• 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

Whovian

Whovian

Banned
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
7,153
Reaction score
2,250
Location
dimensionally transcendental
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
No wonder unions like the ones in Wisconsin are so pissed...

Union membership down again in 2010


The Bureau of Labor Statistics is out with its annual report on union membership. It’s down, once again: 11.9% of employees in 2010 were union members, down from 12.3% in 2009. There were 14.7 million union members, significantly down from 1983, the first year for which comparable data is available, when there were 17.7 million. Note that the population of the United States in 1983 was 234 million as compared to 308 million in 2010.

In 2009, for the first time, a majority of employed union members were public employees. The trend continues: in 2010 there were 7.6 million public sector union members and 7.1 million private sector union members. Which leads me to ask some questions. Why does the union movement continue to oppose free trade measures so vociferously? What interest do public employees have in trade protectionism? Is the union opposition to free trade agreements an effort to somehow, some way, get back all those unionized auto and steel jobs that have disappeared in the last three decades?
 
hmm. but are the public unions down?
 
That just cant be

How can the unions be destroying america when membership is among multidecade lows
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
That just cant be

How can the unions be destroying america when membership is among multidecade lows
Click to expand...

Because the amount of power they hold is greater than the amount of people in their ranks. Where is their extra power coming from?
 
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 vast communist conspiracy

Reality check

If union membership is at multidecade lows the amount of money unions have is also reduced. The lower amounts of money means less influence. If unions had much power they would be seeing increasing membership not decreasing membership
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
The vast communist conspiracy

Reality check

If union membership is at multidecade lows the amount of money unions have is also reduced. The lower amounts of money means less influence. If unions had much power they would be seeing increasing membership not decreasing membership
Click to expand...

union thugs have lots of power in the public sector.
 
That reflects the stagnation of wages for private sector workers...Id bet thats all private sector not public.
 
TurtleDude said:
union thugs have lots of power in the public sector.
Click to expand...

One group of many though

Farmers have a large amount of power

Large companies, foreign governments, local builders
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
That just cant be

How can the unions be destroying america when membership is among multidecade lows
Click to expand...

Because the Bill for decades of Union Slobbery........is Due.......
.
.
.
 
TurtleDude said:
union thugs have lots of power in the public sector.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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...

unions look out for their members contrary to the best interests of the publi

they also support politicians who raise taxes on productive people and give plush contracts to the unions
 
TurtleDude said:
unions look out for their members contrary to the best interests of the publi

they also support politicians who raise taxes on productive people and give plush contracts to the unions
Click to expand...

i guess that depends on your definition of "best interest of the public" - unions are just an efficient way for workers to organize.
 
theplaydrive said:
i guess that depends on your definition of "best interest of the public" - unions are just an efficient way for workers to organize.
Click to expand...

less work for more pay involving public workers is hardly in the public interest
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
That just cant be

How can the unions be destroying america when membership is among multidecade lows
Click to expand...

Sad hyperbole.

Unions aren't a bad thing. Few suggest they are. But public sector unions can be problematic. For a variety of reasons...


.
 
Cole said:
Sad hyperbole.

Unions aren't a bad thing. Few suggest they are. But public sector unions can be problematic. For a variety of reasons...


.
Click to expand...
ok
list those reasons
 
TurtleDude said:
less work for more pay involving public workers is hardly in the public interest
Click to expand...

"less work for more pay" - that's an interesting way of looking at people who took the initiative to get good work conditions, salaries and reasonable hours instead of leaving all of that up to the whim of their employer.
 
Union membership surges among state workers

By JOHN O’CONNOR The Associated Press Mar 26, 2011 06:56PM

SPRINGFIELD — It’s getting lonely at the top of Illinois state government.

In the past eight years, more than 10,000 state employees have joined unions, a four-fold increase over the previous eight years, according to records analyzed by The Associated Press.

If pending requests are approved by the Illinois Labor Relations Board, nearly 97 percent of state workers would be represented by unions — including many employees once considered management. Only 1,700 “bosses” would be left out of nearly 50,000 state employees...........
Click to expand...

Union membership surges among state workers - Lake County News-Sun

Union managers, I am all for it.
 
As I understand it, union growth is in the bigger money occupations like doctors and engineers.

The most succesful union is the cast of Friends who unionized to earn a $ million per episode.

Charlie Sheen, the rock star from Mars, is trying to contract for $ 3 million per episode by winning. Alan and Charlie are a classic comedy team. Shouldn't they unionize so that they both get a huge raise?

Should David Bowie sue for some of that money or just let Charlie be the rock star from Mars as a courtesy?

Here's a little gossip leak. Mean Sue Sylvester on Glee is going to be David Bowie in an upcoming episode that has already been filmed. I guess it's like when she was Madonna in an earlier episode. That won't be a hoot! But that''s gotta be tough. deciding which David Bowie to be.

I think Sue wants to be good, but she's all evil.

We're all clear by now that I don't know how to insert things...
http://www.twitvid.com/KXBMM
 
Last edited:
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...

That's hilarious. Unions look out for, oh, right, union bosses. That's why their pension is funded and the workers pensions are underfunded. And, people do tend to target criminals. Extortion, assault, murder, theft, fraud. And, the victims of this are middle-class folks. Who did the government screw with the takeover of General Motors? The middle-class foks who had GM bonds in the pension portfolios. Who did the goverment reward with the takeover of General Motors? The union thugs who gave President Obama millions and millins.
 
justabubba said:
ok
list those reasons
Click to expand...

1. subverts democracy by giving a non-represenatitve, elected, or accountable entity veto power over the decisions of the representatives of the people

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.

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.


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.
 
Patrickt said:
That's hilarious. Unions look out for, oh, right, union bosses. That's why their pension is funded and the workers pensions are underfunded. And, people do tend to target criminals. Extortion, assault, murder, theft, fraud. And, the victims of this are middle-class folks. Who did the government screw with the takeover of General Motors? The middle-class foks who had GM bonds in the pension portfolios. Who did the goverment reward with the takeover of General Motors? The union thugs who gave President Obama millions and millins.
Click to expand...

You are confused. Unions look out for, oh, right, union members. Of course, they also look out for themselves and union members complain when they overreach, but unions also negotiate higher wages, better work conditions, better benefits and so on for the paying members. Union members pay them to negotiate and lobby to the government. Sorry. Like I said, they're just another lobby - lobby whose members tend to be in the middle class. Unions are how certain public workers ensure that they have a good work environment instead of getting treated however the government wants to treat them.

Just another lobby. Nothing to see here.
 
TurtleDude said:
unions look out for their members contrary to the best interests of the publi

they also support politicians who raise taxes on productive people and give plush contracts to the unions
Click to expand...

Hows that different than just about any other lobby in DC or anywhere else for that matter? Its called special interest for a reason. I'm not disagreeing with you, but you are very selective.
 
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

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.

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.


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...

This is why anyone who has the slightest consept of capitalism knows public sector unions are problematic.
 
celticwar17 said:
This is why anyone who has the slightest consept of capitalism knows public sector unions are problematic.
Click to expand...

Anyone who has the slightest conception of employers taking advantage of workers would understand the desire/need of workers to have a public union.
 
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...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom