Fun With Unions
Labor unions; is there anything more irritating and yet amusing than the childish bickering and actions of unions? Well, maybe the relationship between unions and democrats, but it’s a close second. Which brings me to the subject of today’s annoyance:
Democrats and unions.
Are unions good for America? Hell no. I don’t care what anybody says, unions are nothing but a relic of older days that have grown into nightmarish dinosaurs. Anybody who has ever worked with unions (or as part of a union) knows that nothing good comes of unions. They are harmful and destructive to the companies they occupy, they screw over the best workers and the are detrimental to the economy. With the possible exception of construction unions, they are no good for America.
So why, then, do the democrats drool all over one another to get on board with, and support, the unions? Is it money or is it something else? Is it a microcosmic look at the dem’s blind lust for collectivism? Or maybe it’s both. After all, it’s hard to overlook $558,764,784 given to the democrats since 1990 (from OpenSecrets.org). But money aside, you still need to have at least a small fragment of ideological agreement to support such radicalism (and yes, collectivism is radicalism).
So I have to say that I was amused that the democratic presidential candidates are siding with the CBS news writers and threatening to sit out one of the last debates before the primaries because they will not cross the picket lines.
Boobs. Every last one of them are a bunch of entitlement-grubbing collectivist boobs. Which makes the democrats what? A bunch of babies hanging off the great collectivist boob? It kind of looks like that, doesn’t it? Not only that, but isn’t this nothing more than the democrats showing that they support collectivist ideals over business and capitalism? Oh yeah, that’s just what this country needs more of. More anti-business, anti-capitalism, anti-progress idealism from Washington.
And just what does the DNC say about things?
“The Democratic Party believes the right to organize and collectively bargain is one of our most fundamental rights, and we are proud to stand with the working men and women in the labor movement. Given the Democratic Party’s long history of supporting the labor movement in America, if the strike is still going on, we will not cross the picket lines.”
Fundamental rights? You have got to be kidding me. People may have the right not to get screwed over by their employer, but they do not have the right to screw over that employer in the process. They do not have the right to make demands that are damaging to to the industry, the economy or even the employer.
Anybody who thinks that the collectivist, democratic way is a way that is good far America needs to think again. This whole idea of union entitlements and rights went out of style decades ago. If the goal of the dems is to support the “worker” at the expense of all else, they need to open their eyes. This is how the Soviet Union developed and collapsed. Wouldn’t it be better to use collectivism as a model for failure instead of a model to emulate? If we ever want to industrially catch up to Japan and other industrial powerhouses, we need to outgrow collectivism and shed this tether that holds America down.
For more on fun with unions, check out Joey’s posts on AFSCME and union campaign contributions.
on November 23, 2007 on 1:19 pm
Isn’t negotiating a 2-way process? Companies have consolidated over time, so shouldn’t employees of companies also consolidate in order to maintain negotiating power?
on November 24, 2007 on 8:27 am
Ed, why should the employees of a company have any say as to how things are run or how they should be compensated? In the “real” world, if you don’t like the place you work or your compensation, you find a new job; you don’t go to your employer and tell them that they have to change their ways. If enough people quit, the company changes their ways or they disappear. That is what the free market is all about.
Unions take that away. They don’t let the market decide. They make the decisions for them. At no point should it be OK for the employees to hold a company hostage and always get their way. I can tell you that if I owned a company that went union, I would shut it down then and there. Unionized companies and industries no longer belong to the businesses. They are run and controlled by the unions. How is that ever OK?
on November 24, 2007 on 8:37 am
I agree 1000% arclight. Unions are antiquated and breed mediocrity. Next to go should be affirmative action, another outdated, detrimental practice.
on November 24, 2007 on 8:55 am
Ahhh. Don’t you miss Anti? I’d love to hear his take on this…
I’m not really going to go into whether or not unions are needed. As always, I’m on the fence. I’ve always thought they were a bit archaic but I’ve never been in that situation. And I can’t comment being a person who doesn’t work in a field that has unions. Who am I to judge unless I work for a corporation which has them and supposedly needs them? I’m not in their shoes. But one thing is for sure about that strike. There are so many factors involved that I had no idea about. Did you read my blog about it? I was a little cheeky about it because I’m missing Jimmy Kimmel, but there’s a woman named Max who commented on there who kind of opened my eyes a little. Though I’m still a little bitter that journalists haven’t risen up to the injustice of our paychecks!
