English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

6 answers

I believe it would depend on working conditions and the treatment one recieves from their employer.
Some things [ time spent with family, respect one recieves at job, safety on the job et al] are worth using the strike option that a union worker has in order to achieve them.

2006-08-08 18:42:01 · answer #1 · answered by jkautt 4 · 0 0

well it depends on the country.

In the US, almost all workers are ungrateful for how good we've got it. I mean you can work in a factory folding boxes or sweeping the floors in a building and make $8 an hour, $300 a week, $15,000 a year and in most countries you would make $1,000 a year, not $15,000 a year. So Americans have it extremely good, and don't realize it and are hardly ever grateful about it.

They have it so good because of labor movements and laws and because our government has the best military in the world, which makes it so we have the best economy in the world. But having a great military that we can use to push other countries around doesn't necessarily benefit the average joe of the USA. I mean the leaders could easily keep all the profits to themselves and the wealthy businessmen who help them maintain their power.

The working people throughout US history have had to fight for their due against the upper class.

I think most of the good life that the American people enjoy is due to progressive policies and changes that are brought about by the advocates of the masses, like liberal politicians and labor unions, who demanded that the people get a share of the massive wealth our country generates. In most countries this is not the case. In the USA 100 years ago, this was not the case. At that time in the US, and today in most of the world, the people who run things get almost all the reward and the people who do all the work get nothing. If you look at China, or Korea, or most of Asia, the Middle East, Africa and South America, and even Mexico and most of Eastern Europe, the people are virtually living in slavery. The US of course has many parts that are like the 3rd world itself, but we like to think we do a little better job of preventing people from dying from starvation and easily treated diseases than most poorer countries, and in reality we probably do.

I think when Union Workers go on strike to increase their wages or benefits, they are being selfish, but that's not wrong, it's something that benefits the union striker first as an individual, but also benefits the entire society of workers, as well.

2006-08-09 03:02:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No, not at all. It is the fact that the members are united and willing to fight for better wages that we get those above average salaries and above average benefits. It was Peter McGuire who founded the Carpenter's Union that created the 40 hour work week. Up until that point, people worked from sun up to sun down, six days a week. Unions also pushed very hard for work place safety laws that protect all workers. Unions also have excellent apprenticeship programs that not only give opportunities to people from all walks of life a chance at a better life, but also provide the work place with highly skilled workers.

2006-08-09 01:48:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

depend on the situation. If the employer hide profit off the book and divert to somewhere else. then is it employer play the fair game?. The most recent case was couple years a go, the American Airline CEO suspend the pesion payment, cut wages while divert the fund to fund the pension for top executives millions of dollars. That CEO was fired couple months and brought in the integrity CEO talking or communicating to employee. That CEO call truly a good leader.

Another case, the union may hold employer hostage that make business run down or losing money. IF GM or Ford losing money right now, the union need to make some change to survive or they all going down together. To compete with Asian automaker you have to make the car more appeal more to consumer that mean the US car makers need to change fast in decision making or falling further behind

2006-08-09 01:57:38 · answer #4 · answered by Hoa N 6 · 0 0

Not really, they are just exercising their rights. Imagine what Management would do, if union did not have their rights. Most of the time, they are of the opinion that Management get better deal than them. Besides you migh be making above average salaries but they just suck.

2006-08-09 01:46:19 · answer #5 · answered by ngina 5 · 0 0

No, they're fighting for the collective rights for everyone not just themselves.

2006-08-09 01:48:23 · answer #6 · answered by Aussie Chick 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers