Executive order: UNION labor for federal construction

[RevDisk]

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.

It's a given that unions will lose members on the long term.   The entire union setup is entirely about protecting members based on seniority, not merit.  Sure, if you're a newb, you're guaranteed a 'decent pay'.  But you're expected to carry the weight of the more senior guys, at lower pay, and with a set time period until you make good money.  If you work hard, you don't get much for it.  Often, you'll get a lot of grief if you work too hard, because it shows how much the older union guys are slacking.  If you're lazy and can gut out the decade or so until you're an old hand, you're good to go. 

If you're young, don't mind working for a buck, don't feel like carrying weight for someone who doesn't deserve it and don't wish to pay protection money out of your paycheck...   Why would you EVER consider doing union work?


Of course, the unions know this.  Tis why they're pushing the Employee Free Choice Act, which would allow them to selectively intimidate folks into voting union.

[Logos]

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

No, for many years the government has been destroying Unions.....especially since Reagan.

Originally, government started helping Unions to stop violence and force peaceful settlements to disputes.

[RevDisk]

No, for many years the government has been destroying Unions.....especially since Reagan.

Originally, government started helping Unions to stop violence and force peaceful settlements to disputes.

I have to disagree.  There are so many rules on how companies must deal with unions that it isn't funny.  Union busting is damn near illegal.  Plus, fed.gov has repeatedly propped up industries crippled by unions. 

[Logos]

No, for many years it's been pretty futile to take a case to the REPUBLICAN NLRB.

They almost always ruled for the bosses.

NOW.....we'll get a fair shake.

[MicroBalrog]

The NLRB has been created, from the start, to favor Big Unions AND Big Business. Look it up.

[john828]

I work for a non-union company.  If we unionized, the starting pay would drop from $10/hr to $7.25/hr.  Sounds great, huh?  Oh yeah, we would have to pay dues.  Sounds even better, yeah?  Oh I forgot, I would have to forfeit my negotiation rights, so I could let Guido and the boys negotiate on my behalf.  This is sounding better and better all the time, no?  I like to work hard.  I know it sounds crazy, but I really do.  So now, if we unionize, all the slackers will be protected while I look like the bad guy for working hard.  Man, this is a sweet deal. 

Unions are just a multi-level marketing pyramid scheme.

The Employee Free Choice Act is anything but a free choice.  Bad idea all around for all involved except the unions.

[MicroBalrog]

If unions are so awesome, why do they need laws to basically force people to join?

[buzz_knox]

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

You're lucky.  Union trouble in this area has resulted in considerable damage to non-union entities.  The issues have ranged from economic downturns when the unions had a hissy fit over machinists being asked to sweep when the filings off their machines (6 month strike for a major employer), businesses going under (a couple separate occasions when the strikes led the parent companies to cease operations), to vandalism and attempted murder (including the owners of a business being fired upon, which helped lead them to simply give up and shut the business down).  This doesn't even cover the innocent people hurt because unions protect incompetent people (we actually were told that we couldn't act against a Teamster until he'd ran over his third civilian vehicle in his dumptruck, which he eventually did).

[john828]

Does anyone know the specifics on the Employee Free Choice Act regarding the 30% +1 and 50% +1 card sign rule?  I guess I could look it up, but I think right now if 30% +1 employee signs a card, then a vote to unionize is mandated.  Under the new rules, the employees would be unionized without a vote if 50% +1 employee signs the card.  Just remember, you don't have to sign the card to get more information or to go to a meeting for more information.  

[taurusowner]

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.

Finally someone who will let you loaf around and do half the work for twice the pay.  If I ever became a business man and had to use a union, I would rather close my business, fire everybody, sell off my property and equipment piecemeal, and then retire.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

If I ever became a business man and had to use a union, I would rather close my business, fire everybody, sell off my property and equipment piecemeal, and then retire.


me too and i was a shop steward.
  be easier just to bribe the leadership to leave you alone. they aren't expensive  they take payments.
i know so many union stories its sad.  i went from shop steward to working for management getting rid of my former union.

[lone_gunman]

If I ever became a business man and had to use a union, I would rather close my business, fire everybody, sell off my property and equipment piecemeal, and then retire.

If unions had not been developed in the US, we would have had our own communist revolution.  Instead unions and management worked together, to keep every at least happy enough that revolution did not occur.

[jackdanson]

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.

Yeah, people are more concerned with American Idol than America.

Anyone actually think that the average fat american, who freaks out if they can't get a good parking spot at walmart, is going to fight a revolution?  You think all the mentally castrated Jayden, Cayden, and Aiden's of tommorrow are going to fight?  meh, why get dirty outside when you have porn and entertainment inside?  If americans were the way the are now in 1942 we would all be speaking German.

Oh yeah, I'm union... I support the theories of unions, but they often get out of control.  It is very nice having a union job though, I don't have to worry about getting fired for some BS reason, I have great benefits, and fair pay.  I don't believe people should be forced into unions, but I do believe workers should have a right to organize themselves.

[Manedwolf]

Again, I think you're thinking of the wrong sort of revolution. Think Rand instead.

Those that produce will no longer produce when they have less incentive to than to just sit around and be entitled. And then the system breaks.

[MicroBalrog]

Again, I think you're thinking of the wrong sort of revolution. Think Rand instead.

Those that produce will no longer produce when they have less incentive to than to just sit around and be entitled. And then the system breaks.

If these people cared, they wouldn't be nominating and electing leftists to office all the time.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

If these people cared, they wouldn't be nominating and electing leftists to office all the time.

The people doing the producing aren't the same people who are voting in leftists.

[MicroBalrog]

The people doing the producing aren't the same people who are voting in leftists.

Really? Then where did John McCain come from? Where did Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. come from? These were all second-rate arsonists, not firemen.

[lone_gunman]

Really? Then where did John McCain come from? Where did Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. come from?

No, no, no.  You don't understand.  McCain and Bush are Republicans.  Only Democrats can be leftists.  Don't you understand that?

For example, when a Democrat proposes a new health care spending bill, such as Obama's SCHIP thing, it is obviously socialist.  If a Republican does something similiar, like Bush's Medicare drug bill, it is obviously not Socialist. 

You will understand this better if you want Hannity every night, and record his show so you can watch it a few times the next day.

[Manedwolf]

No, no, no.  You don't understand.  McCain and Bush are Republicans.  Only Democrats can be leftists.  Don't you understand that?

For example, when a Democrat proposes a new health care spending bill, such as Obama's SCHIP thing, it is obviously socialist.  If a Republican does something similiar, like Bush's Medicare drug bill, it is obviously not Socialist. 

You will understand this better if you want Hannity every night, and record his show so you can watch it a few times the next day.

So can I ask what the hell you're for, if you've got all this bile against Republicans with every post you make?

[makattak]

No, no, no.  You don't understand.  McCain and Bush are Republicans.  Only Democrats can be leftists.  Don't you understand that?

For example, when a Democrat proposes a new health care spending bill, such as Obama's SCHIP thing, it is obviously socialist.  If a Republican does something similiar, like Bush's Medicare drug bill, it is obviously not Socialist. 

You will understand this better if you want Hannity every night, and record his show so you can watch it a few times the next day.

Many of us republicans were opposed to those socialist bills as well.

Please don't let that get in the way of your screed, though.

[Nick1911]

So can I ask what the hell you're for, if you've got all this bile against Republicans with every post you make?

Honestly, I can understand the sentiment.  What good have the Republicans done?  When they had control, did government shrink?  Did *any* social programs get the boot?  Was government spending decreased?

How are they different from the Democrats?

[Manedwolf]

Honestly, I can understand the sentiment.  What good have the Republicans done?  When they had control, did government shrink?  Did *any* social programs get the boot?  Was government spending decreased?

How are they different from the Democrats?

Are you talking about the last few years of the Stupid Party, or under Reagan?

[Nick1911]

Are you talking about the last few years of the Stupid Party, or under Reagan?

It is my belief that the Republican party has changed since the Regan years.  In an effort to capture more fence-sitter votes, it's moved to the center.  I believe that in today's GOP, a candidate like Reagan would be passed up for being too far to the right.

As such, the GOP won't push back - it seeks to maintain the status quo, while the democrats push that status quo further to the left with every passing year.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

Republicans sometimes nominate RINO centrists.  That sucks, no doubt about it.  But Republicans also sometimes nominate strong conservatives.  In fact, the Republicans are the only party that ever nominates conservatives. Destroying the Republican Party will ensure that no conservative will ever be in the running for high office.

RINOs often support watered down socialism.  Again, that sucks.  But the altnerative is to vote in Democrats who supports concentrated and aggressive socialism.  You could abstain or vote thirf party, but that accomplishes the same thing.

If you think Bush and the RINOs are bad, just wait and see what happens in the next two years.  We can survive guys like Bush and live to fight another day.  We cannot survive guys like Obama for long.  There is value to using RINOs as place holders to keep Democrats out of power.

[roo_ster]

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.

Yeah, FDR (inadvertently/ignorantly) followed in Hoover's footsteps and did his level best to prolong what should have been a short, sharp recession into the Great Depression.

I don't claim WWII production did bupkis to get us out, especially given the immediate post-WWII economic slump.  Even the depression-era USA was still an economic powerhouse relative to the rest of the world.  For instance, ours was the only entirely mechanized army.  The rest, including Germany's blitzkriegers, relied on horse-drawn logistics.

But, when all your competitors have had their factories turned into rubble, opportunity arises and we surfed that wave until they rebuilt.  And then took it in the jimmy from the late 1960s until the early 1980s until we figured out how to compete again.