Are unions outdated? Is striking really effective in our current society?

Options
24

Comments

  • Posts: 13,576
    pjhawks said:

    i take great value in what they provide to my community BUT that doesn't mean in bad economic times they should automatically get raises and free healthcare. as for what they make compared to other professions remember to base their pay on 9 months a year and not 12 AND that most towns pay into their pensions for retirement. and don't even get me started on the ridiculous amount of vacation days and the fact that they can carry those days over year to year if not used.

    Pensions in general are such an outdated concept and are placing cities in huge financial trouble these days. We need to get out of the Pension business for local and state employees.

    Edit: Just because i disagree with how their union represents them doesn't mean I don't value them. These opinions are based on a business perspective. you can't have a healthy debate when any dissenting opinion is somehow labeled anti- whatever group you are talking about. i am not anti-teacher.
    Using terms like absurd to characterize teachers demands will derail debate a little bit too, you are gonna get people fired up.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    I'll never send my kids to a public school, especially one that does Common Core.
  • Posts: 12,907
    rgambs said:

    Using terms like absurd to characterize teachers demands will derail debate a little bit too, you are gonna get people fired up.
    ah yes i think you are correct. it was a poor choice of words by me. didn't want to offend by my post.
  • Posts: 9,478

    In terms of the OP, that strike was ridiculous.

    Strikes can have an impact if the company is losing profits as their employees don't attend to their jobs. In such a case, the company is motivated to rectify grievances and employees stand the chance to make gains that a stubborn employer might not have offered until pointing a gun at their heads.

    In the public school teachers' strike (their 3rd in a decade), once again, teachers forfeited their wages and funded their own raise. Not to mention they kept kids out of classes for a month.

    It became apparent that the Government wanted to squash the teachers' union and seemed hell bent on doing so. They may have succeeded: many teachers are steamed that the offer they accepted after striking for 4 weeks and having been 'locked out' for a month with a 10% wage garnish,,, was WORSE than the one they could originally have accepted.

    Poor leadership and old school tactics created much hardship for teachers in this dispute. The union is trying to sell a victory to its members- but only the very naïve feel it has been one. Most are very angry at the cliff the executive drove them to and pushed them over.

    And as for RG's post... the teachers' union collects $41 million a year. A YEAR! They paid out $3.5 million in strike pay and claimed they had no more to pay members. How interesting is that?

    Reckless.

    This seems to be all to common in Canada these days, governments federally and provincially are doing their best to kill unions. I keep thinking of all the back to work legislation that Harper keeps imposing whenever the railway unions strike.

    Good post.
  • Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,642
    edited October 2014

    Capitalism unchecked is a recipe for disaster. Organized labour is the backbone of the middle class, Any jobs outside of a union that pays well can be thankful that unions exist to set standards that private companies must meet.

    With that said, unions have their problems. Strong performers are not compensated and weak performers are protected to the detriment of other members. There needs to be models of accountability for performance. In short, unions need to evolve.

    I'm sure many still do. But many others have perfectly fine models of accountability written into the contract. They normally involve a fair process of gradual discipline. In other words, the employer is obligated to give workers fair warning (usually a three step thing) and the chance to improve, but if the worker doesn't do so then they can be fired for poor performance. It's a very fair method that protects both parties. If it's not working that is necessarily 100% on the employer's head, because it means they are keeping poor workers in favour of laziness (I.e. aren't bothering with the process).
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • rgambs said:

    It's hard to imagine you've done any serious study of the issue if that's your conclusion. I'd suggest Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States"
    No I havent done any studies on this. I am just speaking on personal experience. Going on strike over a one percent raise. On strike for three months, the money lost by union members doesnt cover that one percent raise that was being fought over. Additionally the company ended up losing out on production during that time. That is my personal experience and similiar experiences in my immediate area. No one I know has come out of a strike feeling like "We Won". Of course this is just my perspective from my experiences which may not be consistent with strikes across the country. Either way just adding to the discussion.
  • Posts: 9,087
    edited October 2014
    Unions used to be useful ... now they are no better than the government, "they leach off the productivity of others". Both my wife and I belong to a union, both unions suck and are really good at spending money that is not theirs ... just like the government.

    Oh ... and their really good at keeping lazy people employed ... sure the have a process in place to remove those people ... but here in Ontario it is well know if a grievance ends up in arbitration they generally side with the union and most employers will not spend the $$$ to go that far just to lose.
    Post edited by lukin2006 on
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • Posts: 12,504
    lukin2006 said:

    Unions used to be useful ... now they are no better than the government, "they leach off the productivity of others". Both my wife and I belong to a union, both unions suck and are really good at spending money that is not theirs ... just like the government.

    Oh ... and their really good at keeping lazy people employed ... sure the have a process in place to remove those people ... but here in Ontario it is well know if a grievance ends up in arbitration they generally side with the union and most employers will not spend the $$$ to go that far just to lose.

    I can't argue with you there, I am a union officer at our hall and I see some of the sneaky shit that goes on.

    Godfather.

  • Posts: 19,288
    Striking is effective depending on how much leverage a union has.

    An Asphalt Paving Sealcoating union has lots of leverage if they strike in the middle of summer when half the roads are torn up for repair. If the housing market is down and the Carpenters Union goes on strike, they don't have leverage and members fortunate enough to have work at the time get screwed. I've witnessed both in the last several years.

    Also, the reason we have 1,500 reality shows today is because the Writters Guild went on strike with presumed leverage and totally ended up screwing their trade when producers figured out you could just stick 15 bozos in a house and get killer ratings.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,642
    edited October 2014
    lukin2006 said:

    Unions used to be useful ... now they are no better than the government, "they leach off the productivity of others". Both my wife and I belong to a union, both unions suck and are really good at spending money that is not theirs ... just like the government.

    Oh ... and their really good at keeping lazy people employed ... sure the have a process in place to remove those people ... but here in Ontario it is well know if a grievance ends up in arbitration they generally side with the union and most employers will not spend the $$$ to go that far just to lose.

    You should separate unions from shitty unions in your thinking.
    I support good unions, not bad ones. The bad ones lend heavily to this kind of prejudiced anti-union thinking/union bashing.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Posts: 9,087
    PJ_Soul said:

    You should separate unions from shitty unions in your thinking.
    I support good unions, not bad ones. The bad ones lend heavily to this kind of prejudiced anti-union thinking/union bashing.
    There all the fucking same, Ive talked to members of of other union and they have the same complaints.

    In my opinion in order to fix the the problem several things need to change ...

    -here in Ontario the arbitration process needs to be overhauled so its balanced

    -there needs to be a system in place that if members have complaints against their union there is a process to follow so these complaints are heard and if legitimate action is taken against the union

    there also needs to be a process in place that absolutely rewards the good employees and denies the bad employees advancement within the organization ...
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,642
    lukin2006 said:

    There all the fucking same, Ive talked to members of of other union and they have the same complaints.

    In my opinion in order to fix the the problem several things need to change ...

    -here in Ontario the arbitration process needs to be overhauled so its balanced

    -there needs to be a system in place that if members have complaints against their union there is a process to follow so these complaints are heard and if legitimate action is taken against the union

    there also needs to be a process in place that absolutely rewards the good employees and denies the bad employees advancement within the organization ...
    But they are NOT all the same. You're hearing it from me - I don't have these complaints about my own union, and I am very tuned in to what's going on among our members.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Posts: 19,288
    Construction trade unions are necessary. Although their shenanigans are child like and drive me nuts. But they provide a trained workforce, and for that I'm thankful.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • Posts: 9,087
    If unions are so great why do they need legislation to get union dues? if their so effective then people should want to join and voluntarily pay dues. People voluntarily join organizations all the time and pay for the priviledge ... we pay to be members here, some pay to be members of the legion ... all voluntary of course. Except Unions ... hmmm ... I think they are like the government and leach off the productivity of others.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • Perth, Western Australia Posts: 4,007
    PJ_Soul said:

    Unions are what keep the private sector in check IMO. They help to set an external standard. I don't think most people give unions the credit they deserve because their greatest effect isn't direct. If it weren't for unions, wages and rights in the private sector would be way worse than they are. I think unions are incredibly important to everyone, not just union members.

    Well said and this is why they are important.
  • There is no questioning the value of unions. They are essential- otherwise, in time, we would see the obliteration of the middle class. Don't think for a second that private industry jobs that pay well do so because the employers are fantastic. The only reason why some private sector jobs treat their employees well is because a union has set the benchmark that these companies must match to secure employees.

    With that said, unions must set about evolving. Poorly performing employees must be held accountable. Unions do too much protecting weak members and not enough supporting strong performers. The effect sees a 'lowering of the bar' for work performance. Would be strong performers don't see the value in working hard or doing more, while their colleague 'slacks off' to earn the same money and benefits. As well, the company (or public) doesn't receive the service they seek or could attain with more proportionate compensation for valued employees. As such, the unions develop a bad reputation and, to some degree, disenfranchised employees.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • lukin2006 said:

    If unions are so great why do they need legislation to get union dues? if their so effective then people should want to join and voluntarily pay dues. People voluntarily join organizations all the time and pay for the priviledge ... we pay to be members here, some pay to be members of the legion ... all voluntary of course. Except Unions ... hmmm ... I think they are like the government and leach off the productivity of others.

    If people could get the receive the benefits of belonging to a union without paying for them then nobody would pay for membership and the union would disappear. I suppose that for many anti-union activists this is the ultimate goal anyhow. Personally I'm not a big fan of modern unions but an economy where labour has no organized voice scares the hell out of me. Globalization has already muted the voices of many workers as jobs are being driven overseas to developing markets with fewer safety standards and a lower cost of living. As for the abuse of productive workers; I think multinational corporations do a far better job leaching off of the productivity of others than any union could ever hope to.

    In the end it probably doesn't matter; unions are likely going to lose this battle as we watch the middle class continue to erode over the next few generations.
  • Posts: 9,087

    If people could get the receive the benefits of belonging to a union without paying for them then nobody would pay for membership and the union would disappear. I suppose that for many anti-union activists this is the ultimate goal anyhow. Personally I'm not a big fan of modern unions but an economy where labour has no organized voice scares the hell out of me. Globalization has already muted the voices of many workers as jobs are being driven overseas to developing markets with fewer safety standards and a lower cost of living. As for the abuse of productive workers; I think multinational corporations do a far better job leaching off of the productivity of others than any union could ever hope to.

    In the end it probably doesn't matter; unions are likely going to lose this battle as we watch the middle class continue to erode over the next few generations.
    So all the pro-unionist would quit paying Union dues if given the choice? If that's the case, they really aren't that committed, I'd gladly pay no Union dues and they can send me a bill for when they've increased my wages and benefits ... This would be far more fair. From what I can see unions have no problem with legislation that requires automatic deduction of dues and membership (in Canada called rand act or formula I believe),but cry like little babies if anyone mentions legislation that would require unions to be more accountable and transparent to their members ... If they want forced membership then their should be legislation holding unions accountable.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • lukin2006 said:

    So all the pro-unionist would quit paying Union dues if given the choice? If that's the case, they really aren't that committed, I'd gladly pay no Union dues and they can send me a bill for when they've increased my wages and benefits ... This would be far more fair. From what I can see unions have no problem with legislation that requires automatic deduction of dues and membership (in Canada called rand act or formula I believe),but cry like little babies if anyone mentions legislation that would require unions to be more accountable and transparent to their members ... If they want forced membership then their should be legislation holding unions accountable.
    Would you be committed to paying a union if you could reap the same benefits without having to pay into the pot? This is why the Rand formula was introduced in the first place. The fact is, people tend to be selfish and short-sighted.

    As for unions themselves; I'm not going to pretend that unions aren't full of corrupt, self-entitled members who abuse the system. We know that this is commonplace in many unions. At the same time, I'm reasonably comfortable knowing that many employers are every bit as wretched. I would love to see unions held more accountable to their members, but in places like Canada much of the complaining isn't about accountability to union members but rather accountability to the public at large.
  • Posts: 9,087

    Would you be committed to paying a union if you could reap the same benefits without having to pay into the pot? This is why the Rand formula was introduced in the first place. The fact is, people tend to be selfish and short-sighted.

    As for unions themselves; I'm not going to pretend that unions aren't full of corrupt, self-entitled members who abuse the system. We know that this is commonplace in many unions. At the same time, I'm reasonably comfortable knowing that many employers are every bit as wretched. I would love to see unions held more accountable to their members, but in places like Canada much of the complaining isn't about accountability to union members but rather accountability to the public at large.
    I know why the rand formula was introduced ... it was also a very different era back when it was introduced ...

    Like I said ... send me a bill when you can prove on paper that you've improved my life with increased wages and benefits and I'll gladly pay up. But the truth of the matter is that cost of living has far exceeded wage increases ...
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.