10 ms·

>This pattern isn't as simple to dismiss as "anti-union FUD", especially since it's seen among people who are already union members in closed shops. You act as

by tw04 9y ago

>This pattern isn't as simple to dismiss as "anti-union FUD", especially since it's seen among people who are already union members in closed shops. You act as though anti-union FUD can't affect members. That's kind of ridiculous... if it didn't affect MEMBERS as well as non-members, what would be the point? If I'm a less-educated union member who has no concept of what life was like before unions, and constantly hear that unions just take my money while providing no benefit, I'm probably likely to be swayed. What's the union going to do? Tell me about how 50 years ago companies would literally put my life at risk because there was no downside for them. And then the people financing the anti-union movement are spewing "Well that was 50 years ago, that would NEVER happen again" - all while doing everything they can to drive up hours, drive down safety, and insulate themselves from any responsibility RE: workman's comp. For the average joe who just wants to go to work and get a paycheck, the bigger picture is often lost.

chimeracoder 9y ago
> You act as though anti-union FUD can't affect members. That's kind of ridiculous... if it didn't affect MEMBERS as well as non-members, what would be the point? If I'm a less-educated union member who has no concept of what life was like before unions, and constantly hear that unions just take my money while providing no benefit, I'm probably likely to be swayed. What's the union going to do? Tell me about how 50 years ago companies would literally put my life at risk because there was no downside for them. And then the people financing the anti-union movement are spewing "Well that was 50 years ago, that would NEVER happen again" - all while doing everything they can to drive up hours, drive down safety, and insulate themselves from any responsibility RE: workman's comp. For the average joe who just wants to go to work and get a paycheck, the bigger picture is often lost. Honestly, it's rather patronizing to say that union members who disapprove of their union and want to decertify or deauthorize it must either be ignorant or under the influence of external propaganda or FUD. Maybe they have access to information you don't? Or maybe they just have a different set of values from you? Maybe they hold different priorities from what you hold? Maybe they should be assumed to have their own agency? I'm not going to say that democracy is infallible - in fact, I'm usually the first to point out the exact opposite. But "they don't know what's best for them the way I do" is a pretty dangerous line of reasoning to start heading down.
- crdoconnor 9y ago
  >Honestly, it's rather patronizing to say that union members who disapprove of their union and want to decertify or deauthorize it must either be ignorant or under the influence of external propaganda or FUD. Is it patronizing to say that workers who respond to threats like this: http://www.nysun.com/business/wal-mart-threatens-to-close-unionized-store/3207/ http://www.nysun.com/business/wal-mart-threatens-to-close-un... might not be making the best risk/reward trade off? The employer is hardly going to tell you if they're making an empty threat and the prospect of losing your job because they pulled the nuclear option is probably quite terrifying.
- ultraluminous 9y ago
  Democracy is fine and well (caveats apply etc.) but the crux of the OPs comment is the "50 years of anti-union FUD". Maybe union workers indeed have a different set of values and priorities, which prefers the weakening/dismantling of unionized labor. Or maybe they were swayed by decades of a propaganda war waged by american corporations against unions, organized labor or anything that could be somehow be viewed as anti-corporatist. I think discounting that possibility entirely is also a bit dangerous and possibly even simplistic/naive.
- tw04 9y ago
  >I'm not going to say that democracy is infallible - in fact, I'm usually the first to point out the exact opposite. But "they don't know what's best for them the way I do" is a pretty dangerous line of reasoning to start heading down. I guess it's a good thing I never said any of the words you both put in my mouth and "quoted". Not once did I say I know what's best for them. Not once did I say they couldn't make decisions for themselves. What I DID say is that it's ridiculous to pretend that propaganda doesn't affect people IN unions. Which is EXACTLY what you implied.
  - stickfigure 9y ago
    Your words were dismissive of union members whose opinions differ than your own (they're less educated and missing the bigger picture, incapable of evaluating anti-union FUD on their own). Don't be disingenuous, "they don't know what's best for them the way I do" is a very fair representation of your words. Maybe you do? If you're going to take that position, own it.
jasode 9y ago
>For the average joe who just wants to go to work and get a paycheck, the bigger picture is often lost. Isn't it possible the armchair talking heads like us are the ones missing the bigger picture and the actual workers are the ones who actually get it? Let's consider the Boeing workers in South Carolina: - 2009-09 74% of employees vote against the union and decertify it[1] - 2009-10 Boeing breaks ground on new South Carolina plant to build 787 airplanes[2] - 2017-02 again, 74% of employees vote against IAM union representation[3] The "uncertainty" and "doubt" in "FUD"? The South Carolina workers are quite certain and have no doubt that in 2009, Seattle lost the extra 787 assembly work and it was given to SC workers without the union. It's not irrational that SC workers fear the loss of jobs in Seattle could happen to them. The upcoming 797[4] model is in the works. It's not irrational for South Carolina workers to think that unionizing for better wages will move that 797 production elsewhere. (E.g. Seattle may end up losing all of the 787 production.[5]) >Well that was 50 years ago, Well, the struggle & benefits gained 50 years ago is an abstraction. The events of 2009 are very fresh and real in the minds of workers. Voting "YES" for a union doesn't necessarily mean you get a wage increase. It means (1) you might get a wage increase or (2) you might have no job. How does a worker properly weigh those possible outcomes? [1] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-charleston-decertifies-machinists-union/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boein... [2] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/33521235/ns/business-us_business/t/boeing-chooses-sc-new-assembly-line/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/33521235/ns/business-us_business/t... [3] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeings-south-carolina-workers-resoundingly-defeat-union/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boein... [4] http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/20/news/companies/boeing-797-paris-first-peek/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/20/news/companies/boeing-797-pa... [5] http://www.heraldnet.com/news/future-of-boeings-787-seems-secure-but-maybe-not-in-everett/ http://www.heraldnet.com/news/future-of-boeings-787-seems-se...
- ultraluminous 9y ago
  Yes, but nothing in this speaks to the value of unions. It speaks volumes to the US legal climate allowing massive corporations to subtly coarse employees to vote against their economic interests. Basically what you're describing is "If you'll ask for more rights or better compensation, we'll close down this factory and move it somewhere where people will just say Thank You and shut the hell up". I think that phrase is overused, but this is one of the most obvious examples of Race to the Bottom ever.

by tw04 9y ago

chimeracoder 9y ago

> You act as though anti-union FUD can't affect members. That's kind of ridiculous... if it didn't affect MEMBERS as well as non-members, what would be the point? If I'm a less-educated union member who has no concept of what life was like before unions, and constantly hear that unions just take my money while providing no benefit, I'm probably likely to be swayed. What's the union going to do? Tell me about how 50 years ago companies would literally put my life at risk because there was no downside for them. And then the people financing the anti-union movement are spewing "Well that was 50 years ago, that would NEVER happen again" - all while doing everything they can to drive up hours, drive down safety, and insulate themselves from any responsibility RE: workman's comp. For the average joe who just wants to go to work and get a paycheck, the bigger picture is often lost. Honestly, it's rather patronizing to say that union members who disapprove of their union and want to decertify or deauthorize it must either be ignorant or under the influence of external propaganda or FUD. Maybe they have access to information you don't? Or maybe they just have a different set of values from you? Maybe they hold different priorities from what you hold? Maybe they should be assumed to have their own agency? I'm not going to say that democracy is infallible - in fact, I'm usually the first to point out the exact opposite. But "they don't know what's best for them the way I do" is a pretty dangerous line of reasoning to start heading down.

crdoconnor 9y ago
>Honestly, it's rather patronizing to say that union members who disapprove of their union and want to decertify or deauthorize it must either be ignorant or under the influence of external propaganda or FUD. Is it patronizing to say that workers who respond to threats like this: http://www.nysun.com/business/wal-mart-threatens-to-close-unionized-store/3207/ http://www.nysun.com/business/wal-mart-threatens-to-close-un... might not be making the best risk/reward trade off? The employer is hardly going to tell you if they're making an empty threat and the prospect of losing your job because they pulled the nuclear option is probably quite terrifying.
ultraluminous 9y ago
Democracy is fine and well (caveats apply etc.) but the crux of the OPs comment is the "50 years of anti-union FUD". Maybe union workers indeed have a different set of values and priorities, which prefers the weakening/dismantling of unionized labor. Or maybe they were swayed by decades of a propaganda war waged by american corporations against unions, organized labor or anything that could be somehow be viewed as anti-corporatist. I think discounting that possibility entirely is also a bit dangerous and possibly even simplistic/naive.
tw04 9y ago
>I'm not going to say that democracy is infallible - in fact, I'm usually the first to point out the exact opposite. But "they don't know what's best for them the way I do" is a pretty dangerous line of reasoning to start heading down. I guess it's a good thing I never said any of the words you both put in my mouth and "quoted". Not once did I say I know what's best for them. Not once did I say they couldn't make decisions for themselves. What I DID say is that it's ridiculous to pretend that propaganda doesn't affect people IN unions. Which is EXACTLY what you implied.
- stickfigure 9y ago
  Your words were dismissive of union members whose opinions differ than your own (they're less educated and missing the bigger picture, incapable of evaluating anti-union FUD on their own). Don't be disingenuous, "they don't know what's best for them the way I do" is a very fair representation of your words. Maybe you do? If you're going to take that position, own it.

jasode 9y ago

>For the average joe who just wants to go to work and get a paycheck, the bigger picture is often lost. Isn't it possible the armchair talking heads like us are the ones missing the bigger picture and the actual workers are the ones who actually get it? Let's consider the Boeing workers in South Carolina: - 2009-09 74% of employees vote against the union and decertify it[1] - 2009-10 Boeing breaks ground on new South Carolina plant to build 787 airplanes[2] - 2017-02 again, 74% of employees vote against IAM union representation[3] The "uncertainty" and "doubt" in "FUD"? The South Carolina workers are quite certain and have no doubt that in 2009, Seattle lost the extra 787 assembly work and it was given to SC workers without the union. It's not irrational that SC workers fear the loss of jobs in Seattle could happen to them. The upcoming 797[4] model is in the works. It's not irrational for South Carolina workers to think that unionizing for better wages will move that 797 production elsewhere. (E.g. Seattle may end up losing all of the 787 production.[5]) >Well that was 50 years ago, Well, the struggle & benefits gained 50 years ago is an abstraction. The events of 2009 are very fresh and real in the minds of workers. Voting "YES" for a union doesn't necessarily mean you get a wage increase. It means (1) you might get a wage increase or (2) you might have no job. How does a worker properly weigh those possible outcomes? [1] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-charleston-decertifies-machinists-union/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boein... [2] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/33521235/ns/business-us_business/t/boeing-chooses-sc-new-assembly-line/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/33521235/ns/business-us_business/t... [3] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeings-south-carolina-workers-resoundingly-defeat-union/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boein... [4] http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/20/news/companies/boeing-797-paris-first-peek/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/20/news/companies/boeing-797-pa... [5] http://www.heraldnet.com/news/future-of-boeings-787-seems-secure-but-maybe-not-in-everett/ http://www.heraldnet.com/news/future-of-boeings-787-seems-se...

ultraluminous 9y ago
Yes, but nothing in this speaks to the value of unions. It speaks volumes to the US legal climate allowing massive corporations to subtly coarse employees to vote against their economic interests. Basically what you're describing is "If you'll ask for more rights or better compensation, we'll close down this factory and move it somewhere where people will just say Thank You and shut the hell up". I think that phrase is overused, but this is one of the most obvious examples of Race to the Bottom ever.