- Banned
- #1
Union Workers Replaced With Prison Labor Under Scott Walker’s Collective Bargaining Law
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Jul 13, 2010
- 9,731
- 9,009
- Banned
- #2
I cannot say that I disagree with the us of prison labor. This is something I have advocated for quite some time. We have a excellent work force available to us at low cost. We have an infrastructure that is in a horrible state of disrepair. I see no reason why unskilled labor cannot or should not be used for unskilled jobs such as painting, road work, clean up and similar things.
I think the states should start offering training programs. Anyone (including inmates) should be able to sign up for them. Inmates would be on the bottom of the list and accommodated if room is available. I think people should be offered training in a field of work where that labor is in demand and then offered/required to take a job in that field for a certain amount of time to pay back for the training. The citizen gets a vocation and the city gets cheaper labor and a job done that needed doing.
I think the states should start offering training programs. Anyone (including inmates) should be able to sign up for them. Inmates would be on the bottom of the list and accommodated if room is available. I think people should be offered training in a field of work where that labor is in demand and then offered/required to take a job in that field for a certain amount of time to pay back for the training. The citizen gets a vocation and the city gets cheaper labor and a job done that needed doing.
dapoes
Veteran
- May 17, 2008
- 3,543
- 2,716
Sounds like a sucess story to me!
Speaking of success stories: UNITE-HERE Pays $6 Million, Apologizes for False, Defamatory & “Offensive” Mass Mailing
Speaking of success stories: UNITE-HERE Pays $6 Million, Apologizes for False, Defamatory & “Offensive” Mass Mailing
xUT
Veteran
Great, bring back road gangs... :unsure:
SparrowHawk
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
The Appropriate role of goobernment is to provide services to it's citizens at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer.
The fact that Organized Labor donated MILLIONS to Obama is immaterial when it comes to the will of the people. As the recall elections in WI proceed we will be able to use the data to help determine the mood of the Nation.
Face it! You never hear, "OMG the service here sucks! Quick let's hire some civil servants."
The fact that Organized Labor donated MILLIONS to Obama is immaterial when it comes to the will of the people. As the recall elections in WI proceed we will be able to use the data to help determine the mood of the Nation.
Face it! You never hear, "OMG the service here sucks! Quick let's hire some civil servants."
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #8
Ah once again your wrong, it is against the law for Dues money to be given to a political candidate or a party.
It can be used for get out to vote and voter education.
The money that Unions gave were the PAC money which is voluntary contributions from its members, not dues money.
Try again.
It can be used for get out to vote and voter education.
The money that Unions gave were the PAC money which is voluntary contributions from its members, not dues money.
Try again.
dapoes
Veteran
- May 17, 2008
- 3,543
- 2,716
Still pushing that same old tired lie?
SparrowHawk
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2009
- 7,824
- 2,707
Like it or don't, 700UW is correct.
The law is very clear. What is less clear is the enforcement of that law.
dapoes
Veteran
- May 17, 2008
- 3,543
- 2,716
It may be against the law, but is common knowledge they funnel dues money directly into politicians pockets in plain site.
leprechaun
Senior
dapoes
Veteran
- May 17, 2008
- 3,543
- 2,716
And when has a union dictated CEO pay? Ever? :huh:
Your class warfare pity party is pathetic yet predictable.
leprechaun
Senior
You should appreciate union workers more. While your sitting on your couch, collecting your dissability check, eating Bon Bons, and drinking diet Pepsi, if your trailor catches on fire, a union man will come put it out.
If a near sighted peeper looks in your window, a union man will chase him away.
If that online dating works out, and your flying too Hokie, Minnesota to hook up with Bob, a union man will fly you there.
Unions do not dictate CEO pay, but they can save workers jobs and benefits. That is when you conservitive jackals aren't trying to strip them of their rights.
Funny how every CEO has a contract, but you don't think the rank and file should.
If a near sighted peeper looks in your window, a union man will chase him away.
If that online dating works out, and your flying too Hokie, Minnesota to hook up with Bob, a union man will fly you there.
Unions do not dictate CEO pay, but they can save workers jobs and benefits. That is when you conservitive jackals aren't trying to strip them of their rights.
Funny how every CEO has a contract, but you don't think the rank and file should.
Ms Tree
Veteran
- Jul 13, 2010
- 9,731
- 9,009
- Banned
- #15
Because unions did do good things does not necessarily mean they continue on that same path. I am not in favor of telling people they cannot join a union or that they must.
Personally I think unions and management are their own worst enemies. Management is trying to get the most money out of the smallest amount of labor for the least amount of money. Unions are trying to maintain the largest work force possible (more dues due to more members) and get their workers to do the least amount of work for the most amount of money. No one seems to be interested in getting workers to do a fair amount of work with a fair amount of people for a fair amount of money. SO we end up paying a union worker $20 an hour to put wheels on an assembly line and teachers who are over paid and not capable of teaching while those who are capable are not hired or not fairly compensated.
Neither groups goals are conducive toward a productive work place. It creates an adversarial environment where less gets accomplished. Unions should be looking out to make sure the work place is safe and that all employees are being treated fairly and equally. I do not believe they or the management should be involved in salary or work rule negotiations. Given the current work environment, I think those items should be handled by an uninterested third party that would take into account financial status of the corporation, competitive jobs... etc.
The goal should be the best environment for both company and employee but the current set up gives us the worst for both.
Personally I think unions and management are their own worst enemies. Management is trying to get the most money out of the smallest amount of labor for the least amount of money. Unions are trying to maintain the largest work force possible (more dues due to more members) and get their workers to do the least amount of work for the most amount of money. No one seems to be interested in getting workers to do a fair amount of work with a fair amount of people for a fair amount of money. SO we end up paying a union worker $20 an hour to put wheels on an assembly line and teachers who are over paid and not capable of teaching while those who are capable are not hired or not fairly compensated.
Neither groups goals are conducive toward a productive work place. It creates an adversarial environment where less gets accomplished. Unions should be looking out to make sure the work place is safe and that all employees are being treated fairly and equally. I do not believe they or the management should be involved in salary or work rule negotiations. Given the current work environment, I think those items should be handled by an uninterested third party that would take into account financial status of the corporation, competitive jobs... etc.
The goal should be the best environment for both company and employee but the current set up gives us the worst for both.
Similar threads
