Tea Party activists attack union members in Michigan

Now I've heard everything....

Unions have a place but the world has changed since the early twentieth century. If unions are so unquestionably good, why are they unwilling to be optional?

 

I never said they are unquestionably good. But they did negotiate the conditions, benefits and salary of that firefighter.

Do you deny it?

 

I guess they did; I don't know the particulars of the situation... apparently he had no choice in the matter and who can say what any agreement would be? As I recall his main gripe was the unrealistic benefit demands that the unions hold out for.

 

That's my point. Any firefighter will get the wages and benefits agreed upon because of the work and negotiating the union did. What isn't fair is for others to reap those rewards while contributing zero to the union. What kind of "thank you" is that to the people who put in all the work and effort to get the firefighter his wages, benefits, safety equipment and working conditions.

I would be fine with not having to pay the union if any workers who didn't would have their paychecks and benefits stripped down to the first offer the municipality the firefighters work for put on the table that wasn't negotiated by the union. They could adjust slightly for inflation and cost of living since each new contract started at the spot lastly agreed upon with the union.

 

Yeah, that doesn't stop your plutocrat friends from trying to recreate 1895. Tell you what: I'll trade you unions for plutocrats, straight up.

 

We still have unions in right to work states like Texas.

 

This. I'm for right to work, but I'm not against unions. This pretty much sums up my opinion on the subject.

 

Interesting numbers, but I think there might be some skew in there since I believe all of the northeast is union. Is that correct?

edit...There is another important missing factor in those numbers. Cost of living in union v right to work states is higher. 117 in union states v 94.5 in right to work states. It would seem that workers in right to work states have more buying power than union states.

 

I don't know about all of the northeast. But I do know Unions are much stronger in that part of the nation. It might skew the salary numbers, but it doesn't really skew the workplace death numbers, the people who are insured, and insured through their workplace, and I think it would have an almost opposite skewing on the increased level of poverty in right to work states.

 

Yeah those numbers certainly are more favorable in union states.

 

Right to work in turquoise

 

Why pay for something if you don't have to? Free riders...

 

I am curious.... will Obamacare make up for a good amount of gap in healthcare benefits between RTW and union states?

 

I'm noticing a pattern here lately....

Looking at FB's numbers, is it far off the mark to observe that, in effect, these unions are negotiating a pay increase that is absorbed by their own dues? Somewhere I read $1900 more per year; this guy had about $200/month in dues.....

Cost of living fluctuations make these kinds of things hard to analyze casually.

 

You see what you want to see... are you stating that the total benefits that labor unions provide their members is equal to their union dues? You have a pattern of making these vague unsubstantiated claims and float them out there.

I suppose it is possible, but I can find no evidence that your assertion is accurate for a majority of unions, or even a minority.. Therefore it is really irrelevant.

 

My "vague unsubstantiated claims" are backed by a tidal surge in the direction of preference for right to work-- meaning a right to NOT have to be a member of any particular union to hold a particular job.

Your smarminess is what is irrelevant! :grin:

 

It's probably closer to the $500 a year range for most union workers. $2000 a year would be on the very high end. Just google it.

 

Even this anti-union group puts average annual union dues at $400.

http://www.anh.com/Content/The_Cost_of_Unions.asp

 

FB, do you know if the stated wages you listed are before or after union dues? I mean, if avg union dues for the avg worker are $500, could you just say then that net, the avg worker makes $1040 more per year in union dues?

Not being hostile, just interested in the conversation.

 

Deliberately agitate a crowd in order to provoke a response, then play the victim. Cute.

But this is the only way the GOP can push their agenda through, by using cheesy procedural tactics. The fact that they have to resort to this shows that they are losing. Just like jury rigging congressional districts, lies and cheating are all they have left. The last gasp of an dying political party.