[HM2Viking]

Originally Posted by diveRN

Sigh. C'mon Viking.

Don't you think that it's more than just a little biased in quoting union sources to demonstrate a "pro union" stance?

Of COURSE the AFLCIO, AFT, and a liberal think tank like American Progress (now THAT name is an oxymoron) are going to come out with studies favorable to unions.

Studying the impact of collective bargaining on the lives of workers is appropriate and is actually the subject of entire fields of academic inquiry within economics and other social sciences. There is a premium value achieved for members of labor unions through the collective bargaining process which has been demonstrated across domains.

Admittedly the sources were derived from union websites but there were direct links to academic research from which readers can look back in order to make there own decisions as to whether or not they agree to the points made. There is a definite correlation between the deliberate weakening of the collective bargaining process and flattened wages with decreasing economic mobility.

Attacking sources with allegations of bias doesn't obscure the obtained results of the studies.

[kat nurse advocate]

The statement that there is no national nurses union is incorrect. Check out CNA/NNOC, California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee. They have members in many states, and are working diligently to see single payer health care come to this country. The union "bosses" of CNA/NNOC are the Board of Directors, who are elected from the membership, and must be working bedside nurses. CNA/NNOC is helping to lead a social movement for "everybody in....nobody out" health care for all people in this country.

Originally Posted by wildmountainchild

I would definitely join a union. You can thank labor unions for your 40 hr work wk (as opposed to 140 hrs!). And also thank them for having a weekend, before labor unions people worked EVERY day of the week for up to 16 hours a day. No vacation, no sick pay, no maternity leave, etc, etc.

I feel that unions are maligned a lot of the time, BUT in the end, power comes in numbers, individuals rarely make sweeping changes happen.

I know of a lot of nursing unions. I guess I just don't know of a national nursing union. Which is too bad, because there are waaaay more nurses than there are doctors and the AMA (not techinically a union) has thwarted the health of this nation for a hundred years. If nurses came together under then same united banner that doctors have for so long as a political lobbying force, we would have had universal health care by now.

[Doogie]

New grad, graduated Friday night. Second career. I am 54. I was a union iron worker for 28 years.
Most think it would be great to get all the union backing for a monthly dues of $25-$30. Do you think that is all you pay? Who do you think pays for their offices in your local town, but also the district office, and don't forget about the big office in Washington, plus those expensive apartements in the big cities. There are assessments on your wages. Just a few cents they will tell you, but add about 10 different things at just a few cents. My husband is iron worker. I will start orientation at $19.06. He is making $27.75 and hour and I will be bringing more money home than he is. Who pays for the cadilacs, now big SUV to drive from job to job. Oh, then they have to look good, what about the clothing allowance.
So, never think it will cost just a monthly fee.
Not only that. The unions have lost a lot of power. Oh, and don't forget the union stewards that are chosen by the union that get hooked up with these companies. I could go on and on and on. I hope there will not be any more unions for me.

[mianders]

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

Not always true. In my former union MAPE. (mape.org) Candidates from both political parties were invited to seek endorsement by the Union. Republican candidates were endorsed on occasion for individual state legislative districts.

In any event Republican candidates tend to endorse proposals that are harmful to the interests of working families. (OT eligibility restiction, Kentucky River, restrictions on the right to collectively bargain to improve conditions.) Work for changes within the Republican Party that make it more palatable to the union.

As I said before if you don't like a particular candidate that is endorsed by your union there is no obligation to vote for that candidate. For that matter make the case to your union membership to endorse your candidate of choice.

In any event the purpose of the union is for members to collectively bargain for improved wages and working conditions. That does occasionally call for the union to actively protect the laws that protect those hard fought battles through political activism.

I have noticed one thing about your post, You ASSUME that the ppl that respond to you are not active in their profession and politics. This could not be further from the truth. Being in a union is not the only way to support your profession or become active in the political process. I would also disagree that the Republican candidates support proposals that hurt the working class. Both Democratic candidates running for office have said one of the first thing they will do is repeal the tax cut put in place by the current administration and they will both raise taxes. Their ideas on healthcare reform have no chance of solving the problem, and will hurt small business owners and the middle class. As I said before, an organization with such a diverse population of members should not endorse one political candidate over another. There are so many different opinions just on this website about the issues and I am sure that is true of unions as well. If you want to support the union and whatever benefits you feel you receive from being a member than more power to you, but do not patronize those that disagree with it. After all, isn't that the cornerstone of everything this country stands for.

[♪♫ in my ♥]

.....

My apologies for helping to sidetrack this thread

[diveRN]

Originally Posted by ♪♫ in my ♥

Well, by bringing the presidential campaign into this you're going way off topic but your false assertion demands a reply... the Bush tax cuts that they're hoping to repeal (or let expire in the case of the second set) ARE primarily to the benefit of the extremely wealthy, not for the (shrinking) middle class.

Now your true colors are showing, and perhaps a bit of ignorance.

The house and senate have recently voted to let Bush's tax cuts expire in 2010. That means capital gains will go back up. That affects more than just the "rich."

Also, the democrats are considering their own budget for the next fiscal year. They're going to submit a package that would allow income tax rates to go up on individuals making as little as $31,850 and couples earning $63,700 or more.

It'll get vetoed this year ... but if a democrat gets elected in November, you can bet that that your taxes WILL go up.

Welcome to the upper class.

[Spidey's mom]

Originally Posted by ♪♫ in my ♥

Well, by bringing the presidential campaign into this you're going way off topic but your false assertion demands a reply... the Bush tax cuts that they're hoping to repeal (or let expire in the case of the second set) ARE primarily to the benefit of the extremely wealthy, not for the (shrinking) middle class.

That is not true . . but I see DiveRN has beat me to it.




steph (who owns a small business with her dh and whose inlaws are farmers - and NOT wealthy)

[willow65]

I'll join a union in a slick heartbeat. I'm a firm believer in and supporter of unions. I won't cross a picket line even if it is another union. Anyone that opposes unions has just been spoiled by all the benefits that unions worked to get. I know a bunch of people will have a bunch of reasons why I am wrong in saying this. To this I say, "Whatever".

[offlimits]

Unions are communisim. everyone is equal. that means the poor performer with more seniority gets to outbid you. that means holidays are for the senior RNs. that means you are not professional enough to see yourself as actually being able to speak for your self. At one time yes they were useful when the agenda was for the rights of the nurses and our salaries were poor. We are well paid, and we have come a long way. And for those of you that like to refer to the police and firemen, they dont strike. How dare we walk away from the vey essence of our professionalism, and that is PATIENT CARE.

[HM2Viking]

All work that makes a contribution to the community has dignity and is not degrading. But, unfortunately, many jobs are degraded.
A degraded job is one that pays too little — one-quarter of all jobs in the United States pay wages so low that a full-time worker earns too little to lift a family of four above poverty.
A degraded job is one that is potentially unsafe. Each year some 5,000 workers are killed on the job and about 5 million are injured or become sick due to their job.
A degraded job is one in which the worker is treated unfairly or illegally. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, essentially all poultry processing plants and 60 percent of nursing homes fail to properly pay workers for overtime hours worked, pay less than the legally-required minimum wage, and/or violate child labor laws.
A degraded job is one where the employer discriminates in hiring or promotions. These abuses occur in firms large and small, in local businesses and within Fortune 500 companies.
A degraded job is one in which a worker has too little autonomy or control over her work, resulting in high levels of stress and even physical illness.
Unfortunately, U.S. labor law provides few protections against many of these abuses. Existing laws are often poorly enforced and penalties typically are small and ineffective.
Workers need jobs, even bad jobs, if those are the only ones available. But how can they improve their workplaces and gain dignity on the job, especially the three-quarters of all workers who don't have a college degree and have little bargaining power with their employers?
One important way workers can address workplace injustice is by joining and participating in a labor union.
All of us are indebted to the union struggles of the past for many of the workplace benefits we take for granted. Yahweh gave us the Sabbath but unions brought us the weekend, the 8-hour day, paid vacations, holidays, health insurance, and pensions.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...06/b99064.html

What struck me most about this article was the idea that without a strong labor movement there can be no middle class. Unless we as professionals speak up for the interests of the 30% of workers whose jobs put them at below 200% of the poverty line we put our own benefits and pensions at risk.

The labor movement speaks for ALL workers not just those fortunate enough to have the protections of a collective bargaining agreement.