Quote:
Originally posted by RallyJon
Superman, it always comes back to the same "fair fight" theoretical nonsense. The problem with that approach is that often workers--either as individuals or groups--have priorities that work directly against productivity, flexibility and competitiveness. Giving them MORE power is like asking a child his opinion: it's a cute exercise but when it's time to go to school or do his homework or his chores you really don't much care what he thinks.
Further, if you look at the choices made by organized labor supposedly on behalf of the workers, it often is short sighted and harmful to their well-being in the long term. Remember the thread about losing defined benefit pensions?
So organized labor is good where? In circumstances where workers are exploited and treated badly. Curiously, you rarely see the unions helping the truly abused workers of the world. Guess there's not a lot of money in it.
|
Jon, I accept that labor leaders act badly sometimes.
When you make remarks that seem to suggest labor reps do not have their hearts in the right place, it is conclusive proof that you have not personally dealt with that portion of the labor community that is on the ground floor. I you had, you would know that it is not so much a vocation as it is a mission. Actually, much more like a religion. I could go on, but I'd be wasting my time.
Your analogy is telling. You characterize the management/labor relationship as similar to a parent/child. I fully reject that pedantic vision and work hard each and every day to get it away from my work sites. It is not productive for either party.