Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 112
Thanks Tree71Thanks

Thread: Curtains for union coercion (Employee Rights Act)

  1. #91
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    14,262
    Thanks
    3821

    From
    AK

    Curtains for union coercion (Employee Rights Act)

    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    I guess you'd rather sacrifice the old to benefit the young?
    I just don't think there should be seniority clauses, and the pretense that unions do great things for those just starting out is inexcusable in light of their constant seniority preference.

    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    Insurance companies have so distorted the cost of health care, no one has a clue what the true cost is. I'm not talking about the cost of insurance company administration.

    Drug companies charge what the traffic will bare, and that means what insurance companies will pay.
    Should they have refused to pay claims? Or refuse to cover some types of care? If you acknowledge insurance admin contributing a relatively small piece of the cost pie, why continue Obama's 2010 smear campaign against insurance companies?

  2. #92
    Vexatious Correspondent Leo2's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,413
    Thanks
    3035

    From
    UK/Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post



    What does the "corporate sector" have to do with this?



    Again, what does that have to do with anything concerning this topic?


    Neither observation is completely irrelevant - as I understand it, the topic is the decertification of unions. The corporate sector and unions have been in opposition in every society since workers began organising. The aims of business owners and employees are usually diametrically opposed.

    Workers originally want unions primarily for defensive purposes -- to protect against what they see as arbitrary decisions, such as sudden wage cuts, lay-offs, or firings. They also want a way to force management to change what they see as dangerous working conditions or overly long hours. More generally, they want more certainty, which eventually means a contract that lasts for a specified period of time.

    Business owners, on the other hand, don't like unions for a variety of reasons. If they are going to compete successfully in an economy that can go boom or bust, then they need a great deal of flexibility in cutting wages, hiring and firing, and adding extra hours of work or trimming back work hours when need be.

    More generally, business owners are used to being in charge, and they don't want to be hassled by people they have come to think of as mere employees, not as breadwinners for their families or citizens of the same city and country.
    Who Rules America: The Rise and Fall of Labor Unions in the U.S.

    That labour unions have, on occasion, morphed into unrepresentative monsters, is not open to question, but that workers have benefitted in general from collective bargaining is equally obvious. That any society sees the above mentioned breadwinners as having fewer rights than the corporate sector is doubly regrettable, and pertinent to my observations vis a vis civilisation. The choice between being a mere military/industrial complex and a civilisation is always yours.
    Thanks from labrea

  3. #93
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    30,366
    Thanks
    23927

    From
    On a hill
    Government only has the means human beings give it.

    Conservatives, who now control government in Washington, and want to shrink government down to a size that it can be drowned in a bath tub, arent big on providing means.

  4. #94
    Conservatively Liberal NiteGuy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    17,044
    Thanks
    12445

    From
    Teardrop City
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Lately I've been reading a lot of collective bargaining agreements that strongly emphasize seniority clauses that tend to sacrifice the young for the benefit of the old and mandate, among other things, any layoffs, should they become necessary, to start with those who have the least seniority.
    I'm sorry, but what the fuck does your statement have to do with mine?

  5. #95
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    30,366
    Thanks
    23927

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    I just don't think there should be seniority clauses, and the pretense that unions do great things for those just starting out is inexcusable in light of their constant seniority preference.

    Should they have refused to pay claims? Or refuse to cover some types of care? If you acknowledge insurance admin contributing a relatively small piece of the cost pie, why continue Obama's 2010 smear campaign against insurance companies?
    Do you think the cost of administration is the only way insurance companies add to the cost of health care?

    Oh ye of little imagination...

  6. #96
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    14,262
    Thanks
    3821

    From
    AK
    Quote Originally Posted by Leo2 View Post
    Neither observation is completely irrelevant - as I understand it, the topic is the decertification of unions. The corporate sector and unions have been in opposition in every society since workers began organising. The aims of business owners and employees are usually diametrically opposed.
    Most unionism is public sector. The Employee Rights Act enables employees to exercise a right they already have, and have had for years, but which has been made impractical to exercise because of actions taken by unions and the NLRB.

    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    Government only has the means human beings give it.
    And we have given it the means.

    Conservatives, who now control government in Washington, and want to shrink government down to a size that it can be drowned in a bath tub, arent big on providing means.
    That may be. I'm not here promoting Republicans though. I'm here promoting the Employee Rights Act.

    Quote Originally Posted by NiteGuy View Post
    I'm sorry, but what the fuck does your statement have to do with mine?
    It has to do with your tangent about unions doing good things for up-and-coming workers because companies abandoned them. That was your diversion from the thread topic. I contend that unions do not do good things for newer workers because they are obsessed with seniority privilege. This explains part of why they are not good at attracting younger workers to their membership.

    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    Do you think the cost of administration is the only way insurance companies add to the cost of health care?

    Oh ye of little imagination...
    Cost of care grows indirectly when it's covered and paid for liberally, so to expect insurance companies to have controlled cost growth suggests insurance companies should have covered and paid for less health care in their insurance policies. This is not a notion Democrats What types of health care goods and services should insurance companies have refused to pay for over the years, in your opinion?
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 14th July 2017 at 10:28 AM.

  7. #97
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    30,366
    Thanks
    23927

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Most unionism is public sector. The Employee Rights Act enables employees to exercise a right they already have, and have had for years, but which has been made impractical to exercise because of actions taken by unions and the NLRB.



    And we have given it the means.



    That may be. I'm not here promoting Republicans though. I'm here promoting the Employee Rights Act.



    It has to do with your tangent about unions doing good things for up-and-coming workers because companies abandoned them. That was your diversion from the thread topic. I contend that unions do not do good things for newer workers because they are obsessed with seniority privilege. This explains part of why they are not good at attracting younger workers to their membership.



    Cost of care grows indirectly when it's covered and paid for liberally, so to expect insurance companies to have controlled cost growth suggests insurance companies should have covered less health care in their policies. What types of health care goods and services should insurance companies have refused to pay for over the years, in your opinion?
    It is not about covering healthcare per se, but about about who the provider is.

    One example is a drug available by prescription only at a cost $3,500 for a month supply. The patent drug is a combination of two drugs available over the counter at $40.00 for a month supply.

  8. #98
    Grumpy Metal Slug Champion Blah's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    22,917
    Thanks
    762

    From
    USA
    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    Our health care system has been fucked up for decades.it will continue to be fucked up as long as politicians turn themselves into pretzels to accommodate insurance providers, and regular pharmaceutical companies.
    And we have no politicians that will ever stop sucking up to big money... I mean the Democrats
    used to have people fooled into thinking they were different, but these days people realize that's
    a bunch of crap.
    Thanks from Jets

  9. #99
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    14,262
    Thanks
    3821

    From
    AK

    Curtains for union coercion (Employee Rights Act)

    Quote Originally Posted by Blah View Post
    And we have no politicians that will ever stop sucking up to big money... I mean the Democrats
    used to have people fooled into thinking they were different, but these days people realize that's a bunch of crap.
    I don't think a lot of them do realize it's a bunch of crap. Millennials, for example, are the only age cohort a majority of whom thinks favorably of unions, yet union membership among this cohort is at an all time low. Millennials are not joining unions. It's not hard to figure out why. Baby boomers are still hogging a lot of the jobs for one thing. For another, research has shown strong unions decrease public sector employment. For another, seniority clauses, which are virtually universal to all collective-bargaining agreements across the country, are cannibalistic and treat new entrants to the field like dog shit.

    Millennials do not look at the world and the future and think, "gosh, what I should really do is expect a 30 year career at which point I can retire with a pension." But unions cling to this bygone notion of employment being a 30 year career doing the same job and then retiring with inflation-adjusted pension payments for life. Who's going to get pensions? Not millennials. Who are unions going to make goddamned certain pay for all the pensions? Millennials.

    So while it is not difficult to understand why millennials are not actually joining unions themselves, what remains peculiar is their apparent unwavering ideological support for the notion of unions. I think this is a testament to the effectiveness of union propaganda. Union propaganda is unrelenting in its attack on all employers generally, all management generally. No matter the type of organization or how it's run, "management" is necessarily bad and evil and greedy and unscrupulous and that is allegedly why millennials are suffering economically. If only the minimum wage would be hiked, if only paid family leave were passed, then millennials would be all set. This is of course complete bullshit and laughably stupid, but millennials accept it as gospel and haven't figured it out yet.

    Millennials are not across-the-board stupid, but when it comes to their gullible acceptance of the Democratic Party and union storyline, they are exceedingly naïve and ignorant.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 12th August 2017 at 09:42 AM.

  10. #100
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    30,497
    Thanks
    7848

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by Panzareta View Post
    Shitler will be very very happy.

    Why would YOU want to get rid of anything hanging around others necks? Does anyone make you apply for a job that has union representation?
    Yes Socialists like Hitler love unions until they come to power and no longer need unions.

Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 29
    Last Post: 6th November 2015, 07:16 AM
  2. WI Supreme court upholds 2011 union rights law
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 31st July 2014, 10:40 AM
  3. Judge strikes down Wis. law limiting union rights
    By steezer in forum Current Events
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 22nd September 2012, 12:27 PM
  4. Poll: Americans favor union bargaining rights
    By TennesseeRain in forum Current Events
    Replies: 211
    Last Post: 6th March 2011, 02:40 AM
  5. Americans favor union bargaining rights according to poll
    By Tedminator in forum Opinion Polls
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 28th February 2011, 10:28 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed