• 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!

Where does the rights hatred of unions come from?????????[W:536]

jbander said:
Patrickt your a puppet , to prove it, you have absolutely no idea what communist and socialism means. You can't make up your own mindless definition of communist and socialist to improve your insults. There is not one main tenant of socialism or communism that is incorporated into the into the Democratic party. My advice is to go out and find out what the tenants are, then come back and we will talk about it. Otherwise your on ignore.
Click to expand...

JBander, you're a puppet. To prove it, read your posts. You're in the pocket of organized crime.
 
blaxshep said:
Actually the Airlines proved that they don't.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/11/b...fault-on-its-employee-pension-plans.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

That is different,that is a Bankruptcy issue not a labor law issue. Also 82% of the pension were already fully funded and Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) covered most of the shortfall. Since United came out of Bankruptcy and is solvent the I.A.M has secured a lucrative contract with United. Including a 30% in pay increases over the term of the deal and $100 million in lump sum payments. The contract also includes a 25% hike in defined-benefit pension benefits. None of this would have occurred without a Union in place.
 
Patrickt said:
JBander, you're a puppet. To prove it, read your posts. You're in the pocket of organized crime.
Click to expand...
Lets just go to you calling everyone that disagrees with you a commie or socialist, back it up or go away. by the way this is a stupid remark. Back up your **** buddy or go away
 
Green Hornet said:
That is different,that is a Bankruptcy issue not a labor law issue. Also 82% of the pension were already fully funded and Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) covered most of the shortfall. Since United came out of Bankruptcy and is solvent the I.A.M has secured a lucrative contract with United. Including a 30% in pay increases over the term of the deal and $100 million in lump sum payments. The contract also includes a 25% hike in defined-benefit pension benefits. None of this would have occurred without a Union in place.
Click to expand...
What I find about the right is what Trump says , say a lie three times and people will believe it. very few of them have a clue.
 
jbander said:
What I find about the right is what Trump says , say a lie three times and people will believe it. very few of them have a clue.
Click to expand...

I find it an odd argument, to not form or join a union because the company you work at may file Chapter 11. Many more non- unionized employers file Bankruptcy than Union shops.
 
Green Hornet said:
So do Union members and they earn more to contribute. Most union employers have a higher P&E ratio which makes investing in them more profitable as well.
Click to expand...
Interesting point, PE factor aligned with union shops. It's good , I'll remember that one
 
jbander said:
To repeat myself , no wage or benefit agreement happens with out both side saying yes or no. Do you understand that.
Click to expand...

Wrong. PERA Class I public employees (police, fire, hospital, corrections) are entitled to binding interest arbitration under state law. PERA Class II and III employees (public utilities and miscellaneous other municipal employees) can strike and, if the employer or the state labor agency enjoins the strike, the parties submit to arbitration. Arbitration is intended to impose terms of a contract onto at least one party despite that party's disagreement with those terms. Lastly, unions engage in legal tactics that make it so expensive for employers to defend, they feel coerced into just giving in to whatever the union demands. That isn't a true "yes" when it's under duress of obscene costs of legal defense against the union's tactics. None of this would be possible if it weren't for labor laws, championed by democrats and backed by union money, that allow them to engage in these coercive tactics. So the pretense that all these CBAs all over the country really come with honest mutual agreement is utter horse****.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom