# Union



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

Some of my more liberal friends were discussing Duke Power workers slacking and taking all day to do a job, when one said what do you expect with Union workers. REALLY, these are folks pro raising the minimum wage, open borders, dislike Hobby Lobby and Walmart. I responded 





> Union = Good pay, retirement, health & welfare, pay security between different companies should you change jobs, a high level of safety training. All my employees are union because working families deserve a living wage and security.



Just surprised me that they took this stance.


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

Thats a pretty common stance against unions. Im not sure its only liberals who feel that way.

Union jobs typically are more expensive and take longer. Not saying thats from slacking or anything like that, just the way it is.

Like seeing the guys working on the roads....8 guys leaning on a shovel and one guy in the hole working.


Sent from my LG-K550 using Tapatalk


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

trentonmakes said:


> Thats a pretty common stance against unions. Im not sure its only liberals who feel that way.
> 
> Union jobs typically are more expensive and take longer. Not saying thats from slacking or anything like that, just the way it is.
> 
> ...


But if one feels you are taking the so-called high road in supporting liberal causes wouldn't a Union job respected for pay and bennies.

As for shovel leaning, I often think workers do not do their jobs justice standing around in the open so a passersby can ridicule them.


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

brian john said:


> Some of my more liberal friends were discussing Duke Power workers slacking and taking all day to do a job, when one said what do you expect with Union workers. REALLY, these are folks pro raising the minimum wage, open borders, dislike Hobby Lobby and Walmart. I responded
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Consider most people are not part of a union, it's easy to poke fun. Also my observations (as a self identifying liberal) is that when it comes to brass tacks, empirical evidence supercedes ideology.

Plenty of conservative republicans in the shop I work in, but they all love being union for the pay, benefits, and respect they get from management. I think the generalities applied to the conservative and liberal labels has gotten out of hand.

Liberals are not a monolith. My personal suspicions is that most adult liberals are not for open borders, but those that scream the loudest and say the most extreme things get the most attention these days.

My wife is probably more left than me, but as a business owner she has to face the realities of the market and economics.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

brian john said:


> Some of my more liberal friends were discussing Duke Power workers slacking and taking all day to do a job, when one said what do you expect with Union workers. REALLY, these are folks pro raising the minimum wage, open borders, dislike Hobby Lobby and Walmart. I responded
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've been on the regulated side more than once. The problem isn't the "unions" it's that they are overly managed. Guys that are suddenly immersed in managed work have this mentality that they want to circumvent the " process" and show how hard they can work. 
Problem is, utility maintenance work requires a massive amount of highly trained and well paid resources ( people) the public demands it.
These resources need to be on a job and paid. 
The it looks godaweful from the outside but inside, it's a grind.
No one is sandbagging work, they are " managed resources"


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

As far as shovel leaners. We all know, especially on wire polls and such sometimes you're told to wait. And there's really not much else to do. I sure as hell ain't running to grab a broom to sweep around the reels to look busy.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

brian john said:


> But if one feels you are taking the so-called high road in supporting liberal causes wouldn't a Union job respected for pay and bennies.
> 
> As for shovel leaning, I often think workers do not do their jobs justice standing around in the open so a passersby can ridicule them.


First day working as a kid for the summer I was told "always look busy, sweep the floor or do something and never just stand around" I heard the same thing a few years later while working in my first Union shop.

I think the drugs of the 60s killed the work ethic in too many American shovel leaners.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

TGGT said:


> As far as shovel leaners. We all know, especially on wire polls and such sometimes you're told to wait. And there's really not much else to do. I sure as hell ain't running to grab a broom to sweep around the reels to look busy.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


It's a whole lot different than one guy standing there waiting to get called on than the guys out in the street in a road crew of 5-9 guys leaning.


----------



## Zog (Apr 15, 2009)

trentonmakes said:


> Thats a pretty common stance against unions. Im not sure its only liberals who feel that way.
> 
> Union jobs typically are more expensive and take longer. Not saying thats from slacking or anything like that, just the way it is.
> 
> ...



NCDOT is doing a $1B road project in front of my building and watching them move dirt back and forth all day is frustrating as a tax payer. The $1B project has now ballooned to over $2B with adders and still a year away from completion.


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

Zog said:


> NCDOT is doing a $1B road project in front of my building and watching them move dirt back and forth all day is frustrating as a tax payer. The $1B project has now ballooned to over $2B with adders and still a year away from completion.


Oh wait for it....they will rip it up within one month after its completed and smooth as a babys azz!
It will end up worse than it was after they tear it up! Lol

Sent from my LG-K550 using Tapatalk


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

MechanicalDVR said:


> It's a whole lot different than one guy standing there waiting to get called on than the guys out in the street in a road crew of 5-9 guys leaning.


I don't really see that here in Texas. Then again, they're probably scared of getting deported and don't want to give their masters the excuse.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

Although this hasn't been the way the words have been used for a long time, liberal and conservative really have to do with whether you favor a larger government and further-reaching governance, or a smaller government that exercises less control. By the textbook meanings, the last real conservative Republican was Barry Goldwater, the most conservative party today is the libertarian party, and the most liberal governments today are in China, Saudi Arabia, etc. 

Unions are essentially workers organizing to they can exercise some collective clout. They are not governmental organizations. There is nothing inherently liberal or conservative about a labor union or trade union. 

Liberal and conservative as they are commonly used today just refer to a vague collection of stances on some polarizing issues. For example conservative stance on abortion by the textbook meaning would be pro-choice, that's not how the word is commonly used. There's no real logic or rule to how the polarizing issues split, it's more like a personality type or other stylistic thing. 

Labor unions protect workers. In just about every case, when you protect people, you'll wind up protecting some minority that don't deserve it. Anyone that says they don't know of any examples of people that take advantage of their union's protection to be lazy, is lying, or real real naive. 

When people see it, it looks bad. Most people don't know enough to think about the necessary protections and balance of power that unions (could / should) provide in a world with immensely large, powerful, and politically influential corporations. 

IMO the labor movement should be focusing more on expanding into healthcare (now the nation's largest business) and into China, India, and the developing world. Instead they focus on busting my balls, kissing the democratic party's ass for nothing in return, and shrinking when they should be growing.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

TGGT said:


> I don't really see that here in Texas. Then again, they're probably scared of getting deported and don't want to give their masters the excuse.


It's a very common sight on city streets anywhere in the northeast.


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

splatz said:


> Although this hasn't been the way the words have been used for a long time, liberal and conservative really have to do with whether you favor a larger government and further-reaching governance, or a smaller government that exercises less control. By the textbook meanings, the last real conservative Republican was Barry Goldwater, the most conservative party today is the libertarian party, and the most liberal governments today are in China, Saudi Arabia, etc.
> 
> Unions are essentially workers organizing to they can exercise some collective clout. They are not governmental organizations. There is nothing inherently liberal or conservative about a labor union or trade union.
> 
> ...


Thats always how I thought of democrat or republican

Bigger gubberment or smaller gubberment

Sent from my LG-K550 using Tapatalk


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

splatz said:


> Although this hasn't been the way the words have been used for a long time, liberal and conservative really have to do with whether you favor a larger government and further-reaching governance, or a smaller government that exercises less control. By the textbook meanings, the last real conservative Republican was Barry Goldwater, the most conservative party today is the libertarian party, and the most liberal governments today are in China, Saudi Arabia, etc.
> 
> Unions are essentially workers organizing to they can exercise some collective clout. They are not governmental organizations. There is nothing inherently liberal or conservative about a labor union or trade union.
> 
> ...



I started out as a democrat but a fiscal conservative and became a libertarian as I got older and wiser.

I still think of myself as a libertarian and at the same time being a realist I tend to vote Republican unless there is a democrat that is better qualified.


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

splatz said:


> Although this hasn't been the way the words have been used for a long time, liberal and conservative really have to do with whether you favor a larger government and further-reaching governance, or a smaller government that exercises less control. By the textbook meanings, the last real conservative Republican was Barry Goldwater, the most conservative party today is the libertarian party, and the most liberal governments today are in China, Saudi Arabia, etc.
> 
> Unions are essentially workers organizing to they can exercise some collective clout. They are not governmental organizations. There is nothing inherently liberal or conservative about a labor union or trade union.
> 
> ...


I used to think giving power back to the States would be a good thing, but it's a romantic idea compared to the reality of this country's history. The call for more aggressive enforcement of the 10th amendment actually makes me wary. We know the constitution is not infallible. Slavery was a constitutional right once upon a time. Marriage between different skin colors was relegated to the States until 1967.

Giving power back to the States so they can choose to take civil liberties from people is not appealing to me.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

TGGT said:


> I used to think giving power back to the States would be a good thing, but it's a romantic idea compared to the reality of this country's history. The call for more aggressive enforcement of the 10th amendment actually makes me wary. We know the constitution is not infallible. Slavery was a constitutional right once upon a time. Marriage between different skin colors was relegated to the States until 1967.
> 
> Giving power back to the States so they can choose to take civil liberties from people is not appealing to me.


I agree, shifting government control from federal to state to local is not appetizing to me because I see more unchecked corruption at the local level. 

Giving power to the states is not conservative at all, it is not small-government at all. It is the most obvious and transparent liberal wolf in conservative sheep's clothing I can imagine. Never buy this BS that state's rights equals smaller government or is inherently conservative. Smaller federal government and larger state government is not smaller government. 

Conservatism is about the total size of government, not how it's organized and divided between federal, state, and local. If anything a shift to state and local government is a shift to larger government because there are more chiefs per indian.


----------



## NewElect85 (Dec 24, 2017)

Zog said:


> NCDOT is doing a $1B road project in front of my building and watching them move dirt back and forth all day is frustrating as a tax payer. The $1B project has now ballooned to over $2B with adders and still a year away from completion.


I understand why they do that and it's purely a management problem. If any of those guys didn't show up for a couple of days, They would be fired. It's all about the body count.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Zog said:


> NCDOT is doing a $1B road project in front of my building and watching them move dirt back and forth all day is frustrating as a tax payer. The $1B project has now ballooned to over $2B with adders and still a year away from completion.


By any chance do you know if the dirt under the roadway was contaminated and being removed and replaced?

Sometimes there is more to a job than meets the eye.


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

splatz said:


> I agree, shifting government control from federal to state to local is not appetizing to me because I see more unchecked corruption at the local level.
> 
> Giving power to the states is not conservative at all, it is not small-government at all. It is the most obvious and transparent liberal wolf in conservative sheep's clothing I can imagine. Never buy this BS that state's rights equals smaller government or is inherently conservative. Smaller federal government and larger state government is not smaller government.
> 
> Conservatism is about the total size of government, not how it's organized and divided between federal, state, and local. If anything a shift to state and local government is a shift to larger government because there are more chiefs per indian.


I guess I'm getting confused with your terminology. Nobody would call Texas a liberal state, yet elected officials express disdain towards the Fed and we license hair dressers and put children in jail for excessive tardiness. Are you defining any pervasive government as liberal?

By your example earlier Saudi Arabia is liberal, but I see them as a conservative Muslim theocracy. By contrast I would've said Turkey in comparison (a few years ago anyway) was a liberal Muslim democracy.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

TGGT said:


> I guess I'm getting confused with your terminology. Nobody would call Texas a liberal state, yet elected officials express disdain towards the Fed and we license hair dressers and put children in jail for excessive tardiness. Are you defining any pervasive government as liberal?
> 
> By your example earlier Saudi Arabia is liberal, but I see them as a conservative Muslim theocracy. By contrast I would've said Turkey in comparison (a few years ago anyway) was a liberal Muslim democracy.


That's my point, the terms have been pretty much corrupted and rendered meaningless. The original civics text definitions of the terms are strictly about how far reaching government is, Thoreau's "the government that governs best is that which governs least" is conservative; the Saudi Arabian theocracy that forbids womens rights, gay rights, beer, and holding hands in public is extremely liberal. 

But now conservative is just used like it means whatever republicans favor, which is just what their target demographic favors, and liberal is used like it means whatever democrats favor, which is again what their target demographic favors. At this point the parties are based more on advertising ideas than political principles. 

When Texas disdains the fed it isn't because they want less government, it's that they want that a big intrusive state government, they don't want to cede that power to the federal government. Texans LOVE love LOVE pointing out to visitors that their constitution / charter / whatever permits them to secede from the US any time they want. Then they are always a little crestfallen that this usually gets an "Oh, really? Mmmmm."


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

splatz said:


> That's my point, the terms have been pretty much corrupted and rendered meaningless. The original civics text definitions of the terms are strictly about how far reaching government is, Thoreau's "the government that governs best is that which governs least" is conservative; the Saudi Arabian theocracy that forbids womens rights, gay rights, beer, and holding hands in public is extremely liberal.
> 
> But now conservative is just used like it means whatever republicans favor, which is just what their target demographic favors, and liberal is used like it means whatever democrats favor, which is again what their target demographic favors. At this point the parties are based more on advertising ideas than political principles.
> 
> When Texas disdains the fed it isn't because they want less government, it's that they want that a big intrusive state government, they don't want to cede that power to the federal government. Texans LOVE love LOVE pointing out to visitors that their constitution / charter / whatever permits them to secede from the US any time they want. Then they are always a little crestfallen that this usually gets an "Oh, really? Mmmmm."


So by liberal government, you mean liberal "amount" of government, and conservative "amount" of government? Not pertaining to ideology, but to usage, quantity, or pervasiveness?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

TGGT said:


> So by liberal government, you mean liberal "amount" of government, and conservative "amount" of government? Not pertaining to ideology, but to usage, quantity, or pervasiveness?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


Look at it this way...
Have you ever seen government do something right?

Now, do you want more or less?

Sent from my LG-K550 using Tapatalk


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

TGGT said:


> So by liberal government, you mean liberal "amount" of government, and conservative "amount" of government? Not pertaining to ideology, but to usage, quantity, or pervasiveness?


Yes, this is how the terms were used prior to about 1990, the proper "amount" of government control, on a spectrum where anarchy is at one extreme and North Korea is at the other. 

I would say that conservatism / liberalism in this sense is a fundamental of ideology. 

Ironically I took Civics class in 1984 (the actual year, not the book). At that I think most textbooks would have had definition along these lines. It was not a controversial definition and the point was finding a spot to live between the extremes was the key, the controversy lies in finding where along the scale the sweet spot is - a conservative will lean more towards more government involvement, a liberal will lean towards more involvement (bigger government). 

P. J. O'Rourke, like most of his peers, identified as a liberal when he was in college in the 60's and as a writer for Rolling Stone in the 70's. Over time again like many of his peers he turned more conservative, but deserves credit for gaining the ability to see both sides, and never without a sense of humor: 



> The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then they get elected and prove it.


But since the 90s the term has been redefined by popular repetition, by the media, basically by propaganda, "definitions" like this one - clearly flawed - are what you'll mostly find: 



> Conservatism as a political and social philosophy promotes retaining traditional social institutions in the context of culture and civilization. conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were".
> 
> Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas and programs such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free markets, civil rights, democratic societies, secular governments, and international cooperation


It's too perfect that I found this definition because it was upvoted on Quora and Quora's SEO is great. This kind of thing is why I am in the camp that finds Huxley's Brave New World was a lot scarier than Orwell's 1984.


----------



## Wiresmith (Feb 9, 2013)

brian john said:


> Some of my more liberal friends were discussing Duke Power workers slacking and taking all day to do a job, when one said what do you expect with Union workers. REALLY, these are folks pro raising the minimum wage, open borders, dislike Hobby Lobby and Walmart. I responded
> 
> 
> 
> Just surprised me that they took this stance.



somewhere along the line the union's appear to have been inundated with the union welfare mindset, not an attitude held by all but enough to give us a bad reputation and in my opinion deserved. I've worked with to many guys with it, we need to police our selves with this and we won't have the bad reputation. despite what some conservatives say, liberals don't support giving money to people to just give money to them, but to help them get on a path to be able to take care of themselves. (in case you assume something by what i just said, i disagree with the government doing this)


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Wiresmith said:


> somewhere along the line the union's appear to have been inundated with the union welfare mindset, not an attitude held by all but enough to give us a bad reputation and in my opinion deserved. I've worked with to many guys with it, we need to police our selves with this and we won't have the bad reputation. *despite what some conservatives say, liberals don't support giving money to people to just give money to them, but to help them get on a path to be able to take care of themselves. *(in case you assume something by what i just said, i disagree with the government doing this)


That would be great if it wasn't just given to illegals like NJ just started to do by giving free college tuition to them.


----------



## trentonmakes (Mar 21, 2017)

MechanicalDVR said:


> That would be great if it wasn't just given to illegals like NJ just started to do by giving free college tuition to them.


This better not be true!
I heard they were tosding the idea around but didnt think they pulled the trigger.

If my daughter has to pay and they're getting free tuition heads are gonna roll!

Sent from my LG-K550 using Tapatalk


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

trentonmakes said:


> This better not be true!
> I heard they were tosding the idea around but didnt think they pulled the trigger.
> 
> If my daughter has to pay and they're getting free tuition heads are gonna roll!


Read the other day your so called governor pulled it off! 

Commie bastard he is.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

I fail to understand why the IBEW vigorously supports the Democratic party as a matter of policy when the Democratic party is fundamentally bad for the IBEW's interests.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

MTW said:


> I fail to understand why the IBEW vigorously supports the Democratic party as a matter of policy when the Democratic party is fundamentally bad for the IBEW's interests.


That was one of the primary reasons I stopped voting demonrat!


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

MTW said:


> I fail to understand why the IBEW vigorously supports the Democratic party as a matter of policy when the Democratic party is fundamentally bad for the IBEW's interests.


Because while Democrats are dismissive and of no real help to organized labor (at best and at worst complicit), far more Republicans are succeeding in rolling back labor protections.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## halfamp (Jul 16, 2012)

Republicans need to go after union votes and stop pursuing right to work. I believe right to work began because many republican union members were sick of their unions funneling money to support democrat candidates. Throw that support where it belongs and everyone wins!


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

halfamp said:


> Republicans need to go after union votes and stop pursuing right to work. I believe right to work began because many republican union members were sick of their unions funneling money to support democrat candidates. Throw that support where it belongs and everyone wins!


More recently maybe, but that's not how it started.

http://www.labornotes.org/blogs/2017/08/racist-who-pioneered-right-work-laws

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

TGGT said:


> Because while Democrats are dismissive and of no real help to organized labor (at best and at worst complicit), far more Republicans are succeeding in rolling back labor protections.


That's basically like asking if I should cut my own throat with a sharp knife, or a dull knife.


----------



## TGGT (Oct 28, 2012)

MTW said:


> That's basically like asking if I should cut my own throat with a sharp knife, or a dull knife.


That's not basically asking that at all. A National Right to Work bill has been introduced last year. I don't see Republicans being sympathetic towards organized labor, ever. Northern Republicans amended the Wagner Act with the Hartley Taft Act which made RtW legal.

Without a party that wholeheartedly represents organized labor, democrats will be preferable to republicans.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

MechanicalDVR said:


> By any chance do you know if the dirt under the roadway was contaminated and being removed and replaced?
> 
> Sometimes there is more to a job than meets the eye.


 I was on a multi-million dollar admn. bldg. expansion at a refinery a bunch of years back, when the backhoe guy dug up some bones, and I never seen a project come to such an abrupt halt as that one.
Nobody "owns" land in the USA, the native Americans control every square inch. But only if their relatives are buried there.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

brian john said:


> But if one feels you are taking the so-called high road in supporting liberal causes wouldn't a Union job respected for pay and bennies.
> 
> *As for shovel leaning, I often think workers do not do their jobs justice standing around in the open so a passersby can ridicule them.*


What the average Joe doesn't realize is that many, many 'dirt work' jobs turn on high power excavation equipment, not the few 'slackers' they think they're looking at.

Further, many's the time that the tempo is constrained because of ditch 'surprises' -- such as there is a totally unforeseen obstruction in the way -- like a crossing pipe or power conduit not on the working print.

It might even be the case that it's their proper break time, coming up in 60 seconds.:smile:

Truth to tell, I haven't seen that many shovel leaners in my entire life... and I have dug a lot of dirt. ( I love PVC. )

Many crews are sized because when needed, you need all hands on deck. Period.

What can you say of firemen, the military...? *They wait to hurry up. :biggrin:
*


----------



## cabletie (Feb 12, 2011)

Here the laborer's local has "call out by name". My employer has the the same few that he hires when needed. They laugh at our long handle shovels. Their normal employers only buy the short D handle shovels. They say it stops them from leaning on them!

To me it just looks like back pain waiting to happen.


----------

