The advancements of Unions are high prices for everyone. It feeds itself in a way. You need more money to pay for the goods you are paying more for as a result of union extravagance and unrealistic economics - of the type that put companies they work for out of business. To give you a hint of where Unions are heading. In certain geographical areas, Unions are looking to bring the illegal alien workers into their fold with the promise of benefits and higher wages. Only thing is, the illegals are dubious about joining the Unions. The illegals want to work continuously and at whatever job comes there way.

Well, we can all pay higher prices and simultaneously make more money and have more free time to spend that money and enjoy the things we can afford.

Or we can all pay very low prices, but be working 2 jobs and 16 hour days for so little money that when we finally do get a day off all we can do is buy a few groceries at the company store.

I don't know about their wage scale, but Showerspass clothing which is made in Northern California sells top-notch rain jackets for the same price as Chinese made stuff of famous brands. I do know that the Showerspass has very little in the way of parasitic management and marketing structures.

All you union haters: Please surrender your 40 hour weeks, your health benefits, your paid vacations, your high wages, and all the other benefits that union members fought and even died for. If you like seeing the good jobs go overseas, bust the unions and line up for a job at Walmart.

I'll be 34 on Wednesday. I have NEVER in my life had any benefits, not even paid sick days, from an employer. My 40-hour work week, medical care, and other needs are provided by the government. Yes, I am sure unions had a great deal to do with this in the past, but in Canada today these things are pretty much enshrined as the norm, and I doubt even the strongest lobby groups would get a government to significantly change them. Certainly unions have little to do with it today.

I have many, many times however been told one of the following at the end of a contract:

"I'de love to keep you, but the union says I have to promote from within."

or

"I'de love to keep you, but if you are here any longer the collective agreement says I must hire you full time, and I can't afford to do that."

Or variations on the above.


I know offhand that Ray-o-vac batteries are union made and are usually chaper than the batteries made overseas by Duracell and Eveready. How do you union haters suppose that happened?

The cost of making an item is only one factor in its MSRP, and often not the most significant. Duracell and Eveready essentially market themselves as premium brands and base their sales on name-brand recognition. Ray-o-vac is all but a discount/no-name brand. Even without knowing anything about the relative production costs that alone tells me that Ray-o-vac would likely have a lower MSRP than Duracell.

Disparage the unions all you want, but realize that all the rights and benefits they won in the past are being eroded. How else can we workers be heard politically if we don't group together somehow?

I know many people in union jobs who feel they LOST their voice to the union.

[QUOTE=patc]I'll be 34 on Wednesday. I have NEVER in my life had any benefits, not even paid sick days, from an employer. My 40-hour work week, medical care, and other needs are provided by the government. Yes, I am sure unions had a great deal to do with this in the past, but in Canada today these things are pretty much enshrined as the norm, and I doubt even the strongest lobby groups would get a government to significantly change them. Certainly unions have little to do with it today.

I have many, many times however been told one of the following at the end of a contract:

"I'de love to keep you, but the union says I have to promote from within."

or

"I'de love to keep you, but if you are here any longer the collective agreement says I must hire you full time, and I can't afford to do that."

Or variations on the above.





Here in the U.S., they are trying to get rid of all those benefits you list.
It sounds like you've been continuously hired as a "temp".

[QUOTE=patc]I'll be 34 on Wednesday. I have NEVER in my life had any benefits, not even paid sick days, from an employer. My 40-hour work week, medical care, and other needs are provided by the government.


Believe it or not the government is the people who pay the taxes required for you to get your medical care and other needs provided by the government. What you are describing is socialism, now that may be fine for Canada but nothing is free someone has to pay for it.
It just may be your employer because he is being taxed to provide your so called government benefits.
Taxes are,after all just a redistribution of wealth.

I'd be interested in hearing the theory behind the notion that workers are in a stronger bargaining position as individuals than they are collectively.

I'd also be interested in hearing the theory behind the notion that 15% of the workforce should carry all the weight of negotiating for 100% of the workforce.

buy Cannondale!!! it's still American-made as far as I know... just for that fact, I try to buy it when I can... seems to be higher-quality as well, but that may be just me...

