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

Please, don't use this as a soapbox for denouncing labor unions. I did NOT ask anything about union relevancy.

2007-07-12 08:57:24 · 17 answers · asked by 1848 3 in Politics & Government Politics

So far there has been one person who offered an answer to my question. All others have been soapbox appeals. Reminding me that union membership is voluntary does not suggest a way to encourage membership. Get off your soapboxes, people, and show some respect. I'm not as dumb as you think everyone is. Take your business to the trolls.

2007-07-12 09:06:10 · update #1

17 answers

The decline in membership is part of several bigger issues.

1) Trades are not promoted in High Schools like a college education or the military is. In the Skilled Trades, Union members make a higher wage & better benefits. A person with only a High School Diploma has a chance at the "American Dream". Tell kids they have other options; teach them what Unions are.
I have a 4-year University education; my husband completed an Apprenticeship. I'm in debt to my eyeballs with student loans; he got paid while learning a trade. It would take me over 5 years with one company to earn what he did in his first year of the Apprenticeship. My specialized job market is bloated & flat; as long as Americans need paper, fuel, electricity, etc we will always need his trade. Who made the better decision?

2) Everybody is out for themselves. Solidarity of the Unions has been eroded due to this self-serving attitude. Many people don't understand the slogan "United we bargain; Divided we beg." I can't really think of a solution to this one.

3) Ignorance, Sheeple. In general, most people have no clue about Unions. They don't even know the difference between Industry Unions (Teachers, Airline Pilots, etc) and Craft Unions (Ironworkers, Boilermakers, etc). In the public eye, all Unions are lumped together and a convenient place to lay blame for all the economic troubles. UAW seems to be a target for a lot of people. They simplify the problems of the American Auto Industry down to Unions being the problem; as if it were that simple. If enough Pro-Union people answer questions and try to dispel the ignorance; it may make a difference (at least one person may learn SOMETHING). Naively hoping; jadedly doubting.

4) Unchecked and unrestricted rise in power of Big Business. By importing everything and sending the work out of the country, we're basically dumping our trash on the neighbor's doorstep and flipping them the bird. We become Poverty's Enabler, limit our concern for the Environment to our yard, and assume a lot of risk (tainted wheat gluten, toothpaste, etc). As long is it's more profitable to import products and export jobs, ALL American jobs are at risk. Lets take the politicians out of the back pocket of Corporations and put them back into the hands of American Citizens (aka, the voters). Import Tariffs and Labor & Environmental clauses in Trade Agreements would reduce the incentives to import products and export jobs.

2007-07-12 12:39:22 · answer #1 · answered by beth 4 · 1 0

I can't believe these people who claim that Union membership will grow when there is a need.
No such act will occur as long as the business can pack up and hire communists to do the labor.
Nor will it happen as long as large corporations threaten their employees as a part of new employee orientation about signing union cards.
And don't say it doesn't happen, because my previous job, with a 22 billion $$ corporation, spent an hour during new employee orientation doing just that.
That is why they move to these small town, so the people will be more affraid of them packing up and leaving, while taking 90% of the jobs with them.

And when companies are allowed to employ temp agencies to permanently manage their labor, there is no hope for unions. This isn't just occuring in the unskilled labor markets they are moving on into positions that require advanced degrees as well.

2007-07-12 09:10:01 · answer #2 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 1 0

I will not defend unions. The USA is run for the benefit of the rich. Just look at the tax system in the USA compared to Canada and western Europe. The USA is controlled by special interests. Canada is less venerable because PM's are forced to vote the party line whereas in Congress influence can be bought seat by seat. By the way, Americans are you the same people that fought a war of independence over a 1/4 cent tax on tea? There are millions of Americans out of work. Millions more have lost their homes in an unfair rip-off by banks.

2016-05-20 23:17:05 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Unions helped build the middle class and were an engine of economic growth for decades after the second world war. I've been a union member and am thankful for it.

the decline in union membership is, in part, to blame for growing inequality. The decline is attributable to a number of factors: techonological changes, globalization, right-to-work (for less) laws, and a full out assault on workers' rights by businesses. Some of these changes are irreversible. I, for one, think protectionism and isolationism would do more to harm workers than globalization, and I believe that free trade creates jobs (not unionized manufacturing jobs), builds global dialogue, and harvests innovation. Though I think we need to help those who are hurt by trade. I also think that we need to reverse anti-labor right-to-work laws, and abolish intimidation tactics (by making union membership a product of a simple card check). I also think unions should start adapting to the 21st century and put up an aggressive effort to unionize service and high-tech workers.

Union membership won't be what it was in the 1950s, but I certainly believe that unions have the capacity to build their membership and become a valuable player in a dynamic, free martket economy.

2007-07-12 09:32:57 · answer #4 · answered by Pleboid 2 · 1 0

When we get rid of the hard won labor unions we get rid of workers having any power over employers.
When they out lawed labor unions in Mexico they now work for 2. a day instead of 2. per hour which would still be cheap wages. they quite getting health care and retirement.
Years ago when labor unions were stronger men were not dieing in coal mines because they were not being inspected.
Every descent job had a health care policy, and retirement.
When the government and big business convinces you that unions are not your friends that is when wages will drop to all time lows and no one has the power to do anything about it.
Remember the women that got a union started in the garmet industry and made it possible to get the workers descent wages. It almost cost her; her life. It was a hard fought battle and now they want you to believe you don't need that anymore. That is the same companies that go overseas and pay workers 2. per day. Unless you want those kinds of wages here in US. Keep the unions.

2007-07-12 09:10:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

They need to change their image, and not combat with one arm tied behind their back. It is very convenient to say we have "free Enterprise", which we do not, and a mechanism to help the workers, not business, with the issue of supply and demand. The only leverage they have with employers, and the government, in most cases has taken away the only tool that works with business and that is the right to strike. Current unions won't use it because their employers made it illegal! So what! They need to use their God given BA_LS and go out anyway!

Ironic that an employer like the federal government, can write a law saying those who work for them don't have a right to strike! What recourse does the worker have, none!

I would love to see the State cops, prison guards, FBI, CIA, HHS and all the rest of the workers go out on strike and see exactly whether the public then thought they were needed!

They are only needed to hand out corporate welfare who then, instead of hiring Americans at a decent wage, hire illegals!

2007-07-12 09:08:28 · answer #6 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1 0

I think that the program that's going to be necessary is to build a stronger labor movement. It's not about threatening. It's about building an organization of workers in this country, convincing workers that the only way they can solve the problems that affect their lives and their families is by joining together and bargaining together. And I believe that the work that you see the unions and the AFL-CIO doing now and organizing is an indication that we're going to turn the numbers around and the--you will see a steady building of a stronger labor movement.

2007-07-12 09:02:40 · answer #7 · answered by PRGfUSMC 5 · 2 2

Prove that unionized businesses can remain competitive and produce a profit? Stop supporting one political party blindly? Stop sending out propaganda in favor of tax hikes every chance they get? Reward members based on performance rather than seniority and loyalty?

A lot of Americans just don't buy that huge chunk of the agenda. Sorry. Maybe its time to re-analyze the purpose, agenda, and goals of a union.

2007-07-12 09:06:03 · answer #8 · answered by freedom first 5 · 0 2

unions are not as necessary as they were when employers were exploiting the work force to the point of what would now be considered criminal.
nothing should be done. they should be allowed to die a natural death. they are now the down fall of business. unions have forced employers to promise more than they can give to try and keep from going out of business and as a result many are on the verge of bankruptcy. sorry, it's just the way I see it.

2007-07-12 09:16:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Until more people want to be in a union not sure there is much they can do.

I think people are just getting fed up with everyone wanting some of their money and then not doing much with it except for collect nice big salaries for being "in charge" of said group.

2007-07-12 09:06:24 · answer #10 · answered by Tim B 2 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers