Why you ask? Since the pension debt is so crushing in IL, that when it was time to let State workers go, the non-union workers were let go first. So what did that tell the State workers to do?
Join the Union so they wouldn't be thrown out of a job. Now, we have supervisors who have to discipline underperforming direct reports, and they are in the same union. How is that going to work out? Not all workers underperform. But when they do, who is management? They are all in solidarity with each other. I am sorry I wasn't clear in the initial posting.
Be lucky you don't live in IL.
Fixed.
(06-15-2012 09:41 AM)NIUAlum90 Wrote: [ -> ]Why you ask? Since the pension debt is so crushing in IL, that when it was time to let State workers go, the non-union workers were let go first. So what did that tell the State workers to do?
Join the Union so they wouldn't be thrown out of a job. Now, we have supervisors who are in the same union with their underperforming direct reports. How is that going to work out?
Be lucky you don't live in IL.
I do live in Illinois. I think you are a pathetic little person to call hard working Illinois citizens "underperforming".
Robert, do you consider yourself one of those "hard working Illinois citizens"? Because you've pretty much admitted on here that you underperform.
Oops
They are going down in flames, congrats leftists
I have to be the only libertarianish person who has no problems with unions. Now, don't get me wrong, as they stand now I don't agree with what they can do. I do think that it would be nice if workers could get together and negotiate pay and insurance with the leadership if they can do it peacefully. I don't believe that this union should be bigger than the individual work place.
But I have to ask, on the best places to work list, how many of those listed companies are unionized?
(06-15-2012 11:59 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]Robert, do you consider yourself one of those "hard working Illinois citizens"? Because you've pretty much admitted on here that you underperform.
I work my ass off at my job.
(06-15-2012 12:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote: [ -> ]I have to be the only libertarianish person who has no problems with unions. Now, don't get me wrong, as they stand now I don't agree with what they can do. I do think that it would be nice if workers could get together and negotiate pay and insurance with the leadership if they can do it peacefully. I don't believe that this union should be bigger than the individual work place.
But I have to ask, on the best places to work list, how many of those listed companies are unionized?
Public sector unions should be against the law. They don't negotiate with their employers, they negotiate with the same damn people they put into office. This way, the losers with the most time keep their jobs over the younger ones that run circles around them.
I went back and edited my post. I was unclear about the underperforming part.
(06-15-2012 01:18 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2012 12:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote: [ -> ]I have to be the only libertarianish person who has no problems with unions. Now, don't get me wrong, as they stand now I don't agree with what they can do. I do think that it would be nice if workers could get together and negotiate pay and insurance with the leadership if they can do it peacefully. I don't believe that this union should be bigger than the individual work place.
But I have to ask, on the best places to work list, how many of those listed companies are unionized?
Public sector unions should be against the law. They don't negotiate with their employers, they negotiate with the same damn people they put into office. This way, the losers with the most time keep their jobs over the younger ones that run circles around them.
I agree with that all the way.
(06-15-2012 01:18 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]Public sector unions should be against the law. They don't negotiate with their employers, they negotiate with the same damn people they put into office.
Tell that to the ones in Wisconsin and Ohio.
How does this percentage compare with other states? I expect the vast majority of all public workers to be unionized, because most public workers are police officers, teachers and firemen. Conservatives want to perpetuate the myth that most government workers are faceless bureaucrats in dark rooms getting paid to do nothing, when in reality, a majority of government workers are employed providing either education (teachers) or public protection (police officers and firefighters), and if you ask them directly if they want their education or protection to suffer with the cuts they'll say no. Here in Peoria, we have probably near 100 police officers, and hundreds of teachers. But the "bureaucrats" in city hall consist of maybe 4 deputy city clerks, 2 deputy city treasurers, 3 assistant city attorneys, a few assistant city managers and traffic engineers, a half dozen secretaries and a guy who mops the floor. It's like 15-20 people that you could even begin to argue are these unproductive paper pushing bureaucrats in dark rooms, and I think a fair assessment of them would reveal they're not.
(06-15-2012 04:09 PM)Max Power Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2012 01:18 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]Public sector unions should be against the law. They don't negotiate with their employers, they negotiate with the same damn people they put into office.
Tell that to the ones in Wisconsin and Ohio.
How does this percentage compare with other states? I expect the vast majority of all public workers to be unionized, because most public workers are police officers, teachers and firemen.
Yea.... not so much
Out of about twenty million total state and local government employees, there are 6ix and a half million actual police, firefighters, and teachers.
(06-15-2012 09:41 AM)NIUAlum90 Wrote: [ -> ]Why you ask? Since the pension debt is so crushing in IL, that when it was time to let State workers go, the non-union workers were let go first. So what did that tell the State workers to do?
Join the Union so they wouldn't be thrown out of a job. Now, we have supervisors who have to discipline underperforming direct reports, and they are in the same union. How is that going to work out? Not all workers underperform. But when they do, who is management? They are all in solidarity with each other. I am sorry I wasn't clear in the initial posting.
Be lucky you don't live in IL.
Fixed.
I once dated a supervisor for Amtrak's call center. While she was in management, she kept up her union membership, as did most of management, in case there were layoffs. Since they had the senority, they'd get bumped down to a front line employee position and some dumb schlep would be shown the door. Keeping union membership was a form of job insurance.
(06-15-2012 01:31 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2012 01:18 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2012 12:52 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote: [ -> ]I have to be the only libertarianish person who has no problems with unions. Now, don't get me wrong, as they stand now I don't agree with what they can do. I do think that it would be nice if workers could get together and negotiate pay and insurance with the leadership if they can do it peacefully. I don't believe that this union should be bigger than the individual work place.
But I have to ask, on the best places to work list, how many of those listed companies are unionized?
Public sector unions should be against the law. They don't negotiate with their employers, they negotiate with the same damn people they put into office. This way, the losers with the most time keep their jobs over the younger ones that run circles around them.
I agree with that all the way.
me too.
(06-15-2012 04:09 PM)Max Power Wrote: [ -> ] (06-15-2012 01:18 PM)Rebel Wrote: [ -> ]Public sector unions should be against the law. They don't negotiate with their employers, they negotiate with the same damn people they put into office.
Tell that to the ones in Wisconsin and Ohio.
How does this percentage compare with other states? I expect the vast majority of all public workers to be unionized, because most public workers are police officers, teachers and firemen. Conservatives want to perpetuate the myth that most government workers are faceless bureaucrats in dark rooms getting paid to do nothing, when in reality, a majority of government workers are employed providing either education (teachers) or public protection (police officers and firefighters), and if you ask them directly if they want their education or protection to suffer with the cuts they'll say no. Here in Peoria, we have probably near 100 police officers, and hundreds of teachers. But the "bureaucrats" in city hall consist of maybe 4 deputy city clerks, 2 deputy city treasurers, 3 assistant city attorneys, a few assistant city managers and traffic engineers, a half dozen secretaries and a guy who mops the floor. It's like 15-20 people that you could even begin to argue are these unproductive paper pushing bureaucrats in dark rooms, and I think a fair assessment of them would reveal they're not.
Never been to the DMV, or Public Works Dept have you? how about garbage men, animal contol and adoption agencies, welfare offices, the little ladies at their typewriters at public colleges, or the people who work in our court system? How about child protection services, corrections workers, building inspectors, game wardens, and nurses at state hospitals. Want me to keep going? They permeate our fukking lives and they own liberal politicians.