Anyway, as for sitting out the debate: That’s pretty stupid. And I think it’s just a gimmick to gain some votes from granolas.
on November 24, 2007 on 9:48 am
“is there anything more irritating and yet amusing than the childish bickering and actions of unions”
DNC conventions? Weather men pimping climate change scare mongering? Howard Dean going ARRGHHHEWWWWWWW?
on November 24, 2007 on 12:02 pm
People should have the ability to rise up. That is part of being a free society. However, the other part of living in a free society is giving an employer the freedom to run the business as he sees fit. That means that when employees rise up and walk off, the employer should be able to say “ok, if you don’t like it you can leave” because I’m sure there are always people who would be willing to work for what they are offering. The unions make it so that it can’t happen like that, and even if members of the union don’t agree with the strike and are happy enough to be working for what they get, they still can’t work.
on November 24, 2007 on 12:05 pm
Oh, and I have worked in a union-run workplace as a non-union supervisory role… And it was a nightmare of epic proportions. The unions hobble the industry and the management and create a shelter that allows the worst workers to thrive on the backs of the hardest workers while making the same wage. There is no performance-based compensation which creates an atmosphere of absolute mediocrity and laziness. If you can’t be fired for doing a half-ass job and won’t get any merit from working hard, where is the incentive to do anything but the bare minimum while getting the maximum benefit?
on November 24, 2007 on 2:13 pm
I can see a reason for unions, but where unionization gets my goat is when government employees unionize. A company has the right to decide whether or not they agree to the union’s demands, but taxpayers’ only line of defense against union demands are through their elected officials, who are often in bed with the unions, themselves. It’s unethical, to say the least.
on November 24, 2007 on 2:53 pm
Does any one realize that its not just the companies that are held hostage ?
Thousands have lost there jobs in the business.
No writing no show. No show no job. Camera operaters, all the way down to porta potty delivery.
I’m not saying that I have a better answer ( actually I do but its very unpopular)
But there needs to be a better way. Maybe the writers could of just started writing shitty stories more than they do now.
on November 24, 2007 on 11:17 pm
interesting discussion my friend..I will just sit back and listen on this one~!:)
on November 25, 2007 on 8:45 am
Hey, I’m not saying that I like private-sector unions, okay? I’m a human resource manager, so unions are pretty high on my “things I hate” list. However, we have to have the right to organize. It’s important to our freedom to have this right.
I’m not sticking up for unions, I’m just trying to be fair. You also need to keep in mind that some these companies like Ford (well, most auto manufacturers) made stupid promises to their union employees back when unions weren’t as demanding and evil as they are today, like, “we promise you will always have a pension and health care and continue giving you raises for length of service”. That was dumb and not considering the future. What do you get when you succumb to a spoiled child? Do you think they stop asking for more? No way. I’m sorry, but some of the blame falls on employers for not bucking up and attempting to say “no” and let the chips fall where they may. Rather than attempting to break the union, they cowered, hoping that they wouldn’t create a monster. There will always be people wanting more in our society, but someone has to have the guts to tell them, “no”.
So far, this is exactly what GE has done with the wrtiers’ strike, and I hope that they stick to their guns. These writers are a bunch of babies who expect more money from a product that they may have helped develop, yet didn’t assume any sort of risk. GE assumes all risk, financially, so they shouldn’t have to give in to these whiners. Every time a company stands up against a union (which is very rare) I cheer. Every time a company gives in, I get really cranky and pissy with that company, because union tyranny won’t end until employers start standing up against them.
Here’s one of my posts on the writers guild strike, and also on AFSCME AFL-CIO, the government employees union:
http://www.pheistyblog.com/archives/973
http://www.pheistyblog.com/archives/1042#comment-7486
The AFSCME one should piss you off real good.
Our elected officials need to put an end to public employees unionizing real soon, or we’re screwed.
on November 25, 2007 on 11:30 am
That is true. Government workers should not be allowed to unionize and make demands unless they are asking the taxpayers nicely. The government belongs to the public, not to the government workers. It’s funny how that has been completely forgotten in this day and age. The taxpayers fund government, yet the government workers somehow get to extort money and benefits from the taxpayers without our consent. How eff’d up is that?
And while I agree that people should have fundamental right to organize and form unions, I disagree with any sort of government protection or sheltering if unions. If employees band together and strike because they are displeased with their employer, they should have that right. But the employer should also have the right to give them the finger and fire every last one of them if they want to and hire new employees. Again, this is a free market solution. If the employer fires the strikers and cannot manage to hire new employees because their policies or work environment suck, they will not stay in business. But if there are people who are willing to work with the existing conditions, then they should have that right.