Civil War in Michigan over 'right to work'?

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Old college room mate is way up in the UAW he laughs about the whole thing. If you don't want the union to reperesent you that means it's between you and the company for wages bennies and everything. It won't take long to figure out what the membership is worth. Let me see no retirement whatever the management says you get paid and how much your insurance cost. Get laid off the union people will get called back first because of the contract between them and the company. Seniority will mean nothing




posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by mikellmikell
 



Seniority will mean nothing
My father retired from the Operating Engineers union.
Seniority didn't mean anything for him as a union member. I remember a lot of lean years where he had no work, yet younger union members (sons of stewards and business agents) had work when jobs came up.

Unions are just a branch of the Mafia.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
looks as if the unions in michigan just made the list.


but really, unions when they first came out were a good thing.
but over the years the corruption has grown out of control.
and then they place a strangle hold on companies, and force them to leave the country or go bankrupt.
just ask hostess.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
When liberals win, they are smug and ask for "compromise" from the conservatives.

When liberals lose, they declare civil war.

Sounds about right.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


Union bashing, great ...

You kids drink up on that Kool-Aid those corporations are feeding you.


I have said it over and over either you're NOT a blue collar worker or your worried about you're million dollar bonus.

Union's are being destroyed, they ARE losing the battle ... so that should make you happy.

But in other threads you guys will be talking about the middle class dying, the wage equality gap, bad economy, record corporate profits, record CEO pay and bonuses, falling American workers wages, benefits, money circulation to stimulate the economy etc. and never put it together trying to figure it out ... what happened exactly.

And it is not about telling a person what they can do with their money, political parties, taxes or the economy. It's about greed brother, greed at work. Heard a good one today as a matter of fact ...


A republican, a union member, and a CEO are all sitting at a table with a dozen Twinkies.

The CEO immediately takes 11 Twinkies for himself.

The CEO then turns to the Republican and says."Watch out for that Union guy - he wants part of your Twinkie."


Right there is the problem in a nutshell ...



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tazkven
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


Union bashing, great ...

You kids drink up on that Kool-Aid those corporations are feeding you.


I have said it over and over either you're NOT a blue collar worker or your worried about you're million dollar bonus.

Union's are being destroyed, they ARE losing the battle ... so that should make you happy.

But in other threads you guys will be talking about the middle class dying, the wage equality gap, bad economy, record corporate profits, record CEO pay and bonuses, falling American workers wages, benefits, money circulation to stimulate the economy etc. and never put it together trying to figure it out ... what happened exactly.

And it is not about telling a person what they can do with their money, political parties, taxes or the economy. It's about greed brother, greed at work. Heard a good one today as a matter of fact ...


A republican, a union member, and a CEO are all sitting at a table with a dozen Twinkies.

The CEO immediately takes 11 Twinkies for himself.

The CEO then turns to the Republican and says."Watch out for that Union guy - he wants part of your Twinkie."


Right there is the problem in a nutshell ...

when the unions make them load twinkes in one truck and their bread in another, just so they can get more union drivers to work . what do you call that.
the unions knew the hostess was in trouble but yet they refused to budge . so now being they hard head aholes rthey were they don't have any job.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


Are you kidding me?

They tripled the CEO's pay while asking the workers to take concessions and filing bankruptcy, how many times are you going to stand there and let someone spit in your face? This was the third time the workers were asked to take concessions on pay and benefits.

You got it backwards man ... it was the CEO's of Hostess that wouldn't budge.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Everyone is struggling with making a living in today's environment.

The Unions see the "Right to Work" law as a threat to their way of life.

Others, don't see the value in sending money off to the Unions in every paycheck.

There are no easy solutions where everyone is happy.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie

when the unions make them load twinkes in one truck and their bread in another, just so they can get more union drivers to work . what do you call that.



Not buying this either, and that is what collective bargaining is all about ... They could had simply negotiated removing whatever silly truck jurisdiction that was going on there but what it boils down to is it wasn't that.

It was corporate greed and bad management that brought down Hostess, not how many people where driving the trucks



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   





posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
i send a post ats about what is happening. you say they libel against you, yet the court documents anyone can obtain online show it completely different. you actually lost the lawsuit.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
keep up the governments good work there ats. *&%&$$ offf

just cancel my account this is a useless site, and what a shame. started off right but has ended up all wrong.
your masters will be proud of you. hopefully you nor them will be asked to answer for your lies and deception.
edit on 06/02/2010 by letscit because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Tazkven
 


well here is a warning from one union to the others.


The Teamsters union is urging the bakers union to hold a secret ballot on whether to continue striking. Citing its financial experts who had access to the company's books, the Teamsters say that Hostess' warning of liquidation is "not an empty threat or a negotiating tactic" but a certain outcome if workers keep striking.

does that not sound like the others unions, didn't care just wanted theirs, damn everybody else.

from this article,Twinkie maker Hostess wants to liquidate

statements made from the other unions,



The Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union said the company stopped contributing to workers' pensions last year, and the union wants pension benefits restored.

it didn't matter to them the company was going broke, they wanted hostess to keep on funding their retirement.





Wedrick Hollingsworth, business agent for Local 372-B of the bakers union, said union members took wage and benefit concessions four years ago and are unwilling to accept further wage cuts and reductions in health and pension benefits sought by the company. "It's just too much for these employees to accept. We gave concessions four years ago

four years ago, excuses me wasn't that when the bubble burst, and the economy tanked. there are many companies that have long sense shut their doors. at least hostess was trying to stay open and was keeping them employed.
edit on 13-12-2012 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Tazkven
 

oh here's another joke,



While Hostess has said the shutdown would result in the loss of more than 18,000 jobs and place the fate of more than 30 American brands in jeopardy, union President Frank Hurt said he believed there was "more than a good chance" that a buyer quickly would swoop in to buy the profitable parts of the company and give his union's members their jobs back. "I'm not in a position to promise anybody anything, but I'm in a position to be hopeful," he said Sunday.

but according to one liquidation firm,


Liquidation firm Great American Group Inc. GAMR -13.04% and C. Dean Metropoulos & Co., the owner of beer brands including Pabst Blue Ribbon, have signaled interest in Hostess's brands. But Mr. Rayburn said potential buyers have made clear that their interest partly is because a liquidated Hostess would be free of its collective-bargaining agreements.
"People are excited about the brands today, but I don't know how you connect the dots" to get to a full rebirth of the company, he said, especially one that incorporates the union members who had struck. "That's beyond wishful thinking. That, to me, is just misguided." Mr. Rayburn said he expected a buyer might pick a few of Hostess's


quote's above are from this article,Hostess Union Clings to Hope
who in their right mind would hire union employees that forced a company to shut down.
i find that utterly insane, please hire us we need a job, we wont force you to shut this time, we promises.
should've took what they could have and started looking for another job, but no, now their out on their butts, right before christmas and worried how they are gonna make it. and one of the greatest brands is gone.
edit on 13-12-2012 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


Hey man, people losing jobs is never funny, I never even meant to imply that. The workers voted to oppose the contract, think of a Union as people that vote with rights and representation just like in the American Government, it is not one man or a small group making choices, the workers have a right to vote and they voted to deny the contract.

If workers where treated fairly there would be no need for Unions but the fact is workers won't be treated fairly and is evident in the wage gap equality. Would it actually kill us if a cashier over time were able to earn 20 bucks an hour ? Cut back on CEO bonuses and pay these people ... What is so wrong with that? What is the arguments about .... really?

Sun Capital said they would buy Hostess Union and all ...


Private equity firm Sun Capital Partners wants to buy bankrupt bakery Hostess Brands Inc., Fortune has learned. The proposal would be to operate Hostess as a going concern, including reopening the shuttered factories and continuing union representation of Hostess workers.



"I think that we could offer a slightly better, more labor-friendly deal than what was on the table last week," says Sun co-CEO Marc Leder,



Leder also thinks that Hostess would be a relatively easy company to restart, particularly given that most of its vendors still have empty shelves where Hostess products used to reside.
Source

Someone making 20 bucks an hour will not trigger the Apocalypse, honest ...



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I'm from Michigan and I don't see a problem with this law at all. Maybe it will help me get a better job. Its really bare here when it comes to jobs.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
please explain this:

www.alternet.... org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/twinkie-ceo-admits-company-took-employees-pensions-and-put-it

somehow alot of you put this at the foot of the workers for fighting for a way to provide for their families. hasnt the cost of things been on a constant increase since the 60's, at least? what about the workers compensation? has that also increased? the answer is NO! matter of fact my pay has been in steady, massive decline since 2008. and i know, no one, not a single person who has not seen their compensation decline in that time.




According to a report by the Wall Street Journal , Hostess’ CEO, Gregory Rayburn, essentially admitted that his company stole employee pension money and put it toward CEO and senior executive pay (aka “operations”). While this isn't technically illegal, it's another sleazy theft by Hostess executives - who've paid themselves handsomely while running their company into the ground. Just last month, a judge agreed to let Hostess executives suck another $1.8 million out of the bankrupt company to pay bonuses to CEOs





Hummel notes that the “oops” letter became the justification for asking the workers to take a pay cut, which they agreed to, and his pay dropped from $48,000 a year in 2005 to $38,000 a year last year. But every year, $3 an hour of his compensation showed up in the worker’s pension fund instead of his paycheck. Year after year. With 18,000-plus workers, it was millions and millions of dollars. Dollars that the workers had paid in, at the rate of $3 per hour.





Then came the Bain-style takedown. In order to strip the company down to its individual brands and sell them off, piece by piece, the company needed to bust the union. The union said, “No,” so the company went to bankruptcy court – a method Bain and other vulture capitalists often use to kill off unions





In the meantime, the CEO and senior executives were paying themselves handsome salaries and big bonuses. And where was that money coming from?





Ironically, if you borrow money to pay for your education, you can’t get rid of that debt through bankruptcy – one of the “reforms” of the bankruptcy law during the Bush era. But if you’re a CEO or a buyout bankster and you borrow money from your employees’ trust fund to be able to cover your own paycheck and million-dollar bonuses, and then take your company into bankruptcy, neither you nor the company have to pay those employees back even a single penny. Part of their pension is picked up by federally-run pension insurance, and the rest is just lost.


If you dont have a problem with this, then you are the problem. I just wish for the day that common sense takes over peoples mindset. If this isnt theft in its purest form, then what is?



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 



Imagine it, a law that says you don't have to join the 'club' to work at a job.... Just because the 'club' says you have to.


Isn't this in itself hypocritical if you yourself believe in the freemarket? If private businesses wish to associate with private Unions, what right do you have to intervene? It seems as though conservatives wish to interfere with the rights of businesses when the agenda doesn't suit their politics, hmmm?

Again, nobody in this thread has demonstrated as to whether these right-to-work laws have done any good or any change? If the sole purpose of this law is to attack Unions and nothing else, then people really need to set their priorities straight.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 



Isn't this in itself hypocritical if you yourself believe in the freemarket? If private businesses wish to associate with private Unions, what right do you have to intervene?


If you can't see what goes directly against free market here, I will not be able to convince you.

Oops, almost forgot to say this.... 7%. ?
edit on 13-12-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join