UAW --- R.I.P.

[Sass]

The UAW President now primarily controls the fate of the members of the UAW and the future success of Ford, GM, and Chrysler -- to put it bluntly. Now, with wages at all three automakers nearing $75 per hour, the UAW will be negotiating it's own life in talks with the big three.

 

I will never join a union and it's truly a shame to know or see anyone who is part of one. Any union is operated by one or more top officers who receive compensation only for being the top of that union! This !@#$%^&*le, UAW President, is one that has very little interest in the success of the motor companies which it operates. If the union workers at Ford, GM, and Chrysler operate in similar fashion to other unions, most of the workers there do VERY LITTLE towards the business goals. They simply collect a paycheck and count the years until retirement. All in all, it will be those very people who demand social security benefits well into their late years in life and will probably form some type of Social security union which impacts the very tax we all pay on a monthly basis similar to the way the unions operate now.

 

As for Ford, GM, and Chrysler, I feel sad. Although I have never purchased a new American automobile, I can understand why their vehicles have always been sub-rate and of poor design.

 

We call these three automakers - American. IF that's true, the last 40 years reflect nothing but the deepest misguided lack of true American spirit ever known. Let them fade into nothingness - they are NOT Americans that I know. I'll never consider UNION people to be anything but the worthless animals they are.

Edited July 23, 2007 by Sass

[Greased_Lightning]

Yeah, from my perspective unions cause more problems than they solve and union leaders have been historically corrupt or they misrepresent the others. Back when unions were new, they had a real goal to improve worker safety, decent pay, benefits, etc. Nowadays that's less of a problem because a worker can just sue a company for being negligent.

 

Unions these days don't win themselves any points with regular people when they strike and cause major inconvenience and economic loss. Just look at the airline industry. Also, the pressure on employees to join a union can be really unfair and the fact that if they don't join they may not receive benefits is just plain !@#$%^&*holery (new word?). Too many politics and politicians in the union game.

[NBVegita]

Unions have their ups and downs.

 

A major issue with unions is that promotions and raises are not based off of performance. They're based off of tenure. That can become a huge issue. I chose not to join the union at my employer, and right now they're having a problem. They have loads of old union employees that do nothing, and they can't fire them because they're protected by the union. So they're doing a m!@#$%^&* early retirement offer to try to clear some dead weight.

 

When unions start hurting the productivity of a company, beyond strikes even, they have failed.

[Dav]

When a union is truly a democracy of employers with just goals they work very well.

 

In the 19th century people were killed for forming unions.

 

Other industrial towns were built with no pubs, not because drinking was disagreed with but because it reduced worker productivity and was a place where people would form unions.

 

The problem occurs when high powers such as governments or the upper tiers of a cooperation gain a level of control in a union. At this point things become far less the opinion of the people.

[NBVegita]

Also when you have employees who are in and out of unions, what benefits union employees sometimes hurts the non union employees.

 

Unions do have a good side, but they also have a bad side.