USPS paying people $25/hour to do nothing, unions, etc

jbubs1975 said:
My day job is in a union factory
Click to expand...
Well, you have no financial interest in this discussion...

The argument isn't that the union isn't good for the people in the union. It's the people outside the union that get screwed by the union. Like the guys who would be willing to work in the factory for less because they need a job.
 


The argument isn't that the union isn't good for the people in the union. It's the people outside the union that get screwed by the union. Like the guys who would be willing to work in the factory for less because they need a job.
Click to expand...
So the guys willing to work at Wal Mart for less money than their current employees make are getting screwed by the current Wal Mart employees also? I'm not really following what your saying. You don't have to be in a union to get hired, you join the union after.
 
jbubs1975 said:
So the guys willing to work at Wal Mart for less money than their current employees make are getting screwed by the current Wal Mart employees also?
Click to expand...
WalMart hires at the market rate which is meddled with by the government.

I always laugh when union people cite Walmart. Here is a business people line up at to work for, that hires from within, which offers advanced training for standout employees, and sells goods at a very low price which helps a lot of people with limited purchasing power.

jbubs1975 said:
I'm not really following what your saying. You don't have to be in a union to get hired, you join the union after.
Click to expand...
How do you think a company can afford to pay you more than its competitors?
 
guerilla said:
How do you think a company can afford to pay you more than its competitors?
Click to expand...

Because it makes more money. Plain and simple. And it makes more money because it's employees work harder, are more skilled, more knowledgeable, produce better quality goods, and have a solid, well known and well respected reputation. It's probably a lot of the same reasons you get paid more to build links than your competition...
 
jbubs1975 said:
And it makes more money because it's employees work harder, are more skilled, more knowledgeable, produce better quality goods, and have a solid, well known and well respected reputation. It's probably a lot of the same reasons you get paid more to build links than your competition...
Click to expand...
By that rationale, anyone could compete with you guys, all they need to do is bring in a union.

1. Union
2. ???
3. Profit

Or maybe what you're really saying, is the company is more productive, and that is why they make more money. Which if true, you would have to prove that union shops are always more productive than non union shops.
 
I disagree with guerilla a whole lot, but I gotta agree with him here.

Unions are nominally useful for protecting workers, but as long as workers are free to quit and find another job, they don't need any more protecting.

Any more protections beyond basic worker freedoms will eventually lead to bullshit like the OP article.

If you're okay with unions, you need to shut the fuck up about bailouts because both sides of the coin need protecting.
 
4 million dollars? The government spends $7 million every minute.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU]9/10/2001: Rumsfeld says $2.3 TRILLION Missing from Pentagon - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5uJHvj_xwk]Dennis Kucinich "Pentagon Is Missing Trillions Of Dollars They Can Not Account For" - YouTube[/ame]
 
guerilla said:
Unions are anti-competitive and damage the employment opportunities of lower priced labor, specifically the very young, the very old, minorities etc.

The purpose of a union is to create wage rates that are above the market rate of labor. In other words, to suppress economic law. The result of a successful union, is less jobs, and more unemployment.
Click to expand...

The same could be said of workers negotiating for similar things on an individual basis. You wouldn't criticize that though; and would even recognize self-interest as a natural part of a market.

What do have against workers exercising their freedoms to collectively bargain?

guerilla said:
I always laugh when union people cite Walmart. Here is a business people line up at to work for, that hires from within, which offers advanced training for standout employees, and sells goods at a very low price which helps a lot of people with limited purchasing power.
Click to expand...

People have historically lined up to work in dreadful conditions if they feel that is the only way they or their children can survive.

Walmart and their shareholders are a large entity and can use this power to drive smaller places out of business. If someone points out a negative aspect to this, you would probably say "too bad, that's the market working itself out." However if Walmart workers freely form themselves into a large entity and "bad" things result, your attitude would be the opposite?
 
