Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Union Members Clash with Police in Michigan

If unions are doing such a great job, why are they afraid of non-union workers?

Unions are propped by government operations that do nothing but prevent people from working who are willing to do so below union wages. Pull the government prop and unions collapse. This is pretty basic stuff, the protesters here know their propped up wages will fall without the backup of government coercion.

17 comments:

  1. Arthur Krolman, CFADecember 11, 2012 at 4:15 PM

    Unions are violent gangs. This is what they do. Remember Mutual of Omaha Wild Kingdom? I loved that guy.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm from Michigan and listen to a lot of talk-radio.

    They say:

    It's not fair for the non-union workers to piggy back on all the great work the unions do. Why should someone get the benefits of higher wages, work rules, conditions, etc without having to pay the dues?

    Of course, they can't see that the whole point of a union is to secure higher wages than they deserve. Nor can they see that extra costs they impose is absorbed by employers with smaller profits and/or consumers by higher prices. Nor do they see the unemployed who are created due to artificially high wages. Union corruption actually is seen but discounted, as is sticking up for the worst of the worst - like the recent Chrysler story where they were forced to rehire employees previously fired after a local TV station ran a story about line workers drinking and smoking on the job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I live in a right to work state and we have a union here in my line of work. Your base pay is a little higher if in the union but with union dues taken out, it is about equal. So, it basically costs the customer more money for the same worker to do the same job and pay him the same. When I have asked people what they like about being in the union, they seem to always say "the comradery" or some such thing. They basically like being in a club. There are some benefits and some drawbacks to it, but the good thing is we can make our own damn choices. We are not children.

      Delete
  3. Rival factions of union thugs clash! haha

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No shit. Poetic. I wish they would just "Jets and Sharks" it out with guns. Disgusting trash.

      Delete
    2. Interesting...

      Delete
  4. Vote for/against unions with your checkbook. I personally will not buy another UAW made auto....it is Honda and Toyota for me from now on. When the car sales go away...the employees lose their jobs...and the UAW loses its members and their dues. DO NOT BUY UAW PRODUCTS!!!! Ever!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Vote for/against unions with your checkbook. I personally will not buy another UAW made auto....it is Honda and Toyota for me from now on. When the car sales go away...the employees lose their jobs...and the UAW loses its members and their dues. DO NOT BUY UAW PRODUCTS!!!! Ever!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Unions also hold back the best employees from making above scale

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why should anyone make more than the other employees. All of us should be paid the same, with a little increase for each year at the company. That's why the managers make so much more. The top guys don't do anything, but make 100000 times more than we do. They should make just as much as we do.

      All jobs in the country should be that way. These tech companies with people making millions just because they got in at the right time- sick. And all these small businesses should have to be unionized too- look at how the guy at the top that started makes all the money while the little guy makes bupkis.

      It's bullshit.

      I'm glad I went to a school where they taught me about how this stuff should work, and now I can help other people understand how it should work. If it weren't for the bigwigs then all of us would be rich.

      Delete
    2. Yes, shame on the managers for working hard, working long hours, moving up in the company and being rewarded for it.

      Dale-I cannot tell if you're serious or bs'ing but either way i'll explain something to you.

      You have two workers. Worker A and Worker B. They both hold the same position and both are measured with the same performance metrics. Worker A produces 1.25 times the work that worker B does, yet is still only paid the same as worker B. Not only that, but worker A has worked there a fewer amount of years and so when he asks for a promotion, he is denied because worker B has worked there longer.

      Does this make sense to you (or anyone)? My wife is a teacher and unfortunately unionized. She works her tail off, brings work home and has some of the best test scores in her school. Yet, teachers at the SAME school, who have taught for 15+ years are making twice as much. They teach the SAME exact lesson plans as they did 15 years ago and even pass out the same worksheets as they did 15 years ago. Test scores? Slightly above average (just enough to keep them afloat).

      The only thing thats bullshit is the myth that Unions protect the worker.

      What protection does Worker A have in securing a promotion when he loses the bid to someone who does not perform as well but has worked there "x" amount of years longer?

      What protection does my wife have for getting paid what she deserves? I would bet she would get paid far more if the union was not there simply because of her hard work and dedication.

      -If someone knows that they will get paid the same as everyone else and they don't have to go above and beyond...it hurts the business. There's very little incentive to succeed. Why work harder than the guy next to me if I know that I will never make more money than him?


      Give me a break guy.

      The Moral Hazard with Unions is that it gives the impression that everyone works at the same pace, the same drive, motivation and skill set. This is not true.


      All companies should pay everyone the same? Do you realize how much of a socialist you are?!

      Pathetic. And you claim you went to "school"? Maybe that was your first problem.

      Delete
    3. P.S

      If Unions are so great-then giving an employee the option to join a Union or not should not scare you. Because if Unions are so great they will surely want to join, right?

      (Facepalm)

      Delete
    4. It wouldn't matter if Dale were serious or not, there's Millions out there with that attitude. Nice response.

      ...Unions... the only time I ever took a nap on the job was while working in a union plant.
      (The One and Only time, thank goodness. I wasn't actually a union employee.) Not that doing so is impossible in the non-union sector, but I've never seen the opportunity. If you know of one, let me know. On second thought, scratch that, sleeping on the job is boring and kind of stressful.

      - IndividualAudienceMember

      Delete
  7. I love it. One of them in the video cries over and over "I've got a bad back!" Classic!

    ReplyDelete
  8. "The only thing thats bullshit is the myth that Unions protect the worker."

    There is some truth to that statement: Unions hire politicians to pass laws that create barriers for employers to fire the typical union worker.

    In California public schools, principals are REQUIRED to give teachers 45 days notice before issuing discipline (suspension or termination) for things determined to be "unprofessional conduct." (Unprofessional conduct might be yelling at a child or adult; insubordination; grabbing a child by the arm or clothing, etc.)If the teacher corrects his/her behavior in that amount of time, then there is no discipline.

    If the teacher simply cannot teach, then the school district must give the teacher 90 days to try and turn things around.

    Again, both of these are requirements handed down by the California legislature. (See California Education Code Section 44938.)

    Let's say a teacher continues with their unprofessional behavior or their unsatisfactory performance. The next step is that the school district files a Statement of Charges against the teacher. In short, the school district has to sue the teacher in order to displace the teacher from his/her job. The government has given the employee and implied property right in their job!

    For the lawsuit, who hears the case? It's a three-judge panel: One of the members is appointed by the union. The second member is appointed by the school district, and the third member is an administrative law judge. Guess how the majority typically votes?

    Of course, we are talking about public education, so its a scam through and through. Management is just as corrupt, if not more so.







    ReplyDelete
  9. "This is pretty basic stuff, the protesters here know their propped up wages will fall without the backup of government coercion."

    Bob, my experience tells me that you are far off-base: The majority of the union workers that I know have NO IDEA about basic economics or government coercion. They see everything through the lens of "Us vs. Them." Everything that The Man (any employer) does is considered wrong and evil. Everything is unjust. Every mistake is a grievous wrong.

    I think that it is important that libertarian-minded people realize that things that are basic and common-sense to us are advanced teachings for the majority of the world.

    I recently told my wife that we are all doomed. My reasoning was that I know a lot more about politics/economics than any of my extended family. I would give myself a C- or D+ in terms of what I understand. That, of course, means that those around me are receiving failing grades.

    My extended family consists of one pediatrician, one surgeon, two engineers, and two attorneys. These are not uneducated people, they just have not been exposed to the truth.

    I have some work to do.

    ReplyDelete