Public Employee Unions Must Be Crushed !

[devilsadvocate]

Take your pick; it applies to both. :


How? just saying it's so doesn't make it so. Explain exactly what the pickle is and how it's the Unions fault.

That's not what I'm talking about. A mechanic fixes the car. The customer is paying to have his car fixed, not the person watching over the mechanic. The mechanic is the one generating money for the company. The other staff may be a needed part of a team, but they are not generating money.

That's just silly. I won't even entertain that logic.

Ah, the sidestep.

You are going to have to clear this up. Are you in a debt recovery dept. or do you bring old customers back?

If it's the latter then you can claim your dept. (if not you specifically in your role as supervisor) generates revenue. If it's the first then that loss prevention not revenue generating.

Are you actually trying to tell me what my job is? You're incorrect on both assumptions.

My job is very intricate and not really something I want to get into in this thread or any other.

You raised the subject. I have no doubt you are a cog in the machine. I just doubt your job actually generates revenue.

If every supervisor in your dept. was off work sick, but the people under you continued to do their job ( because you have quality staff ) would your dept. lose money, make more or be pretty much the same?

[Snee]

Take your pick; it applies to both. :


How? just saying it's so doesn't make it so. Explain exactly what the pickle is and how it's the Unions fault.



That's just silly. I won't even entertain that logic.

Ah, the sidestep.

You are going to have to clear this up. Are you in a debt recovery dept. or do you bring old customers back?

If it's the latter then you can claim your dept. (if not you specifically in your role as supervisor) generates revenue. If it's the first then that loss prevention not revenue generating.

Are you actually trying to tell me what my job is? You're incorrect on both assumptions.

My job is very intricate and not really something I want to get into in this thread or any other.

You raised the subject. I have no doubt you are a cog in the machine. I just doubt your job actually generates revenue.

If every supervisor in your dept. was off work sick, but the people under you continued to do their job ( because you have quality staff ) would your dept. lose money, make more or be pretty much the same?

Since they're all in a union, I think it's implied they'd all show up and then sit there picking their noses or something if no one is watching. Quality staff or not.

[clocker]

Certainly, anyone who has ever dealt with a union (as I did when doing trade show graphics) can supply endless stories about sloth and convoluted rules ("No, you can't plug in that light, you need a union electrician to come do it for you").

What I find interesting is that the right now wants to "crush" unions because of the obvious flaws in the process (and the illusory "drag on the economy" they supposedly engender) but other players in the system (like banks!) get a free pass and are even shielded from criticism.

Are unions really the biggest problem we face, or are they simply the fattest, lowest hanging fruit on a tree that is corrupt to the apex?
Is it any surprise that unions are among the biggest Democratic supporters and are the focus on supposedly sincere deficit hawks ire?
No, it isn't.

The war against unions is simply a naked political attack on the left, disguised as responsible economic policy.
It's a sham, we're getting screwed.

[999969999]

Since they're all in a union, I think it's implied they'd all show up and then sit there picking their noses or something if no one is watching. Quality staff or not.

Ha ha ha!

[999969999]

Certainly, anyone who has ever dealt with a union (as I did when doing trade show graphics) can supply endless stories about sloth and convoluted rules ("No, you can't plug in that light, you need a union electrician to come do it for you").

What I find interesting is that the right now wants to "crush" unions because of the obvious flaws in the process (and the illusory "drag on the economy" they supposedly engender)

It's not an illusion. Unions have been so successul-- perhaps too successful-- at getting higher salaries, better working conditions, job security, and some might say ridiculously lavish benefits, that we cannot compete with hardly anyone else in the world, even when you figure in the high cost of shipping the products to us over the ocean.

We already have federal labor laws that would prevent most of the abuses from the 1800s and early 1900s which gave rise to the unions. They are no longer needed, and they are dragging us down.


but other players in the system (like banks!) get a free pass and are even shielded from criticism.

True conservatives, such as the Tea Party are critical of them.


Are unions really the biggest problem we face, or are they simply the fattest, lowest hanging fruit on a tree that is corrupt to the apex?

If we could completely get rid of all unions, not just public employee unions, get rid of the E.P.A., change the law to make lawsuits from groups such as the Sierra Club much more difficult for them, and bring back tariffs, we might be able to turn around the manufacturing base of our economy and ultimately solve our budget problems through having a robust economy.

As a nation of consumers, we are spending more money on foreign goods than we take in from exports. This trade deficit is ultimately why we are in this mess. We cannot continue to spend more than we take in. The federal government and state governments are doing the same thing, but they are just symptoms of the underlying problem.

Is it any surprise that unions are among the biggest Democratic supporters and are the focus on supposedly sincere deficit hawks ire?
No, it isn't.

The war against unions is simply a naked political attack on the left, disguised as responsible economic policy.

Is it right for the taxpayers to pay for the unions to turn around and bargain against the taxpayers for higher and higher salaries and benefits? I don't think so. Is it right for a leftist organization to use taxpayer money to fund the Democrat party? I don't think so. Is it right to have a system where the union members know that voting for Democrats is the same thing as voting themselves a raise? I don't think so.

It's a sham, we're getting screwed.

Yes, by the unions.

...

[devilsadvocate]

Is it right for the taxpayers to pay for the unions to turn around and bargain against the taxpayers for higher and higher salaries and benefits? I don't think so. Is it right for a leftist organization to use taxpayer money to fund the Democrat party? I don't think so. Is it right to have a system where the union members know that voting for Democrats is the same thing as voting themselves a raise? I don't think so.

Not even 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon
The workers pay for the union, not the taxpayer.

The taxpayer pays for a service (work). Once that work is received the money has nothing to do with the taxpayer. If you want to tie every expense that the worker pays out of their own wages to the employer then perhaps we should go after churches, because I'm sure many government workers tithe.

How about this. John has a government job. He is payed by money raised from tax. He goes to the store and buys some beef. The store restocks with beef from your family ranch. The money from the sale goes to pay for your car.

Why the fuck is the taxpayer paying for your car?

[devilsadvocate]

I tell you what is taking the taxpayer for a ride and need to be stopped. Public employees that pay $5355 per year for 4 years then receive a pension of $26,600 annually for life. This is right away after 4 years employment, not wait until retirement age.

[j2k4]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kxc6...layer_embedded

[bigboab]

Kev! If you are going to watch cartoons, watch funny ones. Wait a minute....

It is a very hard job to evaluate teachers unless all their pupils are the same age and have the same IQ level and the schools have the same facilities. Roughly speaking(I come from a rough area).

[999969999]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kxc6...layer_embedded

At 2:20 minutes into it, it gets to the issue of CHOICE. Perfect.

I hope Republicans will now start pushing for a voucher system which would finally make the public schools have to compete and permanently crush the teacher unions into oblivion.