I think you are confusing unions with people working together voluntarily. They are not the same thing. Workers don't need a union to act together voluntarily.

A union is a labor cartel.
 
poisonsembrace said:
Companies don't have a union; the workers do. Unions have nothing to do with bailouts idiot. Maybe it's different in America but in Australia, you join a union so that the company cannot fuck you and if they try, you and everyone else has a voice - attempts to stop the company just walking over the workforce.

American companies already took a dive, took bailout money and then shipped jobs overseas to China. I'm not saying that doesn't happen in Australia but unions have helped to stop that kind of bullshit in the past. Workers have rights but so many people have been sold on the idea that any rights should be limited and reduced where possible with little consideration for workers and the local community.
Click to expand...

If I owned a large company I would make it policy to fire any piece of shit employee who joined a union. Ungrateful bitches.
 
jbubs1975 said:
So the guys willing to work at Wal Mart for less money than their current employees make are getting screwed by the current Wal Mart employees also? I'm not really following what your saying. You don't have to be in a union to get hired, you join the union after.
Click to expand...

What happens if you don't want to join the union after you get hired?
 
Oh btw, if we NEED unions to provide safe clean working environments, then can someone tell me if Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, etc (biggest companies in the US).. do these giant companies have unions?

Are their working conditions awful? I mean, it seems like a dream job. Is this because of unions telling them to provide everything they provide for their employees? Or is it because they are just simply trying to retain and gain talented employees?
 
guerilla said:
I think you are confusing unions with people working together voluntarily. They are not the same thing. Workers don't need a union to act together voluntarily.

A union is a labor cartel.
Click to expand...

A union by definition is two or more people working together, which can be done voluntarily.

Most of the labor force is still non-union, just like Walmart still has competition. Even if Walmart had a 100% monopoly, I doubt you would label them as a cartel. You might instead point out how Walmart is not holding a gun to anyone's head to force them to work or shop there.

Unions are also not holding guns to people's heads. UPS can fire all union workers tomorrow and switch to the labor model of Fedex. If you say that the government would prevent this, then that is a criticism of government and not of the concept of unions.
 
Moxie said:
A union by definition is two or more people working together, which can be done voluntarily.

Most of the labor force is still non-union, just like Walmart still has competition. Even if Walmart had a 100% monopoly, I doubt you would label them as a cartel. You might instead point out how Walmart is not holding a gun to anyone's head to force them to work or shop there.

Unions are also not holding guns to people's heads. UPS can fire all union workers tomorrow and switch to the labor model of Fedex. If you say that the government would prevent this, then that is a criticism of government and not of the concept of unions.
Click to expand...

Didn't the federal government sue Boeing for doing that?
 
guerilla said:
A union is a labor cartel.
Click to expand...
^^^This.
Today unions abuse their power. General strikes in Western Europe is a prime example - ex. airport worker unions striking and causing millions of lost revenue every hour to god knows how many companies.

I'm all about paying good salaries to hard working people, but i can't stand the fact that unions dictate, what they think is the fair salary and if there's an agreement they use striking as extortion tool. Which in the end is going to cost a lot to the company and related industries.
I don't know what kind of union laws do you guys have in US, but here you can't fire someone who's in union, without getting approval from related goverment institution (labor protection agency?).
 
poisonsembrace said:
Why are you going into bat for USPS? Unions are pretty big in Australia and while they are not perfect, I wouldn't want to see the country without them. We have a good minimum wage, holidays, sick leave and many other entitlements that companies would love to get rid of if not for the unions. The sort of thing most Americans don't have but should.
Click to expand...

Australia is also a fucked country to run a brick and mortar business. $30,643/year minimum wage is whack.
 
True story - my wife just applied for a new passport. She had to call the Dept. of State when her new passport was never mailed to her. Turns out the USPS fucked up the delivery, so the Dept. of State Fedex'ed it to us instead.
 
When companies organize to fix prices it is called collusion. When workers do it is called unionizing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom