| Author | Message | ||
     Ft_bstrd |
I still see unions as a necessity in coal country. | ||
| Tpoppa |
The UAW isn't the whole problem, but it is a very big part of the problem. | ||
| Mikef5000 |
It sounds as if the strike is over. | ||
| Ironken |
Xbduck, I was referring to one man train crews....One person in the cab. As far as unloading incedents....I know exactly what you are talking about. We don't unload them. We just spot them. But, I have seen the results of improperly vented tankers. Buellshyter, your warning to me was to late.......I will learn from this mistake....Kenny | ||
| Buellshyter |
Buellshyter, your warning to me was to late.......I will learn from this mistake....Kenny  | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
What mistake? | ||
| Ironken |
Responding to a Union thread.....Bad JuJu | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
No bad JuJu intended. There are some who bash without reason. Others criticize with good reason. There are some who defend without reason. Others defend with good reason. Threads like this give all an opportunity to share ideas. Only those without reason leave without the benefit of the enlightenment that sharing brings. | ||
| Mikej |
Like UPS, we'll see the net results of this only in a decade or more from now. Ford and Chrysler are next in line. | ||
| Cowboy |
The unions will have to strighten up or die or the american auto makers will be forced to move to a 3rd world country to survive. I dont know what is right just the way I see it. | ||
| X1glider |
"The unions will have to strighten up or die or the american auto makers will be forced to move to a 3rd world country to survive. " If that happens, someday it can come back to the US to employ what would be hopefully more appreciative non-union employees. Hell, they can just do "everything" in Mississippi and Alabama (kind of a 3rd world country in places), get workers for half the price who will be happy as a puppy with 2 peters. Even better, set up shop in New Orleans so some of the Katrina batards will move back instead of leaching off of Houston. And they can sell vehicles for alot less. All I can say is, it must be nice to be so well taken care of by your employer and this treatment is "expected" by the UAW and each successive generation. It must be nice to not have to "earn" your right to keep your job by performing. All unions do today is foster mediocrity. There's no incentive to excel. Unions have outlived their usefulness. We have laws today that protect workers from unfairness, unions do nothing more than act as a form of mafia. The price of vehicles today is ridiculous. It goes up quicker than my pay. I may never buy another 4 wheeled vehicle again...especially since they just don't seem to last. Time to teach Debbie to ride... | ||
| Cowboy |
I dont know if you could find any one living in New Orleans that would even go to work. I had 4 kids living there but they moved north of the lake and drive to and from the city daily. | ||
| Ironken |
X1glider, you have verified everything that has ever negatively been said about Texans with your post.....I rest my case. | ||
| X1glider |
Whew! I'm Glad I'm from Philly then!  | ||
| Cowboy |
I would becareful about condeming Texas as the best 1/2 ton pickup in U.S.A. is made in San Antonia.(Toyota)It was born there. | ||
| Ironken |
My mistake. I thought Philly was the city of brotherly love, not biased shots at hard working Americans. You said it best when you called parts of Mississippi and Alabama, "3rd world countries." Both of which are Right to Work states. You clearly made my point. Unions raise the prevailing wages for a given area and by doing so the quality of life. Unions are scarce in those parts. See the connection? | ||
| Ironken |
Toyota being the best 1/2 ton p/u is a matter of opinion. | ||
| Court |
>>>Unions raise the prevailing wages for a given area and by doing so the quality of life. Welcome to the Union . . . I see you are new. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The reason the south is "3rd world" is that there historically has been little industry. The places where there is, the economy is robust. The new Nissan and Hyundai plants in Jackson, MS as well as the MB plant in Alabama are very new. Only the MB plant is UAW. The REASON companies choose to build in the south is because the Union presence ISN'T there to begin with. These companies can not prevent a Union from being established once the plant is completed and staffed. Nissan, Toyota, Mazda, Honda, Hyundai, etc. are all in the same boat. They can not PREVENT a union from being established. It's illegal to do so. They can only create a working environment whereby the Unions are unnecessary. To date, the UAW has not been established in these plants. Why? Their pay and benefits are as good as their UAW counterparts (at least pre-retirement) and better than any other company locally can provide? I have friends who work for Nissan and Honda. They've explained that the UAW regularly makes runs at the plants. They vote them down because they don't see them as necessary. Don't confuse the south as being poor because the Unions are not there. They are poor because the INDUSTRY isn't there. Yet. The land is cheap. The taxes are low. and the workers are plentiful and willing. I love to see Nissan, Honda, and Toyota moving into a local community. They provide great jobs for cars built by American hands that are high quality and long lasting. The profits from the company go into MY 401(k) and mutual fund account. What's funny is how OTHER local companies have to pay to compete for workers with Nissan and Hyundai around Jackson, MS. Some might say that due to COMPETITION, the quality of life and ability to earn more has been increased. | ||
| Jayvee |
At this time, I'm glad to see ANY manufacturing happening in the US, unionized or not. I had a pretty nice LABOR DAY paid holiday recently, even though I work in an office, with no union. | ||
| X1glider |
"My mistake. I thought Philly was the city of brotherly love, not biased shots at hard working Americans. You said it best when you called parts of Mississippi and Alabama, "3rd world countries." Both of which are Right to Work states. You clearly made my point. Unions raise the prevailing wages for a given area and by doing so the quality of life. Unions are scarce in those parts. See the connection?" (I call Philly the city of Brotherly Hate...nothing friendly about that place.) Actually, that's the beef I have with the unions. There are non-union workers who work equally as hard but get nowhere near the same pay and benefits. You can argue that it's more expensive to live in the north than the south, but I'm pretty sure union labor created that situation. They've artifitially inflated themselves. Doing so has created a class separation that should never have happened in this country. It's really unfair to the other hard workers of the country. As for unions creating higher wages and a better quality of life, that's true, one happens because of the other. But, a non-union employer is capable of doing the same thing if they want to retain skilled and motivated employess....and they'll do so if the employee is worth it. Union employees don't have to be motivated or keep up their skills...they just need to show up. If I were an employer, I would want non-union employees. It's in my best interest. I can get away with less employees. ie. the machinist can sweep up his own shavings and ad hydraulic oil to his own machine rather than say "it's not my job" and have to hire someone to sweep and another to fill the machine with oil. What a waste of money. There won't be anyone standing around doing nothing because they have to wait on someone else, they can get what they need by driving the forklift themselves. And if I have a perpetual slacker, I can get rid of him and hire someone with a good work ethic with possibly better skills. Doing that can maximize profit and keep consumer coat down, making me more competitive in the market. It would also enable me to offer better pay and benefits to each employee. The way unions are structured I'd have to hire more people than are necessary and strain my budget. | ||
| Stretchman |
Unions serve a purpose when they protect the workers from managements' illegal practices, and the retributions they make against whistleblowers. That makes them good. Unions suck when their policies cause the company and thus the income stream to suffer. I am all for keeping Unions around, but wages and benefits should be left up to the individual employer. Now, when they tr4y to work you OT and not pay you, hazardous conditions, etc, then they serve a larger purpose. Non Union people? Simply people willing to accept illegal and unfair conditions. Why I left the security industry. No protections from management or the legal system whatsoever. You can be punished even if you are right. No thank you. They need a union worse than anyone does. Mistakes there have deadly consequences. | ||
| Ironken |
Well Court, what do you consider new? Is 12+ years new? (Feb 14, 1995 to Apr 14, 2002....USWA 3405. Apr 15, 2002 to present UTU 771) To the rest of the drivel....•••• it....I give up. (Message edited by ironken on September 27, 2007) | ||
| Ironken |
As for unions creating higher wages and a better quality of life, that's true, one happens because of the other. But, a non-union employer is capable of doing the same thing if they want to retain skilled and motivated employess....and they'll do so if the employee is worth it. Union employees don't have to be motivated or keep up their skills...they just need to show up. Boy X1 you sure can talk outta your ass. That's all that I can say. You have no basis to back the crap you are spewing up. At my old job, my skills as an AWS certified welder were proven and tested. The company required testing every 6 mos. Radiograph of the weldment (3/4" to unlimited) and all by an AWS CWI. (Court, I'm certain that you will have something to add here. This is the short version and I am very aware of the AWS requirements for the AWS D1.1 certs and the maintenance of said certs). At my current job, culpability is a big word. You screw it up, it's your ass! I am required to re-test bi-annually for my trainmen certification and tri-annually for my hosteler and RCO engineer cert. And average about 5 U.O.T.s per month (uniform operations testing) as prescribed by the F.R.A. (federal railroad admin.). I'm waiting for the Badweb panel of experts to pipe up with all of their bullshit wisdom on this one. Have your facts together before you take shots at my career though....Kenny (Message edited by ironken on September 27, 2007) | ||
| M2nc |
Now, when they tr4y to work you OT and not pay you, hazardous conditions, etc, then they serve a larger purpose. Illegal in my state - So protect by law - No Union needed. Non Union people? Simply people willing to accept illegal and unfair conditions. Simple call to OSHA fixes that problem. Man what year were you talking about? Now in Mexico, the Unions certify their members in certain trades like welding. This saves the company money on training and insures that they are hiring qualified workers. That means the Unions provide a value to the company. A good way for American Unions to get back in favor with the American public. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
So if you are unable to debate ideas you bail? So does that put you in the "defend unions regardless" camp? | ||
| Ironken |
No Fat Bastard, just got tired of armchair Labor know-it-alls here who speak with a pan full of bullshit spiced with a pinch of truth or accuracy. I know that Unions have their place. To debate, I would need to debate with somebody that has first hand knowledge of the subject....few here do. This shit here resembles more of a argument from a panel of drunks after work at a bar than a debate, with x1 over at the end of the bar with all of the answers...... | ||
| Ironken |
M2nc....American Unions do certify their members just like good 'ol Mexico.....Say Pipefitters to name one. | ||
| Cixyx_pilot |
After working for GM for 17 years and hearing about crap friends in non union jobs put up with , I'll keep the union job!!! | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Stick around then. Call a spade a spade, but continue the dialogue. I am not a welder, but each year I have to complete 24 hours of testing or they pull my license. Every two years, I have to complete 6 hours in addition. Add to that the 8 hours I have to complete every 5 years. That's just to keep the state and Federal regulators off my butt. Then I have to complete another 6 hours of training required by my employer. None of this is required by a union. These are regulatory and employer requirements (as are what you mentioned for your job, btw). Most (and maybe all) of the requirements that used to be required at the union level for membership are now federal and state legal mandates. Am I wrong in this in your personal experience, Ken? |
