Comments on: Unions

By: Roland

Roland — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 13:45:02 +0000

Personally, I see NO purpose of unions today. None. Well, let me rephrase that..in their current mode I don’t see any but if someone wants to hire someone to negotiate a better deal, I see no problem with that at all. If Will Smith has an agent who can get him more money because he can’t negotiate that well, I don’t see an issue. It’s when they are, as you said Ava, legislated. When Unions are intimidating people and companies.

I am sure Policulture can enlighen us with some good intimidation stories from Michigan. I remember several from the Detroit Freepress strike. They used to throw metal spikes in the road to ruin the tires of so called “scabs”. Yeah, those Unions sure are great.

By: AvaP.

AvaP. — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 13:13:01 +0000

As I see it Unions ,in and of themselves, are not the problem…it is the MANDITORY part that is the issue. Take Detroit for instance. Our problem is in LANSING. It is legislation that tells companies that they have to be union shop! Never a good idea to legislate power of choice away from the people! Also, there is NO COMPETITION for these unions. If one union bid on a job and another union bid on the same job saying its workers can do it in X amount of time for X amount of money…NOW we are talkin’! They have accountability!! Now they just run the show and we are in the situation that we are in! What a mess!

By: Benjamin Williams

Benjamin Williams — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 04:00:42 +0000

@ Roland
“Tom Brady make millions of dollars for playing a GAME”

Yes. If he gets hurt and cannot play again, then what is he support to do, flip burgers? If I left my current job to work at a company that may not exist tomorrow, much less next year (like a startup), I would ask for my yearly income up front. Athletes should be able to do the same. Any given Sunday could be their last day to work, I would want insurance, $10 million would be nice.

By: Roland

Roland — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:29:54 +0000

Dillon, why shouldn’t he? If he has a skill and an employer is willing to pay for that skill, why shouldn’t he make that much? Should a person like Tiger Woods or Tom Brady make millions of dollars for playing a GAME?

By: Dillon Sorensen

Dillon Sorensen — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:46:21 +0000

Can unions be good? Yes. Can they be bad? Yes. Are they sometimes necessary? Yes. Should an assembly line worker in Detroit make $70 an hour? Heck no.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:20:25 +0000

P&C said: “But it seems that the unions always go too far, get greedy and lose their way.”

Unfortunately, the same can be said for pretty much all institutions of power…including “Christian” ones.

By: Robin

Robin — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:51:04 +0000

Living in a household having jobs on both sides of the coin, it is a toss up for me. Husband worked a non union auto related shop years ago. Then worked 28 years as a police officer with a union. The union helped pay negotiations with the city, but there were years he worked without a contract before one was settled. We received good benefits and still do. Son worked at Home Depot and the union could not get a foot hold there because the employees were very happy with the way they were treated. I have watched the UAW for years and they have ruined the auto industry with their outrageous demands, but the auto companies let them. Should Walmart be forced to unionize? Absolutely not! If the employees wanted it, the union would already be there.

By: Politics and Culture

Politics and Culture — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 03:45:54 +0000

As anti-union as I am, I think there are some (limited) situations where a union is needed.

But it seems that the unions always go too far, get greedy and lose their way. Case-in-point: The U.A.W.