| Living wage.
Posted: 4/8/2008 3:34:57 PM |
Why do so many not want the wealthy to be wealthy? Is it jealousy or a more sinister thinking. Sounds like a lot of union talk. Take from the wealthy they're to blame for everything that has gone wrong since time began. The wealthy are greedy they should give me what they have i'm not greedy i just want half but i don't want to work for it. If it wasn't for rats i'd hate unions.
Where did unions come from? Companies paid their employees enough just to live. People organized and decided they were not going to work for a wage that would keep them in poverty. Surprisingly we still have companies and many employ people in unions.
The wealthy are greedy they should give me what they have i'm not greedy i just want half but i don't want to work for it. If it wasn't for rats i'd hate unions.
Wealth is either created by adding value to something or by taking it from someone else. In the case of a company they use the labour of an employee to add value to a product or to provide a service. In our society we sell things for what the market will bear (see gas as an example). To think people would not do the same thing for their services is naive. If the business is not capable of generating a profit they would close their doors so it is in the union’s interest that the company is viable. The beauty of the system is that a balance is found otherwise neither survives.
Within the past 10-15 years some companies have decided to put profit above all else and moved production to other countries paying barely enough to keep their workers alive. If they had the same opportunity to do that here do you think that they would not?
I am sure most people have nothing against a person becoming wealthy. How many people do you see getting angry at Michael Jackson? (as scary a person that he is.) How many get mad at Conrad Black? I will let you work out the reason why.
Unions should be outlawed in this day and age but that's another thread.
Why is this day and age any different than others? If it were not for unions the majority of people would get paid less and have less benefits. Businesses squeeze as much as they can out of their resources, why would they give more away than they had to?
Right now Manitoba has one of the highest MWs in the country.
Sorry, wrong. Two are higher, we are tied with two, and one is $0.10 less, two $0.25 less. (this is including the territories).
Winnipeg C of C is actually doing us a favour by fighting any new increases.
They are only fighting the increase in minimum wage for servers in the hospitality industry. They say their employees make it up in tips.
Burger King would probably be paying more here if we dropped our MW to something stupid like four bucks an hour. Why ? Because then they would be forced to compete for their workers and the only incentive they'd be able to offer would be a higher starting salary.
With this kind of reasoning Burger King would only be too happy for an increase in the minimum wage. It would help to keep their costs down. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/8/2008 3:55:27 PM | I whole heartedly agree with 'printer' on the union stuff.
(and that's about all I dare say at this point...)
 | |
|
| |
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/8/2008 4:33:24 PM |
I whole heartedly agree with 'printer' on the union stuff.
Me too.
Although I'm not mad at Conrad Black, I think he's getting off light with 6 years in jail.
I also notice that Domo stations (and elsewhere) have signs up advertising they pay more than minimum wage. We don't need to drop minimum wage to $4.00 for competition for workers to happen. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/8/2008 4:36:13 PM | Less than 5% of all employed people in Manitoba earn minimum wage.
50% of all minimum wage workers are 19 years of age or younger.
Almost 30% of minimum wage jobs are in the accommodation and food services industry.
The Chamber of Commerce isn’t stupid, they take care of their own. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/8/2008 8:18:46 PM |
Why is this day and age any different than others? If it were not for unions the majority of people would get paid less and have less benefits. Businesses squeeze as much as they can out of their resources, why would they give more away than they had to?
Because now the government has laws in place that make unions redundant. Other than that, I've never worked for a union that did a damned thing for me except take my money and enable the laziest and most shiftless of co-workers to sit on their asses while other people took up their slack. Now there are human rights commissions , watchdog groups, universal healthcare, and a plethora of laws in place to make sure that employees aren't shafted by any company. So what are we paying unions to do again ? They keep production down , wages artificially high, negate merit, and otherwise do nothing but siphon off money from employees who don't have a say either way. As far as I'm concerned, they're just fraudsters.
Sorry, wrong. Two are higher, we are tied with two, and one is $0.10 less, two $0.25 less. (this is including the territories).
Yes, I stand corrected. What I should have said is that when cost of living is factored in , our minimum wage gives people more bang for their buck. It costs more than an extra twenty five cents an hour to live the same life in Ontario as you could live here.
They are only fighting the increase in minimum wage for servers in the hospitality industry. They say their employees make it up in tips.
They do. In theory at least anyway. This must be some special wage the government is considering though because unless something has changed recently, hospitality workers get the same pay as everybody else.
With this kind of reasoning Burger King would only be too happy for an increase in the minimum wage. It would help to keep their costs down.
Sure, I agree that it's counterintuitive. On the other hand, there's Alberta. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 2:45:50 AM | If it weren't for unions the majority of people would get paid less and have less benefits.
That is true Printer and the majority of people aren't worth half what they are paid nor any of the benefits. Unions are only here so people who don't want to actually earn their wages can stay employed and to give people who never wanted to work a place where they can be paid to not work ie union bosses. Unions use terrorist tactics to force companies to do their bidding rather than negotiate and they create an environment conducive to complacency rather than productivity. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 4:41:54 AM | | unions raise the bar for wages and benefits. and i like napping at work. and the paid lunches and the clubhouse fees and the trophy wife..........oh, thats the owner. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 8:33:21 AM |
Why is this day and age any different than others? If it were not for unions the majority of people would get paid less and have less benefits. Businesses squeeze as much as they can out of their resources, why would they give more away than they had to?
Because now the government has laws in place that make unions redundant. Other than that, I've never worked for a union that did a damned thing for me except take my money and enable the laziest and most shiftless of co-workers to sit on their asses while other people took up their slack. Now there are human rights commissions, watchdog groups, universal healthcare, and a plethora of laws in place to make sure that employees aren't shafted by any company. So what are we paying unions to do again? They keep production down, wages artificially high, negate merit, and otherwise do nothing but siphon off money from employees who don't have a say either way. As far as I'm concerned, they're just fraudsters.
Because now the government has laws in place that make unions redundant.
Now there are human rights commissions, watchdog groups, universal healthcare, and a plethora of laws in place to make sure that employees aren't shafted by any company.
If you think unions are inefficient in protecting workers just think if a government had to deal with the day to day stuff that a union does. And why do you think there are all these commissions and laws? Because as a group workers have a voice and governments have to respond to them. Try getting something changed in government by yourself.
If it weren't for unions the majority of people would get paid less and have less benefits.
That is true Printer and the majority of people aren't worth half what they are paid nor any of the benefits. Unions are only here so people who don't want to actually earn their wages can stay employed and to give people who never wanted to work a place where they can be paid to not work ie union bosses.
Where do I start? Ok, if the majority of people are not worth half of what they are paid then where is all this money that is being wasted going to go? I think hockey players get way too much money. Are they worth it? They are just playing a game.
Could people make a living if they only got paid half as much? Right now you almost need two people working to get by. And where will the government get its money if these people were not making the wage they are? Tax the hell out of the few that are worth what they are paid? They would just scream that is unfair.
Unions are here for more than you probably think. I worked in a place that had a union but I was not in it and considered staff. I made 10k less than a union position, am educated, had much more responsibility and asked to be paid what I was worth. After being strung along for two years I applied for a position in another department in the company and had the job if I wanted it.
I told my boss and said I will stay with them if they match the salary. They said yes and they would finalize it next week so I declined the other position. The next week when I met with the director he said they changed their mind and they were not going to do anything about my wage. Lucky for me the other job was not filled and HR said I could still have it. The director was so mad he said I was never going to f*cking work for him again.
Unions use terrorist tactics to force companies to do their bidding rather than negotiate and they create an environment conducive to complacency rather than productivity.
I see them firebombing places all the time, it is kind of pretty if done at night. I do not recall any time where a union got a contract without negotiating. We must live in a different world. I do agree about unions trying to keep the status quo. They are there to protect their members and to get them the best deal that they can. You can think of it as they are trying to milk the company for what they can while the company is trying to milk the workers all they can.
