Layoffs coming...

N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
At one time Wal Mart didnt need a union. They treated their employees well and had benefits
That has all changed
Click to expand...
Really? Then why do people choose to work there? Perhaps they are all slaves and are forced to work there? I assume you have no clue, just like usual about every subject under the sun.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
I've done the same job union and non union at different companies. I also went from union worker to non union manager in a meat plant in Illinois. (Meat plant under UFCW) I can honestly tell you that the pay wasn't better from one to the other. The only difference was paying dues. I was also a mechanical insulator in a union for a while and did the same job non union. It wasn't much different in pay. What exactly would a union bring to some place like Wal-Mart? It has cheap insurance, 401k with matching, stock purchase with matching, dental, vision, college grants, pays for GED classes, 10% discount on all durable goods and produce, 10% off on food during nov-dec, had profit sharing until recently, easy promotions based on merit instead of time on job, automatic raises, lots of different jobs to do so you don't have to leave to change what you do. What exactly would a union do to help the average person at Wal-Mart? Would raising prices help Wal-Mart's associates if they have to lay people off? Would the share holders allow the company to suck balls for profit? You are talking 50-60 million hours a week of man power. A couple dollar an hour raise to every associate would be 6 billion a year, and another billion in 401k matching and the like. The unions are wanting 13 dollar an hour starting wage if they get in. This means the average wal-mart would become unprofitable immediately. That being said, it would be very easy to get a union inside of Wal-Mart. There are departments in the stores that are treated as individual businesses that have all of 10-20 workers in them. It would honestly take a half dozen pissed off people to get a union in a store. I really don't understand why the Unions haven't been able to seal the deal - are they even trying? If the Unions wanted to change Wal-Mart, they would offer it a compromise. Something like "If you spotlight a union/USA made item every week in your store, we will tell our millions of socialist friends to buy them, if we buy enough, you keep it in your store." This would in fact be voting with your wallet and fix the issue by creating union jobs in America if that is their ultimate goal. Do you know there are many made in America items coming back to Wal-Mart? I go to the yearly business meeting every year. They are actively trying to bring American made goods to the table in Wal-Mart. All people have to do is buy them and the company would put them for sale.
Click to expand...
I've worked at two places where a union tried to come in. One time the workers voted to not let the union represent them. A shop down the road, a competitor, had the same union and their pay was only a few cents an hour more than ours. Not enough to even pay the union dues. The other place locked the doors rather than deal with the union. That was a shitty place to work. Hot, dangerous, low pay. They thought they would just move production out of state. We made castings for GM and Ford. The union leaned on Ford and GM and they canceled all their contracts. I think if employers treat their employees fairly and pay them a decent wage, they aren't likely to see their employees unionize. Treat them badly, and suffer the consequences. I dislike the way "right to work" states interfere in that process.
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Unions can be good or bad. They improve pay and working conditions, but their demands sometimes exceed what a business can give to their employees and still remain viable. Honest answer. See above for dishonest answer.
 
Mr Neutron

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
Because Unions support pro labor candidates who happen to be democrats
If unions supported republican candidates they would be the most patriotic form of association a person could partake in
Click to expand...
Teamsters backed Reagan in '80.

edit: btw, every union I have ever been a member of, sold out their members for their own benefit.
 
nontheist

nontheist

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
Because Unions support pro labor candidates who happen to be democrats
If unions supported republican candidates they would be the most patriotic form of association a person could partake in
Click to expand...
This is from someone that obviously doesn't have a clue.

The biggest problem with union is their conflict of interest. It very hard to be pro employee and pro company. Unions are very successful on things that they have a monopoly on like public transportation and municipalities etc but they inflate the cost to live in the area incredibly. Then you factor in that union politics greatly affect production everyone to goddamned worried about what everyone else is doing and how much they're making.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
Mr Neutron said:
yeah, right up to the time he fired all those air traffic controllers.
Click to expand...
and yet there is still a Air traffic controllers union


The National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) is a labor union in the United States. It is affiliated with the AFL-CIO, and is the exclusive bargaining representative for air traffic controllers employed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). It also represents a range of workers related to the Air traffic control (ATC) industry, and the (FAA) itself.
 
Mr Neutron

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
NoDrama said:
Really? Then why do people choose to work there? Perhaps they are all slaves and are forced to work there? I assume you have no clue, just like usual about every subject under the sun.
Click to expand...
Slavery need not be posited imo. You can be free, jobless, hungry, and Wal-Mart could be the only folks hiring. Choices are often made on the very imperfect basis of least evil. cn
 
A

althor

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Slavery need not be posited imo. You can be free, jobless, hungry, and Wal-Mart could be the only folks hiring. Choices are often made on the very imperfect basis of least evil. cn
Click to expand...
Then you take what you can get.

Life only owes us ONE thing, death.
Why everyone thinks "I was born, you owe me" I havent figured out yet.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
althor said:
Then you take what you can get.

Life only owes us ONE thing, death.
Why everyone thinks "I was born, you owe me" I haven't figured out yet.
Click to expand...
I'm getting the vibe that you think I think that. Well ... I don't.
But that doesn't mean I am a fan of corporate predation of "human resources" either. cn
 
Grandpapy

Grandpapy

Well-Known Member
nontheist said:
This is from someone that obviously doesn't have a clue. The biggest problem with union is their conflict of interest. It very hard to be pro employee and pro company. Unions are very successful on things that they have a monopoly on like public transportation and municipalities etc but they inflate the cost to live in the area incredibly. Then you factor in that union politics greatly affect production everyone to goddamned worried about what everyone else is doing and how much they're making.
Click to expand...
Labor has been running Austraila for few years now, and well, it's the #1 place to live now, voted by people who are tired of have the standards lowered.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
Grandpapy said:
Labor has been running Austraila for few years now, and well, it's the #1 place to live now, voted by people who are tired of have the standards lowered.
Click to expand...
the Labour Party is NOT Labour.

in the US we would call those guys democrats. and they generally fuck shit up just as bad as the republicans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top