UnionFacts

[sluggish]

Because they want money they are not entitled to.  uhhh extortion, already covered.

So every group of employees that bands together is trying to extort an innocent, helpless employer?  This is an extremely narrow and incorrect view.

The UAW of the 1960s and 1970s did a horrible job of protecting its members and promoting itself.  I am ashamed to admit that my father was and is a member of local 569 (at one time the worlds largest local).

However, I am quite proud of the fact that my great-grandfather participated in the Great Sit-Down Strike in 1936.  It needed to be done.

The fact of the matter is this:  Very few employers pay their workforce what it's worth.  They pay the workforce what they have to to retain them.

[SteveBailey]

So every group of employees that bands together is trying to extort an innocent, helpless employer?  This is an extremely narrow and incorrect view.

The fact of the matter is this:  Very few employers pay their workforce what it's worth.  They pay the workforce what they have to to retain them.

The FACT is this, a workforce is worth what it costs to retain them and not a penny more.  Any attempt to justify paying them more than this is false, wrong, incorrect. If a worker is worth more than he is getting paid, there is an employer somewhere that is paying that amount.  You are wrong.

[Airhead]

The FACT is this, a workforce is worth what it costs to retain them and not a penny more.  Any attempt to justify paying them more than this is false, wrong, incorrect. If a worker is worth more than he is getting paid, there is an employer somewhere that is paying that amount.  You are wrong.

So it's OK for employers through collusion to keep the costs of labor down, but it's not OK for employees to organize to better their wages?

Uh...OK.

And BTW- EVERY workers' benefit we have today- 40 hour work weeks, safety in the workplace- came about because of organized labor.

[SteveBailey]

So it's OK for employers through collusion to keep the costs of labor down, .

No, that's criminal.  Denied

[sluggish]

No, that's criminal.  Denied

So you agree that the worker's right to organize should not be infringed...

[SteveBailey]

So you agree that the worker's right to organize should not be infringed...

no, I said it's criminal for companies to work in collusion to fix wages. This thought never considers workers.  how did you get to that conclusion or are you just desperate to make some point?

[LePaul]

Frankly, I loved the videos.  I thought they were comic genius.

[sluggish]

no, I said it's criminal for companies to work in collusion to fix wages. This thought never considers workers.  how did you get to that conclusion or are you just desperate to make some point?

So how do you propose to prevent companies from doing this?

(I'm not desperate for anything just confused as to how someone who seems to be intelligent can be so naive of the workings of the world)