Hello, I hope this format doesn't scare you away.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By the way, feel free to critique the way I wrote this. :P

 

 

 

Links to Image:

 

One

 

Two

 

Three

 

Four

 

 

 

 

 

Oh and please provide a little bit of backup to your random claims. It kind of doesnt make sense when you put a statement out there without having any foundation.

eh, my dads in the union.........

Liberal propaganda is affecting you son

Liberal propaganda is affecting you son

 

 

 

Illiterate-ism is affecting you.

Bingo. Down with Unions, up with controlling uor freaking workers..jeebus.... :notalk:

Liberal propaganda is affecting you son

 

 

 

Liberal? You got that backwards.

 

 

 

In a completely free market unions are an integral part of keeping everything nice. We aren't in a completely free market though so I don't really have an opinion.

Liberal propaganda is affecting you son

 

 

 

Liberal? You got that backwards.

 

 

 

In a completely free market unions are an integral part of keeping everything nice. We aren't in a completely free market though so I don't really have an opinion.

It's the Liberals, here in Australia, who spread anti-union propoganda so antaonwhy got it the right way around :P

Liberal propaganda is affecting you son

 

 

 

Liberal? You got that backwards.

 

 

 

In a completely free market unions are an integral part of keeping everything nice. We aren't in a completely free market though so I don't really have an opinion.

It's the Liberals, here in Australia, who spread anti-union propoganda so antaonwhy got it the right way around :P

 

 

 

Oh, two different uses of the word then. Here in America the conservatives are anti-union and the liberals are pro-union.

Liberal propaganda is affecting you son

 

 

 

Liberal? You got that backwards.

 

 

 

In a completely free market unions are an integral part of keeping everything nice. We aren't in a completely free market though so I don't really have an opinion.

It's the Liberals, here in Australia, who spread anti-union propoganda so antaonwhy got it the right way around :P

 

 

 

Hmmm. I'm deeply disturbed. A new convincing and revealing advertisement run by the Liberals on the Chaser's War on Everything warned of 100% of union officials being union officials under a Labor government!!! Rudd is a union whore devil!!

 

 

 

:ohnoes:

 

 

 

I swear Howard makes it seem as though the essence of existance will collapse under Rudds "70% front bench".

 

Oh and please provide a little bit of backup to your random claims. It kind of doesnt make sense when you put a statement out there without having any foundation.

 

 

 

And your sources/backup would be where now...?

 

 

 

On-topic: I never realised this was so debated - In the UK its been a quiet issue recently aside from the odd flare up with postal strikes and things but its certainly not on the brink of collapsing the country.

Hello, I hope this format doesn't scare you away.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By the way, feel free to critique the way I wrote this. :P

 

 

 

Links to Image:

 

One

 

Two

 

Three

 

Four

 

 

 

 

 

Oh and please provide a little bit of backup to your random claims. It kind of doesnt make sense when you put a statement out there without having any foundation.

 

 

 

Time to rip this apart

 

 

 

1. Wikipedia can be easily edited, but cans till be a reputable source on soem things

 

2. This is a fact for the U.S.! If all of the unions were to disband overnight working conditions would return to pre-1930s and any laws passed since then would be repealed withing the next 10 years or so. Remember, the vast majority of companies would be glad to fire anyone associated with a union.

 

3. With the causes of inflation, wages must go up and without the unions forming the overall majority of both Americans and Canadians would be livning in "extreme poverty" according to todays standards of living.

 

4. Do more research on the issue before presenting a clear one-sourced arguement as it gives you no grounds to do so.

 

 

 

 

 

Positive Affects of unions:

 

1. wages stay current with inflation

 

2. Working conditions are forced to improve or the companies that are not doing so are boycotted or picketed and therefore going out of business. Believe me it is not a loss for companies like this to go out of business altogether.

 

3.Before the union movement really grew the vast majority of large companies used their own money in order to trap their own workers in to "company towns" where they had no chance of paying off the debts they accrued because of how low the pay was.

 

4. the mandatory breaks passed in both countries has actually increased productivity as it gives the workers a chance to rest and therefore able to do more things at a constant pace. This also goes for the 8-hour workday in the majority of businesses these days as before unions were in place a company could have you work non-stop if they wanted to.

 

5. This one is for non-uionn workers, but unions helped to get it passed. A company could fire you without cause or reason even if you were clearly the best worker they had. These days all employers in both countries must provide a cause or reason as to why they are firing you or they can be sued. This also goes for working beyond a person's scheduledhours as no employer in either country may fire a person for not responding to a call.

 

 

 

http://www.justlabour.yorku.ca/Livingstone_Raykov.pdf

 

 

 

http://www.psi.org.uk/docs/2003/research/emp-union-wage-premium-us-uk.pdf - I know it includes the UK, but it does have the US in there as well.

 

 

 

http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1993/9343/934304.PDF

1. Wikipedia can be easily edited, but cans till be a reputable source on soem things

 

2. This is a fact for the U.S.! If all of the unions were to disband overnight working conditions would return to pre-1930s and any laws passed since then would be repealed withing the next 10 years or so. Remember, the vast majority of companies would be glad to fire anyone associated with a union.

 

3. With the causes of inflation, wages must go up and without the unions forming the overall majority of both Americans and Canadians would be livning in "extreme poverty" according to todays standards of living.

 

4. Do more research on the issue before presenting a clear one-sourced arguement as it gives you no grounds to do so.

 

 

 

 

 

Positive Affects of unions:

 

1. wages stay current with inflation

 

2. Working conditions are forced to improve or the companies that are not doing so are boycotted or picketed and therefore going out of business. Believe me it is not a loss for companies like this to go out of business altogether.

 

3.Before the union movement really grew the vast majority of large companies used their own money in order to trap their own workers in to "company towns" where they had no chance of paying off the debts they accrued because of how low the pay was.

 

4. the mandatory breaks passed in both countries has actually increased productivity as it gives the workers a chance to rest and therefore able to do more things at a constant pace. This also goes for the 8-hour workday in the majority of businesses these days as before unions were in place a company could have you work non-stop if they wanted to.

 

5. This one is for non-uionn workers, but unions helped to get it passed. A company could fire you without cause or reason even if you were clearly the best worker they had. These days all employers in both countries must provide a cause or reason as to why they are firing you or they can be sued. This also goes for working beyond a person's scheduledhours as no employer in either country may fire a person for not responding to a call.

 

1. Their facts are usually never wrong. This is internet debate, not real debate.

 

2. I never said they should disband overnight! I said we can do a better job with what the unions are doing with lets say "labor laws". They reason unions are hated so much is because their bargains can be UNREAL, and they refuse to negotiate. A simple GM employee

 

"If the deal is ratified by UAW members, the company said it expects to save $3 billion a year before taxes in health care costs"(Washington Post). A simple cut saves them 3 billion!

 

"Hourly workers at GM currently have no deductibles and pay no monthly premiums but do have nominal co-payment charges. Overall, they pay about 7 percent of their health care costs; the national average is about 34 percent." (Washington Post). They are literally forcing companies out of business.

 

3. Fantastical law-making skills

 

4. OK

 

 

 

1. see # 3

 

2. Or we can set standards and not force companies out of business by asking ridiculous amounts of money....

 

3. Past tense = irrelevant

 

4. Or we can have a set workday.

 

5. That was then.

 

 

 

They may have been great in the past but work ethics should be in place right now.[/i]

The workplace is clearly not "fine" otherwise we wouldn't have a need for unions.

 

 

 

I think you have a problem with unions run badly, if you've got something against people getting together and using their collective mass to try and campaign for better working conditions then clearly you've never been in a situation where the conditions are no good.

 

 

 

Unions can have too much power, which is why I think Margaret Thatcher did the right thing by disbanding the coal miners unions in the 80's, but they're still necessary in many areas.

 

 

 

They may have been great in the past but work ethics should be in place right now.[/i]

 

 

 

 

 

Business ethics and work ethics are two completely different things and only one resulted in the formation of unions.

 

 

 

Business ethics is the ability to operate within the bounds of the law while treating the labours in the workplace with respect they deserve.

 

 

 

The total lack of business ethics is why unions came about in the first place. When the workers are not respected they are bound to rebel at some point. If you look around in both the U.S. and Canada you will see that quite a few companies work outside of the law not because they are losing money, but because they want to make more money by circumventing the law. This is all without dealing with the hassle of unions ,and since the U.S. and Canada are both capitalist societies, this is actually quite easy since the laws will tend to take the side of the larger companies.

 

 

 

Case in point look at what the CEOs of Enron did to its own employees. Companies like this one is why unions form and large amount of companies were even withholding wages on a constant basis during pre-union days, in fact I think places like that can still be found all over both the U.S. and Canada even if they are not "illegal immigrants".

 

 

 

Work Ethics on the otherhand is the ability to do your job while both seeing that the labours job gets done while making sure both the rules of that workplace and the laws of the area are enforced. Yes, making sure the laws are being abided by is a part of any workers "work ethic".

 

 

 

There is also a strong correlation to "work ethic" going down when the workers of that environment are not respected in the least.

I am in a "professional union."

 

 

 

Being a teacher, it seems that everyone wants to screw us. We have one of the most important jobs on the planet, and most people barely clear 35k per year as a starting salary. Not to mention, our legal needs are important. Especially as a male teacher, I know that one bad grade to a female student and she can attempt to frame me for sexual assault or something.

 

 

 

And from seeing other union jobs out there, they are desperately needed. Kroger markets tried to shut down health insurance for it's meat employees this past summer.

 

 

 

Unions are still needed across the board.

 

 

 

They may have been great in the past but work ethics should be in place right now.

 

 

 

When you go back to your little Utopian dream world where you are President, go ahead and trust your companies.

 

 

 

But in the real world, you can not expect ethics to overcome greed.

The only thing unions are ruining are the exploitation of the corporations.

 

 

 

If you want an example of what the lack of union does to manufacturing industries, take a look at China. There are several documentaries on the 'net that you can watch about how the workers are being overworked etc. Not to mention the lack of safety regulations that frequently cause accidents.

 

 

 

The problem is that without union, workers who are being exploited has no way to speak out. They'd feel alone and if they do try to argue their case, then they'd lose their job.

 

 

 

I think you believed the media sensationalism that happened when GM closed down some factories, blaming the union for asking too much.

On-topic: I never realised this was so debated - In the UK its been a quiet issue recently aside from the odd flare up with postal strikes and things but its certainly not on the brink of collapsing the country.

 

Perhaps we're just an exception to the rest of the world. Britain was first country to have trade unions, and trade unionism has always been a part of our economic and political systems since their foundations. Even during WWII, where you'd have expected a government led by a war-loving Tory to ban all strikes with ruthless enforcement, the number of strikes actually rose, and the trade unions were not only allowed to continue with Bevin, but actually perhaps gained more power through the Joint Production Commitees.

 

 

 

As for the postal strike, well, we have email now. The need for an effective postal system isn't as large as it used to be. It was never going to bring the economy to its knees realistically.

 

 

 

As for the topic, as many have mentioned, yes trade unions do hinder an economy's progress, but they're vital. Otherwise business ethics will always overrule work ethics, and needless to say, that's a terrible situation for workers. It allows them to be exploited by greedy industrialists. You could also argue a happy workforce is a productive workforce; indeed, there's stats to prove that's true. Allowing workers to have their own trade unions allows them to be represented, thus making them more happy and thus more productive.

There is also another point I would like to bring up and that worker wages themselves and how they are not keeping with inflation. In some areas of the U.S. you need a wage of $13.00+ just to make ends meet and the vast amount of companies "do not" accept any sort of smaller profit margin in the slightest.

Just something I noticed quickly, you said government is the root of evil.

 

 

 

Without government, we'd be a lot worse off then we are today.

1. Wikipedia can be easily edited, but cans till be a reputable source on soem things

 

2. This is a fact for the U.S.! If all of the unions were to disband overnight working conditions would return to pre-1930s and any laws passed since then would be repealed withing the next 10 years or so. Remember, the vast majority of companies would be glad to fire anyone associated with a union.

 

3. With the causes of inflation, wages must go up and without the unions forming the overall majority of both Americans and Canadians would be livning in "extreme poverty" according to todays standards of living.

 

4. Do more research on the issue before presenting a clear one-sourced arguement as it gives you no grounds to do so.

 

 

 

 

 

Positive Affects of unions:

 

1. wages stay current with inflation

 

2. Working conditions are forced to improve or the companies that are not doing so are boycotted or picketed and therefore going out of business. Believe me it is not a loss for companies like this to go out of business altogether.

 

3.Before the union movement really grew the vast majority of large companies used their own money in order to trap their own workers in to "company towns" where they had no chance of paying off the debts they accrued because of how low the pay was.

 

4. the mandatory breaks passed in both countries has actually increased productivity as it gives the workers a chance to rest and therefore able to do more things at a constant pace. This also goes for the 8-hour workday in the majority of businesses these days as before unions were in place a company could have you work non-stop if they wanted to.

 

5. This one is for non-uionn workers, but unions helped to get it passed. A company could fire you without cause or reason even if you were clearly the best worker they had. These days all employers in both countries must provide a cause or reason as to why they are firing you or they can be sued. This also goes for working beyond a person's scheduledhours as no employer in either country may fire a person for not responding to a call.

 

1. Their facts are usually never wrong. This is internet debate, not real debate.

 

2. I never said they should disband overnight! I said we can do a better job with what the unions are doing with lets say "labor laws". They reason unions are hated so much is because their bargains can be UNREAL, and they refuse to negotiate. A simple GM employee

 

"If the deal is ratified by UAW members, the company said it expects to save $3 billion a year before taxes in health care costs"(Washington Post). A simple cut saves them 3 billion!

 

"Hourly workers at GM currently have no deductibles and pay no monthly premiums but do have nominal co-payment charges. Overall, they pay about 7 percent of their health care costs; the national average is about 34 percent." (Washington Post). They are literally forcing companies out of business.

 

3. Fantastical law-making skills

 

4. OK

 

 

 

1. see # 3

 

2. Or we can set standards and not force companies out of business by asking ridiculous amounts of money....

 

3. Past tense = irrelevant

 

4. Or we can have a set workday.

 

5. That was then.

 

 

 

They may have been great in the past but work ethics should be in place right now.[/i]

 

 

 

1. How do you know if they're 'usually' right? Do you have any proof?

 

3. I don't understand what you mean by 'fantastical law-making skills', and I'm, pretty sure most people don't, so that is a drop, then?

 

 

 

1. See #3

 

2. Wouldn't that just make the whole country one big union?

 

3. And his point is that this would happen again if conditions became the same as then.

 

4. See #2.

 

5. Again, this will happen AGAIN if unions are taken away. He is saying what happened without unions that unions helped fix.

Being a teacher, it seems that everyone wants to screw us. We have one of the most important jobs on the planet, and most people barely clear 35k per year as a starting salary. Not to mention, our legal needs are important. Especially as a male teacher, I know that one bad grade to a female student and she can attempt to frame me for sexual assault or something.

 

 

 

Here in Ontario teachers are paid high salaries (50-80k, principals make ~100k) and they still manage to strike for raises every 3 years or so.

Just something I noticed quickly, you said government is the root of evil.

 

 

 

Without government, we'd be a lot worse off then we are today.

 

 

 

That is highly debatable, I think we would be much better off without any government ever. But that's not what the topic is about.

 

 

 

Oh and I'll just through this out there, around 13% of the workers in the US are in a union. The other 87% are not.

 

That is highly debatable, I think we would be much better off without any government ever. But that's not what the topic is about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Could be an interesting side debate though - why do you think we can do without a government?

The workplace is clearly not "fine" otherwise we wouldn't have a need for unions.

 

 

 

I think you have a problem with unions run badly, if you've got something against people getting together and using their collective mass to try and campaign for better working conditions then clearly you've never been in a situation where the conditions are no good.

 

 

 

Unions can have too much power, which is why I think Margaret Thatcher did the right thing by disbanding the coal miners unions in the 80's, but they're still necessary in many areas.

 

 

 

OK, maybe the issue is badly run unions (seems to be a lot) rather than unions altogether.

 

 

 

They may have been great in the past but work ethics should be in place right now.

 

 

 

When you go back to your little Utopian dream world where you are President, go ahead and trust your companies.

 

 

 

But in the real world, you can not expect ethics to overcome greed.

 

 

 

You are right. The greed of the unions has overcome its original purpose. Some unions have ceased to reason with the company, and the company cannot do anything about it. Therefore, it suffers, and according to the statistic indy provided, the other 87% suffer.

 

 

 

The only thing unions are ruining are the exploitation of the corporations.

 

 

 

If you want an example of what the lack of union does to manufacturing industries, take a look at China. There are several documentaries on the 'net that you can watch about how the workers are being overworked etc. Not to mention the lack of safety regulations that frequently cause accidents.

 

 

 

The problem is that without union, workers who are being exploited has no way to speak out. They'd feel alone and if they do try to argue their case, then they'd lose their job.

 

 

 

I think you believed the media sensationalism that happened when GM closed down some factories, blaming the union for asking too much.

 

I'm not talking about just throwing them out. I'm saying there needs to be an alternative or a modification because the status quo is not good.

 

 

 

 

 

1. How do you know if they're 'usually' right? Do you have any proof?

 

3. I don't understand what you mean by 'fantastical law-making skills', and I'm, pretty sure most people don't, so that is a drop, then?

 

 

 

1. See #3

 

2. Wouldn't that just make the whole country one big union?

 

3. And his point is that this would happen again if conditions became the same as then.

 

4. See #2.

 

5. Again, this will happen AGAIN if unions are taken away. He is saying what happened without unions that unions helped fix.

 

Laws: I'm saying the solution to the problem is to either reform unions, have the gov't do something about this corruption, or another effective solution that kills companies such as GM.

 

1. you want to argue wiki? I'll be happy to debate about that in another thread.

 

2. Yes, and that would include all workers and PREVENT it from bad management.

 

3. They wouldnt because you arent completely throwing out the system.

 

4. See 2

 

5. Yes they fixed stuff but today they aren't helping much. There needs to be a reform.

1. Wikipedia can be easily edited, but cans till be a reputable source on soem things

 

2. This is a fact for the U.S.! If all of the unions were to disband overnight working conditions would return to pre-1930s and any laws passed since then would be repealed withing the next 10 years or so. Remember, the vast majority of companies would be glad to fire anyone associated with a union.

 

3. With the causes of inflation, wages must go up and without the unions forming the overall majority of both Americans and Canadians would be livning in "extreme poverty" according to todays standards of living.

 

4. Do more research on the issue before presenting a clear one-sourced arguement as it gives you no grounds to do so.

 

 

 

 

 

Positive Affects of unions:

 

1. wages stay current with inflation

 

2. Working conditions are forced to improve or the companies that are not doing so are boycotted or picketed and therefore going out of business. Believe me it is not a loss for companies like this to go out of business altogether.

 

3.Before the union movement really grew the vast majority of large companies used their own money in order to trap their own workers in to "company towns" where they had no chance of paying off the debts they accrued because of how low the pay was.

 

4. the mandatory breaks passed in both countries has actually increased productivity as it gives the workers a chance to rest and therefore able to do more things at a constant pace. This also goes for the 8-hour workday in the majority of businesses these days as before unions were in place a company could have you work non-stop if they wanted to.

 

5. This one is for non-uionn workers, but unions helped to get it passed. A company could fire you without cause or reason even if you were clearly the best worker they had. These days all employers in both countries must provide a cause or reason as to why they are firing you or they can be sued. This also goes for working beyond a person's scheduledhours as no employer in either country may fire a person for not responding to a call.

 

1. Their facts are usually never wrong. This is internet debate, not real debate.

 

2. I never said they should disband overnight! I said we can do a better job with what the unions are doing with lets say "labor laws". They reason unions are hated so much is because their bargains can be UNREAL, and they refuse to negotiate. A simple GM employee

 

"If the deal is ratified by UAW members, the company said it expects to save $3 billion a year before taxes in health care costs"(Washington Post). A simple cut saves them 3 billion!

 

"Hourly workers at GM currently have no deductibles and pay no monthly premiums but do have nominal co-payment charges. Overall, they pay about 7 percent of their health care costs; the national average is about 34 percent." (Washington Post). They are literally forcing companies out of business.

 

3. Fantastical law-making skills

 

4. OK

 

 

 

1. see # 3

 

2. Or we can set standards and not force companies out of business by asking ridiculous amounts of money....

 

3. Past tense = irrelevant

 

4. Or we can have a set workday.

 

5. That was then.

 

 

 

They may have been great in the past but work ethics should be in place right now.[/i]

 

 

 

1. How do you know if they're 'usually' right? Do you have any proof?

 

3. I don't understand what you mean by 'fantastical law-making skills', and I'm, pretty sure most people don't, so that is a drop, then?

 

 

 

1. See #3

 

2. Wouldn't that just make the whole country one big union?

 

3. And his point is that this would happen again if conditions became the same as then.

 

4. See #2.

 

5. Again, this will happen AGAIN if unions are taken away. He is saying what happened without unions that unions helped fix.

 

 

 

1. By only using wikipedia as the only source he or she has completely discredited himself/herself as being capable to debate in this topic. Just because this is the internet does notn mean that this debate is any less meaningful to the future of unions and he/she does not seem to understand that.

 

2. one of his or her "negative" points is actually a positive effect of unions.

 

3 I have read some of the laws on "labor" and trust me they are not easy to read with all the business jargon mixed in.

 

4. the past is always relevent to this debate which only further hurts his or her arguement on the matter

 

5. The vast majority of profit lost is not through the unions, but through the CEOs of these companies that make upwards of $1-$100+ million/year.

 

 

 

Thank you for clearing that up for him/her Superson. Although, I do not think he/she quite understands the points I am still trying to make since he or she is apparently living some in faraway place where none of this happens.

 

 

 

I will add some countries with some very poor "labor" laws or rather an area where there tend to be poor laws/no laws on the matter.

 

 

 

Area:

 

1.Indonesian Countries- south of china, southeast of India, and northwest of Australia.

 

 

 

 

 

the vast majority of those countries have little or no labor laws.