pension plans run theirs (and for all intents and purposes the two businesses are functionally similar) they would be in jail, as simple as that. But because you work for the government, making unrealistic assumptions for your reserving, not having any sort of capital in the business and running massively risky investment portfolios (often invested in your own securities) is somehow acceptable.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
Barring an unlikely change, the 401k will go down in history as one of the biggest failures in economics.

The 401k will likely go down in history as what saved the economy, by facilitating job mobility, equalizing access to retirement products by employees of small businesses and allowing people to keep what is theirs in the case of a bankruptcy by the sponsor. Industrial corporations and municipalities should not be in the business of running life insurance companies on the side, as simple as that.

Quoting mt99 (Reply 9):
Doesnt the NFL and the NHL and have unions too?

The NFL and NHL are not real good examples, as those are two employers that, for some unknown reason, managed to get anti-trust exemption. Those unions are actually justified because if any other employer ran their business as the owners of professional sports teams do they would be sent to jail for creating a cartel.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
KBJCpilot
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 7:12 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:55 am

I work in the private sector and one of my clients is a very powerful union. Having attended their local board meetings the most important issue they discuss is the survival of the union istelf. Not the members. It's all about how much $$ they can bring in to support the union leadership and staff. The local union head makes 3x what he made as an employee of the municipality and he is paid a bonus for increase in dues and membership. I tend to look at a union as a leach. It sucks the blood out of the organism it lives off of without providing a tangible benefit to that organism.
Samsonite, I was way off!
 
Newark727
Posts: 1426
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:03 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 14):
Because the employers of private sector workers don't have the power to send someone to jail if they fail to purchase their widgets?

I know you're one of the biggest fans of hyperbole around here but I have no idea what you're referring to here.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 14):
Those unions are actually justified because if any other employer ran their business as the owners of professional sports teams do they would be sent to jail for creating a cartel.

It's not that they're justified or not, it's that professional sports players are in a position where they are way less transferrable or replaceable than almost any other type of labor, so management can't apply the same clout/political arguments against them that they can against unions in other cases. Though some sports leagues getting literal sanctioned monopolies is pretty dumb.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9946
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:22 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 12):
It absolutely is. But remember that police and firefighters unions are often untouched by government cuts for some inexplicable reason, so instead the budget is balanced on the backs of those other unions whose members don't make that much.

So that makes it OK?

Meanwhile, the New Jersey Senate, on a party-line vote, passes a law mandating Hurricane Sandy cleanup work be done only by union workers.

http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf...j_senate_passes_bill_regardin.html

"a Corzine administration study showed project labor agreements increase the costs of projects from 18 to 24 percent"
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. - W. Churchill
 
seb146
Posts: 14357
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:00 am

I just asked this question on FB but I will ask it here to the "enlightend" ones: Right-wingers are trying like everything to drive down wages and make all states right-to-work states. Then, they complain all those awful low-wage workers are a drain on the economy by getting food stamps and state sponsored health care because they have no union representation. So: which is it? Union representation so people have a living wage and health benefits or recieve food stams and state health care?
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
BMI727
Posts: 11176
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:08 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 18):
Right-wingers are trying like everything to drive down wages and make all states right-to-work states.

Why do left wingers and unions fear right to work so much? If unions are as beneficial and important as they believe they are, it shouldn't matter. Workers will line up to join unions to get better conditions and employers will demand better trained union workers, right? Or do they fear erosion of power and the loss of their position as a de facto labor cartel? Do they realize that unions have in many cases been rendered redundant, ironically by government regulations and bureaucracy? Is that why they fight right to work, or as some might call it, the free market, tooth and nail at every opportunity?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 18):
Union representation so people have a living wage and health benefits or recieve food stams and state health care?

Many workers not on food stamps do not have union representations. Your correlation of unions with not having welfare is disingenuous.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4087
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:15 am

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 16):
I know you're one of the biggest fans of hyperbole around here but I have no idea what you're referring to here.

Either you don't understand or you pretend you don't... If you work in the private sector making widgets, and a recession drives down the demand for widgets there is not much your employer can do to prevent its revenues from going down. If you work for the government, your employer can always raise taxes on the poor schmucks in the private sector to make sure they will have enough cash to pay your salary, and if those schmucks don't pay their taxes they go to jail.

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 16):
It's not that they're justified or not, it's that professional sports players are in a position where they are way less transferrable or replaceable than almost any other type of labor, so management can't apply the same clout/political arguments against them that they can against unions in other cases.

Actually, in a normal environment you would be right, but the question is a good player isn't just free to move around as it should (there are draft rules, free agency rules, salary caps, etc.) so management can in fact apply that pressure (which I agree they should not be allowed to). The similarity with a normal economic environment is that, by agreeing to those rules, just like other unions, sports players unions have the exact same effect as regular ones - benefit the mediocre players at the expense of the outstanding ones.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
Newark727
Posts: 1426
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:21 am

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):
Why do left wingers and unions fear right to work so much? If unions are as beneficial and important as they believe they are, it shouldn't matter. Workers will line up to join unions to get better conditions and employers will demand better trained union workers, right? Or do they fear erosion of power and the loss of their position as a de facto labor cartel? Do they realize that unions have in many cases been rendered redundant, ironically by government regulations and bureaucracy? Is that why they fight right to work, or as some might call it, the free market, tooth and nail at every opportunity?

-If you're just saying "well okay join a union or don't the money to pay for them just kind of goes wherever" you're allowing people who haven't bought in to get workplace-wide things that the union provides, and its power is based on mobilizing as much of the workforce as possible.

-Those regulations came into being because unions fought for them, and again, I don't buy dismissing unions based on how much they're needed for the same reason 2nd Amendment advocates don't want to decide what arms civilians can buy on the basis of how much they need them- no one can find an objective standard for what that "need" is, and who sets it.

-So the free market is more important than freedom of association? Should we be happy to settle for anything because we're only allowed to have what the mighty market deigns to give us?
 
Newark727
Posts: 1426
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:26 am

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 20):
Either you don't understand or you pretend you don't... If you work in the private sector making widgets, and a recession drives down the demand for widgets there is not much your employer can do to prevent its revenues from going down. If you work for the government, your employer can always raise taxes on the poor schmucks in the private sector to make sure they will have enough cash to pay your salary, and if those schmucks don't pay their taxes they go to jail.

No, I understand taxation and violating laws perfectly well, I just don't quite see the bright line that puts a direct line between public employee wages and the freedom of some idiot who didn't want to pay his taxes. It's almost as if policymaking is way more complicated than that!
 
BMI727
Posts: 11176
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:49 am

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 21):
If you're just saying "well okay join a union or don't the money to pay for them just kind of goes wherever" you're allowing people who haven't bought in to get workplace-wide things that the union provides, and its power is based on mobilizing as much of the workforce as possible.

That's exactly what should happen. If union workers are being overpaid, they will be replaced. In nonunion workers are poorly trained, they will be replaced. If nonunion workers see their union counterparts working for better pay, they'll go join the union.

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 21):
Those regulations came into being because unions fought for them,

And now they have them. Unions were useful for making sure workers wouldn't be fired for getting the flu or have no recourse should they be injured on the job. Unions forced those issues to be addressed and now they are via government regulation and we're better off for it. Despite this, unions have continued to exist for mostly other reasons so let me as you this: when was the last time you heard from an abolitionist or women's suffrage group?

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 21):
they're needed for the same reason 2nd Amendment advocates don't want to decide what arms civilians can buy on the basis of how much they need them- no one can find an objective standard for what that "need" is, and who sets it.

Nobody should be telling gun owners that they can't have guns, but nobody should be telling those of us who do not own guns that we must own guns.

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 21):
So the free market is more important than freedom of association?

Freedom of association carries with it the freedom of non-association. There is a massive difference between saying "You do not have to join the union" and saying "You cannot join the union."

And why should free association apply only to workers? The employers should be able to associate or not themselves with any and all employees they choose. Let them choose whether they want a union, non-union, or combined workforce.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 1816
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:48 am

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 6):
It's not only 401Ks. Despite far less job security than in the 1950s and 60s, middle class Americans are still hell bent on spending above their means, evidenced by $200 monthly cable+smartphone bills, foreclosures, and the like. Pensions wouldn't be necessary if people were exercising more household restraint.

While I think you're right, I also think there's more to the story than that. I earn right about 5% more than my folks did, age per age, adjusted for inflation (they were feds with the associated pensions). But my disposable income spending, is on average about 20% less than theirs was, at this age. Same number of kids, all that.

And though I do eschew a lot of non-essentials (I don't own a television, so no cable), I do still pay for things like a smartphone, internet, car, etc. I think the difference is that there is a greater proportion of nondisposable income spending within my generation (I have a tremendously higher percentage of student loans than the folks ever did, for example, and also file "single" for taxes), but also the job security quotient seems less stable than it was for them in the 70s & 80s.

As I said, I agree that people spend a lot beyond their means, but I think a lot of that is also things like Student Loans as much as cable.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):

Why do left wingers and unions fear right to work so much? If unions are as beneficial and important as they believe they are, it shouldn't matter. Workers will line up to join unions to get better conditions and employers will demand better trained union workers, right?

The problem is that in a lot of RTW states, it really doesn't matter what your training is. If ACME airlines can pay a line tech $15 an hour less in South Carolina, they're going to, and this reduces the bargaining power of a Union in say, San Francisco or Boston. This is a factor completely without regard to the level of training for that job code.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 20):
If you work for the government, your employer can always raise taxes on the poor schmucks in the private sector to make sure they will have enough cash to pay your salary, and if those schmucks don't pay their taxes they go to jail.

Unless those schmucks find all manner of loopholes and deductions, as they do here in America. And it really isn't the "poor" schmucks that treat it that way either, as most of the poor generally don't pay taxes anyway. I think "Rich" schmucks is what you're looking for here.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 23):
If nonunion workers see their union counterparts working for better pay, they'll go join the union.

Not necessarily, no. I'm non-union, but I do about 2 - 8% better (depending on the competing companies' unions) overall, when salary & defined benefits are counted out. But I have no illusions about this. We don't want our people jumping ship to unionized competition.

Now if I were to be transferred to a RTW state's station (and we have a few), this equation is up for change, and I'd have to redefine my contract just to keep what I already have.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 23):

Freedom of association carries with it the freedom of non-association. There is a massive difference between saying "You do not have to join the union" and saying "You cannot join the union."

Uh-huh. And if the situtaion is rigged (as it is in most RTW states) to where companies have a lot more bargaining power than unions specifically because there are no "closed" shops, then all we are doing is tagging "that has any bargaining ability at all" to your second line there. That is the reality in most RTW places.
Be A Perfectionst, You're Nothing If You're Just Another; Something Material, This Isn't Personal...
 
Newark727
Posts: 1426
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:26 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 23):
And now they have them. Unions were useful for making sure workers wouldn't be fired for getting the flu or have no recourse should they be injured on the job. Unions forced those issues to be addressed and now they are via government regulation and we're better off for it. Despite this, unions have continued to exist for mostly other reasons so let me as you this: when was the last time you heard from an abolitionist or women's suffrage group?

That's a disingenuous comparison. Abolitionism had a very specific legal goal; women's suffragists got theirs too but there are still plenty of groups out there that focus on ensuring a level of equality between men and women that they do not perceive to exist. The point is, your reasoning could have been used just as well a hundred years ago to say "Well, we're not making you work Sundays and the workday is now 12 hours instead of 16, you have what you want, you don't need to exist anymore." It's not good enough for you to just decide that unions have everything that they need now.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11176
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:54 pm

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 24):
The problem is that in a lot of RTW states, it really doesn't matter what your training is.

In a lot of jobs it doesn't really matter what your training is.

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 24):
If ACME airlines can pay a line tech $15 an hour less in South Carolina, they're going to

Unless it increases costs further on down the line, which is sometimes the case.

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 24):
And if the situtaion is rigged (as it is in most RTW states) to where companies have a lot more bargaining power than unions specifically because there are no "closed" shops, then all we are doing is tagging "that has any bargaining ability at all" to your second line there.

Bargaining power is earned rather than given via an artificially enforced monopoly.

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 25):
It's not good enough for you to just decide that unions have everything that they need now.

If unions want to keep fighting to get workers paid more to do less, fine. But competition has to be allowed.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 4:25 pm

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 17):
So that makes it OK?

I never said it was ok. If you're going to go after public sector unions, go after all the public sector unions, including the police and fire unions.

But police and fire unions are the unions most likely to vote GOP, so I'm not getting my hopes up for that.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
seb146
Posts: 14357
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 5:37 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):
Why do left wingers and unions fear right to work so much?

Here's the problem: The right has made is so difficult to organize in all states that forming and joining a union is impossible. Plus, with their right-wing mouth pieces throwing out half-truths and people just believing it is all true, unions are hated. I grew up in RTW states. We have very few unions in the West. My parents are nurses but they had no union representation in Oregon. Democrats/left/liberals (whatever the right wants to call them) don't like RTW because it drives down the salaries of workers and drives up the cost of benefits.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):
Many workers not on food stamps do not have union representations.

