Careers

when my uncle came to this country.

  • Last Updated:
  • Jul 14th, 2012 1:51 am
Deal Expert
User avatar
Nov 15, 2004
19333 posts
3378 upvotes
Toronto
NorthYorker wrote: Last time I looked, we were subjected to a lot of hot wind about how very idea of union is bad in principle, without any geographical localization.
In a sense, it did. Costco eradicated Sam's Club in this country. Costco Canada, technically, is not unionized, but it has something called "Costco Employee Agreement". Which is (surprise, surprise) mirroring union agreement.
I worked for Costco for years, and I can tell you there is no special union-like agreement among employees. They are a regular non-unionized employer like the rest, only with a better company culture.

I am not villifying the concept of unions, I'm simply stating that the unions that exist in North America are not interested at all in a stable balance or helping their employer compete, only destructive self-interest that ultimately ruins their parent organization. The success of non-unionized (Toyota & Honda) auto plants compared to the unionized (GM, Ford, Chrysler) plants in the same province only backs this up. When any employee is free to hold his employer hostage because he feels maligned for being called out for poor performance, the organization will suffer.
Deal Addict
Mar 29, 2006
3615 posts
49 upvotes
Piro21 wrote: there is no special union-like agreement among employees.
No, there is not. It is just that pay scale and working conditions for non-unionized you were defined during negotiation between Costco and unions, and then Costco just extended those agreement to non-unionized staff. So, you were piggybacking on union bargaining.
Piro21 wrote: I'm simply stating that the unions that exist in North America are not interested at all in a stable balance or helping their employer compete, only destructive self-interest that ultimately ruins their parent organization.
This is the trait of North American business culture in general, but you are singling out unions in here. GM or Ford are interested in the "stable balance" even less, and it extends to their treatment of suppliers too, but it does not surprise you. You are fine with hostility and "kill'em" spirit, as soon as company exercises it against employee or supplier.
Piro21 wrote: The success of non-unionized (Toyota & Honda) auto plants compared to the unionized (GM, Ford, Chrysler) plants in the same province only backs this up.
Nope. If you want to talk about "plants", Big 3 plants in ON are as good (or better) than Japanese. Oshawa routinely beats Japanese branch plants in quality or performance ratings. It is not inferior qualities of unionized plant workers that brought CM & Chrysler to it's knees, it is string of bad executive decisions made by short-sighted ultragazilionnaires at the top of these companies, stretching back to late 1940s. Chickens finally came to roost. And, by the way, workforce @ Japanese plants in NA fully enjoys the "piggybacking" effect I mentioned earlier. Toyota or Honda just copypaste their NA labor agreements from final documents of negotiations between Big 3 and unions. So Toyota folks have same perks, but save on union dues. Would Toyota ever dare to offer worse conditions to their workforce than unionized guys have, it would be unionized in 24 hours.
Deal Addict
Jun 29, 2009
2307 posts
211 upvotes
Toronto
WannaBe wrote: You don't see doctors forming unions, do you? Or chartered accountants? Why?
Actually they do
They just called themselves "association"

You haven't heard the campaign from their "association" against cuts to doctors' fee?

I have no problem with private sector unions, they can do all they want and the company can go bankrupt. But on public sector they have unlimited funding by way of taxpayers' wallet.

I have no problem with unionized group. My problem is when they kill competitive environment and artificially increase cost because of monopoly. Employers, including public sector, should always have an option to tender out competitive bids. And if union wins, that's fine too, but they should not be allowed to monopoly and suck taxpayers dry.
Deal Addict
Sep 22, 2007
4599 posts
120 upvotes
Piro21 wrote: Japanese auto plants: No unions
North American auto plants: Unions

Which ones went bankrupt again? And which ones paid their employees (including Canadians) good wages while ensuring their companies didn't need bailouts to survive and give them an actual job?

I'm not even going to get into government unions. They have no incentive not to bleed the taxpayer for as much as possible since they don't have to worry about their employer competing in the market.
Piro21 wrote: Last time I looked we were discussing this country (Canada), not Germany. When that happens here, let me know.
If we're talking about Canada, why mention Japan? I'm confused. Unless of course you mean Canadian Auto Plants making Japanese cars.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 6, 2010
9084 posts
1235 upvotes
Montreal, QC
Unions aren't the problem, the people running them are.
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Sep 22, 2009
580 posts
35 upvotes
Rainne wrote: The problem is not really unions, it's globalization.
I agree with you on that point 100%. I will also go out on a limb and say that the globalist are intentionally trying to destroy the middle class.

They should remember that anger can make people do irrational things. Not all of us are brainwashed with their MSM crap. Some of us are watching every single move like a chess game and are just waiting for it.
[OP]
Banned
User avatar
Sep 22, 2009
580 posts
35 upvotes
“We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent.”

