4 ms·

> Unions annoy me. Working conditions 75 years ago were truly deadly, and unions served a major purpose to humanize the work force. Just because a company isn'

by jxf 9y ago

> Unions annoy me. Working conditions 75 years ago were truly deadly, and unions served a major purpose to humanize the work force. Just because a company isn't literally trying to kill you or introduce hazardous conditions for the sake of maximizing profits doesn't mean that unions aren't useful. In a lot of cases, their very presence is inhibitory to regressions in the rights of employees. Do unions have problems? Yes, absolutely, and we shouldn't neglect those either. At the same time, scrapping them would be a very bad idea.

pg_is_a_butt 9y ago
do morons ask themselves questions so they can attempt a stale point in reverse? you're all idiots.
ThrowawayR2 9y ago
> Do unions have problems? Yes, absolutely, and we shouldn't neglect those either. At the same time, scrapping them would be a very bad idea. Existing unions are not taking much in the way of steps to address those problems or clean up their image in the eyes of the public. Until unions can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is the welfare of the worker rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea.
- jxf 9y ago
  > Until unions can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is the welfare of the worker rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea. As I said, their presence is an inhibitor to regressions in employee rights. If you scrap them, the inhibition is removed, so you'd have to replace it with stronger employee protections in the form of regulations if you wanted to keep the status quo for rights. That's a bell that can't be easily unrung. I would think carefully about whether we want to introduce government-mandated rules into each industry about what is appropriate, as opposed to having the efficiency of self-regulation and negotiations.
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    Realistically that would not happen because the only significant advocacy group for better labor laws for employees is... well, guess.
- verbify 9y ago
  You could say the same about many other public institutions. To demonstrate: The media seems more interested in sensationalist irrelevant news than informing the public (it pays better). Until the media can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is informing the public rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea.
  - ythn 9y ago
    > Until the media can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is informing the public rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea. I... I agree with that statement...
    - freehunter 9y ago
      Good, let's just throw away the first amendment. Only government-sanctioned news can be broadcast from now on, and the sitting administration gets to appoint who heads up the department that determines what real news is.
    - Qantourisc 9y ago
      You might need to clarify if you actually mean scrapping them by law, or just as a general personal scrapping. Some people seem to assume by law.
- verbify 9y ago
  You could say the same about many other public institutions. To demonstrate: The media seems more interested in sensationalist irrelevant news than informing the public (it pays better). Until the media can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is informing the public rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea.
vacri 9y ago
Unions are a necessary evil in my opinion. Haven't had a positive experience with them in my own life[1], but life without unions has been done (a lot), and it sucks. [1] The first of these was telling the team I was on that because we were part-timers, we wouldn't get union resources allocated to resolve an issue we had. Funny that, we didn't pay 'part-time' dues, and our work was still just as necessary to putting food in our bellies.

by jxf 9y ago

pg_is_a_butt 9y ago

do morons ask themselves questions so they can attempt a stale point in reverse? you're all idiots.

ThrowawayR2 9y ago

> Do unions have problems? Yes, absolutely, and we shouldn't neglect those either. At the same time, scrapping them would be a very bad idea. Existing unions are not taking much in the way of steps to address those problems or clean up their image in the eyes of the public. Until unions can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is the welfare of the worker rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea.

jxf 9y ago
> Until unions can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is the welfare of the worker rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea. As I said, their presence is an inhibitor to regressions in employee rights. If you scrap them, the inhibition is removed, so you'd have to replace it with stronger employee protections in the form of regulations if you wanted to keep the status quo for rights. That's a bell that can't be easily unrung. I would think carefully about whether we want to introduce government-mandated rules into each industry about what is appropriate, as opposed to having the efficiency of self-regulation and negotiations.
- emodendroket 9y ago
  Realistically that would not happen because the only significant advocacy group for better labor laws for employees is... well, guess.
verbify 9y ago
You could say the same about many other public institutions. To demonstrate: The media seems more interested in sensationalist irrelevant news than informing the public (it pays better). Until the media can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is informing the public rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea.
- ythn 9y ago
  > Until the media can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is informing the public rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea. I... I agree with that statement...
  - freehunter 9y ago
    Good, let's just throw away the first amendment. Only government-sanctioned news can be broadcast from now on, and the sitting administration gets to appoint who heads up the department that determines what real news is.
  - Qantourisc 9y ago
    You might need to clarify if you actually mean scrapping them by law, or just as a general personal scrapping. Some people seem to assume by law.
verbify 9y ago
You could say the same about many other public institutions. To demonstrate: The media seems more interested in sensationalist irrelevant news than informing the public (it pays better). Until the media can once again demonstrate openly and conclusively that their primary concern is informing the public rather than just being another power player jockeying to get their share of the pie, scrapping them would be a very good idea.

vacri 9y ago

Unions are a necessary evil in my opinion. Haven't had a positive experience with them in my own life[1], but life without unions has been done (a lot), and it sucks. [1] The first of these was telling the team I was on that because we were part-timers, we wouldn't get union resources allocated to resolve an issue we had. Funny that, we didn't pay 'part-time' dues, and our work was still just as necessary to putting food in our bellies.