The babyjesuschristsuperstar on Board: filling the moral void of Clinton’s legacy

[andViolins]

Originally posted by Captain
I agree on the first. On the second, why isn't the answer that jobs will go to other plants, whether here or abroad, because of the behavior that is irrational? Is this any different in terms of the need for government regulation from any situation where a company or industry behaves irrationally, and feels the sting of Darwin as a result?

Because labor law protects against "run-away shops." A Company cannot simply say, "this union and this contract costs too much, so we are closing up and moving to North Carolina/Mexico/China." A company has an obligation to negotiate with the union over the movement of the work.

Hank is absolutely correct in his statements about the UAW and Big 3 auto contracts. The UAW negotiated so much crap into the agreements that Delphi and Visteon have absolutely no way to compete with any other Tier 1 or Tier 2 supplier making the same parts.

aV

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Dude, you need to learn a little history. People risked their lives fighting for a decent wage -- and were shot by state militias, federal troops, Pinkerton goons, etc. .

The exercise of 2nd Amendment rights is a beautiful thing. Were these union rabble rousers armed? If they are like the modern day pussified liberal I doubt it. Therein lay the problem.

Penske (strapped and cocked) Account

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
The exercise of 2nd Amendment rights is a beautiful thing. Were these union rabble rousers armed? If they are like the modern day pussified liberal I doubt it. Therein lay the problem.

The Homestead Strike

• With Carnegie's carte blanche support, Frick moved to slash wages. Plant workers responded by hanging Frick in effigy. At the end of June, Frick began closing down his open hearth and armor-plate mills, locking out 1,100 men. On June 25th, Frick announced he would no longer negotiate with the union; now he would only deal with workers individually. Leaders of Amalgamated were willing to concede on almost every level -- except on the dissolution of their union.
  
  ***
  
  Frick turned to the enforcers he had employed previously: the Pinkerton Detective Agency's private army, often used by industrialists of the era. At midnight on July 5, tugboats pulled barges carrying hundreds of Pinkerton detectives armed with Winchester rifles up the Monongahela River. But workers stationed along the river spotted the private army. A Pittsburgh journalist wrote that at about 3 A.M. a "horseman riding at breakneck speed dashed into the streets of Homestead giving the alarm as he sped along." Thousands of strikers and their sympathizers rose from their sleep and went down to the riverbank in Homestead.
  
  When the private armies of business arrived, the crowd warned the Pinkertons not to step off the barge. But they did. No one knows which side shot first, but under a barrage of fire, the Pinkertons retreated back to their barges. For 14 hours, gunfire was exchanged. Strikers rolled a flaming freight train car at the barges. They tossed dynamite to sink the boats and pumped oil into the river and tried to set it on fire. By the time the Pinkertons surrendered in the afternoon three detectives and nine workers were dead or dying. The workers declared victory in the bloody battle, but it was a short-lived celebration.
  
  The governor of Pennsylvania ordered state militia into Homestead. Armed with the latest in rifles and Gatling guns, they took over the plant. Strikebreakers who arrived on locked trains, often unaware of their destination or the presence of a strike, took over the steel mills. Four months after the strike was declared, the men's resources were gone and they returned to work. Authorities charged the strike leaders with murder and 160 other strikers with lesser crimes. The workers' entire Strike Committee also was arrested for treason. However, sympathetic juries would convict none of the men.
  
  All the strikers leaders were blacklisted. The Carnegie Company successfully swept unions out of Homestead and reduced it to a negligible factor in the steel mills throughout the Pittsburgh area.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Yes, but unlike certain activist judges, the Founders did not see any mystical penumbras emanating from their work.

From the Federalist No. 43:

At first view, it might seem not to square with the republican theory, to suppose, either that a majority have not the right, or that a minority will have the force, to subvert a government; and consequently, that the federal interposition can never be required, but when it would be improper. But theoretic reasoning, in this as in most other cases, must be qualified by the lessons of practice.

"But theoretic reasoning...must be qualified by the lessons of practice." This is only one quote of many. But I think it proves the point adequately.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
From the Federalist No. 43:



"But theoretic reasoning...must be qualified by the lessons of practice." This is only one quote of many. But I think it proves the point adequately.

That activist judges can subvert the constitution and make up rights?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
You're argument is anachronistic,like unions. There is no rationale for any special protection for organised labour anymore. Unfortunately, are markets and then our reactive politicians will have to be schooled in this lesson the hard way. Via competition that kicks our ass. Outsourcing. I applaud every union job lost to outsourcing to India and China and Latin America. These union socialist fucks will reap what they sow.

Tell that to all the part-time workers at Wal-Mart who will never be full-timers, because full-time employees have to be paid benefits.

And the crap about applauding every union job lost to outsourcing overseas is just plain old fucking mean-spirited.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
That activist judges can subvert the constitution and make up rights?

You're hopeless. I give up on you.

ETA: To any Admin. Please put Penske on my ignore list.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Not Bob
The Homestead Strike

• With Carnegie's carte blanche support, Frick moved to slash wages. Plant workers responded by hanging Frick in effigy. At the end of June, Frick began closing down his open hearth and armor-plate mills, locking out 1,100 men. On June 25th, Frick announced he would no longer negotiate with the union; now he would only deal with workers individually. Leaders of Amalgamated were willing to concede on almost every level -- except on the dissolution of their union.
  
  ***
  
  Frick turned to the enforcers he had employed previously: the Pinkerton Detective Agency's private army, often used by industrialists of the era. At midnight on July 5, tugboats pulled barges carrying hundreds of Pinkerton detectives armed with Winchester rifles up the Monongahela River. But workers stationed along the river spotted the private army. A Pittsburgh journalist wrote that at about 3 A.M. a "horseman riding at breakneck speed dashed into the streets of Homestead giving the alarm as he sped along." Thousands of strikers and their sympathizers rose from their sleep and went down to the riverbank in Homestead.
  
  When the private armies of business arrived, the crowd warned the Pinkertons not to step off the barge. But they did. No one knows which side shot first, but under a barrage of fire, the Pinkertons retreated back to their barges. For 14 hours, gunfire was exchanged. Strikers rolled a flaming freight train car at the barges. They tossed dynamite to sink the boats and pumped oil into the river and tried to set it on fire. By the time the Pinkertons surrendered in the afternoon three detectives and nine workers were dead or dying. The workers declared victory in the bloody battle, but it was a short-lived celebration.
  
  The governor of Pennsylvania ordered state militia into Homestead. Armed with the latest in rifles and Gatling guns, they took over the plant. Strikebreakers who arrived on locked trains, often unaware of their destination or the presence of a strike, took over the steel mills. Four months after the strike was declared, the men's resources were gone and they returned to work. Authorities charged the strike leaders with murder and 160 other strikers with lesser crimes. The workers' entire Strike Committee also was arrested for treason. However, sympathetic juries would convict none of the men.
  
  All the strikers leaders were blacklisted. The Carnegie Company successfully swept unions out of Homestead and reduced it to a negligible factor in the steel mills throughout the Pittsburgh area.

Good story. I am pro-all of it.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Not Bob

Frick turned to the enforcers he had employed previously: the Pinkerton Detective Agency's private army, often used by industrialists of the era. At midnight on July 5, tugboats pulled barges carrying hundreds of Pinkerton detectives armed with Winchester rifles up the Monongahela River. ...
All the strikers leaders were blacklisted. The Carnegie Company successfully swept unions out of Homestead and reduced it to a negligible factor in the steel mills throughout the Pittsburgh area. [/list]

Yes, but his art collection is something else.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Do you really think your PA bar registration is any better? Seriously, each of the 50 states and DC all have laws that prohibit an attorney from one jurisdiction from practicing in another, except under limited circumstances. Isn't that the same sort of barrier to entry as a union card?

