Thousands protest Wisconsin anti-union bill

[bbarrick8383]

I wouldn’t be so sure. A lot of people from Oklahoma in California. Ever read “Of Mice and Men?” Descendants of the these Oklahoman refugees of the Dust Bowl (I could say “Okies” with no malice but I know how touchy people can be around here ) of old have a lot of power in the Central Valley and in the inland areas. At least the mindset lives on.

Yes, I have relatives around Mt. Shasta and scattered throughout the central part of CA.

CA is full of all kinds of people though, very unlike OK. I’m proud to say we don’t have some of the crowds CA has.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I don’t have anything against the idea of unions, just how modern day unions operate. I don’t know enough about all unions and I’d hope there are some who have good relationships with the employees and business’s.

That being said, unions should imo be more of a mediator between the two parties with no bias to either side. It seems to me that many unions strive to make their members millionaires regardless the cost to the business. Or in this case, the government.

First, if you actually think this, you have no concept of what a union is. The union is all the employees represented by it. Membership entitles you to vote on who represents you in management negotiations and who runs the day to day operations of the union. It’s not some third party “out there,” it’s the people.

But I’ve noticed that about people on the right. They don’t seem to understand democratic institutions very well. Must be that top-down hierarchical mentality which works very well for religion and some forms of government (such as a Catholic monarchy) but not in a society where the rights of the individual, including the rights to assembly, of association and to petition the government, are paramount.

The argument I hear from pro-union employees makes them sound like a very childish spoiled little brat that’s entitled to more, more, more.

First of all, that’s quite a mature characterization.

But let’s look at the facts. The union has offered to sit down in management negotations for CONCESSIONS!

The Governor flipped them the bird in the style of Schwarzenegger. This iconic Republican has shown them the way!

Not hard working, fiscally conservative people trying to make it in society where they just need a decent livable wage.

Well, you’ve let yourself be divided. Get ready to be conquered.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I don’t have anything against the idea of unions, just how modern day unions operate.

Just as I said, “Unions were good 100+ years ago, but no longer.”

It seems to me that many unions strive to make their members millionaires regardless the cost to the business.

But, it’s okay for businesses to make the bosses millionaires regardless of the cost to the union members?

The argument I hear from pro-union employees makes them sound like a very childish spoiled little brat that’s entitled to more, more, more. Not hard working, fiscally conservative people trying to make it in society where they just need a decent livable wage.

As an attorney, I’ve met and talked with lawyers who make a profession of union-busting. They, too, want the bosses to have more, more, more.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Yes, I have relatives around Mt. Shasta and scattered throughout the central part of CA.

CA is full of all kinds of people though, very unlike OK. I’m proud to say we don’t have some of the crowds CA has.

It’s part of why I love being from and living here. I can walk out of my building, turn left or right and within 10 minutes hear conversations in any of a number of languages and see people from all around the world. It’s fascinating, to be honest.

To me, living in a homogeneous society would be boring in the extreme.

We’re also pretty diverse in climate and ecosystems. Beaches, grassy hills, mountains, deserts, forests… :heaven:

Anyway…moving on. LOL

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Just as I said, “Unions were good 100+ years ago, but no longer.”

But, it’s okay for businesses to make the bosses millionaires regardless of the cost to the union members?

As an attorney, I’ve met and talked with lawyers who make a profession of union-busting. They, too, want the bosses to have more, more, more.

You see, that’s all OKAY because it’s someone who is WORTHY of the money, even if they don’t actually do the work that makes the money.

 

[bbarrick8383]

But, it’s okay for businesses to make the bosses millionaires regardless of the cost to the union members?

It shouldn’t matter if they make them millionaires, as long as the employees get paid a livable wage. Jealousy is just as bad, if not worse than greed.

As an attorney, I’ve met and talked with lawyers who make a profession of union-busting. They, too, want the bosses to have more, more, more.

As a blue collar, non union worker, I’ve never had the need for one and hope I never do. I’m just glad there is work to be done, and someone there to pay me to do it.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

You see, that’s all OKAY because it’s someone who is WORTHY of the money, even if they don’t actually do the work that makes the money.

I have socialite friends in and around Greenwich, CT, and fine people as some of them are, they get richer not from doing any sort of productive work, but from the increases in the value of their portfolios.

Caveat: Lest, I imply that none “work,” a few of these acquaintances are surgeons with very valuable practices.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I have socialite friends in and around Greenwich, CT, and fine people as some of them are, they get richer not from doing any sort of productive work, but from the increases in the value of their portfolios.

Caveat: Lest, I imply that none “work,” a few of these acquaintances are surgeons with very valuable practices.

And I wouldn’t say that all of the rich are idle. I do have a problem with people implying that the rich are somehow more “worthy” simply because they’re rich. It reeks of heresy.

 

[bbarrick8383]

First, if you actually think this, you have no concept of what a union is. The union is all the employees represented by it. Membership entitles you to vote on who represents you in management negotiations and who runs the day to day operations of the union. It’s not some third party “out there,” it’s the people.

But I’ve noticed that about people on the right. They don’t seem to understand democratic institutions very well. Must be that top-down hierarchical mentality which works very well for religion and some forms of government (such as a Catholic monarchy) but not in a society where the rights of the individual, including the rights to assembly, of association and to petition the government, are paramount.

It’s so easy to forget the rights of the business owner isn’t it? If unions were an unbiased third party that negotiated fair contracts with the understanding that management has earned it’s place in the food chain and the employee should strive to earn it’s place in management to better themselves, unions would be wanted everywhere.

Well, you’ve let yourself be divided. Get ready to be conquered.

Mmmmkay.

 

[bbarrick8383]

It’s part of why I love being from and living here. I can walk out of my building, turn left or right and within 10 minutes hear conversations in any of a number of languages and see people from all around the world. It’s fascinating, to be honest.

To me, living in a homogeneous society would be boring in the extreme.

We’re also pretty diverse in climate and ecosystems. Beaches, grassy hills, mountains, deserts, forests… :heaven:

Anyway…moving on. LOL

I don’t think you understand what I was saying.

We have a very diverse society as well, full of black cowboys, mexican cowboys, indian cowboys, white cowboys, black country boys, mexican country boys, indian country boys and white country boys. I myself am mixed. Our mexican population now exceeds our native american population as well.

There isn’t much difference in a local democrat and a local republican, we all get along just fine.

 

[bbarrick8383]

You see, that’s all OKAY because it’s someone who is WORTHY of the money, even if they don’t actually do the work that makes the money.

My father’s been in this business for 30 years, I’ve been in it for 3, I don’t deserve what he has and I damn sure don’t want someone coming along to take it away from him to give to me.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

If unions were an unbiased third party.

Unions are NOT labor arbitrators! They represent the workers, just as corporate attorneys represent the bosses. Neither they nor the unions are disinterested parties and ought not be such. They dance with them as what brung them!!

 

[bbarrick8383]

And I wouldn’t say that all of the rich are idle. I do have a problem with people implying that the rich are somehow more “worthy” simply because they’re rich. It reeks of heresy.

And your post reeks of jealousy.

Go ahead and take away from the rich, redistribute that wealth amongst the lower middle class and the poor…and watch the unemployment rate rise.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Unions are NOT labor arbitrators! They represent the workers, just as corporate attorneys represent the bosses. Neither they nor the unions are disinterested parties and ought not be such. They dance with them as what brung them!!

Did I say they were?

I said** IF**.

They can keep going down the same road all they want though, they will never see the same numbers they had in the '30’s.

And they will continue to lose people and as long as they keep showing the same jealousy and ignorance they continue to show.

I guess, actually why don’t their numbers grow though? Who wouldn’t want to smoke pot and drink alcohol during break times or be sent to sit at a mall for 8 hours and get paid because there wasn’t enough work to do.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

It’s so easy to forget the rights of the business owner isn’t it?

Oh, please. The rights of the business owner aren’t eliminated when the rights of the employees is recognized. It’s not an either/or proposition. Employees banding together to address issues with their employer (which is the definition of a union) levels the playing field. It’s easier to ignore one or two employees with a complaint, but if all the employees have a complaint together, it’s kinda hard to ignore.

If unions were an unbiased third party that negotiated fair contracts with the understanding that management has earned it’s place in the food chain and the employee should strive to earn it’s place in management to better themselves, unions would be wanted everywhere.

Then they wouldn’t be UNIONS (union, as in united), they would be third party negotiators.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

And your post reeks of jealousy.

Go ahead and take away from the rich, redistribute that wealth amongst the lower middle class and the poor…and watch the unemployment rate rise.

Wow, how do you get that from what I said?

I said that the rich shouldn’t be considered more worthy simply because they’re rich. I never said anything about taking it from them.

I do believe that the idle money needs to be released back into the economy, but I never said how to do it. But that’s another topic, isn’t it?

I thought we were talking about a Republican attack on the rights of state workers to collectively bargain.

 

[bbarrick8383]

Oh, please. The rights of the business owner aren’t eliminated when the rights of the employees is recognized. It’s not an either/or proposition. Employees banding together to form a union (which is the definition of a union) levels the playing field. It’s easier to ignore one or two employees with a complaint, but if all the employees have a complaint together, it’s kinda hard to ignore.

Then they wouldn’t be UNIONS (union, as in united), they would be third party negotiators.

There have been business owners close their doors when unions tried to unionize their employees.

A union could still be a third party entity if it not only consisted of parties elected by employees, but also parties from the management levels of the company along with unbiased moderators.

 

[a_priori]

Actually, I know exactly why I’m angry. I wish that the people I’m angry for understood why I’m angry.

It’s all about divide and conquer.

So it couldn’t be a simple matter of governments experiencing debilitating debt and that they simply cannot afford to insulate one group of people in society while the rest of the working class struggles?

It’s not hard to understand but it takes a leap of faith to step off the Republican plantation and really take a look at how working people are being divided and conquered by those bound to the love of money.

Can we get on the same page. I am not a Republican. Democrats and Republicans are cut from the same cloth. They manipulate and appease in order to stay in power. Since I am right of center and pro-life, I often hold my nose and vote Republican, being the lesser of two evils. I have an intense dislike for the Bush presidency. (In a cruel irony we are descended from the same colonist.) So please don’t pigeon-hole me in that camp.

There’s a lot of ways to do it (DISCLAIMER: without comment, save for public vs. private. This list is for illustrative purposes only. If you want to discuss any of these, let’s take it to another thread. No rabbit holes, please.):

Not interested. But thanks.

It makes no sense to say, “to those eeeeeeeeeevil public employee unions.” Public employee unions, like ALL unions, are the MEMBERS. Dues are collected and SPENT in the economy for things like travel, office supplies, and yes campaign contributions (corporations, including those who bid on service or supply contracts with public agencies, also make campaign contributions and in far greater magnitude). All that money, including public employee wages, gets recirculated back into the economy because most public employees make a wage low enough to require them to spend most of their money to maintain a middle class standard of living (in my case, very lower middle class, maybe upper working poor). Every time a union member goes to Costco, each dollar spent has an effect that ripples throughout the entire network of economic connections Costco has (granted, on a dollar for dollar basis, it’s not much but it adds up quickly). Every transaction where a good or service is purchased has this ripple effect. Spending by everyday working people is what keeps the economy moving. It creates demand and the need for product creates the need for more jobs.

The economy is a closed system. Borrowing money in order to compensate public employees to level greater than there private-sector counterparts in a down cycle is tantamount to ripping up your hardwood floors so you can feed the woodstove for a week. Shortsighted acts like this feel really good but the end is economic disaster. Where does the money come from?

On the other hand, give the rich an extra thousand or million and they simply invest it in the aftermarket (stocks, etc.). It’s removed from the economy. It’s money making money but nothing else. There’s no incentive for the rich to spend more than is necessary to maintain their lifestyle. The rest is hoarded away for…what? This is where I believe the money has gone.

Excessive CEO compensation and Wall Street on steroids is extremely destructive as well. The incest between Wall Street and the Obama White House doesn’t seem to upset Democrats though. Excessive Wall Street profits subsidized by the taxpayer are evil. Unions trying to get blood out of a stone in a down economy is bad. As I have said, ad nauseum, the pendulum should rest in the middle and it never does.

I’m not a Republican or a Democrat. I’m an “Arithmetist”; don’t spend more than you take in. Don’t incur debt you cannot sustain. Don’t promise other people’s money to supporters for their votes. It’s not complicated. I’m on no one’s plantation.

 

[estesbob]

Unions offer concessions as Capitol stalemate, protests continue

host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_a05349be-3be1-11e0-b0a1-001cc4c002e0.html

 

[LCMS_No_More]

There have been business owners close their doors when unions tried to unionize their employees.

Yes. The nuclear option.

Unlike a strike where the employees are saying, we’ll talk but you’ve reached a low enough level of credibility that we’re not going to work until we come to an agreement. A lockout is the management side of this. It always starts out with high demands with a level with in mind where settlement can be reached. Labor makes high demands and management makes high demands. Sometimes a concession is made here to get a gain there, on both sides. Sometimes, both sides have throw away items they propose just to test the waters (Schwarzenegger did this. I was part of a market research focus group on the issue. It showed me all I needed to see about Schwarzenegger and his Republican cohorrts ). In the end, there should be an intent to carry through with the agreement once it’s reached, the core of good faith bargaining (something Schwarzenegger knows nothing about ).

Simply closing down in order to avoid having to bargain is akin to picking up their ball and going home. Childish, playground behavior.

And I won’t excuse any behavior on the part of union members to intimidate anyone to sign any petition or vote a certain way. That’s not how civilized people act in a democratic institution. Every member is entitled to their opinion and debate must open and questions allowed to be asked without fear of reprisal. Membership also implies a contractual agreement that members will abide by the results of any election of the membership.

Still, there will always be kvetches.

A union could still be a third party entity if it not only consisted of parties elected by employees, but also parties from the management levels of the company along with unbiased moderators.

That would be a joint labor-management committee (union representatives and management representatives) and arbitration board (JLMC plus moderators), not a union.