destruction of unions

[pilotyip]

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.

".................
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.

And he was right it disrupts the ability of gov't to function, and when the world was going to hell in a hand basket, he turned his back on labor and looked to Detroit's business people to save the world. He wanted people who knew how to get things done quickly, he drafted the head of GM to mobilize the country, Bill Kundzen. In Dec of 1943 when the railroad workers were going to go on strike, he told the Army if they strike, draft them all and assign them duties as railroad workers. Labor has the ability to destroy a company and a country.

 

[Downwind]

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

FDR was a socialist. He makes Obama look like Alex Jones.

 

[livin'thesim]

Wow livin the sim- that's plain crazy

That's what people say when they are unwilling to mount a thoughtful counterargument.


Sorry wave, apparently all someone has to do is call something a "union", and off you go on your white horse to defend it.

Here is the real problem - you are probably completely uninformed about the tactics and goals of public sector unions, and how they bear almost no similarity to private sector unions. You probably don't know (and truthfully, you don't care) about the ways in which some of these groups have negotiated their contracts, using some very unethical means.

But you don't care - you follow the typical narrative, worker good, employer bad, union good, etc.


What you should really be asking yourself is why a guy like me is so supportive of private sector unions, but so against public sector unions.

I cannot abide your lack of interest in the truth, preferring instead to simple rely on your first instinct, which is unions = good guys.

I could produce a lot of information about how public unions are thoroughly corrupt, but you won't listen. You've made your mind up a long time ago.

 

[livin'thesim]

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

You should take a look at the outrageous salaries and wages that come union members get. They are absolutely unsustainable. Retiring at age 45 with 110% lifetime pension, for example.

Double dipping on careers and pensions, one couple in California collects over 350K per year in pensions. Those stories are far more common than you would be willing to believe.

I probably should know better than to have this discussion with hard-core union types, but the sooner you realize that public unions are NOTHING like us, the better off our labor groups will be.


Did you know that in some municipalities, the unions have negotiated deals such that the public is NEVER allowed to know the new wages and benefits until AFTER the contract is signed?

Does that sound like the actions of an ethical group?

But you aren't listening. You don't believe me. Because you don't want to hear the truth. You've made up your mind, and new facts are nothing more than annoying distractions.

Holding on to your narrative is more important to you than listening to the legitimate concerns of tax paying citizens.

By the way, you display a stunning ignorance of the facts on the ground. I bet you have no idea about the kinds of wages and benefits that public employees are collecting. But you don't care, because it does not suit that narrative you have chosen to believe. I want public workers to make a fair wage, but they passed that point years ago.

You really have no idea.

 

[shroomwell]

Actually FDR did say that public unions should not exist. It is right there in your quote:

"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service."

 

[livin'thesim]

As usual, the dems are crying "voter suppression", which has been their standard tactic (lie) since Bush v Gore.

http://elections.wispolitics.com/2012/06/dems-cry-foul-early-into-election-day.html

I'm amazed how much energy people have to repeatedly concoct this kind of falsehood. Will it pay off? Hard to know.

It is unlikely that with such a strong lead, Walker would take such an unnecessary risk as this. This looks more like a false-flag hail mary from labor.

God, how I am tired of their lies. Unable to lose with honor, as a real man should, they squirm and scheme like children.

 

[N311HK]

FDR was a socialist. He makes Obama look like Alex Jones.

And? You don't even know why that word is bad or even if being socislist is bad The guy was (FDR) so bad we, the super patriotic, all wholesomeness of the US put the man in office 3 times. I guess our grandparents were just a bunch of socialist loving, naive, bunch of idiots. Now please stop spewing the same stuff you see on TV

 

[N311HK]

You should take a look at the outrageous salaries and wages that come union members get. They are absolutely unsustainable. Retiring at age 45 with 110% lifetime pension, for example.

Double dipping on careers and pensions, one couple in California collects over 350K per year in pensions. Those stories are far more common than you would be willing to believe.

I probably should know better than to have this discussion with hard-core union types, but the sooner you realize that public unions are NOTHING like us, the better off our labor groups will be.


Did you know that in some municipalities, the unions have negotiated deals such that the public is NEVER allowed to know the new wages and benefits until AFTER the contract is signed?

Does that sound like the actions of an ethical group?

But you aren't listening. You don't believe me. Because you don't want to hear the truth. You've made up your mind, and new facts are nothing more than annoying distractions.

Holding on to your narrative is more important to you than listening to the legitimate concerns of tax paying citizens.

By the way, you display a stunning ignorance of the facts on the ground. I bet you have no idea about the kinds of wages and benefits that public employees are collecting. But you don't care, because it does not suit that narrative you have chosen to believe. I want public workers to make a fair wage, but they passed that point years ago.

You really have no idea.

You are asking the wrong questions. As a tax payer I shouldn't pay for schools since I don't have children. And maybe you should hold yourself to hight standard rather than think public union employess are overpaid but no mention of the same public employees called politicians salary and benies. How come there isn't a governor's union? A state rep union? A CEO union? The wrong questions I guess because you refuse to explore a different way of thinking. It always has to be left vs right for you. It always has to be the other side is wrong. It's not solutions you seek it's the confrontation, the fight the is what matters. And your individual special snowflake self will fight and burn no matter the outcome because you have to be correct. It's more important than the unity of what we call this artificial great country. So great we have to spend $600 billion a year to prove it to the world

 

[livin'thesim]

It is NEVER left vs right with me.

I would love term limits, cutting congressional and administrative pay (although it would not help in cases like Bloomberg, who is already rich).

Small government is best.

Which alternate way of thinking do I "refuse" to explore?

Once again, I think you are trapped in a narrative.

 

[JT12345]

If u are tired of teachers that treat u like a parent and act like idiots with immunity then put your kids in a charter school. I did. They treat me like a customer.

 

[N311HK]

It is NEVER left vs right with me.

I would love term limits, cutting congressional and administrative pay (although it would not help in cases like Bloomberg, who is already rich).

Small government is best.

Which alternate way of thinking do I "refuse" to explore?

Once again, I think you are trapped in a narrative.

Ugh Small government, big government blah blah. It should be us against them, the people should have the power. The government should be scared of the people. Any government is not answer! The people are the answer. We sit here and bicker about unions and they're laughing at the top because they're winning.

 

[dragontamer]

This about individualism which is the cancer of our society.

I knew people thought like this but I didn't think folks would proudly proclaim it. Have you read past "WE the people"? Are there any pilot jobs available in North Korea? The greatest country in the world was created with rugged individualism and self-reliance. The constitution was painstakingly written to limit the power of the collective Government (the We).

Your side of collectivism has made great strides in the last 3 1/2 years. I'm sure I'll be one of the first to be re-educated at one of the camps for the common good (as perceived by those in power).

 

[dragontamer]

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:
......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.

Sounds like FDR would have liked the reforms Scott Walker has introduced. He foresaw the militant tactics (ie. taking over the capital and intimidating those who disagree) that such Public Unions would utilize.

 

[fob727]

Unions kill companies with excessive demands, and make them non-competitive. In 1994 the UAW pushed GM into a deal it knew it could most likely not fulfill. It gave unlimited medical and COLA to retirees. GM knew a lengthy strike might drive them into BK. They had exhausted the equity markets, and borrowing was the only solution. Much like living off your credit cards. So they bet on maybe things would work, but they knew in the end they were in trouble. The power of a potential union strike drove them to make a bad management decision.

As they lost market share to foreign rivals, Detroit's auto makers and the UAW lost the power to set standards on labor costs. Yet during the prosperous 1990s, they seemed reluctant to accept the fact that their business model -- with its expensive defined-benefit health and pension programs -- was driving the domestic industry toward ruin. The UAW and its biggest employer have effectively conceded that their golden age of dominance is over.

GM executives consistently acknowledged that it couldn't be competitive in North America without a fundamental change in its labor-cost structure.

The UAW got a harsh lesson in the consequences of bankruptcy proceedings when former GM parts unit Delphi Corp. sought Chapter 11 protection in 2005, and pushed through substantial job and wage cuts under a deal subsidized by GM.

GM's obligation to provide health care for 412,356 union members, retirees and surviving spouses lies at the heart of yesterday's agreement. Even after a partial overhaul of retiree health-care benefits in 2005, GM still faced a $51 billion obligation to UAW members. Health-care obligations added more than $1,900 to the cost of every GM vehicle sold in the U.S. in 2006, a heavy burden given that many GM vehicles sold for less than competing Toyota vehicles.




as they are doing in Wisc, Tuesday will prove how effective this is.