-Feburary 17, 1953, Financier Paul Warburg said before the U.S. Senate (director of the Council on Foreign Relations)

(notice the last name, look familiar?)
Deal Addict
User avatar
Mar 16, 2004
2032 posts
178 upvotes
Live AT, Work FL, Ho…
kabza wrote: I agree with you on that point 100%. I will also go out on a limb and say that the globalist are intentionally trying to destroy the middle class.

They should remember that anger can make people do irrational things. Not all of us are brainwashed with their MSM crap. Some of us are watching every single move like a chess game and are just waiting for it.
Globalization is an excuse to those that cannot adapt.
Everyone benefits from globalization. You can not say you don't benefit from German engineering, American entertainment, cheap household goods from China, computer parts from Asian Tigers, etc.
If your country doesn't adapt to the fast pace of change, well, it's no one's fault than yourself. The world is a not a static place. It evolves. If you don't keep up, you demise, just like natural selection demands.
Deal Addict
Jun 29, 2009
2307 posts
211 upvotes
Toronto
kabza wrote: I agree with you on that point 100%. I will also go out on a limb and say that the globalist are intentionally trying to destroy the middle class.

They should remember that anger can make people do irrational things. Not all of us are brainwashed with their MSM crap. Some of us are watching every single move like a chess game and are just waiting for it.
Do you have anything (cars, electronics, households goods, clothing, etc) that are not made in Canada?
I bet you have lots, so you are just talking lots of bs, because you yourself and every member of your family are enjoying the benefits of globalization.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 1, 2006
3370 posts
343 upvotes
Brisbane
Aristophanes wrote: Globalization is an excuse to those that cannot adapt.
Everyone benefits from globalization. You can not say you don't benefit from German engineering, American entertainment, cheap household goods from China, computer parts from Asian Tigers, etc.
If your country doesn't adapt to the fast pace of change, well, it's no one's fault than yourself. The world is a not a static place. It evolves. If you don't keep up, you demise, just like natural selection demands.
YES so true. It frustrates me when people complain about "globalization", because it is only a fear of the unknown. People are afraid of having to change their lives involuntarily or at the whim of the market. The fight against globalization is no different than early 20th century isolationism, just on a global scale rather than in individual countries. If you start out with the expectation that you do NOT deserve employment, then moving for work and adjusting to employment market demands comes naturally.
Member
Feb 2, 2011
215 posts
22 upvotes
spf1971 wrote: Unions aren't the problem, people are the problem. A union is just a group or people and people are greedy. Just look at any number of threads on here from people who graduated university in June and if they don't have a 6 figure job by September, it's societies fault.
The owners of the companies are worse, they are the truly greedy. Their salaries have doubled over the last couple of years, yet the salaries of people that work for them have remained flat.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Feb 19, 2010
6237 posts
2968 upvotes
JSz wrote: The owners of the companies are worse, they are the truly greedy. Their salaries have doubled over the last couple of years, yet the salaries of people that work for them have remained flat.
With risk comes reward. If you don't like being an employee, start a company and put your money where your mouth is. See how easy it isn't and then come back and complain about the lousy capitalists.
Deal Addict
Mar 29, 2006
3615 posts
49 upvotes
Conquistador wrote:

With risk comes reward. If you don't like being an employee, start a company and put your money where your mouth is.
Do you know the difference between CEO and owner?
Sr. Member
Apr 13, 2007
509 posts
55 upvotes
Truemana wrote: If you start out with the expectation that you do NOT deserve employment, then moving for work and adjusting to employment market demands comes naturally.
So the human race isn't compatible with capitalism, and it's the human race that should change?

Nah.
Sr. Member
Apr 13, 2007
509 posts
55 upvotes
Conquistador wrote:

With risk comes reward. If you don't like being an employee, start a company and put your money where your mouth is. See how easy it isn't and then come back and complain about the lousy capitalists.
The only thing at risk for an owner or CEO is that they might have to live like everyone else. You want us to see this as a terrible fate for them and an acceptable fate for us.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Apr 1, 2006
3370 posts
343 upvotes
Brisbane
squagles wrote: So the human race isn't compatible with capitalism, and it's the human race that should change?

Nah.
Huh? The human race has always been a species that has had to travel to provide for themselves and family if resources are insufficient locally. The owness is on you to demonstrate why every person deserves a good job and good pay in a place they want to live, irrespective of their work habits, education, intelligence, personality, or economic conditions of their field of expertise.
Sr. Member
Apr 13, 2007
509 posts
55 upvotes
Truemana wrote: Huh? The human race has always been a species that has had to travel to provide for themselves and family if resources are insufficient locally.
Resources aren't insufficient locally.

What's different is the balance of power between labour and capital in China and Canada. China has prison labour and unions are largely banned. Goods can be produced cheaper in China than in Canada because of this and little else. Why should we allow goods to be sold in Canadian markets without tariffs to account for this unfair advantage? Why should a Canadian enterprise that pays a living wage and have to compete with cheaper labour created by oppression? There is no good reason, except we fear retaliation on our exports to China. It's not a moral reason, or anything evolutionary, or because free trade is somehow inevitable.

Top