1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Employee Free Choice Act - big mistake

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by chestnut, Feb 6, 2009.

  1. chestnut

    chestnut New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The notion that anyone who has a business could be coerced into implementing a union at "his" company is simply wrong.

    People who don't like where they work or who they work for can either change jobs or work for themselves.

    I hope this push gets squashed
     
  2. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Imagine a "Hamburger Flippers Local #555" where they strike for $15.00/hr. It might not be as bad as you think seeing as how hyperinflation might make a dollar then worth about $0.25 in today's dollars.

    So, don't worry--hyperinflation, insolvency and 63+% unemployment due to bankruptcies will take care of the potential problems you're alluding to.
     
  3. top gun

    top gun New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,940
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    The EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on the actual circumstances involved.

    If used as strictly a wage per hour tool then I think it's being wrongly used.

    On the other hand often there are legitimate safety, benefit and workplace treatment concerns (especially in the larger companies) where forming a union may be almost the only way to get any kind of a fair deal.

    Truth is both Reagan & Bush went way out of their way to severely weaken unions and the pendulum is swinging back the other way a tad.

    Especially in a bad economy workers need to think long and hard about anything that adds cost to operating businesses because that could actually defeat their purpose & cause companies to just close loosing even more jobs.

    But is the actual right for workers to form a union if that's what the majority really wants reasonable & fair... I think to me it is.

    BOTTOM LINE: WORKERS & EMPLOYERS... DON'T BE GREEDY!!!


     
  4. chestnut

    chestnut New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Workers have a right to work. That's it. They therefore make a choice where to work based on their needs and abilities.

    For any organization to impose its will upon a private company, telling that company how to run the business is WRONG!.

    The employees take absolutely no risk in starting the business. That means the decisons on how the business operates is not theirs to make.

    On top of that.. the EFCA will allow unions that want to form (which imo is a crock) the ability to have signed ballots. That means even if they vote, they cannot do with a anonymous ballot.

    How much coersion do you think would take place?

    Unions will do nothing to help the econmy, but will make it worse. Unions impose unbelieveable rules and restrictions on businesses causing them to move their operations out of the country.
     
  5. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Define "right to work".
     
  6. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    :eek: That was ALMOST a conservative line of thought!

    Who are you!?! Where's Top Gun, the giddy school girl slobbering for Obama?!?
     
  7. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Most of these folks have absolutely no clue what a "cost buildup" is for a product. I think one of the common beliefs is that labor is such a small part that there's room for a huge increase in payroll with only an insignificant impact in the retail price of the product. Naturally, it's the greed of the owners that is suspect and the employees just want their fair share.

    I had some items that I owned the patent on being produced at a fabrication company. I was doing a little in-house QA when a worker commented how I must be making a killing off of the items based on their price. I began to tabulate all the costs and that the absolute margin was actually very low, especially after taxes. As he staggered under the weight of the information, he finally asked why I bothered so I told him: it was more of a favor to a friend who needed the product and I wasn't even lying, sad to say. Much more of this and I'll just quit bothering. In this climate, there are a lot of small businesses that are roughly in similar shape.
     
  8. top gun

    top gun New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,940
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    The true history and need for Unions especially in the cases of large businesses is indisputable. This is one of those situations where truly either side can be totally GREEDY and wrong.

    When the Teamsters started for instance the produce companies forced it's workers to work 7 days a week at very low pay in what in many instances were nothing less than death trap trucks... but they were the only game in town so men wanting to work were basically forced to accept those conditions & jobs.

    Once one industry is seen getting away with this others soon (and did) follow. I think we are at a point where people matter a little more than that.

    I'll be the first to admit that Unions have on occasion gotten GREEDY themselves possibly looking a little too much at a particular companies overall profit at a certain time more than if their labor package is fair compensation for the work being done.

    But without Unions being a possible option for workers to be able to decide on there's a danger here as well.

    Remember it was Unions that brought us much of today's workplace safety "OSHA". It was also the Unions that got people a standard 5 day work week. So if you're lucky enough to be off on this weekend and with your family... thank the Unions.
     
  9. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Andy, has anyone ever told you that you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar? How about taking some time out to review a good book like, say... "How to Win Friends and Influence People"?

    Order today here:

    http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650

    Get the expedited shipping option.

    Have you ever considered taking a speed reading course?

    http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias=stripbooks&field-keywords=Evelyn+Wood
     
  10. chestnut

    chestnut New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    O.K. So maybe you're right and some unions are o.k. ... Some

    But to let the employees vote on wether they want a union without an anonymous ballot is simply insane!

    Also, what is up with unions when it relates to government jobs. This I don't get at all.
     
  11. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Unions typically vote Democrat.
     
  12. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene

    no need for unions when it comes to safety anymore. we have OSHA and Fed guidelines.

    The law requires any company union or not to pay at least a min wage, to have a clean air, safe equipment, a 10 min paid break every two hours and an unpaid half hour break for lunch every 4 hours.

    there is no need for unions anymore except to strong arm companies.


    before federal guidelines unions were more than useful but now its only good for protecting lazy workers and bleeding the company for more than the worker is worth. my union is living proof of that
     
  13. top gun

    top gun New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,940
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio, USA

    Don't get me wrong... you're points are not without merit.


    The problem has been that if only the company gets to count the ballots they can exert pressure on individuals that they see as the ones trying to bring in a Union. Often Union initiatives don't have a full majority support the first time through because some workers are worried about employer retribution if the initiative doesn't pass.

    Then if management can start picking off (possibly firing) those who are seen as leaders of the attempted Unionization before a Union approval is passed they can effectively keep the Union out that way.

    But I also see your point that some jobs just don't seem to really require the need of a Union but still have one.

    I think it's probably an... if you're going to let one group do it you legally have to let all groups do it sorta thing.

    I understand your feelings that Unions can themselves be overbearing and become too much of a burden. I think there's some common ground to be found that would be fair to both sides.
     
  14. Pidgey

    Pidgey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,125
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    48
  15. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    LOL!

    Thanks, but I have no interest in being friends with some specific individuals. There are a few people on here that have openly stated that they look down on people of a lower economic level. That the opinions of the "lower class" are not important. Even that no one should listen to those who don't drive the right car, or have the right title, or have enough zeros on their pay check.

    I honestly have no use, or want of friendship with that type of prejudice and elitism.

    Beyond that, I read pretty quick, so I think I'll pass on that. Thanks for the suggestion though.
     
Loading...

Share This Page