OPP Poll........Unions (Page 5): I have been an employer and I always paid the best I could and on time. Some people stayed with me for several years. I knew others in the same...

Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon

Marty 2020 wrote:

It should be up to the employer what they pay as wages and offer as benefits.
If unions were to suddenly disappear, the free market would become balanced quickly and workers would have the actual choice to work where they were most comfortable.
Prevailing wage rates are draconian and unfair to the smaller mom and pop businesses!
Employers would have to pay more for better workers. And they would!
Unions have k**led entry level jobs.

I have been an employer and I always paid the best I could and on time. Some people stayed with me for several years. I knew others in the same buisness as myself who had a constant turnover. I was non union .

billlingle

Marty 2020 wrote:

It should be up to the employer what they pay as wages and offer as benefits.
If unions were to suddenly disappear, the free market would become balanced quickly and workers would have the actual choice to work where they were most comfortable.
Prevailing wage rates are draconian and unfair to the smaller mom and pop businesses!
Employers would have to pay more for better workers. And they would!
Unions have k**led entry level jobs.

You sound like a brochure from the Chamber of Commerce. An employer will pay a worker as little as is needed to make sure that the guy shows up in the morning. If Unions were to disappear the workforce would wind up, in a short time, loosing benefits, pay raises, job security and would eventually find themselves like they were before the UAW strike in 1936 that finally brought GM to the bargaining table.
Prevailing wages are wages that a worker needs in order to feed and take care of himself and his family. If a small business is unable to pay prevailing wages they can hire their children or change to a business that earns enough to actually pay wages. If a business is not able to pay prevailing wages it is not a business it is a hobby. Employers can collude and agree to payroll ceilings. Workers cannot protect themselves unless they represent a threat to the employers entire work force.

billlingle

Parky60 wrote:

You don't know s**t do you?

The one with feces between his ears seems to be you. Do you actually have a comment on what I wrote or are you content with making stupid statements that have very little meaning other than to yourself?

Marty 2020 Loc: Banana Republic of Kalifornia

billlingle wrote:

You sound like a brochure from the Chamber of Comm... (show quote)

You’re one of the most abrasive people on opp. You’re also wrong.
If unions were gone, the workers could almost name their price.
If you want good workers, you pay them enough. If you’re an ass and don’t then they won’t work for you.
Simple economics!
Did you finish high school?
You’re obviously a union boss, that’s how they act, superior!

Kevyn

SeaLass wrote:

I have no problem with unions if somebody believes that is the way for them to go. I do have a major problem with mandatory union membership. If one does not wish to join a union they should not be forced to, in return they would be exempt from union contracts and would need to negotiate their own employment conditions. I will concede I'm not totally sure what the legality of such an arrangement would be.

It is not legal because it provides management the means to undermine majority elected collective bargaining

Marty 2020 Loc: Banana Republic of Kalifornia

Parky60 wrote:

Funny, the non-union place I used to work for offered a comparable total compensation package as other union companies in the area.

Same thing happened with me. But that was in the late seventies!🫣🫣🫣

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

billlingle wrote:

It would be in violation of the union contract with the shop to do what you suggest. Secondly, no owner would consider what you proposed. First it would really raise hell with his other employees and secondly it would involve an entirely different payroll schedule for one employee. If joining a union is that horrible to you then apply at a non-union shop.

Funny, my wife was represented by a union but wasn't forced to join it or pay union dues but was still partially represented by them.

I'll repeat... you don't know s**t do you?

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

billlingle wrote:

The one with feces between his ears seems to be you. Do you actually have a comment on what I wrote or are you content with making stupid statements that have very little meaning other than to yourself?

I did. I said that you have no idea what you're talking about, ie. you don't know s**t.

Parky60 Loc: People's Republic of Illinois

Kevyn wrote:

It is not legal because it provides management the means to undermine majority elected collective bargaining

And you're a liar. My wife worked for an employer where it wasn't mandatory to join the union and my state is a closed-shop state.

Strycker Loc: The middle of somewhere else.

Parky60 wrote:

And you're a liar. My wife worked for an employer where it wasn't mandatory to join the union and my state is a closed-shop state.

Even the federal employees union is not mandatory membership.

microphor Loc: Home is TN

Kevyn wrote:

Apples and Oranges, they offer a public accommodation and discriminate.

Faith trumps sexuality. They choose not to attend or cater to your wedding.

Marty 2020 Loc: Banana Republic of Kalifornia

microphor wrote:

Faith trumps sexuality. They choose not to attend or cater to your wedding.

Wh**ever happened to the sign that said,
“We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”!

microphor Loc: Home is TN

Marty 2020 wrote:

Wh**ever happened to the sign that said,
“We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”!

I thought about that myself before I posted. This is the conclusion I came to. That's only ok if the left is refusing service, if a Conservative and/or Christian refused service, the left has to make it about some kind of discrimination . They don't to live by their on rules, they just want everybody else to!

microphor Loc: Home is TN

Kevyn wrote:

It is not legal because it provides management the means to undermine majority elected collective bargaining

I never met a union official who wasn't setting pretty with his nice cars, big house and money in the bank but I have crossed a picket line in order to feed my kids and make my mortgage payment. Unions are not what they use to be, they are just big business representing themselves at the cost of the working man. Not to worry, they'll throw you a crumb though!

CounterRevolutionary

microphor wrote:

I never met a union official who wasn't setting pretty with his nice cars, big house and money in the bank but I have crossed a picket line in order to feed my kids and make my mortgage payment. Unions are not what they use to be, they are just big business representing themselves at the cost of the working man. Not to worry, they'll throw you a crumb though!

The National Right to Work Act protects workers from Labor Union leaders who are either dysfunctional, or a den of thieves by letting the workers control the purse strings and throw out bad unions or bad leaders. Ending forced dues and forced membership gives the rank and file power to control labor leaders.

Back in 2006, the Office of Labor Management Standards (the police behind the Dept of Labor) arrested some 800 labor leaders and cohorts, indicted and convicted for stealing the PENSION FUNDS of THEIER OWN RANK AND FILE!

A more recent roundup came about just a year ago. I recommend the rank and file subscribe to the National Right to Work Committee and their Newsletter. It pays to stay informed.
https://nrtwc.org/category/nrtwc-newsletter/

Now the labor leaders are demanding a national bailout of pension funds. Does anybody smell a rat?