Union Value??

[dewilson58]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.

[JoMar]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.

As the world passes us by.

[Dusty_Star]

I saw Harold Daggett also complaining bitterly about SunPass/EZPass, truly a Luddite thug.

[dewilson58]

I saw Harold Daggett also complaining bitterly about SunPass/EZPass, truly a Luddite thug.

His salary is +$700k, $1mil house in FL & $2mil house in NJ.

& the silly members are okay with this.

:faint:

[Boomer]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.


There are companies where perhaps a union is/was not needed. Many years ago I asked someone who worked in the manufacturing part of a huge, well-known company if they had a union. The response was, “We don’t need one.”

Also, said company made a lot of regular people very comfortable through profit-sharing. Can you imagine if companies like Walmart, for example, would have made profit-sharing available to ALL employees. Not only would there have been a lot of loyal employees on those cash registers, etc., just think of the learning experience that would have come from owning stock.

But a lot of companies plan to earn huge profits on the backs of employees and never consider how effective company stock all-around can be in moving a company forward with loyal employees. For companies that do not have stock, there are other ways to keep loyal employees and keep unions at bay. The employers’ choice to exploit is what brings in unions.

I am not saying all unions are perfect. But if unions are stomped into non-existence by those who have motives that risk our future overall economy, we will turn into another country.

This thread is going to turn into union-bashing. I can feel those wagons circling already.

Of course, most of those circling up will be the same people who expect teachers to devote their lives to working for basically nothing.

My point is — the middle class has been the backbone of our economy. Unions were instrumental in creating a strong middle class. If we lose our middle class, we are done. Unrestrained greed is bad economics.

Boomer, former union prez

[Rainger99]

I don’t have a problem with unions. But I don’t think unions should have a monopoly where one union controls all the ports on the east and south coast. We should have separate unions for each port and they should not be allowed to collude with other union in the other ports.

That way, 45,000 workers can’t impact the entire country.

The monopoly laws should apply to business and to labor.

Concentrated power is usually bad whether it is business, labor, or government.

[mraines]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.
I disagree. I am here because of a union. I had fair wages and a nice pension because of a union.

[Caymus]

Saw this in my newsfeed. Seems to be an impartial article.

Why the dockworker strike was really an aging-workforce issue | Morningstar (https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/20241003878/why-the-dockworker-strike-was-really-an-aging-workforce-issue)

[Battlebasset]

Instead of trying to fly to the dead rock of Mars, Musk needs to create a US deep water port full of automation and non-union labor. This would put the existing stuck in the 1970's ports on notice that their days in the US are numbered. I'm sure he could find a place in Florida he could do this.

Bezos should do it to, as he stands to lose millions if he can't import his Amazon stuff. But he's too beholden to his masters to go up against them.

[GoRedSox!]

The world is not passing us by. That's just plain false. We are by far the most affluent country in the world. We have the best economy in the world, by far.

Unions will always be a target by those who prefer that profits go to corporations, their CEO's and senior management and shareholders, rather than working people. The middle class was strongest in this country when unions were strongest. This is indisputable economic facts.

These workers just got a 61.5% raise over the next 6 years. I think the union just did a great job. This one the heels of the UAW getting 40% increase over 4 years and Shawn Fain doing a great job. The folks who run these ports have seen their profits soar 350% over the last 10 years. I am glad the working man and woman is getting a fair share of that in this latest negotiation.

[retiredguy123]

It's pretty simple. Unions are created to help the union members. If automation hurts the union members, they are going to be opposed to it. If school choice hurts public school union teachers, the union will be opposed to it even if it hurts students. The union exists to represent the union members. Period.

[village dreamer]

It's pretty simple. Unions are created to help the union members. If automation hurts the union members, they are going to be opposed to it. If school choice hurts public school union teachers, the union will be opposed to it even if it hurts students. The union exists to represent the union members. Period.
the union exists to represent the union members so we don't get screwed over by the company, period. ibew member for 40 years and proud of it.

[dewilson58]

the union exists to represent the union members so we don't get screwed over by the company, period. ibew member for 40 years and proud of it.

1/2 of the membership is public...........nothing to do with "the company".

I'm proud of representing myself & not paying dues.

:eclipsee_gold_cup:

[tophcfa]

Yes, corporations are in the business of making money and maximizing shareholder value. There is nothing wrong with that. Hard working and productive employees, who contribute to that goal, are taken care of and workers who don’t shouldn’t be protected. Corporations aren’t evil and against their employees, they absolutely need good employees. If someone is a good and productive employee and their company doesn’t take care of them, their competitors will be more than happy to hire them. As far as the 61.5% union raises being good for the average working American, how is that? The average working American will be paying for those wage increases since that expense will be added to the cost of the goods they purchase.

[graciegirl]

Yes, corporations are in the business of making money and maximizing shareholder value. There is nothing wrong with that. Hard working and productive employees, who contribute to that goal, are taken care of and workers who don’t shouldn’t be protected. Corporations aren’t evil and against their employees, they absolutely need good employees. If someone is a good and productive employee and their company doesn’t take care of them, their competitors will be more than happy to hire them. As far as the 61.5% union raises being good for the average working American, how is that? The average working American will be paying for those wage increases since that expense will be added to the cost of the goods they purchase.

I couldn't have said it better.

I also have an issue with some teachers unions in this day and age. I don't like the direction they take. Teachers are invaluable, but one can become a teacher, a good teacher without climbing as difficult an education path as a doctor. It is also a job that is somewhat more flexible than others. Good teachers ARE more valuable than diamonds. I realize because of the behaviors of children that teaching has become dangerous as well. I know so many people that teach for the vocation of teaching and that still makes me so proud.

[Pballer]

The rest of the country should be more like Florida - crappy wages, crappy benefits, crappy pensions.

[dewilson58]

The rest of the country should be more like Florida - crappy wages, crappy benefits, crappy pensions.

& Ur point??

[Boomer]

It's pretty simple. Unions are created to help the union members. If automation hurts the union members, they are going to be opposed to it. If school choice hurts public school union teachers, the union will be opposed to it even if it hurts students. The union exists to represent the union members. Period.


Hey! You and I go back a long way — even if we have never met and have no idea who each other is.

Usually, I respect your opinions, but this time I must say when it comes to teachers’ unions, you have no idea what you are talking about. (I also know you will not report me to the admin as being a mean girl trying to scar your psyche. We’ll be OK.)

I must assume you have no problem with private money taking your tax money to promote their private agenda and run schools as a money-maker.

My guess is also that you do not know anything about how tenure works. All tenure protects is the right to due process.

AND I can tell you right now, and in no uncertain terms, that nobody wants to see bad teachers gone more than good teachers want bad teachers out.

IF (some) school administrators would get off their butts, get out of their offices, go into classrooms, and evaluate teachers on a regular basis, tenure would not be an issue if firing would be needed. Get that paper trail going and GET RID of the bad ones before they get to tenured status.

But nope. Lazy-azz principals love to holler, “TENURE!” and claim their hands are tied. NOT SO! It’s just that pesky due process they have to be ready for if they let a bad one go on and on and on. Tenured teachers can be fired, but principals have to do a little work if they have allowed tenured status to be reached. Due process. That is what tenure protects. But teachers cannot fire other teachers. Administrators need to do their jobs from the beginning.

Maybe I will return later and patiently explain how being an excellent teacher but having reached the top of the salary scale could bite one in the azz if it were not for tenured status. I bet you can figure that one out, anyway.

Well, enough from me. I am scheduled to go hang out with people I can actually see. Retired teachers will be among them.

Boomer

[graciegirl]

Hey! You and I go back a long way — even if we have never met and have no idea who each other is.

Usually, I respect your opinions, but this time I must say when it comes to teachers’ unions, you have no idea what you are talking about. (I also know you will not report me to the admin as being a mean girl trying to scar your psyche. We’ll be OK.)

I must assume you have no problem with private money taking your tax money to promote their private agenda and run schools as a money-maker.

My guess is also that you do not know anything about how tenure works. All tenure protects is the right to due process.

AND I can tell you right now, and in no uncertain terms, that nobody wants to see bad teachers gone more than good teachers want bad teachers out.

IF (some) school administrators would get off their butts, get out of their offices, go into classrooms, and evaluate teachers on a regular basis, tenure would not be an issue if firing would be needed. Get that paper trail going and GET RID of the bad ones before they get to tenured status.

But nope. Lazy-azz principals love to holler, “TENURE!” and claim their hands are tied. NOT SO! It’s just that pesky due process they have to be ready for if they let a bad one go on and on and on. Tenured teachers can be fired, but principals have to do a little work if they have allowed tenured status to be reached. Due process. That is what tenure protects. But teachers cannot fire other teachers. Administrators need to do their jobs from the beginning.

Maybe I will return later and patiently explain how being an excellent teacher but having reached the top of the salary scale could bite one in the azz if it were not for tenured status. I bet you can figure that one out, anyway.

Well, enough from me. I am scheduled to go hang out with people I can actually see. Retired teachers will be among them.

Boomer

I have known both of you for some time.

He is making more sense here. Much more sense......

[GoRedSox!]

I don't have any issue with corporations making a profit, since I am a capitalist, and have invested in them and those investments enabled me to retire early. However, I am under no illusions of grandeur when it comes to how they treat their employees.

The poster who said that corporations want good employees and are willing to pay them is mostly correct, up until a point. Check out the number of folks who make it to 65 with their companies. You might be shocked. There used to be a social contract in this country that an employee would stay with a company for life, and you would be good to them and they would be good to you. In my opinion, this was contract was broken by corporations in the 80's. This is when layoffs and off-shoring began.

As you approach your late 50's in corporate America, watch out. Two things happen at around this time....you are at or near the top of the salary scale, and you cost your company the most for health insurance. Once again, the numbers of folks who make it to 65 are on record....many years of working for a company could mean nothing when it comes to replacing someone at 1/2 of their salary and 1/4 of their insurance cost. Employees rarely see this coming, yet it happens to many of this age group.

That's the kind of thing that unions do prevent. There is no question that our middle class was stronger when unions were stronger.

As for the longshoremen increasing costs for everyone, this is not necessarily so. Maybe instead of a 350% increase in profits over 10 years, the ports will be happy to share some of those profits with their employees in the form of higher wages and they will be content to make 300% increase in profits over the next 10 years and have happy employees as well.

[Pballer]

& Ur point??

My point is that when you have a state that is rabidly anti-union, you get the employee paradises that are Florida., or Alabama, or Mississippi, or Louisiana. /s

[Boomer]

Hey, Wilson, your pot-stirring is a success. Responses are numerous and transparent and predictable and entertaining — for a while.

Out now. Bye.

Boomer

[CFrance]

I don't have any issue with corporations making a profit, since I am a capitalist, and have invested in them and those investments enabled me to retire early. However, I am under no illusions of grandeur when it comes to how they treat their employees.

The poster who said that corporations want good employees and are willing to pay them is mostly correct, up until a point. Check out the number of folks who make it to 65 with their companies. You might be shocked. There used to be a social contract in this country that an employee would stay with a company for life, and you would be good to them and they would be good to you. In my opinion, this was contract was broken by corporations in the 80's. This is when layoffs and off-shoring began.

As you approach your late 50's in corporate America, watch out. Two things happen at around this time....you are at or near the top of the salary scale, and you cost your company the most for health insurance. Once again, the numbers of folks who make it to 65 are on record....many years of working for a company could mean nothing when it comes to replacing someone at 1/2 of their salary and 1/4 of their insurance cost. Employees rarely see this coming, yet it happens to many of this age group.

That's the kind of thing that unions do prevent. There is no question that our middle class was stronger when unions were stronger.

As for the longshoremen increasing costs for everyone, this is not necessarily so. Maybe instead of a 350% increase in profits over 10 years, the ports will be happy to share some of those profits with their employees in the form of higher wages and they will be content to make 300% increase in profits over the next 10 years and have happy employees as well.
And I don't claim "to have known you (or anybody else) for a long time," but this is very well said and makes much sense.
I suppose many don't choose to remember robber barons (wealthy, powerful, and unethical American industrialists and financiers in the 19th century") as the reason unions came into being in the first place. Robber baron | Definition, Significance, & Captains of Industry | Britannica Money (https://www.britannica.com/money/robber-baron)

I was never in a union; I'm just appalled at what's been happening to the middle class.

[Boomer]

And I don't claim "to have known you (or anybody else) for a long time," but this is very well said and makes much sense.
I suppose many don't choose to remember robber barons (wealthy, powerful, and unethical American industrialists and financiers in the 19th century") as the reason unions came into being in the first place. Robber baron | Definition, Significance, & Captains of Industry | Britannica Money (https://www.britannica.com/money/robber-baron)

I was never in a union; I'm just appalled at what's been happening to the middle class.




Nobody here actually knows me either, except through my words.

Just want to say I agree with you. History does repeat itself.

Boomer

[dewilson58]

Hey, Wilson, your pot-stirring is a success. Responses are numerous and transparent and predictable and entertaining — for a while.

Out now. Bye.

Boomer

Not pot-stirring.................just don't think there is value to unions.

Union supporters talk out-of-date fearmongering information.

An union supporting posters aren't saying anything new and are marching right in line.

It's not even close...................90% of employees are non-union.

[dewilson58]

My point is that when you have a state that is rabidly anti-union, you get the employee paradises that are Florida., or Alabama, or Mississippi, or Louisiana. /s

Not seeing the direct relationship.

Facts:
Here are the states with the highest union membership rates in 2023:
Hawaii: 24.1%
New York: 20.6%
Washington: 16.5%
New Jersey: 16.1%
Connecticut: 15.9%
California: 15.4%
Alaska: 14.8%
Vermont: 14.3%
Oregon: 14.1%
Minnesota: 13.3%

In contrast, the states with the lowest union membership rates in 2023 were:
South Carolina: 2.3%
North Carolina: 2.7%
South Dakota: 3.6%
Arizona: 4.8%
Louisiana: 5.2%

[Caymus]

The world is not passing us by. That's just plain false. We are by far the most affluent country in the world. We have the best economy in the world, by far.

Unions will always be a target by those who prefer that profits go to corporations, their CEO's and senior management and shareholders, rather than working people. The middle class was strongest in this country when unions were strongest. This is indisputable economic facts.

These workers just got a 61.5% raise over the next 6 years. I think the union just did a great job. This one the heels of the UAW getting 40% increase over 4 years and Shawn Fain doing a great job. The folks who run these ports have seen their profits soar 350% over the last 10 years. I am glad the working man and woman is getting a fair share of that in this latest negotiation.

As UAW produced vehicles become more and more unaffordable. They will need that 100% tariff on Chinese EV's to survive.

[BigDawgInLakeDenham]

Values that you have established and no one will change your minds. Those who are union members are easily identified and those who worked for a corporation that actually paid and provided benefits and no fear of lay-offs can be identified. I grew up in Baltimore near Sparrows Point Bethlehem Steel Mill and the Dundalk Marine Terminal. Everyone around me worked there.Think Francis Scott Key Bridge getting knocked down. Was there and could hear the collapse from my house. Everything was good until blue gave away American know how. Unions quickly became unnecessary and only a minority cling to unions because they don't want to or can't get a job with an actual company. Drug testing comes into play for many in my "neighborhood" nowadays. Speaking of my "neighborhood" I can say without hesitation that the Longshoremen are terribly overpaid and work second jobs or ride one of their motorcycles while they are on the clock. Unions provide their workers with too much protection that they routinely abuse their system and brag about it. No longer the people I grew up with, but all diversity and equity hires. Of course they demand more money to not work because that is exactly what Unions represent. Many collect welfare while getting paid 6 figures. I know this for a fact. Unions are selfish and not for America. Unions are the modern Mafia. You know where I stand

[GoRedSox!]

Yet there is a strong correlation between states with the lowest union membership, and highest number of people on some kind of government program, the lowest salaries, the lowest life expectancies, the worst health coverage, the highest rates of uninsured, and the highest poverty rates.

This is indisputable. The numbers don't lie.

[BigDawgInLakeDenham]

The rest of the country should be more like Florida - crappy wages, crappy benefits, crappy pensions.

You just described the entire nation. Outside the bubble is a dying economy and nation. I still have to go out there and it's very scary

[BigDawgInLakeDenham]

Yet there is a strong correlation between states with the lowest union membership, and highest number of people on some kind of government program, the lowest salaries, the lowest life expectancies, the worst health coverage, the highest rates of uninsured, and the highest poverty rates.

This is indisputable. The numbers don't lie.

So you believe it's solely union membership related and not the demographic makeup of the population? Would you expect these populations to be conditioned to actually work for a living after Johnson's Great Society Program??? I'll answer for you..absolutely not. They get paid to stay home and the more babies they make, the more they get paid to stay home. This leads to multiple fathers that don't raise the child which leads to misdirection and a life of crime and a vicious cycle...need I go on?

[JustSomeGuy]

There are companies where perhaps a union is/was not needed. Many years ago I asked someone who worked in the manufacturing part of a huge, well-known company if they had a union. The response was, “We don’t need one.”

Also, said company made a lot of regular people very comfortable through profit-sharing. Can you imagine if companies like Walmart, for example, would have made profit-sharing available to ALL employees. Not only would there have been a lot of loyal employees on those cash registers, etc., just think of the learning experience that would have come from owning stock.

But a lot of companies plan to earn huge profits on the backs of employees and never consider how effective company stock all-around can be in moving a company forward with loyal employees. For companies that do not have stock, there are other ways to keep loyal employees and keep unions at bay. The employers’ choice to exploit is what brings in unions.

I am not saying all unions are perfect. But if unions are stomped into non-existence by those who have motives that risk our future overall economy, we will turn into another country.

This thread is going to turn into union-bashing. I can feel those wagons circling already.

Of course, most of those circling up will be the same people who expect teachers to devote their lives to working for basically nothing.

My point is — the middle class has been the backbone of our economy. Unions were instrumental in creating a strong middle class. If we lose our middle class, we are done. Unrestrained greed is bad economics.

Boomer, former union prez

Publix has given employees ownership since the very first store was opened. Even ******* get stock after a year as a bonus. Stock has made most very comfortable at retirement. Today employees or ex-employees own over 50% of the company. Must work there to buy Publix stock. Sell it and you sell it back to the Publix.

[dadcat]

This country was founded by a union. 13 colonies, remember? Organized labor. Or do you prefer self checkout while the person who was at a register is now unemployed? Union Ironworker for 40 years, I have what I have because of it. Proud of it!

[mkjelenbaas]

There are companies where perhaps a union is/was not needed. Many years ago I asked someone who worked in the manufacturing part of a huge, well-known company if they had a union. The response was, “We don’t need one.”

Also, said company made a lot of regular people very comfortable through profit-sharing. Can you imagine if companies like Walmart, for example, would have made profit-sharing available to ALL employees. Not only would there have been a lot of loyal employees on those cash registers, etc., just think of the learning experience that would have come from owning stock.

But a lot of companies plan to earn huge profits on the backs of employees and never consider how effective company stock all-around can be in moving a company forward with loyal employees. For companies that do not have stock, there are other ways to keep loyal employees and keep unions at bay. The employers’ choice to exploit is what brings in unions.

I am not saying all unions are perfect. But if unions are stomped into non-existence by those who have motives that risk our future overall economy, we will turn into another country.

This thread is going to turn into union-bashing. I can feel those wagons circling already.

Of course, most of those circling up will be the same people who expect teachers to devote their lives to working for basically nothing.

My point is — the middle class has been the backbone of our economy. Unions were instrumental in creating a strong middle class. If we lose our middle class, we are done. Unrestrained greed is bad economics.

Boomer, former union prez
I have held jobs that were unionized and not unionized - unions are a way to stifle midernatiin because they only think of having more members so the union. Oases can suck the life out of the members!!!

[TheWarriors]

The world is not passing us by. That's just plain false. We are by far the most affluent country in the world. We have the best economy in the world, by far.

Unions will always be a target by those who prefer that profits go to corporations, their CEO's and senior management and shareholders, rather than working people. The middle class was strongest in this country when unions were strongest. This is indisputable economic facts.

These workers just got a 61.5% raise over the next 6 years. I think the union just did a great job. This one the heels of the UAW getting 40% increase over 4 years and Shawn Fain doing a great job. The folks who run these ports have seen their profits soar 350% over the last 10 years. I am glad the working man and woman is getting a fair share of that in this latest negotiation.

Why don’t the Unions ever start a Company? After all, they know best how to make and share profits.

[kamal]

I don’t have a problem with unions. But I don’t think unions should have a monopoly where one union controls all the ports on the east and south coast. We should have separate unions for each port and they should not be allowed to collude with other union in the other ports.

That way, 45,000 workers can’t impact the entire country.

The monopoly laws should apply to business and to labor.

Concentrated power is usually bad whether it is business, labor, or government.
The monopolies in unions, specially the public unions where the customer has no alternative choices is a big issue. In private company unions at least you have a choice, if for example a car made by GM gets too expensive you can buy another brand. In public unions such as schools or federal workers unions there is a lot of unfunded liabilities in many States due to the defined pensions that decades ago the private sector also offered but not anymore switching to 401K contributions.
It is the one reason that the public unions vote 95% for the democrats as they pat each others backs. Basically the public unions don’t want themselves and their jobs and compensation be subject to market forces as much as in the private sector. The same market forces of outsourcing blue collar and then white collar jobs by both parties egged on by Wall Street.
That’s what led to the 2016 political shakedown by Trump on the right and Bernie Sanders on the left.

[MandoMan]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.

I’ve been a union member since 1986. I paid 1% of my salary in union dues. My union is responsible for getting me the investment options that allowed me to retire comfortably and move here. I only needed union representative help once, but it was there when I needed it, and it helped me get treated fairly.

If you read scholarly books about the history of labor unions, you can see that they came about because so many company owners treated workers as little better than slaves. They didn’t care if their workers were in poverty. Collective bargaining is responsible for generations of poor workers leaving poverty behind, getting better housing, sending their kids to college.

A lot of us in The Villages are here because labor unions fought to get us or our parents or grandparents health care benefits and pension benefits and higher wages. If not for unions, the many thousands of us who are here because we have pensions or were able to invest part of our salaries wouldn’t be here. We’d be trying to scrape by on Social Security.

Lots of factory workers from past generations saw their jobs disappear—from the mills of New England and Pennsylvania to North Carolina and Georgia, but then off to China and Mexico and other places. Union membership didn’t stop that, but it helped forestall it for a few years and get better treatment. Sometimes, though, the union managed to keep the factories running.

[bark4me]

I saw Harold Daggett also complaining bitterly about SunPass/EZPass, truly a Luddite thug.
Can you say Mafia!

[Pugchief]

Values that you have established and no one will change your minds. Those who are union members are easily identified and those who worked for a corporation that actually paid and provided benefits and no fear of lay-offs can be identified. I grew up in Baltimore near Sparrows Point Bethlehem Steel Mill and the Dundalk Marine Terminal. Everyone around me worked there.Think Francis Scott Key Bridge getting knocked down. Was there and could hear the collapse from my house. Everything was good until blue gave away American know how. Unions quickly became unnecessary and only a minority cling to unions because they don't want to or can't get a job with an actual company. Drug testing comes into play for many in my "neighborhood" nowadays. Speaking of my "neighborhood" I can say without hesitation that the Longshoremen are terribly overpaid and work second jobs or ride one of their motorcycles while they are on the clock. Unions provide their workers with too much protection that they routinely abuse their system and brag about it. No longer the people I grew up with, but all diversity and equity hires. Of course they demand more money to not work because that is exactly what Unions represent. Many collect welfare while getting paid 6 figures. I know this for a fact. Unions are selfish and not for America. Unions are the modern Mafia. You know where I stand

LOL, sounds more like a public sector union in NYC or Chicago.

[Pugchief]

These workers just got a 61.5% raise over the next 6 years. I think the union just did a great job. This one the heels of the UAW getting 40% increase over 4 years and Shawn Fain doing a great job. The folks who run these ports have seen their profits soar 350% over the last 10 years. I am glad the working man and woman is getting a fair share of that in this latest negotiation.

Wow, they did do a great job. Trying to remember when the last time I got a raise even close to that large....Oh, ya, NEVER. So either they were previously grossly UNDERpaid (Did the union bosses not do their job previously?) or they are asking for an exorbitant raise which no one else in the work force anywhere sees.

[elevatorman]

Unions have played a crucial role in securing many of the rights and benefits that workers enjoy today. In addition to paid holidays, paid vacations, and health care, unions have also been instrumental in advocating for and achieving:

The 8-hour workday and 40-hour workweek: Unions fought for limitations on working hours, leading to laws that standardize working time and establish the weekend.
Overtime pay: Workers receive higher compensation for hours worked beyond the standard workweek, thanks to union advocacy.
Minimum wage: Unions have been a driving force in the establishment and increase of minimum wage laws.
Child labor laws: Unions helped bring about laws that restrict child labor, ensuring children are not forced into exploitative working conditions.
Workplace safety regulations: Unions have fought for better working conditions, leading to the establishment of organizations like OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) and regulations that ensure safer workplaces.
Family and medical leave: Unions have pushed for policies like the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which provides employees with unpaid, job-protected leave for family or medical reasons.
Pensions and retirement benefits: Many pension plans and retirement benefits are the result of union negotiations.
Protections against workplace discrimination: Unions have supported laws like the Civil Rights Act that prohibits discrimination based on race, gender, religion, and more in the workplace.
Collective bargaining rights: The right for workers to negotiate as a group with their employer for better wages, benefits, and working conditions is a foundational union achievement.
Job security and grievance processes: Many union contracts protect workers from arbitrary dismissal and provide clear processes for addressing disputes or unfair treatment.
These are just a few of the additional contributions unions have made to improve labor conditions and workers' rights over the years.

[Skunky1]

Fear keeps the masses in check

[LoisR]

Nonsense. Where is the data?
No unions? Less pay, less benefits, less job security for the employees. But, it certainly puts more money in the pockets of the owners.
Sounds like you have never benefitted from a union. What a shame.

[ehonour]

Administrators:

Please remove this political thread.

[dewilson58]

Unions have played a crucial role in securing many of the rights and benefits that workers enjoy today. In addition to paid holidays, paid vacations, and health care, unions have also been instrumental in advocating for and achieving:

The 8-hour workday and 40-hour workweek: Unions fought for limitations on working hours, leading to laws that standardize working time and establish the weekend.
Overtime pay: Workers receive higher compensation for hours worked beyond the standard workweek, thanks to union advocacy.
Minimum wage: Unions have been a driving force in the establishment and increase of minimum wage laws.
Child labor laws: Unions helped bring about laws that restrict child labor, ensuring children are not forced into exploitative working conditions.
Workplace safety regulations: Unions have fought for better working conditions, leading to the establishment of organizations like OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) and regulations that ensure safer workplaces.
Family and medical leave: Unions have pushed for policies like the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which provides employees with unpaid, job-protected leave for family or medical reasons.
Pensions and retirement benefits: Many pension plans and retirement benefits are the result of union negotiations.
Protections against workplace discrimination: Unions have supported laws like the Civil Rights Act that prohibits discrimination based on race, gender, religion, and more in the workplace.
Collective bargaining rights: The right for workers to negotiate as a group with their employer for better wages, benefits, and working conditions is a foundational union achievement.
Job security and grievance processes: Many union contracts protect workers from arbitrary dismissal and provide clear processes for addressing disputes or unfair treatment.
These are just a few of the additional contributions unions have made to improve labor conditions and workers' rights over the years.

Good post.

SOME of your points are true............but the ones true are very old and unions are living on 50, 60, 70 year old accomplishments. Unions "have delivered nothing lately" (I know that's extreme).

But read history, don't make it up............Henry Ford created 40 hour weeks and overtime long before unions were around.

The things unions "pushed for" as you say is true, but there is no proof the items would not have happened anyway.

[DAVES]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.

Speaking from personal choices. I was self employed. Self employed means when you complain about or to the boss some see you are talking to yourself. When, they SCREAM how little they make and tax write offs that a business takes, they do NOT mention UNTAXED benefits.

I started over three times over 40 years. Union, you do your 20 years and retire to the villages with a pension and benefits. I am still taxed to pay for it.

[dewilson58]

Speaking from personal choices. I was self employed. Self employed means when you complain about or to the boss some see you are talking to yourself. When, they SCREAM how little they make and tax write offs that a business takes, they do NOT mention UNTAXED benefits.

Very difficult to sneak out early.

:mornincoffee:

[Cuervo]

I grew up in a poor Irish neighborhood in Queens with Harold, he was a friend of mine and a standup guy. As a New Yorker you learn to deal with the cards that are dealt to you.

Now I know there are many people on this site who hate unions, but what these people don’t realizes is that unions not only help their members, but also help nonunion members. When a union worker gets a raise, the non-union shop also gives a raise to their workers, either to keep the union out or to retain their workers. I represented my union for the last 5 years of my career and our union had a 3-year apprenticeship that was a must before you could take a job on your own. This was not only to make sure you were proficient but ensured the safety with people you were dealing with.

Automation is unstoppable and there is a good side and a not so good side. The goal of automation is to replace people and the very people who are champions of automations might find themselves unemployed one day. For those who are retired you are not spared, you see the smaller the workforce the less contributions into social security, inevitably forcing a reduction in benefits. I don’t have a solution, but someone better come up with one soon, AI is knocking at the door.

[Switter]

I would be considered pretty strongly conservative by most people but I do support collective bargaining. I consider it an expression of the first amendment. There are a lot of "ifs" around that though that I couldn't possibly get into on this forum.

[ithos]

I guess extortion is acceptable if you want to get paid much more than your skills are worth.

Remarks by Harold Daggett:

"If they don’t come to the table with real proposals, we’ll shut the ports down."

"We will never allow automation to take away our jobs. I’ll fight it to the death."

“First week, it will be all over the news — boom, boom, boom. Second week, guys who sell cars can’t sell cars because the cars ain’t coming in off the ships. They get laid off. Third week, malls start closing down. They can’t get the goods from China. They can’t sell clothes. They can’t do this. Everything in the United States comes on on a ship. They go out of business. Construction workers get laid off because the materials aren’t coming . The steel i s not coming in. The lumber is not coming in. They lose their jobs. Everybody is hating the Longshoremen now because now they realize how important our jobs are now.”

[DAVES]

So you believe it's solely union membership related and not the demographic makeup of the population? Would you expect these populations to be conditioned to actually work for a living after Johnson's Great Society Program??? I'll answer for you..absolutely not. They get paid to stay home and the more babies they make, the more they get paid to stay home. This leads to multiple fathers that don't raise the child which leads to misdirection and a life of crime and a vicious cycle...need I go on?

NOTHING is ONE ISSUE except people trying to support their BIAS. People tend to associate with similar people. The Villages is a clear example of this. I've been in neighborhoods where if, I was wiser I would not have gone. Kids grow up, seeing drug dealers with money fancy cars etc. EDUCATION? You do well in school and you are an outsider. Father knows best family are scarce as unicorn horns. MY PARENTS FAULT. I was taught by example, you work for what you NEED. If, you want something but don't need it,you buy it AFTER your NEED bills are PAID. A strange concept for many.

Answers? There are no simple EASY ones. A good start would be revamping our education system. The teacher's UNION would and does fight that.

[kcwhel]

I have a bad taste in my mouth trying to join the IBEW years ago so I have a dim view of unions. Now the dock workers (glorified equipment operators) who were making a nice $39/hr average with benefits that most do not have will be making $63/hr to push buttons and drive trucks. I doubt that hiring into these positions is done on merit but instead done through a good old boys network. This is bad for all of us who have to pay these overpaid thugs through increased prices on imported goods.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Speaking from personal choices. I was self employed. Self employed means when you complain about or to the boss some see you are talking to yourself. When, they SCREAM how little they make and tax write offs that a business takes, they do NOT mention UNTAXED benefits.

I started over three times over 40 years. Union, you do your 20 years and retire to the villages with a pension and benefits. I am still taxed to pay for it.

I never got any tax writeoffs as an employed person, in or out of a union. I was in a few unions. One of them was great. The others sucked. The purpose of unions is important, and should be supported. The implementation, not so much. It depends on the union.

The employee-run union at the phone company back when I first started working there in the 1990's was excellent. They negotiated paid insurance premiums on our choice of plans, including an HMO that was top-notch and affiliated with Yale University Hospital. Coordination of care was flawless between PCPs and specialists. We had something crazy like 11 paid holidays, plus 4 "personal days," 2 weeks paid vacation, bereavement pay, and 14 sick days per year that were stackable up to 28 days. We had our own on-staff nurse and wellness office, so anyone who wasn't feeling well could get a preliminary check right down the hall (I worked in Human Resources, so the nurse was on our floor).

We had a cafeteria that served pretty good food (for cafeterias), and we were just a block away from the edge of Downtown New Haven and could walk during our 45-minute (unpaid) break to just about any kind of grastronomic delight that interested us that day. I often went to Mamoun's Falafel Palace for a hummus plate and cardamom tea, and walked through the Yale Law School corridor on the way back to enjoy the architecture, and would sometimes sit outside the Beineke library to marvel at its translucent marble walls.

We had a pension rather than a 401k. Fully funded and matched up to 5% of our paycheck by the company. Our pay was excellent. My starting pay in 1991 was $10.00/hour. Minimum wage in 1991 was $4.25/hour, for comparison. I was what old-school phone workers called "steno." A departmental secretary who typed up stuff for the entire department, not just one boss.

And then, the CUTW was taken over by CWA, and everything went to crap. They wanted MORE and were adamant about not signing a contract that didn't give us MORE. We already got more than most corporations in the state - our dues were reasonable - but they had to "prove" to the employees that their union were bulldogs, and turned it into an us vs. them mentality. Previously, union negotiations were (mostly) civil. Now, they were combative.

They conceded job satisfaction in exchange for job security which felt more like jail. If a department needed to let someone go, that person could become a 3rd shift operator who now had quotas for upselling to customers calling them to fix problems.

Upward mobility became more difficult, and dues went up. I quit before things got too bad. I blame the union around 70% for the degradation of the employee trust, and 30% on the company's takeover by Whitacre and Southwestern Bell.

And so - unions absolutely have their place. But employee union members need to be pro-active, responsible, and keep themselves informed about what the union is doing to "protect" them. Sometimes they don't need protection and the union needs to just step back. When they are given free reign, they destroy more than they protect.

[justjim]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.

Don’t understand people in unions. Your father, grandfather and uncles never were coal miners? Unions were necessary to get safety in many different occupations but especially coal mines. A rising tide raises all boats union and non-union boats.

[DAVES]

I grew up in a poor Irish neighborhood in Queens with Harold, he was a friend of mine and a standup guy. As a New Yorker you learn to deal with the cards that are dealt to you.

Now I know there are many people on this site who hate unions, but what these people don’t realizes is that unions not only help their members, but also help nonunion members. When a union worker gets a raise, the non-union shop also gives a raise to their workers, either to keep the union out or to retain their workers. I represented my union for the last 5 years of my career and our union had a 3-year apprenticeship that was a must before you could take a job on your own. This was not only to make sure you were proficient but ensured the safety with people you were dealing with.

Automation is unstoppable and there is a good side and a not so good side. The goal of automation is to replace people and the very people who are champions of automations might find themselves unemployed one day. For those who are retired you are not spared, you see the smaller the workforce the less contributions into social security, inevitably forcing a reduction in benefits. I don’t have a solution, but someone better come up with one soon, AI is knocking at the door.

The first problem is we seek perfect answers but there is no such thing. Far as social secuity it is a prime example of mismanagement. Originally when started there were, if, I recall my reading, 12 workers for everyone collecting. WE are actually the problem. A huge mass of people retiring and going through the system. Today there are like two people working for everyone collecting. Social secuity had the numbers. They spent our money to expand benefits for those before us. They had a lot coming in. Now it is our turn. We paid a lot we want ours.
Problem is we had no choice but to buy into the system. Private insurance would have been cheaper. Truly shocking reality. Our national debt. Social secuity holds 40% of it. Imagine financing an obligation with the obligation. It would be illegal for a company to do that. INFLATION is a slight of hand trick. We need more to pay inflated higher prices. We pay those higher prices with after tax money. People do not realize how much less they have even with the number going up.

Far as HATE, I do not hate Unions. I keep my HATE list as empty as possible so can give anyone or anything to make my list my full attention.

[dewilson58]

Don’t understand people in unions. Your father, grandfather and uncles never were coal miners? Unions were necessary to get safety in many different occupations but especially coal mines. A rising tide raises all boats union and non-union boats.

AGAIN..............old news...............50 years ago............living on old history.

:loco:

[Cuervo]

The first problem is we seek perfect answers but there is no such thing. Far as social secuity it is a prime example of mismanagement. Originally when started there were, if, I recall my reading, 12 workers for everyone collecting. WE are actually the problem. A huge mass of people retiring and going through the system. Today there are like two people working for everyone collecting. Social secuity had the numbers. They spent our money to expand benefits for those before us. They had a lot coming in. Now it is our turn. We paid a lot we want ours.
Problem is we had no choice but to buy into the system. Private insurance would have been cheaper. Truly shocking reality. Our national debt. Social secuity holds 40% of it. Imagine financing an obligation with the obligation. It would be illegal for a company to do that. INFLATION is a slight of hand trick. We need more to pay inflated higher prices. We pay those higher prices with after tax money. People do not realize how much less they have even with the number going up.

Far as HATE, I do not hate Unions. I keep my HATE list as empty as possible so can give anyone or anything to make my list my full attention.

Besides mismanagement there is one big issue with FICA which not only covers Social Security, but also Medicare. Instead of there being a percentage of total earned there is a cap of $160,200 in 2023 and $168,600 in 2024. You remove the cap and clamp down on off the book work and you'll see this problem disappear. Off the book work in this country is everywhere.

[Johnsocat]

We appear to have dodged the bullet for the time being. So, what are we going to learn from it?
Instead of focusing on whether unions are good or bad, how about paying attention to the fact that our Nation's daily way of life and our entire economy rely on IMPORTS.
We can no longer survive as a strong, independent Nation on our own. We can no longer produce the things that are vital to keep us functioning.
So, what are we going to do about it?
Maybe this particular union's actions have a provided a greater value than most believe.


I guess extortion is acceptable if you want to get paid much more than your skills are worth.

Remarks by Harold Daggett:

"If they don’t come to the table with real proposals, we’ll shut the ports down."

"We will never allow automation to take away our jobs. I’ll fight it to the death."

“First week, it will be all over the news — boom, boom, boom. Second week, guys who sell cars can’t sell cars because the cars ain’t coming in off the ships. They get laid off. Third week, malls start closing down. They can’t get the goods from China. They can’t sell clothes. They can’t do this. Everything in the United States comes on on a ship. They go out of business. Construction workers get laid off because the materials aren’t coming . The steel i s not coming in. The lumber is not coming in. They lose their jobs. Everybody is hating the Longshoremen now because now they realize how important our jobs are now.”

[Cuervo]

There was a mention of unions how shall I say this, having mob influence.
I always say when addressing this topic.
In New York there are 3 ways of doing things and this is not only in New York.
The right way, the wrong way and the N.Y. way.
Assuming you want to put a pool in your back yard.

1. The right way you apply for a permit and wait for it to be approved which could be when hell freezes over, if it's approved at all.
2. The wrong way you put it in without a permit, hope you don't get caught and have to deal with it when you go to sell your house.
3. The N.Y. way, you make some phone calls to friends and an inspector come to your house, check the area and the size pool you want to put in tells you will have a permit within a couple of week and leaves with an envelope of cash you conveniently left on the table.
Anyone who does not believe this is not an everyday in this country needs to wake up.

[justjim]

Population density has a lot to do with what rules and regulations need to be in place. New York is an example and other large Metropolitan areas are other examples. Small towns and very rural areas not so much. We see changes in The Villages as the population has grown.

[ken.yotz]

& Ur point??
and you call yourself "SAGE"?

[opinionist]

Private sector unions serve their purpose when business owners abuse their workers. Wages are always limited by what the business can afford. Public sector unions have no market regulation on wages, and the result is ever-higher taxes and deficit spending. Private sector unions have diminished in power with the movement of jobs overseas, giving us a considerable trade deficit and the risk of a massive shock event when we can no longer purchase foreign goods with printed money. The solution will be painful following a failure of the financial system.

[4$ALE]

and you call yourself "SAGE"?

:rolleyes: No "Junior Member"..... he calls himself Mr. Helpful

[bragones]

Unions fester mediocrity. I worked my entire career in non-union companies. Employees were always encouraged to strive for faster, better, cheaper. Those who thrived in that environment were rewarded generously with hefty salary increases, stock options and bonuses. Those who did not eventually parted ways with company, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. Pensions were not needed. You self-funded retirement through 401k contributions which were matched by the company, in some cases up to 11% of your salary. The thought of not keeping up with productivity changes such as AI and automation was not tolerated. My career afforded me the American dream of early retirement with very comfortable financial stability. A union friend of mine once claimed he was a union hero because he figured out how to get the most time off without breaking any union rules. Appalling. BTW, robots will never stop working to hold our country hostage for self-interests.

[Wilson02852]

If companies did what unions do they would be dragged into court and charged with violation of antitrust laws. They cannot even buy one another out without government approval.

Yet unions can form an all encompassing group and can act from New England to Texas and get a pass.

Interesting concept.

[Cuervo]

Private sector unions serve their purpose when business owners abuse their workers. Wages are always limited by what the business can afford. Public sector unions have no market regulation on wages, and the result is ever-higher taxes and deficit spending. Private sector unions have diminished in power with the movement of jobs overseas, giving us a considerable trade deficit and the risk of a massive shock event when we can no longer purchase foreign goods with printed money. The solution will be painful following a failure of the financial system.

First work going offshore will happen even if unions did not exist, if workers here worked for a dollar an hour and an employer believes they could get the same product in India for $0.50 wave good-by the job is gone.
As far as tactics unions will use whatever muscle they have, and employers will use whatever lobbyist has the most influence to get what they want done.
Though this involves the lives of people in this country at the end of the day it's no more than a money game.
Watch the movie Other People's Money, a quote from the movie delivered by Danny Davito "Whoever dies with the most money wins".

[bioman419]

Well put!

[bioman419]

BTW, the Strike Stoppage was all political. Can't effect the economy with election day upon us.

[Pugchief]

I never got any tax writeoffs as an employed person, in or out of a union.

Of course you did. You were responding to DAVES comment about untaxed benefits. Did you not have employer provided medical and dental coverage? Was the value of the premiums paid by your employer on your behalf taxed in any way? Umm, no.

So if you were making $20/hour salary, and the premiums were the equivalent of another $4/hour, that portion of compensation flowed to you tax free as a phantom "writeoff".

Keep in mind that if you weren't given medical, dental, and probably other benefits (life insurance?, disability insurance?, food?), you would pay for those things with after tax dollars. Also, you theoretically could have been paid $24/hour instead of $20/hour if your employer didn't choose to buy you benefits as there would be more money available for salaries.

[Pugchief]

btw, the strike stoppage was all political. Can't effect the economy with election day upon us.

100%

[justjim]

The middle class was doing quite well in 1990 thanks to the Unions. $20.00 a hour wages in 1990 was a living wage for most middle class workers. According to Google, $55.00 per hour today is its equal. With the demise of Unions, the middle class has considerably diminished.

40% of Americans today can’t come up with $400.00 in cash in case of emergencies. Those staying just a bit ahead of the curve are working two jobs. The fortunate Americans, like most of us, complain about minimum wage of $15.00 a hour driving up our cost when we dine out. There are more Billionaires than ever before in the history of our country. Is there something wrong with this picture? Is there an answer? Is there value in a Union?

[dewilson58]

and you call yourself "SAGE"?

Yes, that was absolutely..........I asked for clarification. Oh My.

:1rotfl::1rotfl:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

We appear to have dodged the bullet for the time being. So, what are we going to learn from it?
Instead of focusing on whether unions are good or bad, how about paying attention to the fact that our Nation's daily way of life and our entire economy rely on IMPORTS.
We can no longer survive as a strong, independent Nation on our own. We can no longer produce the things that are vital to keep us functioning.
So, what are we going to do about it?
Maybe this particular union's actions have a provided a greater value than most believe.

Actually, we CAN produce it all. We CAN be self-sufficient. However, we're not willing to work for low wages and substandard benefits, and we're not willing to pay a premium for products manufactured by people who demand fair wages and benefits.

And so, we import from countries that have gone the authoritarian route, whose workers get paid what the government tells them they get paid, they work for however many hours per day the government tells them they work, with no prospect of "retirement," and they can sell product to us for less than it costs us to make it ourselves as a result.

I'd rather not live like that. I'm not willing for my country to turn into "that." I also would like to pay *less* for things. But in a capitalistic society, the shareholder of the stocks are the boss. If the shareholder says "bring us more profits" then the CEO does whatever he has to, to bring us more profits. He isn't being paid to care about his employees. He's being paid to return higher dividends to shareholders. Period.

[Cuervo]

I've negotiated contracts as a union rep.
When I sat at the table even though I knew my members were asking for something I would never get I would put it on the table. Sometimes this back and forth would last days other times it would last months, but at the end of the day I tried to get the best deal I could for the membership. I represented people, not profits, my goal was to get as much as I could without killing the golden goose.
Did I dislike the people across the table, the answer is no. The people across the table were not the employers most were from H&R and a lawyer. Were they putting something on the table much less than the real employer was willing to offer yes. But it was all part of the game.
See I was trying to get as much as I could for the members and the H&R people were trying to make their employer happy and protect their own job.
I still have a copy of the last contract I negotiated, there are 27 signatures on it 26 were representing the employer and the single one is mine.
Though this ends up being a tennis match, I was the one sitting at the table concerned with people lives. Financially I was not going to gain from whatever we agreed to, the only thing I would get is the respect from the membership.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I've negotiated contracts as a union rep.
When I sat at the table even though I knew my members were asking for something I would never get I would put it on the table. Sometimes this back and forth would last days other times it would last months, but at the end of the day I tried to get the best deal I could for the membership. I represented people, not profits, my goal was to get as much as I could without killing the golden goose.
Did I dislike the people across the table, the answer is no. The people across the table were not the employers most were from H&R and a lawyer. Were they putting something on the table much less than the real employer was willing to offer yes. But it was all part of the game.
See I was trying to get as much as I could for the members and the H&R people were trying to make their employer happy and protect their own job.
I still have a copy of the last contract I negotiated, there are 27 signatures on it 26 were representing the employer and the single one is mine.
Though this ends up being a tennis match, I was the one sitting at the table concerned with people lives. Financially I was not going to gain from whatever we agreed to, the only thing I would get is the respect from the membership.

If the employees were already getting great benefits, great retirement packages, great pay, a great working environment, and great company support - and then the company said "this next contract year we're going to offer the same, plus a 1% increase above the expected cost of living increase across the board" why would you try to fight for more? For every thing you demand from them, you have to sacrifice something. Negotiations are a give and take.

I'd rather my union rep say, "y'know what kids? This year, the union doesn't have to do a thing. The company is top-notch and treats us like the valued members of our company that we have always expected. So this year, we're reducing your union dues by 50%, since we really don't have to do much other than arbitrate disputes, which hardly ever happens anyway."

That'd be swell, in an environment where the company already treats their employees with the respect they deserve in all ways.

[GoRedSox!]

So you believe it's solely union membership related and not the demographic makeup of the population? Would you expect these populations to be conditioned to actually work for a living after Johnson's Great Society Program??? I'll answer for you..absolutely not. They get paid to stay home and the more babies they make, the more they get paid to stay home. This leads to multiple fathers that don't raise the child which leads to misdirection and a life of crime and a vicious cycle...need I go on?I don't believe that it is solely due to union membership, but that's a contributing factor. Folks have criticized FL, and while I don't think this is the greatest state to work and salaries are low, at least there is an increased minimum wage here. Some of these states won't even raise the minimum wage above $7.25 an hour.

As an FYI, I was in a union once....when I was in college and working part-time on the janitorial crew. My entire actual full-time working career, I was never in a union.

As far as my thoughts on many corporations laying people off in their late 50's before they reach retirement age, I was part of management and I know for sure that it is true. It's also backed up by statistics, you can actually see this statistic, it's not a figment of my imagination. There is a reason that 70% of Social Security recipients start collecting at age 62.

[dewilson58]

As far as my thoughts on many corporations laying people off in their late 50's before they reach retirement age, I was part of management and I know for sure that it is true. It's also backed up by statistics, you can actually see this statistic, it's not a figment of my imagination.

There is a reason that 70% of Social Security recipients start collecting at age 62.

Share the factual statistic on both of your claims.

:popcorn:

[GoRedSox!]

I really try to post as objectively as I can, using real data and I try to leave my biases out of it. It's not really possible to do that 100%, but I try.

For context, I was on the right side of things. It was fortunate for me. I received stock options as part of my compensation. I received a yearly bonus and a raise. I didn't need a union....but the truth be told, the folks who did the majority of the work could certainly have used one.

The statistics are there. The average American worker has gotten killed in this country over the past 40 years, with meager gains in real wages. Corporate profits have been astonishingly high, as the investor class will tell you. 50 years ago, many employees had a defined pension plan that would augment Social Security with guaranteed income. Now, almost no workers get such a plan and are left to make their own investment choices and manage a 401(k). CEO and top management pay has gone way, way up, not so much the average American worker. Wealth disparity is at a 100% year high. Health insurance benefits seem to shift cost share to employees every passing year. Millions of good American jobs have been offshored overseas to cheaper labor who don't get many, if any, benefits.

The above is all true. The Villages is a relatively affluent retirement community, so I expect that the majority of folks who read this have fared better than the average American. But there are many, many retirees trying to live on Social Security and not much else, or having to work part-time jobs well into their 70's.

I'm not exactly sure what the answer is to all this....I am not an expert....maybe it's not unions, maybe it is....but the current status quo is not working great for the working man and woman in this country.

[Johnsocat]

What has happened to us as a Nation?
Remember? "It's not what your country can do for you; it's what you can do for your country."

[dewilson58]

There is a reason that 70% of Social Security recipients start collecting at age 62.

Here are facts vs. your fake news:

In the U.S., you can retire as early as 62 and start claiming your Social Security. And as of 2021, according to the Congressional Research Service, about 30% of Social Security applicants were 62.

[biker1]

…and the percentage of people starting Social Security at age 62 has been declining (people waiting till a later age for a higher benefit). Here is some additional data of the percentage of people starting social security at various ages for 2022 and the average benefit. Big spikes at earliest age (62), typical full retirement age (66), and age 70 (highest benefit). I don’t fully understand taking the benefit after age 70 since the benefit doesn’t increase after age 70 (leaving money on the table).

Age Number (percentage of total) Average benefit
62 807,587 (27.3%) $1,287.61
63 222,908 (7.5%) $1,510.29
64 238,163 (8.0%) $1,625.03
65 388,996 (13.1%) $1,874.56
66 1,182,692 (24.7%) $2,039.86
67 122,918 (4.1%) $2,399.86
68 74,743 (2.5%) $2,594.74
69 66,638 (2.2%) $2,806.90
70-74 302,327 (10.2%) $3,065.48
75+ 6,317 (0.2%) $1,185.00

Here are facts vs. your fake news:

In the U.S., you can retire as early as 62 and start claiming your Social Security. And as of 2021, according to the Congressional Research Service, about 30% of Social Security applicants were 62.

[BBBnWitty]

Well said.

[Pugchief]

The middle class was doing quite well in 1990 thanks to the Unions. $20.00 a hour wages in 1990 was a living wage for most middle class workers. According to Google, $55.00 per hour today is its equal. With the demise of Unions, the middle class has considerably diminished.

40% of Americans today can’t come up with $400.00 in cash in case of emergencies. Those staying just a bit ahead of the curve are working two jobs. The fortunate Americans, like most of us, complain about minimum wage of $15.00 a hour driving up our cost when we dine out. There are more Billionaires than ever before in the history of our country. Is there something wrong with this picture? Is there an answer? Is there value in a Union?

The middle class is vanishing for sure. What makes you think it has anything to do with unions? It probably has a lot more to do with the elites.

[Wondering]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.
Wrong again, as usual. Shipping companies have made billions recently. Unions made this country and always will. There are more to contracts than wages, medical benefits, overtime rates, work week/year/day. How about safety regs within the company? Keep trying but start stating background facts to support your weak theories.

[jimbomaybe]

We appear to have dodged the bullet for the time being. So, what are we going to learn from it?
Instead of focusing on whether unions are good or bad, how about paying attention to the fact that our Nation's daily way of life and our entire economy rely on IMPORTS.
We can no longer survive as a strong, independent Nation on our own. We can no longer produce the things that are vital to keep us functioning.
So, what are we going to do about it?
Maybe this particular union's actions have a provided a greater value than most believe.
"our Nation's daily way of life and our entire economy rely on IMPORTS." Few could afford their current lifestyle if they had to pay for the American worker to produce it, The dock workers have a monopoly on a bottle neck/ potential strangle hold on goods coming into the country, any move make their job more efficient will be fought over to maintain their power

[waterflower]

People who are not in the working environment today, probably should not be commenting on the issues of todays HUMAN RESOURCE. Not the same game as the 60's-70's-80's.

[dewilson58]

Wrong again, as usual. Shipping companies have made billions recently. Unions made this country and always will. There are more to contracts than wages, medical benefits, overtime rates, work week/year/day. How about safety regs within the company? Keep trying but start stating background facts to support your weak theories.
Keep Wondering............that's why you are wrong.

:)

Yep, companies make millions and billions...................thank God.
Without profits, no wages, no employees, no companies.

Unions may have had an impact over 50 years ago, but with the current minimal percentage and decreasing numbers.......not much impact on the USA today.

Unions may have suggested some safety items for a very limited amount of employees.

Most Americans are NOT union and don't want to be union.

I enjoy "other views", but get out of the past...........old news.

These docks and dock workers are not even in the Top 50 in the world of major ports..........they are fighting automation and advancements to protect jobs.

Not a road to success.

:coolsmiley:

[Cuervo]

Let's put automation and wages aside, there is another service unions enforce.
You see there are a lot of good employers and there are also a lot of bad ones.
Union will put whatever protection they can for their member into the contracts.
That not always fool proof many employers will spend time and money to find workarounds to achieve their financial goal without any care about the workers.
These same companies are the ones if a worker drops dead on the floor, they will replace them before their body gets cold.
I know there are many that don't believe that to be true, but you can't believe what went into some of our contracts just to make sure they would survive the job.

[GoRedSox!]

I misspoke about 70% of people taking Social Security at 62. I was trying to say that 70% take it before full retirement age. And I was not looking at the most current data, which someone posted above.

As for how many people are retired and at what age, according to the Motley Fool:

The average retirement age for Americans is 61.
The average retirement age has increased by a few years since the early 1990s, when the average American retired at 57.

This article with is current as of April 2024 provides much more info on retirement age and why people left the workforce, including involuntary reasons. According to CBS, 70% of Americans are retiring before age 65. Planning on retiring at 65? Most Americans retire far earlier — and not by choice. - CBS News (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/retirement-age-65-most-workers-retire-at-62/)

[juddfl]

I am also IBEW. I worked for Verizon for 31 years, not as long as you. Our union was very good. These port workers do not want automation. Our ports are a lot less proficient than many countries. If we did what these workers are doing, you would not be walking around with a phone not attached to a cord. We worked the problems out by having buy outs for retirement. Then they offered early retirement. We did it and they can also. They need to be modernized to keep up with the world.

[JMintzer]

There is a reason that 70% of Social Security recipients start collecting at age 62.

Not even close to correct. According the the SSA, as of 2023, it was closer to 23%

[JMintzer]

Here are facts vs. your fake news:

In the U.S., you can retire as early as 62 and start claiming your Social Security. And as of 2021, according to the Congressional Research Service, about 30% of Social Security applicants were 62.

And retirement at that age has been steadily dropping. As of 2023, it was around 23%...

[jimbomaybe]

Actually, we CAN produce it all. We CAN be self-sufficient. However, we're not willing to work for low wages and substandard benefits, and we're not willing to pay a premium for products manufactured by people who demand fair wages and benefits.

And so, we import from countries that have gone the authoritarian route, whose workers get paid what the government tells them they get paid, they work for however many hours per day the government tells them they work, with no prospect of "retirement," and they can sell product to us for less than it costs us to make it ourselves as a result.

I'd rather not live like that. I'm not willing for my country to turn into "that." I also would like to pay *less* for things. But in a capitalistic society, the shareholder of the stocks are the boss. If the shareholder says "bring us more profits" then the CEO does whatever he has to, to bring us more profits. He isn't being paid to care about his employees. He's being paid to return higher dividends to shareholders. Period.
Business react to economic conditions ,businesses have to compete with other business for customers and for employee the government makes fiscal and monetary policy a governmental agency controls interest rates, there by controlling the economy, without the lure/hope of profits/ ROI, no business, people put their money where it will give the best return, it isn't possible just to dial up a greater return, its a very complex balancing of resources for any business

[JMintzer]

I misspoke about 70% of people taking Social Security at 62. I was trying to say that 70% take it before full retirement age. And I was not looking at the most current data, which someone posted above.

As for how many people are retired and at what age, according to the Motley Fool:

The average retirement age for Americans is 61.
The average retirement age has increased by a few years since the early 1990s, when the average American retired at 57.

This article with is current as of April 2024 provides much more info on retirement age and why people left the workforce, including involuntary reasons. According to CBS, 70% of Americans are retiring before age 65. Planning on retiring at 65? Most Americans retire far earlier — and not by choice. - CBS News (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/retirement-age-65-most-workers-retire-at-62/)

Life expectancy rose as much as the retirement age did...

[GoRedSox!]

Life expectancy rose as much as the retirement age did...The point I am trying to make and provide some data to support is that MANY employees don’t make it to full Social Security Retirement age. 70% don’t make it to 65. Somewhere between 60-70% take Social Security benefits early. Many of these retirements are not voluntary. Corporations sever ties with a good number of employees before age 65.

[JMintzer]

The point I am trying to make and provide some data to support is that MANY employees don’t make it to full Social Security Retirement age. 70% don’t make it to 65. Somewhere between 60-70% take Social Security benefits early. Many of these retirements are not voluntary. Corporations sever ties with a good number of employees before age 65.

Absolute nonsense...

A simple google search proves you're incorrect...
…
In 2022, the life expectancy in the United States was 77.5 years, an increase of 1.1 years from 2021. The life expectancy for males was 74.8 years and for females it was 80.2 years."

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

The point I am trying to make and provide some data to support is that MANY employees don’t make it to full Social Security Retirement age. 70% don’t make it to 65. Somewhere between 60-70% take Social Security benefits early. Many of these retirements are not voluntary. Corporations sever ties with a good number of employees before age 65.

Absolute nonsense...

A simple google search proves you're incorrect...
…
In 2022, the life expectancy in the United States was 77.5 years, an increase of 1.1 years from 2021. The life expectancy for males was 74.8 years and for females it was 80.2 years."

I'm pretty sure you're misinterpreting RedSox's post. When they say "won't make it to 65" they mean "won't choose to wait to retire until they turn 65, which is the full retirement age." Has nothing to do with dying, and everything to do with retiring from the work force and choosing to take their earned social security checks.

[mike234]

I disagree. I am here because of a union. I had fair wages and a nice pension because of a union.
me too........when I see my union guys. our leaders, I thank them everytime.....arguing with people about unions is like the abortion issue, and politics......blah blah blah...I know they are jealous that they arent in a union......

[Skelly]

Clearly your not a union worker…..

[Marmaduke]

As the world passes us by.
Agreed!
...As the world passes us by, is correct!!!
Education in America leaves students illiterate throughout their school years and especially by the time they reach college. Cannot compete in math or science.

Students find that they'll need Unions to protect them, just like they did for their ancestors, because their college degrees don't mean a thing.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Agreed!
...As the world passes us by, is correct!!!
Education in America leaves students illiterate throughout their school years and especially by the time they reach college. Cannot compete in math or science.

Students find that they'll need Unions to protect them, just like they did for their ancestors, because their college degrees don't mean a thing.

That depends on what they plan on doing with their degree.

You should probably have a degree in medicine if you want to be a doctor.
If you want to be a lawyer, you need a law degree.
A degree in business administration isn't "necessary" but it sure is super-helpful if you want to run a large business. If you want to be HIRED by someone else to run THEIR business, a degree would probably be required.
I wouldn't trust any school teacher that didn't have a degree.
A degree isn't necessary to become an elected official. But the education from attending a university or other higher learning institute would help a candidate open up their mind to new ideas, and I consider that a consideration, even though it's not a requisite.

[dewilson58]

Florida like most of the less educated south are anti union. Therefore, crappy benefits, crappy wages and crappy pensions. It's not difficult to understand.


Please provide support.

Florida education attainment is: 90% for High School & 33% for Bachelor's Degree or higher.

USA Average is: 90% for High School & 35% Bachelor's Degree or higher.

Pretty much average.
"It's not difficult to understand"

[Jim1mack]

[QUOTE=Boomer;2376082]There are companies where perhaps a union is/was not needed. Many years ago I asked someone who worked in the manufacturing part of a huge, well-known company if they had a union. The response was, “We don’t need one.”

Also, said company made a lot of regular people very comfortable through profit-sharing. Can you imagine if companies like Walmart, for example, would have made profit-sharing available to ALL employees. Not only would there have been a lot of loyal employees on those cash registers, etc., just think of the learning experience that would have come from owning stock.

But a lot of companies plan to earn huge profits on the backs of employees and never consider how effective company stock all-around can be in moving a company forward with loyal employees. For companies that do not have stock, there are other ways to keep loyal employees and keep unions at bay. The employers’ choice to exploit is what brings in unions.

I am not saying all unions are perfect. But if unions are stomped into non-existence by those who have motives that risk our future overall economy, we will turn into another country.

This thread is going to turn into union-bashing. I can feel those wagons circling already.

Of course, most of those circling up will be the same people who expect teachers to devote their lives to working for basically nothing.

My point is — the middle class has been the backbone of our economy. Unions were instrumental in creating a strong middle class. If we lose our middle class, we are done. Unrestrained greed is bad

[Jim1mack]

While going to college I worked for the phone in Wisconsin during summers. Their union was Communication Workers of America. The union specified how long it should take to do various tasks. With that, when I got my morning work load I found I could complete it in half a day. Many afternoons I and other workers would take in a matinee or sit in a bar or run household chores. Upon leaving the company's garbage in the morning it was off to a diner first thing for an hour or so breakfast. This union apparently was against maximum productivity.

The father of my girl friend at the time also worked for the phone company and was a union steward. He got both I and my girl friend jobs there. I do thank him for that. It paid quite well.

[Jim1mack]

I’m with you on this. They’re inflationary with bargaining for higher and higher wages and benefits and minimize producdtivity. They had their purpose at one time long long ago.

[Aces4]

That depends on what they plan on doing with their degree.

You should probably have a degree in medicine if you want to be a doctor.
If you want to be a lawyer, you need a law degree.
A degree in business administration isn't "necessary" but it sure is super-helpful if you want to run a large business. If you want to be HIRED by someone else to run THEIR business, a degree would probably be required.
I wouldn't trust any school teacher that didn't have a degree.
A degree isn't necessary to become an elected official. But the education from attending a university or other higher learning institute would help a candidate open up their mind to new ideas, and I consider that a consideration, even though it's not a requisite.

And I don't trust some teachers who have degrees, there are some real doozies out there. I find many colleges don't open minds but close them, critical thinking is sorely lacking. Employers are looking for bright and INDUSTRIOUS employees who appear to be lacking currently.

I personally think unions are a double edged sword. Have they protected the US worker, often. Have the union leaders been the biggest winners, I believe so. Have they created messy issues with the workers, absolutely.

It was so funny when a relative went to work in a large industrial manufacturing organization and was told by fellow employees to slow down when working, we don't work that fast here. But the union dues are collected every paycheck and they aren't cheap.:shocked:

[LeRoySmith]

I think there was a time and place for unions, that time is long past.

Does this union protect 'no show' and 'low show' jobs?

How did 50K dockworkers strike at US ports with only 25K jobs? (https://nypost.com/2024/10/04/business/how-did-50k-dockworkers-strike-at-us-ports-with-only-25k-jobs/)

Sounds like mobsters or at least pay to play. I've worked both union and nonunion and I much prefer the nonunion.

[JRcorvette]

His salary is +$700k, $1mil house in FL & $2mil house in NJ.

& the silly members are okay with this.

:faint:

These Unions are ripping off the American people big time. Their demands are outrageous and they are ok with holding goods hostage. Why don’t they as for a small percentage of profits to be distributed instead of crazy high salaries. That could be given on a quarterly bases.

Say hello to even higher inflation!

[blueash]

While going to college I worked for the phone in Wisconsin during summers. Their union was Communication Workers of America. The union specified how long it should take to do various tasks. With that, when I got my morning work load I found I could complete it in half a day. Many afternoons I and other workers would take in a matinee or sit in a bar or run household chores. Upon leaving the company's garbage in the morning it was off to a diner first thing for an hour or so breakfast. This union apparently was against maximum productivity.

The father of my girl friend at the time also worked for the phone company and was a union steward. He got both I and my girl friend jobs there. I do thank him for that. It paid quite well.

And during that time that you worked for the company and were very well paid for less than fully productive effort, did the company make money? Did the stockholders see some gains, and most importantly, were the workers able to have a single parent make enough to buy a house and send their kid to college and the worker got a pension?

Wasn't that a time when the middle class was thriving not dying? Much of the credit for the health of the middle class was because of unions.

[Pugchief]

And during that time that you worked for the company and were very well paid for less than fully productive effort, did the company make money? Did the stockholders see some gains, and most importantly, were the workers able to have a single parent make enough to buy a house and send their kid to college and the worker got a pension?

Wasn't that a time when the middle class was thriving not dying? Much of the credit for the health of the middle class was because of unions.

So you're saying that it's okay that the employees were intentionally less productive as long as the company made money and the stockholders gained? Jeez, you have clearly never owned a business. If any of my employees intentionally slacked off, they'd be gone.

[Johnsocat]

The median income in The Villages is around $73k. The Villages, FL | Data USA (https://datausa.io/profile/geo/the-villages-fl)
Whereas the median income in The U.S in 2022 was 74k.
Income in the United States: 2022 (https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2023/demo/p60-279.html)

I do not view that as Villagers being "affluent". I view that as average middle class.

I really try to post as objectively as I can, using real data and I try to leave my biases out of it. It's not really possible to do that 100%, but I try.

For context, I was on the right side of things. It was fortunate for me. I received stock options as part of my compensation. I received a yearly bonus and a raise. I didn't need a union....but the truth be told, the folks who did the majority of the work could certainly have used one.

The statistics are there. The average American worker has gotten killed in this country over the past 40 years, with meager gains in real wages. Corporate profits have been astonishingly high, as the investor class will tell you. 50 years ago, many employees had a defined pension plan that would augment Social Security with guaranteed income. Now, almost no workers get such a plan and are left to make their own investment choices and manage a 401(k). CEO and top management pay has gone way, way up, not so much the average American worker. Wealth disparity is at a 100% year high. Health insurance benefits seem to shift cost share to employees every passing year. Millions of good American jobs have been offshored overseas to cheaper labor who don't get many, if any, benefits.

The above is all true. The Villages is a relatively affluent retirement community, so I expect that the majority of folks who read this have fared better than the average American. But there are many, many retirees trying to live on Social Security and not much else, or having to work part-time jobs well into their 70's.

I'm not exactly sure what the answer is to all this....I am not an expert....maybe it's not unions, maybe it is....but the current status quo is not working great for the working man and woman in this country.

[mikempp]

The world is not passing us by. That's just plain false. We are by far the most affluent country in the world. We have the best economy in the world, by far.

