Strikes- do they work?

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
It's quite easy: When Democrats award government contracts, they are required to use union workers. The union thugs then give a kickback in the form of campaign contributions to the politicians who award the contracts so they can continue getting these fat contracts with exorbitant benefits that the public overpays for. It's pretty good work if you can get it, however, if not for the element of government, we'd call this "corruption."

Workers in government contracts are required to be paid the "prevailing wage". Where does this "overpaid" part come in?

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
It's quite easy: When Democrats award government contracts, they are required to use union workers. The union thugs then give a kickback in the form of campaign contributions to the politicians who award the contracts so they can continue getting these fat contracts with exorbitant benefits that the public overpays for. It's pretty good work if you can get it, however, if not for the element of government, we'd call this "corruption."

If I didn't think you were serious, I'd laugh. Of the contracts awarded by Republicans to 'rebuild
Iraq,' how many do you think were not corrupt?

Nemesio

Originally posted by duecer
then join a union, or better yet organize your work place, and maybe they'll protect your incompitence

I despise unions. And as far as your taunt of incompetence goes, I'd wager I'm far more competent at my job than any union dupe ever was, since I have to prove myself every day.

Originally posted by duecer
when republicans award contracts they are required to use union labor as well (or don't you know the laws?) the rethuglicans have had ample opportunity to change those laws, yet they didn't. wonder why?


btw: contracts are not required to go to union workers, just that the workers are required to recieve the prevailing wage. many private sector, non-union companies bid these jobs, and figure the wage differences into their costs.

Sounds like you're a union dupe yourself since you know so much about the details. And btw, you know the reason the Republicans haven't changed these laws -- because the Democrats won't let them since they are beholden to the labor unions. If anyone has any question about the efficacy of unions, look what they've done to Detroit.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Workers in government contracts are required to be paid the "prevailing wage". Where does this "overpaid" part come in?

Union workers are always overpaid since the public is stuck with the bill.

Originally posted by Nemesio
If I didn't think you were serious, I'd laugh. Of the contracts awarded by Republicans to 'rebuild
Iraq,' how many do you think were not corrupt?

Nemesio

Who knows? I don't work in the DOD or the Justice Dept.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Union workers are always overpaid since the public is stuck with the bill.

That makes no sense. The public is "stuck with the bill" for our soldiers and sailors; are they overpaid, too?

Originally posted by Redmike
Absolutely.

When working people stand up for what they want, they benefit.

Either by winning their demands, or by increasing their industrial muscle.

That's what the French thought.

But after years of striking regularly and working only 35 hours per week, they can only look on in dismay as the English swoop in and occupy the French alps in the winter and the Cote d'Azure in the summer, buying up second homes left, right, and center.

Yes, that worked well.

Originally posted by no1marauder
That makes no sense. The public is "stuck with the bill" for our soldiers and sailors; are they overpaid, too?

At least with our soldiers and sailors, you get people who show up that want to do the job right and have the best interests of the country in mind, instead of just collecting a paycheck.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
At least with our soldiers and sailors, you get people who show up that want to do the job right and have the best interests of the country in mind, instead of just collecting a paycheck.

You don't even bother to present a coherent argument.

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Who knows? I don't work in the DOD or the Justice Dept.

Where do you work that allows you to assess with great accuracy and confidence the corruption
of the government awarded contracts from Democratic circles but makes you completely ignorant
of the ones awarded by Republicans?

Nmeesio

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Sounds like you're a union dupe yourself since you know so much about the details. And btw, you know the reason the Republicans haven't changed these laws -- because the Democrats won't let them since they are beholden to the labor unions. If anyone has any question about the efficacy of unions, look what they've done to Detroit.

ha ha ha ha ha...the democrats wouldn't let them? they controlled all 3 branches of government and they still couldn't put and end to the evil unions? ha ha ha ha...you are so deluded!

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
I despise unions. And as far as your taunt of incompetence goes, I'd wager I'm far more competent at my job than any union dupe ever was, since I have to prove myself every day.

you see, the real problem is that you know nothing about labor history in the USA, or about how unions work today. It is in the unions best interest that the company turn a profit, and that employees are productive, honest, etc... when an employee is lazy and shiftless, incompitent etc...it is incumbent upon management to document this behaviour, so that said employee may be legally dismissed. The problem isn't with the union or the contract, it is almost always with managements inability to enforce the contract due to their incompitence. My union welcomes a fair enforcement of the contract, because it makes it easier to bargain for wages and benefits.

Originally posted by spruce112358
That's what the French thought.

But after years of striking regularly and working only 35 hours per week, they can only look on in dismay as the English swoop in and occupy the French alps in the winter and the Cote d'Azure in the summer, buying up second homes left, right, and center.

Yes, that worked well.

So, the English are buying second homes in France because France is such a terrible country?

Originally posted by spruce112358
That's what the French thought.

But after years of striking regularly and working only 35 hours per week, they can only look on in dismay as the English swoop in and occupy the French alps in the winter and the Cote d'Azure in the summer, buying up second homes left, right, and center.

Yes, that worked well.

You have no idea of how well the French live, do you?