destruction of unions

[shroomwell]

Bottom line is the rules that public employee unions/cartles play under are very different from the rules that private unions like ALPA have to play under. You cannot compare the two, in fact one is the enemy of the other.

 

[waveflyer]

Adam Smith noted the imbalance in the rights of workers in regards to owners (or "masters"). In The Wealth of Nations, Book I, chapter 8, Smith wrote:
We rarely hear, it has been said, of the combination of masters, though frequently of those of workmen. But whoever imagines, upon this account, that masters rarely combine, is as ignorant of the world as of the subject. Masters are always and everywhere in a sort of tacit, but constant and uniform combination, not to raise the wages of labor above their actual rate[.] When workers combine, masters ... never cease to call aloud for the assistance of the civil magistrate, and the rigorous execution of those laws which have been enacted with so much severity against the combination of servants, labourers, and journeymen.

Wow, a pilot who has actually read Wealth of Nations instead of quoting the talking points that fit an agenda- well done.

Unregulated capitalism devolves every time into feudalism-
We're headed down a very anti-capitalistic oligopoly designed to provide the illusion of competition in our largest industries, enabling a defacto ruling class that have the lobbying money to stay above taxation and often, the law.

The most important unsustainable bubble isn't debt- and it's not student loans- its the gap between the rich and everyone else

 

[JT12345]

They can move to a cheaper state that has all these jobs suppositly or manage where they are. It is a big free country and easy to change states compared to elsewhere. You brag about it.

Hey some people move to a more expensive state to make more money. And they love to vacation in cheaper states and laugh at the prices.

I can not think of too many reasons the majority of the population can't move. There are some, but really they probably just need to cut the cord from their family and become independant.

Grow up. I have lived all over the country. Quit whining. Move where the jobs are and things will work out. Move to another country if you have to also you cry babies without a job. I almost had to. You might have to stop being an ignoramus though living in other countries.

Moving is like quiting a job. Just quit the state and move where it is to your benefit. They lose your tax revenue. Layoff public workers and they move too!

 

[JT12345]

And why are folks, businesses and regular folks leaving, particularly those with money? Because of the taxes! And why are the taxes so high? They have to pay for all the people that aren't working, or who are and are getting paid cash under the table and not paying their fair share! Not to mention all those over inflated wages and benifits of the public employees. Look at San Jose, that is just one city where city employees are raking in the big bucks, all at the expense of the tax payer! What about that city outside of LA, where all those city officials where making 6 figures!!

I don't think there is a war on unions, or anybody wants to dismantle the untions. I think what most of us want is fair compensation and benifits. But when the public employees are making more than private sector and they are unwilling in times of budget crises to negotiate, then that creates a lot of heartburn with us tax payers!

Look at the UAW when the automakers where in trouble, they where demanding that all those workers continue to come in and sit in a room for 8 hours and watch tv and play video games, all while still getting paid!!! Just one example and there are more! What about SEIU spending millions of dollars, (Dues money) to fund and protest banks and corporations, the very corporations that pay those dues! Busing in voters and protesters to the Nevada elections two years ago! What about busing hundreds of protesters to the home of executives on a Saturday morning to protest!

Those are all great examples of wasting hard earned money for an agenda! I think these are some examples of why everyday folks are getting fed up with the unions! And maybe, by giving workers the option of not paying union dues, we can force the unions back to what they were intended to do, work to protect workers rights not push political agenda's in hopes of getting a pay back at some point!

That was my whole point. Now who is looking for a fight? Just be careful what you wish for because it can happen to you.

As for Texas... oil is over 80 a barrel still and that is pretty low lately. Taxes does not have much to do with it, but it is cheap to live there. Why more don't go there for jobs is beyond me. Move your arses where the jobs are.

Cut the cord from mommy and daddy little boys and girls.

 

[livin'thesim]

Forcing people to move to escape the iron grip of public unions is hardly what I call freedom.

While yes, it is good that people can leave, it is probably smarter for state governments to rein in crushing financial obligations to retain citizens of their state.

States exist to serve the people, not to create gold-standard living conditions for an elite few.


And all that stuff about the worker and the masters?

The public employees ARE THE MASTERS. They own the politicians and they own the revenue stream of tax payments.

The problem is, that once you call them a "union" well-intentioned private sector union workers will rally around them, responding like pavlov's dog to the word "union".

Well, the taxpayers have now formed a union to represent their interests, so you are all obligated to throw your full support behind them.

Public. Union. Employees. Are. The. Oppressors.

