Trickle-Up Economics?

[Loren Pechtel]

Earth to untermensche: Jobs moving elsewhere is a form of not being able to compete against non-union companies!

Bullshit.

There were no companies in China competing with union companies that were making a profit in the US.

Until scumbags took the capital that workers created and moved there.

Just to get rid of the union.

Earth to untermensche: The best example is the auto makers being devastated by Japanese competition. That wasn't US capital moving there.

 

[untermensche]

Earth to untermensche: Jobs moving elsewhere is a form of not being able to compete against non-union companies!

Bullshit.

There were no companies in China competing with union companies that were making a profit in the US.

Until scumbags took the capital that workers created and moved there.

Just to get rid of the union.

Earth to untermensche: The best example is the auto makers being devastated by Japanese competition. That wasn't US capital moving there.

Worthless non-sequitur.

Nobody has ever said that all things happening in all nations are the exact same thing.

And thinking they are is just stupidity.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

Wow, I thought Unions in private sector companies was a dead issue since there are no more. Apparently some folks will continue to blame unions long after their death as an infringement to 'capitalism'.

Find a different reason that your favorite capitalist corps are declining!!

aa

 

[angelo]

Militant Unions have been responsible for the vast majority of businesses going to the wall, or shifting manufacturing overseas because of extreme unreasonable demands like up to 3 months annual leave, up to a dozen different varieties of tea and coffee in the lunch room. Exorbitant penalty rates, and a dozens of other demands. Unionism was solely responsible for the end of the auto manufacturing industry in Australia for example. It would cost Toyota an extra $3000 per car to manufacture a Camry in Australia than it does in Germany, a nation who's

wages are on a par, or even higher than Australia for example. It would be madness for any company to hold the status quo!

 

[untermensche]

Militant Unions have been responsible for the vast majority of businesses going to the wall...

You have anything like evidence?

All a union can do is negotiate.

If owners don't want to negotiate fairly, which they don't, the union is merely a way to force them to. But unions have to be backed up by the government to withstand illegal activity. In the US they have not been backed up against illegal anti-union activity in decades.

They have been killed. They did not die because they are not needed.

And as the unions have died so has the American middle class. The thing that made the US special at one time.

 

[angelo]

Evidence? Have you ever heard it said that one man's pay rise is another man's job? The facts are that there's never been such a thing as a free lunch! Someone always pays!

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/...s/news-story/cdedfe1d54436e1f36b75419a02e70e6

 

[untermensche]

Evidence? Have you ever heard it said that one man's pay rise is another man's job? The facts are that there's never been such a thing as a free lunch! Someone always pays!

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/...s/news-story/cdedfe1d54436e1f36b75419a02e70e6

Corporate executive pay and perks have gone through the roof.

That is what has killed companies.

Good old greed.

The former head of Toyota Australia and one of its top supplier executives say combative industrial relations helped trigger the company’s decision to stop making cars.

Your "evidence" is the claims of two very interested parties.

It is total bullshit.

 

[angelo]

Evidence? Have you ever heard it said that one man's pay rise is another man's job? The facts are that there's never been such a thing as a free lunch! Someone always pays!

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/...s/news-story/cdedfe1d54436e1f36b75419a02e70e6

Corporate executive pay and perks have gone through the roof.

That is what has killed companies.

Good old greed.

The former head of Toyota Australia and one of its top supplier executives say combative industrial relations helped trigger the company’s decision to stop making cars.

Your "evidence" is the claims of two very interested parties.

It is total bullshit.

You my friend live in a fantasy world that in reality has never existed and never will.

 

[untermensche]

Corporate executive pay and perks have gone through the roof.

That is what has killed companies.

Good old greed.



Your "evidence" is the claims of two very interested parties.

It is total bullshit.

You my friend live in a fantasy world that in reality has never existed and never will.

One of us is living in a fantasy.

Who is it?

Is it the person who thinks good old capitalists gave workers decent conditions and decent pay because they are just such nice people?

Or is it the person who thinks that unions had to fight against violent capitalists to get decent working conditions?

Is it the person who has no clue about labor history in the US?

Or is it the person that knows the history and understands what capitalists are?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Militant Unions have been responsible for the vast majority of businesses going to the wall...

You have anything like evidence?

All a union can do is negotiate.

If owners don't want to negotiate fairly, which they don't, the union is merely a way to force them to. But unions have to be backed up by the government to withstand illegal activity. In the US they have not been backed up against illegal anti-union activity in decades.

They have been killed. They did not die because they are not needed.

And as the unions have died so has the American middle class. The thing that made the US special at one time.

And what says a union will negotiate fairly?

The teacher's union here keeps exploiting a loophole in the law and not negotiating fairly at all.

And they blamed the state for the health plan--the result being they took it over and now it's far worse.

 

[DBT]

The Business sector, including government policy making, has its own form of Union.

''Union busting is a range of activities undertaken to disrupt or prevent the formation of trade unions. Union busting tactics can refer to both legal and illegal activities, and can range anywhere from subtle to violent. Labor laws differ greatly from country to country in both level and type of regulations in respect to their protection of unions, their organizing activities, as well as other aspects. These laws can affect topics such as posting notices, organizing on or off employer property, solicitations, card signing, union dues, picketing, work stoppages, striking and strikebreaking, lockouts, termination of employment, permanent replacements, automatic recognition, derecognition, ballot elections, and employer-controlled trade unions.[1] Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) declares that everyone has a right to form and/or join a trade union.[2] The provision is, however, not legally binding and has, in most jurisdictions, no horizontal effect in the legal relation between employer and employees or unions.''

 

[angelo]

The fact remains that less than 12% of the workforce in most Western Democracies are in unions. And most of those are in public servant type jobs where one has to be a unionist to get a job there in the first place. Many small businesses, the biggest employer by far, have no need of union thugs telling them how to run their businesses!

 

[untermensche]

The fact remains that less than 12% of the workforce in most Western Democracies are in unions. And most of those are in public servant type jobs where one has to be a unionist to get a job there in the first place. Many small businesses, the biggest employer by far, have no need of union thugs telling them how to run their businesses!

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Unions exploited companies just like companies exploited employees. Neither party ever acted in the best interests of both parties. My years of experience working in unionized shops was only negative. Both groups were ignoramuses and deserved each other.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Unions exploited companies just like companies exploited employees. Neither party ever acted in the best interests of both parties. My years of experience working in unionized shops was only negative. Both groups were ignoramuses and deserved each other.

I agree, but not as bad as working in non-unionized shops. :/

Unions are a good idea, usually horribly implemented, and the best option the worker has to reduce/avoid exploitation, much like democracy.....

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Unions exploited companies just like companies exploited employees. Neither party ever acted in the best interests of both parties. My years of experience working in unionized shops was only negative. Both groups were ignoramuses and deserved each other.

I agree, but not as bad as working in non-unionized shops. :/

Unions are a good idea, usually horribly implemented, and the best option the worker has to reduce/avoid exploitation, much like democracy.....

It's important not to stereotype and generalize. My experience with non-union shops is very positive, as both labor and management. It depends primarily on ownership and how they run their company. Most importantly the relationship between the parties must not be antagonistic. Unions should want companies to be profitable and companies should want employees to be well paid and safe.

 

[untermensche]

Unions exploited companies just like companies exploited employees. Neither party ever acted in the best interests of both parties. My years of experience working in unionized shops was only negative. Both groups were ignoramuses and deserved each other.

It is not exploitation to negotiate and try to get the fruits of your labor.

Exploitation occurs in a system where the worker has no ownership of the fruits of their labor.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Unions exploited companies just like companies exploited employees. Neither party ever acted in the best interests of both parties. My years of experience working in unionized shops was only negative. Both groups were ignoramuses and deserved each other.

I agree, but not as bad as working in non-unionized shops. :/

Unions are a good idea, usually horribly implemented, and the best option the worker has to reduce/avoid exploitation, much like democracy.....

It's important not to stereotype and generalize. My experience with non-union shops is very positive, as both labor and management. It depends primarily on ownership and how they run their company. Most importantly the relationship between the parties must not be antagonistic. Unions should want companies to be profitable and companies should want employees to be well paid and safe.

Based on what I've experienced I should include one more item to the big three of profitability, safety and pay. That is that both parties must be willing to remove individuals from the company, be they management or labor, that do not work in furtherance of those three goals.

 

[DBT]

Balance is needed. At this time, the balance of power is weighed heavily in favour of employers at the expense of employees, which is reflected in stagnating incomes, erosion of conditions, penalty rates, etc.

 

[angelo]

Unions exploited companies just like companies exploited employees. Neither party ever acted in the best interests of both parties. My years of experience working in unionized shops was only negative. Both groups were ignoramuses and deserved each other.

I agree, but not as bad as working in non-unionized shops. :/

Unions are a good idea, usually horribly implemented, and the best option the worker has to reduce/avoid exploitation, much like democracy.....

The problems arises when said unions are run by crooks and corrupted officials who don't really give a hoot about union members but see the union as their personal credit cards or a springboard into politics. The vast majority, into leftists causes.

- - - Updated - - -

Balance is needed. At this time, the balance of power is weighed heavily in favour of employers at the expense of employees, which is reflected in stagnating incomes, erosion of conditions, penalty rates, etc.

What's stopping the employees from starting their own business and risking their own capital?