4 ms·

Unions are democratic organizations that exist to advocate on behalf of their members. Of course they should be involved in politics.

barry-cotter 6y ago
Corporations are voluntary organizations that exist for the benefit of their owners and if their owners don’t like their politics they can leave much more easily than any union member can. Of course they should be involved in politics.
- Someone1234 6y ago
  If you cap corporation's contributions to the same as each individual member of the union, no problemo.
  - barry-cotter 6y ago
    Contributions to unions aren’t capped and don’t need to come from members. If George Soros wants to leave his fortune to the AFL-CIO I doubt they’ll refuse.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      Unions are directly elected institutions with general assemblies. That means you can't ever capture a union using money alone. Moreover, unions are legally prevented from contributing to political campaigns, while corporations are allowed to do so. Therefore, the comparison breaks down at every single level, and no useful conclusion can be reached from it.
      - barry-cotter 6y ago
        Corporations, like unions are free to campaign independently. For example the for profit Fox, Breitbart, New York Times and Washington Post Corporations all made their political preferences very clear over the past two years. They each spent a lot of employee time and money supporting their favoured candidate. Or Disney, a for profit corporation, releasing Michael Moore films. They’re political propaganda, just like the garbage Citizens United produced to denounce Hillary. Political speech rights in the US belong to individuals, who do not lose them by coming together in corporate organizations, whatever their form. This is just.
        sudosysgen 6y ago
        There is an absolutely massive difference between corporations and unions, in that corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to seek profit. Unions don't. This is why Unions should be allowed to campaign independently, but not corporations. If all of the shareholders decide to contribute with their dividends, they are already allowed to, which gives them an advantage. That ought to be more than enough.
burfog 6y ago
Suppose they were republican organizations. Would you feel the same? Picture this: You take a job writing software for camera boxes on power poles. It happens to be direct employment with a police department, and it isn't management, so somehow you wind up forced to join the police union. Every election, they give millions of dollars to the republican candidates. They supported Bush. This year, they give Trump $42,000,000 to thank him for his support for the police. It's about $5000 per year of your paycheck that is going to this. Do you mind?
- throwanem 6y ago
  Not Democratic as in the party, democratic as in the members vote on what the union does.
  - engineeringwoke 6y ago
    Americans thinking that this means anything outside of their bubble is still flabbergasting to me.
- thunkpad 6y ago
  As discussed above, police unions are a different beast. And an explicitly partisan union would be a shot in the foot of the organizers. That's not exactly how you build solidarity.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    I'm not sure what you mean. Many unions are explicitly partisan organizations, and indeed many see political activism as one of their core activities.
    - thunkpad 6y ago
      As far as I understand they are "partisan" not by design but as a result of representing their interests (which, in my opinion, should always represent the aggregate of the workers the union represents -- which is sadly not so) Please do correct me if I'm wrong! That's my favorite way to learn. I've grown a lot from being the least-informed gal in the room.
metrokoi 6y ago
Unions often don't represent the beliefs of their members, they usually represent the beliefs and goals of the highest ranking members (and sometimes the people that pay them off, unions are not exempt from corruption). Sometimes the goals of the leaders line up with the goals of the majority, sometimes not. When I was in a union, many items were decided without a vote and no effort was put in to informing new members on how to be represented within the union. I should also add I don't think unions should not be involved in politics; I think they are used as crutch for democratic representation. The real solution is removing corporate lobbying.

barry-cotter 6y ago

Corporations are voluntary organizations that exist for the benefit of their owners and if their owners don’t like their politics they can leave much more easily than any union member can. Of course they should be involved in politics.

Someone1234 6y ago
If you cap corporation's contributions to the same as each individual member of the union, no problemo.
- barry-cotter 6y ago
  Contributions to unions aren’t capped and don’t need to come from members. If George Soros wants to leave his fortune to the AFL-CIO I doubt they’ll refuse.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Unions are directly elected institutions with general assemblies. That means you can't ever capture a union using money alone. Moreover, unions are legally prevented from contributing to political campaigns, while corporations are allowed to do so. Therefore, the comparison breaks down at every single level, and no useful conclusion can be reached from it.
    - barry-cotter 6y ago
      Corporations, like unions are free to campaign independently. For example the for profit Fox, Breitbart, New York Times and Washington Post Corporations all made their political preferences very clear over the past two years. They each spent a lot of employee time and money supporting their favoured candidate. Or Disney, a for profit corporation, releasing Michael Moore films. They’re political propaganda, just like the garbage Citizens United produced to denounce Hillary. Political speech rights in the US belong to individuals, who do not lose them by coming together in corporate organizations, whatever their form. This is just.
      - sudosysgen 6y ago
        There is an absolutely massive difference between corporations and unions, in that corporations have a fiduciary responsibility to seek profit. Unions don't. This is why Unions should be allowed to campaign independently, but not corporations. If all of the shareholders decide to contribute with their dividends, they are already allowed to, which gives them an advantage. That ought to be more than enough.

burfog 6y ago

Suppose they were republican organizations. Would you feel the same? Picture this: You take a job writing software for camera boxes on power poles. It happens to be direct employment with a police department, and it isn't management, so somehow you wind up forced to join the police union. Every election, they give millions of dollars to the republican candidates. They supported Bush. This year, they give Trump $42,000,000 to thank him for his support for the police. It's about $5000 per year of your paycheck that is going to this. Do you mind?

throwanem 6y ago
Not Democratic as in the party, democratic as in the members vote on what the union does.
- engineeringwoke 6y ago
  Americans thinking that this means anything outside of their bubble is still flabbergasting to me.
thunkpad 6y ago
As discussed above, police unions are a different beast. And an explicitly partisan union would be a shot in the foot of the organizers. That's not exactly how you build solidarity.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean. Many unions are explicitly partisan organizations, and indeed many see political activism as one of their core activities.
  - thunkpad 6y ago
    As far as I understand they are "partisan" not by design but as a result of representing their interests (which, in my opinion, should always represent the aggregate of the workers the union represents -- which is sadly not so) Please do correct me if I'm wrong! That's my favorite way to learn. I've grown a lot from being the least-informed gal in the room.

metrokoi 6y ago

Unions often don't represent the beliefs of their members, they usually represent the beliefs and goals of the highest ranking members (and sometimes the people that pay them off, unions are not exempt from corruption). Sometimes the goals of the leaders line up with the goals of the majority, sometimes not. When I was in a union, many items were decided without a vote and no effort was put in to informing new members on how to be represented within the union. I should also add I don't think unions should not be involved in politics; I think they are used as crutch for democratic representation. The real solution is removing corporate lobbying.