Wisconsin Does the Nasty Against Labor

The Wisconsin GOP did an end game against Democrats and passed a bill which destroys union rights to collective bargain. Milwaukee Biz Times:

Republicans in a hastily called state legislative conference committee approved a resolution Wednesday night to revoke the collective bargaining rights for thousands of public employees in Wisconsin, leaving Democrats and thousands of screaming protesters outside the Capitol to cry foul.
Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) and his brother, Jeff Fitzgerald (R-Horicon) led the committee, which met for less than five minutes and then approved the resolution.
Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca (D-Kenosha) protested that he had not had a chance to even see what was in the resolution before the vote was taken.
“I need to know what was removed. I need to know that,” Barca said.
The public, the media and the Democrats were not allowed to see the resolution before the Republicans voted on it.
“This is clearly a violation of the open meetings law,” Barca yelled, as Scott Fitzgerald called for the vote and struck the gavel to adjourn the meeting.
Barca said state law requires at least 24 hours notice before a conference committee hearing can be convened.
Some Democrats speculated that the committee hearing was a Republican trick to convince at least one of the 14 Democratic Senators into showing up at the Capjtol to protest the conference committee resolution. If one Senator had shown up, the Senate could attain the quorum it would need to approve Gov. Scott Walker’s budget repair bill, and the committee vote would not even be needed.
The conference committee resolution may need to go back for debate in the State Assembly, where the first bill was approved 17 seconds after a vote was called.
Moments after the committee hearing, Scott Fitzgerald called the Senate back into a special session. No Democrats were present at the session.
The Senate Republicans called for a vote without discussion on the bill, and the Senate Republicans approved, 18-1, with Sen. Dale Schultz (R-Richland Center) casting the only no vote.

Lovely, the public doesn't want something, so simply push through your agenda at all costs. This is a critical turning point for unions as the GOP has been strategically attacking them in preparation for the 2012 elections. Unions are a reliable Democratic vote.

Below is a MSNBC news clip on the union ramrod, brought to you by Scott Walker.

 

 

Subject Meta: 

Forum Categories: 

No Need For Unions

The fact is that this is 2011, and not 1911. We've passed the era of slave labor and unfair treatment of workers. We have labor laws and workplace safety laws that greatly protect workers. We do not force anyone to work for an employer, and everyone in America is free to choose their place of employment. If a worker is not happy where they're presently working, they have every right to go look for employment elsewhere. We have minimum wage laws, and laws that protect workers against discrimination and other immoral and unethical practices.

Unions have no financial investment in businesses, and unions do not contribute to the start-up and growth of a company. Unions come in "after the fact", and then dictate wages and benefits to the ones that are directly responsible for the success and management of a business. Basically, unions are nothing more than "greed machines", and union workers are nothing more than greedy self-interest self-serving employees.

How can anyone justify paying an uneducated unskilled floor sweeper at GM $22.50 per hour? How can anyone justify paying an uneducated unskilled janitor at a high school $18.50 per hour? How can anyone justify paying a retired street cop ( California ) over $100,000 per year in retirement pay and benefits? Unions are almost forcing some state governments into bankruptcy. And, unions have already caused financial harm to the three auto makers.

Union workers pay monthly union dues, and also pay to get their union card. But, when unions go on strike, unions don't come knocking on the doors of union workers and hand workers a fat check to pay their bills while on strike. And, union leaders and management pocket enormous sums of money from workers' dues and membership fees.

Why do grown-up adult workers need unions to talk for them? Why can't workers talk for themselves, and ask employers for pay raises and more benefits? Why are employees so afraid to speak for themselves?

Why are employers stupid enough to allow unions to dictate wages and employee benefits? A company invests $$millions into the start-up and success of a business, then allow a union that has no investment, and took no risk, to come in a dictate wages and benefits? Go figure.

The bottom line is GREED, plain and simple.

In many industries, union employees have priced themselves completely out of a job. Take a look at what happened to the steel and textile industries. Unions basically open the doors for cheap foreign imports to flood our market place. And, in some cases, unions have opened the doors for cheap foreign labor to enter our workplaces.

Unions do alot more harm than good to our economy, and their decline over the past couple of decades indicates that economic damage. The America workplace, and workforce, would be alot better off without greedy self-serving self-interest unions.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

Never forget - corporations are NOT people...

Why?
Try countering the blatant misrepresentation of a budgetary crisis...
Reduce taxes on one segment and then blame the other

Another way to look at it is that Corporations and Conglomerates are defacto unions of capital. Labor has always required a counter balance. Otherwise - 84 hour work weeks, no minimum wage laws, worker safety gone, mandatory overtime among others. The non-pay issue list is longer than what I could list in one pass.

You seem to suggest that there has been value add from the executives that invested billions of other people's money into flawed financial products only to see the value disappear. Same executives award each other bonuses and salary increases that are independant from actual results. I think that the problems start at a much higher level than some hourly workers.

Finally add in the absolute denial of any environmental or social responsibility on the part of the corporations and their spokesmen, and you get the full reason for a need for unions.

BL (I don't think my house will burn down, but I still carry fire insurance. My stand on climate change is the same... A little bit of insurance (call it the same level of protection) would mitigate many ill effects)

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Apples and Oranges

What happens in government, concerning budgets and finance, does not equate to unions, or to union employees. You're comparing apples and oranges here.

Also, the argument concerning slave wages and no benefits doesn't float in today's workplace, nor in today's workforce. That argument is old, and no longer valid. No one can say with absolute certainty that wages and benefits would not have progressed without unions. Unions served their purpose back in the 30's and 40's, but not today in 2011. Unions have been in a steady decline for a couple of decades now. They have long since served their purpose. In today's America, unions are based on greed, and greed alone.

Today, we have labor laws that protect workers. We have safety and environmental laws, and we have labor boards which protect the rights of workers. We also have discrimination and ehtics laws, and laws against the willful endangerment of employees. What do we need unions for?

The bottom line is one of greed and power, and nothig to do with merit based pay for an honest day's work.

It is not the union employees that are at fault for what we're seeing, but the fault of employers that have given-in to the ridiculous demands of unions.

Again, taxes, budgets, etc., have absolutely Zero to do with unions and their ridiculous demands on employers. Your talking about apples and oranges here.

The basics of unions is to force employers to meet certain demands, else threaten them with worker strikes. This is, for all practical purposes, blackmail and extortion. In other words, it's akin to the Mafia back in Capone's days in Chicago.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

There's More Illegals Than Union Members

I worry a lot more about illegal immigrants taking over jobs and unfairly competing with legal workers than I do union members.

Add in the legal immigrants who aren't offering needed skills -- like the parents, brothers and sisters of prior immigrants who are admitted by the millions in the name of family unification -- and again, that to me is a much bigger problem that we need to do something about.

We don't have enough jobs for ourselves. We particularly lack decent paying jobs for our high school dropouts and high school gradutates. There's going to be another 100 million Americans by around 2050, mostly because of immigration. We don't need another 100 million people, we never discussed getting them, but because of cheap labor lovers and various immigration and ethnic lobby groups, we're going to have them. Now that's something BIG to worry about.

There's so much unemployment and agony right now, and there's lots more to come when we allow companies to ship jobs overseas while we continue import over a million foreign workers each year.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

A Major Problem

Yes, I totally agree. I have written many articles and comments concerning the illegal immigration issue. I have followed it for years now. Back in the 70's, and again in the early 80's, I worked and lived in Nogalas, Arizona, which is on the Mexican border. I experienced first hand what the illegal immigration issued meant to employment. You're correct, we should be more concerned with illegal immigration than with unions. Unions are dying, but illegal immigration is picking up steam daily.

What we have is a very very weak government. Our own government allows, condones, and encourages illegal immigration. They also allow, condone, and encourage job out-sourcing to cheap foreign labor markets. In addition, they freely hand out H-1B visa to foreign workers. As I've said, and have written about many many times, we have an anti-America government seated in Washington, and have had for many decades now.

It's true that unions have done damage to our workforce, but they are on their way out. As you've stated very well, other issues such as illegal immigration and unpenalized unpunished job out-sourcing should be our major concern now. Along with job out-sourcing, our unfair unjust one-sided foreign trade agreements and policies are taking millions of American jobs.

No matter the issue with American jobs, the finger always points straight at our inept derelict pathetic government. John Q. Public doesn't set legislation and policy, doesn't get to vote on the floors of Congress, and doesn't control the out-flow of American jobs.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

Um, You've Already Gotten Your Wish

I used to have pretty negative views of unions. Now I wish to God I could join one. Labor conditions in many ways are more like 1911 in this country than I ever could have dreamed possible.

I don't mean a stereotypical job-controlling and job-killer union from the 1960s, I mean a union that would represent workers first while remembering that if the company doesn't survive and prosper, nobody has a job. I believe unions in Germany are well regarded and considered to perform a valuable function. Something like that would be wonderful to have here.

According to Bureau of Labor Statistics, only a little more than 10% of American workers are unionized. Only about 7% in private industry are in unions. Your description of militant unions controlling whole industries is a genration old for private industry.

I agree with you about public employee pensions. Hughe pensions are not uncommon in the NY-NJ area for cops and fire fighters and it's way too much.

"In 2010, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary workers who were
members of a union--was 11.9 percent, down from 12.3 percent a year earlier, the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number of wage and salary workers be-
longing to unions declined by 612,000 to 14.7 million. In 1983, the first year for
which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 per-
cent, and there were 17.7 million union workers."

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Unions In Decline

You're correct. Unions are in decline, as I stated earlier. That should tell all of us something about greedy selfish self-serving unions. "IF" unions were so good for this country, and for our workforce in general, the numbers would be going up instead of coming down. Unions have long since served their useful purpose. Now, in today's workplace, unions and union workers represent nothing but greed. It's no longer about worker safety, wages, benefits, and work environment, but rather it's about squeezing employers and exerting union power and influence without taking any risk, or without investing one red cent into the business.

Everyone seems to over-look the fact that slave labor is against the law, and that employees have the right to go look for work elsewhere if they feel like they're not getting paid enough, or getting enough benefits. American workers are protected very well.

Employers should pay wages and benefits based on an employee's contribution, and not based on what some uninvested union demands. Employers are slowly waking up to the fact that unions cause way more harm than good. Just look at the damage unions have caused the state of California. Look at what unions cost the three big auto makers. Look at what unions have done to the textile and steel industries.

Of course greedy unions and union workers want to argue the points. They're the ones getting fat. No one ever wonders why some union employees have priced themselves right out of a job. Besides, union workers can do as non-union workers do, which is speak for themselves. Why do grown adults need unions to speak for them anyway?? During my 40 plus years in the workforce, I always spoke for myself when it came to wages and benefits. I never depended on someone else going to bat for me. If I ever thought that I wasn't being paid a fair wage, I just moved on to where I thought that I was being paid a fair wage.

What real purpose do unions serve aside from the greed factor? Can anyone honestly answer that question for me, please? Why should a business pay an uneducated unskilled worker $20.00 an hour for menial labor? Is it because that uneducated unskilled worker belongs to a union?? Pleeeeeeese !!!

What's wrong with paying an employee based on their contribution? What's wrong with paying an employee based on their education and job related experience? Is there something wrong with that, honestly?? Why do we allow unions to set wages and benefits??? What do unions have invested?? What risk do unions take in a business??

When given a choice between buying an American union made product, and buying a cheap foreign made import at Wal-Mart, which one is more likely to be bought by the average worker? How many Americans can afford to buy American union made products?

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

Union busting

If you are working class, did you ever discuss with your supervisor, by yourself: your wages, working conditions, and benefits? If you did have this discussion with a manager, how did it go for you?

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Professional Union Workers and Great Reasons for Union

How dare you take this superficial view of Unions. You don't stand for anything. Why should a Janitor be paid pennies to clean up after children as well as adults. How do you know they are un-educated? You my dear are uneducated and I hope you are soon unemployed and dejected by whom ever you are employed by now. This country was built on the Unions and GREED is what is forcing ingnorant people such as yourself to come to such a misguided conclusion.

I am a professional, college graduate and Union employee. And when your arteries clog up, and you have to come to an hospital. You Meet Union workers that could care less of your thoughts. We are here to do a job and we are well represented by great Unions. How dare you speak on something you have not ever been apart of. Hard working employees of Unions across these United States have employed Americans and have not bankrupt any government. Governments bankrupt governments. Stop playing the blame game. So you get rid of public Unions and you still come up short. It's still the middle class Union member that's the problem? You needed a fall guy and you fell down. Your local government let down so may peoplee, but it isn't over and by the time the smoke clears, hopefully none of the decision makers will be employed!

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Unions

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/03/effect_of_monop.html

Tom West writes:

I'm not certain it's necessarily a net loss for the USA to have actually had labor laws and unionization that led to a middle class large enough to encompass the majority of its citizens during the 1950-1990 period. While the unemployment of extremely marginal workers *is* a real cost, I don't think the transfer of the "excessive" wages garnered from the labor laws to the owner class would make the USA today a better place to live for the majority of its citizens.

Tom misunderstands the effect of unions. As I noted in my post, "Do Labor Unions Promote the Middle Class?", the main effect of unions is not to strengthen the middle class but to transfer wealth from non-union to union workers.

I focused in that post on the effect of unions on relative wages. Let's look here at the effect of unions on owners of businesses that are unionized. Say a union forms and uses its monopoly power to get a higher wage. What happens next? It's true that the profits of the firms that are unionized fall. If the whole industry is unionized, then firms leave the industry until the industry returns to normal profitability. Prices of the output are higher. That means that the long-run effect of the higher wages union receive is not a transfer from capital but a transfer from consumers.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Sonny - And Others Who Oppose Our Freedoms

Well Sonny, you must be from another planet. And your arguments are so shallow I will not dignify them with the myriad of facts that counter them. If you are against basic human rights like the right to form unions or collectively bargain, please leave this country for some authoritarian or communist regime that prohibits these basic rights.

And this applys to all those who oppose our freedoms.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Counter Facts ???

Please, give me all of your counter facts, if you have any, which I doubt very seriously. Nope, I'm not from another planet, been here on Earth all of my life. My arguments are shallow, really ?? Then, please give me your factual counter to what I stated, if you don't mind, please.

Also, for your information, unions have absolutely ZERO to do with basic human rights. Workers have the right to protest, shout, scream, yell, picket, march, wave banners and flags, stomp, and redress the government. And, unions have absolutely nothing to do with thoise basic rights. ALL of us have those basic rights, yes, even non-union workers.

In reality, it's not the unions that are wrong. It's the stupid employers that allow unions to come in and take over, demand certain wages and benefits, and to determine who can and can't be fired. The way I look at it, employers are getting exactly what they deserve, and have deserved for a long long time now.

Hey, why don't you leave this country?? If anyone should leave this country, it's folks like you that are pro-destruction of the American founding principles of hard work and merit based pay. ALL American workers should be paid based on their contributions to an employer, and not because some union set the pay scales. We should be paid according to our contributions, and not according to greed and status.

Besides, rights and freedom person, whoever you are, employees have the right to look for work elsewhere if they feel that they aren't being paid a fair wage and getting fair benefits. We don't force anyone to work anywhere. We all have the right to change from one employer to another. We're no longer slaves, and no longer are forced to stay where we feel that we're not being treated fairly.

Again, this whole issue has absolutely ZERO to do with rights and freedoms, ZERO. Whether we're union or non-union, we all have the same rights. Anyone can protest, speak their minds, march, carry banners, wave flags, and file petitions. Your rights and freedom argument is very weak, to say the least.

Why force employers to accept demands by those that have absolutely ZERO investment in a business ??? That is just plain stupid. Unions have ZERO invested, have contributed ZERO to the success of a business, yet they want to set the rules and guidelines. Go figure.

Again, please tell me where I'm wrong here. Please correct me, and tell me why what I say is not the truth. Also, please explain to me where rights and freedoms come into play here. Anyone can bargain, but that doesn't mean everyone has to give-in to their demands. Only stupid people would give-in to union demands. By the way, just curious here, are you a union employee??? Or, do you greatly benefit from a union employee??? Do you come from a long line of union workers, and now feel that you must defend greedy unions and union employees???

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

facts

>Why force employers to accept demands by those that have absolutely ZERO investment >in a business ??? That is just plain stupid. Unions have ZERO invested, have >contributed ZERO to the success of a business, yet they want to set the rules and >guidelines. Go figure.

Who are more invested in a business than the people who work there..? There is no business without the workers, it would never succeed. If it were possible there would be no unions, capitol having long since disposed of them. It it such a mental stretch to believe then a worker would be interested in safety rules at the place they work?

Name one instance where a union has set the rules or guidelines of a business. You can't because it has never happened. Either the two parties negotiated a compromise or they didn't. The business is free to hire workers outside the union even if that means moving to another state or another country.

I do like the irony though. Its not often you see someone complain about the greed of union members the very force that drives corporations and in fact they are required to be greedy to benefit their shareholders. Come up with something original if you're going to troll. Greed? honestly..

