Worker Unions (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Huntn

    Misty Mountains Envoy
    Joined
    Mar 8, 2023
    Messages
    674
    Reaction score
    710
    Location
    Rivendell
    Offline
    Unions are good. In many lines of work, if you as one of many employees don’t want to be bent over by your employer who proceeds to have its way with you, a union gives you some control over your professional life. It gives you the power of the group versus the individual against the corporation And it offers job protections so you can’t arbitrarily be fired in a dispute, Union naysayers will counter with “you can always quit! “ which is true, but when you have a job that is valuable, and may include a pension, it is worth fighting for, For most cases a union is the only mechanism that gives workers any power and protection.

    My first significant job was the US Military, no unions there, but this was a situation where pay and many work provisions were determined by Congress, and yes, the needs of the military took precedence over your life. I stayed for 9 years, it involved long periods of family separation, but I was lucky enough to be in during the Cold War, without an active war. After separating from the USN, I was hired as an airline pilot and was introduced to the union, in my case ALPA, Airline Pilots Association.

    Not all unions are good unions, they are only as good as their leadership, which is no different on the employer side of the equation. Some unions have made unrealistic demands and actually harmed their jobs, some walk off professional cliffs when they're all fired. I was lucky enough to be in one of the best unions comprised of highly skilled professional people who were not easy to replace, because too much training involved, and experience is required. That is a huge factor in the equation. But any large group has an advantage. They won’t always prevail, but for them even to exist, the backing of the Federal Government is vital. When considering worker’s rights, the right to unionize is a must

    Take a look at the Writer’s strike, and now rhe looming Screen Actors Guild Strike. One of the items on the agenda is job protection from Artificial Intelligence. The Corporate Capitalists have been destroying domestic jobs for 5 decades as millions of jobs have been shipped out of the Country for shareholder profit at the expense of the former employee,it can be argued at the expense of the Nation. Look at the industrial robots where hundreds of thousands found employment, now lost. Do you think that AI will be any different?? NOPE.

    In the USA, the 20th Century’s New Deal was just a temporary reprieve from life at the hands of the Robber Barrons. And WWII were the US got a huge economic boost by virtue of being the major country left economically intact. This is why I continue to argue that Capitalism will eventually fail, when it no longer servers the majority. In fact it can be argued that it’s not served the majority for decades as our domestic Middle Class evaporates. Under Capitolidm, AI will just be another tool to disenfranchise workers, even as the domestic buying power is canabalized so a smaller and smaller group of people can live comfortabley, and even less become filthy rich.

    This is not an argument against technological advancement which is inevitable. It is an argument against Capitalism, at least not regulated enough Capitalism, and for something that will carry most, if not all of us, forward economically. Highly regulated Capitalism with wealth caps might do it, or possibly socialism. But for Socialism to work requires an attitude adjustment by the majority, And no matter what we choose corruption is unacceptable, it destroys any economic system. Corruption is the reason why Communism has been so bad.


     
    Last edited:
    Unregulated capitalism is just another word for feudalism.

    There's the Haves, who lead hereditary lines of wealth and power, largely immune to the law.
    And the serfs, who toil at whatever jobs they can find at the sufferance of the Haves and are abused, exploited and divided in whatever ways the Haves can devise.

    We are, as a society, going to need iron-clad protections against AI, because amoral sociopathic corporations who by definition only care about making money, will happily sell us meat-creatures out to even more sociopathic algorithms that don't even care about money, they don't "care" about anything, they simply find ways to do what they're told.

    I fear (greatly) that our current crop of leaders in government are too old to truly understand what AI is, what and how it does things and will see it as just another step in efficiency. They'll completely cave to corporate pressure and act shocked when half of the Midwest goes dark because doing so balances the power-distribution equations in the most elegant way.
     
    Unions are good. In many lines of work, if you as one of many employees don’t want to be bent over by your employer who proceeds to have its way with you, a union gives you some control over your professional life. It gives you the power of the group versus the individual against the corporation And it offers job protections so you can’t arbitrarily be fired in a dispute, Union naysayers will counter with “you can always quit! “ which is true, but when you have a job that is valuable, and may include a pension, it is worth fighting for, For most cases a union is the only mechanism that gives workers any power and protection.

    My first significant job was the US Military, no unions there, but this was a situation where pay and many work provisions were determined by Congress, and yes, the needs of the military took precedence over your life. I stayed for 9 years, it involved long periods of family separation, but I was lucky enough to be in during the Cold War, without an active war. After separating from the USN, I was hired as an airline pilot and was introduced to the union, in my case ALPA, Airline Pilots Association.

    Not all unions are good unions, they are only as good as their leadership, which is no different on the employer side of the equation. Some unions have made unrealistic demands and actually harmed their jobs, some walk off professional cliffs when they're all fired. I was lucky enough to be in one of the best unions comprised of highly skilled professional people who were not easy to replace, because too much training involved, and experience is required. That is a huge factor in the equation. But any large group has an advantage. They won’t always prevail, but for them even to exist, the backing of the Federal Government is vital. When considering worker’s rights, the right to unionize is a must

    Take a look at the Writer’s strike, and now rhe looming Screen Actors Guild Strike. One of the items on the agenda is job protection from Artificial Intelligence. The Corporate Capitalists have been destroying domestic jobs for 5 decades as millions of jobs have been shipped out of the Country for shareholder profit at the expense of the former employee,it can be argued at the expense of the Nation. Look at the industrial robots where hundreds of thousands found employment, now lost. Do you think that AI will be any different?? NOPE.

    In the USA, the 20th Century’s New Deal was just a temporary reprieve from life at the hands of the Robber Barrons. And WWII were the US got a huge economic boost by virtue of being the major country left economically intact. This is why I continue to argue that Capitalism will eventually fail, when it no longer servers the majority. In fact it can be argued that it’s not served the majority for decades as our domestic Middle Class evaporates. Under Capitolidm, AI will just be another tool to disenfranchise workers, even as the domestic buying power is canabalized so a smaller and smaller group of people can live comfortabley, and even less become filthy rich.

    This is not an argument against technological advancement which is inevitable. It is an argument against Capitalism, at least not regulated enough Capitalism, and for something that will carry most, if not all of us, forward economically. Highly regulated Capitalism with wealth caps might do it, or possibly socialism. But for Socialism to work requires an attitude adjustment by the majority, And no matter what we choose corruption is unacceptable, it destroys any economic system. Corruption is the reason why Communism has been so bad.



    I will take time for a longer reply, but I just want to say that Communism has been bad not because of corruption, but because it makes everyone poor, and no one wants to be poor.
     
    People have very different ideas of what "poor" means and what being "poor" is. Poor to me means not being able to provide oneself with healthy food, viable shelter, emotional and physical healthcare, and other things necessary to be biologically and emotionally healthy and secure. I don't think anyone needs to be able to afford luxuries to not be poor. People have very different ideas of what are and are not "luxuries." Shelter is a necessity. Owning several houses or a single house bigger than is needed for the people living in it is a luxury.

    From what I've seen, corrupt economic systems of any kind make most of the people in that system poor. Corrupt capitalism eventually makes most people poor while making a few elite filthy rich, just like corrupt communism, corrupt socialism, corrupt feudalism and so on and so on.

    Take corruption out of any of those economic systems and most people will thrive and prosper. The corruption is the real problem. The corrupt people exploiting economic systems are what makes people poor and it doesn't matter what economic system is being corruptly exploited.

    Every capitalistic society that has ever existed was built on the backs of slaves and most of them committed a genocide or two. Just saying.
     
    I will take time for a longer reply, but I just want to say that Communism has been bad not because of corruption, but because it makes everyone poor, and no one wants to be poor.

    Your’s is overly simplistic and inaccurate appraisal.
    If you have a group of people who agree in the concept and you have honest motivated people in charge, then there is nothing wrong with communism (group ownership), any more so than socialism. The issues in the largest countries self described as communist are corruption, coercive, oppressive, single party system, and intent on holding power, which is better described as a human issue. That is what we do to each other when the opportunity presents itself. Capitalism allows a minority to accrue wealth at the expense of the majority. There is a valid argument that raw Capitalism relies on the the poor masses working at slave wages to benefit a minority of wealthy. So if you are in the wealthy minority, a good deal. :unsure:

    However if strenuously regulated with wealth caps, to include social safety nets, and retirement support (pensions), Capitalism might be an option or better yet socialism.

    As I’ve said before, AI and automation is a dire threat to a society operating under Capitalism. As millions of jobs evaporate, something will give way, it will either be hard core regulation or implosion because the majority will not be willing to be reduced to serfdom status so the few can live like kings and queens.
     
    This is exactly where we are now ever since Ronald fired air traffic controllers. That administration and the complete and total war on the middle class and our president acting as the biggest union buster ever is the beginning. The amount of unions actually using a strike as a barging tactic is next to none since that day compared to before it.

    Yes technically the controllers broke a law and 12k were banished in two days. Yet the financial sector can cause a crash breaking multiple laws an nobody gets probation? Banned from working in the field for life? Not one. Really the cards have been stacked against the middle class since the 80s because of our presidential union buster and the trickle down crap.

    That thrickle down crap was the perfect storm for corporate raiders. Companies were dealing with high interest rates and were cash poor and assets worth a ton. The new tax code made it profitable to put Americans out of work. We became a global economy because of these things.
     
    Your’s is overly simplistic and inaccurate appraisal.
    If you have a group of people who agree in the concept and you have honest motivated people in charge, then there is nothing wrong with communism (group ownership), any more so than socialism. The issues in the largest countries self described as communist are corruption, coercive, oppressive, single party system, and intent on holding power, which is better described as a human issue. That is what we do to each other when the opportunity presents itself. Capitalism allows a minority to accrue wealth at the expense of the majority. There is a valid argument that raw Capitalism relies on the the poor masses working at slave wages to benefit a minority of wealthy. So if you are in the wealthy minority, a good deal. :unsure:

    However if strenuously regulated with wealth caps, to include social safety nets, and retirement support (pensions), Capitalism might be an option or better yet socialism.

    As I’ve said before, AI and automation is a dire threat to a society operating under Capitalism. As millions of jobs evaporate, something will give way, it will either be hard core regulation or implosion because the majority will not be willing to be reduced to serfdom status so the few can live like kings and queens.

    One of the weird things about automation, and AI is it seems like it's coming for white collar work first. The plumbers, and welders of the world maybe the last to go.

    I personally thought about getting out of Network Eng, and going into security. When all that separates businesses is management, and their home cooked algos, and datasets. There should be a huge amount of money put into security.
     
    Your’s is overly simplistic and inaccurate appraisal.
    It may be overly simplistic, but inaccurate? Come on.

    If you have a group of people who agree in the concept and you have honest motivated people in charge, then there is nothing wrong with communism (group ownership), any more so than socialism. The issues in the largest countries self described as communist are corruption, coercive, oppressive, single party system, and intent on holding power, which is better described as a human issue.
    Overly simplistic, but you have to keep an iron fist to keep everyone poor.
    Capitalism allows a minority to accrue wealth at the expense of the majority.
    At their expense? Are people not getting paid? This narrative that Capitalism allows only a minority to accumulate wealth or some sort of pseudo-slave State is just that, a narrative. It may not be that everyone can amass Bill Gates money, but it allows people to make a good living, and even attain certain levels of luxury; not everyone, of course; there are other factors that may or may not have to do with Capitalism (it's not as if life is fair) but the opportunity is there.
     
    It may be overly simplistic, but inaccurate? Come on.


    Overly simplistic, but you have to keep an iron fist to keep everyone poor.

    At their expense? Are people not getting paid? This narrative that Capitalism allows only a minority to accumulate wealth or some sort of pseudo-slave State is just that, a narrative. It may not be that everyone can amass Bill Gates money, but it allows people to make a good living, and even attain certain levels of luxury; not everyone, of course; there are other factors that may or may not have to do with Capitalism (it's not as if life is fair) but the opportunity is there.
    Only when the Haves are either enlightened or forced to offer a good living.
    Counting on a billionaire's enlightened self-interest (as opposed to plain greed) is a low-percentage game.
     
    It may be overly simplistic, but inaccurate? Come on.


    Overly simplistic, but you have to keep an iron fist to keep everyone poor.

    At their expense? Are people not getting paid? This narrative that Capitalism allows only a minority to accumulate wealth or some sort of pseudo-slave State is just that, a narrative. It may not be that everyone can amass Bill Gates money, but it allows people to make a good living, and even attain certain levels of luxury; not everyone, of course; there are other factors that may or may not have to do with Capitalism (it's not as if life is fair) but the opportunity is there.
    You come on. Sure, they are getting paid, slave wages, 2 or 3 jobs, one illness away from bankruptsy, work till they die serving their Capitalist Masters. It’s a paradise! I bet you are one of those just pull yourself up by your bootstraps people. :)

    Look at the business plan of every fast food and small retail business- SLAVE WAGES. It’s only been recently during COVID, that wages are started climbing. But are they living wages? :unsure:
     
    You come on. Sure, they are getting paid, slave wages, 2 or 3 jobs, one illness away from bankruptsy, work till they die serving their Capitalist Masters. It’s a paradise! I bet you are one of those just pull yourself up by your bootstraps people. :)

    Look at the business plan of every fast food and small retail business- SLAVE WAGES. It’s only been recently during COVID, that wages are started climbing. But are they living wages? :unsure:

    Very moving.

    Are you getting paid slave wages from the airline you fly with? Do you know why you have a job? Or better said, the conditions that created your job? What do you fly? Cargo? People? God forbid, private? Do you think Communism would support the 45,000+ flights a day that occur in the U.S.?

    How big is your house? You rent? Own? Does it have more rooms that people living in the house? Would you like to have the government either move people into your house or take your house from you and give it to a bigger family; while putting you in a studio?

    I feel people have the impression that a Socialist or Communist U.S. will just take all the money from the very rich and distribute it equally, and everyone will live better than they live now. But that is not how it works.

    I told the story before, but I was discussing MX politics with a friend. He too complains about the "very rich" in MX, and thinks the government should take their money and give it to the people, so I told him: "You straight up own 4 houses, 3 of which bring you income as rentals, plus you are the region manager (the 3 States of the Yucatan Peninsula) for the largest lab in MX. I have bad news for you: for over 50% of the MX population, you are the very rich".

    And to be clear, I am not saying Capitalism is some sort of panacea where everyone lives happily ever after, nor am I opposed to social programs that benefit the common welfare of the people, or that reform is needed in certain areaas, but Communism? Come on.
     
    Actually socialism and capitalism can co-exist with the propper legislation as aid ensuring

    • A liveable minimal wage
    • Strict laws guaranteing worker safety (hazardeus materials, dangerous work environments, enough rests between shifts) and requiring all employers to turn in mandatory safety report every year suplemented by unannounced inspections.
    • Laws to protect both employers and employees (dispute management)
    • 5 weeks annual paid vacation
    • Government supported job training/retraining programs paid by a small tax shared between workers and employers.
    • Paid sick leave ( employer pays the first 5 days, after which he will be reimbursed by the government if the employees illness last longer.
    Since we have free health care, employees are not forced to remain with an employer due to health insurance either.

    Companies are doing really good here, because they have well educated, healthy and rested employees. I work for a software company which sends people home if they have clocked 40 hours in a given week (regular work week is 37 hours here) because their statistics showed that after 40 hours people makes more mistakes and it takes 5 times as long to find and fix a mistake, than it takes to get it right from the start. So if people work longer, the end result would be less productive and therefor increase the costs of the software produced.
     
    Very moving.

    Are you getting paid slave wages from the airline you fly with? Do you know why you have a job? Or better said, the conditions that created your job? What do you fly? Cargo? People? God forbid, private? Do you think Communism would support the 45,000+ flights a day that occur in the U.S.?

    How big is your house? You rent? Own? Does it have more rooms that people living in the house? Would you like to have the government either move people into your house or take your house from you and give it to a bigger family; while putting you in a studio?

    I feel people have the impression that a Socialist or Communist U.S. will just take all the money from the very rich and distribute it equally, and everyone will live better than they live now. But that is not how it works.

    I told the story before, but I was discussing MX politics with a friend. He too complains about the "very rich" in MX, and thinks the government should take their money and give it to the people, so I told him: "You straight up own 4 houses, 3 of which bring you income as rentals, plus you are the region manager (the 3 States of the Yucatan Peninsula) for the largest lab in MX. I have bad news for you: for over 50% of the MX population, you are the very rich".

    And to be clear, I am not saying Capitalism is some sort of panacea where everyone lives happily ever after, nor am I opposed to social programs that benefit the common welfare of the people, or that reform is needed in certain areaas, but Communism? Come on.
    1. Your buddy isn't "very rich". Donald effing Trump isn't "very rich." There's a whole strata of wealth that puts single-digit billionaires to shame and it's THOSE ARSEHOLES who need to pay their freaking share.

    2. Is anyone advocating for overall, system-wide Communism? Or something closer to Democratic Socialism. Universal healthcare, guaranteed basic income, free higher education, the kind of social programs that support the base of the Capitalist food chain.
     
    Very moving.

    Are you getting paid slave wages from the airline you fly with? Do you know why you have a job? Or better said, the conditions that created your job? What do you fly? Cargo? People? God forbid, private? Do you think Communism would support the 45,000+ flights a day that occur in the U.S.?

    How big is your house? You rent? Own? Does it have more rooms that people living in the house? Would you like to have the government either move people into your house or take your house from you and give it to a bigger family; while putting you in a studio?

    I feel people have the impression that a Socialist or Communist U.S. will just take all the money from the very rich and distribute it equally, and everyone will live better than they live now. But that is not how it works.

    I told the story before, but I was discussing MX politics with a friend. He too complains about the "very rich" in MX, and thinks the government should take their money and give it to the people, so I told him: "You straight up own 4 houses, 3 of which bring you income as rentals, plus you are the region manager (the 3 States of the Yucatan Peninsula) for the largest lab in MX. I have bad news for you: for over 50% of the MX population, you are the very rich".

    And to be clear, I am not saying Capitalism is some sort of panacea where everyone lives happily ever after, nor am I opposed to social programs that benefit the common welfare of the people, or that reform is needed in certain areaas, but Communism? Come on.

    Why are you talking about communism? Do you know what communism actually is? How does that differ from social democracy, or social capitalism?

    Do you know how capitalism was born? Do you know why people say this is America's gilded second gilded age? Do you actually understand the term robber baron, and how it was used medieval Europe, and 1920's America?

    Do you understand the influence that large wealth holders have on our political system? There is a net good in making sure that massive fortunes are not accumulated, nor passed down. It's something that has been argued for going back to nation's founding.

    I know you get mad when people talk to you like your dumb, but jesus dude.
     
    Why are you talking about communism?
    Read the thread.
    Do you know what communism actually is?
    Yes.
    How does that differ from social democracy, or social capitalism?
    Yes.
    Do you know how capitalism was born?
    Yes.
    Do you know why people say this is America's gilded second gilded age?
    Yes.
    Do you actually understand the term robber baron,
    Yes.
    and how it was used medieval Europe, and 1920's America?
    Yes.
    Do you understand the influence that large wealth holders have on our political system?
    Yes.
    There is a net good in making sure that massive fortunes are not accumulated, nor passed down. It's something that has been argued for going back to nation's founding.
    If you say so.
    I know you get mad when people talk to you like your dumb, but jesus dude.
    Uh-huh.
     
    1. Your buddy isn't "very rich". Donald effing Trump isn't "very rich." There's a whole strata of wealth that puts single-digit billionaires to shame and it's THOSE ARSEHOLES who need to pay their freaking share.
    The point of that story is not to declare that my buddy is "very rich". I'm just pointing out the relativity/subjective nature of what "rich" is. I posted something in the same vain on SR, about something that happened to me.

    You obviously have a problem with multibillionaires that goes beyond mere economics.
    2. Is anyone advocating for overall, system-wide Communism? Or something closer to Democratic Socialism. Universal healthcare, guaranteed basic income, free higher education, the kind of social programs that support the base of the Capitalist food chain.

    I read the OP, and wanted to write a longish reply, but what caught my eye was this comment:
    Corruption is the reason why Communism has been so bad.

    That's what I replied to, and that's what was expanded upon in my conversation with Huntn. So, I didn't think anyone was advocating for system-wide Communism.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom