Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18342749)

Arizona, right to work state... Tucson, lowest job/housing, growth/sales, etc in the Country. Something like 40b in the hole for the State, some 15 or so for the city... no part of this state is functioning correctly.

Originally Posted by Tempest (Post 18342764)

I suspect you're wrong on some things... Not sure what the laws are like in the states, but there are always "loopholes"... Typically when you work in some sort of "management" position (or something similar that a company can use as a loophole to get around certain labour laws), there is no such thing as an 8 hr work day, overtime pay etc... And then the company has a culture of pushing employees to work far beyond 40hrs/week and make it "appear" as if it's "required"... Large corporations have so many people working 60+ hours a week as common place... While true that you may be paid more than some other employees, but in comparison, if you were paid as much as those other ones, plus overtime, you'd make far more than your yearly salary.

Frankly, if companies actually employed enough people to get all the work done, there would be no job problem.. I never worked for a company that had an adequate work force for what they were trying to accomplish.

I used to work for a large corporation where this was the culture... They would push as many ppl into some sort of pseudo management position whenever they could. Would have guys bitch at me that they were making less money after they were promoted.. And we were "encouraged" to limit overtime for the guys that were paid for it and to push the team leaders to take up the slack. There were periods of time where we were expected to work 14-16 hour days for weeks and even sometimes I was putting in 30 hour stints. They've been in the news a few times for their "sweat shop" culture... It's actually a US company...

When I think of it, every single major job I had worked the same way.

Originally Posted by MrBottomTooth (Post 18342832)

This is covered in the employment standards act. You have to sign a written agreement stating you don't object to working more than 8 hours. You can change your mind at a later date with 2 weeks notice, and they can't take any form of reprisal against you for it, etc. Plus you still have to get mandatory breaks, time for meals, etc if you do agree to work more than 8 hours. Employers can face fines or even jail time for not complying.

Originally Posted by Wizzo (Post 18342782)

100... Rights to Work!



Texas is right to work state as well and has created 43% of the jobs in the country this year, and Arizona's problems aren't because of lack of unions.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18342899)

With that, many reports have shown where the growth took place in Texas, almost all of it is in very low wage "tip" type jobs, and the few educated jobs that have came in, are almost all from Cali corps moving in to take advantage of the lowest wages in the Country, even for educated people.

Originally Posted by Wizzo (Post 18342940)

I would be interested in seeing those reports, because from what I understand its alot of oil and gas production, transportation and logistics, heavy construction, business services and financial services. :thumbsup

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls (Post 18342970)

wow 300 workers surveyed! lol You should have posted that at the beginning so I would not have wasted my time reading it.

Originally Posted by joshgirls (Post 18343036)

Their landline, unionized business? Lost 30% of their customers, union on strike fighting to keep benefits won in the 70s.

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 18343044)

I have a difficult time trying to comprehend why so many people think that a job 30 years old, 20 years old, or even 10 years old can and should still be relevant today. You can't force relevancy. You need to be willing to move, change, and adapt.

The majority of us go to basic schooling until we are 18. Many go to college after that, many go to trade schools... by the age of 22-23 one is "done" with schooling and ready to go "work." That is less than a fifth of someone's life spent training and schooling... why do people think that fifth of life in school should be able to keep them relevant until retirement?

The world changes. If an industry dies, one must move on, not force employment.

Originally Posted by joshgirls (Post 18343036)

verizon is the marketplace example of the status of unions...

their wireless, non union business is booming, accounts for 95% of profits.

Their landline, unionized business? Lost 30% of their customers, union on strike fighting to keep benefits won in the 70s.

Originally Posted by DudeRick (Post 18342836)

Union labor has priced itself out of the market and is the number 1 reason for the loss of manufacturing jobs in this country. :2 cents:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 18343161)

What are your (everyone's) predictions regarding tonight's Wisconsin recall elections, taking place in just an hour or so?

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 18341817)

They have outlived their usefulness . . . . years ago.

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 18343251)

The votes are coming in now and the republicans are winning nearly all the races. A few by large margins.

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 18342176)

Democrats love the unions. The unions fund the elections for the democrats who in turn give the unions more power and money to build more unions in as many businesses as they can. Nothing but parasites.

Originally Posted by joshgirls (Post 18343058)

one of the things the union is fighting verizon on is that the union workers pay nothing for healthcare benefits. Verizon wants them to start paying, like 99% of the rest of america.

the union fights for this benefit in spite of their sector dying off.

Originally Posted by twistyneck (Post 18343317)

Not true, dipshit. Not even close.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18342688)

Read the OP again.... You're about a 100 years off: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

Originally Posted by wikipedia

18 southern Democratic Senators and one Republican Senator led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. [6] Said Russell: "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our (Southern) states." [7] The most fervent opposition to the bill came from Senator Strom Thurmond (D-SC)

Originally Posted by raymor (Post 18343551)

Quoting from YOUR source, wikipedia:


I understand you WISH that the democrats supported civil rights, but the fact is they strongly opposed civil rights and filibustered the bill.

Strom Thurmond, the democrat leader in the senate who personally filibustered the civil rights act for 24 hours and 18 minutes, was the continually reelected by democrats for decades until he passed away in 2003.

Thurmond served for decades along side his friend Robert Byrd, another democrat senator. The democrats weren't the first to elect Byrd, though. He first election victory was bring elected to a leadership position in the KKK.

I really do understand you want the democrats to be the good guys, just as any sports fan wants their chosen team to be great. The simple fact, though, is that the democrats were in violent opposition to civil rights, in 1964 just as they had been since 1875 and before. You're a union fan and that's fine, but the fact is the unions of 1964 didn't want negros taking their jobs.

