Unions

[Warik]

THAT I have to disagree with. Warik you've been out of corporate America too long if you believe this. Good employees are getting fucked every hour on the hour. I hate unions, but the naivete of your above statement is surprising.

So...

Fact 1: A company consists of good employees and bad employees.
Fact 2: Companies are fucking employees.
Fact 3: Good employees are getting fucked.

So, companies are fucking good employees, but leaving bad employees alone?

... and I'm being naive?

-Warik

 

[Warik]

but that's not the case with jobs such as factory workers or unskilled labor, where managment views workers as fungible commodities.

If my whole argument was about good employees being safe and bad employees being at risk for termination, then how can you attempt to refute that with examples of factory workers and unskilled laborers? If a job requires no skill, how can someone be "good" at it?

Isn't it possible that management views such workers as fungible commodities because they ARE fungible commodities?

fungible - "being of such a nature that one part or quantity may be replaced by another equal part or quantity in the satisfaction of an obligation"

Assume that your job is to put a big stamp on something as it comes down the assembly line. The assembly line moves in such a way that any speed or efficiency beyond a certain point will not improve the way the job is done. (i.e. if you can stamp 2000 things an hour that doesn't matter because the conveyor belt doesn't move that fast) Also assume that the conveyor belt moves slow enough so that even granny can stamp things.

Given the above, please tell me how anyone working that line is not "fungible?"

If you want job security, get a job that requires skill, and do it well. Factory jobs? "Unskilled labor" jobs? I can walk in there today and do the job just as good as anyone else with little training. Can they do my job? Probably not in this lifetime. Now think about a doctor or a chemist. Can I waltz on in and do their jobs? No, hence the reason they're still employed.

Not trying to be a dick, just stating fact. If you're going to refute an argument, use a valid counterexample.

-Warik

 

[Warik]

Management "uses" wokers for profit until they thing they´re "usefulness" is gone.

Yawn.

Is it so difficult to work in such a way that you will be useful to a company? If you ran your own corporation, would you hire useless people? How would you feel if someone forced you to employ someone who wasn't useful to you?

Oh wait... you support the concept of unions... I'm sure you welcome useless employees with open arms, and the fact that employee A is 10x as productive and efficient as employee B has nothing to do with whether or not you'd want either of them to continue working.

Yup... sound logic at work here.

-Warik

 

[Norman Bates]

When there is a surplus of workers with high unemployment ,manager will be able to enforce low salaries with high working hours good workers ,too.If you quit you won´t find another job and someone else ,who is also capable ,will be more than willing to take it.

The only way for workers in that situation, which CURRENTLY isn´t so actual, is to organize themselves in a union.

In the IT it isn´t that way at the moment, there are not enough people out there, so you will get a good salary. Because managers are competing for you.

This won´t stay that way forever.
History is full of examples, like Germany after WWI or shortly after the industrial revolution.
I´m sure there are examples in the US ,too.

 

[Steroid_Virgin]

Two words:

Eastern Airlines.....

'nough said.

 

[aurelius]

Is it so difficult to work in such a way that you will be useful to a company? If you ran your own corporation, would you hire useless people?

I had many friends who got work in SF during the dot com thing and did NOTHING all day. They were hired so the company could point to "growth" and secure more loans.

How would you feel if someone forced you to employ someone who wasn't useful to you?

What are you talking about?

Oh wait... you support the concept of unions... I'm sure you welcome useless employees with open arms, and the fact that employee A is 10x as productive and efficient as employee B has nothing to do with whether or not you'd want either of them to continue working. Yup... sound logic at work here.

Well, you´ve resorted to the dgreenhill technique of fabricating a ridiculous argument that I never made and proceeded to call it ridiculous. Seriously, there´s a lot of people here who have no concept of rhetoric techniques, and you are one of them. I would suggest taking a class or at least getting a book on the subject.

 

[dimitrios]

AMERICAN
BY
BIRTH
UNION
BY
CHOICE

 

[VooDoo Lady]

To me unions were one of the most necessary organizations to arise in America. Much of what they did and fought for make our lives better every day we go into the work place. With that said every stride that was made by unions is now a law and typically has a federal agency backing it.

40 hour workweek. Labor relations
Time and 1/2 for OT
Child labor - Child labor laws
Minimum wage
Safety OSHA
Environmental EPA

In all honesty the government would have to undo all of these safe gaurds in order to open the work force up to the sins of the past. Unions IMO no longer stand for or do what they were designed to do.

I own three businesses and can tell you it is never mine nor any other business owners desire to hurt our workforce. In fact I try and do all I can for my people. The more happy an employee the more productive an employee.

Dex