My opinionated opinion of the garbage strike

[blackrock13]

More attractive? A union without a closed shop is a begging institution. These states with so called RTW laws are economic basket cases. Also, ever notice that the states with strong closed shop teachers' unions have the best test scores where the states with weak or non-existant teacher unions are educational basket cases. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys. UNION=QUALITY .

Of the 22 states that have RTW, that's almost half of the union, 11 have a very large proportion of their population farmers and ranchers; hard working salt-of the-earth workers in the food basket part of the union. You start calling them basket cases you'll have the wrath of god brought down on you by those bible belt christians and I'd duck.

My question to you regarding the test score in closed states, with a large proportion of private schools in those states. Private schools tend not to have unions and their test score could skew the results of the comparison; yes/no?

Just a thought and a question to ponder.

Your comment about a union without a closed shop is a begging institution. Are you saying that what a union has to offer worker is so weak that it needs protection to exist. Is the product that weak it can't be accepted on it's merits?

Your comment trying to equate quality with union shops, I say 4 words; Chrysler, GM, Toyota, Honda. The buyers of these product might beg to differ.

Just more blind union rhetoric.

 

[Mrbig1949]

No private schools are out of it This is NCLB and NAEP scores. The closed shop is always voted on by the workers in the first place a democratic decision. Secondly, no one is forced to belong to the union, a tiny group opt out in Ontario each year for religious reasons usually Dutch Reformed Church (no loyalty higher than God) but they must pay the dues if they expect the raise etc. Those farm states are mainly concerned with farm unions. Although many are still family farms, agribusiness is moving in everywhere and don't want unions in canning and processing plants on on large farms that use non-family labour. Viva Ceasar Chaves.

 

[blackrock13]

No private schools are out of it This is NCLB and NAEP scores. The closed shop is always voted on by the workers in the first place a democratic decision. Secondly, no one is forced to belong to the union, a tiny group opt out in Ontario each year for religious reasons usually Dutch Reformed Church (no loyalty higher than God) but they must pay the dues if they expect the raise etc. Those farm states are mainly concerned with farm unions. Although many are still family farms, agribusiness is moving in everywhere and don't want unions in canning and processing plants on on large farms that use non-family labour. Viva Ceasar Chaves.

Now I know. More to ponder over my beer.

I then offer the Nature/Nurture condition into this question. That one could go on for days. I've also seen school board boundaries get tweaked enough to make political gerrymandering practitioners proud. Remember better scores mean more money for the school boards. I'm not saying it's cheating, because it's legal, but it is manipulation at it's best.

But a response to my quality comment was amiss.

 

[Mrbig1949]

When you consider whole state averages and small boundary issues are insignificant.

 

[JohnLarue]

Their contract came up afew months ago, you paid no attention, they threatened job action and the city settled, for a better deal than has you so exercised now. Their pay and benefits are a far greater part of your precious taxes than the trash collectors. A tiny effort at conststancy would make your 'opinions' more persuasive.

I did not know that, however
1. Their relative compensation should be higher as their is a risk they may get killed in the line of duty (Get the risk vs. reward angle). They also save lives, property and can not be as easily replaced (Get the supply & demand angle) ie their service is of a higher relative value

2, The absolute pay was probably excessive & if they are banking sick days like the collectors then it was not a good deal for the city. Next time perhaps

3. THEY DID NOT STRIKE during a recession or make their employer (the taxpayer live in filth)

A whole lot of common sense would make your opinions relevant and on point

 

[stang]

its so different from my home country, in thailand if anyone strikes they just get whole new set of workers or even pay someone to beat up the strike people! But they never have to do that because everyone is so happy to even have a job because have 100 people who would love to steal the job from you... in canada its lucky theres so much jobs that people can ask for more money without losing their work! But i think its bad that theyre making everyone in toronto suffer even if its for a good result!

You see, that makes sense to me.
We're too spoiled here.
If the job you have doesn't suit you, you should look for another one.

 

[oldjones]

No, not at all. Some people know far more than I about this tuff and express it so well

From 'Les Affaires', Frances version of 'The Economist'

Forced unionization harms the creations of jobs.
…edit…
Canada is one of the few industrialized countries where the labour codes permit unions to impose uniformally in a business, noteably by forcing them to employ exclusively those workers who are a part of an established union (the Rand Formula obliges the employer to deduct a union membership at the source for all salaries of a unit of accreditation) or which adhere to an umbrella union (closed shop). These two formulas are the rage in Quebec.
…edit…
I know it's a long, but you asked. I can cut and paste but usually like to us my own words, yet this couldn't be passed by without relaying to you.

As I'm sure you know, labour law in Canada is a pronincial jurisdiction. Therefore it's quite possible for ONtario to have one law and for an entirely different law to be in force in Quebec. Last I heard TOronto and it's civic workers' strike was in Ontario, where there is no closed shop in labour law. If you want to discuss Quebec labour law, let's start a athread on the topic.

And as I am also sure you know, the Rand Formula specifically speaks to the case of non-union members working in a unionized shop. So, far all this European writer's pronouncements, the article certainly doesn't establish that closed shops affect this strike, nor that they are the Canadian norm.

 

[onthebottom]

Isn't this strike over yet?

OTB

 

[Rockslinger]

As I'm sure you know, labour law in Canada is a provincial jurisdiction.

Unless one is in a federally regulated industry, labour law falls under provincial jurisdiction. In Ontario we fought long and hard for the right to hire replacement workers during a strike. The problem is that commie Miller and his commie supporters will not exercise the right to hire replacement workers because they are commies and because the union goons will bash their heads in.

 

[oldjones]

Nope, just barely into the third week. It's revealed an enormous number of crybabies who went from Mom picking up after them to having the city take away their trash without ever figuring out they either had to do it themselves or pay for it.

 

[blackrock13]

Nope, just barely into the third week. It's revealed an enormous number of crybabies who went from Mom picking up after them to having the city take away their trash without ever figuring out they either had to do it themselves or pay for it.

....... and you know this how?

 

[Yoga Face]

The states that offer the right-to-work status are not saying no to unions. They can exist side by side with non-union shops. It's just that these states take away the closed-shop regime that exits elsewhere. It's the blending of the marketplace that makes these states more attractive and more successful.

A closed shop is a business in which union membership is a precondition to employment. It is opposed to the open shop, which does not consider union membership in hiring decisions and does not give union members preference in hiring. It is different from the union shop, which does not require employees to be union members as a condition of employment, but does require that they join the union or pay the equivalent of union dues within a set period of time following their hire.



It seems to me that "open shop" means the employee will hire non-union first and also hire more non-union if they strike which removes any power the union has.

"blending" is a nice way to say no negotiating power to the unions and all the power to the man. Any good capitalist will go to RTW states and countries

 

[Rockslinger]

It seems to me that "open shop" means the employor will hire non-union first and also hire more non-union if they strike which removes any power the union has.

Not true. The union has a lot of power. They have the power to wreck the company's equipment. They have the power to bash in the heads of the non-union employees.

 

[buckwheat1]

lol!!!

 

[blackrock13]

Blending inside a company would be very difficult to obtain, for obvious reason touched on in various post, but blending could be done inside a state. You want to work under a unions package work for them. If you want to work without unions support, work here.

The problem is that in TO, taxpayers don't have much of an option or when they've been able to arrangement for a second option, union 'goonery' raises its ugly head and shines another spotlight on the union movement.

 

[buckwheat1]

not to worry there still at the table talking lets go to arbitration and the whole problem would be solved back to work on Thursday

 

[Yoga Face]

Boy has my thread hit the stratosphere. It is like reading a textbook


Would someone answer my original question which is



1 Rich reinvest their moola into what makes the most moola not what is socially good. A good capitalist will sell you the rope that you will use to hang him if he can make a profit from it

2 Moola makes more moola in a endless cycle of moola making until the rich own everything

3 The working man does not get into this moola cycle because he spends all he earns to survive


4 This serious flaw of capitalism that makes the rich get richer will doom capitalism and freedom when it implodes upon itself. Sooner or later even Rush Limbaugh will have to agree that it is wrong that a few own everything and those that actually do the labor have nothing.

Capitalism was nearly lost during the depression, for example


5 Unions, as flawed as they are, save capitalism and freedom by slowing down this rich getting richer cycle and the benefits they establish for themselves eventually bleed down to all workers


I do not understand macro economics but this issue of the rich getting richer is an obvious and egregious flaw of capitalism

 

[blackrock13]

not to worry there still at the table talking lets go to arbitration and the whole problem would be solved back to work on Thursday

Once more it's,. let someone else do it, then I can claim, 'not my fault'.

True to form BW.

 

[buckwheat1]

They will get forced back to work and it'll end up at arbitration anyway so lets go now an dget it over with. I have been to arbitration it's an interesting process

 

[Rockslinger]

I do not understand macro economics but this issue of the rich getting richer is an obvious and egregious flaw of capitalism

Hey Yoga, you comingled a bunch of issues but the main one seems to be the "rich" are getting richer and this is somehow bad.

First of all. WHO are the rich? Is it those two guys sitting on a yacht clipping coupons on their government bonds? Someone named Gunter (check spelling) did a survey and found that almost all "rich" people were busy either at work in their businesses or working in various benevolent societies. Very few are the "idle rich". So, almost all "rich" people put their wealth to work in a business, charitable purposes or lend their money to governments so they can pay above market wages to public sector unions.

In case you are not aware, the largest pools of capital actually sit in public sector pension plans such as TEACHERS, OMERS, etc. to fund the overly rich pensions of public sector union employees so they can retire with an indexed pension at age 54 and go on to a second career or to bask in the sun in Mexico.