It all comes down to balance. If there is no union or the employees have no leverage the companies take what they will. If the union is too unreasonable the company will take a walk and the workers are out of a job. Unions are a check against the power of a company. We also have laws and commissions in place to protect workers for good reason. Because companies will exploit their employees if they can. If companies played fair we would not need either. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 1:46:06 PM |  way to go Printer they don't call it big business for nothing! Look at the list of what CEO's make in comparison to their lowly counterparts. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 2:17:11 PM | If the worker does his job properly he will be treated fairly. If unions are so into balance why don't they pay their own way in the world rather than having the non-unionized worker foot the bill? Why should workers be allowed to walk off the job without having employment terminated? Why should workers be allowed to obstruct traffic, destroy private and public property as well as assault people and numerous other crimes with impunity?
Unions are far too powerful and corrupt. I will far sooner trust anyone who has gone through the effort to build a business and help build a nation than any union official. The only acheivement of union bosses is that they have been able to persuade fools to sent them an income and help them try to destroy business. Business is fundamental for society to exist in the state it has evolved into and any hindrance to that is detrimental to society itself.
Could people make a living if they only earned half as much? Yes they could because everything else would have to come down to where it is affordable and people would be more discerning in their choices when spending and investing. People have always made a living the difference today is that people don't want to make a living they want to live in abundance and extravagance without actually earning that. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 3:01:12 PM | | so dud, what is your view on welfare? like we can't gather from your anti-union, pro american leanings? also what about immigrants who collect welfare?........this should be good..............i also wonder ,as a trucker , do you o/o or just drive? | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 3:43:07 PM | Welfare is as necessary as oxygen in this world. Many of our social programs are many are not. Welfare if it were accessable to those who need the help and unaccessable to those who don't but find it so appealing is good public service. Every part of the community should be involved in some way with supporting that community. As for immigrants and welfare i don't really see the connection. The worst abusers are homegrown. If a person comes to Canada and becomes a citizen he has full rights and access to all social programs the same as you or i. Most immigrants i've met are family oriented, community minded hard working individuals and if they need a hand to get started here or they fall on hardship while here they deserve no less than those who were born here. They at least made a concious decision to become Canadian and work to build a better life for themselves and their families a benefit to Canada is we gained them. Maybe if we pay attention to them we can relearn how to be a better community and a better nation.
A far as trucking goes i "just drive" as you put it. I enjoy it this way as there is less stress than being an o/o but i do plan on becoming an o/o before i retire just to get the experience of it. Hopefully it gets to be more affordable in terms of revenue as well as working conditions before i take the plunge. It is getting better.
But i am a bit bewildered as to how being anti union, or anything that is as totalitarian as a labour union, and pro community makes me pro American. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 3:45:31 PM | Not sure what I'd do without a union........
Probably become a hobo. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 4:13:42 PM | Since you asked.
<div class="quote">
If the worker does his job properly he will be treated fairly.
BS. That would imply all bosses were reasonable and were competent.
<div class="quote">
If unions are so into balance why don't they pay their own way in the world rather than having the non-unionized worker foot the bill?
I said the system is in balance. An unhappy medium is found between both the union and the company. The reason non-union workers get dinged for the same dues is because they usually reap the same benefits. It would undermine the union if non-union workers did not contribute. Go see the southern states where they have right to work legislation.
<div class="quote">
Why should workers be allowed to obstruct traffic, destroy private and public property as well as assault people and numerous other crimes with impunity?
They are not allowed to do that. If they do the police can arrest them. Companys do not have clean hands themselves. The good thing about video recorders is it keeps both sides more honest.
<div class="quote">
Unions are far too powerful and corrupt.
Where do you get this sh*t. Unions are weaker now than they have been in thirty years. If union officials are so corrupt I am sure the membership would vote them out the next election. Mind you, I am thinking in relative terms. If you feel that anyone with a union membership card should be shot, then I guess you are right.
<div class="quote">
The only acheivement of union bosses is that they have been able to persuade fools to sent them an income and help them try to destroy business.
If companies did not try to screw their employees there would be no need for unions. It is a good thing the union bosses are incompetent otherwise there would be burnt out wrecks of companies all over the place. Take a look at Standard Aero. If they treated their employees badly the employees would organize and form a union. I guess they are short of fools there. Or maybe they have a competent HR department and have not hired fools like companies have.
<div class="quote">
Business is fundamental for society to exist in the state it has evolved into and any hindrance to that is detrimental to society itself.
Governments are a hindrance to business so I would guess they are a detriment to society also. So far society has survived quite well with both Government and unions. If there were no checks on businesses I am guessing society would go in the direction of Haiti (or other countries where people have no method of organizing and demanding better conditions) where there are the extremely rich and the poor. I wonder why we are not more like them and they not like us?
<div class="quote">
Could people make a living if they only earned half as much? Yes they could because everything else would have to come down to where it is affordable and people would be more discerning in their choices when spending and investing.
So you cut wages in half and bring the prices down to compensate people for it. How would we all be ahead? The only reason people would have to be more discerning in their choices is if they have less buying power. So your drop in wages is actually a way of taking money away from people. And since you said the majority of people are over paid the majority of society would then suffer.
Strangely enough I am not pro- or anti- union. I myself have had to carry the load for a bunch of lazy sob’s in a union shop. But I have also worked for companies that took advantage of their employees, also for a company where the union and company worked together as partners. I do realize why unions came about, the benefits they provide and the limits they create. If we did not need them we would not have them.
It is quite entertaining debating with someone that has a one-sided understanding of the issue. It makes me look smarter than I am. But the topic was on the minimum wage and why the Winnipeg and Manitoba Chamber of Commerce seem to take different stances on how much money should be directed to people at the lower reaches of society. I would hate to get three more days off from posting for hijacking a thread, even if it is my own.
Edit: Aww you snuck in a post without me catching it first. And one that I can let pass without commenting. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 4:33:34 PM | | I don't see where i have a one sided understanding of that issue just because i stand strongly on my position but i must let that rest. You are correct we need to go back to the original content of the thread. I will thus restate that i feel it is better to raise welfare a little than minimum wage and for the reasons i have previously stated. I will add however that people today make too much money thus have too much disposable income and that to me is another reason not to raise the minimum wage. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 4:46:37 PM |
make too much money ........definetly NOT pro american......as for o/o, don't do it pal, the stress will give you maless gray than you have[ie lose your hair completely..............as for uppity, hobo? aren't you just a classy one than the run of the mill? you just ride up front in stead of "coach". | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 4:50:24 PM | | I've been a "behind the heater" hobo for 31 years. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 5:19:10 PM |
I will add however that people today make too much money thus have too much disposable income and that to me is another reason not to raise the minimum wage.
It is not the people making minimum wage that have too much disposable income. Most of the people who spend money like it is going out of style may not be making too much money either. Their problem is easy credit. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/13/2008 5:34:15 PM |
Their problem is easy credit. It’s like a bad crack habit. I’m pretty sure more people suffer from this, than from minimum wage. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 4/30/2008 2:52:13 PM | | The federal government spends more on the Senate than they do on Social Assistance of any sort. The senate does nothing, and those senators certainly dont need the money. Lets start at the top, get our priorities straight, then everything else will fall into place. | |
|
SFL
|
Joined: 3/16/2008
Msg: 97 | |
| Living wage.
Posted: 7/4/2008 2:13:40 PM | | Everyone deserves to have kids.......Think about it this way , some of us can't have children for medical reasons, children are a blessing . don't you think???? | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 7/4/2008 6:44:10 PM | Unions often exist because of how workers were getting treated. Not that unions are always a good thing, there are procedures for decertification for this reason.
I have worked for minimum wage and all I can say is more money made me work more.
Very simple formula. | |
|
| Living wage.
Posted: 7/4/2008 7:18:29 PM | Uppity Mike said
I've been a "behind the heater" hobo for 31 years.
Why you union swine. Imagine people expecting to be heated by their employer! Is there no end to their demands? | |
|
Home
login 
