2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.

[Lucien]

a growing pragmatism and awareness on the part of corporations to avoid union involvement by being proactively more fair.

and when the unions are gone what would drive corporations to be more fair? sounds like they could go back to practicing whatever assholish practices they would have done before the unions.

i mean, i'm just the biggest idiot here but corporations just want profit, and fair practices are never more profitable

[bosk1]

a growing pragmatism and awareness on the part of corporations to avoid union involvement by being proactively more fair.

and when the unions are gone what would drive corporations to be more fair? sounds like they could go back to practicing whatever assholish practices they would have done before the unions.

Not really.  The employment laws themselves and the many various agencies that regulate and enforce every minute aspect of labor and employment law are more than enough deterrent in most industries such that unions are largely irrelevant and unnecessary nowadays.  If unions disappeared tomorrow in America, I can almost guarantee that (in most industries) there would be no uptick at all in "unfair labor practices."  In today's business climate, few companies act or refrain from acting out of fear of unions.  Far, far more often, they act or refrain to act out of fear of a lawsuit or agency intervention. 

[hefdaddy42]

Unions are almost nonexistent here in North Carolina (only about 2% of the working population are union members), and we don't have any issues.

[Stadler]

a growing pragmatism and awareness on the part of corporations to avoid union involvement by being proactively more fair.

and when the unions are gone what would drive corporations to be more fair? sounds like they could go back to practicing whatever assholish practices they would have done before the unions.

i mean, i'm just the biggest idiot here but corporations just want profit, and fair practices are never more profitable

And then the unions would come right back.  Read what I said: a growing PRAGMATISM... to AVOID UNION INVOLVEMENT.

Look, I get it, I read it all the time, corporations = Beelzebub = the end of humanity, got it.  It just happens to be flat wrong.   I have worked half my career for one of the largest corporations in the world, and I can tell you that from a compliance perspective - in terms of not tolerating "cowboy" behavior, in terms of environmental stewardship, in terms of balancing objectives - there is little that could reasonably change in terms of being more fair and more conscientious.    Let me put it this way:   I worked in the environmental department of the "large corporation" and I worked for a environmental contractor for about the same amount of time.  That second company actually cleaned up dirty property under EPA scrutiny, and later would buy property to clean it and resell it, and I would unequivocally rate the environmental knowledge and integrity of the large corporation well ahead of the firm that allegedly is "environmentally friendly".   

Yes, their focus is "profit", but most GOOD companies engage in sustainable profit.  The "quarter to quarter" mentality is still present but it isn't the driver that it once was. 

In this day and age, when people won't come off unemployment to take a job because "the commute is too far", or "I'd have to shave my beard" (both legit excuses I've heard), and who will leave a job in a heartbeat if there is even the dangling of more money, TRUE talent is at a premium.   It is not profitable to be bad employers in this day and age.   

[El Barto]

Unions still serve a valuable purpose, which is to advocate for people who would otherwise be too risky to keep on. This is an odd example for me to make, as I think they're more often than not crooked as shit, but police unions serve this role. This is a field of employment that's rife with false accusations, and while departments used to blindly support anybody with a badge those days are coming to an end. It's often cheaper in both real and political capital just to dump somebody than to get it right. Their union will often support them long after their chief has cast them off. Teachers are in a similar situation. All we hear about is the shitty unions that keep schools from being able to fire anybody, but some of those people probably don't deserve to be fired. If little Maddisynne accuses her science teacher of grabbing her twat, still illegal for a few more months, nobody in their right mind would stick by him. His union will. And since we're at a point where how someone words a common lesson can get him sacked after butthurt parents whine about it, I'd say that's probably more important than ever.

[bosk1]

^Yup.  You cite probably the two poster child workplaces I would cite for unions still being a necessary evil.  But they are few and far between.

[Stadler]

If little Maddisynne accuses her science teacher of grabbing her twat, still illegal for a few more months, nobody in their right mind would stick by him. His union will. And since we're at a point where how someone words a common lesson can get him sacked after butthurt parents whine about it, I'd say that's probably more important than ever.

I just snarfed tomato soup - and damn good tomato soup, I might offer - all over my desk.  Classic. 

(And yes, you are right.)

[Stadler]

By the way, Obama just granted a shit ton more pardons and commutations.   Bowe Bergdahl and Edward Snowden are not among the list, but, and I can't confirm this, I understand that Hitler, Tony Soprano, the Birdman of Alcatrazz, Paul Di'Anno, the Menendez Brothers, the entire cast of Oz, Vic Mackey, and the members of Milli Vanilli.   With the pure numbers, it's almost a mathematical impossibility that at least some of these are not on the list.

[jsbru]

People say unions are unnecessary, but wages have lagged behind corporate profits ever since unions have declined, so...

[Stadler]

People say unions are unnecessary, but wages have lagged behind corporate profits ever since unions have declined, so...

Why is that relevant?  It's a false equivalency.  As corporations are increasingly automated, and global, there is no correlation, and to force such a correlation would be disastrous (and harmful to the worker). 

[jsbru]

The decline in wage rates is due to a decrease in worker leverage at the bargaining table.  Unions were once a way to fix that lack of bargaining leverage.  Now, with globalization, unless the whole world is unionized, unionization here isn't enough to fix that lack of bargaining leverage.  Automation doesn't help, either.

So it's sort of a chicken and egg thing.  Lack of bargaining leverage leads to declining union power, which leads to further lack of bargaining leverage.  It's dragging down everyone's pay rates, too.