Author Topic: Executive order: UNION labor for federal construction (Read 18498 times)

Manedwolf · « **on:** February 07, 2009, 11:18:30 AM »

Uh-huh. Well, there's the payback they were waiting for. Hoffa commented, even. And the new committee of "consultants" he brought in? AFL-CIO is on it, of course!

Cliff ahead, rails greased a bit more. Competitiveness? What's that?

Every day, I think a little more that it is going to take an another revolution. Every new facepalm-worthy rage-worthy mistake of the last few weeks seems guaranteed to send us into a Greater Depression.

It's like the 1930's all over again. And it took WWII production to get us out of that one because the government had "helped".

Quote

Obama executive order favors union labor

By SAM HANANEL – 17 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Friday issued an executive order backing the use of union labor for large-scale federal construction projects.

The order encourages federal agencies to have construction contractors and subcontractors enter project labor agreements. Those agreements require contractors to negotiate with union officials, recognize union wages and benefits and generally abide by collective-bargaining agreements.

Obama's order restores a Clinton administration order that was revoked by President George W. Bush.

It is the fourth union-friendly executive order that Obama has signed since he's been in office, and one of about a dozen orders put in place by Bush that labor leaders have urged Obama to repeal.

"Project labor agreements are a win-win for everyone involved," said James Hoffa, president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. "Contractors get highly trained, skilled labor with fixed costs, and workers are fairly compensated with their rights and safety protected."

But the Associated Builders and Contractors, a trade group, said the order would unfairly steer federal construction contracts to unionized contractors despite the fact that 84 percent of U.S. construction workers do not belong to labor unions.

ABC president Kirk Pickerel said the effect would "drive up costs for American taxpayers" by reducing competitive bidding on projects.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jEtOI8ay_-XoZrKX9qFZBXsDQb7wD966BV9G3

longeyes · « **Reply #1 on:** February 07, 2009, 11:28:07 AM »

The ultimate result of all this will be to grow a quasi-militarist state. We will have our own "Red Army." It will be justified by self-made economic catastrophe, carefully orchestrated. In WW II we had ten per cent of the nation, mostly men, in uniform, removed from the domestic economy and working for close to nothing. The only difference here will be that there will no post-war free enterprise economic boom.

longeyes · « **Reply #2 on:** February 07, 2009, 11:30:52 AM »

Anything specific about illegal aliens?

Oh wait, I forgot, first unionize them, then amnesty them. Or, better, do both simultaneously.

Manedwolf · « **Reply #3 on:** February 07, 2009, 11:36:35 AM »

Quote from: longeyes on February 07, 2009, 11:30:52 AM

Anything specific about illegal aliens?

Oh wait, I forgot, first unionize them, then amnesty them. Or, better, do both simultaneously.

Hilda Solis, his labor secretary to be, is in La Raza's pocket. You can do the math, there.

cassandra and sara's daddy · « **Reply #4 on:** February 07, 2009, 12:30:21 PM »

psst old news been that way since the 80's a real joke but its great if you work for a non union company on a fed site union scale no dues. sweet. was making almost 20 an hour in 82 and working 60 70 a week at carderock

Standing Wolf · « **Reply #5 on:** February 07, 2009, 12:43:54 PM »

Quote

Every day, I think a little more that it is going to take an another revolution. Every new facepalm-worthy rage-worthy mistake of the last few weeks seems guaranteed to send us into a Greater Depression.

Sorry if this seems pessimistic, but I doubt there'll be a revolution. There surely would be a revolution if "entertainment" were suddenly removed from television or an end declared to government "freebies," but bread and circuses will most probably prevail.

Atlas shrugged.

Manedwolf · « **Reply #6 on:** February 07, 2009, 01:47:16 PM »

Quote from: Standing Wolf on February 07, 2009, 12:43:54 PM

Sorry if this seems pessimistic, but I doubt there'll be a revolution. There surely would be a revolution if "entertainment" were suddenly removed from television or an end declared to government "freebies," but bread and circuses will most probably prevail.

Atlas shrugged.

That's the sort I mean. The entitlement class will keep on being leeches.

But what will happen when the dwindling productive class finally says "No" and stops producing, because they're taking home less than the leeches?

longeyes · « **Reply #7 on:** February 07, 2009, 02:06:43 PM »

Maybe no revolution.

Maybe.

But certainly a devolution. Less prosperity, less stability, less general well-being.

The FBI just issued a report on gangs in America. The way it's going we will all end up in gangs of one type or another.

charby · « **Reply #8 on:** February 07, 2009, 02:49:39 PM »

Well I guess if I loose my job I'll just sign up for an apprentice program at the IBEW.

Manedwolf · « **Reply #9 on:** February 07, 2009, 05:26:19 PM »

Quote from: Charby on February 07, 2009, 02:49:39 PM

Well I guess if I loose my job I'll just sign up for an apprentice program at the IBEW.

Will the "NO WHITE MALES NEED APPLY" sign affect you?

Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas · « **Reply #10 on:** February 07, 2009, 05:29:53 PM »

I'm not sure about contract employees - but my Fed job included an oath/promise that I wouldn't strike against Uncle Sam. If they can't strike, what bargaining power do they have?

charby · « **Reply #11 on:** February 07, 2009, 06:07:08 PM »

Quote from: Manedwolf on February 07, 2009, 05:26:19 PM

Will the "NO WHITE MALES NEED APPLY" sign affect you?

I'm a Samsonite, so I'm cool there.

lone_gunman · « **Reply #12 on:** February 07, 2009, 08:14:39 PM »

Quote

Cliff ahead, rails greased a bit more. Competitiveness? What's that?

Halliburton.

Quote

Every day, I think a little more that it is going to take an another revolution.

You are probably right. Both parties are doing the same things to us. The Bush years plagued us with no bid contracts, and looks like Obama has no plans to keep things any more competitive. Bush's bailout helps corporate fat cats, Obama's bailout increases welfare. The end result of both is the same: my money gets taken from me and given to other people.

john828 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 07, 2009, 08:49:58 PM »

Quote

There surely would be a revolution if "entertainment" were suddenly removed from television

Wait a minute...the TeeVee has entertainment? What channel?

on a somber note...the unions are losing membership and have been for several decades. They are on a serious ad campaign and lobbying campaign. Sign here, for more information.

DON'T SIGN!!!

Edited to correct spelling errors.

41magsnub · « **Reply #14 on:** February 08, 2009, 01:09:52 AM »

Quote from: john828 on February 07, 2009, 08:49:58 PM

Sing here, for more information.

You sure? I'm pretty tone deaf.

john828 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 08, 2009, 01:48:44 AM »

smart *expletive deleted*ss!!! Yeah, I am spelling challenged at times. Still waiting for an official disability designation from the Obama camp so I can lawfully park on the curb at Wally World.

Viking · « **Reply #16 on:** February 08, 2009, 06:12:23 AM »

Quote from: Manedwolf on February 07, 2009, 01:47:16 PM

That's the sort I mean. The entitlement class will keep on being leeches.

But what will happen when the dwindling productive class finally says "No" and stops producing, because they're taking home less than the leeches?

Easy, you'll be forced at gunpoint (or shot if you follow your principles and still refuse).

De Selby · « **Reply #17 on:** February 08, 2009, 08:29:54 AM »

I'm confused as to how one can claim that government intervention ruined the country in the thirties, but then turn around and point to "that WWII production" as the way out?

What was the WWII economy if not a centrally planned, government run, government bought economy? The only difference between WWII and the new deal economies was that in WWII, Washington had total control and unlimited power to spend, whereas during the 30's it could not surmount corporate/private resistance to at least some projects.

MechAg94 · « **Reply #18 on:** February 08, 2009, 09:36:11 AM »

Industry in the US started taking off before US entry into WWII as our war production to support allied countries was ramping up. In addition, our own military was building up. On top of that, the army was pulling in new recruits and taking men out of the work force reducing unemployment.

I don't know if WWII itself ended the Great Depression by itself. It didn't hurt that we were one of the few countries whose industry wasn't devastated after WWII and people had money to spend after rationing was lifted.

AZRedhawk44 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 08, 2009, 11:04:18 AM »

Quote

It didn't hurt that we were one of the few countries whose industry wasn't devastated after WWII and people had money to spend after rationing was lifted.

^Wisdom here.

Brittain, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, China, western Russia.... They looked like ogre golf courses by the end of things. Bombing range free-for-all.

Our industrial centers were sheltered by thousands of miles of water and spread out over 2 shores and thousands of miles of land. Our size and distance from the battlefield made us the industrial superpower of the world as everyone else rebuilt over the next 10-20 years.

Logos · « **Reply #20 on:** February 08, 2009, 08:46:38 PM »

Those of us who are union know just how unions have been attacked since that Clueless Reagan got elected....it's been a long hard fight, but we have some representation now......thank God.

cassandra and sara's daddy · « **Reply #21 on:** February 08, 2009, 09:04:59 PM »

most union trouble/attacks are from within. i've been in three so far not impressed beyond the most selfish selfseeking part of me.

Logos · « **Reply #22 on:** February 08, 2009, 09:09:59 PM »

As long as the bosses are selfish and "selfseeking"......the UNIONS are essential.

When the bosses treat workers fairly......we can disband unions.

Unions didn't start without a reason....they were the only alternative workers had in order to get fair pay and working conditions......a fair share of the big pie that their labor baked.

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #23 on:** February 08, 2009, 09:11:59 PM »

Modern unions' power, though, is artificially propped up by the FedGov and other intervention.

cassandra and sara's daddy · « **Reply #24 on:** February 08, 2009, 09:16:19 PM »

unions once were indeed a needed/good thing. my experience has led me to think no more they are now another parasite feeding off the workers

News:

Author Topic: Executive order: UNION labor for federal construction (Read 18498 times)