"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...
Unions are never required. Every employee has the right to take
what
is
offered or go elsewhere. There is no hint of these chains being
unethical.
If there were no unions, the worker would still have the right to
go
elsewhere; but only to another nonunion environemnt where he will
be treated just as shabbily.
By what standard?
90% of the workforce is non-union.
The grocery clerks enjoy a much higher standard than most FULL TIME
employees.
If they are unhappy with their lot they need to get more education
and
different jobs.
Easily said, not always so easily done.
That there are unions, and laws allowing unions, is the reason
wages are decent, even for non union companies.
Prove it.
Common sense. It follows from the precepts of Capitalism,
competition and human nature.
Many non union companies offer wages higher than union rates,
just to keep the unions out. Those companies
are more afraid of the unions getting into work rules
and other aspects of managment prerogatives than
they are afraid of paying higher wages and benefits.
No, they are afraid of the endless bull**** about who isn't going to do
what.
A more crude way of saying exactly what I just said.
The unions have a long history of corruption and mismangement of things
like
pension funds.
So, corporations also have a long history of corruption, mismanagement,
stockholder fraud, bribery, and price fixing.
The only reason the Teamsters exist is because of Mafia connections and
Mafia muscle.
They only succeed in keeping people who are willing to work out.
Using your analogy, they can go find another job is one of the
90% (according to you) non union workplaces.
They never cease in trying to get more money for less work.
Hence the 40 hour work week and a decent standard of living in the USA.
You are the beneficiary of a century of American unionism.
These have nothing to do with unionism, they have everything to do with
productivity.
Grocery clerks are unskilled labor and are already being replaced. It
takes
about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike
are
going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest
bidder.
Like the slaves of yore.
Slaves had no choice clerks do.
Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're
worth in the marketplace.
What you are worth is a matter of what you are able
to negotiate.
Keying cars, slamming people's hands in doors and other acts of vandalism
are your idea of negotiation?
But, were it not for fear of unions, management would
not be so generous.
Management represents ownership. Ownership is a
conglomeration of many stock holding investors each owning a small
interest
in the
business. Management represents a lot of amassed economic power.
Workers can only deal with the power of management on an equitable
basis
if they are organized into one massed entity (the union), such as the
individual
stockholder interests are organized into one massed entity
(management).
Complete nonsense, 90% of the workforce does very well without unions, they
are able to aquire skills and negotiate on their own merits.
Oh, gang war. Bull****. People with skills in demand get paid well,
people
with skills that are readily available get paid less.
It's trogladytes like you that prevent me from taking the last step
in severing myself from the Democratic party and actually registering
as a Republican.
Unwarranted personal attack noted.
Don't let me stop you, I'm not a Republican.
I'm also not a Democrat.
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---