US Politics/2016 Election Pick Your Poison Master Thread

[skyguy918]

Two points to cosider.

1. The company I work for had the workers in 1 place decide to unionize, and all they got was that the company offered health insurance (to employees who were all eligible for medicaid) and a raise that didn't even cover the union dues. (Basically the union was the one who took advantage of them)

2. A union shouldn't be bust proof, otherwise they have the power to literally put a company out of business with insane demands.

That has nothing to do with the relationship between the union and the companies, and everything to do with the relationship between employees and their union. If union leadership isn't doing their membership any good, the membership needs to vote in new people.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Two points to cosider.

Do you know anything about why unions came into existence? Nothing has changed on the way management thinks.

[avromie7]

Do you know anything about why unions came into existence? Nothing has changed on the way management thinks.

Working conditions are not the same as they were when unions came into existence, and there are laws and regulations in place to stop it from going back to what it was. IMO unions have done their time of being useful to society, and are now a drag on society.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Working conditions are not the same as they were when unions came into existence, and there are laws and regulations in place to stop it from going back to what it was. IMO unions have done their time of being useful to society, and are now a drag on society.

The wages you see in non-union jobs is because of the unions. So most Americans can thank union paying members for their gains. You are welcome!

[skyguy918]

Working conditions are not the same as they were when unions came into existence, and there are laws and regulations in place to stop it from going back to what it was. IMO unions have done their time of being useful to society, and are now a drag on society.

Aren't you generally anti-regulation?

[aygart]

Working conditions are not the same as they were when unions came into existence, and there are laws and regulations in place to stop it from going back to what it was. IMO unions have done their time of being useful to society, and are now a drag on society.

Unless things gradually go back the other way without them.

[avromie7]

Aren't you generally anti-regulation?

Yes, but if unions were abolished and if the regulations didn't exist, I don't think working conditions would get close to what they were before unions were created.

[avromie7]

Unless things gradually go back the other way without them.

Then employees can decide to go back to having unions, but it certainly shouldn't be something heavily protected by the government.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Then employees can decide to go back to having unions, but it certainly shouldn't be something heavily protected by the government.

You don't seem to understand it is a given the workers will get screwed.
It is like saying lets get rid of discrimination laws and hope for the best.

[aygart]

Yes, but if unions were abolished and if the regulations didn't exist, I don't think working conditions would get close to what they were before unions were created.

Why not?

[skyguy918]

Yes, but if unions were abolished and if the regulations didn't exist, I don't think working conditions would get close to what they were before unions were created.

Why not?

+1. You're dreaming. Besides, why is that the standard? If you take away unions and regulations, employers hold all the power, and they're not exactly known for wielding it gently.

[avromie7]

You don't seem to understand it is a given the workers will get screwed.
It is like saying lets get rid of discrimination laws and hope for the best.

Then the worker will find a boss who will treat him better. The employees most protected by unions are bad employees who don't do their work well, and should be fired but union regulations protect them from being fired. Good employees will find good jobs under an employer who is willing to pay them well and treat them well, instead we're all stuck paying the extra costs for employees who don't do their job well.

[avromie7]

+1. You're dreaming. Besides, why is that the standard? If you take away unions and regulations, employers hold all the power, and they're not exactly known for wielding it gently.

Do you think that if we got rid of all labor regulations and all unions, we would have sweat shops like in Bangladesh and other third world countries?

If employers don't treat their employees well, the employee will find a new place to work.

[skyguy918]

Do you think that if we got rid of all labor regulations and all unions, we would have sweat shops like in Bangladesh and other third world countries?

If employers don't treat their employees well, the employee will find a new place to work.

Again, why is that the standard? I guarantee that on the whole, wages, working conditions, etc would get worse - possibly a lot worse.

[aygart]

Then the worker will find a boss who will treat him better. The employees most protected by unions are bad employees who don't do their work well, and should be fired but union regulations protect them from being fired. Good employees will find good jobs under an employer who is willing to pay them well and treat them well, instead we're all stuck paying the extra costs for employees who don't do their job well.

The main purpose of unions is for unskilled labor (that does not preclude them being beneficial for skilled labor as well, but it is a different conversation). The lines are much more blurred in that ability for unskilled laborers.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Then the worker will find a boss who will treat him better. The employees most protected by unions are bad employees who don't do their work well, and should be fired but union regulations protect them from being fired. Good employees will find good jobs under an employer who is willing to pay them well and treat them well, instead we're all stuck paying the extra costs for employees who don't do their job well.

Now your racist views are showing again.

[avromie7]

Again, why is that the standard? I guarantee that on the whole, wages, working conditions, etc would get worse - possibly a lot worse.

The main purpose of unions is for unskilled labor (that does not preclude them being beneficial for skilled labor as well, but it is a different conversation). The lines are much more blurred in that ability for unskilled laborers.

Even for unskilled labor, there's a reason why WalMart and Target and many other retailers (my assumption is that they are the biggest employers of non skilled non union employees) increased wages to well above minimum wage, and offered more benefits. If you were correct they should be paying minimum wage, and not providing any extra benefits.

Now your racist views are showing again.

What does racism have to do with this discussion?

[gozalim]

Now your racist views are showing again.

אויפן גנב ברענט דאס היטל

[ChaimMoskowitz]

What does racism have to do with this discussion?

Who our all these bad employees that don't do their job? Fireman, police, teachers, hotel workers, postal employees?

Please explain to me why thousands of APWU grievances are won every year against USPS. Once you understand that you will understand why unions are needed more than ever.

[avromie7]

Who our all these bad employees that don't do their job? Fireman, police, teachers, hotel workers, postal employees?

Please explain to me why thousands of APWU grievances are won every year against USPS. Once you understand that you will understand why unions are needed more than ever.

All of the above mentioned have bad employees, not all employees are bad.

Link?