They are not the oppressed.

 

[waveflyer]

Wow livin the sim- that's plain crazy

 

[N311HK]

Sadly this isn't about unions. This about individualism which is the cancer of our society. There is no more unity. Some tax payers think that their taxes shouldn't go to certain groups aka public employees. Since I don't have children, I feel defrauded paying taxes for schools. Since I don't own a car, I feel defrauded paying for roads and bridges, etc. This individualism has led to the monsters of Fox and MSNBC. We are forced to take a side even if that side goes beyond one's ideals. Its freaking pathetic. The 1st line is "We the people!" Not me the individual that thinks others shouldn't have what I have cause I think I worked harder. It amazes me, whether left or right, we think our side is correct and our politicians will follow thru. I would tend to always be on the side that has less.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."

And if anyone thinks public unions have too much, you are delusional and should keep buying your lottery tickets to pretend that some day you can be like those people that live in their castles. Sooner or later, the commoners will revolt. We just need to stop watching Kim K, the stars dancing, american karaoke to realize we're all bunch slaves and we're not even part of the game

 

[IBNAV8R]

Sadly this isn't about unions. This about individualism which is the cancer of our society. There is no more unity. Some tax payers think that their taxes shouldn't go to certain groups aka public employees. Since I don't have children, I feel defrauded paying taxes for schools. Since I don't own a car, I feel defrauded paying for roads and bridges, etc. This individualism has led to the monsters of Fox and MSNBC. We are forced to take a side even if that side goes beyond one's ideals. Its freaking pathetic. The 1st line is "We the people!" Not me the individual that thinks others shouldn't have what I have cause I think I worked harder. It amazes me, whether left or right, we think our side is correct and our politicians will follow thru. I would tend to always be on the side that has less.

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."

And if anyone thinks public unions have too much, you are delusional and should keep buying your lottery tickets to pretend that some day you can be like those people that live in their castles. Sooner or later, the commoners will revolt. We just need to stop watching Kim K, the stars dancing, american karaoke to realize we're all bunch slaves and we're not even part of the game

Right on, comrade. Karl Marx, Chairman Mao, or Stalin couldn't have said it any better.

 

[Freeze_gopher]

Two of the greatest supports of the union movement, FDR and LaGuardia, said public employee unions would bankrupt the country because of their ability to shut the country down and the inability of public officals to say no. We are reaping the results of promises made on a wish and whim 30 years ago, when the guy who voted for it did not have to pay of it.

BTW. Where is the growth?, Right to Work states

FDR never said any such thing. You, as is true of most of your ilk, are badly misrepresenting a letter that FDR wrote in 1937. His concern was that strikes from public sector employees would badly disrupt the ability of government to function. This is not in any way a denunciation of organized labor but rather another example of how important FDR thought was the role of strong centralized government. There is no question that President Roosevelt supported Unions across the board.

"My dear Mr. Steward:
As I am unable to accept your kind invitation to be present on the occasion of the Twentieth Jubilee Convention of the National Federation of Federal Employees, I am taking this method of sending greetings and a message.

Reading your letter of July 14, 1937, I was especially interested in the timeliness of your remark that the manner in which the activities of your organization have been carried on during the past two decades "has been in complete consonance with the best traditions of public employee relationships." Organizations of Government employees have a logical place in Government affairs.

The desire of Government employees for fair and adequate pay, reasonable hours of work, safe and suitable working conditions, development of opportunities for advancement, facilities for fair and impartial consideration and review of grievances, and other objectives of a proper employee relations policy, is basically no different from that of employees in private industry. Organization on their part to present their views on such matters is both natural and logical, but meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.

All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management. The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations. The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.

Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of Government employees. Upon employees in the Federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people, whose interests and welfare require orderliness and continuity in the conduct of Government activities. This obligation is paramount. Since their own services have to do with the functioning of the Government, a strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent on their part to prevent or obstruct the operations of Government until their demands are satisfied. Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government by those who have sworn to support it, is unthinkable and intolerable. It is, therefore, with a feeling of gratification that I have noted in the constitution of the National Federation of Federal Employees the provision that "under no circumstances shall this Federation engage in or support strikes against the United States Government."

I congratulate the National Federation of Federal Employees the twentieth anniversary of its founding and trust that the convention will, in every way, be successful." FDR.

 

[N311HK]

Right on, comrade. Karl Marx, Chairman Mao, or Stalin couldn't have said it any better.

Right on, doughboy. FDR said it. That lefty was so bad he got a 3rd term.