Because they make too much to get food stamps. I am working part time and going to school. I make too much to get any useful food stamp benefits. I would get only $30 a month. How does that help?
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6148
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:29 pm

Quoting Newark727 (Reply 4):
Who the heck sets that standard?

The standard is set by the public in this case as that is who sets the standards for the government. The courts then validate that the standards are reasonable and follow the prevailing law.

Quoting Mir (Reply 5):
So do private businesses.

Which will go bankrupt (as we all to well know) if the demands are excessive. A public institution generally will not and the courts have ordered that the public must meet the legal obligations contained within the legally binding contract. And often the only solution to do that is either cut other services or increase taxes.

And you left out the rest of my post:

Quoting tugger (Reply 2):
Public employee unions are not a good thing, they essentially get to vote for the people they will be negotiating with. And add to that, unlike a private corporation, in general municipalities will not go bankrupt as they have "the power of the purse" with access to tax revenue. Politicians often (have) sweetened benefits that will come due "down the road" in order to secure votes now. This is what has gotten so many municipalities into trouble.

This is where the real problem is. That benefits are often "down the road" elements that don't come due immediately so their effects are de-emphasized by both the union involved and the officials involved to get the package passed and make every one look good.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 6):
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
The problem is that many of those positions aren't well-paid. The pension was supposed to help make up for the fact that the pay was sub-par.

The way government jobs usually pay based on locality makes sense to me. Why should a cop in Butte, CA make anywhere near what one in San Diego does?

The dangerous thing is that everyone likes to compare and have their wages be equal and similar to those of their peers around them. And they expect or demand that they be paid at that level (or better), this leads to a constant spiral upward in wages. And the elected official that the PEU's negotiate with acquiesce to such demands. If they don't then unions play on public sympathy's or fund a competing "friendly" candidate or attack the incumbent that is not acquiescing, because all they need is a majority vote. Again there is politics involved more than just business decisions.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 7):
Already is happening. The Democratic mayor of San Jose, California did the same thing and there were no protest, riots, media attention or recall elections.

Boy I hope so, I am not going to hold my breath but it would be nice

Quoting Flighty (Reply 13):
Union teachers are typically around $100k when you include pensions. In Milwaukee during the Scott Walker protests, the cost per teacher was >$100k when you include even the very low pension allocations and health care. The real HR cost is probably a good deal higher than $100k by the time the pensions go out.

Not saying teachers should get paid poorly. But let's offer a $100k cash package to every new applicant. Will there be a shortage of qualified teachers? Nope. Even at $90k and no pension, you could get fabulous applicants in Milwaukee. So, why aren't they doing that?

Because the union would never go for that. Their interest is in protecting the existing club of union members, not society.

The most important aspect of this is the fact the the entity paying the money gets to immediately write that cost off its books. So even if you "overpay" now, the big thing is that there is no unknown and likely ballooning "future cost" out there to impact you down the road (how do think WN can "overpay" its employees and yet still remain competitive even after other airlines went through bankruptcy and trimmed their debts and obligations?). And we have all seen how everyone likes to kick the can down the road and use current money for things now while saying "we'll make this up next year..." but next year never comes. And yes, this may be a flaw of the people/management involved but I say that it is also a flaw in the process/idea since it is always happening.

One of the biggest problems I have with PEU's is the fact that the contracts negotiated are often lopsided and nonviable in the long term. As I noted above, the PEU's will actively fund and promote electing officials that in turn support them. They also aggressively attack those officials that do not agree with them.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 11):
Mostly, it is about the rate of return promised by pensions. This high promised rate of return gives a big promised pension with hardly any contribution by the worker. This is the explosive part of the contracts.

  
This is a huge part of the problem, and I do not see how to prevent it with what I have noted above. It is simply too easy to do. One recent glaring example that we had where I live is the "extra" earning on investments for pensions. The union successfully negotiated that any "extra" funds above the needed rate of return (set at 8%!) was to be dispersed to the employees on a yearly basis, however no calculus was included for what to do during the years that the rate was not met (the contract was negotiated during the stock-boom years). So during the past few years we have had to kick in money from the general fund or raise taxes (which the public rejected thankfully) and shortchange other functions of the city. I mean it is absolutely ridiculous and somewhat immoral to expect someone to give you any money earned above the required rate of return as it prevents you from being able to balance things out for when returns are below what is required, and then have the taxpayers or other services budgets make up for any shortfall in the earnings when the required rate of return is not met by the markets.

Those kinds of things should be absolutely disallowed with any pension contract.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
 
BMI727
Posts: 11176
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:17 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 28):
The right has made is so difficult to organize in all states that forming and joining a union is impossible.

Impossible or just pointless?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 28):
Democrats/left/liberals (whatever the right wants to call them) don't like RTW because it drives down the salaries of workers and drives up the cost of benefits.

Allowing the free market in will erode the power and artificially high prices that monopolies and cartels can get away with.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 28):
Because they make too much to get food stamps.

So it's now well established that unions are not a prerequisite to avoid poverty.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5288
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:24 am

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 30):
So it's now well established that unions are not a prerequisite to avoid poverty.

Correct, but it's interesting how many of the right to work states have the highest rates of poverty and are most reliant on federal government assistance. Of course they don't need unions, they have Uncle Sam to make up the difference.
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:56 am

Quoting tugger (Reply 29):
Which will go bankrupt (as we all to well know) if the demands are excessive.

Which businesses have gone bankrupt because they requested too many favors from the government?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
seb146
Posts: 14357
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:23 am

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 30):
Quoting seb146 (Reply 28):The right has made is so difficult to organize in all states that forming and joining a union is impossible.
Impossible or just pointless?

Impossible. I guess it would be pointless if you want child labor, no minimum wage, and no maximum hours per week.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 30):
Allowing the free market in will erode the power and artificially high prices that monopolies and cartels can get away with.

ummmm.... the "free market" ends up being monopolies and cartels, anyway.

Looking at the "free market" we can look at Costco vs Wal-Mart. Costco pays their employees a living wage. Wal-Mart does not. The excess goes to the very top, not to the employees who actually have to do the most work in stocking shelves, dealing with rude people, working long hours for low wages. As opposed to the very top who sit in offices and push paper all day and get stock options.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 30):
So it's now well established that unions are not a prerequisite to avoid poverty

I would rather have union help getting health benefits and being able to pay for housing than be called a drain on society by the right.
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
Geezer
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:37 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:28 am

A couple of things here;

First, how many people discussing this issue belong to labor unions ?
Second, are you employed by a corporation, a private business, or are you employed by A. the Federal Government
B. a State C. a City D. a big college ?

It make a lot of difference who you work for;

If you work for A, B, C, or possibly even D, all of these entities are "supported" by..........everyone who works and pays taxes.

Lets say you have 25 years in at good old Generous...'er....General Motors; (or Ford, or Chrysler) in this case you must be represented by .......the UAW.

There are a LOT of unions around; I'm not "against" unions; I belonged to one for 40 years. The last 20 or so of which all I ever heard on my CB radio every day, was guys driving non-union trucks (and making 15 cents a mile) screaming and yelling about what a bunch of crooks the Teamsters were, and why "they" (meaning the non-union guys) drove BIG trucks, while I was driving a "dinky" truck, (and making 75 cents a mile).

Meanwhile, the people where the cars I was hauling were made at were making $18 an hour, with HUGE pensions, while other factory workers were making $ 9 an hour, and probably didn't even HAVE a pension ! I used to think about this a lot; why do so many people doing more or less "similar" jobs, get paid wages that are so "dis-similar" ? what I'm pointing out is, no one understands the "other guy's" situation; (nor does he even CARE about the "other guy's situation") 99.9% of "guys" only care about THEIR situation. Which becomes just one of the many things that always keep "guys" arguing with each other.

Here's a test for you; I don't know where anyone works at; don't even care. but take a close look at where you work, what the pay was, say 40 years ago, and watch how it's increased from then, until now; some have gone up faster than others; some haven't "gone up" very fast at all; many haven't gone "up" at all; they've "gone" to China ! Or "where-ever"; lotta guys get pretty pi***d off about that. Let me ask you this......did you vote ? for "anybody" ? if you did, I'll bet it was either a Democrat or a Republican, right ? Take a look at what THEY were "making" 40 years ago, and while you're at it, what they "made" every year until now. You'll notice that "they're doing pretty damned well now" ! (while yo'all are still down here arguing with each other! )

And while we're on the subject of pensions, take a close look at the "pension plan" of your faithful U.S. Representative and your faithful U.S. Senator.........the "servants of the people", right ? so "proud" of their "faithful public service", right?

