Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
2 edits | reply to flashcore
Re: shrug.. Define "the CWA" , youre talking about the workers themselves, not some separate organization.
Your ignorance is amazing. "Cheer cheer Ra ra ra.... Gooo Verrrrrizon ! Fuck the hard working middle class." Schmo. sigh.
The CWA which is completely against this cable deal, supports almost 45,000 FAMILIES working for Verizon. We're talking about food and mortgage payments. You go ahead and keep cheering for their rich CEO and board members. |
|
| said by ITALIAN926:The CWA which is completely against this cable deal, funny, you guys were all FOR the T & Tmo deal.
Aren't the employees of TWC free to organize themselves? |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
Its funny how some people's minds work We are supposed to accept the pay levels of CEO's and upper management unquestionably, but when our next door neighbor makes more than 30K per year because they are in a union they are suddenly horrible leaches on society that need to be brought down. No wonder why the middle class is disappearing. It has turned against itself. |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
Re: shrug.. I'm cheering to eliminate the CWA and the workers who support the scum union officials by paying dues as they are part of the problem, if they want to work for a reasonable wage and benefits then fine but if they are going to support the scum running the unions then they deserve to go as well.
The fact is that the unions are part of why this country is going to hell faster and faster, they expect there members to get all these perks and when shit starts hitting the fan they refuse to take any responsibility for the mess that they have caused and expect to be payed the same old salary and pay next to nothing for there premier benefit plans.
Before you start bitching about me being for the CEOs and board members, I am against them too but that is a whole other story that I am not going to start bring up on here.
And before you start bashing the above, the fact is I am stuck in a union paying dues for shit I do not support (Basically any democrat campaign that my money gets funneled into which is most), I want to opt out but there is no option to do so due to who I work for so I am stuck and due to health issues I don't have the luxury of finding another job without a union or decent benefits. Additionally I do not get paid the same kind of salary that a CWA worker or the like get paid, I am underpaid for the work I do but the benefits make up for the screw job on my pay so in the end I make about what an average worker in my field would make. |
|
|
|
CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picturePremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| quote:
And before you start bashing the above, the fact is I am stuck in a union paying dues for shit I do not support (Basically any democrat campaign that my money gets funneled into which is most), I want to opt out but there is no option to do so
Haha So you would rather support a people that want to lower your quality of living?
quote:
I am underpaid for the work I do but the benefits make up for the screw job on my pay so in the end I make about what an average worker in my field would make.
Hmmm, 'about'? You mean 'a little more than'? When you say average worker you mean non-union workers?
If you are really against unions then why don't you simply quit and start your own business? After all, that what the republicans would suggest you do... stop stealing from some poor corporation and become a productive member of the business community. |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
and those same CWA "members" are making the same money working at the local University as well answering phones all day eh? I'm sure- another way to screw the state budgets. |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to blehh
quote:
funny, you guys were all FOR the T & Tmo deal.
For the record, support of that deal by CWA and/or IBEW was not one of the workers, but the CWA national union. The membership never voted on such a merger. I never even heard of such support until I found out on THIS website. (not that any of that matters in regards to this issue)
I can assure you, the overwhelming majority of the WORKERS, who are the union, are against this deal. Why? Because for the past 6-7 years we were trained to beat the snot out of the cable industry. Now all of a sudden we find ourselves perplexed by a ridiculous deal, all in the name of destroying union jobs, for a CEO bonus, and increasing stock price.
Verizon needs to finish their FiOS rollout, thats the bottom line. It surely is not finished, unless that asinine cable deal goes through.
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Frontier Communi..
| reply to CXM_Splicer
said by CXM_Splicer:Haha So you would rather support a people that want to lower your quality of living? CXM, why does it always have to be one extreme or the other?
People can be opposed to union excess without supporting bad CEOs that make short sighted decisions that will ultimately doom their company.
Growing up in a union household left me with decidedly mixed feelings about them. The union at my mother's defense contractor employer did nothing to help her or the many others who were repeatedly abused by the company. They were happy to take their 1% of her wages but when push came to shove they weren't there when we needed them.
Furthermore, I've seen "bad apple" union members firsthand. I worked for a unionized shop once upon a time that had an employee who was affectionately referred to as "solitaire lady". Her original job description was to process bill payments and direct phone calls in the days before automated payments and automated phone attendants. Obviously those functions became less and less relevant over the years, nevertheless she refused to take on any new roles that weren't "in the contract", and spent most of her days playing computer games while waiting for the one or two phone calls she'd receive.
For what it's worth, I don't dispute that Unions do SOME good work, nor do I dispute everything they've accomplished with regards to improved Labor Laws, safety standards, etc. I just think that they become prone to corruption and lose sight of their primary purpose as they grow larger and larger.
The CWA's support for the T-Mobile/AT&T merger is a case in point. That merger would have resulted in thousands of net job losses but the CWA was still happy to support it because they would have gained more dues paying members. There were no benefits for the existing CWA membership, so why support the deal? Why support a deal that does nothing (good or bad) for your existing membership while harming thousands of non-members?
Money corrupts everything it touches, including Unions.... |
|
CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picturePremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| said by Crookshanks:CXM, why does it always have to be one extreme or the other?
The only thing about your post that I disagree with is that my view is extreme. From my perspective (and where else could I see things from  ) I am fairly middle of the road. Without trying to cast aspersions to one particular group, the leaders and talking heads of the right have a tactic to portray middle-of-the-road thinking as extreme left. The real extreme left (and believe me, it is out there) is usually dismissed outright as communism or other such totally impossible option. They hem and haw about middle of the road as if it is the worst place we could be and it MUST CHANGE! While I think it is an unproductive and even damaging tactic, there is no doubt that it works (I wish it didn't). So, FWIW, I think that is why you may see my viewpoints as 'extreme'.. just my opinion.
Now on to unions. I have said many times in these forums that unions aren't perfect. They are a form of republican government and, like any republican government, they are vulnerable to corruption. I am speaking of the governmental structure here and not the republican party. (Personally, I think both parties are so corrupt, at least 80% of politicians belong in jail). To me, the extreme view is 'Since union leaders suffer so much corruption, we should eliminate unions'. I disagree with that. I think that unions serve a valuable purpose that makes their total elimination unwarranted; I would much rather work at ways to address the corruption (both in unions and in government).
I also agree that there are bad-apple union members and that they can be protected by the union... I see them first hand too. People claim that union members are slackers and it is impossible to fire them, therefore we need to eliminate the unions. To me, that is an extreme (and also inaccurate) position, the vast majority of union workers are hard working people. Contrary to what some claim, I have seen slackers get fired. I have also worked at non-union jobs and I can tell you there are bad-apples there too. The dynamic may be different... maybe they are the boss's friend or relative, someone who is good at looking busy while not getting anything done, or just someone who fell through the cracks who's duties are done by other people (I have seen all three), but they are there. The thought that 'if only the company could get rid of all these protected slackers' is a Utopian pipe-dream. I do think that unions should do a better job at policing their own ranks but with the current attacks against them, I can see how they have more important things to worry about.
I am sorry to hear about your mother's situation. I agree that there are union leaders that will move in to collect dues and provide very little (or nothing) in the way of support. Corruption? Indifference? I don't know but it certainly needs to be addressed.
I can't really say why the CWA leaders decided to support the merger because I have no idea what their reasoning was. Was it corruption... greed... or a master plan that no one knows about? Don't know. I can say that I and many other members were against it. While I may rant and rave a lot about workers' rights... I also step in to defend consumer rights and elimination of competition is a bad thing, period. Luckily, even with their support, the deal was squashed. I consider it a victory for consumers and neutral for the union.
I am sorry you feel my views are extreme, as I said I perceive them as rather fair. Thank you for your otherwise accurate & courteous post. |
|
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| CXM,
I'll hash out a longer reply when I'm in front of an actual PC (on my phone right now) but I wanted to say that I don't regard you as extreme. My post may have been poorly worded if that is one of your takeaways. I've followed your posts here long enough to know that you're one of the good guys!
Look for a longer reply tomorrow, I always enjoy having a dialogue with you. |
|
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| reply to CXM_Splicer
CXM, my promised longer reply:
I never meant to say that I regarded your own viewpoint as extreme. The snippet of your post that I quoted and replied to was "Haha So you would rather support a people that want to lower your quality of living?" My reply to that was "People can be opposed to union excess without supporting bad CEOs that make short sighted decisions that will ultimately doom their company." I took exception to your implication that someone who doesn't support unions automatically supports those who seek to lower our quality of living. Of course the person you were replying to wasn't exactly being civil, so I probably should have taken that into account. 
As you pointed out, we're largely in agreement on things. Please accept my apologies for having misread your post and know that I don't regard you as an extremist in either direction. |
|
CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picturePremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Please... no apology is necessary. You are absolutely right, my reply to flashcore was not clear. I certainly didn't mean to imply that people who are against union excess (and we ALL should be) would automatically support those that would lower our quality of living. My reply was directed at his unhappiness of the union making political contributions for 'shit' he doesn't support. Since the union makes specific contributions (we hope) for the benefit of the members, I found his position ironic. I was only asking him if he would rather make contributions that worked against him instead.
Sometimes when replying to someone who is ranting, I keep my posts excessively short since I doubt the discussion will go in a meaningful direction anyway. I forget that the forum has a large following of reasonable people who are also reading the replies. For that I apologize to you and I will make more of an effort at clarity in the future. |
|
