Union wages keep other wages up = Unions represent all workers Union or not

The question becomes who out there wants to work for less money? Such that the Right to Work legislation is pushing?

Why should anyone work for less?

Union wages keep other wages up because employers are usually searching for the best which in fact may mean matching union wages and benefits.

In realty the unions work for all workers whether all are union members or not.

Wal-Mart and other large corporations do cost taxpayers a lot of money not only with tax abatements and such. And in some cases the cost of food stamps because employers such as Wal-Mart = Always Low Wages.

Could the multi billion $$$$ Wal-Mart industry and other billion $$$$$ corporations afford $15 per hour? Of course they can. Hell my part time job pays me $15 per hour plus paid vacations and the controlling partners are nowhere near billionaires nor is the business generating billions of $$$$$.

 

what you say is true

 

Nicely said. And now you know why the greedy have done everything in their power to kill unions (and doing it quite nicely, might I add) - because it forces owners to pay decent wages and/or share a part of the profits from those employees instead of keeping it. And we all know the political party that best represents that greed, don't we?

 

Yep and they're fewer and fewer union jobs in the process. I rethink your theory on this one.

 

Yes, and the reasons have more to do with politics than common sense. Or do you actually think that we will explode with great paying jobs if Republicans do manage to kill of the union movement? Sorry, I've seen workplaces with unions and those without. Unions work.

 

But mostly they don't.

 

History and common sense says otherwise, but you are entitled to your opinion.

 

Just out of curiosity, are you a member of a union? And before you ask, I've been a member of two for twenty-eight years, HERE and the CTA.

I have to agree with QLB, mostly they don't work. I agree that there IS a need for unions - but there ISN'T a need for the unions that exist in the here and now.

 

Nope, you only need to look at the history of the UAW and OCAW. Theft, shoddy workmanship, nepotism, corruption and low productivity are their legacies.

 

All union wage demands do is cause inflation.

 

I manage union employees and they are the single biggest reason why my company is hurting. Unions are a cancer.

 

Been a member of two (long time ago), but did work for a unionized shop for 25 years, though admin staff not unionized. Listened to our 'good old boys' complain about how they had to join the union, yet their wages and benefits were well ahead of those companies providing similar services who were not unionized. Never did figure that one out.

I gather you'd rather negotiate yourself with the government? Lotsa luck wid dat.

 

Utter BS. There may have been some validity to ths 80 years ago but today when more than 50% of union workers are state federal and local government employees (in some states much much more) Union wages are in fact bankrupting us.

 

Let's put it this way: I've dealt with two union reps who were corrupt. One so much that people were actively looking for ways to quit the CTA. Only had one who was honest and actually cared for our welfare. Two others who played favorites so much that literally half the staff that isn't brown nosing the reps are completely ignored. One of those had an aide who told a teacher to shut up in front of his own students for no apparent reason, and because that aide worked for the union rep, nothing happened when the teacher complained about it.

We all at least had to admit that being a union crony worked for her, but as far as making a case for why unions should even exist in the first place, their own reps don't do that so well. One out of five really doesn't cut it. And Lord knows what the odds are above the rep level. I've personally found that dealing with the admins works better at resolving problems than going to the union. When I say that we need unions, just not the ones we have at the moment, I'm not joking.

I believe that part of the problem is the closed shop system that the CTA has. They know we have to be a member whether we like it or not, so the union brass can do whatever they want and we have no say in it. If we could opt out, then the unions would HAVE to work hard to work for us AND our union dues, they'd have to impress us enough to stay a member. It's no wonder they want to keep that monopoly. We'd certainly have better reps if we could quit, I'm quite sure of that.

 

Of course auto industry management, which was more interested in cutting corners on product quality, using the cheapest components possible, and their reliance on planned obsolescence had nothing to do with it.

 

I didn't say that but considering the quality of the workforce you can hardly blame them.

 

Unions seem to be giving back more than they are getting and not representing all their members equally even with the same employer. I would never join one like that.

There is an interesting one playing out locally as they are on the eve of having the vote. There are 3 groups of employees at issue and it seems like the prospective union is trying to play them off each other to get support. There are the regular old employees, the temp agency workers, and the zero-hour contract employees. Most of the grievances are by the zero-hour employees so it will be interesting to see if the other employees actually vote for the union. The zeros think they should be paid to be on-call and have hiring preference over the temp agency workers. I don't see that the regular employee have much to gain other than to be putting part of the paycheck and possibly their jobs at risk since the employer will find a way to close this plant and "consolidate operations" elsewhere in a few years if they unionize. I have no doubt about it. This employer built this plant in the US to escape some of the European unions.

 

How is that?

 

the claim is walmart doesn't benefit all americans because they pay lower wages? is that a fair summary of your statement? I don't want to put words in your mouth...

but the average american saves over $2000 a year as a result of the competition walmart forces among other companies, making the average american life $2000 cheaper annually... I'd say thats helping all americans? more specifically the low wage and poor people who work for them?

I've always been fascinated that people will hate walmart for having low margins and high volume as a method to make profit, but they will LOVE apple for having high margins and lower volume as a means to make profit... so which company really does more for consumers, the company making consumer goods cheaper and easier to afford, or the company making products expensive and harder to afford? yet people always seem to favor apple over walmart... fascinating...

https://www.aei.org/publication/every-month-walmart-gets-one-profit-day-from-its-sales-while-apple-gets-7-5/

using this margin difference between the two companies, if apple was paying workers equally as walmart pays theirs... an 8x difference should be normal... 3% margin vs 24% margin right... so apple should be paying the average worker well over $70 an hour... but yet, apple does not have that average, they average roughly $12 an hour company wide... apple is sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars of cash, while walmart only has a couple billion...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/24/business/apple-store-workers-loyal-but-short-on-pay.html?_r=0

apple has so much cash, it could BUY walmart, IN CASH... if it wanted to... why is nobody ever outraged at apples practices?

 

Not fan of apple, and end of guys post did say Walmart and other billion dollar company's...i didn't know apple sales people didn't get commission, so yea...kinda hate apple even more now. if your agreeing with the guy...your right, its bs.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...shop-factory-workers-paid-just-1-12-hour.html
What i got from his claim is that unlike apple though...Walmart is indirectly getting subsidized by our tax dollars to screw its employees.

 

apple gets plenty of "indirect subsidies" through our government and many other governments around the world... there are apple employees who receive welfare benefits of some sort... just like there are walmart employees who do also... there is NO comparison we can't make equally about both... except one... walmart has 3% margins while apple has 24% margins... walmart has a couple billion dollars of cash, apple has HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of cash... yet we never see the smug people who demonize walmart, apply that same scrutiny to apple... and thats the point I guess... apply logic equally and all those smug folks wouldn't buy apple products, just like they refuse to shop at walmarts... but they don't ever seem to actually get rid of their iphones do they... double standards suck...

 

Apple just takes advantage of slave labor over in China so it's all cool. No unions or safety laws over there to get in the way of profits😀. Oh yeah. $100 extra for memory that cost them $2. Nice markup a holes. Imagine if Apple made
Phones here and made a reasonable profit instead of an astronomical one? Might have more respect. Wonder how many liberals hate Walmart but praise Apple for the same exact practices?

 

Much of the reason for the unions shrinking has to do with their own greed. They got so much BS put into contracts that people could come to work and do nothing at all. And trying to get rid of dead weight that was in a union was much more expensive than just paying them to do nothing.
They went overboard, IMO.

But to the OP, yes, union jobs do increase the wages and benefits of other workers in the area.

 

I will agree with you. But many who love Wal-mart and how cheap their stuff is, like to complain about all the welfare people are getting. Many Wal-mart employees receive gov't subsidies.
Most probably don't as they are people who are providing the 2nd income to the family or are single themselves.
But no one can realistically raise a family being an employee of Wal-mart. Unless mid to upper level management.
No, I don't have nice links like you.

I may be wrong, but I'd bet Wal-mart employs many more people than Apple. Apple has most production overseas. Yet another problem why people have to get gov't subsidies.

- - - Updated - - -

I have never purchased an apple product. Not even 1 Itune.

 

They won't, that's why Obama issued his executive amnesty. Somebody has to do the low paying jobs, Obama found a way to make that happen.