If Unions are an Evil Empire then what are the Koch Brothers?

[BigGreenHorse]

I bet the Koch boys were in the room when ole Mitt talked about the 47%:ohbrother:

[PurplePride92]

I've worked in/help run companies with union labor and companies without union labor. Both have their advantages. I've seen the dedication and commitment up front and personal of union workers. Almost every union worker I experienced was top notch, well trained and dedicated. There were a few, very few, that weren't. Having to deal with the union procedures in dealing with the few that weren't, bothered me I'll admit (but won't give examples). But fortunately, I didn't have to deal with that issue much at all. It was also great having the union bench to call on when we needed a bunch of qualified workers fast. All in all, the union workers I dealt with were top notch workers and great family men.

 

I also dealt with non-union labor. Most of them were top notch, well trained and dedicated also. Contrary to what we had been told, I saw non-union welders that could weld every bit as good as the best union welders. But, finding those folks took time and there was a lot more trial and error. Also, when you had to lay off some of the non-union workers for any significant period of time, unlike the union worker that either went on the bench or took a job with another local contractor and remained in the area, the non-union worker may have to leave the area to find work and not be available when you needed him back. That sucked.

 

Personally I think there is a place for both in the U.S business place. The union workforce had its advantages, but so did the non union workforce.

 

I fully understand the role of the union in making sure it's members got paid properly, then again, I as an employer liked being able to tell one of my non-union workers that showed up in my office one day after work asking me why he wasn't paid as much as another non union worker working for us. I looked him in the eye and said it was because he wasn't as good of a welder as the other guy and that if he improved his welding, I'd gladly pay him as much. He sat there for a minute, acknowledged he wasn't as good of a welder and said he'd get better. He did and when he did, I started paying him as much as the other welder he referenced. With the union employee, you pay your worst worker the same as the best worker and that always bothered me. Fortunately, we didn't have many bad union workers so it wasn't a real big problem. But it did bother me when I saw the occasional slacker and if the bench was empty, we had to keep him.

 

I'll admit that in these tough economic times with high unemployment it's a little different, but I don't believe the hard working, dedicated workers need a union to protect them from the greedy business owner. Good, hard working workers will leave the employment of greedy, unfair owners and find employment with employers that will treat them fairly. The law of supply and demand and survival of the fittest will take over and eventually the greedy, unfair business owner will go out of business because he/she won't be able to keep the best workers. Any business that can't keep its good workers is doomed to fail. It's just a matter of time. Those owners that treat their employees fairly will survive and prosper. I've seen it happen many, many times.

 

From what I read in the article, I've got no problem with what was sent to the workers. Maybe I missed it, but it seemed to me that the letters and info merely told the workers how the owners felt about the two candidates and their likely impact on the businesses' future. Seems fair and upfront to me. Heck, years ago when a collective bargaining agreement was going to expire and we heard talk of an possible strike, we contacted all of our union workers and asked them to vote against the strike and that if they did strike it was going to have a major negative impact on the company and their future jobs with us. It wasn't a threat; not at all. But we had been directly told by the purchasing manager of a major customer that if we didn't man the job (because of being out on strike), we would never step foot in the plant again. Because that affected us and our union workers, we wanted them to be educated about the impact of their vote. And to balance it out, if you don't think the UAW is telling its workers that President Obama saved the jobs of all the UAW workers at GM and they better vote for him to be re-elected, you're kidding yourself.

 

 

My only beef with the Koch Brothers letter is that it comes off as a threat and they control those jobs. If Obama wins and they layoff 50K people it is easy to blame it on Obama. I find it hard to believe that two well educated and highly successful businessmen can't find a way to still prosper. Have they lost money and their business suffered the last four years? Granted I have no clue about running a business not how the current economy affects a business. I am admittedly naive. It just seems like they could find a way to keep making money.

 

The rest of your post is excellent. Thank you for not denigrating unions and stating the pros and cons of both. We are not all greedy, fire breathing dragons. Much appreciated.

[rockmom]

I can see both sides of the issue. My dad was in the Bakery & Confectionary Workers Union. The conditions of his job sucked. I'm certain that without the union he may have lost fingers or even a hand. As it is, he suffers terribly from injuries past. One of my uncles was a meat cutter at Kroger. One of my aunts was a lunch room lady. Another uncle worked for International Harvester. Quite a few friends work at Ford LAP and GE.

 

However, when my son was 15 he got a job as a bagger at Kroger. A 15 year old bag boy shouldn't have to join a union, IMO. He made minimum wage, for Pete's sake!

[rockmom]

 

My only beef with the Koch Brothers letter is that it comes off as a threat and they control those jobs. If Obama wins and they layoff 50K people it is easy to blame it on Obama. I find it hard to believe that two well educated and highly successful businessmen can't find a way to still prosper. Have they lost money and their business suffered the last four years? Granted I have no clue about running a business not how the current economy affects a business. I am admittedly naive. It just seems like they could find a way to keep making money.

 

The rest of your post is excellent. Thank you for not denigrating unions and stating the pros and cons of both. We are not all greedy, fire breathing dragons. Much appreciated.

 

My beef is the same. It's a thinly veiled attempt at scaring workers into voting a certain way. And the Koch Bros aren't the only corporate heads doing so. I doubt they'd be sending out those communications if Romney were solidly leading in the polls.

 

Their tactics remind me of the early tactics of the unions, or the Mob.

[marvel]

Their tactics remind me of the early tactics of the unions, or the Mob.

 

Unions still do this.

 

However, when my son was 15 he got a job as a bagger at Kroger. A 15 year old bag boy shouldn't have to join a union, IMO. He made minimum wage, for Pete's sake

 

I have a very good friend who in high school had to deal with the same thing.

 

That is what Right To Work does and why Kentucky needs it. Workers and employers are entitled to have the choice.

[PurplePride92]

Unions still do this.

 

They aren't threatening jobs like they probably physically did in their earlier times. They put their propaganda out every election season but let's not act like the times of Jimmy Hoffa still rule the roost.

[marvel]

They aren't threatening jobs like they probably physically did in their earlier times. They put their propaganda out every election season but let's not act like the times of Jimmy Hoffa still rule the roost.

 

 

That is not true. Spend some time up in the New England area.

 

I will tell you stories but do not have the time available right now.

[PurplePride92]

That is not true. Spend some time up in the New England area.

 

I will tell you stories but do not have the time available right now.

 

That's cool. I'm not naive to believe there aren't some underhanded tactics being employed by unions. Let me rephrase....the unions and Steelworkers I deal with cover Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina and Kentucky don't scare me in the slightest. Nor will they ever.

[StickerMann]

My only problem with this entire thread is that people are stupid enough to believe that Obama or any other Dem cares for you because you're in a union, are poor, etc.; any more than their Rep. counterparts?? Unfortunately all politicians only care about you for your vote--Wake up!! Dems have been "caring" about the poor & downtrodden for 80 years and its only gotten worse for them?? Keep voting for them and we'll all be the serfs they seek; and only the queen will sit in her hotel having her lobster lunch on your dime (or wait-- Maybe she already is??)!!

[leatherneck]

My only beef with the Koch Brothers letter is that it comes off as a threat and they control those jobs. If Obama wins and they layoff 50K people it is easy to blame it on Obama. I find it hard to believe that two well educated and highly successful businessmen can't find a way to still prosper. Have they lost money and their business suffered the last four years? Granted I have no clue about running a business not how the current economy affects a business. I am admittedly naive. It just seems like they could find a way to keep making money.

 

The rest of your post is excellent. Thank you for not denigrating unions and stating the pros and cons of both. We are not all greedy, fire breathing dragons. Much appreciated.

 

You are welcome. I was just stating my experiences.

 

As for the Koch letter, let's go back to the situation I experienced: if we had not notified our workers about the impact of them going on strike and not manning the job; and they voted to strike and not manned the job; and we thus lost the account and laid off a bunch of workers and lost a lot of profitability (weakening our ability to compete against non-union companies), would we have done the right thing or wrong thing for our workers and their families by not telling the impact of their strike vote? I think not notifying them about the impact of their vote would have been the wrong thing to do. I also think, for what it's worth, that some of the union workers interpreted our communication as a threat. We obviously didn't. We just wanted them to be aware of the situation. To me at least, the Koch communications on their face seemed to be doing the same.

 

I have ran or helped run 3 companies. 1 of those I helped found, starting with zero workers and zero customers. I advise a fair number of small businesses today. I can assure you that it's not easy to prosper or to find ways to keep making money. I wish it was, as none of my clients would ever face money problems and I'd never get stiffed on any of my legal bills. But unfortunately that's not the case.

[PurplePride92]

You are welcome. I was just stating my experiences.

 

As for the Koch letter, let's go back to the situation I experienced: if we had not notified our workers about the impact of them going on strike and not manning the job; and they voted to strike and not manned the job; and we thus lost the account and laid off a bunch of workers and lost a lot of profitability (weakening our ability to compete against non-union companies), would we have done the right thing or wrong thing for our workers and their families by not telling the impact of their strike vote? I think not notifying them about the impact of their vote would have been the wrong thing to do. I also think, for what it's worth, that some of the union workers interpreted our communication as a threat. We obviously didn't. We just wanted them to be aware of the situation. To me at least, the Koch communications on their face seemed to be doing the same.

 

I have ran or helped run 3 companies. 1 of those I helped found, starting with zero workers and zero customers. I advise a fair number of small businesses today. I can assure you that it's not easy to prosper or to find ways to keep making money. I wish it was, as none of my clients would ever face money problems and I'd never get stiffed on any of my legal bills. But unfortunately that's not the case.

 

 

Good points. I guess some of my distrust for the uber wealthy and the political agendas of their companies is what makes me see their letter as a threat. I do wonder how employees of the Koch Brothers view this letter and if it does indeed influence their vote. I know for me personally that the lines of communication are open between my union and the company and that while I might not see a similar letter written by my company as a threat some of my union members would. Makes for an interesting dynamic at a union meeting trying to calm the masses.

Hopefully I will never have to go through that but if so then I'll be ready. I signed up for it and welcome the challenge.

[PurplePride92]

My only problem with this entire thread is that people are stupid enough to believe that Obama or any other Dem cares for you because you're in a union, are poor, etc.; any more than their Rep. counterparts?? Unfortunately all politicians only care about you for your vote--Wake up!! Dems have been "caring" about the poor & downtrodden for 80 years and its only gotten worse for them?? Keep voting for them and we'll all be the serfs they seek; and only the queen will sit in her hotel having her lobster lunch on your dime (or wait-- Maybe she already is??)!!

 

I guess I'll just be stupid then. I'm fairly certain democrats are in bed with unions.

[Dlbdonn]

You are welcome. I was just stating my experiences.

 

As for the Koch letter, let's go back to the situation I experienced: if we had not notified our workers about the impact of them going on strike and not manning the job; and they voted to strike and not manned the job; and we thus lost the account and laid off a bunch of workers and lost a lot of profitability (weakening our ability to compete against non-union companies), would we have done the right thing or wrong thing for our workers and their families by not telling the impact of their strike vote? I think not notifying them about the impact of their vote would have been the wrong thing to do. I also think, for what it's worth, that some of the union workers interpreted our communication as a threat. We obviously didn't. We just wanted them to be aware of the situation. To me at least, the Koch communications on their face seemed to be doing the same.

 

I have ran or helped run 3 companies. 1 of those I helped found, starting with zero workers and zero customers. I advise a fair number of small businesses today. I can assure you that it's not easy to prosper or to find ways to keep making money. I wish it was, as none of my clients would ever face money problems and I'd never get stiffed on any of my legal bills. But unfortunately that's not the case.

Didn't the company that you were associated with usually agree beforehand to work under the terms that were to be negotiated between the Union and the MCA thus avoiding the possibility of a strike against said company . I know that is what happened when I worked for that company .. In the 38 years that I was an active working member I can only remember 4 actual strikes ,only 1 of which that I lost any time to and that was only for 3 or 4 weeks . During the other strikes I worked for a company ( yours included ) that was a pre-signatory to whatever agreement that was made between the Union and the MCA .I had family members work for that Company their entire working lives ( you know them ) and I for one can never remember them losing one day to a strike .

[PurplePride92]

We have a no strike clause here at Corning. In my 13 years here we have never even sniffed breaching that part of the contract. Good relationship with the company that I aim to make better.

[leatherneck]

Didn't the company that you were associated with usually agree beforehand to work under the terms that were to be negotiated between the Union and the MCA thus avoiding the possibility of a strike against said company . I know that is what happened when I worked for that company .. In the 38 years that I was an active working member I can only remember 4 actual strikes ,only 1 of which that I lost any time to and that was only for 3 or 4 weeks . During the other strikes I worked for a company ( yours included ) that was a pre-signatory to whatever agreement that was made between the Union and the MCA .I had family members work for that Company their entire working lives ( you know them ) and I for one can never remember them losing one day to a strike .

 

Yes to the company being part of the MCA. Not sure how that changes anything I was saying however. If the local voted to strike against the MCA, they would not have manned the job I referenced. We reached out before the vote to all the folks working for us and explained the ramifications of the local striking. The local did vote to strike however. Fortunately the issues were settled late on a Monday night (it over the Memorial Day weekend) and we were able to get a crew on the job Tuesday morning and avoid what would have been unfortunate ramifications.

 

PM me and I can provide you more details if you are interested.