Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

hahaha... Ayn Rand would. I dont think that is a good thing or not.... Is it wrong to have a slight crush on Ayn Rand?

lol since you are Libertarian Ayn Rand is pretty much the godess of its followers :p
But geez her idea of Ethical Egoism= *facepalm*

Immanuel Kant and the Catagorial Imperative FTW!

Though you lot will most probably disagree, after all Ayn Rand referred to Kant as a "monster" and "the most evil man in history"!

The alt text reads:

Hey what are the odds -- Five Ayn Rand fans on the same train! Must be going to a convention.

As a side note, I've had to deal with my boss' rave reviews of Ayn Rand's work all summer. I have not read any of her work but if (as he says) my boss holds it as a bible....she must be one crazy lady.

Originally Posted by c.erl

I currently hold down two jobs. One is unionized, the other precarious (labour-studies speak for seasonal/part-time). In my unionized shop, I get my government mandated breaks and lunches, representatives to talk to outside the reach of the corporation, money put aside in the union protected pension fund and hundreds of other social affairs organized through the UFCW.

In my non-union shop, breaks and lunches are frowned upon, there is no one to speak to but supervisors and job security is a major issue.

Nice slant.

I've only worked for non-union jobs. I've always been free to take my breaks, I've always been free to speak to management about any issues that have come up, I've always felt secure in my job.

I've always been a hard, productive worker, and have always been recognized and rewarded.

There's nothing wrong with non-unionized workplaces. I'd rather keep my money than be forced to give it to the gangsters and leeches that are union bosses.

PS: I state again, please look at the 22 right-to-work states in the US, and please note that those 22 right-to-work states generally have more jobs and stronger economies than the closed-shop states.

We need right-to-work.

Originally Posted by DannyV

The alt text reads:

As a side note, I've had to deal with my boss' rave reviews of Ayn Rand's work all summer. I have not read any of her work but if (as he says) my boss holds it as a bible....she must be one crazy lady.

Read her books, you will think she is nuts, and you might want to kill yourself. But if you don't kill yourself, you will find that you tend to understand the ideas in everyday life. Definetly a good read.

Originally Posted by DannyV

The alt text reads:

As a side note, I've had to deal with my boss' rave reviews of Ayn Rand's work all summer. I have not read any of her work but if (as he says) my boss holds it as a bible....she must be one crazy lady.

I LOL-ed so hard when I saw that one!

Ayn Rand is a little bit extremist/bat shit insane, but her books do make for a very good read. Try The Fountainhead, I found it to be a much better read than the ridiculously long philosophical rant that was Atlas Shrugged.

I looked her up on Wikipedia (yeah it may not be the best source) and read the summary of Fountainhead... It seems like a great "main character needs to overcome hardships story" but I'm not the kind of person to read into books. I may pick it up from the library to read during my vacation.

Originally Posted by Ian Finlay

hahaha... Ayn Rand would. I dont think that is a good thing or not.... Is it wrong to have a slight crush on Ayn Rand?

A little wrong, yes. Haha, don't worry, I've had a slight crush on Howard Roark since I was sixteen. At least Ayn Rand was a real person...

Originally Posted by DannyV

I looked her up on Wikipedia (yeah it may not be the best source) and read the summary of Fountainhead... It seems like a great "main character needs to overcome hardships story" but I'm not the kind of person to read into books. I may pick it up from the library to read during my vacation.

Lol don't get Ayn Rand get Immanuel Kant and especially his work on Moral Philosophy, it makes much more sense!

p.s: Howard Roark is a stubborn little egomaniac bish

Just kidding lol

Kant's Ethics of Virtue.
Betzler, Monika.

Kants' Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals : a commentary
By: Timmermann, JensPublished: Cambridge, UK ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2007.

"Critique of Judgement"


There is tons of work by Kant at Mills!

I agree with the first post for the most part. While there are many benefits unions bring to the table I really don't think that they are as needed in their current structure. Perhaps unofficial are the way to go so as to ensure fairness. This way workers will be organized already when violations do occur, needing only to unite meaningfully at such point.

That said, unions have played a great part in getting us to where we are today and for that they must be thanked. This country, and others like it, would not be the same without the rise of unions. Today, however, they are not nearly as critical to working life.

I <3 Ayn Rand.

Although I've never found her to be the strongest writer. All her books have amazing plots, she has no trouble coming up with the ideas. But her character development is non existent, the dialogue is weak, and she tries too hard to fit the actual logical arguments for her points into fiction books.

But I guess if people had to read her non-fiction books to hear the full logic behind her ideas they wouldn't have been as effective. And I suppose the wider audience for her ideas are much more important than a more enjoyable read.

But I digress, the topic is supposed to be Unions.

------------------------------------------------

I think right away that any organization that advocates equal pay for people doing unequal amounts of work is pretty deeply flawed. But the thing that really brings out anti-union sentiment is their radical behaviours. Striking is one thing- its a method for showing how much you are needed. But it really only works if you are needed. If the company/government can bring in workers in for cheaper than it would be to get the strikers back to work, that's their right/ responsibility. Its when unions start trying to interfere with that that the public loses sympathy.