I asked the bike shop guy about this . . . Cannondales are made in the US at $600 and up. Their lower-priced bikes aren't. I couldn't afford to go that high, so I chose a Specialized Sirrus over a Marin Muirwoods, partly because the former was made in Taiwan rather than China . . .

(China is the worst, btw. The worst.)

Clearly there is no way that US workers, unionized or not, can compete with slave & semi-slave labor elsewhere in the world. If US consumers want to subsidize evil by buying from such nations, that is their choice.

That's exactly why I asked the question. It's one thing to wear shorts so tight that you can tell my religion; it's another to support slave labor while I do it. :mad:

Since biking is new to me, I just don't know the answers. For basketball and running, I know that some New Balance employees make a living wage -- http://www.nbwebexpress.com/madeinusa_nb.htm

But I don't know anything about bike stuff . . . so here we are again . . .

Assos clothing is made in Switzerland I believe. It is top of the line. No union needed as the Swiss enjoy government guaranteed health care, vacation and retirement benefits.

I'd be interested in hearing the theory behind the notion that workers are in a stronger bargaining position as individuals than they are collectively.



GOOD workers are in a better position to succeed as individuals. Unions tend to benefit bad emplyeees more than the good. Unions are interested in what is best for the union, not the employee. Businesses are interested in what is best for the business/shareholders not the employee. At least the business is honest about their interests and they pay me instead of me paying them.

It sounds like you've been continuously hired as a "temp".

No, my employment history is a series of contracts, from a few weeks to a year each. That is now the norm in many fields, and some people expect it to be the norm overall in the future. My life-partner worked 4 consecutive 1-year contracts for the same employer before they hired him as an permanent employee. Which means he has benefits, but less pay and no more job security!

Believe it or not the government is the people who pay the taxes required for you to get your medical care and other needs provided by the government.

No, really? Wow. :rolleyes:


What you are describing is socialism, now that may be fine for Canada but nothing is free someone has to pay for it. It just may be your employer because he is being taxed to provide your so called government benefits. Taxes are,after all just a redistribution of wealth.

Really, I thought governments used taxes for toilet paper. At least we agree that the government is taxing me, and not the unions.

I think this thread is going the way of bike-lane debates.

I think this thread is going the way of bike-lane debates.
At least bike lane debates have something to do with bicycling advocacy and/or bicycling safety.

I'd say this thread is as related to bicycling as rants about the evils of fast food or cell phones on this list.

One might try learning a skill and being good at it.
Yes, that is important. But it is not a guarantee is it? Just come to Massachusetts and ask any of the PhD scientists, engineers, IT pros, and optical networking folks who have been laid off since all those industries took a dive five years ago. Some are just now starting to find jobs again, at lower pay than they were getting before. (and yet, housing prices continue to go up, in defiance of basic economics. Fancy that.)

Liquidation firms are making out just fine though.

Three more American Bicycle businesses, if not mentioned already:

Waterford Precision cycle.
Steelman cycles.
Merlin Metalworks.

These companies all produce very well made frames, for cycling enthusiasts. (I ride a Gunnar Street Dog) Most people agree that this is the future of the bicycle business in America: Small companies, producing very high quality frames and other products, for a very small part of the market. There is nothing wrong with this that I can see. Yes, I do remember when Treks were all American made.

To answer the orginal poster's question, yes, cycling clothing is very expensive in large part because it is retailed to such a small market. The same goes for clothing for Skiing, tennis, and golf. Uh, has anyone checked the price tags on ski stuff lately? :eek: Glad I don't ski. Let's not forget, cycling is also seasonal for many. (like skiing.) Those who are able to ride in winter are a hearty bunch, but very few in number.

We live in interesting times, that much is certain.

J&G Cyclewear is made in the US at least.
+1 for J&G (http://www.bicycleclothing.com). It's very high quality stuff, reasonably priced and made in Oregon.

All you union haters: Please surrender your 40 hour weeks, your health benefits, your paid vacations, your high wages, and all the other benefits that union members fought and even died for. If you like seeing the good jobs go overseas, bust the unions and line up for a job at Walmart.

To the OP: Your union education committee could help you find the source of union-made products. I know offhand that Ray-o-vac batteries are union made and are usually chaper than the batteries made overseas by Duracell and Eveready. How do you union haters suppose that happened?

WELL SAID and THANK YOU FOR RESPONDING TO THE UNION BASHING IDIOTS.

I don't know about their wage scale, but Showerspass clothing which is made in Northern California sells top-notch rain jackets for the same price as Chinese made stuff of famous brands. I do know that the Showerspass has very little in the way of parasitic management and marketing structures.


OK -- NOW we are getting somewhere . . . Check this out from the Showerspass website:
We pay our suppliers and contractors fair wages. We make our products in the USA allowing us to visit contractors factories and ensure good working conditions. We try to minimize resource consumption (such as paper catalogues) and recycle or reuse shipping materials as much as possible . . .

This is what I was looking for! J&G also looks pretty good.

A note on unions: as a student rabbi, I worked for a summer with HERE (Hotel Employees/Restaurant Employees union), in an AFL-CIO/Interfaith Worker Justice program designed to bring clergy and labor together. I met amazing people: labor organizers who busted their asses organizing workers, activists earning a fraction of what they could get somewhere else, and immigrant workers who RUN OUR ECONOMY.

When the WTC was knocked down, so was Windows on the World, the restaurant at the top of the towers. The surviving workers and the widows were promised much in the immediate aftermath, and given nothing. The press left. The celebrities left. Mayor Ghouly Guiliani sure as **** left. And then INS threatened to deport them.

ONLY the union cared a rat's ass about these people.

And how did many/most of them get to work? By bike -- people riding not for fun, but because it was what they could afford.

I NEVER thought this would be a controversial question. Why is it so strange to be bummed about supporting human misery just to have a kick-ass time on a bike?

Found this just now from InSport

As the company grew, so did its ties with the community. InSport is dedicated to working together with its business partners in its nearby communities and nearly 95 percent of InSport's products are made in the United States.

www.insport.com/history.cfm

Yes, that is important. But it is not a guarantee is it? Just come to Massachusetts and ask any of the PhD scientists, engineers, IT pros, and optical networking folks who have been laid off since all those industries took a dive five years ago. Some are just now starting to find jobs again, at lower pay than they were getting before. (and yet, housing prices continue to go up, in defiance of basic economics. Fancy that.)

.....

True, it's no guarantee, but neither is Union employment. I was a carpenter for many years (non-union). It was always amazing how many union guys would come out and work with us. They would constantly complain about the pay, the work, the conditions, etc. When I would suggest that they might be happier in a union job the answer was usually "There's no work right now" or "We're on strike". I don't know how many of those guys we fired because they were not very good at the job or just plain lazy. While there are no absolutes (of course) I don't think a good employee needs a union.

Unions? I've lost many a job due to unions, not a one has helped me though. To me unions have very negative associations. As in, "oh, the bus driver's contracts are up, they'll threaten to strike again." Or, "oh, the teacher's contracts are up...."



Exactly. The only areas where unions are growing in membership is in the public sector. Should be absolutely illegal.

I think what will happen in the future is, just as UNIONS went too far for a long time and alienated their support, businesses will go to far and alienate their support as well, and unionism will stage a reasonable comeback. There are folks out there who, for whatever reason, are in need of a strong advocate, who need a union to balance the needs of those workers against the demands of capital.

roughstuff

I think what will happen in the future is, just as UNIONS went too far for a long time and alienated their support, businesses will go to far and alienate their support as well, and unionism will stage a reasonable comeback. There are folks out there who, for whatever reason, are in need of a strong advocate, who need a union to balance the needs of those workers against the demands of capital.

Interesting view, you may have a point there. Certainly tech workers here need some sort of representation - be that traditional unions or something new. The employers are all too aware that for every employee with a complaint, there are a dozen unemployed guys willing to take the job.

Workers of the world, UNITE! Throw off the chains of oppression, and come together to rally for the rights of all workers! Bring back the wobblies!

I'm still buying made in the USA eco friendly wool Ibex clothes, that's as good as I can do with my consumer dollar, i think.

My Burley rain jacket (which might see its first wearing all season today in Seattle rain!) says

"Made in Eugene, Oregon USA"

"Burley Design Cooperative"

must be a bunch of hippies running the show or sumpin'!

Another update:

Hi Mike,

Yes, we make our products right here in Oregon because we believe just as you do. Thanks for taking the time to email us, and I hope you'll give our gear a try. Welcome to the world of cycling!

Thank you,

Linda

J&G Cyclewear
PO Box 1195
Marcola, OR 97454

800.452.3938

www.bicycleclothing.com

You guys have been very helpful . . . thanks!

And so . . . now that it seems that we have some choices . . . . WHATEVER you think about unions, can we start a movement to avoid slave labor-produced bike gear whenever possible? Who's in???

I heckle all union strikers, you hosers!

you might want to do a little research about where the term "scab" came from if you're going to continue this practice.

Workers of the world, UNITE! .... My Burley rain jacket (which might see its first wearing all season today in Seattle rain!) says "Made in Eugene, Oregon USA" "Burley Design Cooperative"

must be a bunch of hippies running the show or sumpin'!

Indeed!

http://burley.com/about-burley/default.html
Burley Credo
We are a democratic cooperative workplace. By designing, manufacturing and marketing ecologically and socially responsible outdoor family products, we enhance the world community and provide a livelihood for our membership. We use business practices and manufacturing processes that promote the health and well being of our members, communities and customers. Our dedicated work force is committed to attracting lifelong customers by offering a superior level of quality, safety and services for many generations to come.

Here at Burley we are both workers and business partners operating as one team with a common goal, being personally responsible to one another and to the success and health of our cooperative.

Wow -- jackpot!

So . . . once one gets past the haters up on here, you guys rock! Thanks SO MUCH for all the help!

Workers of the world, UNITE! Throw off the chains of oppression, and come together to rally for the rights of all workers! Bring back the wobblies!



Bikers of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!

roughstuff

I didn't read all the posts, but in answer to the OP's original question, check out: J&G Bicycle Clothing (http://www.bicycleclothing.com/company-history.html). They make everything in Oregon and probably aren't unionized because it's a small outfit and under the radar of most unions.

Bikers of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!
Yeah, but the shaft drive transmissions for bikes weigh more than I want for my road bike. I find comfort in my chains....

To the OP: Your union education committee could help you find the source of union-made products. I know offhand that Ray-o-vac batteries are union made and are usually chaper than the batteries made overseas by Duracell and Eveready. How do you union haters suppose that happened?

Just checked the pager batteries in our fridge. We have Duracell,Eveready,and Kodak. All say Made in USA on them.

ok, for the OP:

Burley is a worker-owned co-op right here in the states. They make hand-built steel frames that rock and the best damn raingear you'll find anywhere.

Circle A is a worker-owned co-op that builds custom frames.

There are several smaller companies that also make stuff in the USA. Kucharik makes their wool stuff in their CA shop. Most bag companies - Chrome, REload, Under the Weather (NOT timbuk2) make their stuff by hand in the states.

Planet Bike stuff is made overseas but they donate a portion of the proceeds to bike advocacy.

hope that helps...

ps - i work for a union. we're growing. we're helping workers improve their lives. we have a vision, and we're reaching for it. all you haters can do what you do, but we'll continue seeking justice and equality for working families.

And so . . . now that it seems that we have some choices . . . . WHATEVER you think about unions, can we start a movement to avoid slave labor-produced bike gear whenever possible? Who's in???

On that note, how about lobbying for more accurate "Made In..." labels? I believe the rules in the USA are same/similar to those in Canada, and many things are not indicated. For example a jersey may be "Made In Canada" with fabric from China.

http://www.canadianmade.com/
canadian made products (assembled anyways, may require more research for components)

My wife is union. She's a medical laboratory technologist. I don't want an under-educated, over-worked person in charge of my health care.

I'm glad my wife is not forced into coming to work if she's called in. I'm glad that when she accepts it, she's compensated additionally for not being scheduled. I'm glad I will know my wifes schedule is made 6 weeks in advance so we can plan outings. I'm glad she's not forced to work double-shifts. I'm glad she can not be let go with no warning or reason.

She's worked hard with her company and company management has selected her based on her prior experience, work ethic, ability to work well with others and seniorit for her positions.

It's not as black & white as you all make it out to be.

I'm not fanatic about it, but if I notice a choice, I'll opt for non-union. It's just politics. I guess I'm not a "to each according to one's demands" kind of guy.

Pretty obvious that most of the posters are from the management side of the tracks.

I'll be 34 on Wednesday. I have NEVER in my life had any benefits, not even paid sick days, from an employer. My 40-hour work week, medical care, and other needs are provided by the government. Yes, I am sure unions had a great deal to do with this in the past, but in Canada today these things are pretty much enshrined as the norm, and I doubt even the strongest lobby groups would get a government to significantly change them. Certainly unions have little to do with it today.[/
That's certainly not the case in the US. Here, the only health care for workers comes from employers. Unions got that for everybody, mainly in the 60s and 70s.


I have many, many times however been told one of the following at the end of a contract:
"I'de love to keep you, but the union says I have to promote from within."
or
"I'de love to keep you, but if you are here any longer the collective agreement says I must hire you full time, and I can't afford to do that."
Or variations on the above.
Again, unions do not make the work rules. At most, unions negotiate with companies over work rules. Unions will try to get benefits for permanent employees, and will try to get more workers classified as permanent with full benefits. Companies, on the other hand, often exploit workers by hiring them on a temporary basis without benefits, then letting them go as soon as they are eligible for union membership and benefits. They then try to confuse workers for blaming the union for work rules that the company also agreed to. Surely you can see that this is a management ploy, and not approved by unions. Unions would obviously prefer for all workers to have union representation and benefits from the day of hire.



The cost of making an item is only one factor in its MSRP, and often not the most significant. Duracell and Eveready essentially market themselves as premium brands and base their sales on name-brand recognition. Ray-o-vac is all but a discount/no-name brand. Even without knowing anything about the relative production costs that alone tells me that Ray-o-vac would likely have a lower MSRP than Duracell.

Thanks for making the union point for me. Executives of the company determine what proportions of company assets to spend on labor, marketing, and other expenses of doing business. I am not aware of a case where a company consulted with a union about these matters.

Like other posters here, you seem to have difficulty in understanding the different roles of management and unions. You want to blame unions when management does a poor job of running the company.

I think this misunderstanding is largely accountable for the bad image that unions have today. Companies and conservative politicians have gone to a lot of effort to confuse workers on these issues. Based on this thread, I see that they have succeeded.

ps - i work for a union. we're growing. we're helping workers improve their lives. we have a vision, and we're reaching for it. all you haters can do what you do, but we'll continue seeking justice and equality for working families.

Thank you. Reading through this, I know there are some who "get it". Still, I find it interesting that so many of the bug-eyed, acid-laced anti-union postings on the internet come from young people, which is why I ask that question, "How long have you been in the workforce?" More often than not, the question goes unanswered. As another member suggested, it would seem they are getting their information about organized labor from biased media reporting. I must also ask how much of the history of the labor movement is being rewritten. I think that is possible, given Walmart's political clout.

FLBandit, it sounds as though the carpenters union has changed a lot since my grandfather was a member, decades ago. The houses he built still stand. I wonder if all those yuppie housing proj,,,,er,, "luxury condominiums" being built today will still be standing fifty years from today?

Again, unions do not make the work rules. At most, unions negotiate with companies over work rules. Unions will try to get benefits for permanent employees, and will try to get more workers classified as permanent with full benefits. Companies, on the other hand, often exploit workers by hiring them on a temporary basis without benefits, then letting them go as soon as they are eligible for union membership and benefits. Surely you can see that this is a management ploy, and not approved by unions. Unions would obviously prefer for all workers to have union representation and benefits from the day of hire

I don't see this any more as a "management ploy" as a "union ploy". I'm not naive, and when told something (particularly by an employer) I demand to see it in writing. I have worked at several places where the collective agreement did indeed specify that the company was not to hire any individual for (using one specific example) more than 4 consecutive contracts without creating a new full-time position AND opening that position up to current employees first. (Due to the nature of the job, contacts were always 4.5 months).

Bottom line, unions create a work environment where your (or my) job situation is defined by a generic set of rules, and that is something I am against. I am an individual and negotiate my own contracts. That is, of course, how things are now that I am self-employed but it was that way for most of my work life. At this point I'm not sure if I would willingly accept a union job. I certainly would not respect the demand of a strike vote or any other union action I didn't agree with.

As for things like 40-hour work weeks, work conditions, etc. I say again that is the realm of govrnment regulation, we don't need unions for thgovernmenat.

There's no point in trying to get me to change an opinion I've had since high school, and this is certainly not the forum for it.

My wife is union. She's a medical laboratory technologist. I don't want an under-educated, over-worked person in charge of my health care.

I doubt the union had anything to do with specifying the job qualifications to be a med lab tech.


It's not as black & white as you all make it out to be.

One of the hazards of any discussion - particularly an on-line forum - is that we tend to present one opinion with a short argument, which of necessity comes across as very polar. In reality a person's full opinion might have many shades of grey and much complexity, but that would require a much lengthier debate to explore.

I don't see this any more as a "management ploy" as a "union ploy". I'm not naive, and when told something (particularly by an employer) I demand to see it in writing. I have worked at several places where the collective agreement did indeed specify that the company was not to hire any individual for (using one specific example) more than 4 consecutive contracts without creating a new full-time position AND opening that position up to current employees first. (Due to the nature of the job, contacts were always 4.5 months).Would you rather have a company that hires "temporary" workers (i.e., workers who are not in a permanent, full time position) on a permanent basis? That may or may not mean much in Canada, but it means the difference between having benefits and not having benefits here.


Bottom line, unions create a work environment where your (or my) job situation is defined by a generic set of rules, and that is something I am against. I am an individual and negotiate my own contracts. Bottom line, contract theory explicitly recognizes that, in the vast majority of cases, individuals negotiating contracts with companies are always at a disadvantage. That's why workers bargain collectively. The only exceptions to that rule would be where the worker is unique (think top entertainer, top athlete, professional at the top of his field)-- a description the vast majority of people, including you, don't fit-- and where the contracting party has contracting expertise to match the company's contracting expertise (think mortgage broker negotiating the terms of his own mortgage).


That is, of course, how things are now that I am self-employed but it was that way for most of my work life. At this point I'm not sure if I would willingly accept a union job. I certainly would not respect the demand of a strike vote or any other union action I didn't agree with.Then I presume you would also refuse to accept any of the benefits of a union job...


As for things like 40-hour work weeks, work conditions, etc. I say again that is the realm of govrnment regulation, we don't need unions for thgovernmenat.You clearly have no understanding of labor history to make a statement like that.


There's no point in trying to get me to change an opinion I've had since high school, and this is certainly not the forum for it.At least you know it's an opinion.

One of the hazards of any discussion - particularly an on-line forum - is that we tend to present one opinion with a short argument, which of necessity comes across as very polar. In reality a person's full opinion might have many shades of grey and much complexity, but that would require a much lengthier debate to explore.[/QUOTE]

The above ought to be required reading around here. Still, personally, I disagree with your position on unions - not all are bad. Often management gets the union it deserves anyway - give employees no incentive to unionize, and they won't; give them the mushroom treatment (kept in the dark and fed nothing but sh!t), and they will. I have anecdotes, if anyone wants 'em...

This thread needs to be relocated to the Politics backwater forum. It's obviously gone well beyond the OPs topic and turned into a non-cycling discussion.

Would you rather have a company that hires "temporary" workers (i.e., workers who are not in a permanent, full time position) on a permanent basis? That may or may not mean much in Canada, but it means the difference between having benefits and not having benefits here.

Its means about the same thing here, but keep in mind that we have universal (basic) health care provided. For myself, I'd rather have the choice. In some cases the benefits package isn't worth nearly as much as, for example, a few extra $$ on the paycheck.


Bottom line, contract theory explicitly recognizes that, in the vast majority of cases, individuals negotiating contracts with companies are always at a disadvantage. That's why workers bargain collectively. The only exceptions to that rule would be where the worker is unique (think top entertainer, top athlete, professional at the top of his field)-- a description the vast majority of people, including you, don't fit-- and where the contracting party has contracting expertise to match the company's contracting expertise (think mortgage broker negotiating the terms of his own mortgage).

Yes, many jobs (e.g. retail) require few skills and still have a clear workers vs. management division. More and more professional fields are not like that, however, and you compete for one position as an individual, based on your individual merits. You do make a good point, however, I have no doubt my opinions are influenced greatly by my experience, with most of my jobs being in the photo-imaging field where I was hired for my specific skills/experience/expertise. I don't actually know many people who are in a job where they are pretty much "generic employee x". Even when I was a lowly clerk (many moons ago ;) ), however, I still negotiated my contract.... there just was a lot less to negotiate back then!


You clearly have no understanding of labor history to make a statement like that.

Aw, how sweet of you to take the time to throw in a disparaging statement. I did make a point of stating, in an earlier post, that I was speaking of unions today and not in a historical context. Perhaps you missed that?


At least you know it's an opinion.

Of course it's just an opinion, as are your comments above.

Its also my opinion that this off-topic thread really should be dropped, and that I have better things to thinnk about right now. Birthday and Solstice and Christmas, oh my!

Aw, how sweet of you to take the time to throw in a disparaging statement. I did make a point of stating, in an earlier post, that I was speaking of unions today and not in a historical context. Perhaps you missed that?What I mean is that all of the things you say should be regulated by the government-- 40 hour work week, etc.-- are now standard because of unions. Government had nothing to do with it. In fact, government was sending the cops out to break strikes, often by killing the union men.




Of course it's just an opinion, as are your comments above.Of course, we all have our opinions. Hopefully, however, we all have opinions based on some facts, as opposed to opinions based on nothing (e.g., understanding some labor history would seem to be a necessary basis for having a valid opinion about contemporary labor standards).


Its also my opinion that this off-topic thread really should be dropped, and that I have better things to thinnk about right now. Birthday and Solstice and Christmas, oh my!Happy birthday!

By the way a good way to weigh in, on either side of the union debate and make a difference, is to concentrate your investments in companies that have the attitude toward workers/unions that you toe up to. There are mutual fund groups that confine their investments to (for example): non military companies; non-polluters; living wages (at least overseas); and so on.

It gives ya a chance to do more than just chat about it.

roughstuff

What I mean is that all of the things you say should be regulated by the government-- 40 hour work week, etc.-- are now standard because of unions. Government had nothing to do with it. In fact, government was sending the cops out to break strikes, often by killing the union men.

History is a bit of a catch-22. Absolutely we must learn the lessons of history (and all to often fail to do so). However we must not worship history as some holy grail. An institution may have been historically meaningful for decades or hundreds of years and be useless - or worse - today. That doesn't mean that a person saying, "x is/are bad" is ignorant of history or wants to dismiss or dismantle the good done by 'x', merely that the person no longer feels 'x' is needed or helpful.


(e.g., understanding some labor history would seem to be a necessary basis for having a valid opinion about contemporary labor standards).


This debate (at least me small share of it) has not been about contemporary labour standards at all! It has been about whether or not unions have done anything for me in my work life and my belief as to their lack of usefulness now. Unions today are too busy doing other things... like our threatened transit strike which included a complaint that bus mechanics would not be retrained to maintain the new light rail system, but instead qualified people would be hired. No one was getting laid off here, this was a case of "we want our people to get access to these jobs, no matter how stupid it is to pay to retrain them when their own skills are still in demand." (Note: several other issues existed as well, I am just using this one as an example of a ludicrous demand). This has reached the level of local joke, actually - every three years, like clockwork, the transit contracts are up for negotiation, we get job action and sometimes a short strike, blah blah blah.


Happy birthday!

Thanks. I plan to celebrate by riding my Christmas-decorated bike! Actually I have a lot planned, I'm a real brat on my birthday. The rest of the year I'm busy with partner, lover, pets, friends, work, etc. That one day is all about me! :p

Pretty obvious that most of the posters are from the management side of the tracks.
Not necessarily. I have a union job and I'm one of the highest paid people in the building. Nonetheless, I hope our union falls apart. I acknowledge that I personally receive job stability, protection, Cadillac style benefits, and advocacy from this representation. Here are my basic issues with my union:

1) Viewing labor issues as "workers vs. management" is counterproductive. If everyone doesn't work together on cost control, productivity, benefits, and quality of workplace issues, the result is a poisonous and inefficient workplace.

2) During periods of contract negotiation (and especially strikes), too many people seem to think that it's OK for union members to ostracise, harrass, and intimidate those who don't buy this "line in the sand" crap. If management did this to workers, they would rightly be charged with criminal activity and/or sued out of existence. I'm willing to change my mind, but I don't find name calling or intimidation persuasive.

3) Our union instills a sense of entitlement in members. Many people do not seem to understand the simple economic fact that you cannot hire someone to do a job unless they produce as much wealth as they cost. For them, a paycheck is something you just get. Our fully paid health benefits cost our employer about $10K/year PER EMPLOYEE. Few people seem to get that money has to come from somewhere.

4) Our contracts and actions vigorously protect workers that bring the whole organization down. Firing an incompentent or uncooperative worker takes an act of God, and so long as they have sufficient seniority, they can expect preferential treatment for all opportunities. When these parasites eventually retire or leave, management doesn't notice a drop in overall productivity, so we lose the position permanently. On a related note, when layoffs occur, the most vulnerable and lowest paid employees are let go first, regardless of how much business sense it makes.

5) It is difficult to attract decent management to a workplace where the workers automatically take an adversarial stance towards management and try to screw them every chance they get. A good boss is the most important part of a good workplace and these people are not easy to find.

6) Contrary to popular belief, there are strong disincentives to fire even expensive employees. Labor laws in this country are good. Even if we ignore the fact that it is economically more efficient to hire the expensive person who does a high quality job fast than some unskilled unmotivated nitwit who'll take too long and screw things up, companies have to treat good people well if they want to retain them.

[QUOTE=patc]I doubt the union had anything to do with specifying the job qualifications to be a med lab tech.[QUOTE]
The union requires certification, employement requires union membership. It wasn't that way 5 years ago. A lot of our public health care is privatized, and these companies are responsible to their shareholders first, public health second, and employees third. Scary but true.

.

FLBandit, it sounds as though the carpenters union has changed a lot since my grandfather was a member, decades ago. The houses he built still stand. I wonder if all those yuppie housing proj,,,,er,, "luxury condominiums" being built today will still be standing fifty years from today?

I would not be suprised if it has. The workforce in general has changed. My experience as a Carpenter was that, while there are a few craftsman still around, the money is made by quantity not quality. I've worked on everything from high dollar custom homes to subsidized tract housing. Guess which pays better?

It is a brave new world. With the WTO opening the world to trade cheaper goods are easier to find, funny how it costs $80 for a Reeses Jersey. The woman who made it probably gets 2 cents.

I find that most of the younger 20-35s and business managers and owners don't like unions. To me some are good and some are bad, but most are better than what big business will do to you. As we can buy more off shore "help" unions will vanish.

Can you really blame huffy for closing down the ohio operations and moving to china? If you owned the business wouldn't you? Now if you are high end it makes business "ethics" sense to be politically correct like Burley and Patagonia. Too bad all the american consumers are not among the 17 million millionaires that we have in the us, (1 out of 125 US citizens is a millionaire or about 500 bf members). Now shut up and pay.