It's Going To Get Really "Bad After The Next Election"

[CID1990]

Too many holes, not enough Japanese hackers.

Too many lawyers, too, you'll be happy to hear! Glad I'm within sniffing distance of retiring.

There's ALWAYS been too many lawyers.

Never enough holes

[Ivytalk]

Too many holes, not enough Japanese hackers.

Too many lawyers, too, you'll be happy to hear! Glad I'm within sniffing distance of retiring.

There's ALWAYS been too many lawyers.

Some of our greatest Americans WEREN'T lawyers!

Ben Franklin
George Washington
Ronald Reagan
Hank Aaron
Dolly Parton

[HI54UNI]

In all seriousness, I've seen very little to suggest that nearly every industry is NOT still completely over-built. Too many coffee shops, too many bank branches, too many car dealerships, too many homes etc. I'm concerned that Obama re-inflated a 30 year bubble and the chickens have still not come home to roost.

Too many golf courses...

I tell ya, golf courses and cemeteries are the biggest wastes of prime real estate

[grizzaholic]

This...is VERY true.

Get rid of them all and build tennis courts over them. It's a superior sport, anyway.

Get rid of them and build shooting ranges. It is much better anyways.

[houndawg]

It's only a matter of time before the smoke-and-mirrors act known as the modern global financial system crashes and burns for good, and we start over from scratch. I for one am looking forward to it.

I'll mulch my garden with $100 bills and spit on George Bush and his "will work for food" sign.

[Pwns]

There are numerous differences between us and Germany. First, work contracts generally do not affect productivity, they just deal more heavily with benefits and pay and are light on the proverbial coffee breaks.

Anyone at the BMW plant in Spartanburg (which is there because of the high cost of manufacturing in Germany... and the lack of unions in SC.. hmm) can tell you that German work expectations are quite strict, and benefits center more around pay and healthcare and nothing else.

Lastly, many labor contracts in Germany do not have to be nearly as comprehensive because the government provides a lot of benefits that would normally be in a labor contract here in the US. Germany can afford to do this for a number of reasons, but one big one is that their defense spending is a minuscule fraction of ours, because the US is the guarantor of their security, as it is for all of Western Europe.

Oh, and Germans on the whole take a lot of pride in their work and efficiency. Americans just get by until the lunch bell rings, and American unions make sure they can continue doing just that.

Unions and corporations are much more symbiotic there, rather than adversarial which is the case here.

That, and the Germans don't waste their time griping that they can't produce pots and pans with prices competitive with the developing countries. Germany makes things like machines and chemicals that developing countries don't have the human capital to make. That, and they just plain make good stuff that folks want to buy.

[houndawg]

Funny, Germany manages to have a robust manufacturing and exporting sector, even with a MUCH stronger union presence than us.

There are numerous differences between us and Germany. First, work contracts generally do not affect productivity, they just deal more heavily with benefits and pay and are light on the proverbial coffee breaks.

Anyone at the BMW plant in Spartanburg (which is there because of the high cost of manufacturing in Germany... and the lack of unions in SC.. hmm) can tell you that German work expectations are quite strict, and benefits center more around pay and healthcare and nothing else.

Lastly, many labor contracts in Germany do not have to be nearly as comprehensive because the government provides a lot of benefits that would normally be in a labor contract here in the US. Germany can afford to do this for a number of reasons, but one big one is that their defense spending is a minuscule fraction of ours, because the US is the guarantor of their security, as it is for all of Western Europe.

Oh, and Germans on the whole take a lot of pride in their work and efficiency. Americans just get by until the lunch bell rings, and American unions make sure they can continue doing just that.

Unions and corporations are much more symbiotic there, rather than adversarial which is the case here.

Yeah, its the fault that 10% of the workforce that is unionized.

[CID1990]

There are numerous differences between us and Germany. First, work contracts generally do not affect productivity, they just deal more heavily with benefits and pay and are light on the proverbial coffee breaks.

Anyone at the BMW plant in Spartanburg (which is there because of the high cost of manufacturing in Germany... and the lack of unions in SC.. hmm) can tell you that German work expectations are quite strict, and benefits center more around pay and healthcare and nothing else.