Unions will always be a target by those who prefer that profits go to corporations, their CEO's and senior management and shareholders, rather than working people. The middle class was strongest in this country when unions were strongest. This is indisputable economic facts.

These workers just got a 61.5% raise over the next 6 years. I think the union just did a great job. This one the heels of the UAW getting 40% increase over 4 years and Shawn Fain doing a great job. The folks who run these ports have seen their profits soar 350% over the last 10 years. I am glad the working man and woman is getting a fair share of that in this latest negotiation.

The economy all over the world is a mess, just because our is slightly better is no consultation and certainly not cause for a victory lap.

[Johnsocat]

What I tried to point out was this threat made highly visible to every American citizen our dependence on IMPORTS and highlighted a HUGE National Security vulnerability.
Yet, no one is talking about this very real threat to our daily lives and what we can do to reduce that threat.


"our Nation's daily way of life and our entire economy rely on IMPORTS." Few could afford their current lifestyle if they had to pay for the American worker to produce it, The dock workers have a monopoly on a bottle neck/ potential strangle hold on goods coming into the country, any move make their job more efficient will be fought over to maintain their power

[Stu from NYC]

Too much power in the hands of business or unions is no good for our economy.

Big unions have been the death of quite a few large businesses and put lots of people out of work.

[JMintzer]

I'm pretty sure you're misinterpreting RedSox's post. When they say "won't make it to 65" they mean "won't choose to wait to retire until they turn 65, which is the full retirement age." Has nothing to do with dying, and everything to do with retiring from the work force and choosing to take their earned social security checks.

He's wrong on that point, as well...

I posted the numbers published by the SSA...

[kingofbeer]

The latest strike is a great example of the lack of value.

Yes they wanted wages but they want job security thru the lack of automation.
That's nuts.
Of all these striking ports, "represented" by the union........none of them are in the Top 50 efficient ports in the world.
What's that light in the tunnel??

Pretty sad the USA labor is not a leader, it's not even close.
The cost of labor protectionism.

The vast majority of people don't want or need union representation.

Don't understand people in unions.
Haters are going to hate. Unions protect jobs and improve the lives of everyday workers. I pity those middle-class and lower income, ham and eggers who "hate unions". I was a union member, when I was in high school and worked in a grocery store and the union worked for me.

[JMintzer]

There are companies where perhaps a union is/was not needed. Many years ago I asked someone who worked in the manufacturing part of a huge, well-known company if they had a union. The response was, “We don’t need one.”

Also, said company made a lot of regular people very comfortable through profit-sharing. Can you imagine if companies like Walmart, for example, would have made profit-sharing available to ALL employees. Not only would there have been a lot of loyal employees on those cash registers, etc., just think of the learning experience that would have come from owning stock.

But a lot of companies plan to earn huge profits on the backs of employees and never consider how effective company stock all-around can be in moving a company forward with loyal employees. For companies that do not have stock, there are other ways to keep loyal employees and keep unions at bay. The employers’ choice to exploit is what brings in unions.

I am not saying all unions are perfect. But if unions are stomped into non-existence by those who have motives that risk our future overall economy, we will turn into another country.

This thread is going to turn into union-bashing. I can feel those wagons circling already.

Of course, most of those circling up will be the same people who expect teachers to devote their lives to working for basically nothing.

My point is — the middle class has been the backbone of our economy. Unions were instrumental in creating a strong middle class. If we lose our middle class, we are done. Unrestrained greed is bad

Walmart -does- offer stock options to all employees...

which walmart employees are eligible for stock options - Google Search (https://www.google.com/search?q=which+walmart+employees+are+eligible+for+ stock+options&oq=which+walmart+employees+are+eligible+for+stock+ options&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIR igATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigATIHCAUQIRifBdIBCTI3NTU3 ajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

[JustSomeGuy]

This country was founded by a union. 13 colonies, remember? Organized labor. Or do you prefer self checkout while the person who was at a register is now unemployed? Union Ironworker for 40 years, I have what I have because of it. Proud of it!
Well, the group that declared independence was a "Confederation of States" - The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was the first written constitution of the United States. Written in 1777 and stemming from wartime urgency, its progress was slowed by fears of central authority and extensive land claims by states. It was not ratified until March 1, 1781.

Under these articles, the states remained sovereign and independent, with Congress serving as the last resort on appeal of disputes. Significantly, The Articles of Confederation named the new nation “The United States of America.”

The Constitution, adopted in 1787, used the words "in order to form a more perfect union, establish this constitution," which outlined the current 3 branches of government (not a union like the Iron Workers, it was describing improving the Confederation of States by implementing the three branch government we have today.(We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.) (Defence is spelled that way in the Constitution, old spelling)
Self Checkout? Cause by the increase in minimum wage to 15.00 in most states. Unions backed this increase because the starting rate in most union contracts is also tied to the minimum wage rates and include an automatic increase in pay if the minimum wage goes up.

Traditionally, unions have supported minimum wage initiatives because their contracts have been directly or indirectly tied to the minimum wage. For instance, UNITE contract that covered workers in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and South Jersey said the following: "Whenever the federal legal minimum wage is increased, minimum wage [in the agreement] shall be increased so that each will be at least fifteen (15%) percent higher than such legal minimum wage.”

Contracts for Cal Fire Local 2881, which represents 6,000 California firefighters, and UFCW Local 1099’s agreement with CVS have had similar stipulations. Other contracts, such as those signed by Retail, Wholesale, & Chain Store Food Employees Union Local 338 and UFCW 1262, also stipulated that minimum wage increases trigger an automatic return to the bargaining table, where new -- usually higher -- compensation is negotiated. The Center for Union Facts estimates that unions may have spent over $70 million on the Fight for $15 since 2012. Why Do Unions Fund The Fight For $15 Minimum Wage? Because They Gain A Financial Windfall In Return (https://www.forbes.com/sites/edrensi/2017/01/19/why-it-is-that-unions-fund-the-fight-for-15/)

When technology/automation becomes cheaper than human labor, companies shift to automation. Ironically, one of the key issues in the longshoreman's contract dispute is the shift to automation. That was not a concern when they were promoting the change in minimum wage. This is proven by corporations like Walmart returning to human labor when self checkout theft exceeds human labor costs (they are removing self checkout from Walmart stores with theft issues now. Notice that grocery stores have self checkout at stores without theft issues but not in areas where theft is an issue. You can see this demonstrated in the area around the villages...)

[blueash]

So you're saying that it's okay that the employees were intentionally less productive as long as the company made money and the stockholders gained? Jeez, you have clearly never owned a business. If any of my employees intentionally slacked off, they'd be gone.

And you are certain I never owned a business. And like so many certainties posted here, yours is wrong. I very much was a principle owner of a very successful business with well paid employees who had health insurance, disability insurance, 401 K with a match, 4 weeks vacation after 10 years, paid time off for illness or any personal needs which increased with increased years. And if I'd paid them less and fewer benefits which was common in my town and my industry I'd have made more myself.
But I had so many long term employees who appreciated their benefits and that I was not a slave driver.

So you're wrong.

[Bay Kid]

And just like that they made more funny money for all.

[Bwanajim]

Sounds like pretty big raises for the union workers who have absolutely zero risk in the corporation! I was a small business owner. Did I make a hell of a lot more money than my employees? Yes. But I’m the one that took the risk! I had to get the supplies, I paid for the insurance, worried with a hurricane came or when the economy tanked. I handled the payroll and All the stress and headaches that goes with owning a business. Have you ever owned a business? I had two employees with me over 25 years and several with me over 10 so I must’ve treated them pretty damn good. It’s called supply and demand. If they want to work there go work somewhere else. Unions should NOT be able to hold companies hostage

[Pugchief]

And during that time that you worked for the company and were very well paid for less than fully productive effort, did the company make money? Did the stockholders see some gains, and most importantly, were the workers able to have a single parent make enough to buy a house and send their kid to college and the worker got a pension?

So you're saying that it's okay that the employees were intentionally less productive as long as the company made money and the stockholders gained? Jeez, you have clearly never owned a business. If any of my employees intentionally slacked off, they'd be gone.

And you are certain I never owned a business. And like so many certainties posted here, yours is wrong. I very much was a principle owner of a very successful business with well paid employees who had health insurance, disability insurance, 401 K with a match, 4 weeks vacation after 10 years, paid time off for illness or any personal needs which increased with increased years. And if I'd paid them less and fewer benefits which was common in my town and my industry I'd have made more myself.
But I had so many long term employees who appreciated their benefits and that I was not a slave driver.

So you're wrong.

Good for you. Glad you took care of your employees. So did I. But my assertion, that intentional slackers would be fired, stands. Did you condone that? I doubt it.

So perhaps you'd like to clarify the first quote above?

[dewilson58]

Sounds like pretty big raises for the union workers who have absolutely zero risk in the corporation! I was a small business owner. Did I make a hell of a lot more money than my employees? Yes. But I’m the one that took the risk! I had to get the supplies, I paid for the insurance, worried with a hurricane came or when the economy tanked. I handled the payroll and All the stress and headaches that goes with owning a business. Have you ever owned a business? I had two employees with me over 25 years and several with me over 10 so I must’ve treated them pretty damn good. It’s called supply and demand. If they want to work there go work somewhere else. Unions should NOT be able to hold companies hostage


The union did not deliver much to the workers.................the offer from the company prior to the strike was 50% increase. The new agreement is 62% increase.

[Blueblaze]

I have no problem with unions. I just have a problem with unions using their monopoly power to force people to join a union, and then driving wages to ludicrous levels. I'm sorry -- learning how to operate the joy stick on a crane does not qualify you for a wage that I went into debt earning three degrees to get. And if you force an employer to give it to you, you're just asking for that employer to move your job to China or invest in automation to replace you.

But the weird thing I mostly notice about unions is their voting preferences and the fact that unions don't exist in communist countries.