Oh God, yes. I couldn't agree more. There should be automatic reciprocity everywhere. But I guess that runs afoul of states' rights advocates.

I think the bar admission nonsense is the worst kind of local protectionism imaginable. Our fungible, transferable skill sets are no different than those plied by others who don't have such protections. We provide a service and should be forced to compete within anyone else anywhere providing the same service.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Tell that to all the part-time workers at Wal-Mart who will never be full-timers, because full-time employees have to be paid benefits.

That's life. Find a full time job. I know lots of low-skilled workers who work part-time who have better health benefits than I do. The market is a wonderful place for those with ambition and ingenuity.

Originally posted by taxwonk

And the crap about applauding every union job lost to outsourcing overseas is just plain old fucking mean-spirited.

Not really, because we all absorb the costs of union labour. i will take my Nikes made in Indonesia with cheap labour for a reduction in price. I work hard for my money and don't want to expend for socialist ideals.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Tell that to all the part-time workers at Wal-Mart who will never be full-timers, because full-time employees have to be paid benefits.

No one has to be given benefits, wanker. They could give health and other non-retirement benefits just to managers and above if they bought insurance rather than self-insuring. It's just not good for PR. And, you can't exclude a category "part time" from retirement plans -- so if you have full-time and part-time people in the same job classifications, the way to keep people out is to ensure that they don't work more than 1,000 hrs/year.

But the thing where they were going to add somewhat strenuous physical activity (pushing carts in the summer in 90+ heat is strenuous) to every low-level job classification to discourage people with health problems (and probably the elderly) from applying was possibly, like, illegal. Heh.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
You're hopeless. I give up on you.

ETA: To any Admin. Please put Penske on my ignore list.

I thought we had a truce and were making progress. Why so much hate?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by andViolins
Sorry Spanky, but this is incorrect. Whether you are a public sector employee (see Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977)) or a private sector employee (see Pattern Makers v. NLRB , 473 U.S. 95 (1985)), NO employee can be required to be a union member.

Even if a contract requires union membership as a condition of employment (the closed shop clause), all that can be required is that the employee pay a fair share fee to the union. These "fair share fee payers" are not members of the union, do not have the right to attend meetings or vote on contracts, but they do enjoy all of the rights of the terms of the contract. The fair share fee usually ends up being around 93-94% of the total dues amounts.

The bottom line is that employees can be forced to pay money, but they cannot be forced to be "members" of a union.

aV

That is a distinction without a difference.

If the employer is forced to pay their dues, then in reality they are forced to join. Now if the employer could refund the dues to the employee who did not join the union there would be freedom of choice and action.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
More interesting and individualized stories, but not as significant in terms of social development. Unions, and the fear of socialism/communism, linked healthcare and retirement to employment, and with that went a long way toward ensuring a more reasonable standard of living for huge numbers of people. They were the solution: now they are part of the problem.

Middle-class entrepreneurs can't get anywhere unless there are people to buy from them. The whole industrialization/mass production thing had to shift work from individuals and small groups to huge numbers of people working in a single location. We wouldn't be where we are if it weren't for this type of labor --we'd be in the pre-industrial, small shopkeeper era and all have shit-ass standards of living.

Re your first paragraph, that is true. But unions also gave us an unsustainable level of expectation in terms of what workers were entitled to. Competing against foreign workers, companies utilizing our high priced workers simply can't compete. Unions never hedged for globalization.

In re to the second paragraph, you're taking a different view of the union member. I see him as uncreative and lacking ambition. You see him as a necessary lower level consumer who fuels the ambitious person's business plan. We're both right. I just have this naive ideal that if everyone tried to better himself, instead of just getting a union card and phoning in a worklife, we could achieve some amazing things. But from a pragmatic, practical perspective, your point - basically, "we can't have winners without losers" can't be debated.