re: Michigan teacher wants to quit union--but can't

quote:

---

Sounds like it was a close enough case for the jury to buy the managers story.

---

They had a year to coordinate their stories.

quote:

---

Again, what did the union do here other than bitch?

---

Got her moved to an office not under the senior manager.

quote:

---

Again, what is the union doing other than bitching and making headaches for all?

---

Managers aren't union-covered.

quote:

---

So, why do you need a union again?

---

To keep the competent ones who try to do their jobs from being harassed by the managers who don't want them to do so.

If Obama weren't shrinking all the private sector jobs, a lot of folks would have jumped ship.

quote:

---

To keep the competent ones who try to do their jobs from being harassed by the managers who don't want them to do so.

---

So, because you have nothing but a one-sided account of corrupt management, you need a union?

I don't for a second believe that "corrupt management" is as pervasive as you have indicated, or that union representation is necessary to counter that. In fact, if there is any discord, it's likely because those managers have to deal with shitty union labor they can't fire.

quote:

---

We had one employee who's boss was so vindictive, she didn't stop at trying to get her fired

---

What is the other side of that coin?

Was the employee a good employee? If yes, then why would the boss have it in for her?




Only stupid employers try to run off valuable, productive employees, especially nowadays.

quote:

---

If relatively powerless laborers want to organize to broker deals, why should they not be allowed to do so?

---

You answered your own question. Relatively powerless people ... don't broker deals.

They work for and do what the people who broker deals tell them to do.

Laborers aren't supposed to have power...except individual power which should be realized if they want to advance to a higher status/paygrade via hard work, initiative, dedication, drive, etc. And those individuals shouldn't be straddled by union rules holding them back ... seniority and such.


If the laborers have bosses who are idiots ... then the bosses of those people should see that and fire that crappy boss.

If the boss' boss is an idiot, too ... well, then maybe the business just sucks and likely receives government bail-outs.

quote:

---

I'd honestly like you to expound upon that. What benefit can unions provide in today's world?

---

I am hardly pro-union, but I will give you my opinion on this:

Unions are best when they are focusing on issues that affect all employees regardless of merit. For example, worker safety.

It's not like crappy miners should get worse gear. When unions push for safety related reforms and expenditures (protective gear for miners, better conditions for pilots and drivers so they don't fall asleep while operating, etc) they are pushing back against a corporation that is trying to make a profit.

So without a union, Mining Company X will only spend 1% of their operating budget on safety equipment because that is what Company Y spends. If they spend more, they lose money. However a union can insist on better conditions at both companies.

Where unions get off track are in compensation and employee relations. Better workers should get paid more. Poor workers should get fired. Yes there is some arbitrary judgement in there, but that is life. Unions don't improve that problem, they just substitute it with another one.

So unions do serve a purpose-setting minimum standards for workers, particularly in the areas of worker safety.

quote:

---

Unions are best when they are focusing on issues that affect all employees regardless of merit. For example, worker safety.

---

Isn't that OSHA's job? If not, lets get rid of another bureaucracy.

quote:

---

Gotta love it when Unions play the "safety card."


As if all merit shop companies are unsafe.

---

Brings up a good question.....do inner city school teachers receive hazard pay?

quote:

---

If unions were doing their job, they would provide a great set of tools to the labor force.

---

When unions do their job they actually actively combat the rise in real wages! They do so by various means aimed at destroying the rise in the productivity of labor.

They oppose the introduction of labor-saving machinery on the grounds that it causes unemployment.

They oppose competition among workers.

They require featherbedding practices and impose make-work schemes.

They impose narrow work classifications, and require that specialists be employed at a day’s pay to perform work that others could easily do.

The artificial wage increases imposed by the labor unions result in unemployment when above-market wages are imposed throughout the economic system. Employers in the nonunion fields will feel compelled to offer their workers wages comparable to what the union workers are receiving — indeed, possibly even still higher wages — in order to ensure that they do not unionize.

Widespread wage increases closing large numbers of workers out of numerous occupations put extreme pressure on the wage rates of whatever areas of the economic system may still remain open. These limited areas could absorb the overflow of workers from other lines at low enough wage rates. But minimum-wage laws prevent wage rates in these remaining lines from going low enough to absorb these workers.

Far from being responsible for improvements in the standard of living of the average worker, labor unions operate in more or less total ignorance of what actually raises the average worker’s standard of living. In consequence of their ignorance, they are responsible for artificial inequalities in wage rates, for unemployment, and for holding down real wages and the average worker’s standard of living.

LINK

quote:

---

When unions do their job they actually actively combat the rise in real wages! They do so by various means aimed at destroying the rise in the productivity of labor.

They oppose the introduction of labor-saving machinery on the grounds that it causes unemployment.

They oppose competition among workers.

They require featherbedding practices and impose make-work schemes.

They impose narrow work classifications, and require that specialists be employed at a day’s pay to perform work that others could easily do.

The artificial wage increases imposed by the labor unions result in unemployment when above-market wages are imposed throughout the economic system. Employers in the nonunion fields will feel compelled to offer their workers wages comparable to what the union workers are receiving — indeed, possibly even still higher wages — in order to ensure that they do not unionize.

Widespread wage increases closing large numbers of workers out of numerous occupations put extreme pressure on the wage rates of whatever areas of the economic system may still remain open. These limited areas could absorb the overflow of workers from other lines at low enough wage rates. But minimum-wage laws prevent wage rates in these remaining lines from going low enough to absorb these workers.

Far from being responsible for improvements in the standard of living of the average worker, labor unions operate in more or less total ignorance of what actually raises the average worker’s standard of living. In consequence of their ignorance, they are responsible for artificial inequalities in wage rates, for unemployment, and for holding down real wages and the average worker’s standard of living.

---

Let me add in, I agree with most of that.

But the question was do unions have any role in modern society and I think they do when it comes to safety (and other minimum working conditions).