GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   You FOR or AGAINST unions? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1122842)

adendreams 10-05-2013 03:09 PM

You FOR or AGAINST unions?
 
I heard Robbie and others saying we should get unions out of they way.

For me I say keep em.







Yes a lot of new hiring would happen with cheap labor but then we would just slip that slope and in 50 years end up having a slave labor class like the iPhone camps in China.




:2 cents:

Sly 10-05-2013 03:11 PM

How do you account for the millions of nonunion jobs that are not iPhoneesque sweatshops?

adendreams 10-05-2013 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 19823923)
How do you account for the millions of nonunion jobs that are not iPhoneesque sweatshops?


Not sure what you mean but if you're saying there are a lot of shit nonunion jobs...at shit pay... and shitty conditions here in the US then I agree.

So should we make more of those shit jobs? Or less?

Rochard 10-05-2013 03:21 PM

Unions are idiotic.

I was in a union when I worked at the phone company, and all the union did was protect the idiots. The union negotiates guidelines, policies, and rules that benefit the employees, which in concept is a great idea but in reality it ensures the workforce does the bare minimum and never anything more.

It was stunning to see employees who had worked for the company for twenty years in an entry level position and never even tried to move up the ladder.

nexcom28 10-05-2013 03:23 PM

The only time I eat onions is when they are fried with a hot dog and mustard.

adendreams 10-05-2013 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 19823930)
Unions are idiotic.

Unions are idiotic.
The middle class is idiotic.

Same statement (virtually) since the unions built the middle class.

adendreams 10-05-2013 03:30 PM

http://www.dailytech.com/Foxconn+Ins...ticle18877.htm

Suicide nets at factories...no thanks.

fitzmulti 10-05-2013 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nexcom28 (Post 19823931)
The only time I eat onions is when they are fried with a hot dog and mustard.

:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup

Wizzo 10-05-2013 03:51 PM

100 years ago they made sense before there was many of the laws that protect workers today. Now all unions do is protect dumbasses and make others carry their weight and give undeserving power to the leaders. No thanks.

SilentKnight 10-05-2013 03:55 PM

Staunchly opposed to unions. :boid

Union greed has literally decimated the manufacturing industry in our Niagara region in the past two decades.

epitome 10-05-2013 03:56 PM

I can't help but to think that Americas most prosperous years where when unions were at their strongest.

L-Pink 10-05-2013 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wizzo (Post 19823957)
100 years ago they made sense before there was many of the laws that protect workers today. Now all unions do is protect dumbasses and make others carry their weight and give undeserving power to the leaders. No thanks.

This ??.

epitome 10-05-2013 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilentKnight (Post 19823962)
Staunchly opposed to unions. :boid

Union greed has literally decimated the manufacturing industry in our Niagara region in the past two decades.

Pretty sure jobs being shipped overseas for pennies on the dollar is what did that.

It used to be that everyone in the supply chain prospered.

SilentKnight 10-05-2013 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epitome (Post 19823969)
Pretty sure jobs being shipped overseas for pennies on the dollar is what did that.

Not in our area.

The majority of the companies simply couldn't remain viable and competitive while paying $40-60/hr. plus medical benefits and pension plans.

Our John Deere plant closed down a few years ago and relocated operations to Wisconsin (and yes, Mexico). Many other companies centralized their operations south of the border in the U.S.

We've lost Henniges Automotive (consolidation south of the border), Atlas Steel (bankrupt), Stelco (bought out by U.S. Steel and subsequently broken up and sold off), Union Carbide (UCAR), United Steel, Plymouth Cordage, three drop forge plants...and almost all our textile mills.

L-Pink 10-05-2013 04:26 PM

Toyota opened a factory just outside Lexington, Ky. it's non-union pays very well and turns out a great product. Non union workforce was their main reason for choosing this location.

brassmonkey 10-05-2013 04:31 PM

against them!

DBS.US 10-05-2013 04:54 PM

Many dumb people are in unions and make big money.
Many dumb union people still pay for porn.
Less union jobs, less porn profits.:2 cents:

Barefootsies 10-05-2013 06:11 PM

I have been in multiple unions, but the biggest was when I worked in telco.

I was a member initially, a steward for a couple of years, and later became management. I can tell you that unions have their place and there should honestly be more of them if you're "pro-worker" and middle class.

That being said, they suffer from the same problems that corporate/management suffer from in regards to bureaucracy and the stereotypes. Some of which are greed and power hungry players who are about "mine, mine, all mine". You have abuse on BOTH sides of the aisle. If it were not for unions, you would not have had the great American middle class talked about in history of the past century.

:2 cents:

Barefootsies 10-05-2013 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 19823930)
It was stunning to see employees who had worked for the company for twenty years in an entry level position and never even tried to move up the ladder.

Not everyone is interested in advancement. At the phone company, if you started at the bottom, you would 'top out' in 5 years. If you started higher up the ladder, you would top out sooner. For most with a high school diploma, it was the best money they were ever going to make. Not everyone wants to take on more responsibility and are more than happy to collect their $50-80k a year for answering the phone.

Spunky 10-05-2013 06:44 PM

Iwas ina union for 18 years and left for a smaller non union position .The benefits were almost the same.The union saved my ass with Compo.It would have cost me thousands to fight them.Unions are great protecting workers rights.I'm grateful to mine.

Captain Kawaii 10-05-2013 07:12 PM

I'd rather have unions than slave labor camps. When I worked at Cal the only thing preventing the Regents from anally gang raping the staff was the union. Grateful to them.

bronco67 10-05-2013 07:33 PM

Unions were started with good intentions, because not every boss is a saint. But they're an out of control extortion ring now.

Minte 10-05-2013 07:35 PM

Today we have OSHA,EEOC,EPA to keep an eye out for workers rights. Factor in the big buildings the unions own. The amount of overhead they have and the huge amounts of cash they have to toss around during elections, I'd say they milked their members long enough.

BFT3K 10-05-2013 10:56 PM

http://whatnowtoons.com/images/wisco...at-now-328.jpg

2MuchMark 10-05-2013 11:11 PM

Without unions, we wouldn't have weekends.

Vapid - BANNED FOR LIFE 10-05-2013 11:21 PM

^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism

adendreams 10-06-2013 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 19824273)
Without unions, we wouldn't have weekends.

yea. few people know that

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude 10-06-2013 02:22 AM

http://moreorlessbunk.files.wordpres...lli-gif-10.png

Union Yes! :thumbsup

:stoned

ADG

kane 10-06-2013 02:40 AM

In most cases I think they don't really help much. My brother is in a union and he complains about always having shitty workers on his crew because of it. However, I have a few friends that are cops. If people decide to sue them the union steps in and helps them with legal council and will help them out if there are problems on the job.

uniquemkt 10-06-2013 07:04 AM

Unions can have their purpose but ask any grocery store worker how they like their minimum wage, no benefit job while still having to pay union dues.

Antonio 10-06-2013 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nexcom28 (Post 19823931)
The only time I eat onions is when they are fried with a hot dog and mustard.

You can't have a Greek salad without a few onion rings. I am pro onions.

MaDalton 10-06-2013 07:24 AM

it's all about balance

but from what i hear, unions in the US a far too strong with sometimes absurd regulations

Barry-xlovecam 10-06-2013 09:25 AM

I have been considering your question some ... Unions had a definite reason for being in the last century. The was a real exploitation of labor then. Today we have labor and work safety laws that prevent many of these same labor abuses is most cases.

The problem is that the same "cabal" that gained their wealth by the unfair exploitation of labor in North America and Europe in the last century has moved on to the Far East so stronger unions in North America and Europe would do little good.

As I replied earlier, the United States government, by and through its taxpayers, should not provide benefits via entitlements or subsidies to larger employers 1000+ We do not need to facilitate their abuse of labor, read: Walmart and the like.

From my own experience as a building contractor for many years -- building trade unions are both good and bad. If you are a union contractor you can get qualified people, usually on short notice, from the hiring hall. Being a union contractor may give you an edge to bidding government and large unionized corporation construction jobs (union maintenance agreements are commonly in collective bargaining contracts). However, you can offer Davis-Bacon prevailing wages too (less for an employer usually -- as you, and not the union, control the benefit costs and their funds).

In manufacturing the unions became too confrontational and demanding to justify their cost to the workers. One reason GM and Chrysler went Bankrupt was to invalidate the heavy handed union contracts that were restrictive in allowing them to increase productivity and cost efficiency.

The law is if workers want to organize they have that right -- they also have the right to make their employment too costly.

The worker's production quality and its productivity is only tolerable in low wage countries when wages at home are too high for the labor's productivity.

Now I'll ask a question: Would it be easier to do business if all porn models were unionized? Like SAG (screen actors guild) or the unionized guilds for stage hands or cameramen like in the motion picture industry?

Grapesoda 10-06-2013 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 19824573)

The worker's production quality and its productivity is only tolerable in low wage countries when wages at home are too high for the labor's productivity.

Now I'll ask a question: Would it be easier to do business if all porn models were unionized? Like SAG (screen actors guild) or the unionized guilds for stage hands or cameramen like in the motion picture industry?

pretty obvious by your question you are not involved with production :2 cents:

adendreams 10-06-2013 12:11 PM

Corporate profits are THROUGH THE ROOF...major corporations are breaking records every quarter...the middle class is disappearing a the poor are getting poorer...wage earners are not able to sustain their families on a single job.

The executives, share holders and board members are filthy rich and getting richer...

What do they spend their money on:
Lobbying to sway YOUR OPINION on UNIONS...looks like a bunch of you have taken the bait.

Barry-xlovecam 10-06-2013 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grapesoda (Post 19824598)
pretty obvious by your question you are not involved with production :2 cents:

Yeah, we only have 2,700 models working every day on streaming cams, LMAO -- that was a rhetorical question ...

baddog 10-06-2013 01:47 PM

Unions served their purpose; now there are laws that take care of the issues that made unions a good thing. They are useless now, especially for the good employee that is low in seniority.

I have to wonder how many of you pro-union people ever had a union job and how involved you were with your local.

SilentKnight 10-06-2013 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adendreams (Post 19824687)
What do they spend their money on:
Lobbying to sway YOUR OPINION on UNIONS...looks like a bunch of you have taken the bait.

That's incredibly dismissive and naive.

Speaking for myself - my opinion is based on seeing the obvious around me. Empty factories and brownfields where the factories once stood...friends and neighbours who are now unemployed...and my property taxes going through the roof as the city attempts to recuperate lost industrial tax revenues.

A corporate brainwashing campaign you say?

Drop by sometime - I'll give you the personal tour. No corporate lobbying needed.

Barefootsies 10-06-2013 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 19824745)
I have to wonder how many of you pro-union people ever had a union job and how involved you were with your local.

...and yet you bite the hand that fed you for years when you worked in telco. That same union that gave you a good job, top notch pay, a pension, and benefits that allowed you to buy your house, send your kid to school, take care of yoru mom, build up a savings/retirement, and all of that yoke.

Funny. Now that you've retired... unions are bad. Why not turn back in that pension and benefits you most likely still get to enjoy compliments of your old telco union job. You do not work there any longer, and you're apparently so successful you no longer need them.

Stop being a cake eater.

:2 cents:

baddog 10-06-2013 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies (Post 19824789)
...and yet you bite the hand that fed you for years when you worked in telco. That same union that gave you a good job, pension, and benefits that allowed you to buy your house, build up a savings, and all of that yoke.