Some reporter once asked Willie Sutton why he always robbed banks; Willie answered, "Are you kidding me ? because that's where all the money's at"! ( I have always had a sneaking suspicion that's the main reason why so many people always want to get in Congress; Cause that's where even MORE money's at !)

Remember what happened on 9-11-01 ? A great big building in Washington, D.C. got "torn up" really bad, and it made me mad as hell, because I just KNEW that my taxes were gonna help pay to get it rebuilt; then I had this FABULOUS idea! I was "retired"........but I'm not "crippled".....I can still work; I figured, there's a lot of retired guys like me that can still work; so I did a lot of thinking, and came up with this "plan"; I sent my "plan" to a couple of places; first, to the IBT, (whose general office is in D.C.) I also sent it to.......( you ready for this ?) The U.S. Labor Dept. My "plan" was: if they furnished "housing" (I'm not talking Watergate, or even Hiatt here); just plain, ordinary, basic "housing" like service guys get, plus three squares a day, and me, and about 20,000 other retired guys from the Teamsters and some of the Building Trades would rebuild it for 20 cents on the dollar of what they'd have to spend otherwise! Guess what they told me...."Fugettaboutit!" We got PLENTY of money ! (If we "run out", we'll just "print more"......which is basically exactly what they were already doing, and what they've been doing ever since ! Oh....The IBT didn't think much of my "plan" either; they basically said, "there's plenty of bucks up here and we aim to get "our share" of 'em. (or something like that)

But let's get back to Wisconsin for a minute; Scott Walker is as you know, a Republican; he's also the Governor; but even though he was "elected", that wasn't "good enough" for the Teacher's Union, so THEY decided to just "kick him out" (only they called it something else; didn't work; so now they're still not satisfied ! Now they're gonna demonstrate !
Hey.......breaking news to all teacher's unions..........States go broke too ! Let me ask you something.........do youall like school teachers ? Well I sure do ! I still remember every one of mine; From Miss Brooks (1st grade) Mis Bevis (2nd grade) Miss Coulter (3rd grade) Miss Birely (4th grade) Miss Cadwalader (5th grade), and Miss Orr (6th grade) (I think "Miss" Orr might have been a guy in a skirt, but I'm not sure.)

(Mr. D.W. Jacot was the Principle) Every single one of those teachers were GREAT ! And they "taught" everyone who had brains enough to come to class. They were always happy, and not one of them ever tried to "tinker" with little boys. And one more thing..........NONE of them belonged to a "teacher's union"........probably because there WASN"T any damned "Teacher's Union" !

Anyway, Governor Walker has come to the conclusion that the State of Wisconsin is about to go broke because of all of this pension nonsense, and all of the "over the top" demands of the teacher's union. But the "teachers" don't want to hear that ! "They" just want to get "theirs", right ? (Maybe some brilliant botanist will come up with a "money tree" one of these days; then we can ALL be rich ! (Right )?

Here's something everyone needs to realize about almost ALL unions; the whole idea of a union is to "represent" the "workers", and to "secure'' more favorable benefits and conditions for them, than they would be able to do on their own, right ? Guess who's "benefits" MOST unions are really "working hard for"............the schmucks that RUN the damned union, that's who's !

I first joined the Teamsters way back in the late 50s; Yeah, they always got us a pretty good contract; the problem was, (and still is), the schmucks at the top all got mega-rich, then got in bed with "the mob", then gave "the mob" the keys to OUR pension fund, and said, "where ya are "wise guys".......help your selves ! And Boy, did they EVER ! Anybody here ever go to Vegas in the 60s and 70s ? All those big fancy hotels and casinos were built with $$$$$$$ from the Teamster's Pension, Health and Welfare Fund. ( There are about a dozen real good books written about it; you should read a couple.)

That same kind of thing happens in a lot of unions. ( Read a book sometime about the late, great , Walter Reuther if you care to know what really happened to the automotive industry in the U.S.) So that's essentially what's wrong with unions; most of them are run by crooks.

Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2016
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:32 am

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 31):
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 30):
So it's now well established that unions are not a prerequisite to avoid poverty.

Correct, but it's interesting how many of the right to work states have the highest rates of poverty and are most reliant on federal government assistance. Of course they don't need unions, they have Uncle Sam to make up the difference.

True, but correlation is not causation. Do you have data indicating that the ones receiving food stamps and government benefits in these states are employees working these right-to-work jobs which have been "outsourced" to the state?

I grew up in Kentucky and remember when Toyota decided to open up a manufacturing plant in Georgetown, there was all kinds of ruckus about it at the time with it being non-union and all. As it turned out though, the $11-$15/hour wage plus benefits like child care and such is a perfectly livable wage considering the cost of living in Kentucky is very low and thus do not receive/need government benefits.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11176
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:45 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 33):
Impossible. I guess it would be pointless if you want child labor, no minimum wage, and no maximum hours per week.

Unions still popped up in the late 1800s and 1900s, despite the cards being stacked in favor of corporate interests. I don't see how organizing is more difficult today.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 33):
ummmm.... the "free market" ends up being monopolies and cartels, anyway.

Unless they are abused. Rip people off long enough and they will go elsewhere.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 33):
The excess goes to the very top, not to the employees who actually have to do the most work in stocking shelves, dealing with rude people, working long hours for low wages. As opposed to the very top who sit in offices and push paper all day and get stock options.

So? If it's that much of a hangup for you, don't work there. And don't shop there if it makes you feel better.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 33):
I would rather have union help getting health benefits and being able to pay for housing than be called a drain on society by the right.

Ok, then don't complain when the company seeks out other people to do the job who do not demand those things.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:01 am

Quoting tugger (Reply 29):
Boy I hope so, I am not going to hold my breath but it would be nice



Already happened.
No media circus, no protest, no Michael Moore appearances, no crying man throwing temper tantrums or anything.
Bring back the Concorde
 
seb146
Posts: 14357
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:06 am

Quoting Geezer (Reply 34):
most of them are run by crooks.

So is Congress. Every time we have a chance to throw the bums out, it does not happen. The bums use their corporate money to convince us they are humble servants of the people.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 36):
I don't see how organizing is more difficult today.

Because they legislate unions out. Unions do not force workers to join. No, they don't. Read up on it. No one is *FORCED* to join a union. Educate yourself. However, thanks to RTW, people are *forced* to bargan for their own rights and have no representation collectively and:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 36):
don't complain when the company seeks out other people to do the job who do not demand those things.

who are illegals. But, the same group who legislate unions out of existance are also legislating illegals out and then wonder why legal American citizens are demanding a living wage and benefits.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 36):
Unless they are abused. Rip people off long enough and they will go elsewhere.

but, in most small towns, there is no choice. I actually do go to Target instead of Wal-Mart for two reasons: 1) they are closer and B) it is the lesser of two evils. Either way, we have fewer unions and more people on state assistance. And the right-wing complains about it even though they are the ones doing it!
Patriotic and Proud Liberal
 
BMI727
Posts: 11176
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:36 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
Unions do not force workers to join. No, they don't. Read up on it. No one is *FORCED* to join a union.

Right to work means that joining the union cannot be a condition of employment. In non-right to work states, union membership can be made compulsory.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
However, thanks to RTW, people are *forced* to bargan for their own rights and have no representation collectively and:

Right to work does not mean you cannot have unions.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
who are illegals.

Not necessarily. Or the whole factory just moves to China. And let's not forget that consumers ultimately pay the difference when it comes to giving union workers better wages.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
but, in most small towns, there is no choice.

Because it doesn't bother people enough to find an alternative.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2016
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:47 am

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 36):
I don't see how organizing is more difficult today.

Because they legislate unions out. Unions do not force workers to join. No, they don't. Read up on it. No one is *FORCED* to join a union. Educate yourself.

Please, you're pretty much forced to join a union in every other sense of the word. No, technically you do not have to become a member of the organization, but unless you live in a right-to-work state, you'll be required to pay union dues. I worked retail at an airport in high school, a few months after being hired on the employees voted to unionize with the the SEIU, my options were either to quit, join the union or not join and still pay union dues...if that's not a coercive proposition I don't know what is.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
However, thanks to RTW, people are *forced* to bargan for their own rights and have no representation collectively and:

That's a meritocracy, since when did it become ridiculous to justify your compensation based on your own skills/qualifications?
 
Geezer
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:37 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:11 am

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 35):
I grew up in Kentucky and remember when Toyota decided to open up a manufacturing plant in Georgetown, there was all kinds of ruckus about it at the time with it being non-union and all. As it turned out though, the $11-$15/hour wage plus benefits like child care and such is a perfectly livable wage considering the cost of living in Kentucky is very low and thus do not receive/need government benefits.

I didn't grow up in Kentucky but I sure hauled a hell of a lot of loads of Toyotas out of that Georgetown plant and I can guarantee you one thing; every single hill-billy working in that plant is just happy as hell to have that job ! The reason I know that is simple; the quality numbers for Toyota Georgetown are about half again as good as any assembly plant G.M. has ever had, and plants with p***ed off workers NEVER have high quality numbers. (Incidentally, the Toyota plant over at Princeton, Indiana is even better.)

Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:01 am

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 40):
No, technically you do not have to become a member of the organization, but unless you live in a right-to-work state, you'll be required to pay union dues.

If you didn't pay dues, but were still able to take advantage of the stuff that the union was able to provide for the workers (not necessarily pay, but work rules and the like), that would create a free-rider situation, and it should be evident why that's problematic.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
sfbdude
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 2:57 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:34 pm

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 40):
No, technically you do not have to become a member of the organization, but unless you live in a right-to-work state, you'll be required to pay union dues.

My neighbor works as a pipefitter down here in Orlando and he says that everyone has to pay dues even the guys that are retired. I was just curious as to why that is.
 
windy95
Posts: 2660
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 1:11 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:40 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 18):
Right-wingers are trying like everything to drive down wages and make all states right-to-work states.

But the left and illegal alien's are not?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 18):
Then, they complain all those awful low-wage workers are a drain on the economy by getting food stamps and state sponsored health care

If we rid ourselves of the illegal alien problem there would be more job's for the legal citizens.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 18):
So: which is it? Union representation so people have a living wage and health benefits or receive food stamps and state health care?

There are millions of well paying non union job's out there.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 38):
Because they legislate unions out. Unions do not force workers to join. No, they don't. Read up on it. No one is *FORCED* to join a union.

Yes we are forced to join the union. You have no idea what you are talking about. When you get hired with a unionized company you are *FORCED* to join the union as a condition of your employment. Even if you are in a 'right to work" state working for a company based in another state like what happen's in the Airlines.
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2016
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:32 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 42):
Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 40):
No, technically you do not have to become a member of the organization, but unless you live in a right-to-work state, you'll be required to pay union dues.

If you didn't pay dues, but were still able to take advantage of the stuff that the union was able to provide for the workers (not necessarily pay, but work rules and the like), that would create a free-rider situation, and it should be evident why that's problematic.

So tyranny of the majority in other words? Why is it that the people who don't want to be a part of the union have to bow down to those that do and pay instead of those who voted for the union respecting their fellow individuals?
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:27 pm

Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 45):
Why is it that the people who don't want to be a part of the union have to bow down to those that do and pay instead of those who voted for the union respecting their fellow individuals?

Why is it that people should be able to get things without paying for them?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2016
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:08 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 46):
Quoting flyguy89 (Reply 45):
Why is it that the people who don't want to be a part of the union have to bow down to those that do and pay instead of those who voted for the union respecting their fellow individuals?

Why is it that people should be able to get things without paying for them?

Because they didn't want those things in the first place. You can't yell at someone for not wanting to pay for a product you shoved into their hands and told them they have to buy.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:34 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 46):
Why is it that people should be able to get things without paying for them?

Should soldiers be the only ones that enjoy full freedom? They were the ones that paid for it.

If there are too many "free loaders" I think you'll see the union's power decrease, conditions start sucking, more people joining the unions, and then conditions improving.

I also don't see it right making people join unions if they don't want to. Free loader or not, I'm not keen of forcing people to do things when you don't have to.

Edit: I'll add that I'm not anti-union... they definitely have a time and place, and they are very applicable in many situations today. I just think they can and do have too much power a lot of times. Forcing someone to join a union crosses the line in my book, even if there are good arguments for it (and there are)

[Edited 2013-01-22 15:39:04]
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 6148
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

RE: Victory For Wisconsin: Court Upholds Union Limits

Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:43 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 48):
I also don't see it right making people join unions if they don't want to. Free loader or not, I'm not keen of forcing people to do things when you don't have to.

Wouldn't the simplest thing be to just have those that are in the Union, those that make the commitment and join and pay dues, be covered by the Union contract and have access to the Union health plan and benefits and those that are not, well... don't?

I mean if I don't pay for my health insurance plan I don't get to have it just because I am in the company.

Of course the company could extend it's own plans and coverage to its employees and they could take advantage of that but the union could either have their own and limit it to members. That is actually the great strength for the Union with the new automakers contracts where the Union owns the health insurance (and costs) and pension (and costs).

Tugg

[Edited 2013-01-22 16:10:09]
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: B747forever, KLDC10, usflyer msp and 27 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos