Public Employee Unions Must Be Crushed !

[999969999]

Another good reason to hate unions...

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

[999969999]

Privatizing and outsourcing of government jobs is another great way to kill off the unions...

http://www.kpho.com/local-video/inde...deo_id=4602199

[clocker]

9, the fact is, you don't have enough information to either "hate" or approve of unions.
90% of your posts are unfiltered Fox newspap and the remaining 10% are clueless in the extreme.

You wanna outsource government jobs, eh?
Say, turn the fire department over to the same folks who perform Comcast home service?
Good luck with that.

[mjmacky]

Privatizing and outsourcing of government jobs is another great way to kill off the unions...

Rentacops can become the actual police force (your new well below average mercenary protector and server)
FedUPS becomes your new postal carrier, $7.50 to mail in your payment for the electric bill
Child Services can now be managed by a mega corporation, that would naturally turn it into a child sex slave trade

Sounds ridiculous, but without government jobs, all of those services would be for profit, the real alternatives could be far worse

[Skiz]

More union is not the answer.

We wouldn't be in this pickle if it were not for the union in the first place. Call me crazy but having ALL employees paying a relatively equal percentage of their health benefits in order for ALL employees to receive raises based on a balanced scorecard consisting of performance, effectiveness, etc. seems mighty fair to me.

Your company is not paying you, or the union employees, based on profits. Without the unions, your company would be abusing you AND them. Union membership does not guarantee poor performance from employees, but non-union employees almost universally equates to abuses by companies. The fact that union members are working for the same company as you, and have received better treatment than you, indicates that your company will never be any more fair than it is forced to be.

If union members were required to pay for their benefits, it would not mean a reduction in your dues, nor an increase in your pay- simply an increase in company profits. Would this make you any happier? You may think you are on the same side as the company, but when it comes to profits, you are NOT on their side- you are simply a salary to pay (a cost who would be replaced if a cheaper/more efficient alternative became available). If you think you are on their side, ask for a bigger cut of those profits, then tell me which side you are on...

To think that corporations pay employees based on profit is absurd. Salaries and pay rates are almost solely a demand-driven market, like most things in this world, as they should be. A good example is what's going on with the police in Austin. They're all puffed up about wanting a pay raise, but there's a 2-3 year waiting list just to get in the cadet school due to the overwhelming amount of applicants trying to get in. Should the policemans union win out by muscling the taxpayers into settling, or should the fair market dictate an appropriate salary by saying, 'wait a minute, we must be paying these guys fairly since there are thousands of people lined up ready to do this job at the current starting salary rate'.

The quote is also quite a blanket statement considering you know absolutely zip about my corporation, our policies, or our pay scale. To show you how wrong you are, the average length of employment (last years statistic) is 22 years. I've found by shopping around a bit, that I've not been able to find anything that can top what I'm currently offered. "Taken advantage of"? "Abused"? You have no idea what you're talking about. I have great benefits that are the envy of anyone I know. It's great to hear at a doctors office, "Oh... wow... you have wonderful coverage." We have stock options year 'round, profit sharing, management incentive plans, tuition reimbursement up to $4,000/year, an actual pension plan (which is extremely rare these days). Nearly all of these are programs are offered exclusively to non-union employees of the company.

I also don't pay dues, so when you keep saying that I do, you're again, incorrect. Even when I was an hourly employee I still never paid dues as I never wanted to be a member of the union.

[clocker]

Skiz, the only reason your company offers benefits to the non-union employees is they're afraid you'll unionize if they don't.
Lose the union and you all lose the benefits.

[Skiz]

By that methodology, all non-union corps, business, shops, warehouses, etc would have no benefits/perks, but that's far from reality.

Of all my friends and acquaintances, I'm the only person who works for a company that has any union of any kind in any capacity, yet they all have good perks, vacations, and benefits.

[clocker]

Really?
They have six weeks of vacation, fully paid health care and education, maternity/caregiver leave, etc.?
Good for you and them then.

[999969999]

9, the fact is, you don't have enough information to either "hate" or approve of unions.
90% of your posts are unfiltered Fox newspap and the remaining 10% are clueless in the extreme.

You wanna outsource government jobs, eh?
Say, turn the fire department over to the same folks who perform Comcast home service?
Good luck with that.

You don't know much about Arizona, do you?

http://www.rmfire.com/aboutus.html

[mjmacky]

You don't know much about Arizona, do you?

http://www.rmfire.com/aboutus.html

You make it sound like volunteer fire departments and the like are unique to Arizona. They occur around the country in more rural areas where local budgets can't afford more fire departments/staff/trucks. However, they do need funds to operate. Since you're so fond of overly politicized stories, here you go:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_750272.html