MovieChat Forums > Hoffa (1992) Discussion > Unions good or bad?

Unions good or bad?

posted 17 years ago by tricksofthetrade
26 replies | jump to latest

So what is your opinion about unions? Yes they protect the working man from abuse, but there is no such thing as slave labor in America anymore. If they treat you like sh!t you can always quit, aquire skills and get a better job.

Every goal of every union is to get the most amount of money for the worker for the least amount of work.

I work in a place that has a VERY STRONG UNION. Stronger than management, because of the union strength, the place is highly inefficent. Each job is described as a 'skilled-craft' (although it requires only minimal training). There are numerous 'layers' were one person can only do a certain job and not another (thus protecting the worker but hurting the business because you have to find the right person to do a simple job). In fact this union is so strong that is almost impossible to get fired.

Strong unions will slowly bleed the companies profits dry. Star corporate leaders who understand business dynamics will flee the company because they do not have the power to change and adapt to the economic pressures without consulting the unions. They will go to companies where they can earn more money and have more power. What is the end result? Slowly the compition that does not have a strong union, will surpass the business in it profits and size, giving the consumer a better product at a cheaper price.

"You sent us to guard the wrong man Mr. Chalmers."

[–] Little_Korean 17 years ago

Like a lot of things, unions are necessary in moderate. If they're powerful, then you get situations like the one you described or the 'winter of discontent' in Britain. If they're weak or nonexistent, then you get bet your bottom dollar the bosses will bleed their workers dry.

When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...

[–] nosnojsirhc 16 years ago

lil korean's got the right attitude. one can't just sum up 200 + years of labor history and decide 'good' or 'bad'. this type of forced duality imposed on multi-faceted situations hinders more accurate study of past events, which are always more nuanced.

[–] budt3 16 years ago

I agree. Every situation is different and has to be handled individually

Be yourself, everyone else is taken

[–] bluestrat70 16 years ago

i think they were very necessary years past. in modern times there may still be a need in some industries, particularly jobs that can be dangerous (however, i'm not very familiar since i don't work in such an environment). i don't think we need a union for the grocery store clerks. even in places where they might be useful, if they go overboard then you're absolutely on the money - it can cripple the efficiency of the organization. that in turn can hurt profits which in turn will hurt the employees. as a manager, i think i do the right thing by my employees and don't exploit them.

in a nut shell i'm not a fan.

[–] Station9 16 years ago

If you don't think Grocery store clerks need a union you might want to watch the Wal-Mart documentary "Wal-Mart the high cost of low price".

[–] Markmainwaring 15 years ago

Everybody should be in a union. Im a member of the Communication Workers Union in the UK. Get fed up of scabs. Theres no excuse for not being in a union.

[–] smoogy_smooger 15 years ago

Agreed.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tawdry_hepburn 14 years ago

In the modern world of international corporations and globalization, of Walmart and the race to the bottom, I believe that Unions are a vital part of protecting workers. In 1950, the average executive made 20 times the wage of his worker, today, he makes 100x. Unions are not obsolete at all, and in the coming years they will become even more important.

Yes, some unions and union leaders are abusive, but in my chosen field of highly specialized labor, I do not believe that I would be able to survive comfortably without the aid of a Union. Granted, I would be willing to do it anyway, because it's the only thing I've ever loved, but on an aggregate level, I think that not only do workers enjoy a higher standard of living with the aid of unions, the end product of our labor is of a higher quality because we are less worried about where our next meal will come from.

,Said the Shotgun to the Head--
Saul Williams

www.myspace.com/ohhorrorofhorrors

[–] jestucker 14 years ago

interesting... I'm a union member and I'm ready to quit mine. In ten years I've had two decent years of work, generally I'm lucky if there's 6 months of work at a time in any given year. Our out of work list is regularly topping 500 members, yet they always want their dues on time, regardless of if you're making any money or not. I've had one car repossessed, my wife had to get a full time job, my kids are on the school free lunch program... I am not, nor have I ever been living beyond my means, but I'd at least like some means to live on. Being a Union member has hindered me in looking for other jobs when I'm out of work, because no one wants to hire someone that may quit at any moment because their regular job may have work. I'm greatful for my apprenticeship and the training it gave me, as it is a life skill I'll always have, but as for good solid employment, they can *beep* off.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hobartman 13 years ago

When I was in a union all it did was protect krappy dead beat workers who deserved to be fired.
The best protection to keeping your job is to be dam good at it. Then you dont need a union....

[–] Astrolupine 13 years ago

Its's helpful, but depends on the service and time.

For example, when a bus driver union strike went on in my city last winter, it was an annoyance to the city.

You see, the winters here are terrible and the city doesn't have enough money for sidewalk clearing. People needed those buses to get around safely. Many were pissed at the bus union afterwards.

Yippee-ki-yay, pastel-colored resistance!
http://astrolupine.deviantart.com

[–] rj-27 13 years ago

Hobartman sums up the issue succinctly:

"When I was in a union all it did was protect krappy dead beat workers who deserved to be fired.
The best protection to keeping your job is to be dam good at it. Then you dont need a union...."

In economics you get what you ask for.

If a company exploits its workers to their detriment, it will breed unions. Therefore it is in a companies best interest to keep and retain valuable employees through paying what they're worth and other incentives (clean, safe environment, performance bonuses, etc.).

Strong unions often exist at the expense of the unionized (Teamsters, e.g.) They also breed ineptness, incompetence and generally slothful behavior through protection by threats of strikes and violence. Eventually, they will cause the business they are unionized against to become uncompetitive. This is what happened to the auto industry in general and Great Lakes Steel in particular.

In conclusion, unions became necessary to correct a wrong. But like out of control government, a taste of power and money becomes too much for the leaders and they exist at the expense of the very worker whose interests they claim they are protecting.

[–] CPETERS757 12 years ago

"The best protection to keeping your job is to be dam good at it."

Do you really believe that? If you're good at your job but some guy in China will do the same job for 25 cents an hour the fact that you're dam good at your job is going to save it?

[–] rj-27 12 years ago

How will a union keep the job from going to China?

On the other hand, perhaps the demands the union makes for certain wages and benefits might be an incentive to outsource the job. What do you think?

The union cannot decide what a job is worth paying. Only the markets can decide that.

Or, put another way, would you rather pay $25,000 for your Ford Fusion or $15,000?

[–] RickVee 12 years ago

Unions stink.

[–] MurderInc2014 11 years ago

Pro- Union!

[–] MurderInc2014 11 years ago

Union, Yes!

[–] kag2 10 years ago

I often favor them but with many exceptions in cases of corruption, racketeering, or when unions make unrealistic demands or protect incompetent work & workers. On the other hand employers have many advantages and some workers are paid so poorly they need food stamps and other government help to survive. Also, CEO pay in the USA is often 100 times that of their lowest-paid workers, a distance that has grown as the middle class shrinks into more poor with a few increasingly rich at the top.

Some say unions ruined the U.S. economy, but Canada remains 30% unionized (as the USA was in about 1960-1962) with a strong economy on par with the USA. Also, many low-paid workers are bitterly anti-union, believing the corporate line about unions costing jobs even where it's not true.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]