Worker's Rights

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
41

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
pat wrote:

As I said if you deserve a raise or bonus you should get one. Perhaps you do, but for many people that is not the case.

If you are in a situation where 10 employees are doing the work of 5 and not being adequately compensated then you should press for the compensation you deserve. If you are an asset the company can’t do without they will do their best to keep you happy. If your expendable you should be happy you’ve still got a job. No company wants productivity to go down.

Salaried employees is a different animal entirely. I never said I agree minimum wage should be so high, I believe the higher minimum wage the less jobs there will be, but it is definitely one of the many workers rights. I’m sure those making minimum wage would rather make $7 bucks than $2.50.

[/quote]

I removed the above to save clutter, not to change anything.

We are supposed to get annual raises according to our merits. I am an above average employee and always have been, but I do necessarily want to talk about myself. I am thinking in general terms. Good people getting tossed out for bed decisions others make.

Yes, I agree there are plenty of people who “work” but aren’t worth a fuck. But those aren’t the ones losing their jobs. Those imbeciles get promoted.

I am talking about the folks who come in day in and day out and do their thing and yet, through no fault of their own get laid off. Yet, you have Joe the CEO maintaining two corporate jets at two million per year per plane. That’s the kind of shit I see all the time. Things should not be treated better than people. Luxuries should take a back seat to maintaining the health of a business. But they do not, people take the fall and the crap remains status quo. I think that’s bullshit. There does have to be a paradigm shift at some point.
People are surprised when a disgruntled worker comes and shoots up a place, but not me. I am surprised it doesn’t happen more often.
You just have to see the spinelessness and dispicableness in upper management first hand. I tell you now, there is a cozy place in hell awaiting some of these bastards. They make the decision to lay people off and have others do it for them, because they don’t have the balls to face the people themselves.
I am very pro-business and I know hard decisions have to be made, but I am telling from first hand experience, in many cases, these decisions don’t have to be made, but are because it is the easiest way to balance the books.

42

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
it benefits the masses

How?[/quote]

The masses including the skilled laborer makes more money

43

[quote]pat wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
pat wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
There is a balance. Workers must be productive and employees must reward them accordingly. Failing to be productive to the companies you will be out of a job. An employer who fails to reward their successful employees will be looking for new employees and they are at the disadvantage here. To the extent one is in a high demand job one is much better off. Unskilled labor is cheap, abundant, and very easily replaceable. Find a niche!

Employment is not a right and neither is a paycheck. We must create our own demand sometimes.

Balance is the key. Both the employees and the employers must be protected. An employee in good standing should not be able to be cast away like garbage because the management team made a bad decision and lost money, but it happens all the time.
My father worked for a top 5 global company. In his little division they lost money. The management made the decision that non-profitable employees were to be laid off. The problem is that they ended up laying off the proposal team and the accountants. You can only imagine what ensued. Business stopped and they lost money at a record pace. Yet, the management team was never held accountable for their idiotic decisions. Needless to say they had to rehire all those people.

Now you are sounding like a moderate liberal :slight_smile:

Perhaps, but so be it. My thinking in solution is that all employer/employee relationships should be bound by contract. When either side enters the contract both have to hold up their end of the bargain. At least that way their are no surprises. The problem is, mandating contractual relationships. I don’t know if it can be done, or should be.

I am in the beginning stages of fleshing out a solution, that may be multifaceted. What I am sick of is good people getting treated like shit for no reason. More often than not the reason a company loses money is either poor management or market forces. Managers should take the fall for their own mistakes, not pass it down the line. Market forces you can do nothing about if you make good decisions. [/quote]

Damn we agree

44

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
it benefits the masses

How?

The masses including the skilled laborer makes more money[/quote]

But how can the masses be better off if raising wages leads to less productivity which by necessity it must? Less productivity means higher consumer prices. Are not consumers also part of the “masses”. So laborers make a marginally higher wage but they must ultimately pay higher prices for the same goods they produce.

So again, how does organized labor benefit the masses?

45

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:But how can the masses be better off if raising wages leads to less productivity which by necessity it must? Less productivity means higher consumer prices. Are not consumers also part of the “masses”. So laborers make a marginally higher wage but they must ultimately pay higher prices for the same goods they produce.

So again, how does organized labor benefit the masses?[/quote]

It means no such thing. Generally higher wages (or the knowledge that better work will lead to better wages) means better/more work. It also equals more buying power.

Only a libertarian could make high wages bad and parasitic profit rates good.

46

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
it benefits the masses

How?

The masses including the skilled laborer makes more money

But how can the masses be better off if raising wages leads to less productivity which by necessity it must? Less productivity means higher consumer prices. Are not consumers also part of the “masses”. So laborers make a marginally higher wage but they must ultimately pay higher prices for the same goods they produce.

So again, how does organized labor benefit the masses?[/quote]

We are talking about workers being better off, the companies probably take a hit and the consumer takes a hit that goes to the worker. But the down side is that a strong union breeds sloth. We are talking about workers being better off, the companies probably take a hit and the consumer takes a hit that goes to the worker. But the down side is that a strong union breeds sloth.

47

[quote]pat wrote:
So I have been thinking lately, looking at unemployment and the expansion of unemployment benefits, about the rights of employees; or lack there of.
Now, I am all for business and I am all for businesses being profitable, but there seems to be a distinct advantage to the company in terms of who holds all the cards.

I am in a good position and have no reason to complain myself, but I have heard story after story of companies taking advantage of employees, freezing raises and so on, just taking advantage of the current climate. For instance, my company made 6 billion more this year than it did last year, but all raises were frozen. Why? Am I mad, maybe a little, but I am not going to pitch a hissy and walk out. So problem number one, we have companies taking advantage of the economic crisis by screwing their employees…There are many examples, I listed one.

The other problem is that companies can unload you for any reason except race. I find this one particularly disturbing. We have no rights in the matter, the company holds all the cards. This is an issue that is not getting much attention, but I think it’s high time employees have some protection by the law. I do not think it’s right for companies to be able to sift you like wheat and cast you in to the fire when they are done.

I know this sounds mega liberal, but I don’t really see it that way. I just don’t think you should be able to shit on people at will, but that is literally the power companies hold over us.

Other than unionize (I fucking hate unions) what are yalls thoughts on how to solve this issue. Soft of balance the scale a little bit.

This isn’t an issue being looked at right now, but eventually, something will have to be done.[/quote]

Workers get all the brain-benefits from workers above them on the intellectual ladder. Your paycheck is mostly a gift from the engineers, scientists, venture-capitalists and stockholders. It therefore follows that, if you have a right to your job, they must have a right to their profits. Of course, that notion is ludicrous; you therefore have no rights whatsoever to your job.

The only right an employee has is to take a one-way walk out the door. But that possibility has created unimaginable abundance for all of us.

Do the best job you can and say a silent prayer to all those above you, who gave you so much more than you could ever give them. I do.

48

[quote]pat wrote:
usmccds423 wrote:
pat wrote:

As I said if you deserve a raise or bonus you should get one. Perhaps you do, but for many people that is not the case.

If you are in a situation where 10 employees are doing the work of 5 and not being adequately compensated then you should press for the compensation you deserve. If you are an asset the company can’t do without they will do their best to keep you happy. If your expendable you should be happy you’ve still got a job. No company wants productivity to go down.

Salaried employees is a different animal entirely. I never said I agree minimum wage should be so high, I believe the higher minimum wage the less jobs there will be, but it is definitely one of the many workers rights. I’m sure those making minimum wage would rather make $7 bucks than $2.50.

I removed the above to save clutter, not to change anything.

We are supposed to get annual raises according to our merits. I am an above average employee and always have been, but I do necessarily want to talk about myself. I am thinking in general terms. Good people getting tossed out for bed decisions others make.

Yes, I agree there are plenty of people who “work” but aren’t worth a fuck. But those aren’t the ones losing their jobs. Those imbeciles get promoted.

I am talking about the folks who come in day in and day out and do their thing and yet, through no fault of their own get laid off. Yet, you have Joe the CEO maintaining two corporate jets at two million per year per plane. That’s the kind of shit I see all the time. Things should not be treated better than people. Luxuries should take a back seat to maintaining the health of a business. But they do not, people take the fall and the crap remains status quo. I think that’s bullshit. There does have to be a paradigm shift at some point.
People are surprised when a disgruntled worker comes and shoots up a place, but not me. I am surprised it doesn’t happen more often.
You just have to see the spinelessness and dispicableness in upper management first hand. I tell you now, there is a cozy place in hell awaiting some of these bastards. They make the decision to lay people off and have others do it for them, because they don’t have the balls to face the people themselves.
I am very pro-business and I know hard decisions have to be made, but I am telling from first hand experience, in many cases, these decisions don’t have to be made, but are because it is the easiest way to balance the books. [/quote]

I agree with you one hundred percent. Businesses make poor decisions and waste valuable assets on jets, vacations, happy hours, etc…

The only thing I have to add; however, is what would you do without middle and upper management? I read a good book, I can’t think of the title or author, but the author talks about opening a small business. A little different, but many of the principles apply. Anyway the point is a business owner has three personalities; the technician, the entrepreneur, and the manager. The technicians, you and me, hate management because they get in the way of getting the job done, but the manager sees the bigger picture as far as where the business is, but more importantly where the business is going. They are absolutely vital to a companies success and the best managers are going to get the most benefits at the expensive of the technician.

As far as the raise is concerned I guess the question is do you want a raise this year in hopes the company stays in business or accept the same pay in hopes management is not giving raises in order to ride out the recession and stay in business?

If you think you can do better, and I mean anyone in general not specifically you, I would take my chance and open a small business. That’s my goal anyway.

49

The right to a job is no more ludicrous than the right to property. They’re both made up.

50

I am not a very high ranking employee, but I rub elbows with the top execs.

I have a hard time accepting the notion that companies lay people off for no reason. I think they take advantage of tough economic times to clean house, but sometimes they have to let marginal people and those who lack potential go as well to hit headcount reduction targets. So it’s not for no reason, but the reason may not be obvious to the coworkers of the affected individuals.

I work for a company that has about 12,000 people around the globe. We are restructuring. I asked my boss the other day why a certain guy was not being offered a position in the new organization, because I thought he was a productive long term employee. Management has a different perspective on him. His division was a mess, unprofitable, and little did I know over his 20 year history with the company, each division he has managed ended up a train wreck. He’s hard working and dedicated, but just never been very good at any of his jobs.

On the other hand, in Europe, we are constrained with what we can do. There are so many lazy, stupid & incompetent people stealing a paycheck over there and a few hard working dedicated and efficient people carrying the load.

The other day I heard an HR guy say he could only get rid of about a third of the under-performers in Europe because of various constraints. So what happens? They have to meet global headcount reduction targets by increasing the number of layoffs in the US and transferring the work to the ineffective Europeans.

Socialism vs capitalism.

51

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

Do the best job you can and say a silent prayer to all those above you, who gave you so much more than you could ever give them. I do.

[/quote]

So youre a slave and a troll. Rad. Literally straight out of the US slavery era playbook. Why bother working for a wage HH? Getting a pretty uniform and some soup at mid day is already more than you could ever give them.

The best thing you can do is opposite of that. Just because theres someone above you doesn’t mean theyre better than you or even contributing more. Wait for them to fuck up and take their job, climb the ladder don’t grovel at it.

52

[quote]pat wrote:
So I have been thinking lately, looking at unemployment and the expansion of unemployment benefits, about the rights of employees; or lack there of.
Now, I am all for business and I am all for businesses being profitable, but there seems to be a distinct advantage to the company in terms of who holds all the cards.

I am in a good position and have no reason to complain myself, but I have heard story after story of companies taking advantage of employees, freezing raises and so on, just taking advantage of the current climate. For instance, my company made 6 billion more this year than it did last year, but all raises were frozen. Why? Am I mad, maybe a little, but I am not going to pitch a hissy and walk out. So problem number one, we have companies taking advantage of the economic crisis by screwing their employees…There are many examples, I listed one.

The other problem is that companies can unload you for any reason except race. I find this one particularly disturbing. We have no rights in the matter, the company holds all the cards. This is an issue that is not getting much attention, but I think it’s high time employees have some protection by the law. I do not think it’s right for companies to be able to sift you like wheat and cast you in to the fire when they are done.

I know this sounds mega liberal, but I don’t really see it that way. I just don’t think you should be able to shit on people at will, but that is literally the power companies hold over us.

Other than unionize (I fucking hate unions) what are yalls thoughts on how to solve this issue. Soft of balance the scale a little bit.

This isn’t an issue being looked at right now, but eventually, something will have to be done.[/quote]

the basis for capitalism is maximizing profit. if a company could, it would still make use of slavery because zero wages means higher profits. as long as capitalism exists the interest of the companies will be adverse to that of the employees. to a company, a human being is just a commodity. they dont have a column for the suffereing a laid off worker goes through on their stat sheet.

a post earlier told the story about people being able to choose between being an employer and an employee but that is a one in a million shot. all one has to do to see that this is untrue is look at the constant increase of the income gap. if the rich are getting richer that means that all the wealth is being accumulated by a handfull of people.

since the 70’s worker’s real wages have declined. 40 years ago one person working could support a household, now it takes at least two. it is a fact that among industrialized countries, U.S. workers work the most and make the least.

all i have seen on this board is arguments for why it is so great to have the freedom to get rich. i want to know at what point did humans discover that the meaning of life was to use capitalism to get rich.

53

[quote]PB-Crawl wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

Do the best job you can and say a silent prayer to all those above you, who gave you so much more than you could ever give them. I do.

So youre a slave and a troll. Rad. Literally straight out of the US slavery era playbook. Why bother working for a wage HH? Getting a pretty uniform and some soup at mid day is already more than you could ever give them.

The best thing you can do is opposite of that. Just because theres someone above you doesn’t mean theyre better than you or even contributing more. Wait for them to fuck up and take their job, climb the ladder don’t grovel at it.[/quote]

why should i wait for them to fuck up? this system has caused you to look at co-workers as your enemy. where is the solidarity? why dont we help each other climb up together? i guess its all about looking out for number one

this is why shit is fucked up, because everyone is stuck in the “I” mentality.

54

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
orion wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
usmccds423 wrote:
What I find pretty funny is we expect a raise every year, no matter what we did in the previous year, but get mad when a company is looking at for their best interest. Did you do anything above and beyond this year to deserve a raise or a bonus? IMO, if I owned a business, I wouldn’t give raises to employees that just show up and do their job. If they went above and beyond then I would absolutely reward them, but in today’s world people expect to get more than they deserve for less.

Honestly just look back a few decades and you will see workers today have many more rights then in the past. Companies are required to pay time and a half, for example, if an employee works over 40 hours. Another example is minimum wage up to $7 something this year. Hell look at unemployment, there is a possibility this rights will be extended again because of the recession.

Remember a company is taking all the risk, especially if it isn’t a corporation, and has to continue to invest in the company to stay competitive. We just have to collect our check and look for another job if the company goes belly up. A partnership could go into millions of dollars of debt if they run their business poorly while we have no liability what so ever.

There is a labor market, it is a commodity. If labor does not force the employers to recognize their value, they will never make more money. Most people that labor do not even stay current with inflation

So why do most places pay over minimum wage after you’ve worked there a while? I didn’t have to “force” my employer to pay me more than minimum wage.

Supply and Demand

Ahhhhh!

So it seems that capitalists are competing when it comes to qualified workers?

Yes to a degree, I would say the more education your job requires the more value you have. When I say education I use the term loosely.

It is your labor positions where you have a lot more workers than you have positions. That needs organized labor
[/quote]

That would mean that the amount of positions is fixed.

Alas, it is not.

Human labor is a means of production and competes with others. If it becomes cheaper the market shifts to using less capital and more human labor.

If however unions keep the price of labor high this shift does not happen and lots of people remain unemployed while does in the union have a cushy job.

55

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
orion wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
There is a balance. Workers must be productive and employees must reward them accordingly. Failing to be productive to the companies you will be out of a job. An employer who fails to reward their successful employees will be looking for new employees and they are at the disadvantage here. To the extent one is in a high demand job one is much better off. Unskilled labor is cheap, abundant, and very easily replaceable. Find a niche!

Employment is not a right and neither is a paycheck. We must create our own demand sometimes.

If businesses were not organized, I would agree with you but if you have convenient stores on 3 out of 4 corners, they will all pay the same and not deviate unless done quietly. They will only raise their pay when they have to so they do not lose their employees to. Organized labor is the only way to compete in an organized employer world

Those businesses will not pay more for more work they will pay more only if forced to. It is the nature of business

No, the nature of bushiness is that these 4 stores compete with every other business in the area for their workforce and if those other businesses pay more they can collude all they want to, wont make a lick of difference.

It will make a difference because it is intheir best interest[/quote]

What difference does it make if every worker can just leave them and go to the shop in the next street?

They can wish for unicorns too, doesn’t mean that they suddenly pop up everywhere.

56

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:But how can the masses be better off if raising wages leads to less productivity which by necessity it must? Less productivity means higher consumer prices. Are not consumers also part of the “masses”. So laborers make a marginally higher wage but they must ultimately pay higher prices for the same goods they produce.

So again, how does organized labor benefit the masses?

It means no such thing. Generally higher wages (or the knowledge that better work will lead to better wages) means better/more work. It also equals more buying power.

Only a libertarian could make high wages bad and parasitic profit rates good.

[/quote]

What are “high” wages?

What profits are “parasitic”?

Both are market signals without any intrinsic emotional connotation.

57

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Headhunter wrote:Of course, that notion is ludicrous; you therefore have no rights whatsoever to your job.

The right to a job is no more ludicrous than the right to property. They’re both made up.
[/quote]

So if I clear a field, plant some crops, tend to them until I can harvest them, dry them and make them into something useful they are not mine?

Everyone else has exactly the same right to them as me?

58

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Headhunter wrote:Of course, that notion is ludicrous; you therefore have no rights whatsoever to your job.

The right to a job is no more ludicrous than the right to property. They’re both made up.
[/quote]

Made up by who?

59

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
PB-Crawl wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

Do the best job you can and say a silent prayer to all those above you, who gave you so much more than you could ever give them. I do.

So youre a slave and a troll. Rad. Literally straight out of the US slavery era playbook. Why bother working for a wage HH? Getting a pretty uniform and some soup at mid day is already more than you could ever give them.

The best thing you can do is opposite of that. Just because theres someone above you doesn’t mean theyre better than you or even contributing more. Wait for them to fuck up and take their job, climb the ladder don’t grovel at it.

why should i wait for them to fuck up? this system has caused you to look at co-workers as your enemy. where is the solidarity? why dont we help each other climb up together? i guess its all about looking out for number one

this is why shit is fucked up, because everyone is stuck in the “I” mentality. [/quote]

If its wrong to think of myself first, then why is it right for others to accept the results of my labor?

If the sensation of eating a cake I make is an immoral selfish indulgence when I eat it, why is it a good and moral act when others accept and eat the cake? Doesn’t that make THEM immoral and selfish? Do the moral exist to serve the immoral?

60

[quote]orion wrote:

If however unions keep the price of labor high this shift does not happen and lots of people remain unemployed while does in the union have a cushy job.
[/quote]

Funny I have a career with a union backing me and I don’t consider my job “cushy”…