Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GlyphGryph]

Some unions are bad. From everything I understand, this isn't one of them.

Management ran the company in the ground, tried to fuck over their employees to pad their own golden parachutes when they realized things were going south, and scapegoated the union as the cause of the whole mess when they had the audacity to say that they weren't going to work if they were being robbed.

And make no mistake, this was robbery, plain and simple. These workers were under contract, promised certain amounts of money for their effort, and management took it. They took the money they had contractually promised their employees and put it in their own bank account. There is no way to blame the union for that sort of behaviour.

And this isn't the first time they've done it, either.

[King DZA]

Hearing about how much trouble this event has caused people makes me feel bad about the fact that my first thought was, "What will happen to the Twinkies?"

[GlyphGryph]

Someone else will start making them, mostly.

[Zrk2]

Some unions are bad. From everything I understand, this isn't one of them.

From everything I've heard this sounds like the union doing the right thing, I just wanted to remind people that unions aren't all puppies and flowers.

[mainiac]

From everything I've heard this sounds like the union doing the right thing, I just wanted to remind people that unions aren't all puppies and flowers.

Which is relevant to the discussion in no way.  It's guilt by association and it's a negative contribution to the discussion.

[GalenEvil]

Walmart also has a 'Union is a bad word' policy.

[Knight of Fools]

Office Depot, too. Large scale retail mostly became a thing after the union boom, so not many unions were formed under its banner. I honestly think firing for someone for being pro-union is reprehensible. That's like firing someone for voting for a particular presidential candidate.

I personally don't have any experience with Unions, so I'm fairly neutral on their existence. From what I've heard, they can help or hurt, depending on how well they're managed, just like companies.

From everything I've heard this sounds like the union doing the right thing, I just wanted to remind people that unions aren't all puppies and flowers.

Which is relevant to the discussion in no way.  It's guilt by association and it's a negative contribution to the discussion.

...How are Unions not relevant when part of the conversation is about a Union? Should we stop talking about businesses in general, too?

[mainiac]

...How are Unions not relevant when part of the conversation is about a Union? Should we stop talking about businesses in general, too?

Because the discussion was about this particular union where none of that stuff applied.

[GalenEvil]

Yeah, it is my understanding that a Walmart up in New York closed its doors due to Walmart wanting to spite the few that dared attempt forming a Union. That understanding is from lack of actually researching it and mostly Walmart gossip (used to work there). It may be completely false but if true it shows just how against Unions Wally world is. I hope it's false, just so I don't feel worse for working for that soulsucking company.

Concerning Hostess: they make tasty treats and I'm a little sad to see them going away (yes?), but oh well. The Union made their attempt at doing their job of protecting Hostess workers and the high-ups decided they weren't gonna play. Good Union!

[Knight of Fools]

...How are Unions not relevant when part of the conversation is about a Union? Should we stop talking about businesses in general, too?

Because the discussion was about this particular union where none of that stuff applied.

I don't see how it's completely unacceptable to talk about something off-topic (the topic being Hostess, the union and layoffs), but related (related things being companies, employees, and unions). A mention of a union was made, an opinion was mentioned about unrelated unions, and someone appeared to disagree with it and started huffing about that person being off-topic. Imagine if the situation were reversed, with the union being responsible and the company being genuinely innocent, and someone mentioned that all unions weren't like that, while someone else mentioned that all companies weren't like that. Would either statement be off topic enough to warrant claiming it to be a negative contribution to the discussion?

It just seems to be a weak way to defeat a differing opinion by crying "off-topic" instead of actually continuing the discussion.
_{There's irony somewhere in this conversation, I just can't put my finger on it...}

[Neonivek]

Unions are great in theory, just like properly run companies are great in theory. In practice they make a few people rich (albeit not as rich as companies make people) at the expense of others. But unions claim it's for your own good while they do it. Now this is purely anecdotal but in my family I've found that people get screwed by unions at least as often as they get screwed by companies. More so in some cases.

This. Unions used to be good, back when they actually were about social progress and workers' rights, but at this point they're essentially no better than the corporations themselves.

My issue however is that instead of trying to FIX unions people are more then willing to burn them.

As bad as Unions are... it is far far worse a fate when they cease to be.

Yeah, it is my understanding that a Walmart up in New York closed its doors due to Walmart wanting to spite the few that dared attempt forming a Union

It isn't out of Spite. Unions would be absolutely devistating to Walmarts profit lines especially if it spreads from store to store.

A properly paid work force with reasonable hours would mean millions if not billions of lost dollars for Walmart. That is why it is FAR less expencive for Walmart to simply close a store that almost forms a union.

It is also why there needs to be something to protect workers just because of this strategy. Heck where I live some jobs have manditory unions just to prevent something like this.

[Knight of Fools]

My issue however is that instead of trying to FIX unions people are more then willing to burn them.

As bad as Unions are... it is far far worse a fate when they cease to be.

I think you're on to something there. Replace "unions" with "schools", "the government", "companies", and just about anything else someone disagrees with in part, but not a whole, and you've got the issue with any entrenched practice or organization. It's far more easy to simply cut a limb off than patch up a perceived deformation (With potentially devastating results). When several people are in on the debate, it gets next to impossible to decide whether surgery, amputation, or leaving it alone is the best course, so it's typically left as-is. I find it hard to believe that there's a "right" decision in the whole matter.

[Neonivek]

Well here is the thing Knight of Fools

You could probably perform open arm surgery instead of just cutting it off.

It may be more painful and require more recovery... but it has the best chance of having a better outcome.

Schools need to be lopped off and regrown

And Government needs to be patched.

Companies need to be patched

done.

[IronyOwl]

http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/11/16/fox-ignores-hostess-array-of-troubles-to-scapeg/191440 (sources 80% stat to WSJ)

    Last July, the court documents said, the compensation committee of Hostess's board approved an increase in then-chief executive Brian Driscoll's salary from to $2.55 million from around $750,000. The company had hired restructuring lawyers in March 2011, the creditors said, and filed for bankruptcy protection on Jan. 11.

    [...]

    Besides Mr. Driscoll, "other executives' salaries were increased by from 35% to 80%," the creditors said. The documents said that Mr. Driscoll subsequently renounced a portion of the increase while "other executives did not appear to have done so." Besides Mr. Driscoll, two other executives who saw their salaries increase have also left the company, according to the spokesman.[The Wall Street Journal, 4/4/12]

Thanks for this. I was wondering if anyone had credible sources to back them up, and this seems to be both rather credible and incredibly damning. Company suffering massive debt, already went bankrupt once, soon to go bankrupt again? Better triple the CEO's salary.

Damned unions.


In related news, another situation where two people are saying diametrically opposed things, so you can tell that at least one of them is spewing baseless bullshit as a smokescreen. At least this time we got to the bottom of which one (and mostly exonerated the other guy, I guess?).

Well here is the thing Knight of Fools

You could probably perform open arm surgery instead of just cutting it off.

It may be more painful and require more recovery... but it has the best chance of having a better outcome.

What does pointing out that there's a better solution have to do with the assertion that there's usually not enough political will to implement a solution at all?

[Knight of Fools]

It frustrates me to no end that high-up execs get massive bonuses while workers are left with absolutely nothing when the dust settles. There's no easy solution to it, either.

Well here is the thing Knight of Fools

You could probably perform open arm surgery instead of just cutting it off.

It may be more painful and require more recovery... but it has the best chance of having a better outcome.

Schools need to be lopped off and regrown

And Government needs to be patched.

Companies need to be patched

done.

I'm not debating that. I'm pointing out that several things can be done, with at least one person behind each opinion of what thing should be done. Unless the problem is relatively simple, which it almost never is in political landscapes, there will be several suggestions not only on whether it should be fixed or not, but also how it should be fixed. In such a complex environment it's difficult to tell which fix will be the most successful, and which will lead to more damage being done.

Consensus is the crux of the problem. No one can agree on what exactly needs to be done (Or even if there's a problem that needs to be fixed), and our current system leaves no room for second choices.