So.....if unions contributed to Republican politicians it would be okay? The fact that public employee unions generally contribute to the Democrats is why plenty of public employees file for the rebate. But maybe if Republican politicians looked out for ALL their constituents rather than their corporate masters we wouldn't be having this debate. Unions exist as a bulwark against corporate abuse (read your history) be it public or private. Unions are as corrupt as the corporations. But at least they did far more for guys like me than than did management in both the public and private sectors. Regardless of some opinions, public employees are not public property. They have a right to representation. This is still America, like it or don't.
Another SMH moment. I don't get it. It seems obvious to me that if you understand how a corporation works and how a union works, they don't raise money the same way at all. And they have different rules when it comes to political activities.
If you don't like what the board of directors does, elect a new one. If you don't like what the CEO does, hire a new board of directors. Or sell your stock. Sheesh.
If you don't like what union leadership does, vote them out. If you don't like what a union does, decertify them. Or get a different job. Sheesh. barfo
Except I had no choice but to be in the union and against my wishes. Another SMH post. You must be trying to set some sort of record for those.
I knew you were old but didn't realize you were a slave. No wonder the modern world is bewildering to you. barfo
In some towns, the only employer of note is a company infected by a union. Infected? Infested. Either works. You can log into etrade in your jockey shorts and sell your stock. Nobody voted against your wishes that you are forced against your will to buy those shares in the first place.
Naw, public employee unions contributing to the politicians they need to negotiate with is not American! It is an unholy alliance of corruption and the major reason the public is saddled with huge unfunded liabilities.
I favor unions, collective bargaining, protecting striking workers from violence, etc. Infestation is a good word for a parasite that isn't wanted.
I benefited several times by unions in control of various jobs at several companies. The highest priced union workers always are a good target for eliminate those jobs, or even to drastically reduce the numbers. You can alway justify the price of the contract and the stuff it takes to get it done.
Seems to me that if there is only one employer, and the employee is 'forced' to work there for lack of other opportunities, then that's exactly when a union would be most needed. barfo
Why aren't you pro choice? I am. The infestation here eliminates choice. It could be the company treats the workers as best as they can, while the infestation of manufacturing by unions has driven our manufacturing base elsewhere. I do understand that you believe the company should lose money for the workers' benefit. "Liberals" don't understand economics, barfo. The company goes bankrupt and closes down and the workers lose everything. Way to go! DETROIT. That says it all.
Bullshit. What could be more American. Justice goes to the highest bidder and has since this country was founded. It's called "Capitalism". Unions exist in an effort to level the playing field. And it still isn't even close. Really read the history of organized labor. The unions learned every one of their tricks (dirty or otherwise) at the feet of their corporate masters. Big business has only themselves to blame for organized labor and it can't be argued otherwise. And as far as unfounded liabilities go........as much as you and most everyone else would like to blame the public employee unions, that is far and away one of the biggest political fallacies in existence. If there really and truly are unfounded liabilities, the vast majority of the blame goes to the politicians and bureaucrats. They created the situation by refusing to pay reasonable wages. When they couldn't recruit talent, they (not the unions) created the PERS system because it was cheaper than paying up front. It snowballed from there. I spent 30 years in the public sector (and five years in the private sector working in a public facility). Not even once in all those years did the unions EVER bargain for retirement benefits when it came time to negotiate a contract. Instead, it was the public employer voluntarily offering the retirement in lieu of improving pay and other benefits because, as noted, it was cheaper up front. Now (supposedly) the bill has come due and all of a sudden it's the public employee union's fault. Talk about revisionist history....They only took what was offered. Your "corruption" is, in reality, nothing more than political stupidity and shortsightedness. And it was all started by the Republicans....the Democrats just picked up the ball and ran with it......and FWIW, I fought with every union I ever belonged to because they have the wrongheaded idea that the union members work for them, rather than the other way around. I just couldn't bend over for that. But I still respected their right to exist......and I appreciated their efforts on my behalf.
