Unions suck

[Ctisphonics]

I've been two two protest in D.C. to support my towns Steel Mill, and yet the local unions in my area are attacking the jobs of other non-union workers in my area. Example, in a local coal mine, the workers were on pretty good terms with the owners and trusted them, and unamiously agreed to not unionize when all the other mines in that area did, not the company is suffering from boycotts organized by thier Union president! What the hell is going on!

I would have gladdly of joined my union at my grociery store, but instead was forced into it and made to pay socialist tribute to the unions. In the recent election, one of the guys pledge tostrongarm more grocerystore chains into the crappy union! I refused to vote, didn't want either of them. Unions seemed like a good idea, but thier getting way to powerful. If I stay after work for a good ten minutes to talk to a cashier friend and bag for them, I can loose my crappy benifits if caugh by a unionguy for doing something reflexsive for me.

[IHP]

You are degenerating a large idea into a miniscule scale. You are arguing that unions are bad from a few bad experiences. I have had problems with unions before, but I also have had good experiences. Many, many workers have fought and died for the right to be a part of a union, and the right to congregate in a seperate body to help with problems that greedy bosses will not assist and in fact hinder. Be proud, and grateful that you have the right to be in your union.

As the CFMEU says "Be Proud, Be Union"

--IHP

[Hatchet]

Hey,
Modern unions do suck balls, they're too establishment. The idea of unions should not be forsaken though, workers need solidarity if they're ever going to strike or get better conditions.

Hatchet

[Vinny Rafarino]

What exactly does "too establishment" mean anyway?

[sliverchrist]

You are arguing that unions are bad from a few bad experiences.

All it takes are a few bad ones though to make you never want to go back becuase of what could happen. Unions have great potential, but in many areas they no longer adequately support the workers that they represent, either do to too much power or not enough of it.

[IHP]

Once again we see the small scale of unions. You are taking it to a tiny scale. I have already said this, but I will say it again. A few bad personal experiences cannot be the be-all and end-all of your opinion. I have had bad experiences at my university. Does this mean that universities 'suck'? I would say not. You cannot judge an entire institution based on this rationale.

--IHP

[elijahcraig]

Unions are bourgeois reformism, illusions for the working class.

[IHP]

You're a little too dogmatic for me, elijah. You forget not all members of this board are hard-core Stalinist 'true communists.' Hell, I'm not even a communist at all.

--IHP

[elijahcraig]

Dogmatic? Unions serve no purpose other than pandering to the ruling class. That is the truth of the matter.

[mentalbunny]

I have to say that Elijah has half a point here, Thatcher brought the British unions to their knees and although now they are recovering and are getting ready to stand up to Blair (at least as far as I can see), they seem to be very cosy with the establishment, like the head of the firefighters' union who went out for a really expensive meal, which I believe was paid for by the union, during the strikes, How wrong is that? I knwo that mgiht count as "personal" and I'm definitely not suggesting an abolishment of unions, but they aren't doing what we want them to, and who knows if they're doing what their members want.

I think this is a case of watch this space, the only people who can do anything are the workers and those already in the unions, I'm not eligible in any way.

[IHP]

Yes, dogmatic, perpetuated further by the following sentence. You forget how many people have fought and died for the right to be a part of a union. There have been countless examples in Australia (The maritime union most recently) that stood up for the workers in a HUGE way and almost took down one of Australias largest shipping companies.

--IHP

[elijahcraig]

Abolishing the capitalist system is our goal, not getting better conditions in which to suffer.

[IHP]

How can you claim that you're not dogmatic? Once again, I am NOT a communist. I don't believe in communism. But never-the-less, you are saying that there shouldn't be unions because we want to overthrow government? Therefore no unions now, because the whole structure will someday change. To use an example that a former member of this board used, you are like a child that wants cake before his evening meal. He'll yell and scream. Rather than have his dinner, then cake, he'll go without either dinner or cake.

Your post is too flawed and idealistic. Try again.

--IHP

[Sovietski Soyuz]

Sorry, elijah. I agree with you on many points, but "unions serve no purpose"?

ALL communists should fully support workers' unions.

[elijahcraig]

Unions fight for better wages? The space they think they've gained only comes back to hit them through consumption.

Dogmatic? I am a Communist, I stand by my ideology. I'm not sure what you mean.

[Ian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2003, 05:07 AM
Unions serve no purpose other than pandering to the ruling class. That is the truth of the matter.
So the truth of the matter is that your signature quote a person who panders to the ruling class
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/newbie4.jpg

[Hatchet]

Hey,
There's a really big difference between labour unions and workers unions. An excellent example of a workers union is the bus workers in Barcelona in the 30's. With an organisation inwhich the workers split into small groups which made small decisions for themselves and appointed ever-changing representatives to represent the group at a meeting of other representatives within the factory. They increased production and even started making rifles for the militias. This is true socialism, with no boss at all.

