writer's strike - another bullshit union move

November 21, 2007 ·



now i'm not against what the writers are standing up against, i just despise unions. sadly all this hoopla surrounds something as superfluous as tv. oh my god, the masses can't be fed their culture! but back to the unions.

here's my main beefs with unions:
1) counter-productive
2) anti-progress
3) protectionist
4) self-serving
5) power grubbing

to extrapolate a little further:

1) movements like striking don't work for anyone. the writers don't get paid, they just get their union due payments which is their money anyway. but beyond the union workers' suffering, think off all the other non-unionized people who also suffer. when a union stops working, so does everyone else in the organization (ie. the actors, lighting people, gaffers, etc in the silly example of the writer's strike) and the general public suffers from being deprived of something.

2) i suppose that unions promote fairness and that's a good thing. but at what cost of progress? the unions are a huge part of why north american auto companies are struggling. when a company can't do what's best for itself because a union stands in the way, there's a problem. i'll illustrate this with the automaker's example. the union fights to keep as much human labor as possible on the lines when the process could be automated much more. do we need someone there getting paid $30/hr to screw in lug-nuts (i say this without knowing if that job is in-fact automated, but it's for illustration only)? surely that money could be better spent in say cheaper transportation, or perhaps r&d to develop alternate fuel sources, or other environmental concerns. it's sad if lots of people lose their jobs, but that's life. as technology progresses, we shouldn't be held back. those people need to adapt. but they can't because they've gone to long with what they know and the union has coddled them throughout so they can't develop other skill sets.

3) unions are a great place for underachievers and constant fuck-ups. they protect their own regardless of what they do. i could crash my ttc bus with 20 people on it and i won't lose my job, i'll just be moved to another one within the organization. there's something wrong there. back to point #2, what do people care about progress when they can continue on without fear of losing their job and work as shoddily as they want?

4) the unions ultimately only serve themselves. they fight for above market fair wages only to collect those wages back in union dues. that's convenient. and what for? i guess power. but really, they collect dues to run an organization that doesn't need to be there, for the purpose of maybe making a power-play (ie. strike) and to pay out members in the event of said strike. otherwise, where does the money go? i'm asking, i don't know. maybe there is something more, but i don't see it. really, it just exists to create an imposing force that stands in opposition to a company moving forward, and you're paying to create that facade.

5) i think i covered most of their power-grubbing nature in point #4.


every worker faces hardship, everyone has struggles, everyone feels they aren't getting paid enough. does that mean the world should be unionized? no, it just means people deal with it because it's the norm. that's what companies do, get the most out of their employees. i'd like to work out the differences, but there's productive ways of doing that. why can't they work out their differences while still working like the rest of us? because they're just as greedy as the people they're striking against. and unfortunately they have a power position and make a big stink about it in public. they exploit the workers no different.

here's a scenario with the most powerful union in north america, the UAW. they constantly fight to save a human workforce and have them paid ridiculous wages. all this does is put more nails in the auto companies coffins as they can't compete because they have to pass on their labor force costs to the consumer. when they can't compete, the companies go tits-up and everyone loses their jobs. the workers and the people whose sole function is in the union, whom without the workers, are nothing. how's that working for you?

2 comments:

buzz hargrove said...
November 24, 2007 at 7:05 AM  

unions are what is wrong with the north american auto industry?

silly me, i thought union members just assembled the cars, i didn't realize they designed and marketed the cars as well?

Jim said...
February 19, 2008 at 4:57 AM  

The writers strike was total bullshit. These guys get paid alot better than other people in the industry. They want more money, and don't give a shit if they shut down whole productions and put hundreds of others (who already get paid less than them) such as grips, runners and others, out of work.

Alot of people got laid off, all because these people wanted a bigger piece of the pie. Bullshit. They can at least say that they're being selfish, and cut the hypocritical crap about 'defending the little guy'. If they were, they wouldn't have put all these grips, camera men and lighting guys out of work.

Bullshit. I hope they choke on the extra money.

Labels

subscribe/follow

 subscribe to rss feed Add to Technorati Favorites

tracking

 
Clicky Web Analytics