Our President is championing unions.  My father worked for the unions for several years, so my feelings for them should be positive, but they are not.

Simply put, Unionized groups that work for large organizations do not work and the latest example is Hostess.  Hostess just offically went down the shitter today and I can give a big reason why.  UNIONS.

My company works in a space where we are competitor to their in house unions for the service we provide.  Whenever there is overflow for need that their Union guys couldn't handle, it would spill over to us.  Our rates for Hostess, in comparison to our other clients, were pretty high and YET we were told that we were at least 30% (often times 50% cheaper) cheaper than their Union force costs for the exact same service every time. 

Ever wonder why Southwest is the most successful airline in the country?  They will not work with Unions.  Of course there are tons of other large businesses that are successful that follow their path.

I have a friend who drives trucks at UPS, he's a teamster and homeowner who's in the middle class. I have another friend who does practically the same job at fed ex, rents and has considerably less money and security than the UPS driver. I also know two southwest employees who work at KCI who make less than both of them and who can never count on owning a home in a decent neighborhood in their current situations. I bet sweatshops are extremely profitable to everyone involved but the workers. A strong middle class and organized labor go hand in hand. I can see the problem that we're in in relation to public sector unions, but that's not what you're talking about so I'll just chalk this up to another post in which you're flat wrong.

Oh yeah and whatever happened to not posting during the week because you're too busy making 10k decisions? Get back to work jabroni

Aussie97 wrote: Our President is championing unions.  My father worked for the unions for several years, so my feelings for them should be positive, but they are not.

Simply put, Unionized groups that work for large organizations do not work and the latest example is Hostess.  Hostess just offically went down the shitter today and I can give a big reason why.  UNIONS.

My company works in a space where we are competitor to their in house unions for the service we provide.  Whenever there is overflow for need that their Union guys couldn't handle, it would spill over to us.  Our rates for Hostess, in comparison to our other clients, were pretty high and YET we were told that we were at least 30% (often times 50% cheaper) cheaper than their Union force costs for the exact same service every time. 

Ever wonder why Southwest is the most successful airline in the country?  They will not work with Unions.  Of course there are tons of other large businesses that are successful that follow their path.

Perhaps we should bring back slavery.  I am sure these companies could do even better.

BillSelfsGOON816 wrote: I have a friend who drives trucks at UPS, he's a teamster and homeowner who's in the middle class. I have another friend who does practically the same job at fed ex, rents and has considerably less money and security than the UPS driver. I also know two southwest employees who work at KCI who make less than both of them and who can never count on owning a home in a decent neighborhood in their current situations. I bet sweatshops are extremely profitable to everyone involved but the workers. A strong middle class and organized labor go hand in hand. I can see the problem that we're in in relation to public sector unions, but that's not what you're talking about so I'll just chalk this up to another post in which you're flat wrong.

and now the Union Twinkie driver you champion may have no job at all.

Unions don't suck. They overreach, just like corporation management does. This is an example of what refusing to compromise accomplishes more than an example of why we need to destroy unions.

Too many people on this board were born about 150 years too late, based on their ideal world.

knighthawk68 wrote:

BillSelfsGOON816 wrote: I have a friend who drives trucks at UPS, he's a teamster and homeowner who's in the middle class. I have another friend who does practically the same job at fed ex, rents and has considerably less money and security than the UPS driver. I also know two southwest employees who work at KCI who make less than both of them and who can never count on owning a home in a decent neighborhood in their current situations. I bet sweatshops are extremely profitable to everyone involved but the workers. A strong middle class and organized labor go hand in hand. I can see the problem that we're in in relation to public sector unions, but that's not what you're talking about so I'll just chalk this up to another post in which you're flat wrong.

and now the Union Twinkie driver you champion may have no job at all.

Maybe the problem with Hostess wasn't their union contract, but that they were paying for Twinkie drivers at all?

Aussie97 wrote: 

My company works in a space where we are competitor to their in house unions for the service we provide. 

Aussie is a scab.

Unions are too busy destroying themselves to find use in my assistance. I'm just sitting back in amusement.

Aussie97 wrote: Our President is championing unions.  My father worked for the unions for several years, so my feelings for them should be positive, but they are not.

Simply put, Unionized groups that work for large organizations do not work and the latest example is Hostess.  Hostess just offically went down the shitter today and I can give a big reason why.  UNIONS.

My company works in a space where we are competitor to their in house unions for the service we provide.  Whenever there is overflow for need that their Union guys couldn't handle, it would spill over to us.  Our rates for Hostess, in comparison to our other clients, were pretty high and YET we were told that we were at least 30% (often times 50% cheaper) cheaper than their Union force costs for the exact same service every time. 

Ever wonder why Southwest is the most successful airline in the country?  They will not work with Unions.  Of course there are tons of other large businesses that are successful that follow their path.

You continue to be the worst informed partisan hack this side of Sayers.  If he's a "Pro", what does that make you?

http://www.prnewswire.com/news...-118457584.html


http://www.amfanational.org/do...ntract_2008.pdf

http://www.swapa.org/

floydmaster wrote: Unions don't suck. They overreach, just like corporation management does. This is an example of what refusing to compromise accomplishes more than an example of why we need to destroy unions.

Correct. But management usually has a more realistic idea of the health of the company.

I am pro union*, but I wonder about some of the leaders. 



*Exc I don't think govt emp unions should be able to negotiate.

Meanwhile, a company goes out of business and everybody loses.  But everyone is too busy talking about slave owners.

Hostess was driven into the ground by poor management, not just a union who gave concessions a while back only to see it get blown on executive payouts and not invested into the company as was promised

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with unions in the private sector. Those unions must work in partnership with management and be concerned about how the company is doing, because if they go too far, they lose their jobs. Just because we have an occasional reminder of those consequences doesn't mean unions are broken.

Public sector unions for government workers on the other hand, should be illegal.

American workers emerged as the most productive in the world in the early 1900s and that productivity led this nation to the top of the world economic heap. Unions were the single largest factor in that.

Executives sucking at business and negotiations is not the fault of unions no matter how many times the right tries to sell this idea.

EvolveHawk wrote: Hostess was driven into the ground by poor management, not just a union who gave concessions a while back only to see it get blown on executive payouts and not invested into the company as was promised

The past is really irrelevant here. If in the present the company is bankrupt and can not afford what the unions want, than thats the way it is.

Northjayhawk wrote: I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with unions in the private sector. Those unions must work in partnership with management and be concerned about how the company is doing, because if they go too far, they lose their jobs. Just because we have an occasional reminder of those consequences doesn't mean unions are broken.

Public sector unions for government workers on the other hand, should be illegal.

Why?

A long time ago unions were necessary. Today, most of the industries who have bankruptcies and layoffs seem to be unionized. The pendulum has swung too far. Wages, benefits, regulations, and taxes force companies to move overseas. It's sad. Twinkie workers are not worth $30/hour, plus benefits. Hostess has reorganized twice. Can't do it anymore.

Because the tax payers have no means of negotiation. It is difficult to negotiate against your own people. What is a Municipality's motivation to negotiate against the very police officers and firemen who they depend on for protection? None. Public unions should not be allowed.

Jhawk20 wrote:

Northjayhawk wrote: I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with unions in the private sector. Those unions must work in partnership with management and be concerned about how the company is doing, because if they go too far, they lose their jobs. Just because we have an occasional reminder of those consequences doesn't mean unions are broken.

Public sector unions for government workers on the other hand, should be illegal.

Why?

StilwellHawk wrote: Because the tax payers have no means of negotiation. It is difficult to negotiate against your own people. What is a Municipality's motivation to negotiate against the very police officers and firemen who they depend on for protection? None. Public unions should not be allowed.

Jhawk20 wrote:

Northjayhawk wrote: I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with unions in the private sector. Those unions must work in partnership with management and be concerned about how the company is doing, because if they go too far, they lose their jobs. Just because we have an occasional reminder of those consequences doesn't mean unions are broken.

Public sector unions for government workers on the other hand, should be illegal.

Why?

This seems like an indictment of the free market. If policemen and firemen are really that valuable to the community, why shouldn't they get what they're worth? Sounds like you're coming around to our side, comrade.