Hatchet

[Hatchet]

Hey,

PS: Ian, you is ugly

Hatchet

[Exploited Class]

first off to reply to the original started post. I have to agree that personal experience alone is not sufficient in determining if a union is a good or bad thing. As far as a union forcing you to pay dues in order to work at a place is completely justified. Nobody would pay any of the dues if they had a choice, just like most people wouldn't pay social security, taxes, unemployment insurance or any of the other things taken out of a pay check. But then there wouldn't be a union if there weren't any dues paid, also why should you get to reap all the benefits that a union provides to a workplace, there might not have been health benefits provided or as good of health benefits, you may be getting a pay wage increase or a cost of living increase, not as easy to be fired, less policy changes, less work load. All these things a union provides. I have worked at grocery stores, one union, one not unionized, the union one I did less work, work that was suited to me, more pay, health benefits offered, 401K offered, guaranteed raises, promotional advances like journeyman, and if I was fired incorrectly I could have the union involved and they could get my job back if they felt it was an improper dismissal.

I worked at a non-union grocery store as well, and I was expected to do a lot more work, work that wasn't in my job description. There were no benefits or vacation time offered unless I had been there for 2 years. I made only minumum wage and an actual livable wage was hardly offered to anyone, whereas at the unionized place I would have made a livable income and a decent income as soon as I was promoted. The non-union job, there were constant policy changes and it was hard to tell what managment wanted.

As far as unions coming in to places where workers are happy with the company. Just because one group is happy with not having a union in a proffesion that is mostly unionized, like grocery stores, hauling companies, plumbing..ect..ect. Does not make it okay. Companies like to break unions and want to have a dictatorship, if not then why do we always here "If you don't like it leave." They want total control and don't want to answer to any group. They make companies that have no union and try to undersell those that do. It makes it impossible for union places to strike for better treatment since the whole idea is to bring production to a halt so that negotiations can be accomplished. If some Joe Shmuck company can offer the same goods to his suppliers and can tell them that there won't be a strike because there is no union, then all the contracts from the unionized companies will go to him and the unionized companies will fail due to lack of buisness.

As far as somebody saying they are worthless.

First off as a communist you should know that propaganda about the truth of the ruling class system has to reach people. Unions are one of the best places for that information to be handed out. Unions tell the workers how much the company is making and how much of that is going back to the workers. Union halls are meeting places and other than church most people don't go to many meetings, this is a great way to get people to go and gather in locations. Strikes show solidarity works and is an example to other people that it will require solidarity to win. Scabs crossing picket lines and breaking solidarity shows class traitors and people that will break solidarity movements for their own personal gain. Unions are sometimes the first experience anybody has at being apart of something that is bigger than themselves. If they were bad things then the ruling class wouldn't be trying everything possible like starving towns, burning strikers, sending armed militia in to break strikes. I won't say they are perfect but it is one the first awareness of situation movements out there.

[mentalbunny]

Well elijah, I hope you really think about that, you just can't get rid of unions, how would you try anyway? I have a feeling you're all talk.

[elijahcraig]

Let me revise my statement then. I feel that unions in Imperialist nations are pandering to the ruling class, they are serving a working class built on a labor aristocracy. In the third world, these unions do much good, they actually aoccupied a workplace in Venezuela not long a go.

[Ctisphonics]

Okay, I read everything you guys said, and gotta say this:

I don't want revolution. I'm not in a class; I'm Ctisphonics. I know people, some rich, some poor. We each have a variety of intrests, many of mine unique in my circles, or vice versa. I don't want to shoot people so I can be manager, I don't want to shoot people to get rid of my manager to have a hierachless company.

The people at work are for the most part idiots, I know that sounds bad, but it's true. They are also REALLY lazy, I tend to do the work of three people in the store just to get it done. I've heard it's even worst in steel mills, a guy I know used to work in one, but he said everyone was getting mad at him because he was working too hard, so he quit. Unions create lazy, lazy people. I don't see these people as the pioneers of some new Utopian Society. Strike for what- I have nothing to strike for.

---------------------
THinking about all this stuff reminds me of a meeting I had to have with the management once, a person(worker) from each department had to go up to sit in some meeting and look at pie charts and listen to blah blah stuff, and I say my store union rep. guy sitting next to the doughnut box, he sucked down 5 freaken doughnuts! There was only a dozen in the box, and 12 people were there! Big belly mo*fu*.

[elijahcraig]

Not in a class? Moron.

[Red Flag]

not in a class???


I am pro Union till the end of my breathing, I was a member of the Internation Organization of Heat and Frost Insulators for a few years, and I don't understand how anyone could be against a Union? name one place where the job has got worse after becoming unionized.

If it wasnt for the unions coal miners like my father, would still be slaving shoveling coal for $5 a car load

[sc4r]

Unions have always improved the lot of working people. All the specific criticisms of them ever do is say 'Oh they could have done more', or 'in this instance someone behaved badly'.

Yep things aint perfect even in Unions. Next inane observation please.

The capitalist objection is straightforward. They hate unions because unions mean that the working classes have a little more economic muscle and can extract a better deal. Big surprise.

The 'commie' objection is really that in making things better they stave off the total misery that they think might usher in a revolution. They are optimistic, in my view, if they think that the inevitable result of working class misery will be a successful uprising supporting Socialism and are also prepared to effetcively sanction one hell of a lot of suffering to see their ideals given half a chance.

Theres another way, of course, instead of relying on rubishing the competition (liberal democracy and Capiatlism) explain why things would be even better under socialism; and give people a viable opportunity to express this choice. Unions provide an almost perfect communciations medium for getting this message across. If you cant communicate why your 'product' is any good believe me its fucking optimistic to think people will buy it just because another product has failed them.

Make no mistake. Where union power declines so also does support for Socialism. Always has, always will. Only where unions are supressed (and therefore effectively operate anyway, but underground) does socialism flourish without Union support. Not surpising because a Union is the way working people organise themselves. It is in a very real sense what they are; an organisation of and for working people.

To me a self styled 'socialist' opposed to Unions is like a soccer player opposed to all passing and shooting. No matter how good he is, he wont get picked because he does not really understand the game.

You might take issue with particular Union policies, maybe with certain Union leaders, Maybe even with specific Unions. But opposed to them in general? it dont make sense.

[Sabocat]

The people at work are for the most part idiots, I know that sounds bad, but it's true.

So that means they are not entitled to be able to make a decent living?



They are also REALLY lazy, I tend to do the work of three people in the store just to get it done.

Why wouldn't they be lazy. They're being exploited for their labor. The owners and bosses are making a killing and these people are barely getting by most likely. You doing the work of three is a ruling class/boss/owner's wetdream...nicely done. Maybe they'll give you an extra 15 minutes for lunch... :lol:


I've heard it's even worst in steel mills, a guy I know used to work in one, but he said everyone was getting mad at him because he was working too hard, so he quit.

And yet steel got made. Amazing. There are lazy people everywhere, the union doesn't make them so. My dad was a US Steelworkers union member for 42 years, and worked his ass off. I'm sure your friend worked so hard that he had to quit, because I'm sure working for a union shop at much higher wage levels than non union shops was the incentive to go work harder for less money. If that's the case, then he's an idiot.


Unions create lazy, lazy people. I don't see these people as the pioneers of some new Utopian Society. Strike for what- I have nothing to strike for.

What unions create is an environment that is safer, where employees get paid a livable wage for a days work, where they are not at the whim of the owner and bosses. You can thank a union everyday for the 40 hour work week, overtime pay, vacations, increased wages across the board etc. If you think corporations did all those things out of the goodness of their heart, then you're a fool.

I suggest you go to the History forum and check out the thread about labors struggle. That'll give you an idea of what corporations wanted to give workers.


http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?a...=ST&f=5&t=17189 (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=5&t=17189)

[Ctisphonics]

I know the history of my area, and the struggle of the unions. I just think it shouldn't be mandatory, instead voluntary!

I'm not in a class. I'm poor, but I have rich and poor friends, and don't see too much of a diffrence between the 'two' groups other than where they live, we grew up together, we the same for the most part.

So that means they are not entitled to be able to make a decent living?
No, but I think if I'm to be trapped under a Mobocracy they shout be an intelligent mob. Their views are really short sighted and have no real motivation other than getting thier way. Ignorant=Arragant in this case.

Besides, their Exploiting the Company. Would they be anymore energetic in a Communist Country? Come on, I've read about the efficency of Soviet and Chinese Factories.

As too the Steelworker, it's called a Work Ethic, and trust me, the Steel industry is going under as a result of the Worker's Struggle the last few decades- over paid, under worked= German and Korean Steel Cheaper, America goes down tube.

(Did you know Pres. Bush is supporting the Steel Union Cause even against most Capitalist in the US and abroad in Europe and Asia?)

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2003, 03:20 AM
Unions are bourgeois reformism, illusions for the working class.
Except when they strike and achive more in a week than a petty stalinist coup could achive in a year.

http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/europe/09/14.../fuel.protests/ (http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/europe/09/14/fuel.protests/)

AS CNN actuall covered it even you should have heard of it. Though CNN (as usual) put the workers in a shitty light, they actually covered it, which supprises me, and have you ever heard of 70's Britian where the Labour government were hand in hand with the Unions and they installed a system far closer to socialism than Stalin ever did.

So my advise is go and get an education before spouting your crap.

[Scottish_Militant]

Some very anti-Leninist comments from Elijahcraig once more

You should actually read some Lenin, from his book Left wing communism - an infantile disorder (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/index.htm)




"We can (and must) begin to build socialism, not with abstract human material, or with human material specially prepared by us, but with the human material bequeathed to us by capitalism. True, that is no easy matter, but no other approach to this task is serious enough to warrant discussion."

"We cannot but regard as equally ridiculous and childish nonsense the pompous, very learned, and frightfully revolutionary disquisitions of the German Lefts to the effect that Communists cannot and should not work in reactionary trade unions, that it is permissible to turn down such work, that it is necessary to withdraw from the trade unions and create a brand-new and immaculate "Workers’ Union" invented by very pleasant (and, probably, for the most part very youthful) Communists, etc., etc."

" This ridiculous "theory" that Communists should not work in reactionary trade unions reveals with the utmost clarity the frivolous attitude of the "Left" Communists towards the question of influencing the "masses", and their misuse of clamour about the "masses". If you want to help the "masses" and win the sympathy and support of the "masses", you should not fear difficulties, or pinpricks, chicanery, insults and persecution from the "leaders" (who, being opportunists and social-chauvinists, are in most cases directly or indirectly connected with the bourgeoisie and the police), but must absolutely work wherever the masses are to be found. You must be capable of any sacrifice, of overcoming the greatest obstacles, in order to carry on agitation and propaganda systematically, perseveringly, persistently and patiently in those institutions, societies and associations -- even the most reactionary—in which proletarian or semi-proletarian masses are to be found."

[Sabocat]

Besides, their Exploiting the Company.

LOL. Yes, the company's stockholders must be suffering terribly... :lol:



Would they be anymore energetic in a Communist Country? Come on, I've read about the efficency of Soviet and Chinese Factories.

I don't know....wasn't Sputnik made in a factory? Was the rocket that flew the first man in space made in a factory? Weren't the Migs made in a factory? Are these the same inefficient workers that had made the Soviet Union the second most powerful country on the planet?






As too the Steelworker, it's called a Work Ethic, and trust me, the Steel industry is going under as a result of the Worker's Struggle the last few decades- over paid, under worked= German and Korean Steel Cheaper, America goes down tube.


No, the U$ steel went down the tubes because the U$ companies using it could get it cheaper overseas where labor costs were cheaper (no union), and the workers nothing more than indentured servants and mere commodities of the companies. Ask any of them if they made as good a living as their U$ counterparts.

Who decides who is over paid and under worked? You? :lol: What seems to bother you most is that a laborer can actually make a good living in a union without having to sacrifice his family life, safety and health. I guess you think that only guys working in an office or shareholders deserve that quality of life.

Thanks for stopping by.




P.S. On your site you have Mutiny on the Bounty under American Literature? :lol: :lol: :lol:

[IHP]

"Besides, their Exploiting the Company"

Please excuse me while I stitch my sides back up. That is hysterical. The workers are exploiting the company? Hardly.

[Fabi]

The company is making profits - profits are unpaid labor - thus the company exploits the workers... Whether that is right or wrong is another story, but of course they are being exploited.... If they weren't they wouldn't have a job there.. :rolleyes:

[Exploited Class]

I'm not in a class. I'm poor, but I have rich and poor friends, and don't see too much of a diffrence between the 'two' groups other than where they live, we grew up together, we the same for the most part.

So you hang around with people who's parents are worth around 200 million plus? You have rich friends? Or is it just your prespective on what is rich? The poorer you are the less it takes for somebody to appear "rich" to you. I might appear "rich" to somebody who is homeless.

You are in a class, there is a ruling class then everybody else.


Besides, their Exploiting the Company. Would they be anymore energetic in a Communist Country? Come on, I've read about the efficency of Soviet and Chinese Factories.
hmmmm can't be too bad, almost everything I have purchased pretty much comes from China. Try finding something not made in those countries, and if you say cars, I will hit you. Those are all manufactured across seas or south of the boarder then just assembled for the final steps to get the seal of approval for "Made in America". All those made in china products seemed good enough for your efficent captialist companies.


(Did you know Pres. Bush is supporting the Steel Union Cause even against most Capitalist in the US and abroad in Europe and Asia?)

He is doing it for the union workers cause??? Wow what a kind man, he can't at all be doing it for any of the following...

A. Votes
B. The owners of the Steel Industry
C. Higher Tarriffs mean more tax money

No he is overwhelmed and disheartened by organized labor members, probably just as much as when he made them stop striking on the W. Coast and his idol Reagan broke the strike of the Air Traffic Controllers.
Peddle that softhearted bullshit fairy tail somewhere else.