***** unions - all of 'em.

[markw]

Out of state electricians and tree repair companies were asked to come help with repairs, particularly in te hardest it shore areas, and this is the welcome they get?.

We need all the help we can get and THIS (http://www.waff.com/story/19981857/some-nonunion-ala-crews-turned-away-from-sandy-recovery) is what they do to us?

Gee, thanks, guys. We really appreciate you looking out for us.

[Hyfi]

How about that, we do agree on something.

Unions were needed 100 years ago. Now they have caused these kinds of issue as well as the fact that Americans can no longer afford to buy American made goods.

When I was a Toolmaker, I worked in a Union Shop for 3 months. It was a joke. So many people doing nothing or not helping others because being kind and helpful was not in their job description.

I have a work ethic where I do the best work I can, always. I was building some stamping dies for Grumman and the current Mail Delivery trucks when the owner's son came up to me and started questioning why I was machining and squaring certain surfaces. I asked if I was over the alloted time for the work and he said "No, you are well under the time quoted". So I asked what the problem was and he told me "You are making your work look too good and other customers might want their stamping dies to look the same".

At that moment, I put my tools away, closed my box, handed him my apron and told him that he did not want me working there if I was required to do sub-quality work and I walked out and got another job.

The only real reason unions are helpful today is to slightly curb the greediness of rampant Capitalism which today means Immoral yet Legal.

[Hyfi]

By the way, you hosed the link and need to remove a set of HTTP://""" from the front of the URL in order to see the article.

[ForeverAutumn]

I repaired the link for Mark. See? Mods can be helpful. :)

Mark how did you and your family fare? Is everyone okay? Are trees and homes around you still standing and dry?

[dean_martin]

link didn't work, but hang in there man. Glad you're ok. When our power was out for days and trees were down in my yard, on my house and across my driveway after Ivan, the best pick-me-up I discovered was the little camping coffee pot/perculator given to me by my in-laws. After firing off the grill and brewing a pot for friends and family, a little normalcy returned.

Also, the Flying Burrito Brothers' song "Sin City" became my tongue-in-cheek anthem (replaced "earthquake" with "hurricane" - this ol' hurricane is gonna leave me in the poor house).

Good luck.

edit: I see you fixed the link while I was constructing my response, FA. Good work!

[markw]

I worked in a union steel mill in the late 70's until the early 80's, right about the time Brasilian and Chinese steel imports were undercutting us big time. Te "old-tilers" would yell at us newbies to slow down so they didn't have to work hard. End result, we could have done at least four times te work without breaking a sweat and holding back also made the job boring as hell.

Also, at that time, management was "forcing" the union inspectors to pass inferior products to keep production numbers up. The ultimate result of this was we lost customers.

When contract time came up, we could all see the handwriting on the wall: We were lucky to still have jobs.

Well, doncha know that the old-timers decided they wanted more money. Us newbies warned this might not be te best idea but we got outvoted.

Rather than face a strike, the company gave in to their demands.

But, within six months, te layoffs started and within a year and a half, the plant was closed down. There were four wave of "layoffs" and after that, a vacant toxic waste site where the plant used to be.

Dunno if I can totally blame the unions for everything but, in my heart, I truly believe they forced the company's hand and speeded up the process.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I can't agree about unions. The working environment would not be very safe if it were not for unions. American would have never enjoyed the standard of living they had if it were not for unions. As union have declined, so have wages in this country.

Crooked union leaders are a problem, but not unions in general.

I am sorry about what is happening, but this is reality. If New Jersey is a union state, then union employees should be the only workers that can assist. That is the rules that are negotiated, and that is the reality folks have to live with. Personally I think right to work rules have assisted in keeping folks poor, and all one has to do is look at the standard of living in right to work states, and you can see what I mean.

[Hyfi]

Unions or not, there is no excuse to refuse help in times of disasters. It is pure BS and the agreements should be broken to help unfortunate victims out.

It's the same as going to Home Depot and asking for help and they tell you Sorry it's not my isle, instead of just getting you some help.

[markw]

I am sorry about what is happening, but this is reality. If New Jersey is a union state, then union employees should be the only workers that can assist.If you honestly believe this, I obviously gave you too much credit for intelligence.

But, then again, it's not your state that's under seige. .

[markw]

By the way, you hosed the link and need to remove a set of HTTP://""" from the front of the URL in order to see the article.I just tried it again. It worked fine.

[Hyfi]

I just tried it again. It worked fine.

Look up, FA fixed it for you


ForeverAutumn I repaired the link for Mark. See? Mods can be helpful.

Mark how did you and your family fare? Is everyone okay? Are trees and homes around you still standing and dry?

[Feanor]

I can't agree about unions. The working environment would not be very safe if it were not for unions. American would have never enjoyed the standard of living they had if it were not for unions. As union have declined, so have wages in this country.
...
I agree and it's basically beyond dispute. Unions are interest groups and act in their narrow self-interest very often -- an that makes them no different from private businesses. However on the whole they moderated the balance between businesses and labor for the benefit of the greatest number.

The risk for Americans (and Canadians) today is the failure to perceive that the balance of power has shifted from working people, (the proverbial middle class), to the very wealthy. The decline of union power has been one factor in facilitating that shift; (there are others).

Globalization has exposed North American and European workers to people willing to working for < 10¢ on dollar. Given the magnitude of this differential it just isn't plausible to whole blame the greed of unions for last 30 years of stagnation, and 10 years of decline, in the median income.

Business have been quick to exploit this fact and consequently manufacturing jobs (in particular) have moved off-shore. Since manufacturing jobs were/are the most heavily unionized, wage & salary rates have fallen in general, Further, employers, (business & government), have been not slow to demand concessions from remaining unions and non-unionized employees under the plausible threat of off-shoring or out-sourcing.

Is it inevitable the North American wages will decline to the levels in, say, China & India? What's to prevent it? Don't forget if we're talking about "averaging" pay across the NA, China, and India, that the average is going to look more like the latter than the former. Equalization will inevitably occur, but is there the alternate possibility that NA wages will be relatively stable while Chinese/Indian wages will rise to approach them? What conditions would make this possible?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

If you honestly believe this, I obviously gave you too much credit for intelligence.

But, then again, it's not your state that's under seige. .

My name is not Terry, and I don't like to be called that. State of emergency does not cancel out labor agreements PERIOD.

My state experiences earthquakes which can be as devastating as a hurricane. I was in the Bay Area for the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, and was in Southern California during the 1994 Northridge earthquake, so I know first hand how disasters can affect a person.

Mark, I have lived just fine without your credit for intelligence. As a matter of fact, I prefer that you keep your credit. You most definitely need it more than I do.

[ForeverAutumn]

Guys, let's not get personal. If you want to discuss whether the union was right in their actions, or the validity and usefulness of unions in general that's fine. If you want to start calling each other names that's not fine. Settle down.

I think that in this case, the union certainly could have bent the rules for the sake of getting their community back on it's feet a little faster. If I were Mark, I'd be mad as hell too.

[markw]

Look up, FA fixed it for you


ForeverAutumn I repaired the link for Mark. See? Mods can be helpful.

Mark how did you and your family fare? Is everyone okay? Are trees and homes around you still standing and dry?We fared well, Much, much better than most.

Monday,lots of sideways rain and serious wind blowing but that was it. We lost a big branch off a big tree in our front yard but, aside from a few blinkouts Monday evening, we had power constantly. The rest of the town went dark but our little congested six-block area seems to be lucky about these things. I'd say we were blessed but that would start a fight.

Tuesday AM, we woke to no phone, internet or cable TV. Gotta love comcast's triple play. Cell phone service was out as well, both ATT and Verizon..Our Verizon hot-spot worked about three minutes over those two days.

Our neighbor's POTS worked, though. Fortunately, the trusty old rooftop TV antenna survived and we went back to OTA.

When we saw what Sandy did to the rest of the area we were horrified. The famous Jersey shore was pretty much devastated. Most boardwalks are gone, Hoboken was buried in a flood of equal parts water and sewage, Many, many parts of Jersey were without power. It was like a disaster movie with the most realistic special effects I've ever seen, but with some pretty bad acting.

Gas is at a premium, not so much because it's in short supply (it is) but the pumps to get it out of te storage tanks to te pups are electric and there ain't none of that.

Thursday AM, we woke up and all was back to normal, thank God. Literally millions are still witout power.

My BIL, who was in central jersey and ad no power, called and was trying to reach us since Tuesday but we had no phones. He had cell service but we were deaf. He wanted to come up with his three kids, grand baby,and a sister in law to get warm and take showers. What normally is a 45 minute drive took in six hours, most of that was waiting for gas. Lines for that everywhere. We now have a full house,.

Thanks for asking.

[edit] as of 3:30 Friday afternoon, Novemner 2, 1.4 million are still without power. They've been working on this for two days so far.

[ForeverAutumn]

Mark, we may have our differences, but I would never wish this on anyone. I hope that you and your family continue to do well and that life returns to some sort of normalcy soon.

[RGA]

I am not sure I understand the issue here

"Upon arriving at a staging area in Virginia, crews were held in place pending clarification of documents received from IBEW that implied a requirement of our employees to agree to union affiliation while working in the New York and New Jersey areas. It was and remains our understanding that agreeing to those requirements was a condition of being allowed to work in those areas."

So why not sign the page and agree to the requirements?

But then it says that the Union would accept help from anyone whether union or not

"Decatur Utilities wrongly assumed they would have to agree to the union contract before traveling to New Jersey to help with recovery efforts. The IBEW said in times of crisis, help is welcomed from union and non-union utility workers."

So why is the union being blamed - it was this private company that got it mixed up and made a WRONG ASSUMPTION not the union?

And the Union leader said this

"IBEW local leaders in New Jersey have reiterated what has been the long standing record of our union – in times of crisis all help is welcome and we pull together with everyone to meet the needs of the public. We have communicated this to the office of New Jersey Governor Christie as well."

Seems that "Other utility crews from Alabama are still helping with storm cleanup. Huntsville Utilities said they were not turned away and are in Long Island, New York

So exactly how is the Union responsible for this? Seems like the private company needed an excuse not to go (probably hurts their bottom line to give away free service so now they can keep their profits and blame the union for a "mix-up."

[Feanor]

I am not sure I understand the issue here
....
"A man (markw) hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." ~ Paul Simon

[ForeverAutumn]

The article that is now posted, that RGA has quoted from, is not article that was originally posted. The article has been revised and now includes a lot more information.

Anyhow, RGA, the original article basically stated that a crew arrived to help and was told that if they don't join the union their help is not needed and they were sent home.

[markw]

The article that is now posted, that RGA has quoted from, is not article that was originally posted. The article has been revised and now includes a lot more information.

Anyhow, RGA, the original article basically stated that a crew arrived to help and was told that if they don't join the union their help is not needed and they were sent home.Your skills in translation are greatly appreciated.

Maybe now you can see where my attitude comes from. This place is like a nature show. Note how the alpha hyena jumps in and takes a bite, runs away, and then the lesser ones jump in to take a bite. What's really funny though is that bill obviously read the original article but just had to jump back in to interject a smarmy remark after his leader jumped into the fray.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Your skills in translation are greatly appreciated.

Maybe now you can see where my attitude comes from.

Actually no I can't. You attitude is based on incomplete and misinformation. This is why one should not shoot from the hip while half cocked...the bullet could hit your own foot.

[markw]

Actually no I can't. You attitude is based on incomplete and misinformation. This is why one should not shoot from the hip while half cocked...the bullet could hit your own foot.As if they drove all the way from Alabama just to decide to make up a story and go home without getting paid.

...and my attitude is based on experience. You ever worked in the Jacob Javitz center in NYC? You can't lay an extension cord. You have to call union electrician to plug it in. Yeah, labor unions suck.

[RGA]

The article that is now posted, that RGA has quoted from, is not article that was originally posted. The article has been revised and now includes a lot more information.

Anyhow, RGA, the original article basically stated that a crew arrived to help and was told that if they don't join the union their help is not needed and they were sent home.

Okay that is fair enough - I'd be pissed too but the media seems to suck. Putting out disinformation the first time then it's edited.

Now that it seems to be a private sector company that screwed up (maybe deliberately to save a buck and blame the unions - I I wonder if anyone will RANT that Private sector non union shops basically decided not to go into save some money!!

[Feanor]

The article that is now posted, that RGA has quoted from, is not article that was originally posted. The article has been revised and now includes a lot more information.

Anyhow, RGA, the original article basically stated that a crew arrived to help and was told that if they don't join the union their help is not needed and they were sent home.
Of all that can be said about the Hurricane Sandy situation, I wonder why Markw chose to comment on a (minor and ultimately incorrectly reported) union involvement aspect?

The truth of the matter is that many unionized workers have gone out of their way and even put themselves in danger to help victims.

[ForeverAutumn]

OMG! I really don't believe this. Millions of people are still without power, several states are in shambles, thousands are homeless and have lost everything, and here you all are nitpicking over what a news article may or may not have said.

First of all, you are all smart enough to know not to believe everything you read. Second of all, why does it matter whose fault it is? Help arrives, confusion followed, Help went home. Let's not lay blame, let's get Help the hell back to do what they offered to do in the first place...HELP.


Of all that can be said about the Hurricane Sandy situation, I wonder why Markw chose to comment on a (minor and ultimately incorrectly reported) union involvement aspect?

Seriously Feanor? If London were devastated by a tornado and you read the original article about a crew being sent home by the local union, you wouldn't have been outraged? I sure would have been. And how was Mark to know that the article wasn't telling the full story?

How about a little empathy for our AR brother who has just been through a friggin' hurricane! Try putting yourself in his shoes.

[dean_martin]

Lost in translation. Jersey folks and Bama folks don't speak the same language, literally. Mark, I revisited some of the tunes I was listening to during our hurricane nightmare. The aforementioned "Sin City" and Uncle Tupelo's "No Depression" - I think you'll "get'em".

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

As if they drove all the way from Alabama just to decide to make up a story and go home without getting paid.

Who said that? I didn't. I am just facing reality as you should.


...and my attitude is based on experience. You ever worked in the Jacob Javitz center in NYC? You can't lay an extension cord. You have to call union electrician to plug it in. Yeah, labor unions suck.

It is based on your experience, in your city, and in your state. A pretty small fish view in a rather large pool. I am looking at both sides of the fence - from a union(I was part of the electrical and post production union in Hollywood) and now as a hybrid union and management perspective. The union has work standards, and non union folks don't.. There are working conditions and safety rules for union folks, and there are basically no rules for non-union workers. I would rather(from experience) work in a union shop than work with a non-union shop where anything goes. You know what you are getting into in terms of cost, and quality of work with unions, but you don't have that luxury with non-union worker(in my industry)

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Seriously Feanor? If London were devastated by a tornado and you read the original article about a crew being sent home by the local union, you wouldn't have been outraged? I sure would have been. And how was Mark to know that the article wasn't telling the full story?

How about a little empathy for our AR brother who has just been through a friggin' hurricane! Try putting yourself in his shoes.

FA, having been through hurricans, Nor-easters, and earthquakes, the answer is no. Developing news is just a snapshot of current events, and cannot compare with a broad comprehensive view of news after it happens. I never base my opinion on developing news because it is developing, and just a snapshot of what is happening right now. I base my opinion on news accumulated over time, and that is when my emotions kick in, not while the event is happening. You cannot get a broad based perspective on developing news, it is just temporary in the moment reporting.

[Feanor]

...
Seriously Feanor? If London were devastated by a tornado and you read the original article about a crew being sent home by the local union, you wouldn't have been outraged? I sure would have been. And how was Mark to know that the article wasn't telling the full story?

How about a little empathy for our AR brother {sic} who has just been through a friggin' hurricane! Try putting yourself in his shoes.
I'm cynical about Markw's agenda. I suspect his main agenda is to damn unions rather than to comment on the Sandy situation.

Why should I not be cynical given Markw's record? He's a rank conservative who never has a good thing to say about government, unions, public education, or anything that shows the least shred of concern for the community. So it's different how that he and his homies are threatened.

So I'm biased -- oh but I suppose I shouldn't be just be cause he's mocked me for being old with health problems, atheist, Canadian, and any other thing that's popped into his head. He hasn't exactly acted brotherly to me.

[ForeverAutumn]

I don't think it's different. He still has nothing good to say about unions. :) On this, he and I agree. I don't like 'em either.

If you want to be cynical, that's your right. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and given what I've seen in the news I believe that Mark was sincerely angry about that news story. I would have been in his situation also. Perhaps he's done nothing to earn your sympathy and that's up to you. I can't tell you how to feel. I feel bad for everyone hit by Sandy...Mark included.

There was a guy on another music site that I frequent who was giving regular updates on Monday. The last update was around 9:00pm on Monday night. Nobody on the site has heard from him since. Another friend is on his 6th day without electricity. It's scary out there.

As for trying to keep the peace around here, I give up. If you want be cynical, I can't say that Mark hasn't earned that cynicism. And if Mark wants to respond to your cynicism it's his choice. You're grown men.

On that note, I'm now staying out of this.

[markw]

I don't think it's different. He still has nothing good to say about unions. :) On this, he and I agree. I don't like 'em either.

If you want to be cynical, that's your right. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and given what I've seen in the news I believe that Mark was sincerely angry about that news story. I would have been in his situation also. Perhaps he's done nothing to earn your sympathy and that's up to you. I can't tell you how to feel. I feel bad for everyone hit by Sandy...Mark included.

There was a guy on another music site that I frequent who was giving regular updates on Monday. The last update was around 9:00pm on Monday night. Nobody on the site has heard from him since. Another friend is on his 6th day without electricity. It's scary out there.

As for trying to keep the peace around here, I give up. If you want be cynical, I can't say that Mark hasn't earned that cynicism. And if Mark wants to respond to your cynicism it's his choice. You're grown men.

On that note, I'm now staying out of this.You're a credit to all Canadians and pretty much ameliorate the damage that two others here have done to tarnish their reputation.

Yes, I was incensed at the thought of anyone hindering repair operations for those out of power which, BTW, is still over one million in Jersey alone. I'd be that way if it were Canadians under the gun, too.

It's funny that bill says I have an "agenda" against unons as if it's a bad thing. From his first post here, it's plainly obvious that he's simply the pot calling the kettle black. Oddly enough, I honestly don't think he can see that. ...and yet, he comes back for another bite of the apple from te other side once richard weighed in!!! Yeah, he's a crotchety old man reliving past glory bordering on senility. I'm not too sure on which side of that border, though.

As for Terry, well, all I have is my experience in my state. To assert tat only unuion members are capable of doing excellent work is pure hubris and simply takes te union excuse. I know many.many people who do excellent work and are not in unions. Heck, I did soud reinforcement work for several curches around er efor years before I retired and,from what I was told, the results were excellent.

I take his rantings it from the source: A proud one percenter who is anal about that alphabet soup under is avatar who has no qualms about people being without power as long as the unions needs are satiated. Keep in mind that his main goal in life is to assure that Lindsay Brittney, Pixar animations, and the Kardasians sound good. It's not like he's doing medical research to save lives, feeding the hungry, working towards world peace, or heck, even reconnecting power lines to restore electricity to those without.

[Hyfi]

As for Terry, well, all I have is my experience in my state. To assert tat only unuion members are capable of doing excellent work is pure hubris and simply takes te union excuse. I know many.many people who do excellent work and are not in unions. Heck, I did soud reinforcement work for several curches around er efor years before I retired and,from what I was told, the results were excellent.



US made cars cost 2x what they should so we can pay the union employees. I have only worked in a union shop once and as stated earlier, I walked out because the boss wanted me to do less than quality work.

Another instance to prove a point was when I had just finished my apprenticeship and was making a whopping $12 per hour building stamping dies for the Auto industry. These dies would then be shipped to Detroit where they were clamped into a press and hooked up to an auto feeding coiler for everything to run automatically by itself. Now the Union employee that got to sit there just watching the press run, and occasionally replace the coil, was getting paid about $25 per hour with triple the benefits and vacation as the Toolmaker who made the die, and he went on strike because it was not enough.

I now work in an industry where luckily there is no union. I do high quality work for Global customers and I get paid a fare wage and have decent vacation and bennies.

Unions are not needed if the owners and employers stop being so greedy. But that is the downside to Capitalism.

Americans as a whole, cannot afford to buy American Union Made products and that is why Wal Mart flourishes with a booming business. Unions have turned this country into a Consumer rather than a Producer because they made it so the owners go elsewhere to avoid all their demands for more more more all the time.

[ForeverAutumn]

We do a lot of printing in my job. Letterhead, invoices, newsletters, annual reports, etc. This year we starting to price around to ensure that our printer and mailing house were charging us competitive prices. What we found was that because we were using a union shop for our printing our costs were 1/3 higher than a comparable non-union shop. We changed our printer to a smaller non-union shop and could not be happier with the results. The service we are receiving is outstanding and we will save over $100,000 this year using a more expensive paper (paper from sustainable resources).

[Hyfi]

We do a lot of printing in my job. Letterhead, invoices, newsletters, annual reports, etc. This year we starting to price around to ensure that our printer and mailing house were charging us competitive prices. What we found was that because we were using a union shop for our printing our costs were 1/3 higher than a comparable non-union shop. We changed our printer to a smaller non-union shop and could not be happier with the results. The service we are receiving is outstanding and we will save over $100,000 this year using a more expensive paper (paper from sustainable resources).

My points exactly. Funny how the only real defenders of Unions here are Union employees.

[ForeverAutumn]

I'm not saying that Unions haven't had their place in history. I just think that current labour laws have lessened the need for them in both the US and Canada.

[Hyfi]

I'm not saying that Unions haven't had their place in history. I just think that current labour laws have lessened the need for them in both the US and Canada.

That is true, and I said that in my first response, but that was 100 years ago when we needed to protect children and others from dangerous work places.

Today we need to protect people from Capitalists.

[RGA]

I'm not saying that Unions haven't had their place in history. I just think that current labour laws have lessened the need for them in both the US and Canada.

Unions were the people who lobbied to get those labour laws you like so much in place. And without them those laws can be eroded by business owners.

As for costs - I never quite understand why middle class anti-union workers never seem to want more money but rather want their boss to get rich on their backs blaming the economy or unions for their ills.

The sad fact is - companies don't HAVE TO ACCEPT unions. McDonalds doesn't.

In many parts of the U.S. it is "At Will" employment. Your boss can make you pee in a cup every Monday - if you smoke on your personal time - you're fired, if you have a BMI too high, you're fired - no recourse no labour law protection and that is intrusion on your personal life - something Unions would try to stop dead in a heartbeat.

Yes I know the stories of the lazy butt union worker who does as little as possible because they have a "protected" job - that certainly has to change but I've lived around the world and seen businesses and entire cities without unions. Go live in Wenzhou for 1 month and see what corporations REALLY want and what they REALLY think about YOU the worker.

Do you really need a list of corporations that do wrong to their employees and the buying public to see that they only care about profit.

Anecdotal one off stories don't impress me much. Some people work for great companies with no unions - I did ESCO Limited in Port Coquitlam - non union - wonderful foundry. I worked for terrible union outfits - BC Housing also in British Columbia. Working as a teacher in BC the Union is a big old gutless useless pile of cowards that charge me a lot in Union dues and I get nothing useful out of them. My personal experiences heavily favors non union working situations. But you have to look beyond personal experience and see big picture roles.

