




'Don't Unionize, Buy Video Games,' Delta Airlines Employees Are Told (bbc.com) 227
dryriver shares a report from the BBC: Delta Airlines is facing significant criticism after posters discouraging its staff from joining a union were widely shared online. "Union dues cost around $700 a year," one of the posters states. "A new video game system with the latest hits sounds like fun. Put your money towards that instead of paying dues to the union," it continued. The posters point to a website featuring Delta branding which encourages workers not to unionize. The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), which claims to represent more than 110,000 airline employees in the United States, is attempting to organize union representation for 44,000 Delta employees.
"Delta Airlines' all-out assault on their employees' legally-protected right to unionize with the Machinists Union is confirmation that our campaign to bring the benefits of IAM-representation is succeeding," it said in a statement. "The day when Delta ramp workers and flight attendants will finally be able to bargain for the compensation, benefits and work rules they deserve is coming quickly, and that has Delta terrified."
"Delta Airlines' all-out assault on their employees' legally-protected right to unionize with the Machinists Union is confirmation that our campaign to bring the benefits of IAM-representation is succeeding," it said in a statement. "The day when Delta ramp workers and flight attendants will finally be able to bargain for the compensation, benefits and work rules they deserve is coming quickly, and that has Delta terrified."
Missing Link Found! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Remember kids, here in Europe the left is right and the right is left while in the US the right is left and the left is right. Lets just not think of the political complexity of Australia where the up is down and the down is up as well. And in the Soviet Russia, everything was the opposite of all these and yet fully negotiable over a glass of Vodka.
Re: (Score:2)
Problem: get together with people at your workplace and at all competitor's workplaces, all at once. The moment the contractor company ceases to be competitive, due to e.g. enforcing its employees' rights, it will be dropped and a different one will get the contract. And the fact you're now in position of power in regards to your immediate employer doesn't mean shit if your employer is now "unemployed" and soon out of business.
$700/year (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder how much of employees' future compensation and general improvement in working conditions would be attributable to unionizing. If the union does its job, it's going to be more than $700/person/year.
IF the union does its job.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:$700/year (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, it's just the way Delta Airlines fell about their employees. The executives, playing computer games on their PCs with spreadsheets, you know fire 10,000 employees, you get a bonus this month of $10 each, that's $100,000, shame about next quarter when the companies losses $10,000,000 labour shortages and trying to hire people back but no losses, so better good bonuses every second quarter than none at all.
So the executives thinking, just play computer games, like they do with their workers lives, just a game suckers and they play with you and your life. Yeah this looks horrible, seriously horrible.
Yep! (Score:2)
You bet your a$$ they do. That's why they suggested gaming.
If base wages rise, that's money out of their pocket (actually, their and their customers' pockets*).
If number of staff is negotiated upwards, that's money out of their pockets. If length of shift or operational tempo are negotiated down, that's money out of their pockets. If quality or quantity of operational equipment or safety equipment is negotiated up, that's money out of their pockets. They absolutely thought about these things. They thou
Re: (Score:2)
> Do you believe that the company takes into account your consideration when suggesting gaming as an alternative to unions
Of course they're taking that into consideration. That's why they are so dead set on poisoning the idea of unions in workers' heads. Can't have the plebes get ideas about being paid well or there'd be fewer yachts to go around in CEO land.
Re: $700/year (Score:3, Insightful)
How are they obscuring benefits? They don't want unionisation, so they're trying to push the benefits of not being a union. That doesn't stop the unions from speaking to the employees directly, nor does it hinder or otherwise obscure the message that the union wants them to see. Believe it or not, not everybody wants to be in a union. Volkswagen tried to get its own employees to unionise in the US, and they voted against it.
Of course, Volkswagen is used to the European version of labor unions, which are far
Re: (Score:2)
More than direct compensation (Score:2)
Aside from earning more than non-union workers, unions typically have more vacation time, better health insurance & retirement, etc. They also reduce stress by making the company show cause before firing you, instead of a supervisor pulling some reason out of his ass.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe the pay could be more evenly distributed though, I recall hearing something about seniority having a ridiculous amount of weight at airlines.
Re: $700/year (Score:5, Insightful)
Horseshit. The US manufacturers went away because they could get guys who work for $2 an hour in China. Nobody is going to work for $2 an hour. If a job is so bad your left in abject poverty, who the fuck is going to take that job.
Unions don't kill businesses. Market forces kill business, Paying your employees a fair wage is a cost of business. If your business model can't afford that, your business model sucks.
Re: $700/year (Score:1, Informative)
The gp should be modded up, and the parent modded down. Almost no cars are imported into the US from China, now or in the past. The main overseas producers during the last 60 years have been Japan, (West) Germany, and to a lesser extent South Korea. Some production comes from Canada. More recently we've seen some production in Mexico. Of those places, Germany, Japan and Canada have had standards of living and wages comparable to those of the US for the entire time. South Korea was somewhat behind until the
Re: $700/year (Score:3, Insightful)
"American unions pushed too hard, demanded too much, and ultimately ruined the American auto sector."
False.
The American heavy manufacturing base was destroyed by intentional public policy. One-sided "free trade" deals, supported by both faces of the Establishment Party, enriched a tiny handful of well-connected bourgeoisie while immiserating the masses of working people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you trust corporate executives more than union members you are misinformed.
Union members haven't run unions for 100+ years. There's a reason why Unions in the US have a reputation as being organized crime fronts. That's because they're often just a glorified racketeering operation.
The executives run something that produces something of value. The union bosses produce... well... nothing really. Protect the incompetent workers, drive up wages for a few workers in the short term, and screw the workers outside the Union who now find the demand for labor depressed because of the U
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Teh mechine er gunna take er jerbs." nonsense has been around for frigin 200 years and it's really tired at this point.
Re: $700/year (Score:5, Informative)
Both have factual inaccuracies, one about exactly where US manufacturing labour was outsourced to and the amount of savings made, and the other about the general cause of the collapse in US manufacruring capacity and the effects of unionization on economies.
Yours is also misleading about where American car manufacturers have outsourced their manufacturing to. While not many entire cars are imported from China, many car parts are. There's a reason Trump's trade war threatens to make cars more expensive:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/0... [cnbc.com]
Re: $700/year (Score:3, Insightful)
It had nothing at all to do with China or any other similar location.
Yes, in the face of unfair, [gov't subsidized] competition from Japan, the unions' demands proved to be too much for our horribly-mismanaged Big Three, who had concluded by the mid-70's that the only cars America needed to be manufacturing were pieces of shit that fewer and fewer wanted to buy.
Now fuck off with your entirely-misleading 'partial truth.'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: $700/year (Score:4, Insightful)
>"Unions don't kill businesses. Market forces kill business"
That is not really accurate. Unions can and do sometimes kill businesses, and they are part of the market forces (the labor market). Some unions demanded so much pay that, in some industries, lower skilled workers were making obscene amounts of money and poorly performing employees became almost impossible to get rid of. I don't think that was the rule, however. I think unions play a perfectly acceptable part of labor's power, as long as employees are not REQUIRED to join a union.
>"Paying your employees a fair wage is a cost of business."
What exactly is "fair"? That is what the market decides in a free market economy.
>"If your business model can't afford that, your business model sucks."
If your business model can't pay what a free labor market demands, then your business won't be able to attract and/or retain workers and/or good/productive workers, and your business will languish, shrink, or die. And those jobs will disappear with it. Sometimes that is OK. Sometimes it isn't. Depends on lots of factors- like how much competition there is, what other products are out there, how many other jobs are available, how many workers are available in that field, etc.
Unions, in general, are not inherently good nor bad.
Why is it that if a low skill worker can afford (Score:5, Insightful)
I know, I know, false dichotomy and you didn't say that. But the points your making are part of the "Market Place of Ideas" and, well, it's not a free market. Those points are anti-Union propaganda, and I'm pretty sure you don't realize where they came from. They were very carefully put in front of you for you to consume.
Yes, anything can be corrupted. Fiat Chrysler just got caught bribing Union heads to weaken negotiations. Thing is, the headlines were all "Union Leaders Bribed!" and then on paragraph 8 out of 12 they mentioned who paid the bribes and why...
Unions _are_ inherently good. They're nothing more than workers organizing to get a share of profits. Put another way, who are you to say what's "fair". The company wouldn't exist without the workers. As for the CEO, there's a reason Dilbert made fun of "leadership" for 30 years. We all know it's bullshit. Yeah, somebody has to manage, but your CEO isn't anything more than a manager of managers. Ask yourself how much more do you think your manager is worth than you?
Re: (Score:3)
> That is what the market decides in a free market economy.
If you ever actually find a "free" economy, let us know OK? Because if you think the US economy is one, you flat out wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
>"If you ever actually find a "free" economy, let us know OK? Because if you think the US economy is one, you flat out wrong."