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Employees Investment

Employees only have an investment if the company or business is owned by the employees. Unions do not own businesses.

Employees are mere workers, not owners. Employees do not get a dividend check each quarter, or yearly.

Employees come and go, with no ownership stake.

If unions do not influence pay and benefits, then what exactly do unions do?

Also, some nerve saying that I troll. You're joking, right?

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

Walker

Walker, as Mayor of Milwaukee, fired union workers and hired Wackenhut from Germany who hired security workers (some with criminal backgrounds). Walker, supported by the Koch Brothers, has a clause that allows him to give away public assets with no-bid contracts. It is all about privatization including public schools. All 19 red-state governors are following the script. If you have any respect for public schools, realize the unions are only a small part of a plan to strip assets from the states. The recalls needs to move quickly because the damage is vast and happening quickly. If you want to see workers from the US be hired, be concerned about this hostile multi-national corporate take-over within the states.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Politics Is Dirty

Yes, politics on all levels is dirty, and a dirty business. Honor and honesty mix with politics like oil mixes with water. But, unions have had their dirty hands in dirty politics for decades.

Also, no-bid contracts are common-place, even in local and state governments. But, again, this doesn't equate solely to unions and union workers. This is common even amomg non-union activity.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

Freedom requires Equal Proection

Quote: "Also, for your information, unions have absolutely ZERO to do with basic human rights. Workers have the right to protest, shout, scream, yell, picket, march, wave banners and flags, stomp, and redress the government. And, unions have absolutely nothing to do with thoise basic rights. ALL of us have those basic rights, yes, even non-union workers."

Absent the protection of collective action, the worker cannot do these things without risking automatic termination. Only in a union does labor have the power to bargain fairly with with either the government or the unions of capital i.e. corporations.

By denying the right of protected collective bargaining to labor you are violating the principle of equal protection by given to capital via limited liability unfair power against single individuals and using the force of government to prevent workers from making collective contracts.

Quote: "If anyone should leave this country, it's folks like you that are pro-destruction of the American founding principles of hard work and merit based pay. ALL American workers should be paid based on their contributions to an employer, and not because some union set the pay scales. We should be paid according to our contributions, and not according to greed and status."

There is no merit based pay in market economies. Please read Steve Keen's papers on why productivity can never be linked to wage levels. Wages are determined by the relative political power of the parties entering a contract. If you do not understand these basic facts of labor economics then please go away.

Here's a quote from Abe Lincoln who you apparently want to "leave the country": "I am glad to know that there is a system of labor where the laborer can strike if he wants to! I would to God that such a system prevailed all over the world."

You are a Neo-Confederate who needs to leave the country. America is the Union, not a some "libertarian" southern plantation for the Koch brothers. In a free country, people have the right to organize themselves without fear of Nanny State Confederates using big Government to ban the collective organization of some groups of citizens (unions) while protecting others (corporations).

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Unions Do Not Equal Freedom

I totally disagree. If there were no unions, we would still have the basic rights that we have today. Unions do not grant, not do they protect our rights. Everyone has the right to bargain with an employer. If you work for an employer, and that employer fires you justly, where have freedoms been lost? Are you saying that we have the right to FORCE an employer to give-in to our demands? What truck did you fall off of, may I ask?

I have never workered for a union. Yet, many times I bargained for a raise in pay, and never once had anyone do my talking for me.

You're wrong when it comes to merit pay. Back in my working days, employers paid, or gave raises, according to merit. As far as I know, it still continues today. My wife works for a huge company, a world-wide corporation, that gives merit pay. Someone has given you false information my friend. And, you sir, or mame, whichever the case may be, can go away also. Who died and left you in charge here?? I fully understand labor economics, and have for many decades now.

And, further more, Abe Lincoln is not the authority and last word in economics, business management, worker rights, and labor. Quoting him added ZERO to this conversation.

Unions are NOT the only ones that can bargain. Again, someone has given you false information. Individual employees can bargain just the same as unions can.

I have a question for you Mr. or Mrs. pro-union person. If a person, or group, invest $10,000,000 to get a business off the ground and running profitably. Then invested another $5,000,000 in equipment and up-grades, and pushed the business to the top of their field, all without one red cent from any union, what right does a union have to come in after the fact and demand certain wages and benefits? See, unions have no vested interest, take absolutely no risk, and then want to run the show. Duh !!

Why are businesses so stupid, given the above example, to let unions basically dictate to them without ever investing one red cent into the business? Remember, employees are on every street corner begging for work. We have no labor shortage in America.

If an employer fires an employee without good cause, we have laws that protect that employee. Employees are protected very well in this country.

And you, uninformed uneducated person, should also leave the country. Why are people asking others to leave this country? Is that the only counter argument here? Gee, a bunch of children have infested this site. These comments remind me of another site that has childish activity and comments. Grow-up folks, be civil and polite in these conversations. There's no call for asking someone to leave the country just because they disagree with you.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

woah, woah, woah!

Cat's away the mice will play. Sorry, I had to take care of some other things today so I'm behind, to come back and see *this*.

Firstly, people, no personal attacks on EP.

Secondly....Sonny, you clearly do not know the history of labor as well as what happens without unions around.

If you wish to discuss child labor, slavery, indentured servitude, labor arbitrage, 20 hours work days, the "company store", indebtedness, the minimum wage, workman's comp. and a host of other positives unions brought to workers throughout history...

but these blanket claims that somehow unions are the "bad guys" is not only fiction, simply isn't appropriate for EP.

This is incredible, I believe it's 21 states now which have right to work laws, which means they can be fired without cause and meritocracy? Let's discuss executive compensation.

No, no no, this site is not available to blanket attack unions. If one wants to argue their illegal immigration position is nonsensical, well, it isn't because it's all about increasing their membership, a "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" as well as reducing illegals for future because they erode wages, workers rights...

Not saying that will work but that is their position reasoning.

Anyway, this thread is loaded with attacks, attacks on comments, attacks on unions and attacks on facts...

Consider this comment a warning.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Union History

I know exactly how things were back when unions first organized. You sure are assuming alot here. And, why attach your comment to my comment?? I certainly didn't start the personal attacks. As a matter of fact, I just asked that this childish nonsense stop. Please read my latest comment.

A warning on what, may I ask?

Would you like to debate the pros and cons of present day unions? Or, are you going to continue the personal attacks on me?

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

Answer To Warning

In my personal opinion, no, we do not need unions. And, I'm not a troll.

Now, if this site is pro-union, and I'm wrong for not agreeing, then exercise whatever follows your warning.

If you want to ban me from this site because I'm not pro-union, then so be it.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

this site is not for "personal opinion"

or "feeling", it's for facts. You are misrepresenting the facts here, filling up the site with your "opinion". I'm pretty la de da on comments but thinking what Wisconsin just did is good overall for workers in America is not correct and assuredly something we write about often. We're not here as another bitstream of the never ending misinformation campaign.

If you don't like the site rules, go elsewhere, but do not fill up this site with misinformed "opinion" and argument.

And believe me, I do not blindly endorse every agenda or policy desire of the unions, especially the SEIU, it's on a case by case, issue by issue detail. But on this one, you're just "decided" you don't "like unions", so therefore somehow you have some right to spam the comment thread. Not so.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Personal Opinions ??

Hey, look back over just the past week of comments on this site, please. How many do you see that are "Opinions Only"??? I see many. Do you dispute that ??

Why call me on the carpet, and not anyone else?? Do you have something personal against me ?? IF so, what and why ??

Also, I did NOT start the personal attacks. Please go back and review and see where the personal attacks started.

And, for your information, I do NOT spam this site, or any site for that matter. It would be easy to label some of the posts and comments on this site as spam. And, you've said several times that this is a news site. I see posts on here that are basically copies of news on other sites, with a little extra twist to them. Do you dispute that ??

Where did I misrepresent facts, please point it out, if you don't mind. My opinions are NOT misinformed, no more than other opinions I read on this site are.

No worries, I'll leave your NEWS site, and you and the other biased folks can have at it. What a joke. Pleeeeeasee !!!

P.S. - there was no call to single me out, re-read all of the comments that I responded to.

Have a great day.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

WADR, is Mr. Clark a real person?

Or is he a Russo Marsh and Rogers construct--or dream target audience member?

Because, honestly, he seems to have much more time than any of us working people do, to spend on the internet writing long, meme-repeating screeds with a lot of recycled talking points.

As a retired communications professional I feel compelled to observe that among intelligent people, it is strength of idea connected to depth of experience and breadth of consensus that counts for proximity to truth. It is only among dimwitted audiences that robotic repetition of talking points gains traction.

Consider your audience here, Mr. Clark. Say your piece, then let go and let others have a say without you jumping back in and repeating yourself to tell the world they're wrong because they don't agree with you.

WADR - with all due respect.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Point ????

Yes, Mr. Clark is indeed a real person. Since, as you've stated, you're a profressional, care to contribute to the conversation/debate with your view and/or opinion on the topic of unions? I will not follow suit and stoop to personal attacks. I don't believe that the intent and purpose of this site is to counter points with personal attacks on the posters. Since such remarks as "leave the country" and "go away" have already been conveyed, I will leave such to those that have nothing else to offer this conversation.

If you would like to moderate this forum/site/discussion, please ask someone in the administration of this site. I have only responded to comments directed at the comments that I've made. Others are free to add whatever they wish. Everyone has the same rights as I do here. I'm not keeping anyone from speaking their mind. As a matter of fact, I welcome all counters to the points that I've raised. I encourage you to offer your two cents worth on topic.

Also, for your information, I don't think everyone is wrong that disagrees with me. I believe that we all have opinions, and have the right to express them. I simply state by views and opinions, and welcome all counters. I enjoy civil conversation and debates. In the case of unions, until someone proves me wrong, my opinion is just as strong as anyone elses'.

Now, you have the floor, speak your piece, please. I would greatly appreciate it if you would stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks. Lets have friendly civil conversation and debate the issue.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

Corporate asset-grab not seen since robber baron capitalism

I wish it where funny. The financial crisis of 2008. Then they keep these incredibly expensive overseas wars going on. The federal deficit, and most state deficit increases. American is starting to eat American, if anyone remembers the fall of the Soviet Union, and how they stole Russia's resources, Walker will help it happen in America.

From a very good article in the Guardian UK.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/mar/10/wisconsin...

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Your disagreement is not

Your disagreement is not valid and therefore unimportant. The practice of collective bargaining is unionization. You are right it is something that is granted but something that is inherent.

If I decide on my own time to talk to my fellow workers and we decide we will prefer to ask as group this that is our right and you have no right to use the government to prevent us from conducting our business as we see fit. The only way prevent unionization is by force which violates first principles.

Quote: "I have never workered for a union. Yet, many times I bargained for a raise in pay, and never once had anyone do my talking for me."

Bully for you. But I and my coworkers prefer to do things differently and you have no right use the government to interfere and force me into negotiating only on your terms. I prefer to unionize and hire a professional negotiation using our dues. Just because you like being a chump working for low compensation doesn't give you the right to keep the rest of us hiring professional.

Quote: "Are you saying that we have the right to FORCE an employer to give-in to our demands? What truck did you fall off of, may I ask?"

Strawman. So long as I don't have the right to sue shareholders then I have the right to make the employer hear demands via a means of negotiation I decide. No you don't get to decide for me and neither does the government. The employer decides whether or not he wants to deal with us or find some other people. However because we are hard to replace in mass the employer is bargain more fairly and thus we worker get getter leverage via unionization. In this situation, the issue is even more clear because the employer is the government.

Quote: "You're wrong when it comes to merit pay. Back in my working days, employers paid, or gave raises, according to merit. As far as I know, it still continues today. My wife works for a huge company, a world-wide corporation, that gives merit pay"

Really, the CEO of your company make 300 times more than you because he put in 300 times more hours and produces 300 times more physical wealth? You are retarded?

Quote: "And, further more, Abe Lincoln is not the authority and last word in economics, business management, worker rights, and labor. Quoting him added ZERO to this conversation."

I added him to conversation as you implied that being pro-unionization is anti-American and therefore since Lincoln for most Americans defines American patriotism therefore his opinion out weights your opinion on what is considered American.

Quote: "I have a question for you Mr. or Mrs. pro-union person. If a person, or group, invest $10,000,000 to get a business off the ground and running profitably. Then invested another $5,000,000 in equipment and up-grades, and pushed the business to the top of their field, all without one red cent from any union, what right does a union have to come in after the fact and demand certain wages and benefits?"

Uh the fact that without workers none of your plants and equipment wouldn't be able to do anything. Are really saying that labor invest nothing into the businesses were they work?

Let me quote Lincoln again.

Quote from Lincoln: "Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights. Nor is it denied that there is, and probably always will be, a relation between labor and capital producing mutual benefits."

Quote: "If an employer fires an employee without good cause, we have laws that protect that employee. Employees are protected very well in this country."

Yes, because of damn unions fought for those legal protections. Capital sure as hell didn't wake up one morning and say gee maybe we have safety standards for workers.

Quote: "And you, uninformed uneducated person, should also leave the country. Why are people asking others to leave this country?"

Hello? Pyschological projection anyone? You were the one who said

"Hey, why don't you leave this country?? If anyone should leave this country, it's folks like you that are pro-destruction of the American founding principles of hard work and merit based pay."

And now you are projecting you own authoritarian suggestions on me when I point how absurd your arguments are.

You are the one defending the state use of force to prevent workers from organizing and negotiating on the terms that they choose . Where in the hell did you get the idea that Merit part of the American tradition.

Merit is a tradition of an aristocracy not a Republic. A republic means rule according the public interest not according aristocratic notions of "merit."

You are the idiot who doesn't understand this was created for more a more perfect Union not more perfect "meritorious" nobel families.

Get out of here you Monarchist. If your type wants to dragging us back to 1775 my response is that all free western men " molon labe"! You will take our unions from our cold dead hands.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Government Use

Where did you get that I said it was OK for the government to take away your rights?? Please show where I said that, if you don't mind. Yes, you have the right to bargain, complain, scream, protest, and petition. I never ever said otherwise.

And, I wasn't the one that first said to "leave the country", nor the first to say, "go away". I didn't start the personal attacks. You people started the childish personal attacks, not me.

Also, your comments are just as absurd to me, as mine are to you. I see no more merit to your argument, than is contained in mine.

Also, calling me a Monarchist adds nothing to this conversation. Your childish personal attacks are totally uncalled for.

And, I don't have to take your unions from your cold dead hands, they're folding as we speak, and have been for decades now.

What real purpose do unions serve other than the greed factor? Care to explain?

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Because you can do wrong, and get away with it, doesn't make it right

Quote: "Where did you get

Quote: "Where did you get that I said it was OK for the government to take away your rights?? Please show where I said that, if you don't mind. Yes, you have the right to bargain, complain, scream, protest, and petition. I never ever said otherwise."

It was implied when you compared unions to organized crime. If you here to defend the denial of collective bargaining right to workers then you are denying the basic human right to free association.

Unions are folding because since Taft-Hartley and Right to Slave legislation has the government actively denying members of unions the ability to right to bargain, complain, scream, protest, and petition without jumping through piles of red tape.

The public sector unions are folding because certain governors are using state troopers and police state tactics not because they are unpopular.

Do I think unions are the greatest institution ever? No. I prefer Worker Owner Co-OPs but this issue has me so fired up I recently quit the Republican party over this union busting.

If people want to join together and hire professionals to negotiation through a system of dues then they are effectively a union.

Why do you hate the idea labor should have the right hire a professional when bargaining? A free society doesn't use laws and threats of violence against workers who decide to hire lawyers on their behalf.

Where's the laissez-faire? Why do you libertarians feel the need to stick a gun into people faces ever time ordinary people want to hire a damn lawyer?

If you believe workers should have the right to strike, protest, petition etc...then why are you defending Walker?

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

The Historical Perspective of Unions

I like your observation regarding the structure of the productive enterprise.

There have been many instances of co-operative and and participatory organisations in both the US and UK - where workers are owner participants. These alternate structures have been history 'suppressed' and their utility eroded in terms of being made less tax advantageous in the US and the UK.

In general the evolution of Unions from Medieval Guilds and artisan associations has historically resulted in improved working conditions and rates of pay for workers in the West. This has served as protection against exploitation and many Unions actively participate with management for the betterment of their members and also their company and/or industry.

Repealing the rights to free association and diverse forms of bargaining is retrograde step and I would agree that comparing Unions to criminal organisations is highly prejudiced view of the role, evolution and contribution of labour to the development of Western societies.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.

Nexus EP Admin request

You write such insightful comments and add to EP. Would you please consider getting an account and signing in? That way you bypass CAPTCHA, plus the moderation queue, on anonymous comments, plus would have the ability to track on your comments, see replies and so on.

Love to have you more "interactive" on the discussion.

You must have Javascript enabled to use this form.