If it's THAT important to you to have your team be on the right side, maybe it's time to consider if you were tricked and it's time to switch teams. If you want to be on the side that passed the civil rights acts rather than the side that filibustered them, welcome. Here's your elephant.

Mayve the democrats have changed?
The dems elected the KKK official Robert Byrd to the senate from 1959 until he died last year. Had Byrd, the democrat leader in the senate changed? As recently as 2001 he was still using the word "n i g g e r" in debate on the senate floor. That's the democrat leader, a man who thinks it's ok to talk about "n i g g e r s" while debating legislation even these days.

I know you want to be on the right side of these issues. You can be. Come on over.

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 18341836)

The BULK of the list is stuff you will get today, with or without a union.

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 18341817)

They have outlived their usefulness . . . . years ago.

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 18343506)

Which is why they have outlived their usefulness. They have been giving up things gained in the past since the 80's. Seniority is the only thing they have not lost and it is what fucks things up for them.

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 18342249)

I did. We hired 40 new employees last year. We invested over $5m in new equipment in the last 36 months and are putting on another 60k sq ft to our main plant. When it's finished we will add another 50+ jobs. With health,dental,life and 401k. We had a couple of guys try to start a union a few years ago. They were voted down by a large majority.

I can take you to hundreds of small business like mine that are doing just fine. We are growing and we are making money.

Large corporations that are stuck with unions are the ones having the problems.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18342273)

Shit tons of union corps are kicking ass, come on.... it's not a one way door, that is without question. Just like a shit ton of non-union corps, need a union, and are failing... it's even, all around.

You're a great example of what happens when a corp actually offers something to employees... it shows union attempts are easy to squash if employees are actually happy.

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 18343447)

So far 3 R wins - 2 D wins - and 1 still up in the air.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18343881)

It's funny watching halfwits on this board blur the line (intentionally or thru lack of intelligence) between private and public unions.
Neither are any good but one at least was 70 years ago

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 18343959)

No question that rings true in Wis.

Last year the republicans took back complete control of state government,which was amazing when you consider Wis. has always been a democratic swing state. After the fall elections,the democrats left the state to avoid passing the new collective bargaining legislation,which eventually did pass.

During that process, out of state special interest groups(afl/cio) tossed serious money at the supreme court race to get a dem in,which failed.

And finally this recall attempt,which was also heavily funded by out of state special interest groups. The citizens have clearly spoken here.

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 18343959)

The citizens have clearly spoken here.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 18344144)

adios unions in wisconsin.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18343877)

Leftist have have their moment in the sun to remind us all what idiots they are, now the pendulum will swing back

Originally Posted by Chris GAMBA (Post 18343661)

Because of unions, you old ignorant twat.

Originally Posted by Captain Kawaii (Post 18343664)

With top paid CEOs making 350 times the average workers salary...really? You've been duped sir by the people who want to get rid of them. Namely conservative democrats and republicans who call the financial shots in this country... Its clear if you step back for a moment the root causes of the current financial turmoil have not been corrected in any meaningful way...and that failure is only going to hurt mom and pop businesses and people making less than 50k a year, most of the population... I despise corrupt unions but unions are the last line of defense before a return to the days of 19th century industrial revolution period.

Originally Posted by Chris GAMBA (Post 18343668)

You are so backwards it is unbelievable. Unions have been giving up gains? What the fuck do you think would happen without unions? Of course, every worker in the country would be able to negotiate a great deal with the corporation they work for!

Without organized labor, we would still have the working conditions of a 3rd world country. If we were to get rid of it, we would be back there in no time. The middle class exists because of unions. Everyone who is not unionized only has their benefits and wages because of unions.

The fact that anyone's brain is too weak to understand basic realities, yet they can still function in some capacity in our society, never ceases to amazes me. Get a fucking education instead of spouting off bullshit you heard some asshole ranting about on talk radio.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18344537)

The recalls aren't over... this was just the senate, more are coming. (others already happened) And it's still a massive hit that it they have lost seats, enough that if a few more go with the election(s), it would give Dem's a super majority after the Presidential election.

Thinking the Dems lost on this is... well, silly. They just didn't win as big as they wanted.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18344537)

The recalls aren't over... this was just the senate, more are coming. (others already happened) And it's still a massive hit that it they have lost seats, enough that if a few more go with the election(s), it would give Dem's a super majority after the Presidential election.

Thinking the Dems lost on this is... well, silly. They just didn't win as big as they wanted.

Originally Posted by ReGGs (Post 18344914)

Most of the people against unions here probably are using nothing but anecdotal evidence at best as to whether or not unions are still needed. In fact. The whole reason wages are stagnant and workers have been taken advantage of is directly related to the loss of unions.

"Focusing on full-time, private sector workers, Western and Rosenfeld find that deunionization?the decline in the percentage of the labor force that is unionized?and educational stratification each explain about 33 percent of the rise in within-group wage inequality among men. Among women, deunionization explains about 20 percent of the increase in wage inequality, whereas education explains more than 40 percent."

http://www.newswise.com/articles/stu...age-inequality

You think corporations make people work 40 hours a week in non-sweatshop conditions because that's the right thing to do? Nice fantasy.

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 18344667)

They spent $31 million and they didn't get a supreme court justice,they had a recount and still lost..they did not get control of either house. Even if the last two recall elections go to the dems,they still won't have control.

I can appreciate looking at the glass and calling it half full. No matter how you want to spin it, the dems half full glass isn't as good as the repubs full glass.


edit...I am not talking about any national races. This is the state of Wis. and the mandates on unions rights to collective bargaining

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 18344711)

Even if they lose the seats, do you really think they can reverse what Gov Walker did? Just the Unions blowing money to control the government, liken to the big business that everyone is against running the Governent.

The way the government should be run is thrown out the window for both