Its as free a market as you will find most anywhere. And what is the point of your comment? To say that since it isn't a "pure" free market, that justifies making it less and less free?
Re: (Score:3)
If making it "less free" means balancing the table just a tiny bit in favor of workers instead of the capricious businesses, instead of letting them have free rein to cut jobs whenever the quarter was only half as profitable as expected, sure. Better that workers have some say and stability before we're in a new Gilded Age.
Actually, the auto jobs went to Red states. (Score:2, Informative)
There are several auto manufacturing plants in Tennessee, all are non-union.
Volkswagen actually wanted to unionize, as they are quite used to working with unions in Gemany, but the State of Tn sued them to stop it.
Idiots in red states have no problem cutting their own throats for their slave owners benefit; they went for Trump by 75% in the last election, and are all in for the Tariff Man.
No one here realizes that tariffs come out of their pockets, and I no longer try to explain; there's just too much stupi
Re:Actually, the auto jobs went to Red states. (Score:4, Insightful)
Volkswagen actually wanted to unionize, as they are quite used to working with unions in Gemany, but the State of Tn sued them to stop it.
They can unionize legally. What they can't do in a right-to-work state is compel employees to join, or require them to pay union dues.
If they wanted mandatory union membership, they picked the wrong state. Ohio, Illinois, or California would have been better.
US States with right-to-work laws [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
They can unionize legally. What they can't do in a right-to-work state is compel employees to join, or require them to pay union dues.
It's unlikely VW would want to. The model in Germany is to recognise only one union to make negotiations easier, but not compel membership. Compelling membership pretty much stopped in Europe about 35 years ago and it seems to be the USA where it lingers.
Re: (Score:2)
According to this article [bloomberglaw.com], VW prefers to remain union free. But if there is going to be a union, they want everyone included.
"Including everyone" may just be a ploy to ensure that the UAW's unionization effort fails.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Picked the wrong state huh? (Score:2)
To be fair they've got plenty of stock (Score:2)
I've kept an old car running and the price of parts is a fraction of the price of labor. The increased demand for mechanics coupled with auto shop being done away with in the late 90s due to budget cuts means the cost of labor shop up. Not their labor, BTW, they shop mechanic's pay is d
Re: (Score:2)
Cars have gotten so expensive that lots of people are dropping out because they just can't afford them.
Boy, you got that right. I'm coming up on 175,000 miles on my truck (that often gets used as a truck), and while I'd like to get a new one, the prices for new ones having any appointments more than "vinyl interior work truck"-level are ridiculous. I'm not looking for a cowboy Cadillac or a 4-door dually, just something that's actually useful as a truck and has a reasonably decent interior.
And you're spo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The US manufacturers went away because they could get guys who work for $2 an hour in China. Nobody is going to work for $2 an hour.
Americans were far more productive than Chinese, so they didn't need to work for $2 per hour to compete. However if you are 5 times as productive, but demand 10 times the pay, you are going to lose your job.
But Detroit didn't lose auto jobs to China. They lost them to the right-to-work states in the American South and lower Midwest.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah the unions were demanding high wages for unskilled labor. They priced themselves out. If I can bring a guy in off the street and have him do your $30/hr job with minimal training then it clearly isn't worth that cost.
Re: (Score:2)
Unions don't kill businesses. Market forces kill business
Speaking in absolutes makes you look silly. Unions have done wonders for some businesses. They've absolutely sunk others. Hell in some cases it has done a bit of both. I worked at a plant once where the history was that a union ordered strike meant the plant stopped operation. So the engineers took over running the plant and managed to set production records straight away with ease. That business thrived, after everyone associated with the union was fired for what the courts eventually determined as legitim
Re: $700/year (Score:5, Interesting)
You don’t have the collective-bargaining in the airline industry that you do in other industries. You can’t go on strike. The air traffic controller‘s unionized. They try to go on strike in the 80s. If you’re not old enough to remember what happened it’s worth looking into. Let’s just say that the message was received loud and clear.
Most job losses were from automation (Score:2)
Not that China, Mexico and the rest of the second world helped. And you're right about the Market forces, but if we don't do something about wealth redistribution we're going to be living in a second world country ourselves.
Re: $700/year (Score:1)
The State Bank of Vietnam _intentionally_ maintains the Dollar/Dong exchange rate at far below purchasing power parity. This gives Vietnamese manufacturers a significant price advantage when exporting to the formerly-rich countries of Europe and America.
Re: $700/year (Score:5, Informative)
First-world unions don't improve working conditions these days.
Either you have no idea what you are talking about, or your definition of "first world" is extremely limited. Take a look at Europe. Here in Germany, unions are usually seen as a good thing even by many employers. Legally protected employee representatives (usually, but not always union members) advise the company about problems in the workforce and propose solutions. For large companies, half of the board of directors has to be filled with employee representatives, who thus are reasonably well informed about both the current state and the strategy of the company.
Among the benefits is much higher employee retention and, as a result, much higher skill levels relevant to the given company. Also, usually fewer strikes, fewer sick days (which do not count against your 30 days of vacation), and better productivity.
Re: $700/year (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, sure. Nothing to do with the US auto industry being led by nincompoops who kept designing gas guzzling land yachts that noone wanted to buy, while lobbying for heavy tariffs and other protective legislation on imports the local market preferred.
Sure, it's all the unions' fault.
Fuck off, idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
First one is free.... don't worry about what happens in the future...
Re: (Score:2)
People escape union dues... (Score:1, Flamebait)
...whenever they possibly can.
When the abolished mandatory union dues in Wisconsin, workers fled unions in droves [maciverinstitute.com].
Unions are great...for the unions themselves and bad workers. Good workers and the industries they're in? Not so much [battleswarmblog.com].
You mean people freeload (Score:2)
You mean workers didn't want to pay for increased compensation and benefits for other workers who weren't paying the dues. That's the point of union-busting laws like in Wisconsin...to bust the union.
Union members make enough for video games (Score:5, Insightful)
Most Union workers make quite a bit more than non-members, have better benefits, get bigger raises and raises more often.
It's well worth the dues you pay. In most industries we're talking 25%-40% or more, not counting pensions and other benefits.
Delta needs to put down the pipe.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And? (Score:1)
You know using fancy words (Score:5, Interesting)
Unions have been proven time and again to work. Ask any economist who isn't in the tank for a corporate backed think tank and they'll tell you that lack of collective bargaining (or some reason economists are loath to use the "U" word) is a major factor in why wages are down 20% in the last few decades.
And if we must do a thought experiment, try this: ask yourself, do you have enough bargaining power as a single employee to go up against a multi-national corporation with 2/3rds of your government in their pocket? If you answered "yes" and you aren't either an Einstein grade math whiz or born to whatever your country's version of royalty is then you are what we call a temporarily inconvenienced millionaire [duckduckgo.com].
Re: (Score:2)
doesn't make your arguments better, right, just more confusing.
And snark doesn't make yours any better, lol
Re: (Score:2)
Unions have been proven time and again to work.
If by "work" you mean "destroy for decades", then sure [duckduckgo.com].
Unions clamped onto the auto industry like a tick, but in the post war bounty period there was enough to go around for awhile. When that ended, they left the host a shadow of its former self.
Re: (Score:2)
If by "destroy Detroit" you mean "politicians passed NAFTA over the angry objections from unions"? You aren't the brightest bootlicker in the tool shed.
Welcome to Earth (Score:1)
Or you could take that $700 (Score:1)
and save it in a retirement fund, or maybe even buy some food.
Sure, that worked great for Hostess employees (Score:3)
Propaganda (Score:5, Insightful)
"Delta Airlines' all-out assault on their employees' legally-protected right to unionize..."
Doesn't sound like an assault on their rights...rather an attempt to sway the opinions of the workers. The quoted slogan isn't even slinging any mud!
Unions are probably the lesser of two evils; in this case, and perhaps in general...but as the size and resources of a given union increases, it becomes vulnerable to corruption same as corporations and governments.
IMHO.
Re:Propaganda (Score:4, Insightful)
>"Doesn't sound like an assault on their rights...rather an attempt to sway the opinions of the workers."
I was going to post the same thing. Suggesting they buy video games is not an "assault" on anyone's "rights". The company has the right to discourage unionization by saying how expensive it is to join, how you risk strikes, how strikes could lead to your dismissal, how if pay gets too high it could cause the company to fold. As long as they are not threatening employees with retribution of any type, then it is fair game.
It's an all out assualt (Score:2)
Just to be clear (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If Unions are for workers rights, they arent showing it when fighting against Right To Work.
I'm in a Union and the only way out is to quit. This Union was formed recently (less than 10 years) and its already a shit show of both corruption and stupidity. The company had a 5%/year pay raise policy (subject to a cap) with the ability to negotiate even more and since the Union, le
Re: (Score:2)
>"If Unions are for workers rights, they arent showing it when fighting against Right To Work."
+1
Unions are a fine and important part of empowering Labor. However, allowing them to FORCE employees to participate is just as "un-free" a market as slave labor by employers.
"Right to work" is just as important as "Right to Unionize".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I live in Las Vegas. I'm an electrician. The owners of my company are 3 ex union guys. They know a lot of the union higher ups, They get "offered" to join the company a few times a year. They go around to the employees that have been around for a few years and ask us our opinion. We normally all have a laugh and then get back to work. The electrical union out here(Local 357) is a joke. I tried to join when I was 19, after being in the trade for 3-4 years already. Had a long time union member willing to spon
Should capitalism be attacked? (Score:2)
If capitalism has an absolute right to organize capital, workers too must have an absolute right to organize their labor. That includes forcing companies to only hire union workers. Especially when the capitalists are free to organize their capital across international borders, which laborers largely can't do.
Re: (Score:2)
*sets tube of burn gel on the table*
Insulting your employees intelligence (Score:5, Insightful)
"Claims to represent" tells reader what to think (Score:3, Informative)
Hi everyone. Just your friendly neighborhood psychology student and game writer here to point out that saying the union "claims to represent" a certain number of people implies that number might not be accurate, which sure looks a whole lot like pro-capitalist / anti-union bias from where I'm sitting. (Also took a journalism class and was on the school paper in high school, and this type of thing is a big no-no, right up there with scare quotes.)
Is there some reason we should doubt the veracity of the union's statement? Last I checked, unions are happy to publish lists of every company or department that affiliates with them, because doing so shows how popular and widespread the union is... which can only be good for getting more members. Kinda obvious when you think about it. I usually trust the BBC to at least try to be impartial when it comes to world news (which US news is, in Britain), but it seems that may be changing, at least where anything that resembles (gasp!) socialism is concerned.
Nice try, capitalist pig. Thankfully, critical thinking doesn't cost anything.
Re: (Score:3)
Is there some reason we should doubt the veracity of the union's statement?
Is there a reason you would want to misreport the facts?
A real journalist would not report a # it could not independently verify (via multiple sources) as a fact. You do know how knowledge works, right? If you tell me you are X years old, but I cannot verify it, any factual statements by me about your age would include that its you who saying you are X years old. If I do not include this information, then such lazy (at best) statements are not factual.
Is there a reason you would want to misreport the
Re: (Score:2)
Your main problem is that you assume that everyone else is as dishonest about their knowledge as you are about your knowledge. Just because you are a dishonest fuck looking to score ascii wins in online forums does not mean everyone else is also. In fact, most people aren't. Most people are not a dishonest fuck like you.
Re: "Claims to represent" tells reader what to thi (Score:3, Insightful)
It is a journalist's responsibility to effect positive change in society. Not to report facts without bias or favor, that's 20th century thinking.
Trying to call out the BBC for pro capitalist propaganda? Seriously? They're a left biased publication, like most of the media. Objectivity isn't taught any more as you know well.
Of course BBC is capitalist. So is NPR. (Score:2)
Or if you prefer the latter's full name, National Pentagon Radio. As to the former, just look at the years the BBC has spent ratfucking Jeremy Corbyn. You're operating under the fallacy that if the media source isn't in the tank for the GOP/Tories or run by Birchers, it most be "left". That is not the case.
Re: "Claims to represent" tells reader what to th (Score:2)
Re: "Claims to represent" tells reader what to t (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"Is there some reason we should doubt the veracity of the union's statement?"
Sure. That number likely included people like me, who opted out of unions as an airline worker (but were forced to pay dues), people who are no longer employed (but aren't completely off the rolls yet), and people who's interests they don't actually represent.
Airlines in particular are subject to union fuckery - once you're unionized, there is no process to decertify and remove a union - just replace one with another.
So you want to be a freeloader? (Score:2)
Enjoy all the benefits won by the union without paying the dues that earned those benefits. And if you don't like your union, you are free to vote to change it. You have no vote in how the airlines are run.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
psychology student and game writer ... took a journalism class ... capitalist pig
Are you actively trying to tick every passive-aggressive teenage wannabe-communist stereotype box? Is Tumblr down for the day?
Re: "Claims to represent" tells reader what to thi (Score:2)
Re: "Claims to represent" tells reader what to thi (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A union will get (Score:1)
Full and fancy retiree health obligations.
Nice big defined benefit plans.
None of that extra low equal to the social security pension plan.
Want to give that up for a new video game system?
Go full union now and enjoy retirement.
Union dues are more like a wager than a purchase (Score:5, Insightful)
Comparing the union dues to a consumer good isn't quite right. If you got the hottest game or phone each year, you'd see no return, but you'd only be out $700/yr.
The impacts of unionization on your future run the gamut. Best case often happened during the mid 20th century: workers secured higher wages, and kept making them throughout their career. There were probably middlin' outcomes too; but in some cases employers sought other avenues when they didn't like the contracts. In that case, the plant shut down and your total income may have fallen far short of what it could have been under a less generous contract.
The way I see it, union dues are most favorably compared to the kinds of wagers that *capitalists* make. It's like buying a stock on margin. You're spending money to enforce a labor cartel, on the gamble that the company won't be able to find an alternative. If the cartel remains in force, you win. If it doesn't remain in force, the company could fold, move, etc. and you could actually lose a big chunk of your wealth.
You're missing a big part of history (Score:2)
Unions are still the way to go as Germany proves (where 70% of folk belong to one and where standards of living are among the highest). Unions can organize politically and keep the jobs and economy local using laws. American workers treat politics as something dirty they should ne
More like a cost of doing business (Score:2)
Businesses need to advertise, and advertising costs money. Workers need to organize, and organizing costs money. But like advertising, union dues bring in more than they cost.
No more so than Delta is enforcing a capital cartel. Insert eyeroll emoji.
External unions (Score:4, Interesting)
Yay unions. That isn't to say unions are bad per se, but these mega unions are fucking toxic. If Delta staff want to unionize they should create their own. There are enough workers to make it work. Then the union will work for them and them only and they can fund it on that basis.
Complaining unions don't have MORE power? (Score:2)
Funny how often anti-union hatorade is based around the union not having more power to "blackmail" (a word other haters keep using to describe labor negotiations) the company into giving more compensation. If your wife didn't like union leadership - she was free to vote for different leaders or policies and rally other workers to her cause. As opposed to asking the boss pretty please with sugar on top.
not an insult when it's true (Score:2)
So do you have a point to make - or are you just engaging in dumbfuckery?
I pay (Score:2)
Power Imbalance (Score:5, Insightful)
No it seems that unions can also abuse their power and perverse a job marked. In the auto industry, low skilled workers were able to demand high wages because they could hold the equipment of the car industry hostage. That's nice that you have a 2 billion dollar assembly plant, pay us 4 times the market rate or we will set up a strike picket line in front of it. Teacher's unions do this as well. In Canada we have a few very large unions and lots of little school boards. The individual school boards always cave because they aren't coordinated and also a teachers strike means not only is little Timmy not getting an education but his mom has to miss work so she can take care of him. Teacher's salaries are probably 3x what the market value for them is in Canada. We have 7 new graduate teachers for each possible position in Ontario.
The biggest problem with unions is the employment inflexibility. They often create specific job classes that only a person in that class can do. This often destroys the efficiency of a companies work force. The other problems are things like seniority and the difficulty in firing useless employees.
I think a lot of the laws protecting unions should only be in place if the union can prove a power imbalance.
Trust me, you don't want efficiency (Score:3)
I always see people clamoring for more and more efficiency. It sounds good on paper, but a huge part of our economy is finding things for people to do so we can get money changing hands in the economy. Otherwise money collects at the top until the whole thing grinds to a halt.
You are only worth your replacement cost (Score:2)
...and unions are, effectively, trying to blackmail business. Essentially a union bundles workers into a mass, hoping this inconvenience can offset their replaceability. Hoping.
I have no problem with people forming unions; if those people are irreplaceable, then more power to them.
But a company pointing out "with that $700/year you could buy a gaming system" is hardly "an all-out assault on their employees' legally-protected right to unionize". Further, if - when a union forms - the company can quickly r
Re: (Score:2)
Negotiation is blackmail? Workers pooling labor is no more "blackmail" than capitalists pooling capital is. And workers do the work that produces the money. Not corporate execs who spend their earnings on blow, hookers, and bribing politicians.
Union busting is rarely limited to putting
Re: (Score:2)
"Negotiation is blackmail? Workers pooling labor is no more "blackmail" than capitalists pooling capital is"
I didn't say that employers weren't also doing it their own way. Both sides try to blackmail the other as much as they can. That's why I don't object to anyone trying to form a union.
"Union busting is rarely limited to putting up posters. Union organizers are routinely fired,"
Contrast this to what happens to people who try to cross picket lines:
The president of one UAW local addressed a meeting of s
Re: (Score:2)
Well, just pretend to be a real sniper while negotiating and say they should accept your conditions or else...