RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Tow Vehicles: GM Strike

RV Blog

  |  

RV Sales

  |  

Campgrounds

  |  

RV Parks

  |  

RV Club

  |  

RV Buyers Guide

  |  

Roadside Assistance

  |  

Extended Service Plan

  |  

RV Travel Assistance

  |  

RV Credit Card

  |  

RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > GM Strike

This Topic Is Closed  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 15  
Prev  |  Next
Sponsored By:
ShinerBock

SATX

Senior Member

Joined: 02/22/2015

View Profile



Posted: 09/26/19 09:34am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:



You are comparing one union to companies in one industry. Look up the numbers for all corporations vs all unions. Lobbying to say get a judge on the court that thinks a driver should die in a broke down truck, and be fired if he gets a ride to safety, might help a auto company when a worker gets hurt.


I have before and in most cases it is the same. Have you? If not, then how can you claim this if you haven't verified it? All I am saying is verify it for yourself because in my experience, a union will lie to you to gain more profits/membership. Not saying that all do or that everything they say is a lie. I am just saying that there are those that do and it is best to verify.



JRscooby wrote:

Well, I have not looked in Texas. But I have studied a little in Ks, (enough to know what I would have to do if I put a driver in my truck in that state) I read repeatedly the law the people of Mo would not let our legislature put in force. I have read the proposed law circulated by ALEC. In every one, if a company has a contract with a union, all employees get paid the rate of the contract. And if there is a dispute worker/management, the union must represent the worker, even if the worker has decided not to pay dues. This is why I always refer to what is sold as "Right to Work" laws as "Right to Freeload"


Well I refer to the non-right to work laws and "forced to pay for something that you don't believe in especially if the money is going to politicians who do not share your values and actually works against them". Shouldn't it be the workers choice or do people not have that freedom to choose what clubs they want to join?

Although, in my case and in other instances. I never wanted union help in any of my disputes so I was not "freeloading" anything. Whether the union was forced to by contract or law is a whole other story and discussion, but not the fault of the person who chooses not to join. I and many others who I knew that chose not to join unions would be more than happy to kick the union out of our business and disputes because in many cases it is them that is trying to get you fired for not being in their club, not the management. Maybe this is the whole reason why they are involved and are just telling members it is a law to make them angry.

* This post was edited 09/26/19 09:44am by ShinerBock *

danrclem

Ky.

Senior Member

Joined: 12/25/2015

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/26/19 10:36am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

The politicians that the union supports aren't for the American Worker. They scratch the backs of the union bosses and the union bosses donate to their political campaigns. The worker is there to support both of them with their dues.

The retirees of the company that I worked for just got what little retiree benefits we had taken away from us by the company. UAW International has said that they won't help us. My two brothers worked for a company for over 40 years each when they shut down. They were owed a huge severance package but never received it. Their union refused to help them. If you ain't paying dues you are left to fend for yourself.

JRscooby

Indepmo

Senior Member

Joined: 06/10/2019

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/26/19 10:58am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:



You are comparing one union to companies in one industry. Look up the numbers for all corporations vs all unions. Lobbying to say get a judge on the court that thinks a driver should die in a broke down truck, and be fired if he gets a ride to safety, might help a auto company when a worker gets hurt.


ShinerBock wrote:

I have before and in most cases it is the same. Have you? If not, then how can you claim this if you haven't verified it? All I am saying is verify it for yourself because in my experience, a union will lie to you to gain more profits/membership. Not saying that all do or that everything they say is a lie. I am just saying that there are those that do and it is best to verify.


Well, you seam to think I get my info from unions. As a matter of fact, any time a politician is asking for my vote, I look at his donor list. If he is telling me something, check the list. If I see a ad paid for by dark money, I use logic, and the politician's donor list to make a guess about how well that politician will represent me. And when I have a question about the stance my rep is taking, I will ask them for a explanation. What's more, I write down what I need to remember for the next election.



JRscooby wrote:

Well, I have not looked in Texas. But I have studied a little in Ks, (enough to know what I would have to do if I put a driver in my truck in that state) I read repeatedly the law the people of Mo would not let our legislature put in force. I have read the proposed law circulated by ALEC. In every one, if a company has a contract with a union, all employees get paid the rate of the contract. And if there is a dispute worker/management, the union must represent the worker, even if the worker has decided not to pay dues. This is why I always refer to what is sold as "Right to Work" laws as "Right to Freeload"


Quote:

Well I refer to the non-right to work laws and "forced to pay for something that you don't believe in especially if the money is going to politicians who do not share your values and actually works against them". Shouldn't it be the workers choice or do people not have that freedom to choose what clubs they want to join?


Can you name the union where the rank and file members do not vote to decide who will represent them when it comes times to decide how to spend the money?

Quote:

Although, in my case and in other instances. I never wanted union help in any of my disputes so I was not "freeloading" anything. Whether the union was forced to by contract or law is a whole other story and discussion, but not the fault of the person who chooses not to join. I and many others who I knew that chose not to join unions would be more than happy to kick the union out of our business and disputes because in many cases it is them that is trying to get you fired for not being in their club, not the management. Maybe this is the whole reason why they are involved and are just telling members it is a law to make them angry.


Bet you only cashed 2 out of 3 paychecks too.

On the macro level, before unions where widespread, maybe the church insisted business close on Sunday, but work 6 days a week was normal, and the best your kids could hope for was a job as "good" as yours. Then there was I time when a man could work 40 hours, and have money and time to enjoy something like a camping trip. After about 30 years of class warfare, we are again to the point when it is very hard for a family to get time off all the jobs needed to spend a weekend camping. But I got mine, you are on your own.

JIMNLIN

Oklahoma

Senior Member

Joined: 09/14/2003

View Profile



Posted: 09/26/19 11:58am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

shiner wrote:

1. None of that answered my question about how it help US jobs if we have open borders for workers from foreign countries, more free trade agreements, and lower tariffs on countries we already have huge trade discrepancies with? Sometimes people are focused on short term entitlement promises that they lose sight of the long term.

My replies are toward the thread about GM unions and unions in general as far as the employee goes. However your interpretation of unions and their political supporters and how the system is working for them is a bit exaggerated.
Nothing short sighted about company/union agreements.

Quote:

2. I understand that you are influenced by union propaganda. I was too at one point. But some of what they say is not reality. Some of it is scare tactics to keep the "us versus them" status quo which keeps them relevant. They have to create this false fear that the company and politicians are out to get you and they are your only savior to keep them in business and profitable. If much of these scare tactics were true, then you would see it in states and factories that do not have a union.

LOL...wrong again with more exaggerations.
Lets flip this . I see your influnced by company and their political party machines.
Us vs them scare tactics is real and is working for unions and companies alike and very alive in the non union shops I've worked in.

People are biased from what they read or hear mostly from their political ties and shows in their comments about unions in general (pro or con).
Just like politics I'm not going to change your or anyones mind.... on the GM union contract thread in general...and no one is going to change mine.


"good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment" ............ Will Rogers

'03 2500 QC Dodge/Cummins HO 3.73 6 speed manual Jacobs Westach
'97 Park Avanue 28' 5er 11200 two slides

FishOnOne

The Great State of Texas

Senior Member

Joined: 02/12/2011

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/26/19 12:22pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

ShinerBock wrote:

time2roll wrote:

JRscooby wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

My Dad used to work for a utility company and I remember him telling me about when he attended a training course for a day in Houston and during a morning break the men went to a break room. When entering the room he was told the non union break room was down the hall. What he noticed in the union break room was a table full of pastries, Houston Chronicle news papers at every table, juice, bottle water and soda on ice and coffee dispensers full of coffee. When he entered the non union break room there was a coffee maker which they made coffee themselves and a vending machine.


I can understand that. With the non-union group, who was in charge of the break refreshments? And paid for them? Should the non-union workers be allowed to free-load?
So did the Union actually pay for those pastries or did they bully the training camp to provide if the union sent enough people? Did the training camp give a union discount on the classes on top of providing snacks? We will never know.


Another aspect is if it was at a hotel conference room. Most hotel conferences I have booked come with those kind of things as a part of the package. This kind of stuff is generally supplied at all training seminar's I have been to that lasted a day. If this were the case, then the union guys would be dicks for not sharing something that was free.


This was a safety training class and the facility was the utility company’s.


'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs
"Built Ford Proud"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"


ShinerBock

SATX

Senior Member

Joined: 02/22/2015

View Profile



Posted: 09/26/19 02:19pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JIMNLIN wrote:


My replies are toward the thread about GM unions and unions in general as far as the employee goes. However your interpretation of unions and their political supporters and how the system is working for them is a bit exaggerated.
Nothing short sighted about company/union agreements.


My question was about how can unions can support a political party whose long term goals will be worse for US jobs. You didn't answer that yet quoted my question. Hence the reason why I said you did not answer my question(yet you quoted it).



JIMNLIN wrote:


LOL...wrong again with more exaggerations.
Lets flip this . I see your influnced by company and their political party machines.
Us vs them scare tactics is real and is working for unions and companies alike and very alive in the non union shops I've worked in.

People are biased from what they read or hear mostly from their political ties and shows in their comments about unions in general (pro or con).
Just like politics I'm not going to change your or anyones mind.... on the GM union contract thread in general...and no one is going to change mine.


Actually I used to be a Kool-aid drinking union guy until one day I saw a union shift leader post the blame on a young guy who I went to orientation with at a paper mill I used to work evening shift at in college. The union leader was the head forklift driver who delivered paper roles to the corrugator machine. Everyone knew he had a cot out behind all the roles and purposely overloaded the machine so he could take a nap. One day, the regional GM was taking a walk through the warehouse with the plant manager and they stumbled upon the cot.

The union shift leader blamed it on the new guy who just had his third child and was so excited to have a good job. I told the truth about whose it was, but the union leader got everyone else to back him. So they fired the kid I went to orientation with and black balled me from that point on. After that, I was a little more skeptical about all the BS propaganda they used to drive into us to hate white collar workers and upper management. I found actual facts proving it was BS, but it made no difference since the rest were just too hooked on the kool-aide.

Later on, when we were in contracts for a pay increase, the talks stalled for weeks and the union leaders told us it was because the company was not meeting our demands. About six months before this, I started dating an intern that worked in office around the executives. I asked her why the company is trying to low ball us and stall the talks. She said they weren't and that they agreed to all of the contract from day one, but the union said they wanted a few weeks to look it over. So the union was telling us that they were fighting for our rights, but in actuality they were purposely stalling the talks to make it seem like it was the companies fault.

I also have friends and family members with their own horror stories about the unions they were apart of. Don't get me wrong, there are good stories too, but it was what I stated above that made me verify all the propaganda the union was feeding us to find out that most was not true, not a political party as you stated. Basically, I caught them in one lie, then another, and they lost my trust so I started checking whether everything else they were telling was a lie too which most of it was.

* This post was last edited 09/26/19 03:21pm by ShinerBock *   View edit history

ShinerBock

SATX

Senior Member

Joined: 02/22/2015

View Profile



Posted: 09/26/19 03:35pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:



Well, you seam to think I get my info from unions. As a matter of fact, any time a politician is asking for my vote, I look at his donor list. If he is telling me something, check the list. If I see a ad paid for by dark money, I use logic, and the politician's donor list to make a guess about how well that politician will represent me. And when I have a question about the stance my rep is taking, I will ask them for a explanation. What's more, I write down what I need to remember for the next election.


So you are able to speak with every person representing you including the President?



JRscooby wrote:

Can you name the union where the rank and file members do not vote to decide who will represent them when it comes times to decide how to spend the money?


I was talking about political candidates. Like the example I stated earlier with my brother and IBEW where the union was giving money to politicians that don't share the same policies and values as 90% of their members. They are essentially forced to give money to get people they don't agree with to get elected.



JRscooby wrote:

Bet you only cashed 2 out of 3 paychecks too.


Huh?

JRscooby wrote:

On the macro level, before unions where widespread, maybe the church insisted business close on Sunday, but work 6 days a week was normal, and the best your kids could hope for was a job as "good" as yours. Then there was I time when a man could work 40 hours, and have money and time to enjoy something like a camping trip. After about 30 years of class warfare, we are again to the point when it is very hard for a family to get time off all the jobs needed to spend a weekend camping. But I got mine, you are on your own.


I am on my own and I prefer it that way. I became an expert in my field by my own merit which is why the last two companies I worked for sought me out to work for them. Because of this, I am able to negotiate pay, vacation, retirement, and stock options. Our healthcare sucks, but I am more than compensated in my bonuses for it. I don't want to be in a situation where someone else is negotiating my pay because I would have to make the same as everyone else that may or may not have a lower work ethic.

JIMNLIN

Oklahoma

Senior Member

Joined: 09/14/2003

View Profile



Posted: 09/26/19 06:59pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Quote:

My question was about how can unions can support a political party whose long term goals will be worse for US jobs. You didn't answer that yet quoted my question. Hence the reason why I said you did not answer my question(yet you quoted it).

You loaded your question with your own opinions about what that political party long term goals are hense is the reason you won't get a answer.
Those claims have been around the union/company negotiations world for years spouted by anti union media pundits and their political supporters.

Seem like some that bash unions or union members like to tell a story about about one incident that was told to them by their 3rd wifes 2nd cousin or a 2nd-3rd party and base their bias on one or two incidents.

Anywayz like all political threads or bash the union worker threads this could go back and forth with nothing new posted but the same old theories...opinions....retoric....bilge and propaganda we saw on the last union bashing thread.

ShinerBock

SATX

Senior Member

Joined: 02/22/2015

View Profile



Posted: 09/26/19 07:28pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JIMNLIN wrote:


You loaded your question with your own opinions about what that political party long term goals are hense is the reason you won't get a answer.
Those claims have been around the union/company negotiations world for years spouted by anti union media pundits and their political supporters.


Have you been watching the political debates and gone to the candidates websites to see their views on that side? How about their voting record? It mirrors what I stated. Heck it even says it on wikipedia.

JIMNLIN wrote:

Seem like some that bash unions or union members like to tell a story about about one incident that was told to them by their 3rd wifes 2nd cousin or a 2nd-3rd party and base their bias on one or two incidents.


The story I told earlier happen to me, not anyone else.


JIMNLIN wrote:

Anywayz like all political threads or bash the union worker threads this could go back and forth with nothing new posted but the same old theories...opinions....retoric....bilge and propaganda we saw on the last union bashing thread.


Like JRscooby is when he calls people in right to work states "freeloaders". I don't think anyone called a union worker a name like that in this thread.

I have not bashed union workers at all in this thread either. I have stated my distrust and happening about the unions I have dealt with along with their general political affiliations and spending, but I have not bashed a union worker.

FishOnOne

The Great State of Texas

Senior Member

Joined: 02/12/2011

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/26/19 07:44pm Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

My Dad used to work for a utility company and I remember him telling me about when he attended a training course for a day in Houston and during a morning break the men went to a break room. When entering the room he was told the non union break room was down the hall. What he noticed in the union break room was a table full of pastries, Houston Chronicle news papers at every table, juice, bottle water and soda on ice and coffee dispensers full of coffee. When he entered the non union break room there was a coffee maker which they made coffee themselves and a vending machine.


I can understand that. With the non-union group, who was in charge of the break refreshments? And paid for them? Should the non-union workers be allowed to free-load?


The Utility company my Dad worked for was in charge of these break rooms since it was the companies training facility. From what I understood the union required these accomodations in their break room. I can't speak about the other non union workers but I know my Dad's comment was he saw nothing but waste in the union break room and was simply there because it was a required training program and Free loading is simply not in the culture of a small group of men who worked hard and efficient.

This Topic Is Closed  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 15  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > GM Strike
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:

© 2019 CWI, Inc. © 2019 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Terms of Use | PRIVACY POLICY | YOUR PRIVACY RIGHTS