I have to go to my none union job right now and may not get a chance to get back to you today as my wife is dragging me to an AC/DC concert tonight.

Not a big concert fan me but it is my wives favorite band wouldn't you know it.

But if you can please answer the firing question, I am curious to hear how you protect workers rights/human rights in large corporation without unions.


Enjoy your day, Rick.

 

Sorry, but I find that to be an extremely laughable reason for why unions are needed. If a business owner doesn't get along with someone below him he out to be able to fire him, period. I've yet to ever hear of union formation on the basis of someone getting canned because they don't get along with the boss.

If I own a company and an employee is making me money I'll let his supervisor deal with him so long as he's following company policy. Any competent boss would.

Let me ask you something... have you ever owned a company with employees? The reality is as the employer you created and own the job position, not the employee.

People don't go up to companies and say "you have my job." Rather, companies say "we have a job available." If you lose your job and are replaced, the job still exists because it belongs to the employer, not to you. You are there to be an asset to the company, and are payed compensation in return. If as an employer I decided to can my entire work force that's my business but anyone who's built up a company wouldn't do that if they could avoid it - you don't sheld assets without good reason, be they capital assets or human assets.

30% of the Ford's UAW work force was absent from work on any given day at its peak. That's not an insignificant minority. How does a company compete when its dealing with that sort of internal inefficiency and can't fire people who are often absent? Someone like that needs to be canned when it becomes a problem, not ignored or stalled in union paperwork.

Did you know the printout of UAW regulations and processes weighs about 40lbs. That's bureaucracy for you.

How come the majority of corporate America seems to get along just fine without unions? Do you see people rallying at Google, HP/Compaq, IBM, Starbucks, or any number of other jobs clamoring for a union?

 

I think much of the bummed hohum about unions this and that involves nothing more than perception and very little solid fact if any.

Of course that's just my 2 pennies worth!

 

I agree with Ken to an extent, but he is extremely hard on the unions and refuses to give them any credit. Common sense would tell you they have done some good and helped raise the standard for the middle class. He reads too much, or thinks too much, or something. I have lived in a UAW enviroment all my life and can see the good and the bad and there is some of both.

 

I work in a union shop for the Post Office and I see both sides of the argument each day. I see the good steady employee who is being harassed by management recieve the protection that he deserves based on his work ethic and attendance record. Likewise I see the person who should have been fired months ago for poor attendance and poor work quality recieve the same protection.

Ken and I have danced this dance a couple of times and I'm not going to dance anymore. I used to take his words personal as I am a union member, however, I now realize that he refers only to the UAW though he does cast a broader net than that. The UAW and the Poastal unions have soooo little in common that I just don't care what anyone says anymore.

It's against the law for letter carriers to strike. The same should apply to the UAW and any other union that can collectively shut down a company. It sickens me to think that well compensated people woud stretch the very fabric that binds the union together in the first place. I guess people will inherently test the rules and attempt to get away with what they can.

The letter carriers union proudly and vocally preaches "an honest days pay for an honest days work". Those words mean something in my workplace, they should mean something in all shops.

Tim

 

i agree... it does make sense to keep on the lot what will sell.. and im not here to debate that... but same time it does make me wonder too.. Like ive said in other threads ive been looking around local dealerhips trying to find a v10 just to test drive but none of the local guys are carrying them.. (even have been told by one they were no longer going to stock them cuz the gas prices scared that market off)... but does make me wonder sometimes.. If they were to keep an equal number of both on the lot.. would they sell more of one over the other or not.. but thats just the problem if they just think they wont sell.. and not even bother to try and keep some on the lot it makes it hard for us non-retailed people to put belief in what theyre saying..

like even at the start of this thing you had someone wanting a manual.. but if all they had on the lots were auto? wheres the vehicles for the people who wanted to try the manuals.. theyll just end up looking elsewhere for what they want sometimes.. even if it means going to the competition to get it..

 

I had to order my V-10 in my 01 super duty along with the manual trans. I don't if your dealer is worried about you shopping someone else, as no one keeps a manual tranny in a full size on the lot. There's not even a manual tranny offered anymore on a lot of half tons. Lets face it, manuals are becomming extinct.

 

Ken, your feelings about the inept union is the same as mine. For a short time I was a member of the UMWA, one of the most twisted unions in the USA. I have watched at the end of a three year contract, a stike happens and the local workers end up losing about everything they gained during the last contract.

I had the opportunity to witness a walkout one night. It just blew my mind. Apparently an entire section was pissed because management would not let them off to go to a "AKC Santioned Coon Hunt." And before the tight-assed PC moderators get their panties in a wad, it is a RACCOON hunt so back off! I did not witness it, but the tale was that one of the so called brothers pissed on another's boot, filed a grevience, walked out that night and went to their "Coon Hunt."

Was I pissed, Yes. Why, because these union protected asses caused me a work shift, money that I needed.

Then, the night I quit, a so called brother, that had caused numerous accidents was behind me sounding the roofbolts with a damn mallet. This idiot brought down 30 feet of top behind me, leaving me with no escape. I was trapped for 20 hours waiting on rescue, which I ending up doing myself, destroying a piece of equipment in the process. Guess what, the idiot kept his job, instead of not only being fired, he should have been fined under the federal laws. I later found out that he got several other workers seriously hurt a few years later and he was still allowed on the job.

So

Union Protection of Jobs = Allowing idiots to keep a job.
Union Protection of Jobs = Money taken out of my check that did not benefit me.
Union Protection of Jobs = Expenses borne by companies that drives up prices.

This happened to me almost 30 years ago. I have not worked a union job since.

 

Its simple really, a good worker, that is competent at their job does not need a union.

A worker that is lazy, useless, or just wants to be able to do as they please, and not be good at their work.....They need a union to protect them.

I worked for a union company for 2 years, and the BS that went on there was aweful.

I would never again work for a union company, I know that.
I hate working with useless, lazy, fatasses.

 

They don't have unions in W,Va, there lucky to have roads. However, the tooth brush was invented in W,Va, anywhere else, it would be called a teeth brush. I just noticed you were a fellow hillbilly. I 'm from Petersburg over in Grant co.

 

No, they don't really have a union, it is a corrupt political organization resembling the mafia. Is that close enough?

 

theyre not offered on the 1 tons either...least not from the looks of it on their site... 350's only had autos..

 

I love my manual 7.3 except in the stop and go traffic in the city. Geared too low, three shifts between block red lights is a PITA. Other than that, much better fuel mileage and with low lock and granny gear, it won't climb a tree, but it will sure raise hell trying.

 

as do i..both my car and truck are manuals.. use to have autos and almost every one of them i had problems with... but ive got the same issue with my trucks tranny that you do with your truck.. its geared really low.. i can actually putter around at 25 in 4th and the truck could care less its doing it.. its only a 4spd and am in 4th before hitting 40.. i timed it once to see how long it actually took me to go from 0-60 and it took it 30 seconds flat to get up there...

 

I heard that the manual wasn't long for the world in the super duty. I didn't know it would be so soon. I heard a while back that manual tranny sales world wide was only 9%. That includes all makes, not just ford. I'm lucky I still can get a ranger with a manual. When the fiesta comes out, it will have a 6 speed manual option, thats cool.
There was alot of unions with mob ties, the teamsters were big into the mafia. also as Ken has said, they have communist origins to boot. My Dad was in the UAW for 30 years and it hated it. He loved working for ford, but didn't like the union. Thet tried to tell him how to vote, that really pissed him off. His machine would break down, instead of letting him go work somewhere else, they would send him home because of his union classification. He would get paid for the full day, but he's an old W,Va boy, he believes in a days pay for a day's work. He would ask them to let him at least swepe floors or something. They would tell him if he didn't want to go home, to go set in the cafeatria and play cards untill his machine was fixed. He retired back in 82, so we don't know if it's still like that, or worse. He could tell you stories about the UAW.