Lastly, many labor contracts in Germany do not have to be nearly as comprehensive because the government provides a lot of benefits that would normally be in a labor contract here in the US. Germany can afford to do this for a number of reasons, but one big one is that their defense spending is a minuscule fraction of ours, because the US is the guarantor of their security, as it is for all of Western Europe.

Oh, and Germans on the whole take a lot of pride in their work and efficiency. Americans just get by until the lunch bell rings, and American unions make sure they can continue doing just that.

Unions and corporations are much more symbiotic there, rather than adversarial which is the case here.

Yeah, its the fault that 10% of the workforce that is unionized.

Lol right on time, Hyperbole Boy.

Even for a generalized number you are low. Overall, it runs around 15% nationwide. Second, you need to go back and research the REAL number as it pertains to this conversation, specifically heavy industry. You know? The area where we are getting our a$$es kicked?

[houndawg]

Yeah, its the fault that 10% of the workforce that is unionized.

Lol right on time, Hyperbole Boy.

Even for a generalized number you are low. Overall, it runs around 15% nationwide. Second, you need to go back and research the REAL number as it pertains to this conversation, specifically heavy industry. You know? The area where we are getting our a$$es kicked?

First you hand out a overall figure that includes career government employees, such as yourself, then you want a number for heavy industry.

About all one can expect from a scotch drinker, I suppose. As of 2006 less than 8% of private sector, non-agricultural employees were unionized, according to cato.org. If you think you can turn that number into unions having a stranglehold on labor in heavy industry, be my guest, I would love to see how you go about that. We're getting our asses handed to us in heavy industry because our Asian friends were envisioning today fifty years ago. US management spent the post war years focused on nothing but their bonuses and negotiating bad, from their standpoint, labor contracts while their counterparts were retooling and modernizing their manufacturing base. Unions are a tired old excuse that no longer has any cred. The sad part is that even though management has upped its game, the market share they gave away due to their short-sightedness is happy where they are.

What do you think a heavy industry blue collar type should be paid? Since you know so much about factory work and all.

Edit - Did enjoy your tip of the hat to a single payer health care system though.

[CID1990]

Lol right on time, Hyperbole Boy.

Even for a generalized number you are low. Overall, it runs around 15% nationwide. Second, you need to go back and research the REAL number as it pertains to this conversation, specifically heavy industry. You know? The area where we are getting our a$$es kicked?

First you hand out a overall figure that includes career government employees, such as yourself, then you want a number for heavy industry.

About all one can expect from a scotch drinker, I suppose. As of 2006 less than 8% of private sector, non-agricultural employees were unionized, according to cato.org. If you think you can turn that number into unions having a stranglehold on labor in heavy industry, be my guest, I would love to see how you go about that. We're getting our asses handed to us in heavy industry because our Asian friends were envisioning today fifty years ago. US management spent the post war years focused on nothing but their bonuses and negotiating bad, from their standpoint, labor contracts while their counterparts were retooling and modernizing their manufacturing base. Unions are a tired old excuse that no longer has any cred. The sad part is that even though management has upped its game, the market share they gave away due to their short-sightedness is happy where they are.

What do you think a heavy industry blue collar type should be paid? Since you know so much about factory work and all.

Edit - Did enjoy your tip of the hat to a single payer health care system though.

You can blather all you want, but American workers would NEVER accept working under the same conditions that the Koreans or even the Germans do.

I like how you blame management (and they are part of the problem too) alone and in the same paragraph admit that the Asians saw this coming 50 years ago, and retooled. Since you know so much about Asian industrial economies, why don't you tell me what happens to Korean workers who threaten strikes over working conditions?

Oh, and fail as usual with your comment about government workers. I was a cop for 17 years in a right to work state (I served at the pleasure of the chief with no labor contract) and the Foreign Service is not unionized and there are no labor contracts.

I obviously struck a nerve with you, but I will run circles around you on heavy industry (particularly in the aluminum industry) and you know too little about me to know why.

In a roundabout way, you are correct about unions not being THE problem. Unions are just the enablers.

[houndawg]

First you hand out a overall figure that includes career government employees, such as yourself, then you want a number for heavy industry.

About all one can expect from a scotch drinker, I suppose. As of 2006 less than 8% of private sector, non-agricultural employees were unionized, according to cato.org. If you think you can turn that number into unions having a stranglehold on labor in heavy industry, be my guest, I would love to see how you go about that. We're getting our asses handed to us in heavy industry because our Asian friends were envisioning today fifty years ago. US management spent the post war years focused on nothing but their bonuses and negotiating bad, from their standpoint, labor contracts while their counterparts were retooling and modernizing their manufacturing base. Unions are a tired old excuse that no longer has any cred. The sad part is that even though management has upped its game, the market share they gave away due to their short-sightedness is happy where they are.

What do you think a heavy industry blue collar type should be paid? Since you know so much about factory work and all.

Edit - Did enjoy your tip of the hat to a single payer health care system though.

You can blather all you want, but American workers would NEVER accept working under the same conditions that the Koreans or even the Germans do.

I like how you blame management (and they are part of the problem too) alone and in the same paragraph admit that the Asians saw this coming 50 years ago, and retooled. Since you know so much about Asian industrial economies, why don't you tell me what happens to Korean workers who threaten strikes over working conditions?

Oh, and fail as usual with your comment about government workers. I was a cop for 17 years in a right to work state (I served at the pleasure of the chief with no labor contract) and the Foreign Service is not unionized and there are no labor contracts.

I obviously struck a nerve with you, but I will run circles around you on heavy industry (particularly in the aluminum industry) and you know too little about me to know why.

In a roundabout way, you are correct about unions not being THE problem. Unions are just the enablers.

Is that all you got, CInDy; we have it better than Koreans? Really not much of an anti-union argument, is it? I notice that after your red-herring about heavy industry labor that you don't dispute the under 8% numbers of the cato people. American workers, the most productive in the world, have increased productivity steadily for 40 years while their wages have decreased.

Why don't you go ahead and favor us with your opinion of what a steel worker should be paid in wages and benefits?

[houndawg]

First you hand out a overall figure that includes career government employees, such as yourself, then you want a number for heavy industry.

About all one can expect from a scotch drinker, I suppose. As of 2006 less than 8% of private sector, non-agricultural employees were unionized, according to cato.org. If you think you can turn that number into unions having a stranglehold on labor in heavy industry, be my guest, I would love to see how you go about that. We're getting our asses handed to us in heavy industry because our Asian friends were envisioning today fifty years ago. US management spent the post war years focused on nothing but their bonuses and negotiating bad, from their standpoint, labor contracts while their counterparts were retooling and modernizing their manufacturing base. Unions are a tired old excuse that no longer has any cred. The sad part is that even though management has upped its game, the market share they gave away due to their short-sightedness is happy where they are.

What do you think a heavy industry blue collar type should be paid? Since you know so much about factory work and all.

Edit - Did enjoy your tip of the hat to a single payer health care system though.

You can blather all you want, but American workers would NEVER accept working under the same conditions that the Koreans or even the Germans do.

I like how you blame management (and they are part of the problem too) alone and in the same paragraph admit that the Asians saw this coming 50 years ago, and retooled. Since you know so much about Asian industrial economies, why don't you tell me what happens to Korean workers who threaten strikes over working conditions?

Oh, and fail as usual with your comment about government workers. I was a cop for 17 years in a right to work state (I served at the pleasure of the chief with no labor contract) and the Foreign Service is not unionized and there are no labor contracts.

I obviously struck a nerve with you, but I will run circles around you on heavy industry (particularly in the aluminum industry) and you know too little about me to know why.

In a roundabout way, you are correct about unions not being THE problem. Unions are just the enablers.

Yeah, the enablers. How far have executive bonuses declined during the past 40 years, bro?

http://www.afsa.org/what_is_afsa.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"..16,000 dues paying members representing over 31,000 active and retired Foreign Service employees.."

"AFSA is the exclusive bargaining agent for the Foreign Service employees of the Dept. of State, USAID, FAS, FCS, and IBB. In this labor/management relations capacity AFSA negotiates with the managements of the principal foreign service agencies on personnel policies and practices affecting members working conditions. AFSA also represents members in formal grievance proceedings......"

Definitely not a union.

