Walmart Strike

[pathtofreedom]

You already admitted they were overpaid when you said this:

my statement makes perfect sense the government artificially drives the wages of employees barely subsidence levels.

 

[angelatc]

So your "truth" is that union members require no skill-set, only the ability to "bully". An absolutely ridiculous assertion.

I think it depends on the union, but yes - a worker with more skills commands more money. The whole point of unions is protectionism.

 

[UWDude]

There are generations of mouthbreathing neckbeards around here that can't add 2+2, but make $25/hr because they signed up for the union and waited for someone to retire.

why does that make you angry? And why does it matter to you? Why do you feel you are superior to them? And how realistic is your obviously hate filled assertion of a bunch of people you don't know? And why should anybody care about your obviously false and hyperbole filled anecdotes? Did they get all the chicks? Did they beat you up in high school? What's wrong with a neck-beard?

 

[Weston White]

It absolutely is not. I live in central IL which is born/bred Union, and the only union members that are skilled are the ones that have had their jobs long enough to actually learn something, jobs they've had long enough only because they are almost impossible to fire due to the union. There are generations of mouthbreathing neckbeards around here that can't add 2+2, but make $25/hr because they signed up for the union and waited for someone to retire.

Say what now? You are wronging the unions for employers hiring unqualified employees and keeping those incompetent employees on throughout their probationary period? Sorry, I am so not buying that book.

 

[angelatc]

Depends on the call center. The call center I worked at had extensive training. It was for computer support. And it still had atrocious attrition.



All you got is bluster, too bad there isn't a market for that, or you'd be rich wasting your life online all day like you do.
Hey, you turn on the troll, you get a bigger, meaner, badder troll back, because if you want bluster, I can give it to you.

Now go crawl back under your bridge. You've been out-blustered. Buh-bye Angela! Go madly tweet and change the world, while yours passes you... buh bye!

So, ya got nothin?

 

[Weston White]

No, but the constant poo-poohing of the facts - that the NLRB exists, it is cozier with unions than it is with employers, and the fact that they are involved in "just" settling disputes is annoying me.

They aren't just an arbritration committee - they continually push for changes that would always make life better for the unions. THey've clearly lost their independence and are now just an arm of Big Labor.

I don't know the name for it, but I get the same irritated feeling when a lefty tells me that the government doesn't want to take my guns away.

Well I sort of think you are conflating political power play with union legitimacy.

 

[angelatc]

Well I sort of think you are conflating political power play with union legitimacy.

I have no problem with a group of workers banding together to demand workplace reforms. But the government should not be involved.

 

[Weston White]

I think it depends on the union, but yes - a worker with more skills commands more money. The whole point of unions is protectionism.

Yes, collective protection for a specific class of qualified and skilled employees under a binding contract to perform. There is nothing at all wrong, evil, or bad about that at all.

 

[belian78]

Say what now? You are wronging the unions for employers hiring unqualified employees and keeping those incompetent employees on throughout their probationary period? Sorry, I am so not buying that book.

No I'm talking about drunks showing up for work drunk and hurting themselves, then getting workman's comp and still keeping their jobs because of the union. Things like that and just as bad happen all the freakin time. Union members getting caught keying the cars of contractors, knifing the tires of contractors that don't use union and still keeping their jobs. I could go on for days.

 

[belian78]

why does that make you angry? And why does it matter to you? Why do you feel you are superior to them? And how realistic is your obviously hate filled assertion of a bunch of people you don't know? And why should anybody care about your obviously false and hyperbole filled anecdotes? Did they get all the chicks? Did they beat you up in high school? What's wrong with a neck-beard?

It makes me angry, because the UAW has a majority of the blame for all but a fraction of the production work leaving this area over the last 40 years or so. This area still hasn't completely recovered from CAT closing down over 80% of it's plants around here.

 

[angelatc]

Yes, collective protection for a specific class of qualified and skilled employees under a binding contract to perform. There is nothing at all wrong, evil, or bad about that at all.

LOL at "skilled" employees. I'm in Detroit. It takes the skill of a monkey to be a UAW member.

Skilled workers don't need unions.

 

[belian78]

LOL at "skilled" employees. I'm in Detroit. It takes the skill of a monkey to be a UAW member.

Same for the UAW members around here. To be fair, a vast majority, not all.

 

[Weston White]

I have no problem with a group of workers banding together to demand workplace reforms. But the government should not be involved.

Exactly, save for when criminal acts are involved by the parties (union, employees, employers, etc.) of course. All should be left entirely to the union to file civil complaints for contract breaches (e.g., courts could order upon petition to first complete the ADR process and if still unresolved then begin discovery and move into trial).

 

[PaulConventionWV]

The whole argument that you have you join a union in order to get a job is stupid then you are excepting the anarcho-socialist argument that working isn't voluntary even though it technically is.

lolwut?

 

[Weston White]

No I'm talking about drunks showing up for work drunk and hurting themselves, then getting workman's comp and still keeping their jobs because of the union. Things like that and just as bad happen all the freakin time. Union members getting caught keying the cars of contractors, knifing the tires of contractors that don't use union and still keeping their jobs. I could go on for days.

You are talking about entirely separate issues there, unions are not intended to protect employees that are involved in criminal activity, and if the elected board-members of those unions are voting to financially represent employees involved in such activities, then they need to be voted out and replaced with qualified employee representatives.

 

[Weston White]

Skilled workers don't need unions.

Sure, but being in a union aids in protecting their continued professional interests, including work related risks and dangerous working conditions, and to prevent their employers from trampling all over them and discarding them as if they were nothing more than a replaceable drill bit.

 

[angelatc]

Sure, but being in a union aids in protecting their continued professional interests, including work related risks and dangerous working conditions, and to prevent their employers from trampling all over them and discarding them as if they were nothing more than a replaceable drill bit.

And there we have it - protectionism. You can't fire drunk stoned employees, because they aren't drill bits.

Worker safety is the responsibility of the government now. No legitimate need for union involvement there.

I live in freaking Michigan. Even the union members think the unions are a waste.

And I am just baffled by the constant berating of "evil" employers. Is that why union workers need special protections - they literally hate their employers, and want to bully them into running the company to suit the workers instead of the people who actually own it?

 

[angelatc]

And I disagree that unions put the interests of their workers first. The pumber next door is a prime example. His union stopped doing residential jobs because commercial paid more. But the gaps between the jobs were longer. The union members would have preferred to accept both kinds of work, but their made a deal with another union not to compete in that market.

Protectionism. Bid rigging.

So the guy next door was out of work about half the time, thanks to his union.

 

[Weston White]

And there we have it - protectionism. You can't fire drunk stoned employees, because they aren't drill bits.

Worker safety is the responsibility of the government now. No legitimate need for union involvement there.

I live in freaking Michigan. Even the union members think the unions are a waste.

And I am just baffled by the constant berating of "evil" employers. Is that why union workers need special protections - they literally hate their employers, and want to bully them into running the company to suit the workers instead of the people who actually own it?

Sure you can, employers simply need to first go through whatever disciplinary process for termination as outlined by their MOU, then once completed (including whatever appeals process), like Emerald and Trump: BAM! You're FIRED!

And no not "bully", but rather contract with them.

 

[Tod]

He doesn't call unions unconstitutional. lol. He calls laws that dictate wages and who can or can't work are unconstitutional.

this ^

government interference in the right to freely associate (laws that dictate that if employees vote to be part of a union then everyone is forced to join, etc).

More RP discussion of unions in this video, starting with a question at 53:27