Yes.

My mom is a public school administrator, and she cannot be fired. Not saying she deserves it, but literally the only way they can fire her is if she molested some child. It's absolutely ridiculous. There are plenty of shitty teachers in this district, and plenty of coaches getting cushy jobs administrating that are terrible. Fuck the unions.

I'm all in favor of unions backing off some, but we still need them in some situations.

I mean it's like anything else, there are negotiations and almost always the union gets what they want because the employer gets screwed by the threat of a strike. All they want is money, so sure they pay them off. Doesn't mean they have plenty of money sitting around to do it. They'd just be more screwed if their employees went on strike.

A big problem with the union is exactly that, it turns employees against their employer. So how can anyone be shocked if the employer turns their back on their employees in some cases? Most people don't realize what it takes to operate a business. I've heard many employees talk about how their boss is driving around in a Beamer and they're making 15 bucks an hour and it's bullshit or whatever. First of all, the guy that owns the company cuts himself a paycheck--rarely does the company purchase the Beamer for him. Secondly, HE'S TAKING ALL THE RISK. What does the employee have invested in the company other than time? Time that they're being paid for. A union takes examples like this and brainwashes the employee into having some level of hatred for the higher ups. All they do is try to cause problems and pad their pockets with money they didn't earn. I mean I've seen cases where the union demanded 2 dollars more an hour for a group of employees to do the same job. Suppose the group is 50 employees in a decent sized company--that's 800 dollars more a day for an 8 hour day, that hurts a company BAD. And the problem with it is the union with threaten with a strike, so the company gets nothing--they shell out 800 more dollars a day to employees doing the same job they were doing. The union doesn't put a stipulation in there for the employee to do something extra to earn that extra money. This happens all over the place and over time they start to add up and the company gets pushed against the wall. That's when things go bad and when their backs are against the wall--in most cases the union only pushes them harder. They have to start laying people off, the union strikes. They all lose their jobs, the company folds, and no one is better off at all.

And that isn't a silly, made up, rare scenario. That happens all over the country, many times, every year.

A big misconception--the union is there for the employees.

The union is there for the union, period. It's become a business in it's own right at this point.

unions are just like everything else in this world, good ones and shitty ones.

UAW/and its members werent helping the car industry much with how much they were making and whatnot.

the union im in provides me with good affordable insurence, a decent wage and a few other things. the union is only as good as the teams of members that give input for the union teams to bargain for/against on the next contract.

Just curious, How many people on this thread are in or have ever been in a union? I was...Teamsters Local 284, Columbus Ohio.

I've been in a couple of them..and each one has screwed me one way or another.

Occasionally I will get one of these guys trying to come and talk to my reps about going union. Always funny when one of my reps tells them that they love their job and that unions are a waste of time.

in our district the administrators arent in the union and they can be moved, fired or not given a raise at any time or even sent back to the classroom

GoChiefs wrote:

tk421 wrote: they don't do anything except take dues twice a month. Absolutely worthless.

tk421 wrote: HAHAHAHAH. You actually think unions give a crap about the workers? That's hilarious. It's all about the Benjamins, baby.

Curly J wrote: That Union was all about bringing in money to the Union and not protecting their employees.

All of these. Unions today are absolutely worthless. They do nothing but take your money and protect the bums.

It's all about taking money from people. These unions were once a good thing until the government and organized crime got involved. IMO the unions need to go.

One of the best things about living in a free country is that you have the right to decide for yourself what you will do. Obviously most huddlers on this thread disagree.

chs71 wrote: One of the best things about living in a free country is that you have the right to decide for yourself what you will do.

Sure you have the right..but in todays economy..the more important question is "Do you want a job or don't you?" Not "Do you want to be in a union or don't you."

You're dumb if you think America would be better off without unions. Companies are just as much to blame b/c they're just as greedy. I've never known a union to collapse an economy. I have known corporations to. How many CEO's of these banks were union members?

It's a double edged sword IMO. They have their goods..but they have their bads. And IMO..the bad outweigh the good. They had there time when they were needed..but I don't believe that time is any longer upon us. You've never known a Union to collapse an economy? You don't think the UAW had a major negative impact on the way the economy is now? I'd say behind the housing market/banks..they are probably the next in line to blame.

Govt salaries have gotten way out of whack, too. With the very generous pension and retirement benefits it's some of the better paying jobs out there right now. Nothing worse than a de facto union that can give itself pay raises.

GoChiefs wrote: It's a double edged sword IMO. They have their goods..but they have their bads. And IMO..the bad outweigh the good. They had there time when they were needed..but I don't believe that time is any longer upon us. You've never known a Union to collapse an economy? You don't think the UAW had a major negative impact on the way the economy is now? I'd say behind the housing market/banks..they are probably the next in line to blame.

No b/c the Big 3 said ok to them b/c they were making money hand over fist. They're just as much to blame. Greed on both sides.

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote: They're just as much to blame. Greed on both sides.

I don't disagree with that at all..but like you just said..the Union had just as much of a part in it as the companies did.

GoChiefs wrote:

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote: They're just as much to blame. Greed on both sides.

I don't disagree with that at all..but like you just said..the Union had just as much of a part in it as the companies did.

So if you're going to blame unions, blame corporations too. The fact remains that Unions created a middle class in the country, not corporations. They aren't going pay those wages voluntarily.

I do lay blame on the corporations..I think they are both equally to blame. You'd be surprised about companies paying those wages voluntarily..there are plenty of great non union jobs out there.

GoChiefs wrote: I do lay blame on the corporations..I think they are both equally to blame. You'd be surprised about companies paying those wages voluntarily..there are plenty of great non union jobs out there.

Trust me.. the only reason I make what I do is b/c u make what you do.

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote: Trust me.. the only reason I make what I do is b/c u make what you do.

Because I make what I do? I don't make anything right now. LOL Except Unemployment.

Since the implementation of safety requirements, much of what unions originated for are doubly covered. Unions original purpose has been addressed sufficiently.

What unions do remain do serve a purpose to companies that don't have unions in that by offering sufficient benefits/wages up front they don't run the risk of employees organizing. Keeping them happy prevents a lot of the roadblocks away from day to day operations.

There are several companies that I've read about that took this approach so as to not have to deal with unions and have been very successful, but their names escape me now.

hang_loose wrote: Just curious, How many people on this thread are in or have ever been in a union? I was...Teamsters Local 284, Columbus Ohio.

I have been. Not only did they do nothing except apparently waste dues paying for newsletters loaded with Marxist garbage to be distributed, but they refused to actually do something when someone was injured on the job and the company refused to pay the medical expenses.

NNN, What happened to your job? Were you the one who was injured on the job? Did ? have insurance from your company? If ? was off for a while he could have received Social Security benefits (partial even) to get by plus workmans compensation (even if ? has to fight for it).

I worked for the Teamsters for a long time and have seen it benefit more people than most realize. This includes maternity leave, medical, optical, dental and job security. Its a lot harder to lose a job with the union behind you than just you against the company.

Your " Marxist garbage" comment could deal with any political or election campaign. I'm sure you've heard enough of those.

Unions have served their original purpose and have long since been taken over by greedy, corrupt individuals.

When unions first were put together, they were necessary. The lack of laws protecting the rights of workers gave companies all the power they needed to take advantage of employees.

This was long ago though and many laws now protect employees, unions are not needed to do this any longer.