Look at when Ottawa transit was on strike. Carleton and U of Ottawa brought in shuttle services to try and make sure students who needed the bus would not miss exams. The union tried to block the shuttles from getting to their destinations.

Look at citizens of TO who tried to start taking care of public parks when the workers went on strike. The unions threw garbage at them.

Look at how successful GM was after giving in so much to the unions.

What we need is politicians who aren't afraid to stand up to unions. Reagan dealing with the air traffic controllers comes to mind.

unions are terrible...there was a time when they were necessary, but now they just inconvenience everyone else so they can get an inflated wage.

Originally Posted by c.erl

Brothers and sisters,

Time and time again, I feel myself coming to the aide of organizations that are being attacked viciously by individuals who have themselves never experienced the numerous benefits of unionized workplaces. Nor have they experienced the harshness of a non-unionized workplace.

I currently hold down two jobs. One is unionized, the other precarious (labour-studies speak for seasonal/part-time). In my unionized shop, I get my government mandated breaks and lunches, representatives to talk to outside the reach of the corporation, money put aside in the union protected pension fund and hundreds of other social affairs organized through the UFCW.

In my non-union shop, breaks and lunches are frowned upon, there is no one to speak to but supervisors and job security is a major issue.

I've been in the workforce for 14 years. Never have I worked for a union shop, nor do I plan on ever doing it. I also have never had breaks or lunches be a concern, because of things like the ESA. And my jobs have always been secure as long as I was good at what I was doing.

Originally Posted by c.erl

Unions, today, are more relevant then they have ever been. We live in a time where we, the children of privilege, have the opportunity to go to school and get an education leading to well paying, secure jobs in the upper tier of society.

But for the millions of other people out there, who for one reason or another, do not have the opportunity to go to school, unions must be in place to provide a solid, uniting voice against all forms of discrimination, oppression and maltreatment.

Again, this is where the ESA comes in. If theres any sort of discrimination, oppression, or maltreatment, all it takes is a call to the Ontario Labor Board (or the equivalent outside Ontario) to launch an investigation. This has happened at my current employer several times over the course of my 7 year employment there, and when the government has heard about the laws being violated, changes in the workplace are swift, and never have I seen repercussions towards the employee reporting it. Maybe you should check out your prospective employers before accepting a job from them. There's countless websites out there for that.

Originally Posted by c.erl

Have we not evolved to the state where we look out for those among us who cannot look out for themselves?

You mean like the union workers in Toronto blocking welfare recipients from entering building to receive their benefits? Are those the kind of people who "cannot look out for themselves" that you're referring to?

Originally Posted by c.erl

Have we not entered an era that, despite the recent downturn, still leaves us richer and more complacent then ever before?

Unions fight for higher wages for those living paycheck to paycheck.

Unions protect pension benefits being clawed back by businesses and their interests in government.

Unions provide a social aspect to workplaces where productivity is paramount.

I'm pretty sure we live in an era where we're facing the biggest global economic crisis in 70 years, and hundreds of thousands of people are losing their jobs every month. Over 400,000 were left jobless in the United States alone in June. 400,000+, in 1 month. How many million do think it is worldwide? I'd think that people left standing with jobs would be happy they weren't joining the unemployment line. But no, they want more.

Originally Posted by c.erl

Unions are a basic human need...the need for groups, unity and solidarity.

Unions were a basic human need, from about 1850ish when tehy started until the 80's, when employment legislation had become a universal thing in the western world. There may be places in the world where theyre still needed to fight for basic rights, but not here.

Originally Posted by c.erl

Those who oppose unions, generally speaking, take the side of the corporation. To die-hard anti-unionists, what is best for the biggest and most successful corporations is, ultimately, best for all of us.

But at the end of the day, the corporation has an obligation to return a high profit to its investors.

The union has an obligation to do its best for its members, to stand for them, even when counter rallies are held to fight them, even when trash is thrown at them, even when they are harassed for standing up for their rights.

I am one of these "die hard anti-unionists" you speak of, and I can promise you I do not side with the corporations. Companies will do anything they can to make more money. I have yet to see or hear about an all round good (in the non-business sense of the word) corporation. I side with me, and I will speak for myself. I know what my rights are, and anyone entering the workforce should know theirs as well.

Originally Posted by c.erl

What kind of world is it, where that happens! What kind of world is it where people will physically intimidate, verbally harass and emotionally attack people for standing up for their rights, or what passes for rights in this world today!

Again, I bring up the union workers blocking access to social services for citizens, or the union workers throwing garbage at the residents protesting park dumping, Or as someone else mentioned, the union workers blocking shuttles full of students from getting to school. Sounds like Physical Intimidation to me. One could even argue that throwing garbage is assault (which technically it is), which goes well beyond intimidation.

Originally Posted by c.erl

Strikes disrupt people's lives, yes. But who's fault is the strike?

There's no right or wrong here. It's not black and white. Both the government and the union are at fault. The whole point of negotiations is to compromise, which neither side is willing to do.

Originally Posted by c.erl

The CUPE workers who voted to stand together in solidarity and walk out, or the government contractors who refuse to give part-time, seasonal and temporary workers access to the pension fund they have been paying into since they got their jobs!?

If you are privileged enough to have never experienced workplaces without unions, or even privileged enough to have never worked, then I congratulate you on your success.

But I ask one thing:

Put yourself in the shoes of the working single mother who can barely feed her family because her wage is too low.

Or in the shoes of the 50 year old temporary CUPE worker in Toronto who, after years of paying into his pension fund, has been denied access to it, and will retire into poverty.

Or the 19 year old university student who has to work 2 jobs to put himself through school.

What do I think of unions?

Solidarity. Forever.

I am privileged enough to have never worked in a union job. Everything I've got is because I earned it. every promotion, every raise, every pat on the back, was all my doing, not some random guy who negotiates on my behalf.

And that 50 year worker has nothing to fear. Any pesnion fund he's been paying into isnt going to be touched. It's only the workers who havent been putting money away, and have been relying on cashing in sick days to get them through their golden years that need to worry. In my opinion, those people deserve it. Maybe it's because I was raised by 2 accountants (both now retired), but putting money away for your future seems like common sense. Not relying on sick days. What would they do if they caught some debilitating disease, and had to use all their days? Those days are for sickness, not for banking your retirement on.

2000 VIA employees are laid off due to the engineers strike: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp... 8Qdlo4-3gVWaA

What are other people's thoughts on this?

Originally Posted by lorend

2000 VIA employees are laid off due to the engineers strike: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp... 8Qdlo4-3gVWaA

What are other people's thoughts on this?

I think it's disgusting that because of 340 workers wanting more, 1200 are now out of work, and another 1200 are at risk of job loss, at least until this gets resolved

Originally Posted by reeves

I've been in the workforce for 14 years. Never have I worked for a union shop, nor do I plan on ever doing it. I also have never had breaks or lunches be a concern, because of things like the ESA. And my jobs have always been secure as long as I was good at what I was doing.



Again, this is where the ESA comes in. If theres any sort of discrimination, oppression, or maltreatment, all it takes is a call to the Ontario Labor Board (or the equivalent outside Ontario) to launch an investigation. This has happened at my current employer several times over the course of my 7 year employment there, and when the government has heard about the laws being violated, changes in the workplace are swift, and never have I seen repercussions towards the employee reporting it. Maybe you should check out your prospective employers before accepting a job from them. There's countless websites out there for that.



You mean like the union workers in Toronto blocking welfare recipients from entering building to receive their benefits? Are those the kind of people who "cannot look out for themselves" that you're referring to?



I'm pretty sure we live in an era where we're facing the biggest global economic crisis in 70 years, and hundreds of thousands of people are losing their jobs every month. Over 400,000 were left jobless in the United States alone in June. 400,000+, in 1 month. How many million do think it is worldwide? I'd think that people left standing with jobs would be happy they weren't joining the unemployment line. But no, they want more.



Unions were a basic human need, from about 1850ish when tehy started until the 80's, when employment legislation had become a universal thing in the western world. There may be places in the world where theyre still needed to fight for basic rights, but not here.



I am one of these "die hard anti-unionists" you speak of, and I can promise you I do not side with the corporations. Companies will do anything they can to make more money. I have yet to see or hear about an all round good (in the non-business sense of the word) corporation. I side with me, and I will speak for myself. I know what my rights are, and anyone entering the workforce should know theirs as well.



Again, I bring up the union workers blocking access to social services for citizens, or the union workers throwing garbage at the residents protesting park dumping, Or as someone else mentioned, the union workers blocking shuttles full of students from getting to school. Sounds like Physical Intimidation to me. One could even argue that throwing garbage is assault (which technically it is), which goes well beyond intimidation.



There's no right or wrong here. It's not black and white. Both the government and the union are at fault. The whole point of negotiations is to compromise, which neither side is willing to do.



I am privileged enough to have never worked in a union job. Everything I've got is because I earned it. every promotion, every raise, every pat on the back, was all my doing, not some random guy who negotiates on my behalf.

And that 50 year worker has nothing to fear. Any pesnion fund he's been paying into isnt going to be touched. It's only the workers who havent been putting money away, and have been relying on cashing in sick days to get them through their golden years that need to worry. In my opinion, those people deserve it. Maybe it's because I was raised by 2 accountants (both now retired), but putting money away for your future seems like common sense. Not relying on sick days. What would they do if they caught some debilitating disease, and had to use all their days? Those days are for sickness, not for banking your retirement on.

Wow... I think you just won this argument, lol. Awesome post!