You last visited: Today at 04:21 PM
|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|07-18-2012 06:48 AM|
California is a total disaster..
|07-05-2012 11:05 AM|
|07-04-2012 09:09 PM|
yup. owners have NO risk to personal "wealth". question: do you actually believe this shit?
|07-04-2012 08:21 PM|
Employees pay the ultimate price when losses become too great. They lose their jobs.
Meanwhile the owner goes bankrupt, disposes of any past obligations and opens shop tomorrow under some other INC. name.
If set up properly, he doesn't even lose any of his personal property, like his home or cars, while a working stiff stands to be on the street if he loses his job.
It appears to me the workers take it in both ends, not the owner. They get a minor share of the wealth and stand to lose the most.
Of course, to those who believe ALL wealth should ONLY flow to the owner, I'm sure this would appear to be a misguided opinion.
|06-19-2012 12:44 PM|
It's crap like that which to me is a major problem with our educational system. There is no financial or job security reason to excel as a teacher. Sadly some do the bare minimum to get by and get their kids on to the next upgrade because no matter how hard they work or how much their kids excel for the most part you're gonna get the exact same raise as the teacher next door who only does Scantron tests...
Oh wait, I'm on your ignore list aren't I for stating the obvious and providing logical and fact based counter points. Someone who isn't on his ignore list please quote me
|06-19-2012 12:41 PM|
It's no shocker that I don't personally think unions are needed in our economy any more. IMO it's like affirmative action. Sure there was a time for it, but that time has passed.
My question I suppose is that if you truly believe that the employees, not the employers actually produce the wealth what about when there are massive losses. In that scenario do you agree that the employees actually produce the loss, and that they should in turn share the burden of the loss with the employers? One would stand to think so, or is purely that if there is a profit made that the employees get the benefits?
I gotta be honest. I'd love to be an employee that shared greatly in the profits while not sharing in any of the losses!
|06-19-2012 09:09 AM|
State Pension Shortfall Ballooned In 2010, Study Says
|06-07-2012 04:37 PM|
|06-05-2012 07:04 PM|
My personal situation has nothing to do with whether or not unions are coercive.
Even if you could prove (which you can't) that I have benefits that make me complicit, you STILL wouldn't disprove my opinion that unions are coercive.
|06-05-2012 06:51 PM|
It's a VERY simple question hsj.
Was it YOU, and YOUR mad bargaining skills?
Or was it the hundreds of thousands of hard working and dedicated Union members who fought for a century and gave blood and lives in order to set the baseline that FORCED your employer to offer them or be non-competitive?
Call it coercion if you like, but if you take one red cent of those benefits you are as complicit as any Union member you claim is holding the gun.
YOU could always do the honorable thing & live up to your claim of idealistic displeasure with the Unions.
Stop taking those benefits.
Give up your pension, give up your health care, and give up the decent wage you get, and go work for the PROPER wage - whatever the employer WANTS to actually pay you after you bargain for your own wages and benefits - without the Union baseline backing your play.
Are you woman enough to give it a go?
(I use the female gender because most of them UNDERSTAND employer discrimination and what it feels like to go up against them alone. I HONOR women in the workplace and thank my lucky star I wasn't born one.)
|06-05-2012 06:42 PM|
Your red herring is not going to disprove my opinion that unions are coercive.
All the fallacies in the world aren't going to help you.
I'm not even sure what exactly it is you're trying to disprove here because you are obviously very confused.
|06-05-2012 04:46 PM|
Keep avoiding the inevitable question...
WHO made it possible for YOU to have the nice benefits you get from your job?
YOU know the answer, but admitting it would blow your selfish attacks on Unions to hell and back - which is why you refuse to answer.
Just not woman enough to come clean & admit defeat though, are you?
|06-05-2012 11:43 AM|
This isn't a contest to see who has better pay or benefits.
If it were a contest, union jobs would win hands down.
You keep tossing out fallacies because you believe they make great arguments.
Your post is one big Appeal to Ridicule and Red Herring.
The argument I am making is not about how successful or unsuccessful unions are, or how successful or unsuccessful I am at negotiating the pay and benefits of my job.
If I got the all the employees at my company to join forces, we could try to coerce our company into "giving" us better pay and benefits.
Would it work?
Whether it's successful or not, would it be right?
|06-04-2012 11:17 PM|
Do you get a paid pension plan?
Did you offer to take less of a pension contribution than all the other candidates for the position and thereby make yourself the more attractive alternative for the employer?
Did you do the same for your health care coverage?
How about vacation pay?
Did the other candidates all demand more vacation than you did, thereby making your offer the best one?
Please, I beg of you, since I have no clue, teach me how REAL workers negotiate a pay and benefits package.
Fill me in on how market conditions for a job work and how you successfully maneuvered yourself into the wage and benefit package you personally receive.
While you are at it, how much better of a deal or worse of a deal did you get compared to others doing similar work where you are employed.
I have an Enquiring mind and I really wanna know - and since you have the inside track on what is drivel and what is not, it should be a snap to point out how the Union method of collective bargaining is wrong and your way is right.
Or are you not woman enough to take up the challenge?
|06-04-2012 08:14 PM|
Your claims are unsubstatiated drivel.
It's you that should be ashamed, not me.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|