Corporate ends

[Brad]

BLB_Oregon:

How is it possible that workers should have the right to unionize while companies at the same time have a right to thwart the exercise of that right? A company does have the duty, though, to treat its employees fairly, with or without a union to force them to do it.

I’m not certain why it is not practical for part-time workers to join a union. I was in a union which represented both full-time and seasonal workers… we managed.

Walmart undersells nearly every one of its competitors, yet reaps huge profits. They say they do that by way of innovative strategies with inventory, and I believe that is a key to their success. Still, I’d like to see their employees treated as well or better than anyone else’s… otherwise, the success of the Walton family is coming at least in part on the backs of their employees, and at the expense of competitors who treat theirs more fairly. For now, that alone seems reason for me to do business elsewhere.

If I judge Walmart unfairly, by all means give me the facts. I don’t think it is right to punish a business on account of an undeservedly bad reputation.

I think it is more the reverse. I think you have to demonstrate how employees, in general, are being treated unfairly by Walmart.

I don’t have to prove that they are not being treated unfairly when there is no evidence saying they are being treaded unfairly. Is anyone forced to work there? Are they forced to work hours that are unbearable? Do they have to work in sweat-shop conditions? Do they enforce child-labor?

What is it that they do so unfairly? I notice quite a few people working at Walmart that wouldn’t get a job at many other places around town. I think that’s pretty fair.

 

[katherine2]

Lisa N:

I’m certainly no fan of WalMart but I’ve never heard of any violence associated with union organizing activities.

Well, you need to get out more.

If that were happening wouldn’t the local union take action?

After they get back from the Emergency Ward? That’s a rather heartless comment.

They have a powerful lobby, lots of attorneys and could face down WalMart if its conduct were egregious as you suggest.

WalMart’s litigation division has more lawyers than every union in the nation totalled up.

I do recall hearing that WalMart was successfully sued for some kind of labor problem…maybe people working OT off the clock or something? A large corporation can be sued and successfully if people have a case.

And the money to hire lawyers and the courage to do so in the face of big corporation.

LIsa N

 

[katherine2]

Employers routinely harass, coerce, intimidate–and even fire–workers to keep them from exercising their freedom to form a union. According to Cornell University research conducted by Kate Bronfenbrenner, one-quarter of private sector employers illegally fire at least one worker during a union organizing campaign.

 

[Brad]

BLB_Oregon:

How about we just look it up in the catechism? By my reading, it comes out against the totalitarian and atheistic aspects of socialism and communism, and the materialistic, individualistic, and socially unjust aspects of capitalism. Here is an unbroken segment from the section on social justice in my CCC:

"Any system in which social relationships are determined entirely by economic factors is contrary to the nature of the human person and his acts.

"A theory that makes profit the exclusive norm and ultimate end of economic activity is morally unacceptable. The disordered desire for money cannot but produce perverse effects. It is one of the causes of the many conflicts which disturb the social order.

"A system that “subordinates the basic rights of individuals and of groups to the collective organization of production” is contrary to human dignity. Every practice that reduces persons to nothing more than a means of profit enslaves man, leads to idolizing money, and contributes to the spread of atheism. “You cannot serve both God and mammon.” [Boldface mine]

“The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with “communism” or “socialism.” She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor. Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for “there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market.” Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.”

Having said that, I don’t see that K-Mart merging with Sears is inherently an evil development!

Whereas an interesting section of the Catechism (they always are), it does not condemn capitalism, just its improper implementation - when it promotes “individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor”.
There are always opportunities for a business person to cheat his/her employees - that is wrong - but it does not make the system of capitalism wrong.

Meanwhile, the Church has indeed condemned the concept of socialism outright in several documents.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

blessings on my friend BLB and Leo!!!

Of course, if workers have a right (even a duty) to form unions, for Walmart to obstruct the free exercize of that right is sinful.

We are not talking about WalMart putting an article in the company newsletter outlining why they think unions are not a good idea. we are talking about people being fired for wanting a union, having their overtime taken away, captive audience meetings, and in some cases even violence.

It is completely nonsensical to say a corporation can commit a sin. Only people can commit sins. Further, as I’ve already stated, Walmart desire to have non-unionized employees is not wrong in and of itself - it is one way they keep costs low so that poor people can afford their products - isn’t that “social justice?”

The reason they need to do this is because unions as they are run today are themselves greedy and demand money for longevity rather than merit. If employees want to be unionized - they can be - at a different employer. Walmart does not force people to work at its store.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

Employers routinely harass, coerce, intimidate–and even fire–workers to keep them from exercising their freedom to form a union. According to Cornell University research conducted by Kate Bronfenbrenner, one-quarter of private sector employers illegally fire at least one worker during a union organizing campaign.

Is it sinful for a worker to take a longer break than they are allowed? How about if they gab to fellow employees and customers when they are supposed to be working? What if they do not do the job they were asked to do by their supervisor? What if they show up late or leave early?

There may be more than meets the eye when a “union-promoter” gets fired.

 

[fix]

Brad:

Is it sinful for a worker to take a longer break than they are allowed? How about if they gab to fellow employees and customers when they are supposed to be working? What if they do not do the job they were asked to do by their supervisor? What if they show up late or leave early?

There may be more than meets the eye when a “union-promoter” gets fired.

Thank you for bringing up an important point. When some push for unions as if the Church annoints these unions, we tend to polarize the situation. It is not that all big corps are evil and these poor little folks without a union are being trampled on, in fact, often the workers are guilty of sins that are never talked about.

When was last time anyone heard about a worker not being diligent, or taking a “sick day” that was not justified, etc? These types of things happen all the time, they are a form of theft. Back in the 70 and 80s we all read the stories of how unions had many folks who loafed, or did a poor or minimal job for a very reasonable wage with great benefits and foriegn countries had hard workers who out produced us.

My point is unions are not always about helping the worker and corporartions are not about always cheating the worker.

It always goes back to personal holiness. If we conform ourselves to God’s will then we will always seek justice in every area of our life. If our only touchstone is socialistic, left leaning propaganda with a patina of Catholic thought then we will not have authentic justice.

 

[Brad]

fix:

It always goes back to personal holiness. If we conform ourselves to God’s will then we will always seek justice in every area of our life. If our only touchstone is socialistic, left leaning propaganda with a patina of Catholic thought then we will not have authentic justice.

Correct. Justice cannot be on 1 side only and we cannot assume that an entire group is always evil-intentioned. It depends on how individuals in that group act.

 

[katherine2]

Brad:

Walmart desire to have non-unionized employees is not wrong in and of itself - it is one way they keep costs low so that poor people can afford their products - isn’t that “social justice?”

No, its not social justice. And while they canhave a desire to not have a union, they have no moral right to obstruct their employees from forming one.

The reason they need to do this is because unions as they are run today are themselves greedy and demand money for longevity rather than merit. If employees want to be unionized - they can be - at a different employer. Walmart does not force people to work at its store.

The decision to have a union is a decison of the employees, not the WalMart corporation. Unions are greedy, huh? I think WalMart has already stolen that prize.

 

[katherine2]

Brad:

Is it sinful for a worker to take a longer break than they are allowed? How about if they gab to fellow employees and customers when they are supposed to be working? What if they do not do the job they were asked to do by their supervisor? What if they show up late or leave early?

Yes.

There may be more than meets the eye when a “union-promoter” gets fired.

I am willing to discucss our respective first hand awarness of of particular incidents related to the above. I think you will come out on the short end.

 

[katherine2]

fix:

Thank you for bringing up an important point. When some push for unions as if the Church annoints these unions, we tend to polarize the situation. It is not that all big corps are evil and these poor little folks without a union are being trampled on, in fact, often the workers are guilty of sins that are never talked about.

When was last time anyone heard about a worker not being diligent, or taking a “sick day” that was not justified, etc? These types of things happen all the time, they are a form of theft. Back in the 70 and 80s we all read the stories of how unions had many folks who loafed, or did a poor or minimal job for a very reasonable wage with great benefits and foriegn countries had hard workers who out produced us.

My point is unions are not always about helping the worker and corporartions are not about always cheating the worker.

It always goes back to personal holiness. If we conform ourselves to God’s will then we will always seek justice in every area of our life. If our only touchstone is socialistic, left leaning propaganda with a patina of Catholic thought then we will not have authentic justice.

Oh what a bunch of bunk. Unions don’t have to be perfect. It is an issue of justice that workers have the right to self-organize, just as capital has an extremely legally protected right to organize. Each then proceeds in the legitimate interests of its side and has the potential to reach for illegitimate interests.

As for the Church, her teachings on this matter is no patina. it is deep and historic. Her critics, however, make one wonder what their real agenda is. it doesn’t seem to be holiness nor justice.

 

[Lisa_N]

katherine2:

Well, you need to get out more.

After they get back from the Emergency Ward? That’s a rather heartless comment.

WalMart’s litigation division has more lawyers than every union in the nation totalled up.

And the money to hire lawyers and the courage to do so in the face of big corporation.

Well Katherine that was certainly a helpful response. Maybe you could provide some citations for your claims. I find it hard to believe if union organizers were routinely ending up in the emergency room that it wouldn’t have made the news.

WalMart may have plenty of lawyers but they also have plenty of money and are a good target. I think they were successfully sued for making people work off the clock. If a case is well substantiated the best lawyer in the world won’t help.

Lisa N

 

[BLB_Oregon]

Brad:

I think it is more the reverse. I think you have to demonstrate how employees, in general, are being treated unfairly by Walmart.

I don’t* owe* anyone my business. When it comes to choosing, I can choose paying more but knowing that the workers take home more of what the store brings in, if I want to. I can choose local businesses over non-local. I don’t have to be satisfied with the fact that there isn’t actually slavery going on. OTOH, some families don’t have that choice… they need to save every penny just to make ends meet. I don’t want to sit in judgment of them (or anyone else just trying to be frugal), but use this forum find out whether Walmart is doing anything so bad that taking advantage of those low prices is immoral.

I do read the business pages, and when it comes to workers taking claims to court, Walmart shows up, and the complaints are systemic in nature. I know it is not that they are struggling to go under, either. Nevertheless, there is more to every story than what gets into the newspaper.

Having said* that*, I also have a problem with unions who feel it is their duty to shield workers who are purposely underperforming or who resist companies who rightfully want to reward merit. IMHO, that is wrong. They need to make certain their members get due process and their day in court, but they shouldn’t abuse their collective power anymore than those in the executive suites should abuse theirs. Since that is a real danger, I do see where even an entirely moral company might be wary of unionization. Collective bargaining is the right of workers, but a company may do well to act in such a way that its own workers choose otherwise.

 

[fix]

katherine2:

Oh what a bunch of bunk. Unions don’t have to be perfect. It is an issue of justice that workers have the right to self-organize, just as capital has an extremely legally protected right to organize. Each then proceeds in the legitimate interests of its side and has the potential to reach for illegitimate interests.

As for the Church, her teachings on this matter is no patina. it is deep and historic. Her critics, however, make one wonder what their real agenda is. it doesn’t seem to be holiness nor justice.

I was not criticizing the Church, I was criticizing some who attempt to use Church teaching as a tool to further socialistic goals. What I wrote is no bunk. It seems you want to vilify business and make employees victims. It is not black and white in every case.

 

[katherine2]

fix:

I was not criticizing the Church, I was criticizing some who attempt to use Church teaching as a tool to further socialistic goals. What I wrote is no bunk. It seems you want to vilify business and make employees victims. It is not black and white in every case.

Its not black and white in every case. But the Church’s position has long been that both sides have rights. Unions simply give workers a way to stand up for their interests. The laws are think with rights and protections for corporations. All the Church is asking for is a little equity between capital and labor.

Let workers organized through their unions and capital organized through the corporation hash it out. No side in these negotiations is right by nature. But don’t suppress the right of workers to organize. Don’t destory our forum to advance our interests.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

Yes.

I am willing to discucss our respective first hand awarness of of particular incidents related to the above. I think you will come out on the short end.

Unless you were the one fired, I don’t think you have all the information regarding the employee.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

Yes.

I am willing to discucss our respective first hand awarness of of particular incidents related to the above. I think you will come out on the short end.

Unless you were the one fired, I don’t think you have all the information regarding the employee. Further, 1 incident among tens of thousands of employees is not enough to paint an entire corporation.

If I owned a business in which employees wanted to unionize, I’d have no problem, as long as they did not demand pay raises for all employees, regardless of perfromance. Most unions today do demand such pay raises. A company cannot survive if employees are making more money than their performance brings in - it’s simple accounting.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

Oh what a bunch of bunk. Unions don’t have to be perfect. It is an issue of justice that workers have the right to self-organize, just as capital has an extremely legally protected right to organize. Each then proceeds in the legitimate interests of its side and has the potential to reach for illegitimate interests.

Your statements here indicate you want see capital and labor as completely separate. A company’s existence is due to it’s employees. Those companies that recognize this the best usually perform the best. I have done studies on this. Our group proposed that “customer-first” may not be the best strategy but rather “employee-first.” Happy employees make happy customers.

Southwest is one such example. They do well because they treat their employees well and, they, in turn, treat the customers well.

Separating the workers from the company and putting them on opposite sides is bad for the company, bad for the employees, and bad for the customers. It creates opposing interests. Unions, to me, should be a last resort - for the cases when management is tyrannical - but, even then, I say a better alternative for the employee is to find a different job - this is allowed in a free-market economy - a little get up and go can take you a long way.

Please consider these comments thoughtfully before you label them as “bunk.” Thank you.

 

[Brad]

BLB_Oregon:

I don’t* owe* anyone my business. When it comes to choosing, I can choose paying more but knowing that the workers take home more of what the store brings in, if I want to. I can choose local businesses over non-local. I don’t have to be satisfied with the fact that there isn’t actually slavery going on. OTOH, some families don’t have that choice… they need to save every penny just to make ends meet. I don’t want to sit in judgment of them (or anyone else just trying to be frugal), but use this forum find out whether Walmart is doing anything so bad that taking advantage of those low prices is immoral.

I do read the business pages, and when it comes to workers taking claims to court, Walmart shows up, and the complaints are systemic in nature. I know it is not that they are struggling to go under, either. Nevertheless, there is more to every story than what gets into the newspaper.

Having said* that*, I also have a problem with unions who feel it is their duty to shield workers who are purposely underperforming or who resist companies who rightfully want to reward merit. IMHO, that is wrong. They need to make certain their members get due process and their day in court, but they shouldn’t abuse their collective power anymore than those in the executive suites should abuse theirs. Since that is a real danger, I do see where even an entirely moral company might be wary of unionization. Collective bargaining is the right of workers, but a company may do well to act in such a way that its own workers choose otherwise.

Understood. A fair and even-handed approach by you.

 

[Brad]

katherine2:

Its not black and white in every case. But the Church’s position has long been that both sides have rights. Unions simply give workers a way to stand up for their interests. The laws are think with rights and protections for corporations. All the Church is asking for is a little equity between capital and labor.

Let workers organized through their unions and capital organized through the corporation hash it out. No side in these negotiations is right by nature. But don’t suppress the right of workers to organize. Don’t destory our forum to advance our interests.

I can stand up for my rights without a union very well. I have plenty of options. I can go to school. I can look for work somewhere else. I can talk to managment.

I have close relatives that are hindered by the unions they have been forced to belong to. They do exceptional work and are rewarded by incentive packages and pay 3 times less than someone that does less work with less quality and a bad attitude - simply because that person has worked their longer.

Justice anyone?