Garbage Strike - Give Me a Break

[Mrbig1949]

The USA with 50 states gives us a good experiment. High unionization rate=high average standard of living, low unionization rate in so called "right to work" states have low average standard of living.

Northern Europe, high unionization rate=high standard of living. This is not "my opinion" every economist knows that unions drive up wages for everybody not just their members because non-union employers must pay more or lose their good people. Economics 101.

I've worked in union and non-union environments. I would never work in a non-union environment again.

 

[someone]

The USA with 50 states gives us a good experiment. High unionization rate=high average standard of living, low unionization rate in so called "right to work" states have low average standard of living.

To bad you cannot present evidence to support this claim.

Northern Europe, high unionization rate=high standard of living.

See my last post.

This is not "my opinion" every economist knows that unions drive up wages for everybody not just their members because non-union employers must pay more or lose their good people.

Well I am one economist who does not know that. If you ever actually take the Economics 101 course you mention below, you would learn that labour demand curves are negatively sloped.

The threat of unionization may encourage a large employer to pay higher wages. However, for firms that don’t have to worry about the threat of unionization (e.g. smaller firms), the unemployment it creates is more likely to reduce the competitive wage rate they face..

Economics 101.

Clearly, you have never actually taken Economics 101. Although I hate teaching first-year economics, I have taught it in the past. I would suggest that you actually take the course or read a textbook for the course before you claim such courses teach the nonsense you claim they do.

I've worked in union and non-union environments. I would never work in a non-union environment again.

Union environments can increase the wages of "insiders". Moreover, the job protection can definitely benefit slackers. Thus, preferring to work in a union environment may be perfectly rational. However, that does not mean that the rest of society does not pay a cost. If you ever took that ECON101 course you mentioned, you would learn that the most basic economic principle is that there is no such thing as a free lunch (the technical phrase is that everything has an opportunity cost).

 

[Rockslinger]

Sorry , I grew up in Quebec and I have to call bullshit on this one. He may have been pulling your leg.

Sorry to beat this horse to death. Here is what happened.

I am doing some repair work on my porch on a SUNDAY. A pickup truck pulls up to the curb and a guy gets out. He says unionized workers are prohibited by law from working on a SUNDAY (Lord's Day and all that). I said I am not a unionized worker but the son of the owner of the property. He said doesn't matter (maybe this is where he might have been pulling my leg ).

 

[wantoplay]

Sorry to beat this horse to death. Here is what happened.

I am doing some repair work on my porch on a SUNDAY. A pickup truck pulls up to the curb and a guy gets out. He says unionized workers are prohibited by law from working on a SUNDAY (Lord's Day and all that). I said I am not a unionized worker but the son of the owner of the property. He said doesn't matter (maybe this is where he might have been pulling my leg ).

I call BS. If overtime is available, you are free to sign up. If you meet the criteria, you get the work.

 

[JohnLarue]

The argument seems to be I don't get this stuff with my job so unions should not get it either. You don't have to have a two-didget IQ to believe this but it helps. Either get off your lazy duff and start a union or move to a job that has one already. It is not ALL about YOU, it is about what is good for society in general. It is unions almost alone that make this society GREAT.

This is truly funny

1, Lazy???
The private sector does not tolerate lazy, so I think your comment is mis-directed at the wrong side of the argument.

2. Start a union or move to a job that already has one??
Perhaps a better route to success is hard work & being a team-player within the current organization & being recognized for the contribution to the organizations success. It has worked well for millions for a long time
The Us vs. them approach is so counter-productive

3. It is unions that have made society great???
Please, some reality here.
I will give some credit to unions for some benefits we all enjoy, however to characterize unions as negotiating for the good of all is hardly correct.

They are motivated to negotiate (strike / blackmail) what they feel they deserve for one specific group.
In fact unions completely ignore the cost of their demands to an organization or society as a whole.

Case in point, how does the population of Toronto benefit from having millions of tons of garbage not being collected?
There are health issues here & the union just ignores this

Who pays ? (not an union problem- the govt can raise taxes or the corp can raise prices)
They do not care just so long as they to bank 25 sick days a year

 

[squash500]

How much longer does everybody think this garbage strike is going to last?

 

[Mrbig1949]

They are paid by the public as are doctors, judges, many lawyers, teachers, profs, nurses, secretaries, caretakers, engineers, park rangers, soldiers, sailors, pilots, and the list goes on and on. So what. This is the way it is in civilized countries and BTW it is going to stay this way notwithstanding your anti-union nonsense. You can piss into the wind if you want to but you know the consequences.

 

[Keebler Elf]

This is truly funny

1, Lazy???
The private sector does not tolerate lazy, so I think your comment is mis-directed at the wrong side of the argument. FALSE

3. It is unions that have made society great???
Please, some reality here.
I will give some credit to unions for some benefits we all enjoy, however to characterize unions as negotiating for the good of all is hardly correct.

They are motivated to negotiate (strike / blackmail) what they feel they deserve for one specific group.
In fact unions completely ignore the cost of their demands to an organization or society as a whole. LIKE INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES DON'T DO THE SAME?

I love how people think unions = bad and private sector = good. In many respects, unions stir shit up and keep things that would otherwise be unknown to become public knowledge. If you don't think private companies are chock full of corruption, waste, mis-spending, etc., you're living in a dream world.

 

[JohnLarue]

I love how people think unions = bad and private sector = good. In many respects, unions stir shit up and keep things that would otherwise be unknown to become public knowledge. If you don't think private companies are chock full of corruption, waste, mis-spending, etc., you're living in a dream world.

Your in comatose world if you do not acknowledge that the private sector , while not perfect, does a much better job of driving those same inefficiencies (corruption, waste, mis-spending, etc) out of their operations.

Why? because there is personal incentive to do so in the private sector.
It is as simple as that.

This sick day issue is a perfect example
Try asking a private sector boss to bank 25 sick days every year.
I assure you the answer will be no once they stop laughing.

 

[Mrbig1949]

Yea, the private sector is great. I for one really like Enron, Worldcom, Wall Street hedge funds, Sub-Prime mortgages, General Motors (or is that Government Motors) Chrysler, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Fort McMurray, global warming, pollution of the oceans, smoke stacks, the tobacco industry, private car insurance, man you could go on and on. The private sector is so efficient and no corruption either. LOL

 

[blackrock13]

They are paid by the public as are doctors, judges, many lawyers, teachers, profs, nurses, secretaries, caretakers, engineers, park rangers, soldiers, sailors, pilots, and the list goes on and on. So what. This is the way it is in civilized countries and BTW it is going to stay this way notwithstanding your anti-union nonsense. You can piss into the wind if you want to but you know the consequences.

What hornswaggle!!

There's a whole list of 'civilized' countries that don't pay some of the people you listed; most doctors, nurses, lawyers, and professors aren't paid in Australia, New Zealand, USA just to name three.

Your list is so full of holes and shows that you shoot your mouth off befire you grey matter is engaged. So try again.

 

[blackrock13]

Yea, the private sector is great. I for one really like Enron, Worldcom, Wall Street hedge funds, Sub-Prime mortgages, General Motors (or is that Government Motors) Chrysler, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Fort McMurray, global warming, pollution of the oceans, smoke stacks, the tobacco industry, private car insurance, man you could go on and on. The private sector is so efficient and no corruption either. LOL

Let me see, Chrysler and GM are unionized. I'm not sure but I think I can say with some certainty that Global warming is not a result of non union corporations. Not too many unions in China, India and Russia; roughly 1/3 the population of the earth. So your point is full of hot air MB. You're just shootin' in all directions and hoping to make a point somewhere with someone.

 

[Rockslinger]

It is not complicated. If there are no public sector unions our taxes will go down (probably by a lot) and this has to be a good thing and our garbage will be collected and efficiently which is also a good thing. Who can argue against lower taxes and efficient garbage collection ?

 

[Mrbig1949]

Union garbage collection at high wages is more efficient since when the private sector collects it it is usually Darryl and his other brother Derryl doing the collecting and they screw it up all the time. Who cares about lower taxes, I probably paid double your taxes and it doesn't bother me. A high wage economy is a high standard of living economy and unions drive up wages and make worplaces safer as they should. With your philosophy the kids would still be in the mines.

 

[benstt]

Union garbage collection at high wages is more efficient since when the private sector collects it it is usually Darryl and his other brother Derryl doing the collecting and they screw it up all the time. Who cares about lower taxes, I probably paid double your taxes and it doesn't bother me. A high wage economy is a high standard of living economy and unions drive up wages and make worplaces safer as they should. With your philosophy the kids would still be in the mines.

Not true, Etobicoke has very good service. Far better than when it was city employees.

I care about keeping taxes contained.

 

[oldjones]

WHAT?!?! Now you're talking crap.

The private sector pays VERY WELL for "good workers". The beauty of the competitive labour market (NOT a union market) is that strong performers always have the option of going to another company. A standard practice for many (most?) private companies is that management will review and rank their employees each year. The top performers (retention priorities) are given big raises and big bonuses.

Unions exist to protect mediocrity. At the extreme, unions can make sure that even the sloppiest, laziest, most insubordinate worker gets to keep his/her job and an annual raise to boot.

But did you have to respond with the usual crap from the other side?

The private sector pays AS LITTLE AS IT CAN, for "good workers". The pitfall of the competitive labour market is that strong performers have to suck up what level of pay competition (so-called) amongst employers has established. While occasionally some private companies may objectively review, rank and reward superior employees when they feel they can, such 'bonuses' are arbitrary gifts, not compensation for effort, achievemnt or ability; the job that 'earns' one this year may not the next year. A superior worker quickly moves on, and the workforce declines.

Unions exist to equalize the relationship between mangers and employees. At the extreme managers react to the slightest hint of worker organization with hidebound resistance and antagonism, guaranteeing a poisoned work atmosphere and freezing out any but the minimum contributions from the workers making their products, resulting in declinig product quality, and preserving outmoded production modes.

 

[train]

They are paid by the public as are doctors, judges, many lawyers, teachers, profs, nurses, secretaries, caretakers, engineers, park rangers, soldiers, sailors, pilots, and the list goes on and on. So what..

None of whom have 18 bankable sick days and are significantly greater contributors to society. Thanks for reinforcing the point.

This is not "my opinion" every economist knows that unions drive up wages for everybody not just their members because non-union employers must pay more or lose their good people. Economics 101.

Do they give you something to drink at the union meetings or are you the one handing it out. You are obviously unaware of the advancement in economic theory since Marx.

 

[masterchief]

Not true, Etobicoke has very good service. Far better than when it was city employees..

Immensly better. Unlike other parts of the city where they just toss the cans back somewhere within the vicinity of your property, in Etobicoke they actually take the time to stack and place the empty cans/bins back where they found them.

 

[train]

......................................(maybe this is where he might have been pulling my leg ).

I can guarantee you he was.

 

[oldjones]

Right, so it's the "Man's" fault that worker attitudes suck? Sure.

My experience differs from yours. I work in a service industry. It's all about hiring, keeping and encouraging good people. In all of my jobs, the "good" employees have been paid much better than the average and weak performers.

You're talking about nepotism and playing favourites. I'm not saying that it doesn't exist. But, the companies that do this will not last.

Speaking of "great" societies - how many of the world's "great" civilizations were/are socialist or communist?

As much "The Man's" as the unions' fault. Unions weren't born in eras of employer generosity and fairness. You might point out when those eras were, if you want me to name great civilizations that were socialist (which is entirely off-topic BTW), but the Northern Europe does better than North America on many indexes of well-being that matter, and I'd take-well being over spurious 'greatness' any day. Wasn't 'greatness' an aspiration of the Third Reich after all?

You know nothing of my experience; I freelance, and if I'm not better than the other candidates I don't get the gig. That contest happens every couple of months, and I have yet to meet a producer who offered high to attract better, as you describe. Sure better workers could bargain for and get more, and I do.

But only a union could deal with working conditions—which still routinely don't meet Employment Standards—and ensure that the better workers didn't gobble the whole pay-pie leaving the beginners and able but less gifted at minimum wage. Not because the producers were greedy pigs, but because it suited their budgets and goals to operate that way, and damn the replaceable nobodies they'd be shut of in a few weeks, anyway.

And although everyone'll tell you it's all about hiring and encouraging the good people, if you haven't seen the flavour of the month sweep aside ability or a record of good service in your workplace, you haven't been paying attention.

As for favoritism and nepotism, glad you brought them up (I didn't). While they definitely operate in unions as much as in any organization, at least a union gives another possible avenue of redress.

Unions weren't invented like the lightbulb, to make someone rich. They were the natural response to oppressive, unsafe working conditions enforced by selfish and ruthless employers, who used their influence to have any worker organization declared criminal conspiracies. When the world's all rosy and fair, and we don't have to worry that attitude still prevails in boardrooms—roll back the pensions, but don't touch my $25mill anyone?—then we won't need unions and I'll happily keep my dues money.