Help Our UAL Friends

On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 04:26:08 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:


"Jon A" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 12:44:15 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:


"Jon A" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 18:32:13 -0400, Bob Noel
wrote:

In article , Jon A

wrote:

Unions are there to protect the working class

true.

What prevents unions from abusing the workers or the company?

Unfortunately, the workers themselves must hold the union management
to task. Doesn't work in some instances which seems to be a
commonality within the human race - - - greed!

Millions and millions of jobs have left this country due to union
mis-management and greed. For some reason the unions don't mention that
fact.

Greed on whose part? Are you saying you'll pay $75 for your shirts
rather than $4.99 at Wal Mart? We're all in the same boat, bunky.
Management's job is to find ways to make this work.

I believe I said greed on the part of unions.
And the solution is to move union manufacturing jobs out of country.
Take a look at union membership numbers for the past 30 years.

Precisely my point. Maybe you are starting to get it!

Congrats!

"Jon A" wrote in message
...

No, uninformed about reality would be a better descriptor than what
you use. You guys still don't (won't) get it, will you?


What don't we get?

"Jon A" wrote in message
...

Do you know of any history books that agree with your position?


Outrageous! You don't even deserve the courtesy of this reply!


I'll take that as a "No".

On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:11:53 -0700, "Aluckyguess"
wrote:

I imagine a person with this talent could demand quite a good salary. This
person would not need a union he could make more money on his own.

Unless because this person had to feed the family and a businessman
was able to get him at half the price because although he was a master
of his trade, he wasn't learned in the art of business. If the
tradesman tries to get ahead, they have to strike. They end the
strike when the businessman gives his word to make thing right. If
the businessman needs to get ahead he can slowly screw everyone else
to death.

Now years ago the unionized folks made an agreement with management
that they're reneging on with the infamous bankruptcy. Who cares
about the reason they're skipping. The ****in' pension was part of
the employment package, read: the salary. The company owes it to the
people and bankruptcy shouldn't wipe the obligation away. If the
current and past crop of MBAs were looking at jail time for this
crime, I'll just bet that it wouldn't have happened.

On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 20:09:19 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:


I can sympathize with your plight of 27 years, but you're evidently far too
busy making excuses for your peers and yourself sitting on their brains and
wanting it "both ways". This is a primary reason so many people have lost an
affinity for unions that shoot themselves in the ass.

Grow up!

No, I don't think you can sympathize, unless you've lost everything
you have worked for your future. Again, they only have themselves to
blame for their plight. The fact that they trusted the word of a
bunch of scumbags that had no right to gamble the way they did got
them in trouble. Same could be said about marriage ;-)


The primary reasons that people are against unions is because the
general population has grown from tradesmen to management. As
managers, unions keep you honest and hence become the enemy. Get off
your ass and go down into a section of the country where there are
real workers and see what the thoughts of unions are there. Once
again, we have people claiming others talk out of their ass, when they
actually have no ass themselves.

"Jon A" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 15:11:53 -0700, "Aluckyguess"
wrote:

I imagine a person with this talent could demand quite a good salary. This
person would not need a union he could make more money on his own.

Unless because this person had to feed the family and a businessman
was able to get him at half the price because although he was a master
of his trade, he wasn't learned in the art of business. If the
tradesman tries to get ahead, they have to strike. They end the
strike when the businessman gives his word to make thing right. If
the businessman needs to get ahead he can slowly screw everyone else
to death.

Now years ago the unionized folks made an agreement with management
that they're reneging on with the infamous bankruptcy. Who cares
about the reason they're skipping. The ****in' pension was part of
the employment package, read: the salary. The company owes it to the
people and bankruptcy shouldn't wipe the obligation away. If the
current and past crop of MBAs were looking at jail time for this
crime, I'll just bet that it wouldn't have happened.


How can a business man screw is worker. All the worker has to do is quit and
get another job. Pretty simple.

"Jon A" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 20:09:19 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:


I can sympathize with your plight of 27 years, but you're evidently far
too
busy making excuses for your peers and yourself sitting on their brains
and
wanting it "both ways". This is a primary reason so many people have lost
an
affinity for unions that shoot themselves in the ass.

Grow up!

No, I don't think you can sympathize, unless you've lost everything
you have worked for your future. Again, they only have themselves to
blame for their plight. The fact that they trusted the word of a
bunch of scumbags that had no right to gamble the way they did got
them in trouble. Same could be said about marriage ;-)


The primary reasons that people are against unions is because the
general population has grown from tradesmen to management. As
managers, unions keep you honest and hence become the enemy. Get off
your ass and go down into a section of the country where there are
real workers and see what the thoughts of unions are there. Once
again, we have people claiming others talk out of their ass, when they
actually have no ass themselves.

There will always be a need for the real worker. Skilled labor is getting
very rare. I had to pay some of my machinists over 100k a year. It was tuff
to keep them they would get many job offers.

In the airline business? Supposedly, Northwest was able to hire their
replacements because so much down sizing had occurred in the industry.

"Aluckyguess" wrote in message
...


There will always be a need for the real worker. Skilled labor is
getting very rare. I had to pay some of my machinists over 100k a
year. It was tuff to keep them they would get many job offers.

On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 16:09:32 -0700, "Aluckyguess"
wrote:


"Jon A" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 20:09:19 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:


I can sympathize with your plight of 27 years, but you're evidently far
too
busy making excuses for your peers and yourself sitting on their brains
and
wanting it "both ways". This is a primary reason so many people have lost
an
affinity for unions that shoot themselves in the ass.

Grow up!

No, I don't think you can sympathize, unless you've lost everything
you have worked for your future. Again, they only have themselves to
blame for their plight. The fact that they trusted the word of a
bunch of scumbags that had no right to gamble the way they did got
them in trouble. Same could be said about marriage ;-)


The primary reasons that people are against unions is because the
general population has grown from tradesmen to management. As
managers, unions keep you honest and hence become the enemy. Get off
your ass and go down into a section of the country where there are
real workers and see what the thoughts of unions are there. Once
again, we have people claiming others talk out of their ass, when they
actually have no ass themselves.

There will always be a need for the real worker. Skilled labor is getting
very rare. I had to pay some of my machinists over 100k a year. It was tuff
to keep them they would get many job offers.

Damn, that's tough, but it's supply & demand! God bless you for
hanging in there with American workers and not sending it out to China
for 100 bucks a year. If you could have gotten them for $50K, would
you have done it? Would you have sacrificed a bit of quality for the
savings? Just curious. You say you had to pay some over 100K per
year. is that with or without the load?

Aluckyguess wrote:

How can a business man screw is worker. All the worker has to do is quit and
get another job. Pretty simple.



And pretty naive! Company towns (they still exist). Blacklists. A poor
economy with high unemployment.