4 ms·

It's amazing how you can call something propaganda, while offering nothing but propaganda yourself. Few of us actually need a union to advocate for us. We're p

by Alupis 3y ago

It's amazing how you can call something propaganda, while offering nothing but propaganda yourself. Few of us actually need a union to advocate for us. We're perfectly capable of securing higher pay, and benefits through performance or threat of leaving for greener pastures. That's not propaganda. That's worker's rights... which pro-union people are supposedly in favor of. These days, Unions protect under-performing staff and enrich the Union leadership - all while negotiating a token raise once in a while. You can see it with your own eyes - just go work somewhere that has a union for at least one group of it's employees. > Pure unwitting propaganda Laughable...

AndrewKemendo 3y ago
> You can see it with your own eyes - just go work somewhere that has a union for at least one group of it's employees. I gladly had ~500 AFGE employees under me as CTO two jobs ago. I worked regularly with the Union representatives and we had multiple high stakes situations that I was glad to have them there for (I was not covered by the Union because I was too high rank). What has been your first hand experience with unions such that you can make such claims? I suggest you be more open to those who may be less capable, if you are so capable as to be in such high demand. Think about others.
- Alupis 3y ago
  Tell us, what was it like terminating someone? What was your hiring process like? Did it require union approval? What happened if the new-hire didn't want to belong to the union? What happened if a union-member decided they no longer wanted to be in the union? What happened if you wanted to pay a new-hire more than the pre-defined salary bracket? Conversely, what happened if a new-hire lacked qualifying experience and you wanted to bring them on below the pre-defined salary bracket? What happened if part-way through the hiring process, you decided the job requirements needed to be changed? Did this require union approval? Were disputes always settled with lawyers, or could you resolve an issue internally? My points are, the union ends up running your business. It's pervasive, like a virus, and the outcome is not good for everyone.
  - profile53 3y ago
    These are anti union talking points and only a single one has a grain of truth. If you are certain the others are reasonable, please prove it. > Conversely, what happened if a new-hire lacked qualifying experience and you wanted to bring them on below the pre-defined salary bracket? The goal of a union is the antithesis to this question. They enforce a minimum standard of pay and work conditions.
    - Alupis 3y ago
      > The goal of a union is the antithesis to this question. They enforce a minimum standard of pay and work conditions. So the answer is that person doesn't get hired... That person never gets the chance to grow into the job, because the union wouldn't approve it. Fun... The idea that workers are like cattle... and that each one is the same and deserves exactly the same compensation is absurd, is demonstrably untrue, and is de-humanizing. Funny, because unions are supposed to be pro-worker, no? > These are anti union talking points The pro-union folks need better come-backs than "anti union talking points" or "propaganda". It's a classical technique - assert your opponent is spewing propaganda while you promote your own propaganda as "truth" in it's place. Unfortunately we've had decades to judge unions - and people are well aware of their issues. There's plenty of reasons unions are not as pervasive today as they once were.
      - profile53 3y ago
        That’s a bad faith interpretation of what I wrote and you and I both know that is not what unions do. I’m not going to respond after this because either you have no idea what you’re talking about or you are intentionally arguing in bad faith.
        Alupis 3y ago
        > and you and I both know that is not what unions do. We do? That's news to me. It's rather interesting seeing people support unions but won't admit any of the downsides. It's almost like the pro-union folks have a theoretical idea of how a union should work, but that's in stark contrast with how they do work. > I’m not going to respond after this Almost like saying you have no real argument to offer so we'll just take our ball and go home. Anyone who says anything negative about unions is clearly a Anti-Union shil spreading false propaganda. It's a tired tale... Reducing people's opinions and arguments to "propaganda" or "talking points" attacks the individual instead of the argument, and attempts to misdirect through means of actual propaganda. Not one time have you offered an actual rebuttal... Which is pretty damning on its own.
rtsil 3y ago
> We're perfectly capable of securing higher pay, and benefits through performance or threat of leaving for greener pastures. Just because someone is brilliant with computers or electronics or any other tech job does not mean automatically that they're capable of securing the best working conditions, pay and benefits that they could have. Labor negotiation is a skill in itself.
- Alupis 3y ago
  And...? Everyone has to unionize and endure all the bad that comes with that so a few people can be relieved of having to learn inter-personal communication?
  - labster 3y ago
    Labor unions have good social effects and bad social effects just like literally every other organization of people. Sometimes the good outweighs the bad, and sometimes the reverse.
  - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - Alupis 3y ago
      And the point is what exactly? That people should submit to abusive environments and wait for the glorious union leaders to come save them? How about just not working for abusive workplaces? Why is that not an option you've considered before?
      - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
        > How about just not working for abusive workplaces? You tell me, why do people work for abusive workplaces, sometimes despite sexual harrasment? Have they literally never thought of quitting, they are that dim?

by Alupis 3y ago

AndrewKemendo 3y ago

> You can see it with your own eyes - just go work somewhere that has a union for at least one group of it's employees. I gladly had ~500 AFGE employees under me as CTO two jobs ago. I worked regularly with the Union representatives and we had multiple high stakes situations that I was glad to have them there for (I was not covered by the Union because I was too high rank). What has been your first hand experience with unions such that you can make such claims? I suggest you be more open to those who may be less capable, if you are so capable as to be in such high demand. Think about others.

Alupis 3y ago
Tell us, what was it like terminating someone? What was your hiring process like? Did it require union approval? What happened if the new-hire didn't want to belong to the union? What happened if a union-member decided they no longer wanted to be in the union? What happened if you wanted to pay a new-hire more than the pre-defined salary bracket? Conversely, what happened if a new-hire lacked qualifying experience and you wanted to bring them on below the pre-defined salary bracket? What happened if part-way through the hiring process, you decided the job requirements needed to be changed? Did this require union approval? Were disputes always settled with lawyers, or could you resolve an issue internally? My points are, the union ends up running your business. It's pervasive, like a virus, and the outcome is not good for everyone.
- profile53 3y ago
  These are anti union talking points and only a single one has a grain of truth. If you are certain the others are reasonable, please prove it. > Conversely, what happened if a new-hire lacked qualifying experience and you wanted to bring them on below the pre-defined salary bracket? The goal of a union is the antithesis to this question. They enforce a minimum standard of pay and work conditions.
  - Alupis 3y ago
    > The goal of a union is the antithesis to this question. They enforce a minimum standard of pay and work conditions. So the answer is that person doesn't get hired... That person never gets the chance to grow into the job, because the union wouldn't approve it. Fun... The idea that workers are like cattle... and that each one is the same and deserves exactly the same compensation is absurd, is demonstrably untrue, and is de-humanizing. Funny, because unions are supposed to be pro-worker, no? > These are anti union talking points The pro-union folks need better come-backs than "anti union talking points" or "propaganda". It's a classical technique - assert your opponent is spewing propaganda while you promote your own propaganda as "truth" in it's place. Unfortunately we've had decades to judge unions - and people are well aware of their issues. There's plenty of reasons unions are not as pervasive today as they once were.
    - profile53 3y ago
      That’s a bad faith interpretation of what I wrote and you and I both know that is not what unions do. I’m not going to respond after this because either you have no idea what you’re talking about or you are intentionally arguing in bad faith.
      - Alupis 3y ago
        > and you and I both know that is not what unions do. We do? That's news to me. It's rather interesting seeing people support unions but won't admit any of the downsides. It's almost like the pro-union folks have a theoretical idea of how a union should work, but that's in stark contrast with how they do work. > I’m not going to respond after this Almost like saying you have no real argument to offer so we'll just take our ball and go home. Anyone who says anything negative about unions is clearly a Anti-Union shil spreading false propaganda. It's a tired tale... Reducing people's opinions and arguments to "propaganda" or "talking points" attacks the individual instead of the argument, and attempts to misdirect through means of actual propaganda. Not one time have you offered an actual rebuttal... Which is pretty damning on its own.

rtsil 3y ago

> We're perfectly capable of securing higher pay, and benefits through performance or threat of leaving for greener pastures. Just because someone is brilliant with computers or electronics or any other tech job does not mean automatically that they're capable of securing the best working conditions, pay and benefits that they could have. Labor negotiation is a skill in itself.

Alupis 3y ago
And...? Everyone has to unionize and endure all the bad that comes with that so a few people can be relieved of having to learn inter-personal communication?
- labster 3y ago
  Labor unions have good social effects and bad social effects just like literally every other organization of people. Sometimes the good outweighs the bad, and sometimes the reverse.
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - Alupis 3y ago
    And the point is what exactly? That people should submit to abusive environments and wait for the glorious union leaders to come save them? How about just not working for abusive workplaces? Why is that not an option you've considered before?
    - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
      > How about just not working for abusive workplaces? You tell me, why do people work for abusive workplaces, sometimes despite sexual harrasment? Have they literally never thought of quitting, they are that dim?