[CID1990]

You can blather all you want, but American workers would NEVER accept working under the same conditions that the Koreans or even the Germans do.

I like how you blame management (and they are part of the problem too) alone and in the same paragraph admit that the Asians saw this coming 50 years ago, and retooled. Since you know so much about Asian industrial economies, why don't you tell me what happens to Korean workers who threaten strikes over working conditions?

Oh, and fail as usual with your comment about government workers. I was a cop for 17 years in a right to work state (I served at the pleasure of the chief with no labor contract) and the Foreign Service is not unionized and there are no labor contracts.

I obviously struck a nerve with you, but I will run circles around you on heavy industry (particularly in the aluminum industry) and you know too little about me to know why.

In a roundabout way, you are correct about unions not being THE problem. Unions are just the enablers.

Is that all you got, CInDy; we have it better than Koreans? Really not much of an anti-union argument, is it? I notice that after your red-herring about heavy industry labor that you don't dispute the under 8% numbers of the cato people. American workers, the most productive in the world, have increased productivity steadily for 40 years while their wages have decreased.

Why don't you go ahead and favor us with your opinion of what a steel worker should be paid in wages and benefits?

I do not have an opinion on wages. I think steelworker wages are right about where they should be. Wages are not the biggest employee expenditure that is made by steel and aluminum companies.

Korea was one example where workers do not enjoy nearly as many benefits as US workers. That is why you use hyperbole so much; you do not read closely and focus too much on minute detail instead of the big picture. YOU said Asia. I used Korea as an example because they are the most industrialized nation in Asia that has organized labor. You can add Japan in there and the argument remains the same.

No need to get all emotional about it.

As for union membership- it HAS been moving down because companies have a harder time competing with those Asia markets you mentioned, and so the US companies relocate their activities not only outside the country, but also within the US. Remember those American workers at the Boeing plant in SC that were so snidely criticized by Nancy Pelosi? Those were AMERICAN workers and she all but called them scabs in support of the union suit against Boeing. If conditions were so bad for them (and they are great, BTW... I have two buddies working there and their benefits are better than anything I have ever enjoyed) then why all the employee satisfaction down there?

There was a time when NOBODY worked in places like NY or CHI without being in some union or another. They drive costs way beyond the profitability level in industries where we have to compete with other countries, and claiming that "only 8% of American workers are unionized so it can't possibly be because of unions" is spurious at best. Wherever you find American companies (particularly heavy industries) going offshore, there are unions at home. They aren't the only factor, and poor management is also a contributor, but unions are a prime mover.

[houndawg]

Is that all you got, CInDy; we have it better than Koreans? Really not much of an anti-union argument, is it? I notice that after your red-herring about heavy industry labor that you don't dispute the under 8% numbers of the cato people. American workers, the most productive in the world, have increased productivity steadily for 40 years while their wages have decreased.

Why don't you go ahead and favor us with your opinion of what a steel worker should be paid in wages and benefits?

I do not have an opinion on wages. I think steelworker wages are right about where they should be. Wages are not the biggest employee expenditure that is made by steel and aluminum companies.

Korea was one example where workers do not enjoy nearly as many benefits as US workers. That is why you use hyperbole so much; you do not read closely and focus too much on minute detail instead of the big picture. YOU said Asia. I used Korea as an example because they are the most industrialized nation in Asia that has organized labor. You can add Japan in there and the argument remains the same.

No need to get all emotional about it.

As for union membership- it HAS been moving down because companies have a harder time competing with those Asia markets you mentioned, and so the US companies relocate their activities not only outside the country, but also within the US. Remember those American workers at the Boeing plant in SC that were so snidely criticized by Nancy Pelosi? Those were AMERICAN workers and she all but called them scabs in support of the union suit against Boeing. If conditions were so bad for them (and they are great, BTW... I have two buddies working there and their benefits are better than anything I have ever enjoyed) then why all the employee satisfaction down there?

There was a time when NOBODY worked in places like NY or CHI without being in some union or another. They drive costs way beyond the profitability level in industries where we have to compete with other countries, and claiming that "only 8% of American workers are unionized so it can't possibly be because of unions" is spurious at best. Wherever you find American companies (particularly heavy industries) going offshore, there are unions at home. They aren't the only factor, and poor management is also a contributor, but unions are a prime mover.

Not getting all emotional, amigo, you're reading that in. You seem a bit dyspeptic in print, but are probably not so much that way in person?

My comments about Asia were not labor related, as you know, I was referring to their management being considerably more foresighted than ours.

I realize that wages aren't the biggest employee expenditure made by steel companies and assume you are referring to pension and retirement costs. All of which were negotiated and approved by management, who now wants to change the game because they got out-negotiated by the unions.

You also attribute a quote to me that is your weak paraphrasing of what I said. I did not say that "it can't possibly be because of unions". There is plenty of blame to go around and a great deal of it is not on the unions nor is your assertion that whenever companies go abroad there are unions at home correct. Non union companies go abroad too, I know this first hand.

Funny how all the execs that run these industries that are getting schooled by the Asians have never seen a drop in theirpay. And if you're correct about steel workers wages being about right, then why the whimpering about the big bad union? Because they expect management to live with the deal they negotiated?

Oh, and tell me again how the Foreign Service isn't unionized.

[CID1990]

I do not have an opinion on wages. I think steelworker wages are right about where they should be. Wages are not the biggest employee expenditure that is made by steel and aluminum companies.

Korea was one example where workers do not enjoy nearly as many benefits as US workers. That is why you use hyperbole so much; you do not read closely and focus too much on minute detail instead of the big picture. YOU said Asia. I used Korea as an example because they are the most industrialized nation in Asia that has organized labor. You can add Japan in there and the argument remains the same.

No need to get all emotional about it.

As for union membership- it HAS been moving down because companies have a harder time competing with those Asia markets you mentioned, and so the US companies relocate their activities not only outside the country, but also within the US. Remember those American workers at the Boeing plant in SC that were so snidely criticized by Nancy Pelosi? Those were AMERICAN workers and she all but called them scabs in support of the union suit against Boeing. If conditions were so bad for them (and they are great, BTW... I have two buddies working there and their benefits are better than anything I have ever enjoyed) then why all the employee satisfaction down there?

There was a time when NOBODY worked in places like NY or CHI without being in some union or another. They drive costs way beyond the profitability level in industries where we have to compete with other countries, and claiming that "only 8% of American workers are unionized so it can't possibly be because of unions" is spurious at best. Wherever you find American companies (particularly heavy industries) going offshore, there are unions at home. They aren't the only factor, and poor management is also a contributor, but unions are a prime mover.

Not getting all emotional, amigo, you're reading that in. You seem a bit dyspeptic in print, but are probably not so much that way in person?

My comments about Asia were not labor related, as you know, I was referring to their management being considerably more foresighted than ours.

I realize that wages aren't the biggest employee expenditure made by steel companies and assume you are referring to pension and retirement costs. All of which were negotiated and approved by management, who now wants to change the game because they got out-negotiated by the unions.

You also attribute a quote to me that is your weak paraphrasing of what I said. I did not say that "it can't possibly be because of unions". There is plenty of blame to go around and a great deal of it is not on the unions nor is your assertion that whenever companies go abroad there are unions at home correct. Non union companies go abroad too, I know this first hand.

Funny how all the execs that run these industries that are getting schooled by the Asians have never seen a drop in theirpay. And if you're correct about steel workers wages being about right, then why the whimpering about the big bad union? Because they expect management to live with the deal they negotiated?

Oh, and tell me again how the Foreign Service isn't unionized.

We will just have to agree to disagree on the primary causes for the inability of American companies to compete.

I will address your last question, though. Where have you seen or heard that the Foreign Service is unionized? We have the AFSA, but this is an employee association which is sometimes called a union, but they have no negotiating power. We have no labor contract. We cannot lobby Congress for anything; not pay, not benefits, nothing. I serve at the pleasure of the Executive Branch. I am a commissioned officer at DoS just as my cousin is a commissioned officer at DoD (Marines) and although he is a member of a number of organizations, as a mover of the military he is also non-union.

When I was a cop, I was a member if the Fraternal Order of Police. Also a union in union states, but not a union in SC, pretty much just a club. If there WERE cop unions in SC I would not have been a member anyway because I think police unions protect bad cops (but that is a whole other discussion).

I can assure you that the Foreign Service is not unionized. The AFSA serves a similar function as the FOP did in my old job; i.e.; I get legal representation when I am sued in my official capacity, and that is the reason I am a member.

I can tell you this, though, if you include employee organizations in your definition of unions or unionization, then that 8% goes WAY up.

[houndawg]

You can blather all you want, but American workers would NEVER accept working under the same conditions that the Koreans or even the Germans do.

I like how you blame management (and they are part of the problem too) alone and in the same paragraph admit that the Asians saw this coming 50 years ago, and retooled. Since you know so much about Asian industrial economies, why don't you tell me what happens to Korean workers who threaten strikes over working conditions?

Oh, and fail as usual with your comment about government workers. I was a cop for 17 years in a right to work state (I served at the pleasure of the chief with no labor contract) and the Foreign Service is not unionized and there are no labor contracts.

I obviously struck a nerve with you, but I will run circles around you on heavy industry (particularly in the aluminum industry) and you know too little about me to know why.

In a roundabout way, you are correct about unions not being THE problem. Unions are just the enablers.

Yeah, the enablers. How far have executive bonuses declined during the past 40 years, bro?

http://www.afsa.org/what_is_afsa.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"..16,000 dues paying members representing over 31,000 active and retired Foreign Service employees.."

"AFSA is the exclusive bargaining agent for the Foreign Service employees of the Dept. of State, USAID, FAS, FCS, and IBB. In this labor/management relations capacity AFSA negotiates with the managements of the principal foreign service agencies on personnel policies and practices affecting members working conditions. AFSA also represents members in formal grievance proceedings......"

Definitely not a union.

These quotes are from their own website - sure sounds like a union.

[houndawg]

Not getting all emotional, amigo, you're reading that in. You seem a bit dyspeptic in print, but are probably not so much that way in person?

My comments about Asia were not labor related, as you know, I was referring to their management being considerably more foresighted than ours.

I realize that wages aren't the biggest employee expenditure made by steel companies and assume you are referring to pension and retirement costs. All of which were negotiated and approved by management, who now wants to change the game because they got out-negotiated by the unions.

You also attribute a quote to me that is your weak paraphrasing of what I said. I did not say that "it can't possibly be because of unions". There is plenty of blame to go around and a great deal of it is not on the unions nor is your assertion that whenever companies go abroad there are unions at home correct. Non union companies go abroad too, I know this first hand.

Funny how all the execs that run these industries that are getting schooled by the Asians have never seen a drop in theirpay. And if you're correct about steel workers wages being about right, then why the whimpering about the big bad union? Because they expect management to live with the deal they negotiated?

Oh, and tell me again how the Foreign Service isn't unionized.

We will just have to agree to disagree on the primary causes for the inability of American companies to compete.

We have been for some time.

Hey, I'm the son of a 4th grade teacher and a construction worker; come by my pro-labor position naturally.

And I'd be all for labor concessions if management was willing to cut their own pay too, which they should be if things are as dire as they're always bleating.

[CID1990]

Yeah, the enablers. How far have executive bonuses declined during the past 40 years, bro?

http://www.afsa.org/what_is_afsa.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"..16,000 dues paying members representing over 31,000 active and retired Foreign Service employees.."

"AFSA is the exclusive bargaining agent for the Foreign Service employees of the Dept. of State, USAID, FAS, FCS, and IBB. In this labor/management relations capacity AFSA negotiates with the managements of the principal foreign service agencies on personnel policies and practices affecting members working conditions. AFSA also represents members in formal grievance proceedings......"

Definitely not a union.

These quotes are from their own website - sure sounds like a union.

You sure would think so, huh?

The FOP language is South Carolina is very similar.

But here is where you fail again:

Read carefully your quote above.

"In this labor/management relations capacity AFSA negotiates with the MANAGEMENTS of the principal foreign service agencies on personnel policies and practices affecting members working conditions."

In other words, the AFSA meets with the office of the Secretary and asks for this or that. None of these negotiations are binding, and the Secretary cannot make changes to wages or benefits in any way. They ask for miniscule things, and they print a nice magazine each month, and they provide me with a lawyer when I am sued.

Employee associations like the FOP and AFSA use language like this to inflate their importance, but they have no arbitration power. At all.

Again, Expandospanos, I have no labor contract, and my "union" has no bargaining power. You really need to realize that things, like your take on unions, are not as they always seem.

[houndawg]

These quotes are from their own website - sure sounds like a union.

You sure would think so, huh?

The FOP language is South Carolina is very similar.

But here is where you fail again:

Read carefully your quote above.

"In this labor/management relations capacity AFSA negotiates with the MANAGEMENTS of the principal foreign service agencies on personnel policies and practices affecting members working conditions."

In other words, the AFSA meets with the office of the Secretary and asks for this or that. None of these negotiations are binding, and the Secretary cannot make changes to wages or benefits in any way. They ask for miniscule things, and they print a nice magazine each month, and they provide me with a lawyer when I am sued.

Employee associations like the FOP and AFSA use language like this to inflate their importance, but they have no arbitration power. At all.

Again, Expandospanos, I have no labor contract, and my "union" has no bargaining power. You really need to realize that things, like your take on unions, are not as they always seem.

My my, I think we hit a nerve here. No need to get the vapors over it, dude. You're management, I get it. Exempt.

Read what you quoted in bold, CInDy, and tell me: Who negotiates with managements? Unions do.

Perhaps you people should be taking AFSA to task for being out there talking like a union and representing at formal grievances and all since they're out there fraudulently representing themselves to the public.

[CID1990]

You sure would think so, huh?

The FOP language is South Carolina is very similar.

But here is where you fail again:

Read carefully your quote above.

"In this labor/management relations capacity AFSA negotiates with the MANAGEMENTS of the principal foreign service agencies on personnel policies and practices affecting members working conditions."

In other words, the AFSA meets with the office of the Secretary and asks for this or that. None of these negotiations are binding, and the Secretary cannot make changes to wages or benefits in any way. They ask for miniscule things, and they print a nice magazine each month, and they provide me with a lawyer when I am sued.

Employee associations like the FOP and AFSA use language like this to inflate their importance, but they have no arbitration power. At all.

Again, Expandospanos, I have no labor contract, and my "union" has no bargaining power. You really need to realize that things, like your take on unions, are not as they always seem.

My my, I think we hit a nerve here. No need to get the vapors over it, dude. You're management, I get it. Exempt.

Read what you quoted in bold, CInDy, and tell me: Who negotiates with managements? Unions do.

Perhaps you people should be taking AFSA to task for being out there talking like a union and representing at formal grievances and all since they're out there fraudulently representing themselves to the public.

You are an idiot. You didn't hit a nerve, I just don't have a lot of patience with mouth breathers who can't read.

Let me simplify.

I am not management.

The AFSA lobbies DoS management. For things like, more comfy chairs. They have absolutely no bargaining power. Not a public sector union.

DoS management is not controlling of salaries, benefits, or any if the other things that unions negotiate over.

Management: makes job assignments, handles administrative affairs, directs staffing and planning. Management means Hillary Clinton and on down the chain. Not up the chain. Hillary is a powerful lady, but she has no control over my pay or benefits.

CONGRESS: sets pay and benefits. ADSA does not and cannot (by law) negotiate pay or benefits with Congress. For instance, the teachers' unions in Wisconsin (that I am sure you supported) negotiate directly with the state legislature over pay and benefits. This is a public sector union, and the teachers are contract employees under a contract negotiated by the union.

Again, the Foreign Service is not unionized. You should really try to comprehend a subject before you try to lecture others on it. Also, if you are going to quote tha internetz you should read closely.

That said, NOW I understand why YOU understand so little.

[houndawg]

My my, I think we hit a nerve here. No need to get the vapors over it, dude. You're management, I get it. Exempt.

Read what you quoted in bold, CInDy, and tell me: Who negotiates with managements? Unions do.

Perhaps you people should be taking AFSA to task for being out there talking like a union and representing at formal grievances and all since they're out there fraudulently representing themselves to the public.

You are an idiot. You didn't hit a nerve, I just don't have a lot of patience with mouth breathers who can't read.

Let me simplify.

I am not management.

The AFSA lobbies DoS management. For things like, more comfy chairs. They have absolutely no bargaining power. Not a public sector union.

DoS management is not controlling of salaries, benefits, or any if the other things that unions negotiate over.

Management: makes job assignments, handles administrative affairs, directs staffing and planning. Management means Hillary Clinton and on down the chain. Not up the chain. Hillary is a powerful lady, but she has no control over my pay or benefits.

CONGRESS: sets pay and benefits. ADSA does not and cannot (by law) negotiate pay or benefits with Congress. For instance, the teachers' unions in Wisconsin (that I am sure you supported) negotiate directly with the state legislature over pay and benefits. This is a public sector union, and the teachers are contract employees under a contract negotiated by the union.

Again, the Foreign Service is not unionized. You should really try to comprehend a subject before you try to lecture others on it. Also, if you are going to quote tha internetz you should read closely.

That said, NOW I understand why YOU understand so little.

Touchy today.

[CID1990]

You are an idiot. You didn't hit a nerve, I just don't have a lot of patience with mouth breathers who can't read.

Let me simplify.

I am not management.

The AFSA lobbies DoS management. For things like, more comfy chairs. They have absolutely no bargaining power. Not a public sector union.

DoS management is not controlling of salaries, benefits, or any if the other things that unions negotiate over.

Management: makes job assignments, handles administrative affairs, directs staffing and planning. Management means Hillary Clinton and on down the chain. Not up the chain. Hillary is a powerful lady, but she has no control over my pay or benefits.

CONGRESS: sets pay and benefits. ADSA does not and cannot (by law) negotiate pay or benefits with Congress. For instance, the teachers' unions in Wisconsin (that I am sure you supported) negotiate directly with the state legislature over pay and benefits. This is a public sector union, and the teachers are contract employees under a contract negotiated by the union.

Again, the Foreign Service is not unionized. You should really try to comprehend a subject before you try to lecture others on it. Also, if you are going to quote tha internetz you should read closely.

That said, NOW I understand why YOU understand so little.

Touchy today.

No, you're just especially ignorant today, and your fail annoys me.

[houndawg]

Touchy today.

No, you're just especially ignorant today, and your fail annoys me.

Awww, have a motzoh....

[JohnStOnge]

You know, fear can be a good thing. There's a "reason" why the emotion exists.

[houndawg]

Is that all you got, CInDy; we have it better than Koreans? Really not much of an anti-union argument, is it? I notice that after your red-herring about heavy industry labor that you don't dispute the under 8% numbers of the cato people. American workers, the most productive in the world, have increased productivity steadily for 40 years while their wages have decreased.

Why don't you go ahead and favor us with your opinion of what a steel worker should be paid in wages and benefits?

I do not have an opinion on wages. I think steelworker wages are right about where they should be. Wages are not the biggest employee expenditure that is made by steel and aluminum companies.

Korea was one example where workers do not enjoy nearly as many benefits as US workers. That is why you use hyperbole so much; you do not read closely and focus too much on minute detail instead of the big picture. YOU said Asia. I used Korea as an example because they are the most industrialized nation in Asia that has organized labor. You can add Japan in there and the argument remains the same.

No need to get all emotional about it.

As for union membership- it HAS been moving down because companies have a harder time competing with those Asia markets you mentioned, and so the US companies relocate their activities not only outside the country, but also within the US. Remember those American workers at the Boeing plant in SC that were so snidely criticized by Nancy Pelosi? Those were AMERICAN workers and she all but called them scabs in support of the union suit against Boeing. If conditions were so bad for them (and they are great, BTW... I have two buddies working there and their benefits are better than anything I have ever enjoyed) then why all the employee satisfaction down there?

There was a time when NOBODY worked in places like NY or CHI without being in some union or another. They drive costs way beyond the profitability level in industries where we have to compete with other countries, and claiming that "only 8% of American workers are unionized so it can't possibly be because of unions" is spurious at best. Wherever you find American companies (particularly heavy industries) going offshore, there are unions at home. They aren't the only factor, and poor management is also a contributor, but unions are a prime mover.

Nicely done.