Funny. Now that you've retired... unions are bad. Why not turn back in that pension and benefits you most likely still get to enjoy compliments of your old telco union job. You do not work there any longer, and you're apparently so successful you no longer need them.

Stop being a cake eater.

:2 cents:

FYI: I was saying the same thing about them long before I retired from the telco. :2 cents: What benefits do you think I am collecting from them since you are so in the know?

Barefootsies 10-06-2013 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 19824792)
FYI: I was saying the same thing about them long before I retired from the telco.

That doesn't surprise me that you would be biting the hand that fed you while there. Figures. :disgust


Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 19824792)
What benefits do you think I am collecting from them since you are so in the know?

As you well know, any benefits (pension, health coverage, etc) in a union telco job vary by years of service.

:2 cents:

SilentKnight 10-06-2013 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies (Post 19824798)
That doesn't surprise me that you would be biting the hand that fed you while there. Figures. :disgust

That would imply his wage was a gratuitous handout.

On the flip side of the coin one could say the revenue generated by the productivity of a worker feeds the executive class.

An employer/employee relationship is a symbiotic one.

adendreams 10-06-2013 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies (Post 19824789)

Funny. Now that you've retired... unions are bad.
:2 cents:

laid to waste...ouch

Barefootsies 10-06-2013 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilentKnight (Post 19824803)
That would imply his wage was a gratuitous handout.

That was not my point at all. If it were, I would have made it myself. Thanks.

Minte 10-06-2013 03:11 PM

The wife of one of my friends was a junior high art teacher for 30 years. She retired with full benefits at age 52.. The lady she replaced is still alive and still getting benefits from that job and naturally there is another younger lady now teaching that class. So the state is paying 3 people for that one position.

Why should a union teacher be able to retire at 52 when the non-union workers have to wait until they are at least 62 for partial benefits.

winter_ 10-06-2013 09:04 PM

here is a very united workforce in this country. we had big government up until recently with the state owned enterprises, but now the chinese and south koreans are making moves on all of it. the unions don't like that... i'm pretty sure the unions here want to keep our assets new zealand owned when the chinese have their way i think we can expect some surprising changes.

power companies, train and truck companies, dotcom companies, farming companies... all government owned and run with the lifeblood of the employee within them then the unions. but the chinese are in town and are buying up, and they are willing to sell.

baddog 10-06-2013 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies (Post 19824798)
That doesn't surprise me that you would be biting the hand that fed you while there. Figures. :disgust




As you well know, any benefits (pension, health coverage, etc) in a union telco job vary by years of service.

:2 cents:

Here is what it is; you think you know something but you do not know shit when it comes to me, so stop being such a fucking dick in your commentary to me lately. I do not know who you think you are, but you are no one to me. You know nothing of me other than what I put out there which means you no nothing about any benefits I may have or currently receive.

As far as biting the hand that fed me, again, go fuck yourself. You know nothing of my past; I was a fucking hero to some, saved the jobs of many. That does not mean that I don't think it was bullshit. You think a defense attorney wants every scumbag client on the streets? Same thing with unions. I know I was a lot more involved in mine that you ever were in yours. :2 cents:


Quote:

Originally Posted by adendreams (Post 19824804)
laid to waste...ouch

Your idiocy has been really making itself apparent lately too. :321GFY

MrBottomTooth 10-06-2013 10:19 PM

Nevermind

Vapid - BANNED FOR LIFE 10-06-2013 10:20 PM

The network of unions are bad for feudalism.

kane 10-06-2013 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 19824823)
The wife of one of my friends was a junior high art teacher for 30 years. She retired with full benefits at age 52.. The lady she replaced is still alive and still getting benefits from that job and naturally there is another younger lady now teaching that class. So the state is paying 3 people for that one position.

Why should a union teacher be able to retire at 52 when the non-union workers have to wait until they are at least 62 for partial benefits.

If you serve in the military after 20 years you can retire and get about 40-50% of your pay for life. If you go in at 18 that means you can retire at 38. Should this be stopped?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123