America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 11 years ago by jpotts. 43 replies replies.
I'd never thought I'd see this happen...
jpotts Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 06-14-2006
Posts: 28,811
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121207/POLITICS02/212070366/Right-work-bills-pass-Lansing?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Right-to-work bills pass in Lansing

December 7, 2012 at 9:35 am
Karen Bouffard and Chad Livengood
Detroit News


Lansing — The birthplace of the nation's modern-day labor movement moved closer to becoming the nation's 24th right-to-work state after bills Gov. Rick Snyder vowed to sign into law passed their first hurdles in the Republican-controlled Legislature on Thursday.

The House and Senate each passed bills on the same day they were introduced that give private and public sector workers the right to avoid paying union dues in an organized workplace. Only police officers and firefighters would be exempt.

The package can't reach final completion until at least Tuesday because of procedural rules that require a five-day layover for two of the bills before they can be voted on in the other chamber.

That gives opponents more time to lobby against the legislation, like they did Thursday starting in the early morning when word spread the bills would be introduced, to late evening when the Senate finally adjourned.





Of course, there is no provision in there to prevent union thugs from harassing and/or assaulting people who don't want to be a part of their criminal enterprise. However, this is a good start...
HockeyDad Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,199
That crappy state should already have laws against harassment and assault.
jpotts Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 06-14-2006
Posts: 28,811
HockeyDad wrote:
That crappy state should already have laws against harassment and assault.



Sorry, those were sold off to Kansas so that they could keep Detroit aflot for another month.


(In reality, the funds only lasted a week).
sd72 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
Corporations win.

America loses.
HockeyDad Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,199
sd72 wrote:
Corporations win.

America loses.



Buy out the corporations! (Just like that union is doing with Hostess. Oh wait...they went goose hunting instead)
jpotts Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-14-2006
Posts: 28,811
sd72 wrote:
Corporations win.

America loses.


Really?

A family friend of ours poured basments for a living. He was good at it. He worked hard at it. He employed a couple of people and built up a small, respectable business around his trade.

But he didn't join the union. He didn't want the union negotiating his time for him. Moreover, he didn't want the union taking a cut of his money when they a) did nothing to help him, and b) only got in his way.

Well the union found out about this. They did the following:

a) destroyed or damaged his equipment,
b) took him to court, took virtually all of his savings, purt a lien on his business for back union dues,
c) harassed his customers, drove away his business,
d) harassed him, harassed his wife, harassed his employees and their families. They threatened all of them with bodily harm.

After suffering a heart attack, the guy is basically broke. Because of the heart attack, he can no longer do hard labor (in addition to owning the business, he had to work it as well because it was a small venture). Since his savings are gone - thanks to the unions - he had nothing to fall back on. He lost his business, his house, his cars...basically everything.

You want to take a good look at what "good" unions have done for our country? Well, take a look at GM, Chrysler, Detroit, and Flint.

Unions have been RIFE corruption, and infiltrated by organized crime since their inception. From Lucky Luciono and the Longshore workers unions, to Jimmy Hoffa's ties to the mob, all the way to the present day.




Frankly, in your feeble-minded scenario, I'll side with the corporations, thanks. If unions are America, "winning," then this nation is doomed.
sd72 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
Yup. People living in company towns, paid with chits only good in company stores, living in company housing, and working 16 hour days was better.
How do you think unions came about?

Company's drove people to stand together, and form unions.

Unions took the ball and ran it into corruption, and waste.

Guess what happens now? Do you see a pattern?the government is reactive, and won't enforce any type of worker protection from the company's who are about to cash in on all of us. Well all be paying for the pension funds that are insured by the Feds that are about to lose member funding. And well pay for it with about $8 an hour average pay.

Sorry about your buddy jpotts, I'm sure the big bad unions had nothing better to do than run a small owner operator business in to the ground for fear of going under because of him. Easy to blame failure on everything but what's in the mirror.
HockeyDad Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,199
sd72 wrote:
Easy to blame failure on everything but what's in the mirror.




You mean like blaming the corporations?
sd72 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
I don't blame them. Michigan will be non union and ill either move, or become my own corp. haven't decided yet. Gotta make choices based on what's available, I won't blame anyone or thing for my own well being. Maybe this is the kick in the pants I needed.
Abrignac Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,367
sd72 wrote:
Yup. People living in company towns, paid with chits only good in company stores, living in company housing, and working 16 hour days was better.
How do you think unions came about?

Company's drove people to stand together, and form unions.

Unions took the ball and ran it into corruption, and waste.

Guess what happens now? Do you see a pattern?the government is reactive, and won't enforce any type of worker protection from the company's who are about to cash in on all of us. Well all be paying for the pension funds that are insured by the Feds that are about to lose member funding. And well pay for it with about $8 an hour average pay.

Sorry about your buddy jpotts, I'm sure the big bad unions had nothing better to do than run a small owner operator business in to the ground for fear of going under because of him. Easy to blame failure on everything but what's in the mirror.


Excellent points.

There was a need for unions during the industrial revolution. But, as with government corruption has turned some unions into monsters as bad as those they replaced.
tailgater Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
sd72 wrote:
Yup. People living in company towns, paid with chits only good in company stores, living in company housing, and working 16 hour days was better.
How do you think unions came about?

Company's drove people to stand together, and form unions.

Unions took the ball and ran it into corruption, and waste.

Guess what happens now? Do you see a pattern?the government is reactive, and won't enforce any type of worker protection from the company's who are about to cash in on all of us. Well all be paying for the pension funds that are insured by the Feds that are about to lose member funding. And well pay for it with about $8 an hour average pay.

Sorry about your buddy jpotts, I'm sure the big bad unions had nothing better to do than run a small owner operator business in to the ground for fear of going under because of him. Easy to blame failure on everything but what's in the mirror.


YES!
Unions were good in Nineteen hundred so they must be good in two thousand!!

And while we're at it, let's go back to the horse and buggy and Obama's bayonets.



OK. That was sarcastic.

Let me ask you, if you truly believe everything you wrote above, please explain why there are public unions?
Teachers unions?

sd72 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
I'm well aware of how bad unions can be. Also how much corporations will bilk an employee in a quest to be the next richest in the world.

My point, as its been so many times here, is without a "group" to stand for workers rights as a whole, there will be no rights. Except for take what I give you or out the door you go. And what will be offered, will be enough to qualify for government aide while working 40 hrs. Or 29hrs as the case may be due to obamacare.

As far as teachers unions, I've never been in one. Private schools or public schools should be funded by the parents of the kids in them at the time. I've never related to paying school taxes for kids I didn't have.

Police/ firefighters? Don't know.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,590
sd72 wrote:
I'm well aware of how bad unions can be. Also how much corporations will bilk an employee in a quest to be the next richest in the world.

My point, as its been so many times here, is without a "group" to stand for workers rights as a whole, there will be no rights. Except for take what I give you or out the door you go. And what will be offered, will be enough to qualify for government aide while working 40 hrs. Or 29hrs as the case may be due to obamacare.

As far as teachers unions, I've never been in one. Private schools or public schools should be funded by the parents of the kids in them at the time. I've never related to paying school taxes for kids I didn't have.

Police/ firefighters? Don't know.



Really...that's ALL you got? For ****'s sake you forgot about putting 4 year old's to work in the coal mines!

Like it was already mentioned...1900 was a long time ago...we're NOT going back to it...well, we might when we go off the cliff...but whatever at least you'll have a sweet union steward bumping you to the curb so he can protect his!
tailgater Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
sd72 wrote:
I'm well aware of how bad unions can be. Also how much corporations will bilk an employee in a quest to be the next richest in the world.

My point, as its been so many times here, is without a "group" to stand for workers rights as a whole, there will be no rights. Except for take what I give you or out the door you go. And what will be offered, will be enough to qualify for government aide while working 40 hrs. Or 29hrs as the case may be due to obamacare.




No rights?

How about those who don't want a union, but are forced into it? They have no rights either.

I'll be honest: if I were in a skilled trade that required union participation, I'd be furious because the union would keep me DOWN.

I know I'd be able to earn more without their tenure and without their interference.
But the union thugs group the worst workers with the best and makes the same rules for all.

Are those the "rights' you're speaking of?



sd72 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
You obviously have no clue about unions other than what you learned here.

You won't earn over 100,000 as an employed tradesman working for a company whose non union. Is that being held down?

You always have a choice, I could do what I do non union. Just not at my current company. I'd have to pick from a thousand other ones.
HockeyDad Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,199
sd72 wrote:
You won't earn over 100,000 as an employed tradesman working for a company whose non union. Is that being held down?



If you earn over 100,000 as an employed tradesman working for a company whose is union, where does that company get that money from?

If you can't get that kind of money as non-union, are you worth that kind of money?
sd72 Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
It comes from customers.

No one is worth any more or less than what they can get. There's someone out there who will do your job for less too.

Unions set the wage and the company hires who they want. And can lay off any one at any time with no repercussion. That's how construction unions work in Michigan. Only my wage is protected.
ZRX1200 Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,673
These forums are a vast wealth of knowledge and intellect.


I'm outraged.
edin508 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 06-19-2012
Posts: 4,647
sd72 wrote:

Sorry about your buddy jpotts, I'm sure the big bad unions had nothing better to do than run a small owner operator business in to the ground for fear of going under because of him. Easy to blame failure on everything but what's in the mirror.

Where I work, it is me, the boss, and 2 apprentices. They (union guys) came onto my job site and slashed my tire. Then into my job site and started making threats. Why? Because we were working in "their area", so they say.
Sorry sd, It has nothing to do with the Union thinking we are going to run them into the ground. It has to do with the Union not wanting anyone else but them working, us or them attitude. Banners, blow up giant rats, yep, they were all there. They also thought it was funny to keep hitting the pedestrian cross walk light constantly to f up traffic in front of my site. The PD had to show up and threaten to arrest anyone that would not leave.
I just want to work and earn a paycheck, leave me alone! I have a family too. That tire cost me $225 that I didn't have to spend on that crap.
HockeyDad Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,199
sd72 wrote:
It comes from customers.

No one is worth any more or less than what they can get. There's someone out there who will do your job for less too.

Unions set the wage and the company hires who they want. And can lay off any one at any time with no repercussion. That's how construction unions work in Michigan. Only my wage is protected.




Your wage is only protected if the golden goose is not killed. It is all based on hoping the evil companies can pass on the cost to their customers. When they can't, Hostess goes out of business.

DrMaddVibe Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,590
And that sweet syrup called "Dues" isn't being tossed toward the DNC anymore. That rich blood will dry up and there will be lamentation in the party when they can't tap your awesome amazing paycheck anymore!

OH, the huge manatees!horse

Grow a pair.

You already said you're worth what a company will pay you. You've become soft and believe you're entitled to more. You already do less so don't act like you're busting your balls and productive. Wouldn't want to get in the way with all those breaks and work stoppages. Besides lunch is a daily visit to the local party store and then off to the park to chug down a couple 40's and fire up the chronic then it's back to the salt mines where you can maintain that high level of productivity that the company demands outta you and your champion union!
sd72 Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
I wanna work there ^^^^^
DrMaddVibe Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,590
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVmKyJXHXRE
DrMaddVibe Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,590
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YaQCsrDfdY
DrMaddVibe Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,590
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SSOoWy6opg
rfenst Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,447
Why are almost all the complaints about unions here posted by non-union workers and those who have likely never worked under a union or directly influenced by one? Could they really care about individual workers and groups of workers? Give me a break. We all know you don't give a crap.

No one is forced to work at a union job. They can quit and go elsewhere. No elsewhere? Tough ****. Find another line of work or join the reality that unions exist and that they are protected under the right of Freedom of Assembly. Make a choice. Adapt or don't adapt. That's Capitalism.

Nothing forces companies to hire union employees either. If they feel that the union collective bargaining results in higher labor costs than are appropriate, then they can either hire non-union workers, go do business elsewhere or simply shut down. No where else to go to? Capital investment will be lost by moving elsewhere? Tough ****. Should have planned better or "built a better mouse trap. That's Capitalism too.
.
Unions are nothing but Freedom of Assembly and the Capitalism everyone around here cries out for. Seems to me that those complaining the loudest are those who disagree with the political messages unions put out.
rfenst Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,447
HockeyDad wrote:
Your wage is only protected if the golden goose is not killed. It is all based on hoping the evil companies can pass on the cost to their customers. When they can't, Hostess goes out of business.



Stupid Hostess union workers should have taken whatever they could get in wages and benefits for now. They probably could have negotiated partial ownership or stock options. I wouldn't give a single one of them who went out on strike any unemployment benefits. They "played chicken' and lost. Too bad, so sad.
sd72 Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
rfenst,

I LOVE YOU

sd72
Abrignac Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,367
sd72 wrote:
rfenst,

I LOVE YOU

sd72



Love, exciting and new
Come Aboard. We're expecting you.

Frying pan
tailgater Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
sd72 wrote:
You obviously have no clue about unions other than what you learned here.

You won't earn over 100,000 as an employed tradesman working for a company whose non union. Is that being held down?

You always have a choice, I could do what I do non union. Just not at my current company. I'd have to pick from a thousand other ones.


First of all, my "clue" regarding unions is not from reading anything. I've dealt directly with unions. From automotive manufacturing facilities, to the teachers unions, to the union that Chicago's McCormick Place employ to set up trade shows.
Almost without fail, they bring out everything that is wrong with work ethic and powerful bureaucracy.

I am open and honest about my opinions towards unions. But I don't let it cloud my judgment on the workers themselves. More often then not, union workers are good people putting in honest work.

But there is an indoctrination that occurs that is not dissimilar to a cult mentality.
How else could you explain picket lines and the violence that occurs when they are crossed?
And why would the union brass support a below average worker of 10 years over a star performer of only 2?

My experience with unions prove them to be disruptive to a capitalistic society.

But as for your last sentence? You and I agree 100%.
You DO have a choice.
Right To Work is a concept to keep this reality.


DrMaddVibe Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,590
rfenst wrote:
Why are almost all the complaints about unions here posted by non-union workers and those who have likely never worked under a union or directly influenced by one? Could they really care about individual workers and groups of workers? Give me a break. We all know you don't give a crap.

No one is forced to work at a union job. They can quit and go elsewhere. No elsewhere? Tough ****. Find another line of work or join the reality that unions exist and that they are protected under the right of Freedom of Assembly. Make a choice. Adapt or don't adapt. That's Capitalism.

Nothing forces companies to hire union employees either. If they feel that the union collective bargaining results in higher labor costs than are appropriate, then they can either hire non-union workers, go do business elsewhere or simply shut down. No where else to go to? Capital investment will be lost by moving elsewhere? Tough ****. Should have planned better or "built a better mouse trap. That's Capitalism too.
.
Unions are nothing but Freedom of Assembly and the Capitalism everyone around here cries out for. Seems to me that those complaining the loudest are those who disagree with the political messages unions put out.




Robert, I can tell you've NEVER been in a union. Why? Because you're defending them.

The very first job I had was with Southern Bell. It was a union job. All the old-timers said I had it made and would be able to retire. I got on my first crew and the lead said I didn't have enough time with the company to drive the truck. Whatever. His boss? He wouldn't even talk to a guy that wasn't vested! What I saw there was enough to make me puke. Lazy assed grown men acting shiftless and like little babies. When AT&T was told to bust up the "monopoly" they had by a dirtbag named Judge Brown I had 3-1/2 years with the Can't Work Anyways (CWA) POS union. They took my dues and the one time we did go on strike it was a flippin joke the money we did get for looking like a complete moron holding up a sign walking up and down sidewalks. I didn't go back the next day and took a side job cutting wood and made twice as much money with pride and dignity. Hit the "Forward" button to where I got out of the US Army and I had 2 great job offers on the table. 1) take a job with Michigan Bell, but it was as an operator until a field position opened up or 2) with Electronic Data Systems, H. Ross Perot's company. Non-union, but I would be a copper/fiber technician on an emergency response and construction team. The money was almost the same. EDS was paying more. Which company do you think I went with? Yeah. The non-union company that up to that point had NEVER laid anyone off. It wasn't even an hour's thought with that one.

You can ignore companies that are forced to do the union thing like automotive manufacturing in Detroit where the above YouTubes I posted are a reality almost every tv ratings cycle. The skilled trades inside the plants are even worse! Places where they sleep, their own numbers rackets, when the winter ice and snow melts where they've plowed mountains in parking lots you can find hundreds of bottles, hypodermic needles and rolling paper debris EVERYWHERE! Don't give me that "Well, someone should tell somebody" narco speech because I've seen guys in management get beat up and their cars vandalized IN THE COMPANY PARKING LOTS!

Contrary to you explanation of what a union is...I offer a real life application where they force you to walk the plank, demand you pay dues so they can throw it to political parties with ideas I don't agree with and maintain a thug mentality within the ranks never getting better but protecting what they have and wanting MORE!

Been there...done that...and can tell you're full of crap on this one no matter how bad you want to spin it!
rfenst Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,447
Abrignac wrote:
Love, exciting and new
Come Aboard. We're expecting you.

Frying pan


You are so much a Romantic.
Beautiful cigar weather today, huh?
tailgater Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
rfenst wrote:
Why are almost all the complaints about unions here posted by non-union workers and those who have likely never worked under a union or directly influenced by one? Could they really care about individual workers and groups of workers? Give me a break. We all know you don't give a crap.

Maybe it's because only non-union workers haven't been brain washed to think they can only work if the teet of the union boss is wedged firmly in their mouth?
(OK, that's a bit sarcastic on my part. But it's the type of response your statement above deserves)


No one is forced to work at a union job. They can quit and go elsewhere. No elsewhere? Tough ****. Find another line of work or join the reality that unions exist and that they are protected under the right of Freedom of Assembly. Make a choice. Adapt or don't adapt. That's Capitalism.

I agree with this. But this is the very argument that I use to suggest that unions aren't needed. Union supporters claim that without their tough thug bosses negotiating their lot in life, they'd be broke and working in a dust filled coal mine. To that I say "tough sh*t". Find another job.
So you see, we agree on this one.


Nothing forces companies to hire union employees either. If they feel that the union collective bargaining results in higher labor costs than are appropriate, then they can either hire non-union workers, go do business elsewhere or simply shut down. No where else to go to? Capital investment will be lost by moving elsewhere? Tough ****. Should have planned better or "built a better mouse trap. That's Capitalism too.

You know this is rubbish. Hell, if it were as easy as hiring non-union, there would be no issues. Unions would have to be more flexible and the business/union relationship would thrive. If a company has a decision to hire union or be forced to move, you KNOW that's not a real decision. The argument is actually contradictory.

.
Unions are nothing but Freedom of Assembly and the Capitalism everyone around here cries out for. Seems to me that those complaining the loudest are those who disagree with the political messages unions put out.


While I disagree with the politics, my opinion of unions predate my political posturing. Unions have a right to exist, but likewise a company should have the right to hire non-union. It should be a two way street. Only then would the ridiculous actions by the unions cease to be a problem.



goodwrench Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 02-04-2004
Posts: 461
as a 28 year union teamster mechanic and way to many years as steward i feel i can talk about unions
way to much time and credibility is used to protect members that are a drag on other members and the company that hired them.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,590
goodwrench wrote:
as a 28 year union teamster mechanic and way to many years as steward i feel i can talk about unions
way to much time and credibility is used to protect members that are a drag on other members and the company that hired them.



Thank you for your honesty on this matter.

I don't begrudge anyone the ability to make what they can. What I cannot ignore is the fact that many many honest hard working people are forced to work for a union that they feel they're the square peg in the round hole. They cannot simply just walk away. The matter is much harder than that and to explain it away in simplistic terms demeans the actual truth behind the facade that there's some sort of "brotherhood" in it.

In a case like GM and Chrysler where they took taxpayer money only to promote this poor behavior is an outright crime but it's protected by people that will not prosecute the matter because of contracts.
engletl Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 12-26-2000
Posts: 26,493
goodwrench wrote:
as a 28 year union teamster mechanic and way to many years as steward i feel i can talk about unions
way to much time and credibility is used to protect members that are a drag on other members and the company that hired them.


So true...One of the many reasons I choose to leave the IBEW at my first chance (Thankfully Mississippi is a right to Work State)

@sd72 we have had this discussion before and your "theory" of non-union=lesser wages is BS once again. Here a non-union tradesman gets the same pay and benefits as the union guy does, except the non-union guy doesn't have to forfeit 3% of his paycheck to said union and be force-fed with liberal political BS constantly.

Since I work in the Military Industrial Complex, my job depends on a strong defense budget, that doesn't happen very well under pro-union democrat control.
sd72 Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
I don't think working in the military or federal complex where your pay is dictated at a minimum rate by the Davis-Bacon laws is a fair comparison to being union or non union, whether or not your employer pays at that minimum or above it.

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Union+Electhttp://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Union+Electricianrician

Salary search for the heading union electrician shows average income nationwide of $76000. Plus benefits.

Same search for all jobs with electrician in the title shows $34000 for the national average if you exclude any reference to unions.

You are making wages based on union wages to make bidding on federal work competitive for all bidders, since Mississippi doesn't have prevailing wage laws. Your company is directed to bid at a rate spelled out in its bid documents when it got the contract.

What would you make pulling wire in a new residential development, working for a non union contractor? Big difference.
engletl Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 12-26-2000
Posts: 26,493
sd72 wrote:
I don't think working in the military or federal complex where your pay is dictated at a minimum rate by the Davis-Bacon laws is a fair comparison to being union or non union, whether or not your employer pays at that minimum or above it.

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Union+Electhttp://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Union+Electricianrician

Salary search for the heading union electrician shows average income nationwide of $76000. Plus benefits.

Same search for all jobs with electrician in the title shows $34000 for the national average if you exclude any reference to unions.

You are making wages based on union wages to make bidding on federal work competitive for all bidders, since Mississippi doesn't have prevailing wage laws. Your company is directed to bid at a rate spelled out in its bid documents when it got the contract.

What would you make pulling wire in a new residential development, working for a non union contractor? Big difference.


Wrong answer...

seeing how we are a Private Company our pay is NOT dictated at a minimum rate (we ARE NOT military or Federal Complex) We are Shipbuilding!

Our Company IS NOT directed to bid at a rate spelled out in bid documents. Our labor rates are based on an escalation of our current labor rates. BTW I was a Marine Electrician now I just so happen to work New Business proposals in the Finance side of our Company. Costs are kept down by managing overheads efectively.

As for the "residential" rate...regardless of wether it is union or non-union I would be making about $6 less an hour as a First Class Electrician as compared to what I would be making if I was still a Tradesman...because once again, the Non-Union guy makes the same wages as the Union guy and even gets the same benefits as the Union guy still without having to give up 3% to the IBEW in this Right to Work state.


On a side note that National average salary is really a bunch of smoke and mirrors...one really needs to consider cost of living in relation to salary to really see a fair picture.
sd72 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
Fair enough.

I have got to learn to stick to cigars, and liquor around here.
sd72 Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
One more thing for Todd,

So I open a electrical contractor outfit in the 'sip. sd72 electric. I'm working with a builder, doing houses, the sub next door is union, I an NOT. Who says they're making the same thing less dues. As the owner, I don't hire people and pay them what I work out with each individual?
What if it was a carpentry company? There's some law that says, this is what company X pays an employee?
A remodel carpenter redoing your kitchen makes the same as a carpenter in the shipyard?

I never followed you when you said union and non union make the same, minus paying dues. How is this enforced? By whom?

No sarcasm, maybe I'm worried for nothing, becoming a right to work state. You make it sound like ill be getting a 5% raise when this happens, and lose no benny's.


engletl Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 12-26-2000
Posts: 26,493
You open a biz and offer/negotiate wages/beni's that are not competitive with the rest of the local wages then it won't matter if you are or aren't union as no-one will work for you for very long.

Currently working in the Shipyard is the way to go, Unless one is a highly skilled finish carpenter. Now if we get another devastating hurricane, that will skew the pay to the residential side for a few years, as it did after Katrina. There are no laws dictating (besides Fed Min Wage) what a Company has to pay an employee here.

When i was a Tradesman the only difference in my paycheck before and after I was in the Union were the dues that were deducted from my pay on a weekly basis. So when I left the IBEW I essentially received a 3% raise in my take home pay. My hourly rate of pay was the same regardless of Union membership or not ($18 an hour at the time) as were all my other benefits. No laws enforcing it besides the Right to Work laws.

what it all comes down to is if you work for Andrew Carnegie or a Company that actually tries to be fair to its employees
sd72 Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 03-09-2011
Posts: 9,600
Appreciate the reply. Thanks, have good one.
jpotts Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 06-14-2006
Posts: 28,811
sd72 wrote:
Yup. People living in company towns, paid with chits only good in company stores, living in company housing, and working 16 hour days was better.
How do you think unions came about?


Unions came about because of a new wave of socialist thinking imported from Europe.

Those company towns, company stores, and company housing came about because many of these people who joined these companies didn't have a pot to p*ss in, and had no means to provide form themelves. Back in those days, skilled trades were few, ans a huge majority of people were either farmers, or unskilled labors. Likewise those company towns were not located in suburbs - they were generally in remote areas. Someone had to provide food, clothing, and shelter for the people working the mines.

Your understanding of history is rather lacking.

sd72 wrote:
Company's drove people to stand together, and form unions.

Unions took the ball and ran it into corruption, and waste.


Virtually every union has been infiltrated by organized crime.

Nowadays, in Michigan, forced unionization if en vogue. If you provide dacare services, they tried to force you into a union. If you provide care for your own relatives in your homes, they made an attempt to unionize you (ballot in the last election cycle).

You are SO full of crap on this one, it is coming out of your ears.

I'd say something about "sleeping with the dogs and waking up with the fleas," but what else would you expect from a bunch or reprobate socialists?

sd72 wrote:
Guess what happens now? Do you see a pattern?the government is reactive, and won't enforce any type of worker protection from the company's who are about to cash in on all of us. Well all be paying for the pension funds that are insured by the Feds that are about to lose member funding. And well pay for it with about $8 an hour average pay.


Pfftth. You know *NOTHING* about what goes on with these unions in these "corporations trying to cash in on the rest of us." Yeah, like unions in the car companies don't slow down production to force OT, right? Or threaten you while you're in the plant if they think that what you're installing might "cost union jobs," right?

Yeah, GM is just doing stellar these days.

Most of the manufacturing that's moved out of Michigan has done so because of the cost of unionized labor. People expect to get a salary of $16.00 / hr, with benefits, and a pension when a three-year-old could do the job. Yeah, that's progress all right.

Speaking of "cashing in," ever seen the incomes of those top union "representatives?"

You are an idiot.

sd72 wrote:
Sorry about your buddy jpotts, I'm sure the big bad unions had nothing better to do than run a small owner operator business in to the ground for fear of going under because of him. Easy to blame failure on everything but what's in the mirror.


Yeah, because there's no telling what other union people might do when they see someone making a decent living pouring basements and NOT having to give up 15% of their income to a bunch of union idiots who rarely make good on their promises.

Unions, like the communist chineese, and the soviets don't want their people getting any funny ideas that they can forge their own destiny without them.
Users browsing this topic
Guest