• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Union membership down again in 2010

celticwar17 said:
Where taking about the government here, it's artificial, employers dont have a big choice in the matter, and when they do... it's because it is a Union structure that benifits the people who are most closely tied with it. What does have a big choice is our budget and congress, and that should be THE way to improve government workers needs. Talk to them if you want more funding for teacher's, construction, etc. , but if we can't afford it... either to bad so sad, or cut other programs in order to have more money for funding.
Click to expand...

The government tries to take advantage of public workers all the time and it isn't too bad so sad because public unions still exist and still advocate for their members. Too bad so sad for people like you who would have it otherwise.
 
theplaydrive said:
The government tries to take advantage of public workers all the time and it isn't too bad so sad because public unions still exist and still advocate for their members. Too bad so sad for people like you who would have it otherwise.
Click to expand...

You have some examples of how the government takes advantage of public employees.....??



.
 
Cole said:
You have some examples of how the government takes advantage of public employees.....??
Click to expand...

2nded. Because I understand the incentives for an employer to pinch pennies, but government never seems to care to. So what incentive would a government employer have to take advantage of his employees?
 
Cole said:
You have some examples of how the government takes advantage of public employees.....??
Click to expand...

Sure. For teachers, excessive class sizes, poor work environments, dangerous work environments, longer hours, taking advantage of break time, firing people for arbitrary reasons, having teachers perform duties that others are supposed to perform (i.e. administering breakfast for students when cafeteria workers are supposed to do that cutting into class time), threatening teachers who don't cheat on exams, etc.
 
Last edited:
celticwar17 said:
This is why anyone who has the slightest consept of capitalism knows public sector unions are problematic.
Click to expand...

Yes they make a living and the rich dont want to slow minded private sector to ever realize that
 
theplaydrive said:
Anyone who has the slightest conception of employers taking advantage of workers would understand the desire/need of workers to have a public union.
Click to expand...

American Citizens are that collective. Nobody prevents you from bargaining with the tax payers. Show we the laundry list of terrible exploitation of public workers that can be shown in history with private workers.
 
ARealConservative said:
American Citizens are that collective. Nobody prevents you from bargaining with the tax payers. Show we the laundry list of terrible exploitation of public workers that can be shown in history with private workers.
Click to expand...

Are you joking? The same crap that happened to many private workers happened with many public workers. Study history. If you want modern example, teach in an inner-city in Chicago for 10 years like some of my family and find out what crap their employers tried to pull on them.

As far as history, talk to a firefighter's union or even a teacher's union about the crap they dealt with in the beginning.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
Because the amount of power they hold is greater than the amount of people in their ranks. Where is their extra power coming from?
Click to expand...

The pure good and sacred nobility of our cause.
 
theplaydrive said:
unions are just one lobby among many. the funny part though is that unions look out for more middle class, normal people than many of the rest of them and yet they're the ones people are really targeting.
Click to expand...

They sure. Like when goonionized "teachers" walk off the job to engage in mob action at the Wisconsin state capitol in such numbers as to force school closures, thereby requiring parents with real jobs to take time off or spend money for baby sitters. That's really looking out for the middle class!

Don't forget now, that working mom who had to take the day off because some scum bucket union thug pretending to be a teacher had to go march in his red shirt? She had to pay her own money into her retirement fund, and she's paying taxes to fund that thug's retirement, too. And the thug was out protesting because he might have to join the rest of America in actually contributing to his own retirement for a change. But, sure, that thug was looking out for the middle class. He was looking out to make sure he wasn't forced to join it.
 
ARealConservative said:
American Citizens are that collective. Nobody prevents you from bargaining with the tax payers. Show we the laundry list of terrible exploitation of public workers that can be shown in history with private workers.
Click to expand...

There is none.

Any time a public employee dislikes his job he always had the freedom to look for another.

That's what America is all about.

If hesheit can't find another job, then hesheit should stop whining and get back to work.
 
justabubba said:
ok
list those reasons
Click to expand...

1) The goonion payback to politicians who agree to raise wages in exchange, creating an undesirable positive feedback loop that cuts out the people the politican was actually elected to represent, the man working in the private sector paying the taxes for the goonion's free ride.

2) see the first one, that was enough.
 
theplaydrive said:
Are you joking? The same crap that happened to many private workers happened with many public workers. Study history. If you want modern example, teach in an inner-city in Chicago for 10 years like some of my family and find out what crap their employers tried to pull on them.

As far as history, talk to a firefighter's union or even a teacher's union about the crap they dealt with in the beginning.
Click to expand...

I notice a lack of a single concrete example.
 
theplaydrive said:
Anyone who has the slightest conception of employers taking advantage of workers would understand the desire/need of workers to have a public union.
Click to expand...

Yes, everyone understands greed and laziness. Those who do not wish to succumb to both say out of unions in general and public employment in particular.
 
theplaydrive said:
Anyone who has the slightest conception of employers taking advantage of workers would understand the desire/need of workers to have a public union.
Click to expand...

so, you are saying that the people of this country are evil, and must be fought?

given that they are the employers of public workers?
 
theplaydrive said:
Sure. For teachers, excessive class sizes, poor work environments, dangerous work environments, longer hours, taking advantage of break time, firing people for arbitrary reasons, having teachers perform duties that others are supposed to perform (i.e. administering breakfast for students when cafeteria workers are supposed to do that cutting into class time), threatening teachers who don't cheat on exams, etc.
Click to expand...

1. the only time i'm aware of goernment interating with cheating teachers is when they got caught cheating and were subsequently fired.

2. college professors often teach to classes of 200 people. i somehow doubt that a highschool teacher will suffer mental overload and death if he is forced to lecture a class of 35 rather than 30. the "crowded classroom" thing is a canard, anyway; used by teachers unions to get more funding.

3. longer hours? longer hours? teachers work - what - 7 hours a day? 8? from one public employee to another, they can suck that one up.

4. there is nothing wrong with teachers being used to monitor lunchrooms, there is nothing remotely abusive about that whatsoever, and the fact that you think it is, is hilarious.

5. the dangerous work conditions i will buy. which is why i would pay more to teachers willing to work in dangerous schools (the teachers unions, of course, shoot down the idea of paying teachers extra for behavioral incentives). however, i will only be willing to do this if they can be fired should they fail to perform there. which brings us to point #...

6. if you are fired for arbitrary reasons, usually you can sue and make quite a chunk of change. but public teachers can hardly be fired at all. the cost and trouble for firing a public teachers is legendary.

oh, and getting fired? that's not abuse. that's the entity that hired you deciding it had made a mistake, and correcting that mistake. out in the real world private workers recognize that if they don't perform, that's the result. only in the public sector is getting fired "just" because you suck at your job "abuse".
 
cpwill said:
1. the only time i'm aware of goernment interating with cheating teachers is when they got caught cheating and were subsequently fired.

2. college professors often teach to classes of 200 people. i somehow doubt that a highschool teacher will suffer mental overload and death if he is forced to lecture a class of 35 rather than 30. the "crowded classroom" thing is a canard, anyway; used by teachers unions to get more funding.

3. longer hours? longer hours? teachers work - what - 7 hours a day? 8? from one public employee to another, they can suck that one up.

4. there is nothing wrong with teachers being used to monitor lunchrooms, there is nothing remotely abusive about that whatsoever, and the fact that you think it is, is hilarious.

5. the dangerous work conditions i will buy. which is why i would pay more to teachers willing to work in dangerous schools (the teachers unions, of course, shoot down the idea of paying teachers extra for behavioral incentives). however, i will only be willing to do this if they can be fired should they fail to perform there. which brings us to point #...

6. if you are fired for arbitrary reasons, usually you can sue and make quite a chunk of change. but public teachers can hardly be fired at all. the cost and trouble for firing a public teachers is legendary.

oh, and getting fired? that's not abuse. that's the entity that hired you deciding it had made a mistake, and correcting that mistake. out in the real world private workers recognize that if they don't perform, that's the result. only in the public sector is getting fired "just" because you suck at your job "abuse".
Click to expand...

you make almost everything sound much simpler then it really is (except for #5). i've experienced all of it much differently.
 
theplaydrive said:
you make almost everything sound much simpler then it really is (except for #5). i've experienced all of it much differently.
Click to expand...

Then please enlighten us as to how these issues constitute taking advantage.
 
theplaydrive said:
you make almost everything sound much simpler then it really is (except for #5). i've experienced all of it much differently.
Click to expand...

*gasp* why..... playdrive..... were you used as a lunchroom administrator while serving in a school?

... you poor thing .... are you okay? have the nightmares ended?


i mean, yeah, i got used as sniper bait while serving in our nations' wars, but man; lunch room administration.... that's tough. :( hope you're okay, brother.
 
Lachean said:
Then please enlighten us as to how these issues constitute taking advantage.
Click to expand...

one of the things I've learned on this board is that when someone wants you explain with an air of condescension, they're not really interested in understanding - so i'm not really interested in wasting my time.

like i said, in many schools and districts, the problems i highlighted are not as easily dealt with as cpwill perceives it to be from my knowledge and experience of the system. if you haven't had those experiences, then we're going to disagree. fortunately, for people who've seen what i've, unions still have their power.
 
cpwill said:
*gasp* why..... playdrive..... were you used as a lunchroom administrator while serving in a school?

... you poor thing .... are you okay? have the nightmares ended?


i mean, yeah, i got used as sniper bait while serving in our nations' wars, but man; lunch room administration.... that's tough. :( hope you're okay, brother.
Click to expand...

no, i've never taught before. i grew up in family of inner-city educators. teach in an inner-city school in Chicago for 10 years and come back. until then, your experiences are too limited to understand my arguments.
 
thank you for your reply to my question directed at another poster ... who posited that public unions are problematic
cpwill said:
1. subverts democracy by giving a non-represenatitve, elected, or accountable entity veto power over the decisions of the representatives of the people
Click to expand...
unions, by federal law must be democratic organizations

public sector unions do NOT have veto power. they can only negotiate

2. creates powerful pressure groups with incentives to push for unsustainable growth and spending on the part of government, who are also uniquely positioned to place intense pressure on those in the political structure least able to resist them.
Click to expand...
yes, collective bargaining does give the employee more negotiation leverage than if each employee negotiated with the employer separately
the union can ask for anything it wants ... and stupid union representatives can ask for that which is unsustainable ... but the employer has no obligation to do anything more than engage in 'good faith' bargaining
if the employer agrees to contract terms it cannot afford, then that indicates the employer selected the wrong person(s) to represent the employer in negotiations
please note. that means the unsound outcome is attributable to management's poor decision making
the union, collectively, has an opportunity to be a formidable political advocate or opponent. but that is no different than any other advocacy groups, including PACs, corporations and foreign entities/governments
3. private sector unions are limited in their sapping of a corporation by a simple factor; they want the company to survive and the company must be profitable in order to do so. public sector unions are under no such constraint, as those who they are negotiating with have only gain and no pain in endlessly extending and increasing their benefits. the taxpayer pays, but that's because he is forced to by law.
Click to expand...
it would appear by your post that you do not hold the UAW in any way responsible for the demise of the US auto industry. i would insist otherwise. that such private sector union actually diminished the future of the auto industry in the USA because its contract terms caused the American car manufacturer to no longer be globally competitive
in the instance of wisconsin, we saw the public sector unions quickly concede to wage and benefit reductions ... once it was made apparent that the state could no longer afford to pay the amounts it had previously obligated itself to pay
that reality causes your position above to be found lacking
4. these above factors combined have led to our current situation; where public sector unions and their associated costs are threatning to bankrupt not only multiple counties and municipalities, but full, semi-soveriegn states.
Click to expand...
what we know from what you have stated is that inept employer representatives often bind the public sector employer to contract terms which should be found inappropriate
if you examine that circumstance you should then recognize that the blame for such situation rests exclusively with the employer - NOT the union
 
this makes NO sense
celticwar17 said:
Where taking about the government here, it's artificial,
Click to expand...
excuse me? the government is artificial
for something which is not real, it commands a LOT of power
... employers dont have a big choice in the matter,
Click to expand...
the employers are the ones who hire, fire and assign work. that would appear to indicate they have a massive amount of choice in the matter
... and when they do... it's because it is a Union structure that benifits the people who are most closely tied with it.
Click to expand...
confusing. you insist that employers don't have much "control" when it encounters the employees' union but when they do it's because of the union's structure
what you have posted above is unfathomable
What does have a big choice is our budget
Click to expand...
our budget has choice?
... and congress,
Click to expand...
yes, congress has choice (usually little direction and even less integrity, but it does have choice.) now let's see if that (obvious) fact is in any way meaningful to this discussion
... and that should be THE way to improve government workers needs.
Click to expand...
so, you want us to adopt your view that congress has choice and by using its choice we should expect the government employer to improve workers' needs
but that implies that the government knows what the workers' needs are. that the workers found it necessary to form a union to speak of its needs - with a singular voice - tells us that the government is unable to understand the employees' needs
Talk to them if you want more funding for teacher's, construction, etc. ,
Click to expand...
ok, who is them?
but if we can't afford it...
Click to expand...
a reasonable person would conclude your sentence by saying but if we can't afford it, then we should not obligate ourselves to pay for it. notice how that didn't happen. the inept employer representative(s) agreed to contract terms with the union which are untenable
now tell us why that is the union's fault and not management's
... either to bad so sad,
Click to expand...
this is what cannot happen is labor-management bargaining. each side is required to negotiate in good faith. taking a position 'adopt what we want or too bad, so sad, is not found to be good faith bargaining
... or cut other programs in order to have more money for funding.
Click to expand...
yes. if you signed a contract you later realize you cannot afford, then you cut out other expenditures to generate the monies needed, and/or you seek a renegotiation of the contract terms ... but what should not be done is unilaterally, and arbitrarily, eliminate the employees' ability to collectively bargain
 
Cole said:
You have some examples of how the government takes advantage of public employees.....??



.
Click to expand...

yes. since 2003 our union has attempted to prevent the employer from working its employees without compensation
it took until Christmas season last year to realize $7.6 million in back pay compensation and penalties
no employee alone would have been able to afford to litigate this matter to reach such conclusion as was realized collectively
 
Lachean said:
2nded. Because I understand the incentives for an employer to pinch pennies, but government never seems to care to. So what incentive would a government employer have to take advantage of his employees?
Click to expand...

the employer has an insufficient budget to perform the tasks management wants to achieve
the employee is then forced to work additional hours - without compensation - to make those objectives result
it can also cause the employer to direct the employees to perform tasks at grade levels above that for which they are hired/employed
without union involvement: the employees work uncompensated hours and/or work at higher levels than the salary they receive


the employer may want field visits performed but is without adequate travel dollars necessary to achieve those field visits. if the employee fails to perform them - despite there being no travel money available - then the employee receives a poor performance review. result: employee pays for travel out of pocket
without union involvement: the employees continue to subsidize the government by paying for official business travel out of their own pockets
 
Mayor Snorkum said:
1) The goonion payback to politicians who agree to raise wages in exchange, creating an undesirable positive feedback loop that cuts out the people the politican was actually elected to represent, the man working in the private sector paying the taxes for the goonion's free ride.
Click to expand...
so, the citizens elected a crook who is on the take
and we should eliminate unions because of it
come back with some logic

2) see the first one, that was enough.
Click to expand...
to prove you are absolutely clueless about this topic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom