# Did the Unions kill innovation and efficiency?



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 5, 2011)

> The USPS has historically placed the interests of its unions first. That hasn't changed. In March it reached a four-and-a-half-year agreement with the 250,000-member American Postal Workers Union, which represents mail clerks, drivers, mechanics, and custodians. The pact extends the no-layoff provision and provides a 3.5 percent raise for APWU members over the period of the contract, along with seven upcapped cost-of-living increases. The union is happy.


 
this is a quote in the following article, one that talks about the USPS in such dire shape that its going to go insolvent. Billions in debt, but plenty of options that will not only ease the problems, but quite possibly reverse them and the Union, combined with current government rules seem to be holding it hostage. 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4325951...postal-service-running-out-options/?gt1=43001

have the unions in their frenzy to get more and more for the workers gone to far? Have they replaced the attributes that helped make our country so great... innovation, and efficiency, with attributes like greed, and selfishness? 
Our systems in this country are broken. The postal service should be one of the easiest to fix, but is a perfect example of several things working together to prevent it from succeeding. The Unions being one of the biggest reasons, Federal Government rules being the next. Is there anyone that can look at this and say, no the Unions are making this better, they are working for the American Good?? It seems to be to be sheer greed of the unions, selfishness to take what they can get and not work for the greater good of the country on whole, or the postal service as an entity. I think rules need to be changed to remove the power the Unions have in government functions, they need to be banned from all government work I feel, they have become a monster.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jun 5, 2011)

same post office that is going bankrupt? and they are giving raises?

outlaw unions NOW


----------



## billc (Jun 5, 2011)

YES, OF COURSE THEY DID....

Thank you.


----------



## punisher73 (Jun 6, 2011)

Anecdotal story...

Back when I was in HS Government class, the teacher was talking about how when he was in college, he worked at a local unionized factory (It's MI, and I believe it was a GM plant, but it was close to 20 years ago he told the story).  Anyways, they had to meet a certain quota of parts per day.  If you exceeded your quota, then you could earn a bonus.  He said that being in college and needed money, he found that he could far exceed the quota and earn the bonuses with no trouble at all.

He said, that after a couple of weeks of this, the main union person pulled him aside and told him to stop.  The reason being was that he was only there for the summer and everyone else was there long term and that they had purposely got the quotas lowered and if the management saw how easy it was to hit the quotas on a regular basis than they would raise them back up.  He went on to tell him that the "quota bonus" was only to be used once in awhile by people when they needed a little bit extra.

So  yes, I think that unions erode the work ethic in places.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

punisher73 said:


> Anecdotal story...
> 
> Back when I was in HS Government class, the teacher was talking about how when he was in college, he worked at a local unionized factory (It's MI, and I believe it was a GM plant, but it was close to 20 years ago he told the story). Anyways, they had to meet a certain quota of parts per day. If you exceeded your quota, then you could earn a bonus. He said that being in college and needed money, he found that he could far exceed the quota and earn the bonuses with no trouble at all.
> 
> ...


 
I am not shocked by the story, but I am kind of shocked that a college professor spoke badly of a union. Ooops my bad its a high school teacher, I have found they are no where near as liberal and biased as college professors... my bad


----------



## Omar B (Jun 6, 2011)

Unions do a good job of turning the emplyees against the empolioyers, as if the hold them hostage with labour (or a lack of it).  How about this union?  You make it so hard to produce that I'll shut down my plant and movie it to Mexico, Japan, Korea, India, Indonesia, they you can go as slow as you want.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

Omar B said:


> Unions do a good job of turning the emplyees against the empolioyers, as if the hold them hostage with labour (or a lack of it). How about this union? You make it so hard to produce that I'll shut down my plant and movie it to Mexico, Japan, Korea, India, Indonesia, they you can go as slow as you want.


 
unfortunately I think you have a point. I think Unions have a big part of the blame for all the jobs moving overseas. Not the full blame, and not even the majority of the blame, but they are definitely more then a bit player in that problem.


----------



## granfire (Jun 6, 2011)

Omar B said:


> Unions do a good job of turning the emplyees against the empolioyers, as if the hold them hostage with labour (or a lack of it).  How about this union?  You make it so hard to produce that I'll shut down my plant and movie it to Mexico, Japan, Korea, India, Indonesia, they you can go as slow as you want.



Actually happened in my area. 

The Plant management asked for concessions, like a copay to health insurance etc, rather minor cuts over all. Union refused. Plant shut down. 

Same with the other big plant in town. Union demands, unwillingness to cooperate...the only thing that saved that plant was the big Firestone tire fiasco....

However: As bad as they are these days, without unions we'd be up the creek without a paddle.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 6, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> same post office that is going bankrupt? and they are giving raises?


  Wny not... sounds all American to me.  



LuckyKBoxer said:


> Omar B said:
> 
> 
> > Unions do a good job of turning the emplyees  against the empolioyers, as if the hold them hostage with labour (or a  lack of it).  How about this union?  You make it so hard to produce that  I'll shut down my plant and movie it to Mexico, Japan, Korea, India,  Indonesia, they you can go as slow as you want.
> ...


 Yes, with Unions demanding higher wages and shorter hours how can they even think of competing against long hours and small wages overseas? 
Used to be that American quality was best in the world and it still is in a lot of things ... for a high price. But as stated by the topic... innovation and efficiency have gone down hill... not totally but noticably. Was it the Unions? I dunno but like other things they are partially to blame. 



granfire said:


> Actually happened in my area.
> The Plant management asked for concessions, like a copay to health insurance etc, rather minor cuts over all. Union refused. Plant shut down.
> Same with the other big plant in town. Union demands, unwillingness to cooperate...the only thing that saved that plant was the big Firestone tire fiasco....
> However: As bad as they are these days, without unions we'd be up the creek without a paddle.



This is true... about 30-40-50 years ago even 60-to 80 years ago when workers felt good about getting an honest day's pay for an honest day's labor and not being worked to the ground in the process. Unions helped with that. 
Problem was when the amount of the dues started increasing and the money was piling up because nobody was using the dues for which they were intended (to pay for court/attorney costs in case of labor suits, etc and so on)... all that money ... just sitting there... hmmm... nobody will miss a few 10,000 ... then mob bosses and other organized crime started getting their fingers into it... An employer refuses to pay mob protection money... so the mob influences the workers (via unions) to strike ... wow a lot easier than blowing up the plant ... 
Just a few examples I'm guessing (could be wrong)... but either way... Unions used to be a very good thing for the American worker... but all that money created the greed which created the corruption which gave a sense of power, which likely (helped) influenced the decision of the American business owner to move their plants elsewhere.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 6, 2011)

These graphs destroy the entire premise of this thread.  Productivity continues to rise while employment and earnings have flatlined.  That isn't due to unions, which only have an 11.9% participation rate.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 6, 2011)

Well I was originally just going to post 

Question: Did the Unions kill innovation and efficiency? 

Answer: No 

But then I saw Empty Hands' post and all I really need to say now is...

nuff said.


----------



## Ken Morgan (Jun 6, 2011)

De-industrialization of the western economies, brought about by the rise of the second and third world in manufacturing.

Its no longer 12 countries competing for the same international sale, its 120.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> These graphs destroy the entire premise of this thread. Productivity continues to rise while employment and earnings have flatlined. That isn't due to unions, which only have an 11.9% participation rate.


 
I will bet these graphs do not take into any account technological advancements lol


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 6, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> I will bet these graphs do not take into any account technological advancements lol



No, they don't.  Yet, productivity continues to rise, while the claim was that unions have "destroyed innovation and efficiency".  Based on the evidence, the claim is clearly wrong.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> No, they don't. Yet, productivity continues to rise, while the claim was that unions have "destroyed innovation and efficiency". Based on the evidence, the claim is clearly wrong.


 
um no its not wrong. those simple graphs do not prove anything. Once again I am surprised at how you seem to think that a graph that does not include many factors that are involved actually means anything.
but hey I am glad to see you are waving that union flag so vigorously.

actually tell you what Empty hands, I challenge you to show me a specific union policy, or specific union stance that has specifically been innovative or increased efficiency, something recent say in the last 20 years. 
I am curious to see what you come up with.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jun 6, 2011)

how about, the unions are nothing but a fund raising arm of the left and need to go away OR not be allowed to donate to politicians


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 6, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> actually tell you what Empty hands, I challenge you to show me a specific union policy, or specific union stance that has specifically been innovative or increased efficiency, something recent say in the last 20 years.
> I am curious to see what you come up with.



Now you're shifting the goalposts and putting the onus of evidence on me.  Logical fallacy.  You made the claim, you back it up.  

You decry my graphs for not showing everything, and then continue to believe in what you want to believe in based on a few anecdotal, personal stories.  As incomplete as that data might be, it could *never *be as incomplete as a collection of personal stories.

What is demonstrated in this thread is not *evidence*, but *faith.*


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> Now you're shifting the goalposts and putting the onus of evidence on me. Logical fallacy. You made the claim, you back it up.
> 
> You decry my graphs for not showing everything, and then continue to believe in what you want to believe in based on a few anecdotal, personal stories. As incomplete as that data might be, it could *never *be as incomplete as a collection of personal stories.
> 
> What is demonstrated in this thread is not *evidence*, but *faith.*


 
I provided the initial article that is full of unions quotes that directly contradict innovation and efficiency, some anecdotal evidence in the story has since been provided. Besides the fact mentioned of companies moving union jobs out of an area or even the country because of how inefficient the unions try to make things, or how they fight innovation.
you claim they are efficient and provide innovation. You post a worthless graph again that does not take any other items into account. So I am specifically asking you for only 1 little policy or item that a union does that promotes efficiency or innovation... it should be easy for you to provide if its true. Of course I expect to see nothing from you except complaints about moving the goalposts... btw this is not soccer or football its a conversation.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 6, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> you claim they are efficient and provide innovation.



I made no such claim.  I said they did not destroy it, which is obvious since productivity continues to rise.  You can twist all you want, but that basic fact remains.

I am not obligated to produce evidence for claims I did not make.  It's conspicuous however that you are producing no evidence for your claims.



LuckyKBoxer said:


> You post a worthless graph again that does not take any other items into account.



Compared to a handful of quotes and selected stories?  Evidence always wins against anecdata, no matter how incomplete.



LuckyKBoxer said:


> Of course I expect to see nothing from you except complaints about moving the goalposts... btw this is not soccer or football its a conversation.



Educate yourself.


----------



## Omar B (Jun 6, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> unfortunately I think you have a point. I think Unions have a big part of the blame for all the jobs moving overseas. Not the full blame, and not even the majority of the blame, but they are definitely more then a bit player in that problem.



I've seen it happen many times in recent years.  Looking at the issue from the standpoint of a guitar player I can tell you lots of stories.  Fender/Squire, Jackson/Charvel, Kramer, Washburn, and I could go on, all great American guitar companies who made really great instruments.  Now most of these companies have the bulk of their work being done overseas, by workers in factories that can't even play are are just pushing buttons on a machine.  This is a huge deal when you are a musician are intonation and feel are greatly affected by a millimeter's difference, that can literally destroy an instrument.  Something that looks perfect to the eye and the measurments match the template can sing or it can be just a really detailed wall hanging depending on your luck, because non of those workers are doing it by hand and playing the instrument.

That's why you cannot get a good guitar for any less than $1000 anymore, and the market for older American made instruments made by craftsmen (and why i say old I'm talking mid-80's-early 90's vintage and before).


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 6, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> I challenge you to show me a specific union policy, or specific union stance that has specifically been innovative or increased efficiency, something recent say in the last 20 years.
> .


 
That question right there either shows you are either completely clueless as to what a Union does or you are specifically trying to ask a question that you feel cannot be answered to support your position... that or you're a propaganda ministers dream

But you see there is an answer...teachers unions all over the place have taken raises out of their contracts to help with budget issues and a local school system in NYS "Glensfalls" had its members find ways to streamline the system to be more financially efficient, not have any layoffs and still maintain the same level of education the children of that district...you see.... unions are not that bad

And vilifying one group and planning all the problems on the country is just plain wrong....it is not one groups fault...although there are a lot that want you to believe it is...namely politicians (republican and democrat) and the CEOs that caused the most recent financial crisis that we are still dealing with...

As to your postal service thing...it is strange that the main cause for the problems at the post office is conspicuously absent...e-mail and social networking


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

Xue Sheng said:


> That question right there either shows you are either completely clueless as to what a Union does or you are specifically asking a question that cannot be answered because you are very aware of what a union does and are asking questions that simply do not apply to the subject to support your position... that or you're a propaganda ministers dream


 
oh you mean because unions do not support efficiency they support as easy rules as possible for their people, and they do not support innovation, they are actually against it since they only care about maintaining and growing the union ranks?
I see... so just go ahead and give the answer.....

 NO I can not find any single Union policy that promotes efficiency and innovation....

thanks. 

that was not so hard was it?


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> I made no such claim. I said they did not destroy it, which is obvious since productivity continues to rise. You can twist all you want, but that basic fact remains.
> 
> I am not obligated to produce evidence for claims I did not make. It's conspicuous however that you are producing no evidence for your claims.
> 
> ...


 

I know what moving the goalposts means, it simply does not apply here when you are squirming trying to find a way out...
you are not obliged to provide any proof of your beliefs.
you are also not obliged to post up manufactured graphs that are meaningless.
I can draw a cartoon character making any comment I want it to say and it will be as meaningful as that ridiculous graph you added.
so like I said to the other guy... 
it might be easier for you to say...
NO. I can not find any single thing that shows Unions are pushing for innovation and efficiency..

everything I see in the news, the facts in regards to contracts, and actions shows the exact opposite.... that unions are in fact any innovation, and anti efficiency...


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 6, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> I can draw a cartoon character making any comment I want it to say and it will be as meaningful as that ridiculous graph you added.



*WHY?  *You have provided *no critique *of the data or my conclusions.  You simply say they are meaningless and then demand proof from me for a claim I didn't make.  Someone is squirming here, *and it isn't me*.  You can simply declaim your beliefs all day long if you want, but that doesn't mean you are making a rational argument.  So far, you have dismissed my evidence without bothering to critique it, and offered no evidence of your own.  So who is putting forth an actual argument here?  It isn't you.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> *WHY? *You have provided *no critique *of the data or my conclusions. You simply say they are meaningless and then demand proof from me for a claim I didn't make. Someone is squirming here, *and it isn't me*. You can simply declaim your beliefs all day long if you want, but that doesn't mean you are making a rational argument. So far, you have dismissed my evidence without bothering to critique it, and offered no evidence of your own. So who is putting forth an actual argument here? It isn't you.


 
oh i did critique it based on what you gave... link to the original site that includes the full parameters of the study, on initial glance its appears to me to not take into account any technological advancements at all. thats a big deal. I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone that actually believes union workers on a whole have become more hard working, and more efficient in how they work over the years :rofl: I think that that the only people who will say that are actually union workers, because they have an image to protect and all lol


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 6, 2011)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> oh you mean because unions do not support efficiency they support as easy rules as possible for their people, and they do not support innovation, they are actually against it since they only care about maintaining and growing the union ranks?
> I see... so just go ahead and give the answer.....
> 
> NO I can not find any single Union policy that promotes efficiency and innovation....
> ...


 
Sorry I hit submit before I was done with that one and have edited to change it to what I wanted to say...believe what you will you may want to reread what I meant to post

But to answer your last post to me what I mean is you appear to be clueless as to what Unions are for and what they do based on that question..oh just read my corrected post...I'm tired of typing...besides even if someone posted irrefutable proof you would tell them they were wrong...you have proven time and time again to be overly opinionated and rather closed minded


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 6, 2011)

Xue Sheng said:


> That question right there either shows you are either completely clueless as to what a Union does or you are specifically trying to ask a question that you feel cannot be answered to support your position... that or you're a propaganda ministers dream
> 
> But you see there is an answer...teachers unions all over the place have taken raises out of their contracts to help with budget issues and a local school system in NYS "Glensfalls" had its members find ways to streamline the system to be more financially efficient, not have any layoffs and still maintain the same level of education the children of that district...you see.... unions are not that bad
> 
> ...


 
thanks for pointing out y ou changed what you posted or I would have totally missed it.
my step father retires from teaching this year after 39 years. not a moment to soon for him... his deal? absolutely friggin ridiculously fantastic for him.
i guess since its almost like working two government jobs and earning 2 20 year pensions though it doesnt seem as good, but still...
the union is making concessions by giving up raises? lol ok I will give you that in a strive to be more efficient department.... even though I think its a crock. I think that most teachers honestly want to do right by the students. but the unions do not care. The unions care about keeping the status quo, or making it easier for the teachers... they do not want to budge an inch to change a system that is producing horrible results... I am sure there are extreme examples of good schools... I live in southern california... lets take Los Angeles school district for an example. less then a 50% graduation rate of kids who start kindergarten there... wow don't know what school anyone has gone to but thats failing in my book. another stat, between 2000-2010 there are 170,000 less 5-9 year olds in the los angeles area.. yet whenever the idea of firing teachers is brought up they never mention this fact, they instead say there are more kids.... ummm what? how? they say that class sizes are bigger? What with kids leaving to go to charter schools at a faster rate then ever, and 170,000 less kids to draw from how are they coming up with their numbers?
but teachers vote to forgoe a raise to help out... when they are already in the red, and already not producing great results? umm ok... like I said that is a concession I guess... not a great one, but I will give you that? Do you by chance have any better examples to share?

in regards to email and social networking... there are plenty of opportunities for the post office to become efficient, the union is what is standing in the way. The article clearly states many examples where new technology and ideas can be inserted to help things out... but are not...why? psst... the unions.... 

I appreciate you giving an example though. And like I said I honestly think teachers mean well as a whole, and a different breed of people who want to help others... they in and of themselves are not the problem


----------



## hongkongfooey (Jun 8, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> These graphs destroy the entire premise of this thread.  Productivity continues to rise while employment and earnings have flatlined.  That isn't due to unions, which only have an 11.9% participation rate.



 I don't know about all union shops but at my workplace, many of the union workers would prove these graphs wrong pretty quick. Between the constant cell phone use, wandering, and the frequent cigarette breaks it is a wonder anything is accomplished. 
I won't get into the drug and alcohol use on campus.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jun 9, 2011)

hongkongfooey said:


> I don't know about all union shops but at my workplace, many of the union workers would prove these graphs wrong pretty quick. Between the constant cell phone use, wandering, and the frequent cigarette breaks it is a wonder anything is accomplished.
> I won't get into the drug and alcohol use on campus.



So once again a single person's stories from their daily life are more valid than data collected from the *entire nation of 300 million + people?*

I live in an affluent exurb of Miami and no one I know is desperately poor or hungry.  Therefore poverty does not exist.


----------



## WC_lun (Jun 9, 2011)

There are unions out there that have taken too much.  I will give you guys that dislike unions that.  I have seen it first hand.  I have also seen unions that have worked out quite well for both employees and employers, for instance many teacher's unions and hospital unions.  I've also seen companies that would benefit from union representation.  When the employer takes advantage of the empployees, the employees should be able to band together to have a better position or leverage.

I think the problem here is judging every union by the standards of the worst unions.  If one union does it, it doesn't mean all unions do it.  There are some great examples of unions that have harmed the companies they are in, GM and Chrysler pop to mind immediatley.  These are examples of unions that over-reached and became something they were never meant to be.  However, using this logic to destroy all union would be a great mistake.  Remember why unions were created in the first place?  Do you really want to go back to that era?


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Jun 9, 2011)

WC_lun said:


> There are unions out there that have taken too much. I will give you guys that dislike unions that. I have seen it first hand. I have also seen unions that have worked out quite well for both employees and employers, for instance many teacher's unions and hospital unions. I've also seen companies that would benefit from union representation. When the employer takes advantage of the empployees, the employees should be able to band together to have a better position or leverage.
> 
> I think the problem here is judging every union by the standards of the worst unions. If one union does it, it doesn't mean all unions do it. There are some great examples of unions that have harmed the companies they are in, GM and Chrysler pop to mind immediatley. These are examples of unions that over-reached and became something they were never meant to be. However, using this logic to destroy all union would be a great mistake. Remember why unions were created in the first place? Do you really want to go back to that era?


 
really with the teachers unions? I think they are among some of the worst.
when the californias teachers union spends millions upon millions to push its agenda to get more for their teachers, rather then spend millions upon millions to improve conditions for students, when the results across the state are horrible, does not seem like a win win to me in anyway.


----------



## hongkongfooey (Jun 9, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> So once again a single person's stories from their daily life are more valid than data collected from the *entire nation of 300 million + people?*
> 
> I live in an affluent exurb of Miami and no one I know is desperately poor or hungry.  Therefore poverty does not exist.



Yeah, pretty much.


----------