Throwing unions under the bus is like throwing Veterans under the bus. They fought to give you what you enjoy and didn't lift one finger to get but we'll spit on them for fighting.

What Have American Unions Ever Done For Us? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iObqguaNDdA&feature=player_embedded)


"Working people should thank the labor unions for many things we take for granted today: the 40-hour work week, overtime pay, vacation pay, sick days, workers compensation and a living wage. Remember that union workers fought and died for these basic rights back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Read your history."

The fact is that ever since Ronald Reagan began his war on the middle class, union representation has greatly diminished, and along with it the average wages of most Americans. And to answer the inevitable charge that union wages have driven jobs overseas, keep in mind that Germany, only recently displaced as the number one exporting country by China (with its 1.3 billion population and sweatshop labor), has high-paying unionized jobs with benefits that make those of our unions look stingy by comparison. It used to be that decent health care, vacation time and retirement benefits were considered a basic right of working Americans; they still are in the other industrialized democracies (which also have universal healthcare and less concentration of wealth). It is very strange that, instead of recognizing that the benefits of state workers should be considered our standard, people consider these benefits "entitlements."


My major gripe with unions has always been protecting bad workers - that should not happen - it's almost impossible to fire a teacher unless they do something illegal. And this is true in many union shops - I am all for "union reform" on this because it doesn't serve the public or the business (which in turn affects the entire workforce). Dead weight needs to be chopped - union or not.

[RGA]

Yeah those evil unions -

[markw]

Here's another report of a "misunderstanding, but with a bit more detail of my first, original article.

Go to the hyperlink and select the article named Shame: Union Turf War (http://www.myfoxny.com/category/233240/shame-shame-shame). At the time of posting, it was on the top left.

This video is fairly clear on what actually transpired.

This, too, is attempting to be be foisted off an a "misunderstanding" as well. It seems that it's only a "misunderstanding" when one gets caught publicly with one's hand in the cookie jar. Up to then, it's just an attempt at union thuggery and intimidation.

It really makes me wonder exactly what the "misunderstanding" was in my original post.

...dunno how much I like this new format.

[Worf101]

My EXPERIENCE in this matter is thus:

In my 30 plus years working in utility regulation numerous storms and natural disasters have interrupted electric and gas service across wide swaths of New York State.

In EVERY disaster of a certain magnitude, outside utility crews have come from all over the country and Canada (thanks folks) to aid in utility restoration.

Not every offer of help is a valid offer. After every disaster "Gypsies" as we call em in the trade show up offering to play for pay. In that they're not affiliated with any known utility and may or may not be bonded or qualified to do utility work they are often sent packing by authorities. In our case this is NOT a UNION Vs. Right to Work thing but qualified and verified vs. god knows who these yahoo's are thing.

As I said from the start

We have recipricated as well sending crews any where that can be driven or flown to.

Fact: The Electric and Gas infrastructure in the Northeast is older, trickier and far more diverse than in other parts of the country. NY/NJ is where electricity was first applied on a large scale. Anyone who's seen a cross-section of a city street should know that not just anybody can walk in off the street and do that kind of work.

Fact: In that we're dealing with SEAWATER and not fresh water restoration times are going to be far more lengthy. If you do inadequate cleaning and drying before reengaging circuits you're just going to kill yourself or burn down the house.

Fact: Whatever you THINK you know about what I'm talking about you probably DON'T know. No insults intended, just telling truths.

Worf

[markw]

Worf,

As always, your input is valued and appreciated and I have no reason to question anything you said.

I do, however, want to point out the one pararaph which seems out of place considering my previous post. Please keep in mind that my beef is not with the "feet on the ground" but the union itself.


Not every offer of help is a valid offer. After every disaster "Gypsies" as we call em in the trade show up offering to play for pay. In that they're not affiliated with any known utility and may or may not be bonded or qualified to do utility work they are often sent packing by authorities. In our case this is NOT a UNION Vs. Right to Work thing but qualified and verified vs. god knows who these yahoo's are thing.Now, assuming you've seen the video, you've seen thatthe unions had no problems with the visitors qualifications. Nobody even seems to have been questioned the visitors about their qualificationa. Apparantly that was worked out between the Florida company and LIPA before the union got involved.

All the unions seemed to care about was getting money from whoever they could. And, please note that they didn't back down.

Whe the Florida company called their bluff and said "OK, you win. We'll send the non-union guys to Pennsylvania and just send the union members to LI" and sent only 35 union workers to LI.

Since they only sent IBEW membses to LI, the union couldn't say anyting. The complaints stopped and I strongly doubt that any additional monies were paid to the union for them.

It's only when Arnold Diaz and Fox News got involved that the union rep finally came clean and actually said that signing the forms was not mandatory for them to work here. So, what gives?

If that's not a perfect example of intimidation I don't know what is.

So, the people of Long Island had to do without about 100 additional electricians that could have gotten them back on line quicker. ...for what?

But, it was good to see so many companies from all over coming in to help get us up and running. Mrs. W and I drove back from Ohio the Sunday before the storm and must have passed at least eight convoys of cherry-pickers from various electrical and tree maintenance companies heading east on 70/76/78, all the way to NJ/NY. We knew it was really gonna be a biggie then. Believe me, their help was appreciated.

[RGA]

If true it's a sucky sucky union but that doesn't mean all unions are bad because of one.

Second - whenever you or anyone posts something with the "Fox "News" reports" you need to provide corroborating evidence from what is referred to as a NEWS organization. Fox News isn't a news organization.

[markw]

RGA, in spite of your own self-delusions of grandeur, you aren't a news critic. You are, at best, a shill for certain manufacturers in the hi fi industry.

Since you imply the article is false, feel free to offer some evidence to te contrary. If you can't, or won't, then man up and admit you have no basis for your baseless statement here.

[E-Stat]

Buh-bye Hostess. Unions successfully struck themselves out of jobs.

Hostess closing permanently (http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-closing/)

[ForeverAutumn]

Buh-bye Hostess. Unions successfully struck themselves out of jobs.

Hostess closing permanently (http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-closing/)

So 5,000 people go on strike and 18,500 people lose their jobs. Nice. That number probably doesn't include outside suppliers and distributors. I'm sure that a lot of ancillary businesses will be affected. The final toll could be much higher.

[Hyfi]

Buh-bye Hostess. Unions successfully struck themselves out of jobs.

Hostess closing permanently (http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/16/news/companies/hostess-closing/)

One of the large plants is not far from me. Used to be Tastycake, then Kraft, then Hostess. Always smelled so good driving by.
They were asked to take an 8% pay cut but they smartly chose to be unemployed. What a smart decision in today's economy.

[markw]

They were asked to take an 8% pay cut but they smartly chose to be unemployed. What a smart decision in today's economy.That 8% pay cut was to be paid back with 3% increases over the next three years and a 1% increase in the fourth.

So,that's 3 +3 +3 +1, or a 10% bump in four years.

So, while they would take a hit now to save their jobs, within four years they would be actually be 2% above where they were before the pay cut. ...and, tbey would most likely still have had jobs.

[E-Stat]

So 5,000 people go on strike and 18,500 people lose their jobs.

That was enough to render the company insolvent. You may be aware that the company had two divisions: sweets (Hostess cakes) and bakery (Wonder Bread). For years, the Union dictated that there must be separate deliveries by separate trucks to the same destination. You know, that "I can only tighten nuts that go clockwise. Someone else must handle the other direction" thing.

Sad. Reminds me of the joke as to why there are no Arabs on Star Trek.

[RGA]

Hostess could have refused to allow a Union. They're not forced to have one.

Unions (employees) accept the reality that this could happen. And there is a reason they accept that reality. There is always another low paying crappy job around the corner - even in a recession. Not in your town then move. People are such babies. I left my country to get work - surely a person can leave their city.

And Hostess is a cancer selling obesity people killing company so good riddance.

[E-Stat]

Hostess could have refused to allow a Union. They're not forced to have one.
Actually, in non right-to-work states, such is not true.


And Hostess is a cancer selling obesity people killing company so good riddance.
I didn't realize you thought that about Wonder Bread.

[markw]

Well, it's obvious who here has no family to concern themselves with and can just pack up and run away from life at whim.

[ForeverAutumn]

And Hostess is a cancer selling obesity people killing company so good riddance.


Well, just like Hostess isn't forced to have a union (I don't know if that's true and, frankly, I don't care) neither is anyone forced to eat Hostess products. It's all about choices. The point isn't whether Hostess products are good for you, the point is that union greed has forced the closure of a company and the loss of 18,500 jobs...of which less than 1/3 were strikers.

[RGA]

Ahh so you admit that people are free to make choices. What is a Union? A union is a bunch of people who are employed for a company that treats them like CRAP. that is WHY they formed a union. No one says I love my boss and my job and my pay and my working environment - I know let's be *******s and form a union so we can all lose our jobs.

The reason for unions is 100% because the staff is treated like dog poo. And if entire states have enacted mandatory unions it's the same reason - the voters who are employees decided all companies were treating people like crap so they unionize the whole state.

The employees get to make the choice. Does anyone here not understand the notion of intimidation and threats. "If you go on strike then we'll shut down and you'll have no job" - that is pretty much what EVERY single company with a union shop says - every single time, all the time to get employees to cave. Most of the time it's BS because the owner is just greedy. Some companies have the money to pay employees a liveable wage and close down just to spite them (as McDonald's has done and to avoid precedence of allowing unions or to create precedence "We'll close down if you form a union).

But again it's about choice - you can choose to go on strike and you can choose to gamble that the owner is bluffing. The employees were angry enough over their job situation that they clearly were willing to lose their job over it.

So what's the problem? Some other health hazard company (Wonder Bread is unhealthy BTW) like Nestle will come in open shop and hire a bunch of the people back and probably more. Maybe Nestle is smart enough to keep payroll promises.

And PS - why doesn't anyone bother to get actual CORRECT facts.

"in order to “save” the firm, the operators of the company turned to the unions, which had already surrendered huge concessions just a few years back to turn the company around, and demanded an across the board slash, an additional 31%, along with eliminating the retirement and benefits entirely. It was a bridge too far. The union went on strike, and now the company has declared it will be liquidated."

Of course the right-wing media is quick to blame the unions, but in the end the union members would have lost more if they had capitulated to the vulture capitalists demands. By this move, they can hope to salvage the retirement plan, while if they’d given in they would have lost it all. $2 billion is a lot of money to just “give away” in negotiations. Of course the unions were expected to surrender despite the fact that the management company was asking the bankruptcy court to give their outgoing CEO up to $5.5 million. All of this was in addition to the 80% raises the executives were being treated to.

SOOOOOOO Let me understand you FA and Mark.

You are 64 years old and going to retire next year and the company who is venture capitized to the hilt comes to you and says - "we want you to give back ALL the money you have put into your retirement fund for the last 30 years you have worked here to save the company. You are saying both telling me right here on this forum that "YES YOU WOULD DO THAT".

Anyone who would do this is fill in the expletive of your choice. And THAT is what this company demanded. And not from just you but EVERYONE on staff and they also wanted to dump ALL benefits of any kind for everyone. Plus the wage cuts! Meanwhile giving themselves 80% pay increases and their CEO $5.5 million

But no FA and Mark blame the union for being greedy - WTF? - no WTF? it needs to be said twice.

It's embarrassing that you both have a view that in tough times the ONLY people who should ever give anything is the employee - I have never read once on these boards that you believe someone in management should give one penny to help the economy or even pay the SAME tax. The BC Teacher unions hopes to get a 5% raise while the right wing government gives themselves a 50% PAY INCREASE but did FA even once say that was "wrong" - nope guess that's perfectly fine. Manager drives a Bentley but the employee should take pay cuts for 30 straight years because there's a "recession" - yeah there's always a recession when some greedy pig has to open his wallet.

The Hostess promise - we'll put it back later. Really you're going to gamble your life saving that the venture capitalists are going to honor their word. WTF?

Hostess history.

How Hostess Failed: Hedge Funds vs. Unions - US Business News - CNBC (http://www.cnbc.com/id/49853653)

Vulture Capitalists put this company under - your buddy Mitt Romney and his ilk are the reason 18,000 are out of work and their suppliers. 100% fact and 100% on the owners and investors who walk away with millions and why these employees are out of work.

Hostess Bankrupt – Vulture Capitalists Picked Corpse Clean (VIDEO) | Addicting Info (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/11/16/hostess-bankrupt-vulture-capitalists-picked-corpse-clean-video/)

Here is a simple youtube to understand what happened to Hostess and what Mitt Romney business people are about. And it will continue to happen.

How Did Mitt Romney Get So Obscenely Rich? Robert Reich Explains - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rodifJlis2c&feature=player_embedded)

Blaming the union? Exactly what greedy thugs want you to do - blame your fellow workers. You're being conned.

9008

[RGA]

The sleaze ball running Papa John's Pizza is the prime example of corporate greed. But yes FA and Mark and ESTAT are of course on his side - gotta step on the throats of the minimum wage single moms - why - cause how can he suffer the indignity of living on $52million in sales versus $55 billion. Oh the humanity of not being able to buy that whatever it is you can buy for $55 million that you can't buy for $52 million

9010


It's a fundamental issue of greed - this is WHY the entire fast food industry needs a big ass all encompassing union today! It allows people to actually live properly and not rely on government food stamps which taxes need to cover. If the THICK dim wit right wing voters had two IQ points to rub together to formulate a single intelligent thought the would not be subsidizing corporations and the sociopaths running them. When you force people to live in poverty without health care they become a huge drain on government resources. You could side step that by forcing business owners to do the right thing. And since government is bought and paid for by corporations that leaves the people to do it on their own - the people form unions to generate strength in numbers.

9011

[markw]

It boils down the this: 5,000 people in a union struck now they, and 8,500 other people who voted to take a pay cut in order ko keep a struggling company afloat so they could keep their jobs are out on the street.

I guess the 5,000 think no job is better than one at less pay. It's too bad they forced that decision on 8,500 others

[ForeverAutumn]

RGA, I don't have the time nor do I care to read your long rambling posts. You are very selective in what you choose to read into my posts and I'm tired of you putting words into my mouth. We will never agree on this and I have better things to do with my time than defend your fictional accounts of what I say. Cheers!

[ForeverAutumn]

It boils down the this: 5,000 people in a union struck now they, and 8,500 other people who voted to take a pay cut in order ko keep a struggling company afloat so they could keep their jobs are out on the street.

I guess the 5,000 think no job is better than one at less pay. It's too bad they forced that decision on 8,500 others


It's worse than that. The 8,500 is actually 13,500.

[E-Stat]

Ahh so you admit that people are free to make choices.
Only in right-to-work states. Which is not the case here. The strike affected plants in Seattle, St. Louis and Cincinnati - all located in non right to work states. Slightly fewer than half the states allow such shenanigans like choice. If you worked at one of those plants, you had NO choice but to pay the Union. Try working at a GM plant and say, "Hey, I have a choice and don't want to pay the union". LOL!


A union is a bunch of people who are employed for a company that treats them like CRAP. that is WHY they formed a union.
I guess that explains why more unionized folks work for the Government, not the private sector (7.6 million vs 7.2) and have far greater percentage of participation in unions (37% vs 6.9%). Apparently, its Big Bad Gubment who is Snidely Whiplash here.

Unions in America (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm)

[Feanor]

Broadly speaking, the implicit North American socio-economic bargain the existed in the '50s thru mid-70s. It had been the case that manufacturing workers were unionized and could bargain for a greater share of corporate profits. Non-unionized workers indirectly benefited since their employers had to compete for workers with the unionized manufacturing sector. Through the mid-70s productivity gains were matched by increases in median incomes.

But automation and foreign competition -- the actuality or just the threat -- greatly weaken the unions' bargaining position. Employers have enthusiastically used this leverage to reduce unionized and non-unionized workers' wages. The Hostess situation is merely one, minor illustration of this process.

We need to add that this breakdown was severely abetted by the "Supply Side", "Trickle Down", "Reaganomic", or as I call it, Bribe the Rich, economic strategy of Republicans. With extra money in their hands the rich were supposed to invest and create jobs but it has never quite worked out that way. Rather, the rich either (1) put their cash into negative-sum speculation games, or (2) they invested in automation which reduced jobs, or (3) they invested off-shore which also reduced jobs.

The result of these changes has been that productivity gains have continued to climb while median incomes stagnated and more recently have declined. Check this out (source item HERE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States)) ...

9024

It's essential to understand that we are still in the era of Trickle Down. The Bill Clinton only ever slightly mitigated this trend, and it was taken up and redoubled by the George W. administration. Thwarted by a Republican Congress, Obama has been virtually powerless. The consequence has been the stagnation, and more recently actual decline in median incomes in the USA.

The implicit Right-wing solution to the NA malaise is the "Race to the Bottom" whereby NA unemployment is solved by reducing workers wages, benefits, and protections to global levels thereby making them more competitive. It is tribute to the gullibility of voters that 48% of Americans voted for a Republican president.

[markw]

It's worse than that. The 8,500 is actually 13,500.

True. I used that 8,500 number to reflect those innocents that were affected by decisions made by the other 5,000. They had no choice here: The results of the decision of the 5,000 was forced upon them.

Actually, when you consider the number of the family members of that 13,500, that number goes up substantially.

[E-Stat]

But automation and foreign competition -- the actuality or just the threat -- greatly weaken the unions' bargaining position.
Ya think? Yeah, the day of paying higher than industry standards for unskilled labor is largely over.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics... (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/13669-no-more-twinkies-unions-and-the-death-of-hostess)

"the mean hourly wage for the designation of “bakeries and tortilla manufacturers” was $12.57 in 2011. Supposing that Hostess’ median wage was $17 {it was between $16 and $18}, they were paying 35 percent more than the national average. "

[Feanor]

Ya think? Yeah, the day of paying higher than industry standards for unskilled labor is largely over.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics... (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/13669-no-more-twinkies-unions-and-the-death-of-hostess)

"the mean hourly wage for the designation of “bakeries and tortilla manufacturers” was $12.57 in 2011. Supposing that Hostess’ median wage was $17 {it was between $16 and $18}, they were paying 35 percent more than the national average. "
Yep, all true. And personally I was never been happy about unionized workers earning more and getting better benefits that ME, a non-unionized employee. However my point above is that, along with the demise of union power, employees share of the nations wealth had greatly declined to the detriment of the USA social-economic system. I can put petty selfishness aside to perceive this phenomenon.

[E-Stat]

However my point above is that, along with the demise of union power, employees share of the nations wealth had greatly declined...
Sorry, but in the modern world you have to do more than just show up, pay union dues and raise your hand in order to share in "the nations wealth".

For better or for worse, it requires education and motivation. And choosing a career path where you provide value beyond the abilities of a high school drop out.

When I need miscellaneous lawn work done, I know that costs me about $13 / hr. for someone to clean out beds, cut and stack wood or spread mulch. There's a guy doing exactly that in my back yard as we speak. On the other hand, I pay the Sprinkler guy more because his level of expertise is higher and provides a service that the lawn guy is incapable of doing.

[Feanor]

Sorry, but in the modern world you have to do more than just show up, pay union dues and raise your hand in order to share in "the nations wealth".

For better or for worse, it requires education and motivation. And choosing a career path where you provide value beyond the abilities of a high school drop out.

When I need miscellaneous lawn work done, I know that costs me about $13 / hr. for someone to clean out beds, cut and stack wood or spread mulch. There's a guy doing exactly that in my back yard as we speak. On the other hand, I pay the Sprinkler guy more because his level of expertise is higher and provides a service that the lawn guy is incapable of doing.
As I've said on several previous occasions, I have mixed feelings about unions. They are monopolies and feel free to abuse their monopoly power vis-à-vis their employers, whether public or private sector. (Business monopolies and near-monopolies do the same, of course -- we have only to look at the scandalous rip-off that 'phone, internet, and cable/satellite services are in Canada, and the USA too if I got that right.)

As I've noted also previously, sadly in a way the public sector is one of the last haven for unions. Thus it's too, too easy for Right-wingers and other union haters to bash unions on the basis that it costs those semi-divine entities, the tax payers, too much money. What can I say? Yes, it does. Furthermore it undermines the both the actual benefit of government services and the credibility of those who advocate for them. The union issue has become a "wedge issue" that the Right-wing uses to divide middle class Americans and Canadians against each other.

[E-Stat]

As I've noted also previously, sadly in a way the public sector is one of the last haven for unions.
Havens? Didn't you read Rich's explanation of why unions exist?

"A union is a bunch of people who are employed for a company that treats them like CRAP. that is WHY they formed a union."

According to him, it is the Gubment that is eeveeel.


Thus it's too, too easy for Right-wingers and other union haters to bash unions on the basis that it costs those semi-divine entities, the tax payers, too much money.
Why should anyone's *brotherhood* cost me anything? Conversely, why should my job have a cost to anyone other than the customers to which I bring value with my services?

Union haters? I've never been in a position where I've been forced to do anything by a union. What I do is observe the policies and lack of awareness that is causing them to self-destruct and shake my head in disbelief.

What's truly needed is more incentive for folks to get educated and rise above the minimum wage "someone's got to provide me a job" mentality. The debacle in Wisconsin was a great case of the Teacher's Union (not the teachers themselves) making millions at the expense of increasing class sizes. Fortunately, for the citizens of the State, that is now over.

[Feanor]

Havens? Didn't you read Rich's explanation of why unions exist?

"A union is a bunch of people who are employed for a company that treats them like CRAP. that is WHY they formed a union."
That was very often the case to be sure.


..
According to him, it is the Gubment that is eeveeel. ...

Why should anyone's *brotherhood* cost me anything? Conversely, why should my job have a cost to anyone other than the customers to which I bring value with my services? ...

I sometimes feel that RGA is making a "special plea" in case of teachers' unions. Then again it's easy to argue that governments dominated by Right-wingers, or politicians of whatever ilk bought off by big money, are evil -- certainly the case here in Canada for instance.


...
Union haters? I've never been in a position where I've been forced to do anything by a union. What I do is observe the policies and lack of awareness that is causing them to self-destruct and shake my head in disbelief.

What's truly needed is more incentive for folks to get educated and rise above the minimum wage "someone's got to provide me a job" mentality. The debacle in Wisconsin was a great case of the Teacher's Union (not the teachers themselves) making millions at the expense of increasing class sizes. Fortunately, for the citizens of the State, that is now over.
Well I didn't specify that you in particular were a union hater. (Is it a sense of guilt speaking?)

I couldn't agree more that education is key to success and upward mobility. Stumbling public education is one of the main reasons that the USA has lower intergenerational upward mobility than many advanced countries. I've already agreed that public sector unions usually drive up the cost of public sector employment relative to private sector; (whether this is true for teachers in particular I'll leave to RGA to argue).

What is completely invalid, however, is to imply that the principal problem with public education in the USA today are teachers' union-imposed costs or impediments. This just isn't true: underfunding of public education at all levels is a big problem in the USA (and Canada in some degree), with or without regard to teachers' compensation levels.

9025
... source HERE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upward_mobility#Upward_and_downward_mobility)

American, the land of golden opportunity where anyone can make it? Not especially.

[RGA]

Read something other than garbage right wing material that leaves out the actual facts.

