Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

The Manitowoc Company, Inc. Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • rimmdiva rimmdiva Dec 28, 2011 10:30 AM Flag

    Article about Manitowoc city workers being laid off

    You are right in part..Workers should not be forced to join Unions. Nor should they benefit from the protections they offer. Like fair wages, a safe working environment, overtime, pensions or reasonalbe vacation time, etc. They should allow the company to exploit them and fire them at will when they turn 40 with no recourse to sue for age discrimination. All this, just so the company can give the CEO and shareholders a bigger paycheck while shipping the jobs offshore. Remember, no company does it alone. They use taxpayer funded roads and taxpayer funded educated employees, etc. to fill their positions and get goods to market. I vote we send companies who don't want to pay their fair share and contribute the better good of this country to China where everything they have is at risk. Their will always be someone here who will start a business and play by the rules. Greedy self-serving people need not apply.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Thanks guy and tail, I was in the middle of writing a WAY too lengthy response. I even had a comment about my grandfather telling me how this was the land of opportunity:)
      Just another point. Rim, if we use your logic that no one should benefit from anything the union negotiates --then how about the following?
      You mention tax dollars for roads. If you pay no taxes should you be permitted to use the roads? How about public education. If you pay no property tax should your children receive public (so-called free-LOL) education? How about police, fire protection,libraries? Sure, you can say these are responsibilities of government. However, the fact remains someone has to pay for these services.

      • 3 Replies to kentstate70
      • <<Just another point. Rim, if we use your logic that no one should benefit from anything the union negotiates --then how about the following?
        You mention tax dollars for roads. If you pay no taxes should you be permitted to use the roads? How about public education. If you pay no property tax should your children receive public (so-called free-LOL) education? How about police, fire protection,libraries? Sure, you can say these are responsibilities of government. However, the fact remains someone has to pay for these services.>>

        LOL, I guess ignorant people like you shouldn't be allowed to post on message boards either, but you do. Even the poorest of the poor pay taxes. Whether or not people owe a Federal or State Income tax, if they have wages, they paid Medicaid and Medicare taxes. Unemployment and Social Security wages are also taxed. If a person owns a car, they pay gasoline taxes for roads. If they take a bus, they pay a higher fare so the bus company can pay those taxes. Same for a taxi, etc. If they are renters, landlords raise the rents to cover property taxes. I know this because I have three income properties and demand is up thanks to the housing bust. However, I think everyone here knows of many profitable companies who have paid no taxes, and in some cases received taxpayer funded credits.

      • Your rationale will probably go right over the heads of tail and guy. They have been brainwashed with the idea that all Unions are bad and have never done anything for this great country. Of course, they probably never had to put their career on the line for some pompous, lazy corporate executive that got the job because of family connections.

      • haha you just "liberaled" a liberal!

    • "Rimm"

      Did you just climb out from under a rock??
      Let's analyze your comments:
      You state that unions pay fair wages,, My checks weren't signed by the unions business agent, are your's??
      You say that unions provide "overtime"
      If you work for the union, I guess they must. I worked for a company and that company provided the overtime.
      I thought pensions were paid by the company I was working for, not the union.

      You said that the company has the right to temminate an employee @ 40.
      If that employee is a good worker, does his/her job without rework, there's no way that company will get rid of them. People are terminated for a Just cause.

      When you put your money in the bank or the stock market, I hope you expect to get your investment back with interest,, I sure do.

      "Tax payers funded roads and tax payer funded education"??
      Are you saying that company's are getting by without paying the gas tax when they buy fuel @ a gas station?? Are you saying that company's aren't paying the property tax on their business??

      Gee all the businesses I worked for or I owned had to pay the property taxes.

      "Someone will always start a business"
      It sure won't be a union.
      Although a union will be glad to tell you how to run your business.

      When I worked @ Burgers.
      Burgers had a Carpenters apprenticeship program.
      This program was funded by Burger, NOT the Union or Tax payers.
      The people who were in that Apprenticeship program were paid by Burgers NOT the union or Tax payers.

      The Union told Burgers what the program would consist of, what the apprentice got paid.

      BUT they (the union) provided diddly squat to promote that program

    • Rimm,

      Are you admitting that unions are now useless?
      If you are 40 or over you can't be fired because of EEOC.
      Safe working environment - OSHA (and bonding companies).
      Overtime is regulated by the Department of Labor.
      "Fair" wages and "reasonable" vacation time is highly subjective to the region.

      If you are so concerned with CEO's and shareholders making money why are you posting on a finance forum? Hopefully, you don't own any of that morally corrupt stock you are talking about.

      Quit with your liberal propaganda and come up with something Unions ACTUALLY do.

      • 1 Reply to tablefishdollarsign
      • <<Are you admitting that unions are now useless?>> Absolutely not, but they wouldn't be needed if management played fair with employees whose labor made the company successful.

        <<If you are 40 or over you can't be fired because of EEOC.>> Not true. For a great example, google Coors company multiple lawsuits for age-related dismissals over the years. They lost those cases, but it didn't negate the damage already done. There are many more companies who do this, but not on as massive a scale and often those cases aren't reported or taken up by the EEOC because they are hard to prove.

        <<Safe working environment - OSHA (and bonding companies).>> Which was first: OSHA or the Unions? That's right, it was the unions who pushed for safety standards first.
        If the GOP has their way, OSHA will not be funded.

        <<Overtime is regulated by the Department of Labor.>> Only if it remains funded.

        <<"Fair" wages and "reasonable" vacation time is highly subjective to the region.>>
        I agree. But again, if company management was fair with labor, their would be no need for unions and this would be a non-issue. How many executives who are over 40 get layed off or take paycuts when profits are down?

        <<If you are so concerned with CEO's and shareholders making money why are you posting on a finance forum?>> I'm in favor of everyone making money including labor. Management needs to manage shareholder expectations because there are times when seasonal or other factors make this difficult. I really like the Costco model because the CEO does everything right. He runs a great company, treats his labor well and when shareholders complain, he tells them to sell their shares and move on because he won't treat labor like disposable garbage just so they can make more money. He is a great man like Henry Ford was.

        <<Hopefully, you don't own any of that morally corrupt stock you are talking about.>>
        I don't (smirk), but should the management have a change of heart, I'll invest 100K in the shares. I believe people can change if they really want to.

    • Such gloom and doom!!! Hopefully the new year will bring prosperity and better attitudes!

    • While I don't disagree with your point, I have to take issue with a few points,

      First, CEOs simply respond to the cost desparity in labor costs and decide what needs to be offshored or outsourced and what doesn't. If they keep production onshore they run the risk of being undercut by competition that is gaining an advantage by offshoring. The real risk that unions run is companies pulling the plug on the state and moving to a more union-hostile state rather than outsourcing.

      Second, by taxpayers you have to include corporations. The roads are built through both federal funds and 'feul tax' so everyone pays here.

      Third, most of the seasoned labor force will admit that our educational system does not prepare employees for the jobs that are needed, so the burden of training empolyees is not all taxpayor funded. A lot of training is done on the corporations dime.

      And last, the movement of jobs to china is a function of cheap labor, compromising regulation and a wilingness to do jobs that are labor intensive. Your vote to send jobs to china is an afterthought, it has been happeing since Clinton was president.

 
MTW
4.40-0.07(-1.57%)Sep 23 4:01 PMEDT