- Joined
- Dec 3, 2009
- Messages
- 52,009
- Reaction score
- 33,944
- Location
- The Golden State
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
It is Ditto....Look, as a person I like ya, we have known each other for a long time on these boards, and You alone with others have always provided debate instead of bomb throwing, regurgitations of talking point blather...You're a smart guy. So you tell me am I reading this wrong....In one post you say....
Then just a couple of postings later you say...
So at the very least you hedged your original statement....
Although I too am, as a worker myself for anything that would help boost my own take home pay, I also have an eye toward the longevity of the business that provides the job I do. It's like conservation. Is it that labor in Michigan on a auto assembly line is worth $28 per hour, while the same assembly on a line in South Carolina is only worth $17 per hour? While the factors that compile these disparities in pay for the "same" job exist on a host of factors such as cost of living in different areas, it is not all that. And the fact that cost of labor past, and present drive the over pricing of American made autos to the point that they can not be competitive in a world market without outsourcing. That is a problem in the long term vision of the labor force in their negotiation tactic, and push.
If labor unions are going to be relevant in the future they have to change the face they are now showing to the public. Over bloated institutions, heavily political, with a weighted agenda toward more Marxist ideology, and a sense of entitlement that boasts their greatest achievements that came a century ago, and after such great changes they helped usher in, they have settled for a frame of heavy handed, corrupt, and ugly tactics, fostered in associations with nefarious characters, and one sided political ideologies.
Their popularity has waned from nearly 40% in the 70s and 80s to just 7% now, and what face do they show? Trumpka, Hoffa, etc., all doing their part to divide instead of looking at how to make the Union a viable alternative again...They want to do it by force, instead of winning the argument, and that is their down fall.
OK, let's see if I can make my position a little more clear, then.
The union is hired by the workers to negotiate better wages and working conditions for them, much as a lawyer is hired to negotiate for a better settlement, or perhaps a lighter sentence, in court.
The union is likely to put something on the table that it knows, the employer knows, and the workers should know, is not reasonable. The purpose of that is to establish a bargaining position. No one expects the other side to give in.
Management, usually through their lawyer or labor negotiator, will also come up with something that everyone knows is not reasonable and will be rejected.
From those extreme positions, each side gives a little bit until there is a middle position somewhere that both can live with.
That's how union labor negotiations work. I know from personal experience, having been on both sides of the table at one point or another.
If the management of the auto industry really agreed to nearly eighty bucks an hour for semiskilled labor, then they did a poor job of negotiation.
If I buy a car at sticker price, then that's not the fault of the dealership. I should have known better. And no, I've never bought a car at sticker price.
So, while the union is likely to place an unreasonable "demand" on the table, the rank and file is not going to go on strike to support it. If they do, then management is going to engage in some union busting, and things are likely to get ugly for both sides.
Without a union, the employees are individually negotiating with a much more powerful entity. Their choice is really my way or the highway, my way being whatever management wants to pay.
And, sometimes, what management wants to pay is perfectly reasonable. They do need to have a stable work force, after all, and the last thing they want is for labor to unionize.
So, in reality, the ability to unionize, even if the workers choose not to, helps keep wages up.
The unholy alliance between unions and politicians is another matter, as is the ability of large enterprises to purchase their own politicians. Money in politics is corrupting.