IT WAS NOT ABOUT A PAY CUT.

It was about taking away their $2billion in retirement. DO YOU understand this - how much needs to be spoon fed. If the Union did not strike this is what would happen.

They would have given the company their entire retirement life savings - $2 billion dollars. Then in a year the company would come back (after giving their managers millions and millions in raises) and ask for another 10% pay cut or would simply close down anyway.

Now the employees lost their job and ALL of their retirement life savings.

Right wingers are simply retarded if they can't understand the following choice:

1) Lose your job now but keep your retirement life savings

2) Lose your job in a year and lose your retirement life savings.

Both options SUCK but one option is a lot lot better than the other.

[RGA]

The problem is that people keep saying one group of 5000 people in one state affect the jobs of "non union workers?" in another state. Hostess could have shut one plant down in one state (the striking state) and not the entire company. They made that choice because it was about maximizing profit.

And again 5000 workers asked to lose their pension. Are you all really saying that you EXPECT employees to give up their life savings in pensions to a debt riddled money losing company that is under a vulture capitalist?

Forget the union for a moment and just answer the fraking question on THIS issue alone - not unions at large. A company who has been freefalling for a DECADE and is going to go bankrupt ANYWAY asks you for ALL of your retirement, all of your medical benefits, and an 8% pay cut (actually 31% pay cut as it turns out). And they'll pocket your money and in a year or two at most - they'll lay you off ANYWAY.

The answer is

Yes I would give my retirement life savings to the company and TRUST that the company (on it's 6th multi-millionaire CEO in 10 years)will right the ship and give me money back(but no more).

Or No - I'm not a moron. I don't hand over my entire life savings to a company in free fall who dishes out millions to incompetent CEOs and who give their managers 80% wage hikes when I have to live on food stamps.

Sorry but I don't expect the 5000 workers of one plant in another state to hand over their life savings to save my Job in Seattle. That is an unreasonable expectation.

Any half wit who works at a company in dire financial trouble (and Hostess has been in dire financial trouble since 2003) and never once in 11 years bothered to look for work someplace else is a tool and gets what they deserve. Intelligent people look to work for STABLE companies who are not on the verge of going bankrupt. Whenever a company is in nickle and dime mode and have to make cuts or are in union battles (outside of government) then the writing is very likely on the wall and at some point you're probably going to lose your job. So a smart person says - "it's time to look for a job someplace else" In 11 years if you could not find something - you're a tool.

[markw]

There's a difference between pensions being underfunded and being "stolen" from the workers.

If you knew as much as the workings of our country as you pretend, you would have known that there are contingencty plans in effect to revent the latter.

If you're anywhere as near as smart as you think you are, or at least want us to think you are, you'll be able to ascertain the veracity of this statement in a matter of minutes. ..if you want to.

[RGA]

I hate unions by the way. I hate them for a whole host of reasons - but at the same time I hate vulture capitalists, corporations more. And I am NOT a fan of the BC Teacher's Union. For a start - you're forced to be in the union. I have problems with that - here in HK you can decide if you want to be in the union or not. Up to you. And since you can't strike anyway here then I think the choice should be the individuals.

Well you can't really strike in BC either so the choice should also be theirs to join.

As a teacher here in HK pointed out there is the government job and the private sector. Which path do you choose? The private sector here for the same job pays about 20-25% more money than the same job in public sector. But public sector offers a little more job security and less "stress" because private sector has more ups and downs financially which means wage cuts or layoffs.

I'm okay with this trade-off. The problem in the west is that government jobs (depending what they are) tend to pay higher than private sector AND also provide more job security and benefits. I would make $19 an hour in accounts payable for the BC government while in the public sector for the same job typically $11 - $16 an hour.

The government union also protect me. If 10 accounts payable workers are there and the government needs to lay off 3 they are FORCED to lay off the 3 with the least experience. So If I was there 5 years and a big lazy butt they would have to lay off the three people with less years in even if they work twice as hard. (I hate that about Unions)

The private sector can dump the lazy butt and keep the new workaholics.

The problem in current times (leaving off the reasons why unions initially formed) is how to we protect employees.

The labour relations board is good but generally cases are taken to them through a union shop representative. The idea is that the steward is supposed be the objective outsider to protect the employee (and thus all employees) from poor/illegal actions of a manager/boss/owner. They step in and have the legal E's to discuss the issue on behalf of the employee - in the hope that a dispute never goes to an expensive LRB hearing.

In the teaching union that's the same thing. The average worker/teacher is no a lawyer and teachers go to the steward(union rep) if they are confronted by issues they don;t know how to handle. Which happens a lot more than you would think. Not always bad things a principal does (very very rare) but things related student teacher boundaries, safety, extra-curricular etc. School and teachers get sued a lot and you want to be sure your ass is covered - the staff rep is the person who does that. This is where unions are good. Further, they step in whenever there is a major issues - student falsely accuses a teacher of something, management being a bully. Yes it ends up going to the LRB but the rep is there to do all the grunt work to build a case that people on their own may not know if they're getting screwed over.

The difficult aspect is also - "how do you ask for a raise" and who? Principals run the school but they don't give teachers money - they're not the boss in that sense. The salary is given out by some entity someplace.

In Private sector I go to my boss and we would discuss the past year and the market pay for the same kind of job, my job, and I get a raise. In theory - if you think you're the best worker at your shop and you know they gave the lazy butt a 4% pay increase and they offer that to you you can say "well Mr. or Mrs. Boss my productivity was 140% higher than the lazy butt so I think i should be given a 12% raise not 4 - you haggle and you take 9%. Or they're cheap jerks - you grudgingly take your 4% but the next day you're on the phone and mailing out resumes and contacting head-hunting firms to land you a better job. YOU HAVE OPTIONS.

Teachers can't do that. You start the job and there is a pay scale. Fine - each year your salary goes up say $40,000 to $42,000 and after 11 years in BC it is $78,000 ($84k with a Masters or PHD). Along the way the grid increases 2-3% (or zero percent as the case is now). The salary is 30% or more higher in Alberta and Ontario.

The union saves government a MASSIVE amount of money and time. Whaaat? You say. Well if there was no salary grid and job standards etc in place then each teacher would have to be going to some manager to discuss their job performance and each would have to get a different pay package. After all, if we want to run government and education like a business then that means you have to pay the good teachers more than the bad teachers. You also have to spend a lot of time evaluating who is a good teacher and who isn't. The logistics is nightmarish. So the Union does all of that in partnership with the teacher colleges and every University in Canada. They cull the herd at the university. In my education program we started with 68 students and by the end of the 51/2 year concurrent degrees B.Ed /B.A. program we were down to around 44. 24 people were axed or left because it wasn't for them. (Most were axed).

I digress, the problem is when you are in a union you're no longer an individual - you're a borg. A hive that has to ask for things as a hive. And not everyone wants to be in the hive. Up to 20% of teachers don't vote to strike or are even left wingers. They're staunch right wing Mormons or Christians. They don't want to be in the union yet they have to pay union dues (usually two) and they had to lose a day's pay when the teachers walked out.

I am not exactly sure what the solution is - but I know the solution is not to dump the union for "at will" government dictatorship.

Unions are bad - but the alternative is likely the greater of two evils. Not in every case but in many. There are high school classes in Detroit and in BC now with class sizes of 70 and 200 respectively (in one room that is meant to hold 35 - the 200 class is held in a gym but one teacher to 200 HS students is worrisome IMO).

I don't know what the answer is but class sizes of 70 is worse than 3rd wold conditions. My classes are mostly 18 students. And it's public school not private.

When public education is better in China than in America and Canada - to be blunt we should all be very embarrassed. And it's not the teachers or unions - cause the teachers are brought in from America/Canada/UK/Australia and South Africa. These better educated countries have adopted the "education system" and the teachers from the west. So whatever the problem is in Canada and the U.S. - it is not the actual education system curriculum or teachers that can be blamed. Money? More money might be the reason - they have better classroom facilities (every room has a front projector and the school has several shared smart boards). These so called poorer countries can pay teachers double or triple the top wages in the States or Canada. Funny they seem to have money to be able to do that. Granted they don't spend all their money and resources on building tanks, fighter planes, aircraft carriers but still.

[RGA]

They were asked to give back $2 billion dollars. There would be no protection. The company has no money they can't give it back. So even if there is a contingency where is it coming from bright boy? Oh yes I know - the government. Through taxes that no one wants to pay. So the employees are expected to bail out the company (socialism that you HATE), then the employees are all broke so the government has to bail out the employees (Socialism - that you HATE) and then when the government is broke they ask the rich people who just stole the 2 billion from their employees to pay 2% higher taxes (and these millionaire billionaires rant and rave that they're being forced to bail out the people they just screwed crying Socialism).

Post the link that PROVES all of these employees would not lose a penny of their retirement.

[markw]

I found it within two minutes. You should be able to as well, smart guy. And, like FA, don't try to put words in my mouth.

I'll tell you what, teacher: Find it and post it and I'll give you a passing grade.

Until then, you're just another bloviating crybaby who thinks he knows how to run the world.

When , in actuality, you spend your life alone, in a tiny room, half way across the world from his own kind, who tries to use the internet to prove to the world how smart (he thinks) he is. No wonder why, at age forty, you are alone and the internet is your only friend, and I don't think that's by your choice.

It's been said that there is no man so pitiful that they cannot find a soul-mate or a dog to share their life with. I guess you're the exception that proves the rule.

Oh, from the look of your profile picture on dagogo, I'd say you've forced more than a few twinkies into that corpulant face of yours. No wonder you took it so personally. Withdrawl?

[RGA]

I have not problem with FA, E-STAT or Mark if you say to me Unions should take a wage cut in a time of recession - or they should not get a cost of living increase (which is also a pay cut).

Fine - I am 100% with you on that. What I don;t quite understand is that all three of you gleefully want them to accept the cuts but all three of you are fine if the managers/CEO gets to take the employee money and give themselves a 50% to 80% pay increase. Liberal government did that to the teachers, Hostess did that to their employees.

If you say the company is suffering - we ALL need to make a sacrifice - I am fine with that. So are most unions. But I never quite understand the mentality that the people making the least have to do ALL of the sacrificing and the people who are the richest not only make NO SACRIFICE of ANY KIND and actually get MORE money. Frankly these kinds of people and their supporters deserve a bullet in their head and I hope they get it soon.



My husband has worked for WonderBread for 13 years. Explain to me how 4 mgrs for 5 employees makes sense? Tell me how the company goes into bankruptcy but can pay someone $1 million to "fix" the company. Those that are not involved with the company can say anything. It’s always the Unions fault. If you only knew what was really going on within that company.This statement is exactly what has happened. St Louis has been rumored to close for at least 3 yrs now. I would like to see you go to work tomorrow and say OK to any paycut. At some point you have to stick up for yourself.

I am a Hostess employee. Hostess stopped our pension contributions a yr & a half ago. Then they gave the top execs pay raises of 30-80%. They offered new contracts: no pension payments (no retirement plan at all for union employees, but company management still gets contributions to their retirement plans) for another 2 & 1/2 yrs, and then a 75% reduction in pension when they do start paying into it again; we have to pay an ADDITIONAL $200/ mo for health insurance; They took away our last cost of living raise; they gave us an 8% wage cut on top of that; they are outsourcing all of the office work to Manilla; they are closing 12 plants. THIS WAS ALL PART OF THE CONTRACT THAT WENT INTO EFFECT LAST MONTH!!

The 3 bakery closures were not due to the labor strike, they were locations on the closure list. Hostess used the opportunity provided by the strike to close them w/o having to pay severance or give notice. Hostess will be closing more plants whether the strike is resolved or not. We were told that if both major unions did not accept the new contracts, Hostess would IMMEDIATELY liquidate and we would all lose our jobs. Teamsters accepted (barely), Bakers did not. Hostess didn’t liquidate. We were told that if there was any kind of a strike, Hostess would IMMEDIATELY liquidate & we would lose our jobs. Bakers went on strike, Hostess didn’t liquidate. The Seattle bakery was literally 100 years old. They have been talking about closing it for years. Of the 3 plants closed- the only one on official strike was Seattle. St. Louis & Cincinnati were not on strike.

It’s frustrating for Hostess employees working their butts off and taking all these cuts, to still see Management driving luxury rental cars, flying all over the county at $1,000/ ticket, having meetings in Vegas, spending $200/ night on hotels, $75 on ONE meal for ONE person, golf tournaments at $1,000/ea, throwing away MASSIVE amounts of product because they don’t do their jobs right, the list goes on.

We keep taking cuts and they keep wasting money. We took cuts a few yrs ago (during the LAST bankruptcy) and the money was supposed to be used to update equipment, facilities, 50 yr old route trucks; new product development, etc. None of that ever happened. They wasted the money and then came back to us for more. Where are their cuts and sacrifices? I wish people out there would realize what’s going on. 6 CEOs in the past few yrs?? Doesn’t anyone see what’s wrong w/ this picture? There’s no one there anymore who truly cares about this company. It’s nobody’s ‘baby’. Nobody w/ the power to make decisions loves it. They just care about the money. It’s heartbreaking. I don’t blame any of the employees for finally saying they’ve had enough.

[ForeverAutumn]

Don't you guys ever get tired of rehashing the same old arguments?

I've Steel Caged you. Have fun.

[RGA]

Exactly - where are their cuts and sacrifices? Rich people never send their kids to war - it's the poor and the black.

8% pay cut seems to be dismissed - gee why are they griping it's only 8%. Yeah to FA and EStat and Mark (and even me) that live high on the hog 8% is nothing right? But 8% is a helluva lot of money for some people barely making it as it is. Maybe if you ever actually had to struggle one day in your entire life you'd realize that 8% is huge.

And I would assume that such jobs are in the ~$10 to ~$20 an hour range. 8% will be in the range of .90 to to $2 range less money each hour.

Plus they have to come up with $200 after tax each month to pay for medical since that was dropped. $200 a month works out to $46NET a week. The employee earning $10 an hour makes 400 a week gross. So what around $350 after tax per week. Less the 8% pay cut is around $322. $46 from that is 14%. $276 per week take home. Eesh.

So this employee is asked to take an 8% pay cut AS WELL AS a 14% pay cut to keep his family health plan.

The $20 an hour employee takes the 8% pay cut $800 ($700 week after tax etc) down to $644 and has to come up with the $46 a week health which is 7% additional pay cut - $598 a week.

The million a year CEO hmm. why not an 8% pay cut? $1,000,000 leaves him $920,000 and he could help the company out $80,000. But instead he takes an 80% pay increase giving himself $800,000 - from where - from all the employees taking the 8% pay cut that's where.

But yes you see nothing wrong with that at all - that is acceptable because minimum wage workers deserve what they get.

[RGA]

FA it's a really simple question it involves a yes or a no.

Should millionaire managers and business owners or government leaders take a pay cut if they ask employees to take a pay cut? Yes or no.

You dance around the issue ranting against unions - fine I don't like unions much either but the answer is Yes - you can't cry poverty on one hand then give yourself a 50% pay increase. The BC Liberals did that - Hostess did that. You can't say the unions cause the company to shut down because there is no money when there was plenty of money to give yourselves and management millions of dollars and HUGE expense accounts.

There are Liberal government employees that spent $400,000 in ONE YEAR on their expense accounts and 200% increase in pay over 20 years. But teachers are greedy for asking for C.O.L. After already taking 40% pay cuts over the last 20 years.

I am quite fine with anyone who says - teachers should not get C.O.L and even that they should take the 40% pay cut over 20 years. Fine - I get that - so long as the people implementing that do the same or at least something close to the same - not the exact opposite - stealing from the poor and middle class to take for themselves is patently wrong.

[RGA]

mark

As usual you have no link to provide any evidence that these people will not lose any of their their retirement.

I am fine with people who call me names but I would ask you do it to my face.

[thekid]

Glad to see now that the election is over some have found another topic to argue over. I will keep checking in to see if one side convinces the other of their position.

Mods please keep this thread open so I can check back in about 25 years to see how its going..... :D

[Feanor]

Read something other than garbage right wing material that leaves out the actual facts.

IT WAS NOT ABOUT A PAY CUT.

It was about taking away their $2billion in retirement. DO YOU understand this - how much needs to be spoon fed. If the Union did not strike this is what would happen.

They would have given the company their entire retirement life savings - $2 billion dollars. Then in a year the company would come back (after giving their managers millions and millions in raises) and ask for another 10% pay cut or would simply close down anyway.

Now the employees lost their job and ALL of their retirement life savings.

Right wingers are simply retarded if they can't understand the following choice:

1) Lose your job now but keep your retirement life savings

2) Lose your job in a year and lose your retirement life savings.

Both options SUCK but one option is a lot lot better than the other.
This is the nature of the pressure that workers face have faced in the last couple of decades. In the case of Hostess maybe the company really is in trouble, I haven't read up enough to be sure.

But the fact is that many very healthy companies exert such pressures on employees, unionized and not. An example was the Electromotive railroad engine manufacturing plant closed down here in London, Ontario. Electromotive, owned by Caterpillar, was profitable but was able to cut a deal in the state of Illinois (I think) were they would substitute a non-union work force.

Yeah, that's capitalism at work, but it's part of phenomenon that has seen power -- and wealth -- shifted from workers to executives and shareholders. You might argue that unfettered capitalism is the most efficient economic system -- although it is far from perfectly efficient because it far from completely competitive. Call me a "socialist" if you like, but I want a economic system that is EFFECTIVE, even if somewhat less efficient. And by "effective", I'll stick to the utilitarian principle: the greatest good for the greatest number. You need to be numb-brained to believe that's what we have in North America today.

[E-Stat]

This just isn't true: underfunding of public education at all levels is a big problem in the USA (and Canada in some degree), with or without regard to teachers' compensation levels.
Sorry, but I'm taking your enormous leap of direct correlation between teacher pay and "downward mobility". There are far many more factors involved with successful education. It starts at home. I was reading before I entered school. Weren't you? Many teachers complain they get no support from families and are expected to do the entire job. Obviously, that doesn't work.

The US also has a huge immigrant (legal and illegal) population which greatly affect the overall totals. It is certainly true that the millions of illegal aliens are not going to immediately match the standard of living as established families who understand the native language and are able to do more than migrant labor.

[E-Stat]

Are you all really saying that you EXPECT employees to give up their life savings in pensions to a debt riddled money losing company that is under a vulture capitalist?
Pensions are not *savings* as they are not funded by the employee. "Expected benefits" is a better term. Which, as you suggest, assumes that the company remains financially solvent for decades. True savings are bank accounts, investments and tax free contributions to IRAs, 401Ks, 403Bs, etc. which do belong to the individual. They have material worth whose value can be empirically defined via statements. They cannot be taken away by the employer.

I would never *give* my 401k savings to any company.


Any half wit who works at a company in dire financial trouble (and Hostess has been in dire financial trouble since 2003) and never once in 11 years bothered to look for work someplace else is a tool and gets what they deserve. Intelligent people look to work for STABLE companies who are not on the verge of going bankrupt. Whenever a company is in nickle and dime mode and have to make cuts or are in union battles (outside of government) then the writing is very likely on the wall and at some point you're probably going to lose your job.

Largely agree although I would substitute "unrealistic" for "tool"

[Feanor]

Sorry, but I'm taking your enormous leap of direct correlation between teacher pay and "downward mobility". There are far many more factors involved with successful education. It starts at home. I was reading before I entered school. Weren't you? Many teachers complain they get no support from families and are expected to do the entire job. Obviously, that doesn't work. ...
No indeed. I have never drawn any correlation between teachers' compensation and downward mobility -- maybe you're confusing me with RGA on that point.

Not to make too fine a point, but so far I haven't mentioned downward mobility at all as opposed to upward mobility. Nevertheless in recently years there as been downward trend in the middle class in terms of median income. And I'm sufficiently pessimistic that I think this trend will continue unless there is a radical move away from the 35 years of Right-wing economic policies that are destroying the American dream and stripping American society of its ability to respond the changing international and global environment.

Just an aside, but I think the upper middle class in the USA are the most deluded set of Americans. Psychologically they tend to identify both in social and economic terms with the elites; this is delusion. The interest of the upper middle class lies with the lower economic levels that are directly (or indirectly but ultimately) the source of their income and success. The upper middle class have to loose this hubris and realize that the fate of the rest of the middle class is their own.


...
The US also has a huge immigrant (legal and illegal) population which greatly affect the overall totals. It is certainly true that the millions of illegal aliens are not going to immediately match the standard of living as established families who understand the native language and are able to do more than migrant labor.
It's incorrect as well as egregiously unfair to blame the limited upward mobility in the US on immigrants. In the first place intergenerational "mobility" measures are relative; they reflect the improved status of children vs. their parents. No matter how unskilled the immigrant or whether he speaks English, there is every reason to expect upward mobility for his/her children -- given the low base at least.

Furthermore this 1st generation sort of upward mobility is probably the norm. More problematic is the lower middle class to upper middle class mobility, and upper middle class to (economic) elite mobility.

[markw]

As usual you have no link to provide any evidence that these people will not lose any of their their retirement.Again, reread my post. Now that they are FORCED to liquidate, they are in great danger. Had they been able to restructure and make themselves attractive to a buyer,that buyer would have been liable for the lacking funds. Now,the bakers screwed themselves and everyone else.

Funny, the unions could have had two seats on the board and a 25% ownership of the company but, rather than accept that like the Teamsters did, they chose to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. You can find those facts on the Internet too, if you choose to seek the truth.

...maybe that 9 weeks of vacation the bakers demanded came back to haunt 'em, eh (look that one up, too). Now, they've got a really, really long one. Too bad it's not paid and everyone shares in it.

As for the underfunded pension, well, paying to replace workers for 9 weeks vacation can put quite a strain on the cash flow, doncha think? After all, you DID say you were an accountant, didn't you? And, that pension plan is owned by the union. (you can look tat upm too)Funny how that works, isn;t it?


I am fine with people who call me names but I would ask you do it to my face.The only posible "name I called you was when I described your face as somewhat corpulant. Something anyone can verify as true by looking at the picture themselves. The rest was simply an observation of your lifestyle from your activities here. I'm sorry you didn't find it flattering but, hey, I calls 'em like I sees 'em. Since you feel fee to offer your onservations on us, why should I not avail myself of the same privelege.

Oh, next time you're in the NYC area, PM me. Maybe we can talk it over over a beer. But, I gotta warn ya, I'm even more blunt in person.


Go back and read your precious bible for the truth. LOLI offer it freely here and have no problems or feel no guilt doing so. LOL yourself.

Now, back to your full life, eating alone in a tiny room playing with your toys. Remember, when you're choking on apice of food stubbornly lodged in your windpipe, that if you only had a personality others could tolerate, you might not be alone at times like that.

[E-Stat]

No indeed. I have never drawn any correlation between teachers' compensation and downward mobility -- maybe you're confusing me with RGA on that point.
I'll disregard the big green bar chart immediately following your paragraph about underfunding teachers.


It's incorrect as well as egregiously unfair to blame the limited upward mobility in the US on immigrants. In the first place intergenerational "mobility" measures are relative; they reflect the improved status of children vs. their parents. No matter how unskilled the immigrant or whether he speaks English, there is every reason to expect upward mobility for his/her children -- given the low base at least.
I don't agree with your thesis. Poor Mexican immigrants remain poor with their lack of skills and inability to speak the language.

[E-Stat]

As for the underfunded pension, well, paying to replace workers for 9 weeks vacation can put quite a strain on the cash flow, doncha think? After all, you DID say you were an accountant, didn't you? And, that pension plan is owned by the union. (you can look tat upm too)Funny how that works, isn;t it?

"Ironically (https://patriotpost.us/opinion/15505/print), the largest amount of that debt is owed to the unions themselves. When Hostess filed with the bankruptcy court, the company disclosed that its biggest unsecured creditor is the Bakery & Confectionary Union & Industry International Pension Fund, which it owes approximately $944.2 million. Its second-largest unsecured creditor, Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Plan, is owed about $11.8 million. Hostess's entire debt obligation is just over $1 billion. Thus, Hostess workers likely face not only a loss of their jobs, but their pensions as well, if the company goes under."

It just boggles the mind.

[Feanor]

I'll disregard the big green bar chart immediately following your paragraph about underfunding teachers. ...
I was taking about limited upward mobility in the USA and relating it to public education. I specifically did not imply that the possible decline of public education was caused by teachers being under paid. For a start I agree that teachers were getting more than they would if there were no teachers' unions. What is more, I had earlier decried that public sector unions were tending to over-price public services in general. ...[/quote]


...
I don't agree with your thesis. Poor Mexican immigrants remain poor with their lack of skills and inability to speak the language.
Perhaps you have statistics that indicate that "poor Mexican" immigrants remain so for generations. OK. But it scarcely disproves that there is a upward mobility problem -- perhaps it demonstrates that these poor immigrants, especially "illegals", don't have access to education or service that would improve their lot.

In any case you statement implies a moral deficit on the part of "poor Mexicans". We "liberals" are getting sick of the whole moral/cultural deficits explanation for poverty and lack of upward mobility where these are in fact a result of problems with the system.

The "illegal immigrant issue" in the USA is sublimely hypocritical. If the USA needs more, low-cost labor, allow low skilled workers in legal. That isn't happening because (1) employers of "illegals" don't have pay salaries below the (already too low) minimum wage, provide benefits, or comply with workplace safety regulations, etc. And (2) politicians can pretend that they are preventing American's jobs from being taken. In fact "illegals" are taking jobs that Americans don't want -- for the pay & working conditions that employees are offering to illegal immigrants.

[markw]

"Ironically (https://patriotpost.us/opinion/15505/print), the largest amount of that debt is owed to the unions themselves. When Hostess filed with the bankruptcy court, the company disclosed that its biggest unsecured creditor is the Bakery & Confectionary Union & Industry International Pension Fund, which it owes approximately $944.2 million. Its second-largest unsecured creditor, Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Plan, is owed about $11.8 million. Hostess's entire debt obligation is just over $1 billion. Thus, Hostess workers likely face not only a loss of their jobs, but their pensions as well, if the company goes under."It just boggles the mind.

Congratulations! You found one of my sources! Thanks.

It really wasn't that hard, was it?

Now, I wonder why richard refuses to take the effort, what with all his plagiarizing from other sources that suit his needs.

[E-Stat]

I was taking about limited upward mobility in the USA and relating it to public education.
I most certainly cannot relate. Neither of my parents were college educated and my Dad did quite well with his business. That helped put my wife through pharmacy school. This year, we're going to fund a scholarship in my Mother's name


In any case you statement implies a moral deficit on the part of "poor Mexicans".
What on earth are you talking about? Morality has nothing to do with unskilled workers who can't speak English trying to succeed in America.


The "illegal immigrant issue" in the USA is sublimely hypocritical. If the USA needs more, low-cost labor, allow low skilled workers in legal.
There has always been a process for citizenship.


In fact "illegals" are taking jobs that Americans don't want -- for the pay & working conditions that employees are offering to illegal immigrants.

You're right. Many Americans would rather demand handouts and do absolutely nothing than to actually work *beneath* their perceived *standards*. Like Cousin Eddie from National Lampoon's Vacation holding out for a management position.

[RGA]

Yes he got it from here Hostess Brands on the Brink (http://frontpagemag.com/2012/arnold-ahlert/hostess-brands-on-the-brink/)

Why so afraid to post the link mark?

Cause it's a BS source perhaps


I still don't understand why none of you address ONE simple question. If a company is in huge financial trouble and the management says we need to cut back and asks employees to lose their pension (or not have any more money put into them - since this is beside the point) asks for 8% pay cuts or more or less (again beside the point)

DO YOU THINK IT IS REASONABLE for inexperienced CEOs to give themselves a 300% pay increase as it now turns out was in fact the case. They were making $750,000 and gave themselves a raise to $2,275,000 a year?

Why can't people answer this question? Usually you get a raise if you do a GOOD job - that's the way I structure things. SO these guys run it into the ground and deserve 300% salary increases.

"Hostess workers previously made numerous concessions to keep the company afloat, but they were not enough for the company’s management so they stopped making contractually-obligated contributions to employee’s pensions to save money. The employees stayed on the job until management offered a new contract cutting wages and benefits an extra 27 – 32 percent that prompted employees to strike and thus become scapegoats for Hostess’s demise. What Hostess failed to tell the public is that plans were in the works to close plants months before offering to slash workers’ wages. According to the company’s 1113 bankruptcy court filing earlier this year, they planned to close at least nine bakeries as part of its reorganization plan in addition to the three bakeries that were to be closed as a result of the company’s planned sale of its Merita division. In a November article, St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay said, “I was told months ago they were planning on closing the site in St. Louis, and there was no indication at that time it had anything to do with the strike the workers were waging.” It was Romney Vulture Capitalist Style Management that Killed Hostess, Not Unions (http://www.politicususa.com/romney-vulture-capitalist-style-management-killed-hostess-unions.html)


So the company is under contract to pay and then does not. They say the strike caused them to closed but they were going to close ANYWAY regardless of what the union did. This was a badly managed company and were going out of business EVEN without a union shop.

And here's a thought. The Union is told the company will shut down. They go on strike and the company shuts down. Don't right wing nuts think "gee - they shut down" Pick up phone and say "we changed our minds you were serious okay we'll accept your demands and pull free triple shifts to make up for lost time." D'uh.

Obviously they'd rather NOT have their job than accept that - and that's their choice so why are right wingers whining about this?

I am not exactly sure how living in a small apartment makes me some kind of "evil-doer".

[markw]

Quit trying to BS us, chimunk cheeks. We know you all too well. I don't do your bidding for you. I'm still waiting for your proof my Fox video is false, as you so proudly implies.

Ralph was curious enough to want to validate it, or call me on it, dunno which but, in ant case, he gets the gold star I promised you.

As to it being BS, well, isn't it convenient that whatever you post is the gold standard and everything anyone else post is BS? Yeah, right. Fox isn't a news network. We know you all too well.

As for living alone making you an evil-doer? No, again, you're putting words in my mouth and homey doesn't like that. One has nothing to do with the other. For a supposedly educated person you surprise me, But, then again, maybe you know something i don't.

It doesn't necessiarialy make you an evil-doer, just an anti-social, misanthropic, psychopath who maintains his belief of self-worth and superiority by being an arsehole on the internet, thinking you're impressing everyone with your brilliance.

Triust me, you ain't.

Face it, loser, 8,500 people wanted to maintain the status quo but only 5,000 made the choice for them to take their (and their families) livelihood and health plan.

Yea unions. Suck the company dry and then cry foul when it's forced out of business. Even ticks and fleas have enough sense to not kill the host. At least 8,500 had enough brains to know that.

So, when can we expect you in New York?

[RGA]

Is it reasonable for management or government appointees to say that there is a recession and the company or government is losing tremendous sums of money and ask employees for pay/benefit deep cuts while giving themselves 50-300% pay raises? Where is the money for those raises coming from?

If you wish to call me names do it to my chipmunk cheeks in person - you're quite welcome to come to Hong Kong or Vancouver places that don't allow guns. Crazy right wing religious nuts like you have a worrisome mentality. And since you support the rich guys giving themselves millions when people are barely nmaking ends meet - you likely make much more money to be able to fly to Hong Kong or Vancouver than I. But you're probably too cheap.

And FA - really - it illustrates the kind of "thinking" and "logic" of of such people.

I love being called the names - bring it on. That too illustrates my point

[RGA]

Is it reasonable for management or government appointees to say that there is a recession and the company or government is losing tremendous sums of money and to ask employees for deep pay/benefit cuts while giving themselves 50-300% pay raises?

Where is the money for those raises coming from?

[RGA]

I'll ask again just in case the silver spoons up your asses are making you squint

Is it reasonable for management or government appointees to say that there is a recession and the company or government is losing tremendous sums of money and to ask employees for deep pay/benefit cuts while giving themselves 50-300% pay raises?

Where is the money for those raises coming from?

[Feanor]

You may have the last word here, 'Stat.

I'm certainly not belittling you personal & family accomplishments which are considerable no doubt.

[markw]

I can see where his being apart from any people who will associate with him, without being paid, is taking it's toll on his mental health.

I finally realized that I'm merely adding to is masturbatory fantasies by playing along with him so, in the best interests of all, I'll just bow out and let him continue playing with himself, alone.

Oh, Porky, that offer for a beer still stands. But, I'm already on NYC so I have no need to go the outer provinces. Nor is meeting you something for which I would go out of my way. Again, if you ever find your pasty, porcine, bloviating, self here in the big apple, drop me a PM. ...but wash your ands first.

Expect more of my truths right in your face, but I promise to not hit you ...first.

[E-Stat]

I'm certainly not belittling you personal & family accomplishments which are considerable no doubt.
It's not a question of our "accomplishments" to observe that the American dream lives on for quite a few folks who did not grow up with a silver spoon. My Dad was fired from his job in 1968 and was pretty freaked out. I was let go from my employer following the 2008 recession and felt the same. He took his retirement savings and started a business using his previous business contacts. I now work for one of the companies that I used to support.

My wife's mentor is a black gentleman who put himself through pharmacy school and is now a Dean of a College of Pharmacy.

I'm certainly not saying that everyone's story is a great one, but I can assure you the opportunity still exists.

[Feanor]

It's not a question of our "accomplishments" to observe that the American dream lives on for quite a few folks who did not grow up with a silver spoon. ...
This is my last response on this thread ... really.

Of course the American Dream lives on and many will achieve it. ... Or the Canadian dream or whichever. But your are framing this only individual terms, not the broader socio-economic terms. I'm speaking of conditions where fewer people achieve the dream and have a much harder time doing it. Current conditions in the USA tending to this state of affairs.

No, it isn't because people have lost incentive and become "takers" who feel entitled to live off the "socialism" nanny state. (This would be the "moral deficit" I was referring to.) It is because wealthiest segment has tilted the playing field in their favor and their own children's favor.

[E-Stat]

It is because wealthiest segment has tilted the playing field in their favor and their own children's favor.
Sorry, but I don't see education as a zero-sum game where if one segment gets a good education that necessarily comes at the expense of everyone else.

[Feanor]

Sorry, but I don't see education as a zero-sum game where if one segment gets a good education that necessarily comes at the expense of everyone else.
Neither do I. If you care to, you can explain to me how you think I see it as a zero-sum game.

On the contrary, from my POV those who want to cut education fund at all levels, raise tuitions, make student loans harder to get and harder to pay back, etc., are the ones who see education as zero-sum ... a game in which only plutocrats' kids go to fancy prep schools and on to ivy league universities.

[E-Stat]

Neither do I. If you care to, you can explain to me how you think I see it as a zero-sum game.
I'm confused by two things you've said which seem to indicate that:

I was taking about limited upward mobility in the USA and relating it to public education. I specifically did not imply that the possible decline of public education was caused by teachers being under paid...

It is because wealthiest segment has tilted the playing field in their favor and their own children's favor.

I don't know how public schools are funded in the provinces, but here it is at the county level. Growing up in Atlanta, my school system in Fulton County was shared by millions. The wealthiest kids went to the same schools as the least wealthy. I'm not convinced that private schools really do much of a better job for a given student. I think the variations in achievement you see are largely the product of parents, student attitude and attention, not how much was spent on them.

[RGA]

Is it reasonable for management or government appointees to say that there is a recession and the company or government is losing tremendous sums of money and to ask employees for deep pay/benefit cuts while giving themselves 50-300% pay raises?

Where is the money for those raises coming from?


Yes or No?

Managers who makes hundreds of thousands a year should always give themselves 50-300% raises when the company is in bankruptcy talks while asking the "poor" $16 an hour employees (Union or not) to sacrifice 30%.

I got it - and so does everyone else. Thanks.

[RGA]

I wonder when the last time folks spent the day in a elementary or high school? back in the day of boomers where buying power was far higher and university/college costs far lower - or free because parents could easily afford to send their kids and pay the whole bill.

Boomers have no idea of the realities today - they live in their gated communities and or walls and rant "Well I was successful so you must be a lazy arse."

You have to think about a few things. Education demands in the workforce being a big one. Most of the time a degree is required for getting hired or for advancement. Even in jobs that 40 years ago would have been fine with grade 9. That means you could walk into relatively high paying jobs without any university expense. Now kids can't get work outside of menial positions like McDonalds - Today you walk out $50,000 in debt (if you took student loans) at prime plus 3%. Likely because your parents have been making less for 30 years in buying power (costs went up).

If you simply look at the math and say "Could I live on that" you'll be hard pressed to say yes. I left university paying $700 a month for 15 years.

Add $700 for an apartment - $500 a month for a car $150(if you have a job where a bus will get you there) and factor in utilities and clothes, medical, etc and figure out what you have to make. And forget savings.

$40,000 gross per year to cover all that sucks. And that doubles the poverty line. I have no idea how people live on min wage with those payments.

[RGA]

"This is a scream, unless you're an (R) in which case you're probably thinking the damn unions ruined the good old days of traditional America."

9028

[Feanor]

I'm confused by two things you've said which seem to indicate that:


...I was taking about limited upward mobility in the USA and relating it to public education. I specifically did not imply that the possible decline of public education was caused by teachers being under paid...

It is because wealthiest segment has tilted the playing field in their favor and their own children's favor.

I don't know how public schools are funded in the provinces, but here it is at the county level. Growing up in Atlanta, my school system in Fulton County was shared by millions. The wealthiest kids went to the same schools as the least wealthy. I'm not convinced that private schools really do much of a better job for a given student. I think the variations in achievement you see are largely the product of parents, student attitude and attention, not how much was spent on them.
Are private schools better? It depends on the private school. Some schools, (and I'm talking about Canada as well as the US), are low-grade religious schools whose goal is indoctrination rather than rigorous education. Other schools, mostly long established, recruit from the wealthiest families, and while their teaching might be a step up from the average public level, their major appeal is that your kids get to hobnob with with kids of "elite" families. And there is a third category of private schools whose goal is to provide educational best-practice to capable students whose parents can also afford to pay.

The funding arrangement similar here in Ontario and is also in Saskatchewan were my kids went to high school. In both locations there are public high schools of higher and lower reputation. My kids fortunately were close to a school of higher reputation; most of my son's courses from the International Baccalaureate Program (http://www.ibo.org/general/who.cfm) which provided more rigorous level of instruction than the standard provincial courses, and was only provided in the one public high school.

I don't think my kids were disadvantage in purely academic terms in their public high school. But as I implied, there is inconsistency even in the public schools in the same local system. For one thing, in wealthier neighbourhood, schools get addition, parents-sourced funding the allows enrichment in various forms.

I believe in equality of opportunity and kids aren't getting it -- even in the public schools. But I agree with RGA that "equality of opportunity" doesn't mean everybody gets the same thing: not every kid ought to be preparing for Harvard Law School. Some sort of streaming according to ability is appropriate. But what isn't satisfactory is that parents' wealth or even home location should be a major determinant of the quality of education kids get.

Also is the over-all level of educational quality apart from the narrower issue of equality of opportunity. Here there is an issue of funding, and what is appropriate to keep (North) American schools competitive with rising global standards, especially in science & math. With other factors, there is a correlation with teacher quality with results, and teacher quality with teacher compensation. But I agree that teacher unions are not always conducive to optimal teacher quality, and even RGA would agree with that.

[RGA]

Public versus private is difficult to compare for obvious reasons.

1) Private schools get to cherry pick their students - no low scoring students, no special needs, no behavior problem students, and in general wealthy socio economic status families.

2) small class sizes and in general far higher girls to boy ratios. Classes are often less than 14 students and 9-12 will be girls. (at least in the local Private schools in my town in Canada)

This is a huge advantage for student scores obviously. Students in BC do those dopey FSA tests where schools get ranked. It's kind of a basic education tests. But there are students with brain damage (I kid you not) that take these tests. I don't care how good the teacher is - if you have 28 students with 8 special needs including one with brain damage and you expect the score to compete with schools that get to cherry pick then you know what's going to happen to the mean score. Interestingly, if you look deeper at the numbers and cherry pick the better public school students they perform BETTER than private school kids.

Public school teachers get paid significantly more money than private school teachers - in part because it's much more demanding. Any teacher can teach bright kids from motivated parents. E-Stat rightly notes that the bulk of the work is done at home before a kid ever gets to school. If you parent well - the teacher's job is easy.

In my practicum an older teacher was telling a girl to work harder etc etc so that she could go to university - this girl really wanted to be a hair stylist - the teacher kind of belittled the kid.

That's the problem with the education system (there are many) - not everyone wants a job in an office or wants to get a degree. There is nothing wrong with being a hair stylist or carpenter or auto-mechanic - if you love something chances are you will learn to be good at it.

The education systems attempts to create well rounded individuals and I do believe there is value in that. Everyone should be able to write a basic paragraph, should have a certain level of competency in mathematics, should know some geography, politics, history, science, Art, music, language etc. If you're not exposed to the stuff how are you going to find out that you hate it? LOL

The demands on HS kids have softened a lot over the years though and numerous mandatory exams are no longer mandatory. I believer there were 4-5 mandatory subject exams that you had to pass to get a HS diploma - now I believe it is only 1-2. I'd have to double check.

a good 70-80% of HS students won't be going to University. So why teach those 70-80% in a way that prepares them for a place they're not going?

If you plan to be a hair stylist or a dock worker or an oil driller or a logger, or a truck driver or a floor sweeper - teach them up to grade 10 and let them leave. They get their HS diploma call it HS Level 1 diploma.

Level 2 is for those who stay in and do grades 11 and 12 and call that HS diploma level 2.

I mean I hate failing a kid. I know Susan wants to be a hair-stylist and is truly hopeless in upper level Social studies and mathematics and isn't much of a writer. But nope - gotta pound the info into her - she's feeling terrible cause she doesn't get it - I'm feeling terrible cause she's not getting it and for what? She's not going to University anyway and we're wasting 2 working years where she could be out learning her trade.

Some school are trying to adapt - many schools work in conjunction with the trades programs at nearby colleges. The high School in Nanaimo has a culinary arts program because Vancouver Island University has one of the best culinary arts programs in Canada (if not the best). So you take the courses at the high school as a kind of prep to enter the university. Doesn't require the academic courses to get in.

Other schools do it with the logging industry and mechanic fields.

The problem and it keeps coming back to salary is that schools can't get qualified people. You are not going to get master chefs (or even decent chefs), accountants, business people, mechanics, plumbers, medical practitioners into the schools because why would they want to take a job that pays them 1/2 to 1/4 what they would make in their own fields?

The other problem is that education should not just be about creating non thinking employees ready to be a cog in an assembly line. And unfortunately, the subjects involved with creating THINKING, reflective, intelligent people are the subjects that don't relate to "career" and "job" fields. Those subjects are Social Studies, English Literature, Philosophy, Drama, Art, Liberal Studies, and Social Awareness (Sociology and Anthropology). If we chuck that out we may as well chuck societal advancement under the bus.

[markw]

Jeez, guys. Man up. You were voted out. They can do better without you. Deal with it.

'The Service Employees International Union, or SEIU, claims a company that employs 450 sky caps, cabin cleaners and security workers at LAX illegally broke a contract and is in violation of the city’s living wage ordinance.

That company, Aviation Safeguards, claims that’s inaccurate, saying 52 percent of its workers voted to decertify the SEIU. It also says employee pay has increased by more than $2 million since workers kicked the union out to compensate for changes in their health care policies.
...
The union planned to bus in roughly a 1,000 union members to march down Century Boulevard, the main entrance into LAX, and Sepulveda Boulevard, the entrance used by motorists coming north from the beach cities and Orange County.
...
There is no dispute from our perspective. Our employees voted by a large majority to decertify from the SEIU,” Aviation Safeguard Vice President Joe Conlon said. “It is voluntary process to join a union. And it is voluntary process to not be part of a union. Our employees in a majority voted they did not want to be part of the SEIU anymore. So we don’t have a dispute. Our employees are happy with the wages and benefits they receive.”'

ere's the Link (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/11/21/union-protest-at-los-angeles-airport-threatening-to-disrupt-holiday-travel/) from where I snipped tose quotes.

Here's another link (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lax-traffic-disruption-20121122,0,4968189.story) that's a bit more biased in favor of the union.

But, what they both agree on is that the union was indeed voted out by the workers, altough the second would rather have omitted it it would seem.

[RGA]

Is it reasonable for management or government appointees to say that there is a recession and the company or government is losing tremendous sums of money and to ask employees for deep pay/benefit cuts while giving themselves 50-300% pay raises?

Where is the money for those raises coming from?


Yes or No?


Crickets?

Management has absolutely no fault in Hostess. Management is never to blame ever it is ALWAYS 100% the employees fault whenever any company ever loses money. A manager should make $1,000,000 a year and his employee should make a mere tiny fraction of that salary - in the ballpark of $30,000 to $60,000. Then when times are tough the guy making $50,000 should take a pay cut to $40,000 and the guy making $1,000,000 should get $3,000,000.

That there is Christian Values for ya. I just calls em like I sees em cause I view the world like Ysemite Sam - it's all about me, my money and my guns - yup um hum give me some mashed pertaters and gravey um hum.

9031

[markw]

Face it, poppin' fresh It's over.

The court ordered negotiations have faild.

The courts gave the official okey-dokey for Hostess to liquidate.

The fat lady has sung. Hostess ain't no mo.

Even though you don't like Fox, Here'sa link (http://www.foxbusiness.com/investing/2012/11/19/death-twinkies-union-contract-hit/) that clarifies some of the lies you've been touting. You can refute it, but i won't be listening.

here's a linky to play with (http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/hostess-ceo-were-already-hearing-from-people-who-might-buy-our-brands/) that outline the possible outcome of this

Yea Unions. Between that SEiU stuff and this, they really look after their own, don't they?

Now, I'm done with you. Get a life

Buh-bye, loser

[edit] In see you tried to bring Christianity into this. You really are desparate for attention, arent, you?

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to enjoy a sumptious turkey dinner with all the trimmings with about 19 members of my loving family.

Enjoy your toys and your well deserved solitude.

Buh-bye for good, loser.

[ForeverAutumn]

Is it reasonable for management or government appointees to say that there is a recession and the company or government is losing tremendous sums of money and to ask employees for deep pay/benefit cuts while giving themselves 50-300% pay raises?

Where is the money for those raises coming from?


Yes or No?


I would have thought that after posting this question 6 times without a response, you'd take the hint. Nobody is playing your games any more.

Thread closed.