• 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!

Unionized dock workers threaten to strike at 15 ports

j-mac said:
In the bolded portions you'll need to back that up. Anything I have seen reported on this depicts a freeze of those royalties, NOT a recension of anything.
Click to expand...

here you go. read a contemporary article about the longshoremen retaining their container royalties:
Behind the Longshoremen

here is the conclusion to the following article:
In the current negotiations over a new Master Contract, management is not asking to eliminate container royalties, only to cap the payments and use the excess, not as savings for employers but to help pay for other benefits for ILA workers.
Click to expand...
Container Royalties | USMX Labor Updates

let me explain. when management wants to cap something, it intends to pay less than it is now obligated

don't know how to make this any clearer
 
justabubba said:
Let me explain. when management wants to cap something, it intends to pay less than it is now obligated. don't know how to make this any clearer
Click to expand...

With an expired contract, management isn't obligated to anything.
 
j-mac said:
:lamo "monocle polishing friends".....:lamo Man, why are progressives full of so much hate dude?.
Click to expand...

Because unlike conservatives, we don't want to be dominated by a bunch of Monopoly Guy weirdos, and value real freedom and independence. In short, we're Americans and you're not.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Capitalism would allow the companies paying the dock workers to stare the contract down and replace them immediately with workers that want the jobs at fair market wages.

Capitalism is the union negotiating for as much in wages as the company will give on then deciding whether their members can live with that or quit the contract.

Capitalism is not blocking other people from applying for the wages after refusing to sign a new contract and striking.
Click to expand...

Actually it is. Just like capitalist can sell their products at what the market can bear (and do), so can workers if they negotiating power, and part of that is going on strike.

See, you just don't like capitalism for anybody else.
 
head of joaquin said:
Actually it is. Just like capitalist can sell their products at what the market can bear (and do), so can workers if they negotiating power, and part of that is going on strike.

See, you just don't like capitalism for anybody else.
Click to expand...

That is not capitalism that is a monopoly that may fix the cost of their services (labor). If you allow labor competition, as in right to work states, then that is capitalism, as those workers that desire to continue working may do so (or they may join the strike), independent of the union workers.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1061297992 said:
Then those willing to work should take their place.
Click to expand...

The company signed a collective bargaining agreement, to get the benefits of it (which are many). Now you're saying that the company needs to be saved from itself and shouldn't be allowed to enter contracts with unions.

Nanny state capitalism! That's all you conservatives offer.
 
head of joaquin said:
The company signed a collective bargaining agreement, to get the benefits of it (which are many). Now you're saying that the company needs to be saved from itself and shouldn't be allowed to enter contracts with unions.

Nanny state capitalism! That's all you conservatives offer.
Click to expand...


No we are saying that once the contract expires and the workers go on strike, they should be allowed to hire replacements without those replacements being harassed and threatened by union workers and reps.

We are not asking any government rep to step in. Your rhetoric is agitprop and little else. Get a new talking point.
 
justabubba said:
here you go. read a contemporary article about the longshoremen retaining their container royalties:
Behind the Longshoremen

here is the conclusion to the following article:

Container Royalties | USMX Labor Updates

let me explain. when management wants to cap something, it intends to pay less than it is now obligated

don't know how to make this any clearer
Click to expand...


I'll admit that I don't quite get it, other than to say that after reading both sides of it through the links you provided is that it appears to me, that the pensions agreed to in the early negotiations stemming from the M&M agreement are too expensive to continue, and rather than step away and turn it over to the government where current pensioners would see their pensions cut, the business wants to uphold what they agreed to and to do that they need to look at these "royalties" that have little to do with people doing the job today that have never known anything other than container shipping.

These are some of the highest paid blue collar jobs in America, why in the world in this day and age of asking those that are well off to sacrifice, can we not expect that of these people as well? I'll tell ya...Because the union takes 10% of these royalties off the top, and that is the real rub here, it isn't the workers, the union could care less about, it is the 'vig' they get.
 
ReformCollege said:
Which is blackmail.
Click to expand...

No its not. Blackmail is a crime, a crime which people use unjustified threats to make some gains or cause loss to another unless a demand is met. Blackmail is a form of coercion.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
No its not. Blackmail is a crime, a crime which people use unjustified threats to make some gains or cause loss to another unless a demand is met. Blackmail is a form of coercion.
Click to expand...

Isn't a strike a form of coercion?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
No its not. Blackmail is a crime, a crime which people use unjustified threats to make some gains or cause loss to another unless a demand is met. Blackmail is a form of coercion.
Click to expand...


Hmmmm.....Let's see here....

The union should be a crime, a crime which people use unjustified threats to make some gains or cause loss to another unless a demand is met. Unions are a form of coercion.

hey what do ya know...it works....:)
 
The Man said:
Isn't a strike a form of coercion?
Click to expand...

They have the power for force people to do x, y, and z? They have the power to make people do certain decisions? I dont think so.
 
j-mac said:
Hmmmm.....Let's see here....

The union should be a crime, a crime which people use unjustified threats to make some gains or cause loss to another unless a demand is met. Unions are a form of coercion.

hey what do ya know...it works....:)
Click to expand...

that was very elementary :doh
 
TheDemSocialist said:
They have the power for force people to do x, y, and z? They have the power to make people do certain decisions? I dont think so.
Click to expand...

Absolutely they do. What the hell other point is there to striking??? They strike as a form of coercion to get what they want. Take teachers for example. They go on strike because they know that there is only so long that their school board can hold out until they cave and give them what they want, because they know that the children must be taught. It is coercion, pure and simple.
 
Last edited:
The Man said:
Absolutely they do. They strike as a form of coercion to get what they want. otherwise, what the hell point is there to striking??? Take teachers for example. They go on strike because they know that there is only so long that their school board can hold out until they cave and give them what they want, because they know that the children must be taught. It is coercion.
Click to expand...

The corporate leaders have the board room to make decisions which is forced on all the workers, that is a form of coercion, when the workers disagree they dont have the power to force any demands on the corporate boardroom, they have the power to go on strike or collective bargain, the corporate boardroom does not have to meet the demands of the workers on strike.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
The corporate leaders have the board room to make decisions which is forced on all the workers, that is a form of coercion, when the workers disagree they dont have the power to force any demands on the corporate boardroom, they have the power to go on strike or collective bargain, the corporate boardroom does not have to meet the demands of the workers on strike.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean that striking is not a form of coercion. Striking is ONLY a form of coercion. There is no other point to it. Does it always work? No, not in every instance with every company and union. But it is a tactic of coercion.
 
I hope they go on a very long drawn out strike. Nothing would convince people that unions are archaic like a bunch of 6 figure workers trying to hold the east coast hostage.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
No its not. Blackmail is a crime, a crime which people use unjustified threats to make some gains or cause loss to another unless a demand is met. Blackmail is a form of coercion.
Click to expand...

And how does threatening to force some of the largest ports to close, holding hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions of economic activity hostage for a pay raise NOT count as coercion?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
The corporate leaders have the board room to make decisions which is forced on all the workers, that is a form of coercion, when the workers disagree they dont have the power to force any demands on the corporate boardroom, they have the power to go on strike or collective bargain, the corporate boardroom does not have to meet the demands of the workers on strike.
Click to expand...

Strikes are forced upon every union worker. There is no "well I don't agree with their demands, so I'm just going to show up to work anyways." Coercion.
 
head of joaquin said:
The company signed a collective bargaining agreement, to get the benefits of it (which are many). Now you're saying that the company needs to be saved from itself and shouldn't be allowed to enter contracts with unions.

Nanny state capitalism! That's all you conservatives offer.
Click to expand...

Unions should be able to enter contracts. Unions should not be able to get those contracts by blackmail or forced participation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom