It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Rexnord Bearing Officially Decides To Move Hundreds Of Indianapolis Jobs To Mexico Trump???

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

My father was a union sheet metal worker for 42 years. Retired 3 years ago. My father in law is also a union retired sheet metal worker. Construction unions were great 40 years ago- now it's a joke. I was a union carpenter for 12 years. Moved out of the city, got deep rural, started my own home building buisness. I couldn't even afford to keep my house if my shop went union. It's just not what it used to be. The B.A.'s make all the cash, workers get screwed. I paid my dues for nothing in return, won't do it again.




posted on Nov, 25 2016 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Natas0114

Could the pay be artificially held down becasue of illegal immigration and under the table work. It costs the consumer the same, and the owner of the business can pocket the $.

I have seen this in dry wall, the owner hires some really scuzzy workers, still same cost to the consumer though.



posted on Nov, 25 2016 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: suvorov

I'm non union and make 30+, the unions help set the wages. Do you think if the workers were making 15$ an hour the company would stay?




Unions killing the industries.
How about taking all of the money you pay to the union and use it to reduce you wages, that might help.



posted on Nov, 25 2016 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I don't know. I reinvest 10% of each check back into the company's account, at the end of the year when I do the accounting, whatevers left I take half of and split it between the guys. Good years it's about 1200, bad years it's 2-300. But, we use our equipment to cut 10 cord of firewood for each of us, so it offsets the heating bills. I literally do everything I can think of for my crew. Anytime someone has an idea, we talk about it together and see if it's doable. We try hard not to waste anything, and we work together on everything. If we went union I wouldn't even be able to pay em 15 an hour, and they make nearly twice that now. Not to mention my billing rate would have to double, which means we wouldn't even have work. Im not a buisness man, just a carpenter.



posted on Nov, 25 2016 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: chuckk

I don't understand your comment.



How about taking all of the money you pay to the union and use it to reduce you wages, that might help.



posted on Nov, 25 2016 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: darepairman

Agreed, why do people find it perfectly acceptable for CEOs and upper management to have a contract but not for hourly? Who else in this world can get millions of $ when fired, only CEOs are that important.

That seems to be a crying shame that people think that paying your help is such a bad thing.



posted on Nov, 25 2016 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: darepairman

Agreed, why do people find it perfectly acceptable for CEOs and upper management to have a contract but not for hourly? Who else in this world can get millions of $ when fired, only CEOs are that important.

That seems to be a crying shame that people think that paying your help is such a bad thing.


I guess it comes down to this: If you have the skills that give you enough leverage in contract negotiations that you get a severance package if fired, then it's on the company for having agreed to it in the first place.

How much leverage do hourly employees have? Generally the only leverage an hourly employee (or even most salaried employees) has is if they can show they're highly in demand and that they have a higher offer in hand from another company. That shows you have a higher market value that the company has placed you at.



posted on Nov, 25 2016 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

What you describe is a self defeating scenario.

Hourly people used to have power with unions. Labor is just as important as leadership from CEOs. But with no ability to walk out and have many, many other industries walk with you, you can't force the gains in productivity to be shared with the labor side of the equation.

So with no union no contract, no contract no union and exploitation sets in, as we are seeing. I think that was the plan when the air traffic controllers were fired.

When Reagan fired the air traffic controllers there was a shutter through the unions, and look at pay and benefits since the Reagan pres.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Natas0114




My father was a union sheet metal worker for 42 years


I am a Union sheet metal worker, 28 years now.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
That is disheartening. That is a huge wage gap and I don't know how americans can compete. Cut corporate taxes and slash wages to $3/hr. How do we sustain our country going that direction.


There is only one answer to the question you pose.

"Free," (tariff free) trade is a mad race to the bottom that pits modern economies against developing ones which has a crippling effect on the standard of living in the already developed nation.

Especially when the cost of labor is only one of many advantages to be exploited by corporate outsourcing and/or complete relocation of their manufacturing sites.

They're also free to exploit the lack of environmental pollution standards and worker health & safety regulations.

The only really sustainable "Trade Agreement" must tax imports in order to offset the economic & standard of living imbalance between the trading nations.

If any multinational corporation wants to avoid the import taxes, they must build a factory and manufacture their goods in the same nation where they are to be sold.

I call it a "Build It Where You Sell It Policy" or incentive.

IMO, it's the only way to protect the standard of living in the developed nations.

A set of global worker & environmental standards would also have a huge positive effect, in more ways than one.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatfish

Taxing imports for sure is the logical way to go. But, I seem to recall in the 80's people calling for cheaper goods. I am ok with paying a little more for a product. I remember when one color tv was a luxury. I don't know how your generation would like it.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:07 AM
link   
It's a little more complex than that. Slapping tariffs on everything might seem like a good idea, unless you are in a U.S. business that exports a lot of stuff. Tariffs can also screw us over if other countries start playing trade war, and even impede our own production in terms of importing things we can't make or produce.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: MOMof3

My generation? I doubt they'd mind too much if it meant a better, more secure, life for their children & grandchildren.

By the way, I'm a father of two and a grandfather of two who turned 60 this year.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatfish

Then we are of the same generation, I am 6 yrs older. We wanted to pay the lowest price for products and buy houses and that affected how the lawmakers structured the taxes. I am not sure that was good for our kids or not.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
It's a little more complex than that. Slapping tariffs on everything might seem like a good idea, unless you are in a U.S. business that exports a lot of stuff. Tariffs can also screw us over if other countries start playing trade war, and even impede our own production in terms of importing things we can't make or produce.


It never "screwed us over" or crippled our economy prior to our adoption of free trade agreements.

That all happened after the adoption of NAFTA & awarding China with "Permanent Most Favored Nations Trading Status."

Those two things opened the door to outsourcing and global relocation of our manufacturing base.

Under the type of agreement I would propose, If you're a American company who currently exports a lot of goods, you would also be free to build a manufacturing plant in foreign countries where your goods are sold.

If you're market share in a given country won't support the expense of building a factory there, then pay the tax.

How simple is that?

ETA: If you're exporting/importing to or from a nation who's economy, standard of living and environmental protections are equal to our own, there would be no tax either way.
edit on 26-11-2016 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: suvorov
Union workers are overpaid and they work 1 hour a day. Time to make room.


If you don't know what you are talking about, it's usually better to remain silent.

There was a time when factory workers were being injured on the job on a daily basis due to dangerous and inadequate working conditions. They worked long hours with no overtime. They had no sick leave and no time off. They were subjected to dangerous chemicals without protection. There was no workman's compensation, and barely time to eat a sandwich at the lunch break, with no breaks in between. If you were injured on the job, you were out. No compensation, no medical expenses covered.

Americans fought hard to unionize, often at personal peril. They changed things for the better and you would demonize them.

You've been listening to too many people who begrudge being forced to be fair to their employees. If you have a thinking cap, you should put it on.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatfish

We were sold a lie. We were told that a service economy is going to be just fine. Of course we were told this by the media. The media is owned by large corps/wealthy men who have a vested interest in the new service econ. Servic economy is low paying, low skilled, and for the vast majority is dead end.

Seems to me that there is an fragile web that has been woven, and with the new media, the fragile web mayy be starting to fall.




My generation? I doubt they'd mind too much if it meant a better, more secure, life for their children & grandchildren.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll

Well stated!

It's obvious that suvorov doesn't have a clue when it comes to the union movement or even the benefits that he/she indirectly enjoys because of it.

I think that kind of ignorance is a byproduct of the frustration incurred from being underpaid and overworked at a dead end job with no worker representation or voice.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Yes, we were indeed lied to.

Although, I don't blame the media. They just repeated what they were fed.

The media didn't push Congress to enact the legislation that is crippling our economy.

That blame falls squarely on the shoulders of corporate special interests and the politicians they own. And in part, on the voting public who continues to allow this ownership to continue.

Bottom line is......Corporations should only be allowed to exist if they can do so in a world designed around the needs of people and not the other way around.



posted on Nov, 26 2016 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatfish

I do blame the media, it is there job in a free society to be the canaries in the coal mine. And I don't believe they were fed, I believe they were told.




Although, I don't blame the media. They just repeated what they were fed.

edit on 26-11-2016 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join