UAW Strike - Tentative Deal Reached - Pending Vote

[jaF0]

No, they're bitching about it and bringing it to attention. But they're not fighting to establish a hard and fast formula of X% of labor pay, or productivity.


Establish a formula like that and the only way CEOs could get a raise would be to hike worker pay first.

 

[Sean Renaud]

No, they're bitching about it and bringing it to attention. But they're not fighting to establish a hard and fast formula of X% of labor pay, or productivity.


Establish a formula like that and the only way CEOs could get a raise would be to hike worker pay first.

Pretty sure it would impossible to come up with a formula or any of the rest of that. Even if you could no reason that would stop a CEO from raising their wages one way or another without doing a thing for the workers.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I didn't ask if you didn't like greed. I asked if you didn't like unions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/09/14/uaw-strike-demands-negotiations/

Pay is a big part.....as it is with most jobs...when pay doesn't keep pace with inflation, workers get screwed. Unions have always been primarily about pay and benefit guarantees. Worker conditions have been taken care of by federal laws, for the most part.

Back in the earlier days, Unions played a huge role in the improvement of workers conditions. More so than even the wages. The Government has bought in now, which means the Unions no longer need to fight that battle.

 

[ll74]

Back in the earlier days, Unions played a huge role in the improvement of workers conditions. More so than even the wages. The Government has bought in now, which means the Unions no longer need to fight that battle.

Yep,

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Yep,

I figured you knew, but lots of people forget that the early Unions were formed over poor and outright dangerous working conditions not poor wages. Most of these "union" bashers have no clue what they "owe" to the Unions!

 

[ll74]

I figured you knew, but lots of people forget that the early Unions were formed over poor and outright dangerous working conditions not poor wages. Most of these "union" bashers have no clue what they "owe" to the Unions!

I actually brought it up in the comment you quoted. But certainly no issue reinforcing it. It really speaks to the power that unions have had in the past for workers.

"Worker conditions have been taken care of by federal laws, for the most part."

 

[jaF0]

I've always said I support issues of safety and conditions where workers are at risk. But I do not support certain actions that are economical only. I do not generally support unions for clerical positions for example where safety is not a factor in routine office settings.

 

[ll74]

I've always said I support issues of safety and conditions where workers are at risk. But I do not support certain actions that are economical only. I do not generally support unions for clerical positions for example where safety is not a factor in routine office settings.

So you don't support unions in every industry.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Back in the earlier days, Unions played a huge role in the improvement of workers conditions. More so than even the wages. The Government has bought in now, which means the Unions no longer need to fight that battle.

They have at best done a moderate job of that but still wages are important.

 

[jaF0]

AFSCME and similar unions may have roles in industrialized government jobs, but less so for typists and data entry positions.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I've always said I support issues of safety and conditions where workers are at risk. But I do not support certain actions that are economical only. I do not generally support unions for clerical positions for example where safety is not a factor in routine office settings.

What is the problem with something being purely economical?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I actually brought it up in the comment you quoted. But certainly no issue reinforcing it. It really speaks to the power that unions have had in the past for workers.

"Worker conditions have been taken care of by federal laws, for the most part."

Yes, I got that, I was just making it more apparent. There are so many here who view Unions in the negative. They either don't know, or have never bothered to learn the history of Unions. Just look at how they think the "Teachers Union" is the cause of the education fails in the US. As just one example...

 

[ll74]

Yes, I got that, I was just making it more apparent. There are so many here who view Unions in the negative. They either don't know, or have never bothered to learn the history of Unions. Just look at how they think the "Teachers Union" is the cause of the education fails in the US. As just one example...

Corruption in some unions have led to some blowback...I'll always support them, in every industry that workers want them. Right to works laws have fucked participation and reduced power. Not to mention the right 's war on them.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

They have at best done a moderate job of that but still wages are important.

Go back and look at the beginning of Unions. Try researching "The American Federation of Labour " That's way back in the 1860's...

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Corruption in some unions have led to some blowback...I'll always support them, in every industry that workers want them. Right to works laws have fucked participation and reduced power. Not to mention the right 's war on them.

100%. And for the record, I have never belonged to a Union, but I support them 100%.

 

[jaF0]

Just look at how they think the "Teachers Union" is the cause of the education fails in the US. As just one example...

^^^ vvv

U.S. News // 1 hour ago
GOP education platforms favor school choice, slam teachers unions

"
CLIVE, Iowa, Sept. 14 (UPI) -- Months into the Republican presidential primary campaign, the candidates' policy proposals are coming into focus with several indicating they would ax the U.S. Department of Education and challenge teachers unions.

---

"



Teacher's Unions are not groups you want to annoy ahead of elections.

 

[ll74]

100%. And for the record, I have never belonged to a Union, but I support them 100%.

Bravo. Same here.

 

[jaF0]

100%. And for the record, I have never belonged to a Union, but I support them 100%.

The one I belonged to for a while did everything they could to keep a hi-lo operator on the job no matter how many times he was drunk and damaged the machine, other equipment or nearly injured other employees.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The one I belonged to for a while did everything they could to keep a hi-lo operator on the job no matter how many times he was drunk and damaged the machine, other equipment or nearly injured other employees.

I never said they were perfect, but back in the 1950's companies could just fire a person because they wanted to. The greivence system serves a purpose. It's not perfect, but it beats not knowing if you have a job from one day to the next.

 

[icanhelp1]

IF that's what happens that's what happens. We honestly aren't too far from when we're going to need a guaranteed income, pushing that date forward is a win.

And who pays for that? The government?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

And who pays for that? The government?

No it's the tax payers. Damn you're an ignorant person.

 

[icanhelp1]

I blame the CEOs also. Of all companies.

But nobody wants to fight that. Perhaps if the Unions would fight to tie CEO pay to line worker pay.

Every time I hear of a utility, hospital, insurance company or retailer touting a price hike due to rising costs, I ask ... how much of a pay cut are the CEOs taking to offset those costs?

CEOs are like a commodity. CEOs are compensated what the market will bear. Companies will seek out talent and at corporate level they will pay top dollar for talent. IMHO

 

[icanhelp1]

No it's the tax payers. Damn you're an ignorant person.

How exactly do taxpayers pay for guaranteed income?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

How exactly do taxpayers pay for guaranteed income?

lol....you're clueless......

 

[icanhelp1]

I never said they were perfect, but back in the 1950's companies could just fire a person because they wanted to. The greivence system serves a purpose. It's not perfect, but it beats not knowing if you have a job from one day to the next.

That's why we have this thing called labor boards, to litigate unfair labor practice.. Rather than unions many successful manufacturing companies offered profit sharing