|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 5:18 pm Post subject: Post your good Union stories here. |
 |
|
I've had discussions on this board with people who claim that labor unions are the reason we don't all live in mud huts on a dollar a day, whilst filthy capitalists hoard all the wealth.
Seeing that labor unions are so awesome, I challenge supporters of them to post links to news stories where unions have done some good in the community, developed an innovative new product, helped their employer to make a better cheaper product (which is why he employs you after all), hell! I will even accept a union official petting a puppy or kissing a baby as a one point.
I'll start;
http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/04/01/teachers-unions-dont-work-too-hard/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Good challenge.
Though why would a union be developing new products? The jobs of unions are to protect terms and conditions of members from abuse by employers, in addition to providing other services for members. My mother gets cheaper house insurance through her union.
Also aquaintance with the history of working conditions during industrialisation in England show adequately to my mind the reasons why unions became necessary, and subsequent history have shown them to be as fallible as any other organisation or institution thought up and manned by humans.
I find unions to be neither inherently awesome or terrible, they're neutral tools for protecting members from abuse, and as a tool unions can be used properly (fighting unfair dismissal, gross exploitation, etc), or they can be abused (holding employers/departments to ransom, etc).
Leave the good Unions alone man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chellovek wrote: |
Good challenge.
Though why would a union be developing new products? The jobs of unions are to protect terms and conditions of members from abuse by employers, in addition to providing other services for members. My mother gets cheaper house insurance through her union. |
Why wouldn't it be in the union's interest to find ways of making the product cheaper or better, or even new products? When the business is more prosperous so are the employees.
Insurance likely subsidized by the govt or employer.
| Quote: |
| Also aquaintance with the history of working conditions during industrialisation in England show adequately to my mind the reasons why unions became necessary, and subsequent history have shown them to be as fallible as any other organisation or institution thought up and manned by humans. |
The industrial revolution is marked by consistent improvements in working conditions with or without unions. Initially people went from subsistence farming to working in factories for higher wages. Eventually they could afford to buy the stuff that was produced in the factories. They never would have been able to buy that stuff if they had remained in the fields, barely subsisting.
As they became richer, eventually they could afford to demand better conditions. Obviously this was a slow process, but unions did nothing to expedite workers to higher working conditions, better pay and higher standards of living.
| Quote: |
I find unions to be neither inherently awesome or terrible, they're neutral tools for protecting members from abuse, and as a tool unions can be used properly (fighting unfair dismissal, gross exploitation, etc), or they can be abused (holding employers/departments to ransom, etc). |
Unions by their very definition lower total welfare. Sure, maybe they raise the welfare of a few workers in the short term, but they severely impact total welfare of the WHOLE economy in the long run.
Thinking like this yours is the norm. Seeing the benefit to one group but missing the total cumulative effect on all groups of people. Politicians, journalists, hell even economists do it every day.
| Quote: |
| Leave the good Unions alone man. |
Which unions are good? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes but that is what I am saying, it is their job to look after their members, not the lot as a whole. Developing new products is the responsibility of company R&D. If you look at Germany I believe there is much closer collaboration between the unions.
As for seeking to favour one group over others, you can say the same about employers groups (CBI, etc), motoring groups, any number of vested interest groups that seek to promote their members interests above all others, and yes they too harm others through seeking over emphasis on decisions that favour only themselves in the short term and harm society over the long-term.
I think you're view of the industrial revolution is a bit rose-tinted. What happened was ugly and it wasn't the steady ascent to prosperity that you seem to think it was.
I already pointed out what are the good functions of unions- fighting unfair dismissals, etc etc. They also provide a counter-balance to management.
I'm not even particularly pro-union, but this anti-union stuff is like some kind of time warp back to the 1980s. Unions are nowehre near as powerful as they once were. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chellovek wrote: |
Yes but that is what I am saying, it is their job to look after their members, not the lot as a whole. Developing new products is the responsibility of company R&D. If you look at Germany I believe there is much closer collaboration between the unions.
As for seeking to favour one group over others, you can say the same about employers groups (CBI, etc), motoring groups, any number of vested interest groups that seek to promote their members interests above all others, and yes they too harm others through seeking over emphasis on decisions that favour only themselves in the short term and harm society over the long-term.
I think you're view of the industrial revolution is a bit rose-tinted. What happened was ugly and it wasn't the steady ascent to prosperity that you seem to think it was.
I already pointed out what are the good functions of unions- fighting unfair dismissals, etc etc. They also provide a counter-balance to management. |
Fair enough.
| Quote: |
| I'm not even particularly pro-union, but this anti-union stuff is like some kind of time warp back to the 1980s. Unions are nowehre near as powerful as they once were. |
This isn't entirely true. Teachers' unions, in particular, are as powerful as ever and are doing real damage, for their own gain, to by far the nation's most important commodity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Teachers' Unions +1.
You got a point there, I read some of the stuff from teaching conferences in the UK and some seem to have become politicised as well, which can create problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Unions are organizations of workers. They work to protect the jobs, compensation, and working conditions of the employees. That is their sole purpose.
I used to be in a union. It was a good job. They left the innovation to the employees responsible for innovating and left the community service to the community servants.
The day unions start taxing their constituents to do things other than protect their working environment is the day that union needs cut down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Teachers' unions, in particular, are as powerful as ever and are doing real damage, for their own gain, to by far the nation's most important commodity. |
No, I wouldn't say they are as powerful as ever. If they were, charter schools wouldn't be emphasized more and more. Michelle Rhee, the superintendent here in DC, fired a ton of them last Fall. Prior to her arrival, that would have never happened. The NYC school district has slowly reformed and the teacher's union has weakened some.
I'd also wager that Obama's attempt to reform the educational system in the US is an attempt to (partially) circumvent the teachers' unions.
In short, yes, they're still very powerful, but I think their power has peaked, and they are slowly losing influence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Teachers' unions, in particular, are as powerful as ever and are doing real damage, for their own gain, to by far the nation's most important commodity. |
No, I wouldn't say they are as powerful as ever. If they were, charter schools wouldn't be emphasized more and more. Michelle Rhee, the superintendent here in DC, fired a ton of them last Fall. Prior to her arrival, that would have never happened. The NYC school district has slowly reformed and the teacher's union has weakened some. |
Where have charter schools been emphasized? Certainly not by unions or govt. One of Obama's first acts as pres was to cut the successful voucher system for DC students.
| Quote: |
I'd also wager that Obama's attempt to reform the educational system in the US is an attempt to (partially) circumvent the teachers' unions. |
Hmm, I'll believe it when I see it.
| Quote: |
In short, yes, they're still very powerful, but I think their power has peaked, and they are slowly losing influence. |
Here's hoping.
Remember the purpose of this thread is to post links to "good deeds" done by unions. After a dozen or so replies, we have zero! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
Where have charter schools been emphasized? Certainly not by unions or govt. One of Obama's first acts as pres was to cut the successful voucher system for DC students. |
No, Congress voted to not extend it a year ago. It is not dead yet, still going on. And there is hope it could continue.
WSJ article
Charter schools boomed in my hometown of Oakland. I will look more info tomorrow (I'm about to go to bed). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| Remember the purpose of this thread is to post links to "good deeds" done by unions. After a dozen or so replies, we have zero! |
That's because the purpose of labor unions isn't to do "good deeds," it's to look out for the interests of its members. As .38 special correctly stated, a union that starts using its resources to do generic "good deeds" for a community or in an attempt to innovate new or cheaper products is doing wrong by its members; its resources are for a very particular purpose: advancing the interests of its members.
A good union would never make the news, because it would never do anything newsworthy. A union standing up for its members in a discreet, effective way is something virtually invisible to anyone outside the corporation in question. As such, no idea what you expect here. Criticize particular unions for going too far all you like (your attacks on the teacher's unions for example are totally justified and reasonable), but to attack the entire concept of unions because they don't use their members' dues to do free R&D for the company they work for, or donate their members' dues to community causes, is just confusing.
Any union that engages in the kind of behavior you're asking for is a bad union, based on the purpose of a union. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Remember the purpose of this thread is to post links to "good deeds" done by unions. After a dozen or so replies, we have zero! |
That's because the purpose of labor unions isn't to do "good deeds," it's to look out for the interests of its members. As .38 special correctly stated, a union that starts using its resources to do generic "good deeds" for a community or in an attempt to innovate new or cheaper products is doing wrong by its members; its resources are for a very particular purpose: advancing the interests of its members. |
Fair enough. They are pretty good at committing bad/stupid deeds. I was just thinking there might be some examples of them balancing it out with some good deeds.
| Quote: |
| A good union would never make the news, because it would never do anything newsworthy. A union standing up for its members in a discreet, effective way is something virtually invisible to anyone outside the corporation in question. As such, no idea what you expect here. Criticize particular unions for going too far all you like (your attacks on the teacher's unions for example are totally justified and reasonable), but to attack the entire concept of unions because they don't use their members' dues to do free R&D for the company they work for, or donate their members' dues to community causes, is just confusing. |
In theory a union can help workers to have all the information about the going wage rate and conditions in any given industry. In reality they extract economic rents for a chosen few, to the detriment of everyone else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| In reality they extract economic rents for a chosen few, to the detriment of everyone else. |
This is pretty obviously true; any gains a union makes come at a cost to someone else. Either the products created will cost more, or the management and/or owners of the company will earn less. If the public is willing to continue buying the goods at a higher price, though, then isn't that their real market value anyway? And if the public isn't willing to continue buying them, the business will either stop giving into its unions demands, or (rightly) go out of business itself for agreeing to give its employees more than it could afford to.
This is actually probably why teachers unions got so out of control; their employer doesn't have the same incentive to fight back against their demands that a privately owned company does. The idea that public servants shouldn't be able to unionize is something I could see a case for; applying a capitalist idea like labor unionization to a non-capitalist environment like public sector work seems like a recipie for disaster. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gibberish
Joined: 29 Aug 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Just watch that movie where Stallone gets on a soapbox. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gibberish wrote: |
| Just watch that movie where Stallone gets on a soapbox. |
Over The Top? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
