Should Canada adopt right-to-work legislation?

[Bar Sinister]

Exactly my point, what have unions done in the last 70 years, because those changes are 70 years old now
Financial scandals, murder, fueling money into politics, more money scandals,
all kinds of crap.


Yaaaayyy, Soviet Union.. so no, unions are not the be all and end all of a happy life. Needs other things.

Pretty weak reply. Just in case you missed the gist of my post (no surprise there) the unions I spoke of in Europe and Japan are still there. You want to know what they have done in the last few years? Well, they have kept their gains in place and actually expanded on them.

And the USSR reference simply shows your political and historical ignorance. The USSR referred to itself as socialist, but it was actually communist which is an entirely different kettle of fish. If you like I can explain the difference between democratic socialism and communism, but I doubt you would understand it.

And I find this comment particularly amusing. "Financial scandals, murder, fueling money into politics, more money scandals,
all kinds of crap."

You do realize that what you have described fits the giant businesses that dominate US politics perfectly don't you? Oh wait, I'm betting that you don't have a clue. Here is a challenge for you. Find me actual evidence of unions performing any of those actions and I will match it with scandals involving the moneyed elite. Guess who will have the easiest job?

 

[justlooking]

You want to know what they have done in the last few years? Well, they have kept their gains in place and actually expanded on them.

OK so first you complain that unions are being lowered to 20%, but now you are telling us that unions have made and kept gains...
Do you talk out of both sides of your mouth all the time, or is it usually just out of your ass ? :lol:

And the USSR reference simply shows your political and historical ignorance. The USSR referred to itself as socialist, but it was actually communist which is an entirely different kettle of fish. If you like I can explain the difference between democratic socialism and communism, but I doubt you would understand it.

The USSR was not communist.
Your ignorance is impressive.

Find me actual evidence of unions performing any of those actions and I will match it with scandals involving the moneyed elite. Guess who will have the easiest job?

So your idea to covering the crimes of unions is to deflect things to something else ?
Well, those are really good tactics. :lol:

 

[JamesBondo]

It is easy to bash unions, but here are a few irrefutable facts connected with their history.

1. The five day week came about because of unions

I work a 4 day compressed workweek. You tell your union to stay away from me.

2. The eight hour day came about because of unions

I have a 6.5 hour day. You tell your union to stay away from me.

3. Most safety measures in industry came about because of unions

The safety measures in my job come from me and provincial legislation.

4. Pension plans came about because of unions

Because most employees are too dumb to save for their own retirement.

 

[Bar Sinister]

OK so first you complain that unions are being lowered to 20%, but now you are telling us that unions have made and kept gains...
Do you talk out of both sides of your mouth all the time, or is it usually just out of your ass ? :lol:



The USSR was not communist.
Your ignorance is impressive.


So your idea to covering the crimes of unions is to deflect things to something else ?
Well, those are really good tactics. :lol:

I think your real problem is that you need to take a remedial reading course. I say what I mean and it is dead accurate. The 20% figure was for Canada and the US (check back to the original post since you seemed to have missed that). Unions in Europe are as strong as ever and as I mentioned have actually expanded on workers' benefits.

The USSR was not communist? Are you a complete moron? I am afraid I really can't discuss real issues with someone who is so completely ignorant. Next you will be telling CC members that there were no Nazis in Germany during the 1930s and 1940s.

And what crimes of unions? I note as usual you have nothing to back up your ignorant position. And I also notice that you completely ignored my comment on the crimes of corporate America.

I work a 4 day compressed workweek. You tell your union to stay away from me.



I have a 6.5 hour day. You tell your union to stay away from me.



The safety measures in my job come from me and provincial legislation.




Because most employees are too dumb to save for their own retirement.

I'm glad that you have benefited from union ideas. And you are overlooking the fact that many workers in North America get paid so poorly that they have no money to save after paying for basic expenses.

 

[White_Unifier]

why force a person to join a union when there are other options? for example, if Canada adopted co-determination laws like Germany has, that would be far more effective in promoting worker's rights in a more cooperative environment than more confrontational anti-scab legislation (the name itself being quite defamatory, derogatory, and insulting).

And here's a little-known fact. Sweden, one of Europe's most 'socialist' states, also has right-to-work laws and no official minimum wage! Through granted it also has German-style co-determination laws too.

 

[taxslave]

I think your real problem is that you need to take a remedial reading course. I say what I mean and it is dead accurate. The 20% figure was for Canada and the US (check back to the original post since you seemed to have missed that). Unions in Europe are as strong as ever and as I mentioned have actually expanded on workers' benefits.

The USSR was not communist? Are you a complete moron? I am afraid I really can't discuss real issues with someone who is so completely ignorant. Next you will be telling CC members that there were no Nazis in Germany during the 1930s and 1940s.

And what crimes of unions? I note as usual you have nothing to back up your ignorant position. And I also notice that you completely ignored my comment on the crimes of corporate America.



I'm glad that you have benefited from union ideas. And you are overlooking the fact that many workers in North America get paid so poorly that they have no money to save after paying for basic expenses.

It would appear that you know nothing about the history of the labour movement in Canada.

 

[Bar Sinister]

why force a person to join a union when there are other options? for example, if Canada adopted co-determination laws like Germany has, that would be far more effective in promoting worker's rights in a more cooperative environment than more confrontational anti-scab legislation (the name itself being quite defamatory, derogatory, and insulting).

And here's a little-known fact. Sweden, one of Europe's most 'socialist' states, also has right-to-work laws and no official minimum wage! Through granted it also has German-style co-determination laws too.

Actually it is not a little known fact, except perhaps among the right-wing members of CC. However, codetermination so far as I understand it requires corporations to allow union members to sit in on corporate meetings. At least it is as it is practiced in Germany and Sweden. Also, as I have pointed out before, minimum wage laws are not needed when over 80% of the workforce is unionized as it is in Sweden.

It would appear that you know nothing about the history of the labour movement in Canada.

And you know nothing about reading. The post was discussing union benefits. If you wish, however, I can give your a history lesson on the union movement in Canada.

 

[White_Unifier]

I could be wrong, but I thought the workers' seats on the board were chosen from among the workers, not from the union members. I'll need to look into that. If not though, then why limit it to union members and not just open it to all workers? If the goal to promote the interest of workers or of union members?

Either way though, Sweden still has right-to-work legislation.

 

[Bar Sinister]

I could be wrong, but I thought the workers' seats on the board were chosen from among the workers, not from the union members. I'll need to look into that. If not though, then why limit it to union members and not just open it to all workers? If the goal to promote the interest of workers or of union members?

Either way though, Sweden still has right-to-work legislation.

It may not be easy to find non-unionized workers in Germany. All large corporation must be unionized by law. As I pointed out in a previous post; following WWII Germany was required to become highly unionized to promote democracy. Sadly, the USA which was the architect of the plan failed to adopt the same measures itself. As a result American workers lag behind their European counterparts in economic benefits.

 

[justlooking]

The USSR was not communist? Are you a complete moron? I am afraid I really can't discuss real issues

Yes, we know you can't discuss much.

Under the real definition of communism, workers would decide what happened to any surpluses from the factory.
This never happened in the USSR; a system of state managers was brought in to decide what and how much was made
and sold for in the factory, the shop, the farm.

You can call it many things, socialist, state capitalist, totalitarian, dictatorship, police state, murderous.. but it was never communist.
Instead of many private CEOs, there was one: the State.

I understand the word 'communist' gets abused a lot, and I don't to slide this topic, so I will stop here.

 

[JamesBondo]

The post was discussing union benefits. If you wish, however, I can give your a history lesson on the union movement in Canada.

Keeping in mind that this comment was not directed at me....

Wrt our exchange, you seem to have listed some historical achievements of unions, and i countered by pointing out that my benefits are greater than those achievements.

 

[White_Unifier]

It may not be easy to find non-unionized workers in Germany. All large corporation must be unionized by law. As I pointed out in a previous post; following WWII Germany was required to become highly unionized to promote democracy. Sadly, the USA which was the architect of the plan failed to adopt the same measures itself. As a result American workers lag behind their European counterparts in economic benefits.

I don't know if Germany has right-to-work legislatin or not so I can't comment on that. I do know that Sweden goes though.

That said, I suspect that Swedish unions are probably more palatable than Canadian ones for a number of reasons.

Firstly, Sweden has co-determination laws just like Germany does. This means that a union can adopt a friendlier and more collaborative approach to labour-management relations through its representation on the board of directors than a Canadian union can. As a result, a Canadian union might adopt a more confrontational approach which could promote a backlash against it.

Secondly, Swedish right-to-work laws would also force a union to try to attract workers to join it willingly. This too would likely moderate it somewhat.

In Canada, a union cannot usually cooperate with management due to lack of representation and so adopts a more confrontational approach. And the lack of right-to-work laws allow a union to force an employer to become closed-shop, which in turn eliminates any need for the union to try to attract voluntary membership since it can force it by diktat. As a result, Canadian labour unions have a more confrontational culture and no motive to change that.

 

[JamesBondo]

Unions in canada show their contempt for democracy every time they spend mandatory union dues on political donations in a disproportionate leftard manner.

 

[White_Unifier]

Unions in canada show their contempt for democracy every time they spend mandatory union dues on political donations in a disproportionate leftard manner.

Another reason to have right-to-work laws. That way, members could vote with their feet whenever the union no longer represents their interests. What incentive is there for a union to respect worker interests when it knows it has its members by the balls anyway?

 

[JamesBondo]

I like paying for worker representation, but if i want to donate to a political party, i should have a say who it is. Ottawa already funds major parties based on popular vote, unions have no right manipulating that formula with my money.

 

[White_Unifier]

I like paying for worker representation, but if i want to donate to a political party, i should have a say who it is. Ottawa already funds major parties based on popular vote, unions have no right manipulating that formula with my money.

And right-to-work laws would allow you to walk out until the union smartens up. The free union market at work.

 

[JamesBondo]

And right-to-work laws would allow you to walk out until the union smartens up. The free union market at work.

How many babies have you accidentally thrown out with this line of thinking?

 

[White_Unifier]

How many babies have you accidentally thrown out with this line of thinking?

What do you mean?

 

[JamesBondo]

What do you mean?

you want me to step away from union representation, when the government just needs to pass new laws on the spending habits of unions. imo, you are a wrecking ball not a reformer.

 

[White_Unifier]

you want me to step away from union representation, when the government just needs to pass new laws on the spending habits of unions. imo, you are a wrecking ball not a reformer.

So you want to force people to join a union and then tell the union what to do. why not go in the opposite direction? Allow the union to spend as it wants and people to join or not join it. I like moderate freedom.