(PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Bob F:
My take is that, in Germany -and Europe in general - the benefits
productivity increases was at least split between workers and
business owners... but in the USA, the benefits of productivity
increases went exclusively to business owners.

As I understand it, German law requires substantial represnetation
from labor on corporate boards.

I didn't want to muddy the water by going there.... but my impression
is that just about every worker in Germany belongs to a union.

At one point, my #2 daughter and one of my German nephews worked
essentially the same job: in a travel agency. The nephew, of course,
belonged to a union; and the daughter, of course, did not.

The nephew got paid for overtime, six weeks vacation, lunch breaks, a
living wage, medical coverage, pension plan, and so-on and so-forth.

The daughter had to work overtime but did not get paid for it. Not
only that, but they didn't even get fed at mealtimes.... they just
had to skip dinner and keep working until they were allowed to leave.
*Then* they got to eat.

Needless to say, no vacation time, no medical coverage, and very close
to minimum wage.


Which is exactly where we're headed if the repubs and their Koch brother
benefactors get their way.

Per Bob F:

Which is exactly where we're headed if the repubs and their Koch brother
benefactors get their way.

My feeling has always been that a balance of power is essential.

Unions want to bleed the employers dry by not working and taking every
dime.

OTOH employers (at least corporate employers...) in their heart of
hearts want to work people 24-7, feed them just enough to get the right
amount of work out of them, and then sell the bodies for fertilizer.

Sanity lies somewhere in the middle and you need unions - however bad
they might be - to achieve that balance of power.

Otherwise we're going to continue on the long slide down that we're
already on.
--
Pete Cresswell

In article ,
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote:


Sanity lies somewhere in the middle and you need unions - however bad
they might be - to achieve that balance of power.

Otherwise we're going to continue on the long slide down that we're
already on.

Since unions topped out as %age of workers 60 years ago and has been
downhill ever since and since the best time for workers was arguably in
the 70s and 80s, it is really hard to suggest unions had all that much
to do with it.
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
-- Aaron Levenstein

Per Kurt Ullman:
Since unions topped out as %age of workers 60 years ago and has been
downhill ever since and since the best time for workers was arguably in
the 70s and 80s, it is really hard to suggest unions had all that much
to do with it.

I'm just looking at the contrast between people in my family doing the
same jobs in the USA and in Germany (where unions are pretty much
universal).

The difference in pay, working conditions, and benefits is just huge.

I had my own little experience working for a large electric company. We
had a vote on whether to unionize and the workers voted unions down.

Before that, the company had unionization hanging over it's head and
life was pretty good - mainly, I think, because they didn't want to give
employees a reason to unionize.

Once unionization was no longer on the horizon, things deteriorated
quickly. Before they made me an offer I couldn't refuse, we were all
made to understand that, among other things, we were expected to work no
less than 50 hours a week - for 40 hours pay.

There's plenty more in that vein, but the bottom line is that once they
knew there was no danger of a union coming in, they tightened the screws
without mercy - and kept tightening them.

But that was just one anecdote from one person. The USA-Germany thing
is what really formed my opinion.
--
Pete Cresswell

In article ,
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote:

Per Kurt Ullman:
Since unions topped out as %age of workers 60 years ago and has been
downhill ever since and since the best time for workers was arguably in
the 70s and 80s, it is really hard to suggest unions had all that much
to do with it.

I'm just looking at the contrast between people in my family doing the
same jobs in the USA and in Germany (where unions are pretty much
universal).

The difference in pay, working conditions, and benefits is just huge.

A lot of that is related to the fact that these aren't (American)
unions. They tend to be part of the board (that hasn't ended well in the
US see one of the many United Airlines), there is much less of an
adversarial stance on both sides, they work together instead of both
being out to get as much (or as little) as possible without any real
interest in the long term health of either.


There's plenty more in that vein, but the bottom line is that once they
knew there was no danger of a union coming in, they tightened the screws
without mercy - and kept tightening them.

Which is exactly when the union talk should have started back up.
This isn't a one and done type of thing.

But that was just one anecdote from one person. The USA-Germany thing
is what really formed my opinion.
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
-- Aaron Levenstein