Greedy union steals from disabled.
In Michigan, caregivers are required to pay $30 a month in union dues to the SEIU! Even if they are the parents of disabled children. This adds up to $6 million a year! 95% of what the union uses to buy politicians is spent on Democrats, even though not all those who pay dues agree with how the money from their dues is spent.
Truly a travesty! Those families could put to better use the $30 per month than the greedy thugs in the union could ever do.
What a suprise, it the law was signed into effect by a Democratic governer.
The legislature has started to address the issue but is bogged down in the Michigan senate, apparently by politicians bought and paid for by SEIU.
Oh and the money comes from Medicare, so the rest of us are actually paying union dues. Still no representation for us either.Sounds like you think that unions are just like corporations. Except corporations spend 40 times the amount unions spend buying politicians. Corporations even ask the parents of disabled children to pay for things.
So you're saying that if a person has a disabled child, they are REQUIRED to join a caregivers' union?
While corporate greed continues to get all the headlines, insatiable unions continue to buy off politicians who support their agendas and slip under the radar of the general population. Collective bargaining once had a necessary purpose. Today, it is just like bullying. I'm digusted to hear union leaders whine against cuts in benefits or wage freezes. It's time that they come down to reality and scrimp like the rest of us during our economic downturn. Demands for increases in pension benefits and an unwillingness to negotiate only drives up the prices of goods and services for all both in the public and private sectors. Wake up, America!
You are wrong.
1) Corporations are buying politicians above and beyond anything the rank and file union can...
2) If you think collective bargaining "had its day", and is no longer relevant then you have no clue about what is going on in today's labor field.
With one group (management) able to spend untold amounts of money on elections, isn't right to have at least one other side that can act as a counterweight? Perhaps you'd like the Republican party to always win and hold hegemony over all?
I don't think so...
Corruption exists everywhere....the unions are not perfect...nor should we expect them to be (for that would be nothing but folly). But the institution of the union and the ability of workers to collectivize is an inalienable right going back to before the Revolutionary War starting with craft guilds and moving forward...
- Emile Rposted 12 years ago
0Dealing with unions from the outside, I firmly believe unions have outlived their purpose, on many levels. The arrogance and appearance of belief in entitlements that I've been faced with when dealing with union members has made me cringe when we are forced to build in their areas. They don't want the work, but they'll bully anyone who does. It's a gang. I'm not surprised that the powers that be act like mob bosses.
Though I appreciate the young press operator, they shouldn't have been coming in at $17/hr with full benefits. Some people wait a lifetime to make that kind of money. Automotive manufacturing is dead, so long as unions hold the purse strings.
There is just plain too much bad in this world. And it's never going to stop.
Hate the unions? Move to SE Asia. Not many unions in Thailand or Malaysia.
You can get up to $300 a month in the more generous factories.
In China, where unions are illegal, you might get $200 a month.True, and you get to work in unsafe, unhealthful, polluting plants. Not to mention being subject to being fired without recourse because you didn't kiss your supervisor's ass. Not to mention being subject to layoffs without any unemployment compensation.
I think that argument would have held up in this country maybe even as near back as 50 years ago, but not today. To much PC. We don't need them anymore. And they suck dry those who are working to support those who are no longer working. A good solution might be to pay dues and receive the benefits of the union while you work. Once you retire, no more dues, no more benefits.
You simplify the benefits. I don't know anyone who pays dues once they have left their jobs...check up on your information..
My mother, for example, has been working for the LAUSD for amost 20 years. She began as a teacher's aide, with no benefits and no union coverage. Over time, she transfered over to working as a health care provider for autistic and other special needs youth at a special ed high school (the famous Widney High..."Kids of Widney High" ring any bells?). I hope that she retires within the next couple years... For her labor (far more work than any administration member...hands down), she will receive a pension. She deserves every penny...she will also keep her medical coverage.. For all the years she sacrificed for the district, its the least they could do...
The cause of unions is never out of date... Those who think so are very much out of touch.Mike - I may be missing something here. With all due respect for your mother, what exactly did she sacrifice?
And thus writing off a good chunk of the benefit of Unions!
I don't hate the rights of workers to assemble to ensure fair wages. I'd be for breaking up the huge unions and starting over with a new plan. I cringe when I see Hoffa Jr anywhere near the President, sorry.
I think you are saying that there is a problem of corruption at every level and in every strand of US politics.
@Will - Nope, I'm saying that we've set up our politicians to fall prey to outside influences. I want our leaders to hear the voice of the people for whom they work. We have a system in place where sometimes the voice of the people gets buried by their messengers. And sometimes for corrupt reasons, yes.
I've known many union men. Some are zealously pro-union, but many wonder about the wisdom of taking and taking from the owners that provide them jobs. There is only so much to take, before the owners take their business overseas. We've seen this in Detroit.
It's not the unions, alone, I'm after. It's any group (oh yes, I include the far religious right) that applies misguided pressures on politicians, who were elected to represent their entire constituencies' interests, not the interests of the few.
I'm hopeful that we all expand our minds when it comes to unions, lobbyists, and political parties. None of them are working for the good of all, they are working for the good of the few (i.e. most influential).
I'm not saying that I hate labor unions. The initial purpose was to insure that workers had the collective power to bring about fairness in the factories, safe working conditions, and decent wages. Nowadays, our unions are taking advantage of that power to demand things far and above that of most non-union earners. As Jason has said, higher costs of operation drive businesses overseas. Most of us haven't seen a wage increase for a few years and are having to contribute more out of pocket for our healthcare. Can the same be said for Union members?
"higher costs of operation drive businesses overseas." Actually it is every country in the world has to buy oil with dollars. How do they get dollars but sell stuff here.
Foreign businesses that need US dollars simply go to their local bank and exchange their local currency for dollars.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
Here is a link to the top political donations by business and unions over several years.Thanks for the link. Nothing like the facts.
I wonder whether these data include the contributions which are not to a political party or candidate but rather to issues? Thanks to Supreme Court rulings we are going to see a lot more of this money in the elections next year.
Hi Knol,
The process is quite basic and is called “Foreign Exchange.” A good primer can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_exchange_market:
“The foreign exchange market assists international trade and investment, by enabling currency conversion. For example, it permits a business in the United States to import goods from the United Kingdom and pay pound sterling, even though its income is in United States dollars. It also supports direct speculation in the value of currencies, and the carry trade, speculation on the change in interest rates in two currencies.“
I’m now wondering if your first question was intended to make some other point about unions.
Those "greedy" union workers...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH9iD__JxyYAnd the reality of corporate greed perpetrated at home, and abroad...different languages..but workers facing the same problems..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI6wQJGt … re=relatedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVcVC6yK … re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yinl3F0an1U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqE40Oc1CXo
Let us discuss the true face of greed, shall we?When did ideals ever reign in this nation?
Emancipation of slaves took a long, expensive, bloody war...
Ensuring Civil Rights for all Americans in terms of the ability to vote, serve on a jury, receive "equal" access to education (the list goes on) has taken centuries, was fought with money, peoples' lives, and unrelenting struggle...
There is always a price to be paid for creating/perpetuating change...cash is just one aspect of it..War was the price paid for the Union to stay whole. Guns and ammo cost money, sure. But I don't see that as being comparable to what's going on today. The further the left and right move from one another, the more stalemate there will be in our legislative process. Spending a bunch of money to promote ideals is a fairly new development, simply because of the arrival of more advanced telecommunications.
The price of keeping the Union whole was the removal of slavery...which was the only ever listed reason for the sessession of slave states and creation of the Confederacy..
Spending money has always been important to political efforts because, especially before the days of telecommunications and such, people had to be paid in order to spread the word for a given politician or cause...printing had to take place, advertisements, signs, train/buggy trips, setting up/tearing down rallies...
When the elite had more control over the population (depriving "undesired" minorities, including women, from voting...including the original stipulation that voters had to own land) there was less spending, of course.. In the 20th century, with the realization of workers' rights and civil rights those who have opposed these changes have used the tactic of collecting more money in order to outspend opposition..
This is more complicated than you make it out to be..Hi there, Mike. It is nice to have a chance to exchange ideas with you again. I would like to take exception to your statement about slavery as the cause “for the secession of slave states and creation of the Confederacy.”
During the 1800s, the power and influence of the South faced ominous challenges from the expanding industrialization in the North. Slavery, opposed by many before the adoption of the Constitution, is not the primary reason for the formation of the Confederacy or for starting the War Between the States. Saying it is the “only ever listed reason” ignores the prevailing consensus of historians while it over-emphasizes just one of many economic crosscurrents rocking our republic during that century.
The economies of the industrial North and the agricultural South competed for power and influence in Congress. Furthermore, when the territories in the West began to apply for statehood, the issue of slavery became the litmus for predicting how the new states would align themselves in this power struggle. Northern strategist without moral or ethical conviction welcomed the support of abolitionist as part of a strategy to weaken the influence of the South by preventing slavery in the new territories. Debates, compromises, and legislation ensued in an effort to control the impact of the new states on the balance of power in Washington.
Then Abraham Lincoln, a Republican opposed to slavery, won the presidential election in 1860. The South feared the North intended to deprive them of their right to govern themselves, abolish slavery, and destroy the power base of the Southern economy. After exhausting their legal and political options, individual states moved to protect themselves by withdrawing from the Union. Without intending to form a new nation, they banded together in a coalition that ultimately became the Confederate States of America.
So I submit, Mike, states’ rights, self-determination, and an economic climate free from Federal government interference head the list of issues leading up to the secession of Southern states and the creation of the Confederacy. The ethics of slavery and the rights of the enslaved played minor roles in the dramatic events that nearly destroyed this nation.
Peace, Mike. I wish you well in your pursuit of the truth.
http://www.civilwar.org/education/histo … ights.htmlQuill,
I am well aware of everything you have shared.
While slavery still remains the only actual reason given by Southern states for their secession from the Union, the point you make further makes my point regarding idealism in the United States.
One could not even get slavery abolished unless there was some kind of underlying motive (and profiting) by a competing faction.
Does it have to be? The sooner we realize that money being sent to Washington with our ideals is a trap we all fell into, the sooner we can get back to using the setup the Founders left for us. It's all in place. We have local elected officials. We have various levels of officials above them, leading all the way to the President.
Using money to get politicians elected only breeds corruption and popularity contests.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/302529/saturd … m=fb_share
With corporate lobbyists using their funds to keep regulations from falling on their heads...those who fall victim to their b.s. have to spend right back.
http://www.grist.org/food/2011-11-17-co … -big-pizzaOne of the funniest statements I've ever heard came from one of the only non-union city crew departments in my general area.
They said: Unions are useless. I make about as much and have about the same benefits as the other unionized city departments.
Sounds fantastic at first glance HOWEVER what do you think is driving this departments wages and benefits? If the unions in the area weren't getting a fair wage for the exact same work, why would the non-unionized department pay any more? If the unionized departments made $8 per hour, do you think this city would pay $18? The union wage is driving the non-union wage.
There are some issues with unions that make no sense - cannot deny it. But, the thought they are no longer needed is short-sighted, IMO. What's to protect workers from employers paying everyone minimum wage? Nothing. The addition of labor laws over the decades was a necessity to protect those that weren't in unions from facing the most ridiculous working conditions. The laws are nothing more than the bare minimum to protect people from only the absolute worst and nothing more.That's exactly right.
My brother is a non-union electrician, and his company (whenever an election rolls around) mails out a flyer telling the workers how the management would like them to vote..(why don't the workers do the opposite?).
Yet, since the money going to the work contracts comes from the government, my brother receives prevailing wage...which is set by union electricians.
They can degrade the union while waving their 25-30 dollar an hour wages....but without the union they would be making close to minimum wage...As old as this song is, it delivers a sober message:
We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
And I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
Change it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fall that's all
But the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
And I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!
I'll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I'll get all my papers and smile at the sky
For I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?
There's nothing in the street
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now the parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
"Won't Get Fooled Again" - Pete Townshend, The WhoQuillgrapher-
Thank you for your excellent synopsis. I really feel that true political corruption was launched right after the Civil War with the arrival of the carpetbaggers. They (mostly Northerners) came in and took advantage of those Southerners trying to get back on their feet with no intent except greed and power. There were also he Southern Scalliwags with the same motives but not in such great numbers. In a country based on free enterprise, opportunists with or without good intentions are always waiting to make their moves.I agree.....but what's the alternative?
If food conglomerates are paying 5 million dollars to buy off congressional votes (in this case trying to classify pizza as a vegetable), what do those against such an idea do?
They have to counter, to some degree, with dollars..The alternative is what it has ever been in our country - the people have to stand up and stop it. A united voice, from a majority of Americans should still hold sway?
Don't get me wrong, I haven't given this much thought until recently. When I thought about all the money being collected to advance one ideal or another in Congress, I felt my countrymen were being robbed. It's like we all fell for the same scam. My ideals can't be bought, nor do I think yours can. It shouldn't take such drastic measures to get our own appointed government to hear us over the lobbyists and political parties. Unions are just one example, they aren't the root of all evil, by any means. A proper union, as originally intended before our own Union of States, means to guarantee fair wages, not strong arm ownership with political pressures bought with our dollar. I'm for that.
I realize it goes both ways. I'm conservative. Others are liberal. I think we see the same disease in our beloved America, we need to work together to right injustice and catch-and-keep the greedy piranhas feasting on our ideals.
So I guess since all these other entities are ripping us off, it is okay for the SEIU to steal from disabled to buy politicians. Just wanted to be clear on what you find acceptable.
Paying dues is not robbery. If one is the parent of a disabled kid, but still a member of the union, why should they not pay dues? Are these employees not receiving the pay and other benefits/protections that union membership enables?
If they don't pay dues, perhaps they should make what their private enterprise/non-union counterparts make... In education, at least, there is no such thing as prevailing wage..It definitely goes both ways..
Management has done its best to undermine the traditional workplace, making it harder for unionization to take place, if not outright impossible.
The massive growth of independent contractor work goes to the crux of what I am talking about. While some complain about having to join a union in order to get a job, the majority of jobs in the future will effectively ban any co-mingling of the workforce... Trucking went that way (at least the major work done at ports), and wages/benefits went straight through the floor.. Warehousing went that way, with firms like Walmart subcontracting the labor used in its distribution centers. These full-time "temps" are technically paid 10 bucks or so an hour, but then "temp-agency fees" have to be deducted. Education is going the way of the independent contractor, as well.
The money found in corporate management is so great, that there is very little unions can do to fight back. There is a war going on, whether we like it or not...the globalized plutocracy vs. those being left behind (the 99%).
I have my own solution to this money problem...
1) Local, state, and federal "election fund" accounts...
2) Instead of direct contributions to candidates or causes, monetary proceeds would go into said accounts for use on these levels. If it is a local proposition (say a bond measure) those in favor and opposed both put funds into the local account, and then they are redistributed equally amongst the opponents....may the best cause/party/candidate win..
I agree that money is a big problem....I hope that a reasonable/practical solution that evens the political playing field can be found.Her body, her time, and her mind....working much harder and for less pay then most people in the District. Think of a 50-60 year old woman following around a 17-18 (sometimes older) year old who cannot take care of him/herself. My mother intubates...she suctions...she lifts these, often times, large kids (my mother is 5'2" at the most, and weighs about 110-120 lbs), to put them on the toilet, and then wipes their rears when they are done. She leaves home before 4:30 every morning to drive from Sylmar to Downtown in order to meet her kid before the bus comes. Though the district management has tried to cut her pay and hours (along with the rest of the health cares), the union has fought them off. Officially her shift begins at 8am, with the beginning of school, but then after school she has to escort said youth back home, before fighting her own way back home through Los Angeles traffic.
Making about 25,000 per year, in contrast, the I.T. guys for the district make 90k per year starting.. Administrators make even more.
Again, the cause of unions is never out of date, and for many non-union workers in this nation, a great many of them receive the benefits they do because of unions (my electrician brother, for example). Without the Union prevailing wage, many more would be earning minimum wage (or darn close to it).
Yet, when the "budget problems" come, it is the 25k per year people who get hit... My mother has put up with stresses and struggles from admin both at her school and via the head up a$$ district management and has never complained. Sick, she still goes to work... Tired and weak, her duty is to her student first. When the "big shots" downtown make a mess out of her (all of the health cares) bus runs, her/their pay, and puts stress on her/their life/lives (as happened to Widney this past year...it was ridiculous), just like the horse in Animal Farm, she keeps working harder.
She needs to be making 90k.....and those at the District hq need to come down in the wee hours unpaid and then spend the day getting bitten and hit by autistic students and wiping the soiled rears of these students.
Without the Union she would be making far less, with no health benefits/pension and zero job security. It was her income that put food on the table and got us kids (at that point) our medical and dental insurance.
My dad, on the other side of the token, was a highly skilled engineer who was laid off after the ending of the moon missions. With no jobs in his field, he decided to make his own business repairing electrical appliances, and later selling Herbalife. With no benefits and often meager earnings, he had to look for something else. He has been working for Home Depot for the past 15 or so years. Though his title in the store carries much more weight than my mother's at her school (she's not a teacher, but a health-care worker, following around physically/mentally disabled students), he is paid far less, has minescule health/dental benefits (without my mother's plan he would have next to nothing), no pension, and no job security. If you talk of union at Home Depot, you will be out of a job faster than Herman Cain can spout "9, 9, 9".
People like my mother are denegrated when people disparage union workers. She puts in more work than most people far younger than her.
She deserves a monument, and her fellow healthcares and teachers deserve much more than they are receiving, especially in the way they are perceived by anti-union Americans...Government involvement in schooling has failed in Detroit. Privatized schools are working here. A broke city sometimes has no other options left, but privatization. Teachers should be revered here, as they are elsewhere. Perhaps privatization will finally give them the respect they deserve. They weren't getting it from any government body, that's for sure.
But what does privatisation entail?
Does it involve every family of every child having to fork out the full cost of education with tax payers relieved of the burden of cost?
The whole thing resolves around a strong principal who is held accountable by his employer. The idea is that teachers would respond better if there were more controls in place. The fruit from this is that students will get better teachers. Let's face it, Detroit's broke. There was a stalemate between city unions and city government, not just in teaching. Public schools in Detroit haven't been producing graduates.
An across the board tax on a state level to fund inner city privatization would be a reasonable solution, that is, unless someone labeled that as socialist. I label it as doing the right thing. The sooner we level the playing field for those born into poverty (no fault of their own), the better chance everyone will have of achieving the American dream. Shortsighted thinking leads people to never get to the part where doing this would actually save taxpayers money in the long run (less crime, less imprisonment, less hopelessness, etc).How is something funded by the tax payer "privatisation"?
Hi John,
There is an alternative to failing inner city schools in the US call "Charter Shools." More here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_schoolHi Quill, sounds very much like academies in this country, but still not privatised.
Cherter schools are not privatized, as some may like to point out.
They receive tax dollars...they do not charge admission fees/tuition...as actual privately funded schools do.
As for performance, Stanford University published a study documenting that charter schools performed about the same (in some instances worse) than traditional public schools.
There are bigger issues in education, like the vast amount of resources wasted on publishing companies...and the strangle-hold that these corporations have on "education".... We don't need a new revised edition textbook every year...but there are wheels getting greased..You won't find anyone in Detroit saying charter schools perform worse than DPS.
I don't know Detroit's specific situation regarding the performance of charter schools, but Detroit itself has undergone a whole lot of struggle over the past couple decades.
There is some dissent to the view you assert, however:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/0 … 93327.html
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v& … JXswer_DDQ
Related Discussions
- 106
Thousands Protest Anti-Union Bill In Wisconsin
by Ralph Deeds 13 years ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4Z1AO3yG_8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AbeAcTi … re=relatedThe latest news--The State Police are trying to track down the Democrat legislators at least one of which is needed for a quorum so that a vote may be taken on the governor's bill. The Dems have...
- 108
Wisconsin Union Busting Law Upheld By Supreme Court Of WI.
by TMMason 12 years ago
I believe it is time to toss the Unions from our govt. and maybe even the private sector. they have served their purpose and have become a hinderance and a drain on our economy. They have spat in the face of all those Americans who are right to work workers, and are nothing more, and have been...
- 4
How do you feel about certain states outlawing labor unions and collective barga
by Jonesy0311 11 years ago
How do you feel about certain states outlawing labor unions and collective bargaining?This is not a hypothetical. Many states to include, Wisconsin, Alabama, Maine, Ohio, and Arizona are pushing legislation to limit the power of labor unions; especially those for government and public service...
- 139
In this 21st century have the privileged got too greedy?
by Andrew Spacey 5 years ago
In this 21st century have the privileged got too greedy?If as humans all we need is food&water, shelter, love, work and belief shouldn't we be cutting down on our material luxuries?Is corporate greed to blame for the current recession and financial anxiety?Are tax havens for the rich...
- 50
Why We Have Unions
by kerryg 13 years ago
With all the hate for unions I'm seeing around here, I thought it might be helpful to remind people what happens when they don't exist, or are very weak.Next month is the 100th anniversary of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, which claimed the lives of 146 of the factory's 500 workers. The death toll...
- 14
How many rights are American's willing to watch be taken away without a fight?
by junkseller 13 years ago
How many rights are American's willing to watch be taken away without a fight?Walker's backdoor dismantling of collective bargaining, Rhode Island's mass teacher firings, and Rick Snyder's Emergency management plan (you won't believe it if you haven't seen it). And of course all of this after a...