Collective Bargaining without Unions

1969

       
As John Lennon once prompted . . . . Imagine . . . . but in this case collective bargaining without unions. The nation talks about universal medical coverage, so why not universal labor coverage?

The government would take over what unions do now and replace them with simple workers councils to collect info only. They would be no union officials per se like now. Just people collecting economic data to justify the wages for a given area should be to have a living wage.

Living in the city can be more expensive then a small town, California then Wyoming.

Info would also be collected for labor infractions and forwarded to a regional office for parsing and recommendations of action, much like the Social Security Administration, for action to be taken.

The national workers council would be entirely self-subsidizing with a flat $10 per month per worker council fee. Money left over would go to improving worker conditions like safety and provide training programs. Enabling law would specify that money collected would only be spent on labor rights

All upper level management that currently exists in unions like president, vice-president and so would be at the national level, with no one holding lifetime appointments, would be within the Dept. of Labor. Current union leaders would be prohibited from applying to the Dept. of Labor for any job to prevent power plays and corruption which some unions are noted for.

They are points to be worked out, but what I have here would suffice to start with.

The idea is to take the best that unions offer, get rid of the worst and concentrate again on the common good like unions use to before the “me first” attitude took over.

Advertisements

Unionism and Collectivism

Q: “But what about giving the govt in excess of what you are suppose to owe for taxes, y’know, to support the war on poverty and the like”

A: “Ya know, I would if I believed the war on poverty was designed to eliminate poverty rather than punish the impoverished. So whatever extra I have goes to direct action.”

These are genuine quotes. The question I posed to an individual who identifies as a liberal, supports Bernie Sanders and believes that the federal government can be a force for good. But yet, he criticizes the government’s help of the impoverished, the administration that he vouches for.

But is it a matter of government or who gets the credit? There are factions within both political parties thatdon’t want the other factions to be the dominate force and drive the goals of the government. For these factions the government can only be a force for good as long as they are in control and get the credit.

The union faction wants to become the sole arbitrator of american life in perpetuity where everyone serves the needs of the union and it’s executives become a intellectual elite. It would be the “worker’s paradise” but only if the union let you be a member. It would be much like what Soviet Russia was about, an elite of a limited number controlling the masses and all the resources to enrich themselves while providing the minimum necessary to feed, clothe and shelter the workers.

This isn’t communism, it’s totalitarianism by any name that people will buy into and can be used to enslave people. Another example is the pre-Civil War plantation system, except this time everybody are the niggers to union massa’s

Call it what it truly is, collectivism, to enrich a few at the expense of the many. It is the anti-populism

Capitalism vs Socialism

Capitalism vs Socialism isn’t about the common good, though that is the usual main point of any argument, but is actually just a lever to manipulate people and gain their support. What it is actually about are two groups, the one in control and the one that wants control motivated by self-interest.

Self-interest can be described as wanting society, and the people of that society, to pander to their needs without having to work for the rewards of that labor. These people can be described as parasites and opportunists. The best example is the pre-Civil War plantation owner sitting back and sipping mint juleps while the slaves do all the work and suffer in poverty while the planation owner reaps the rewards and stature.

Self-interest can also be defined as devoting one’s life to an ideal and ignores any facts that run counter to that ideal or would undermine that ideal. If someone has devoted their life to overturning the established order, they are not about to admit any mistakes as it would completely undercut the foundation of their life and lead them to self-doubt and question everything they have ever done. Better to observe ignorance then honor.

Self-interest, at its root, is about whom controls the levers of power, individuals or collectives and the collectives, corporations and unions are the most notorious. You could say government is there to control the depravations, but it is one of these two groups who control the government and set the rules. There is no difference between the two, they are people just like any other people and while each group bad mouths the other, it should be remembered that, “we have met the enemy and they are us”.

Each of the two collectives constantly seek to undermine the other by blocking access to resources, usually money, used to convince people they have God on their side and that their strength is the strength of 10 because their heart is pure.

God leaves it to free will because these people don’t have pure hearts, just greed for money and power and never having to provide for themselves; to have a comfortable life at everyone else’s expense.

Although it can be argued that all nations engage in socialism, it can reasonably argued that all people, every day, engage in socialism when a person buys something and pays for it is a re-distribution of wealth. But for those that argue for a socialist form of government it is about a macro scale and that if a little bit is good, then a lot is better.

“A lot is better” . . . . not really. Anything done beyond moderation is done both badly and dangerously. It is like a junkie that has gotten hooked on drugs, it always takes a bit more and a bit more till finally they overdose . . . . like Greece did, and France, Spain and Italy have come close to.

Further, governments are notorious for running business badly. In Germany, at the beginning of the Internet Age, when all there was expensive dial-up connections, a company wanted to start a low-cost dial-up service, The company was small and plan to start small and boot strap from there. The service proved to be wildly popular but couldn’t be extended to everyone immediately and so the German government ruled if everyone couldn’t have it, then no one could and the company closed down.

For those that argue for socialism I would ask, that company had a service, offered at a low price that was popular, so why didn’t the government step in and help the company expand? It because the government supports the established companies, the big name companies because when is all said and done, politicians need to be re-elected and they need money to run for office.

In a capitalistic society the government would not have used it’s power that way to rule by fiat whether a business can exist. Yes, there are a whole host of rules, regulations and licenses for a business and a corrupt government can abuse it’s power, but they can be overruled by the courts, suffer monetary damages and embarrassment that could affect their career. Not so in a socialist state, the law backs actions such as the German government and a business would have no recourse.

Kind of heavy-handed, eh? That is government of any kind and something we could do without if it weren’t for so many unstable people in the world, people that will do anything, like Adolf Hitler or Josef Stalin, to gain and keep power.

If all people could be responsible for themselves and use common sense, courtesy and respect towards one another, we wouldn’t need government, but that is a Utopian idea. It is not the Pollyanna version that socialists have offered that an all-powerful central government would make life better for everyone. There is a word for that type of government and it is “totalitarian”.

So pick your poison, right or left. Both want to tell you how to live your life without having to be told how to run theirs. OR you could choose to live your life free of outside influence, responsibly.

So when someone says, “believe in us, we offer you more and better”, run as fast as you can away because all they want is what you have and will give you little in return, just enough to keep you on the hook to give more

Unions belong to the 1%

““While we come from different unions and backgrounds, our goal is a government that carries out the will of the people, not prop up the profits of the 1 percent at the expense of the rest of us,” reads a letter on the group’s website that already has 1,109 signatures.”

Unions are not about the “will of the people”, but the will of the unions. Unions are part of the 1% just as corporations are and want the same things driven by self-interest and greed and use the same, if not worse, heavy handed tactics. And like the ultimate goal of a corporation, unions want monopoly control to enrich a few at the expense of the many.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/11/sanders-draws-early-support-for-white-house-bid-from-long-time-union-allies/

Union members make good money, live in nice houses in pirate neighborhoods. They constantly look for ways to use other groups to leverage more money for unions, like the burger flippers. 

To the homeless, the impoverished and those living in projects, the lives of union members looks damn good and those people, the homeless, the impoverished and those living in projects, ask the union members, “where is your fair share? All you do is take and not give.”

Where are unions when it comes to training people and helping them get jobs. The unions wait till you’ve spent yourself into debt, then unionize you and take more money from you. Is it any wonder unions are obsolete? They are looking out for themselves all the while protesting the represent the common man; they represent, they ARE the middle class while forgetting the role of business being part of the middle class.

Unions have become elitist and are no different from corporations – just as greedy, corrupt and hypocrites 

SEIU and slavery and blood money

Screen Shot 2014 08 05 at 7 01 30 PM

(Click on image for the article)

 

I have no sympathy for anyone who supports, condones or received benefits from this blood money and didn’t try to stop it. Enslaving stay-at-home parents caring for disabled children and taking money from those disabled kids to pay for union activities those parents wanted no part of is not only morally wrong, but also heinous.

“Progressives”?!? This is regressive greed

And I don’t care who the person is doing it. I held a now former friend accountable because she not only benefits and condones the practice, she is a SEIU executive officer of her local chapter. She disowned me, not the other way around.

You don’t steal from children just to have a comfortable life

. . . . long live unions

Unions have become their own worst enemy by using a business model that is obsolete and dangerous to national security because it drives jobs overseas or downsizing through automation.

Unions still have a use and the country still need them. What is not needed are corrupt union leaders that is unresponsive to its membership. Arrogance is it’s own reward. But at the same time, if you don’t like the direction your union is going it is likely others think the same and you can form your own union. Unions have become a creature of the left and not all union members think like that or approve.

Unions are part of the check and balance system. They keep an eye of business and government, while business and government keep an eye on unions and each other. Unchecked power leads to tyranny.

Unions need to evolve and recognize the world has passed them by. That the 1950’s, when the US was the world’s manufacturer have ended. The days when unions could dictate excessive, greedy wages and sweetheart contracts are over. They are NOT the system, they are part of it; an ecosystem of people dealing with people.

Unions have to start taking responsibility for their wage demands and the consequences and concentrate of what unions advocate – a living wage.

In this day of focus on a living wage, you have union members making $35 (or more) an hour, which by comparison is greed. It is no different then the fat cats the unions malign. Unions are part of the 1% the Occupy” Wall Street were talking about, not the 99%.

How do unions justify this? “We work for it” as if company CEO’s don’t? Those CEO’s generate the wages that employees earn, not the other way around. If a CEO fails, he’s gone, but the same can’t be said for a union. A union can kill a company just as readily as a bad CEO.

And the worth that unions love to cite of CEO’s, a lot of that is stock vestments that only happen if the company does well. If not, that stock is worthless. As a percentage, making $35 an hour is equal to the SALARY of a CEO in a year.

Unions have killed manufacturing in America leaving America at the mercy of unfriendly countries. This doesn’t need to remain this way, but the jobs will never return in the numbers that left. But UNIONS can take steps to resolve the true inequity, job opportunities.

Start trade schools instead of waiting for people to finish trade schools and go thru a company’s probation period.

Use the dues the unions collect and get manufacturing in America going again instead of outrageous and greed-driven salaries for UNION LEADERS.

Invest in both sides of the political process instead of being owned by Democrats. When your services, or, in this case, favor, are bargained for you get a better deal.

Develop awareness of what union actions mean to union position and declining member numbers. It isn’t because fewer people want to be union members, it is because unions have killed union companies by forcing them to automate or go overseas to stay in business. Unions need to understand that a company’s first loyalty is to their stockholders which is a good thing because those stockholders are, in part, equity companies that make union pensions stable.

Want to get rid of corporations? Kiss your job AND your pension goodbye.

Just as corporations have found, they must become more people orientated – to keep the customers they have and to gain new ones. It’s time unions came to terms with reality instead of living in the past.

(Trade) Unions are dead . . . .

Why are unions dead? Because their business model is obsolete and unions won’t wake up and smell the flowers. In one case, a union, SEIU, resorted to “bodysnatching” that is tantamount to slavery to increase member numbers and dues paid. The SEIU were forcing stay-at-home parents that care for their disabled children to join the union and pay dues, dues taken from money meant for the disabled children. That is nothing less then blood money and any SEIU member that supports such, or is a member of the SEIU, should be ashamed of themselves. Every thing their union has done for them is tainted and resembles that of a pre-Civil War plantation owner.

https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/high-court-s-harris-v-quinn-decision-should-go-even-further

How did the SEIU manage this? By strong-arming state legislators or even bypassing the legislature and using executive orders. How did they manage to keep doing this? That is a good question. Money.

In it’s defense of it’s position, SEIU’s president Mary Kay Henry said in a statement: “No court case is going to stand in the way of home care workers coming together to have a strong voice for good jobs and quality home care. At a time when wages remain stagnant and income inequality is out of control, joining together in a union is the only proven way home care workers have of improving their lives and the lives of the people they care for.”

THE PEOPLE THE SEIU ENSLAVED were not employees and the SEIU could provide no service to them to improve their lives or those they care for. They could only make it worse by taking money intended for the care of disabled children.

That Justice Kagan wrote, “the bad news is just as simple: The majority robbed Illinois of that choice in administering its in-home care program”. In essence a Supreme Court justice is sanctioning slavery in the name of collective bargaining and throwing children under the bus to facilitate that. The old south is alive and well in the form of liberal judges. This is not progressive, it is regressive and it destroys the very foundation of civil rights to benefit a privileged few and subverts the Constitution.

In the 1950’s the right went too far and there has been a backlash ever since and a move to the left. Now the left has gone too far and there is a backlash. And, once again, the Democrats are trying to preserve slavery to preserve a lifestyle that is immoral.

It is human nature to want to be a monopoly whether it be political, religious or economic and history has proven what a bad thing that is. If unions had their way, every single employee, perhaps every single person would be a union employee. Unions want to dictate, not negotiate. Unions want to be the government and when any one group is in charge, human freedoms and rights disappear . . . . just as they did for the stay-at-home parents.

Unions have proven one thing, they are human beings prone to the same behavior any person is. They are not the holy warriors of labor they make themselves out to be freeing people.

MLKjr once said . . . .

“In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, such as ‘right to work.’ It is a law to rob us of our civil rights and job rights.

Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining by which unions have improved wages and working conditions of everyone. Wherever these laws have been passed, wages are lower, job opportunities are fewer and there are no civil rights. We do not intend to let them do this to us. We demand this fraud be stopped. Our weapon is our vote.”

—Martin Luther King, speaking about right-to-work laws in 1961

I say . . . .

Now it is unions using the law to rob us of our civil rights, our freedoms and our job rights. It is the unions that dictate to us and we must not be fooled by false slogans or scare tactics. We must stand up and insist on the facts AND OUR CONSENT! We chose, the choices are not made for us.

MLK was wrong, unions have taken civil rights, destroyed jobs with greed-driven wage demands and reduced job opportunities and we demand this fraud be stopped.

Collective bargaining is not a union-given right. It is the right of people who come together and say no more and does not rest on the existence of unions; it exists on the shoulders of human beings to standup for themselves just as the Civil Rights movement proved.

Once again, there is a Civil Rights movement forming, one to turn back the tyranny of the left. To regain Civil Rights that the left would take from us and that starts with insisting on humane and ethical behavior from unions.