BTW: From the history books, it is 1941, Russia and Germany sign a non-aggression pact. The US is mobilizing, the arms are going to the UK under lead lease. Russia dosn't like arms going to someone who is a war with their buddy Germany. So the communist party calls for strikes throughout the US armaments industry using organized labor. Now June 1941 Germany invades Russia, Russia needs lean lease materiel. Hopkins tells Stalin that the strikes are limiting US arms production, suddenly the strikes diminish. History of labor unions, it is in the history books.

It had nothing to do with them making a POS product??

 

[JT12345]

It had nothing to do with them making a POS product??

States go bankrupt too. Counties. They can throw out the union contracts if they do. Unions and their members get greedy just like the U.S. CEOs making 25x their counterparts in other countries. How were the Exec bonuses during these tough times at GM????????????

Blame everyone. Don't be a rich mans fool.

 

[Freeze_gopher]

Sounds like FDR would have liked the reforms Scott Walker has introduced. He foresaw the militant tactics (ie. taking over the capital and intimidating those who disagree) that such Public Unions would utilize.

Actually, you are quite incorrect. As an aside, how do you pick just the language you like out of one letter? The letter was written in 1937 so the language is a little different than now, but any consideration would have led you to "as usually understood" and "militant tactics" clearly the point of this letter is a dialogue focused on the possibility of widespread general strikes at the federal level, with the leadership of the existing organization you claim he opposed. FDR's belief that public sector workers have the right to the same concerns and rights of protection as do private sector workers is in the letter! Is there any possibility of actual consideration here? I would like to think it's possible. It certainly doesn't seem probable.

FDR's concern was wide spread general strikes, not collective bargaining, not benefits, and certainly this letter does not in any way even vaguely suggest that public sector workers can not organize. In fact rules were put in place that protected the working conditions, pay, and benefits of public sector workers specifically so someone like Scott Walker could not place these workers in a position where they felt compelled to strike. These protections have led us to our current discussion. A discussion in which you and your brethren seem utterly lost. Pay has not jumped sharply for public sector labor, they do not have better benefits than they did thirty years ago (in fact they are worse). Why then does it seem that they have such a great deal? Their pay has not been eroded like it has in the private sector. Huge numbers of lesser skilled jobs have been outsourced to private industry. This outsourcing of jobs have left a larger than usual number of public sector employees on the pay roles that have advanced degrees...they make more money (well less however than their comparably educated private sector counter parts).

In any case, the suggestion that FDR opposed any form of organized labor is laughable and not historically correct.

 

[pilotyip]

In any case, the suggestion that FDR opposed any form of organized labor is laughable and not historically correct.

Well until his encounter with them during WWII where he came close to drafting them to put them back to work. But he got Stalin to tell the US workers to go back to work. Check it out it is in the histroy books.

 

[pilotyip]

It had nothing to do with them making a POS product??

It had everything to do with it, they were broke because of the union's demands, they could not invest in new product like Toyota, a non-union company.

BTW It looks like the people of Wisc have spoken and they strongly support what Walker has done. It will now spread across the national, Rationality in public contracts.

 

[ironspud]

Been humming "On Wisconsin" all evening. Something good must have happened.

 

[lindsaya99]

I just hope I don't have to say "I told you so".

 

[densoo]

A cautionary tale regarding unions particularly in Wisconsin. Many may not like the messenger (Rachel Maddow of MSNBC), but worth listening to as Wisconsin will be the model for the continuing destruction of our jobs nationally that began in earnest in the '80s.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/

Regarding the economy it has been said, "as goes California so goes the country." However regarding labor, "as goes Wisconsin so goes the country." In just one year the teachers' union membership fell by 45%, and the second largest union fell by 55%.

Loss of good paying jobs and loss of political clout in a downward spiral.

The market has spoken. We're next. But then, we have been since 1981.

 

[Dornier 335]

It had everything to do with it, they were broke because of the union's demands, they could not invest in new product like Toyota, a non-union company.

While a union might be a part of the problem, I don't think that the truth is that simple. If you look at Germany, country of a few "premium" car brands, you'll see that the labor groups are heavily unionized.

If you treat your employees right, then there is no need for a union. Just look at the f/a's out of ATL. I find it amazing that such a large employee group is not unionized.

 

[pilotyip]

While a union might be a part of the problem, I don't think that the truth is that simple. If you look at Germany, country of a few "premium" car brands, you'll see that the labor groups are heavily unionized.

If you treat your employees right, then there is no need for a union. Just look at the f/a's out of ATL. I find it amazing that such a large employee group is not unionized.

Yes but German unions have to get gov't approval for any new contract and there has to be a productivity gain in any wage increase. and yes the transplant car companies understand they have to threat their employees as well as the union plants to keep the unions out.

 

[maru657]

Sooo, some of you don't like unions or the so called liberal agenda. Fine, don't ever strike. Some of you think we don't spend too much on the military industrial complex. Fine but I've never seen too many actual veterans who think so.

 

[pilotyip]

Sooo, some of you don't like unions or the so called liberal agenda. Fine, don't ever strike. Some of you think we don't spend too much on the military industrial complex. Fine but I've never seen too many actual veterans who think so.

Here is Vet that knows our failure to spend on the military caused the deaths of about 50M people about 70 years ago.

BTW Been there done that, unions are limited in what they can deliver. One thing they can not deliver is job security. I was ALPA at TransAmerican (L-188/DC-8), 1978-79, owner decided he could make more money selling airplanes than flying them, going backward in seniority, airline ended up in 1982 with C-130's in Angola Africa and New Guinea. Folded in 1984, I bailed to the corp. world in 1979. Handwriting was on the wall and there was nothing a union could do to protect my job. Zantop Teamsters (L-188) in 1996, union got in by one vote, first pay raise on contract due 3-26-1997, owner shut the company down on 3-25-1997. Jimmy Zantop figured why risk my $35M, Nothing a union could do to protect my job. But indirectly, enlightened management knows you have to match industry standards to be competitive in retaining and attracting employees. Therefore employees at those non-union companies benefit from the union company work rules without having to pay dues. Unions are in the business of selling dues. If the Teamsters were as enlightened as many of the higher quality managers, they would understand you just lost your job and needed every nickel to feed yourself and not take that $100 out of your last paycheck, which included credit for earned vacation days.

 

[livin'thesim]

Maru, please grow up. You argue like a teenager. It's either all one way or all the other with you.

The taxpayer pushback came after decades of PUBLIC SECTOR UNION abuses of the negotiating process. We have no problem whatsoever with PRIVATE SECTOR UNIONS. The reason? Because there are checks and balances in the system.

With the public unions, there were no checks and balances. The unions got sympathetic politicians elected, and then "negotiated" excessive compensation. This would be the same thing as pilot unions electing the entire board of an airline.

The best part of this argument is that we don't really have to convince you, because it is clear that even in a liberal state like Wisconsin, sanity and justice won by 6%. That is encouraging.

As I stated before, pilot unions are true labor unions. Public employee unions are cartels MASQUERADING as unions. You can't see the difference? I know. And that is why you lost.

 

[igneousy2]

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

and a 4th...and yes he was that bad.

 

[bluesideup1]

Where is all the outrage over the Mayors of San Diego and San Jose for trying to dismantle the unions previously agreed to pensions? Why are the senators not leaving the state so no one can vote on it? Why aren't the national union leaders organizing protests and sit ins that cause hundreds of thousands in damage to the state houses? Why isn't the President tweeting his support for the California state union workers?

Never mind I forgot it wasn't "the crazy right wing repubs that want to destroy all the unions, dismantle the middle class or kill all your babies." that was trying to balance an out of control budget.

It was the Democrats that did it. Move on nothing to see here.

 

[pilotyip]

Sooo, some of you don't like unions or the so called liberal agenda. Fine, don't ever strike. Some of you think we don't spend too much on the military industrial complex. Fine but I've never seen too many actual veterans who think so.

Think we are seeing class warfare redefined, it is now the public class vs private class.

 

[maru657]

Yep,, I was ALPA until they sold PATCO out. We went on to see ALPA sell out local after local for the larger companies. But, that was the 80,s and the advent of a generation that didn't remember the 30,s or the great depression. Well, we almost got that knowledge handed to us firsthand and may yet.