Powered by Outside

Canada to the Polls

PB Forum :: Social / Political Issues
Canada to the Polls
Author Message
flag ezekiel
Posted: Sep 10, 2008 at 16:44 Quote
bonfire wrote:
All them hated working union shops when they were out in industry. When you are told by your fellow workers to slow down, and to not bring your own tools to the shop, because then they would all have to bring their own tools to the shop and actually do something. It is time to move on. That is the mentality that is portrayed of the east out here, now whether or not that is accurate, I don't know.

I agree with laurie, do you people out east not see how futile unions have been for your economy? Why the hell would you want to have more of them?

It is unfortunately true and sad. When I first started working in a union shop, one of the first things I was told by a senior worker was to not do any more than I had to. If its not in your job description, then don't even think about doing it or else your fellow workers will make your life very difficult. As much as I liked the work and benefits, the worker mentality for some of the older members is pretty crazy.

When it comes to unions, contrary to popular belief, not everyone in Ontario likes them. In fact, I would say the disdain for the unions locally is growing weekly with every new plant closure. The problem is that they still hold enough power to manage to secure work for themselves while non-union shops aren't even willing to set foot within city limits.
flag marty660
Posted: Sep 10, 2008 at 17:17 Quote
When Unions fight simply for the worker's rights and for the worker's, they make sense - it helps keep the workers from being taken advantage of by corporations, which does happen alot. But a shockingly large amount of them have stupid rules and ulterior motives which make them more of a hinderance then a help.
flag laurie1
Mod
Posted: Sep 10, 2008 at 17:26 Quote
marty660 wrote:
When Unions fight simply for the worker's rights and for the worker's, they make sense - it helps keep the workers from being taken advantage of by corporations, which does happen alot. But a shockingly large amount of them have stupid rules and ulterior motives which make them more of a hinderance then a help.

Workers don’t have rights! They are employees for a reason. They get paid for services rendered and are allowed whatever is outline by the Labor Board (Breaks, minimum wage, overtime, statutory holiday pay, etc.). Other than that employees are entitled to any perks or benefits whatsoever. The rising cost of keeping unionized workers employed in huge corporations is the reason why so many employees are being laid off. Corporations just can’t afford them. If the benefits were cut down and people weren’t so greedy, everyone in the auto industry and other struggling industries would still have a job. Instead, no one wants to settle for $1 less an hour, a reduced pension, and a decrease of benefits. Instead, massive layoffs are occurring. Hell, one of the main priorities of a union is for job security. Guess what, being laid off isn’t exactly a job security. Now, instead of making more money with a unionized job, people either collect unemployment insurance or go to work for significantly less in marginal jobs at best. People are just looking out for themselves and not for their peers/coworkers. That is the issue. The only workers that are taken advantage of are the ones overseas. The ones in North America have it damn well and pretty much made!
flag marty660
Posted: Sep 10, 2008 at 17:35 Quote
Yeah but that's what I mean. In some places overseas unions are illegal, here they're legal. I agree most of the unions here are complete bullsh*t, if not all of them. But the fact that we can unionize if we want forces the employers into giving us proper treatment - I don't mean giving us all kinds of money for some joke job, but ensuring that we're getting paid as necessary and that we aren't getting treated badly; much like the "Oakies" in the Grapes of Wrath.

An ideal can never be found; unions will always try and take advantage of the corporations, therefore hindering the economy, whereas the corporations will always try and take advantage of the workers, therefeore hindering the people.

I agree completely with you that the unions have created a massive problem here (I mean basing your entire life off working along the production line, putting like a screw in it's socket, and expecting to get paid like someone with a job where skill is necessary? Come on), but they're still better then going back to 1800's-era industrial employment, which is where we would still be if it wasn't for unions/workers rights.

I dunno. I'm a very slight socialist so there you go.
flag ezekiel
Posted: Sep 10, 2008 at 18:41 Quote
laurie1 wrote:
The CAW wants West Jet to become unionized and wants to be their union leader. No offence, but people in the east need to pull their heads out of their asses and mind their own business!

What the CAW does in no way reflects the "people in the east", they simply see that they've crashed their one ship into a big iceberg and are trying to jump ship to save themselves.

laurie1 wrote:
People are just looking out for themselves and not for their peers/coworkers.

That's not entirely true, in most cases it's been the union itself that throws its weight around without regard for its damage. When the plant I worked at closed, we were told that the union was not accepting concessions by a union head. Our opinions were not asked, a man who wasn't even from the area came in with their predetermined union "resolutions" and that was all that could be discussed. The union itself wouldn't even consider concessions no matter how many people wanted it. We all knew damn well that without we'd be out of a job and sure enough within a month the doors were locked. So please don't assume that everyone has their heads up their asses and can't see reality.

I do agree that the workers rights laid out by the Canadian government are more than enough.
flag carnell
O+ FL
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 11:29 Quote
laurie1 wrote:
[Here is a question. What percentage of eligible voters will cast a ballot?

My guess is between 60 and 70 percent i'll err towards 60.

This will be my first election to where i can Vote. I consider myself a Progressive conservative but unfortunatley no such party exists right now and in my mind the closest to it are the greens. My choice is between the green Party and the Conservatives, but i will have to take a look at the Greens platform to be sure. In all likely hood i will vote conservative to get rid of that damn NDP member my riding has.
flag carnell
O+ FL
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 11:35 Quote
marty660 wrote:
Yeah but most the population is in Ontario and Quebec, two provinces out of ten. So the vote goes to them not you guys.
I'm not saying taxing you guys like there's no tommorow is the right thing to do, but neither is making a haven of an oilfield land and allowing entire respectable communites and towns to dissapear in a year or two.


Regardless it is common knowledge that seat are spread unevenly across this country and the west gets screwed every year! You know who has the most voting power? The people of the maritimes when i go to vote i get 1 vote, when they go comparitive to my vote they get 4! ridings need to be realligned espeacially now the BC and Alberta Have more people (when the two provinces are combined) than Que'bec whilst Que'bec gets more seats.
flag marty660
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 14:12 Quote
carnell wrote:
Regardless it is common knowledge that seat are spread unevenly across this country and the west gets screwed every year! You know who has the most voting power? The people of the maritimes when i go to vote i get 1 vote, when they go comparitive to my vote they get 4!

That's beacause we're the only one's worthy of voting.Wink

The number of seats still reflect rather amazingly the vote percentages, except of course for the Greens. I agree they do need to be realigned though... all the ridings out here should stay the same but new ones out west need to be created.
flag carnell
O+ FL
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 17:29 Quote
marty660 wrote:
carnell wrote:
Regardless it is common knowledge that seat are spread unevenly across this country and the west gets screwed every year! You know who has the most voting power? The people of the maritimes when i go to vote i get 1 vote, when they go comparitive to my vote they get 4!

That's beacause we're the only one's worthy of voting.Wink

The number of seats still reflect rather amazingly the vote percentages, except of course for the Greens. I agree they do need to be realigned though... all the ridings out here should stay the same but new ones out west need to be created.

no they need to be realligned too, i did the math today, there should be a riding for every 100,000 thousnad people or so Quebec has 7.7 million people they get 75 seats, perfect B.C. and alberta have 7.9 million and get 64! we should get 80! further more the territories each get a seat when not one of them has a pop. over 100 000 people! this is not fair at all and im surprised the Conservatives havent yet changed it.
flag bonfire
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 18:28 Quote
marty660 wrote:
When Unions fight simply for the worker's rights and for the worker's, they make sense - it helps keep the workers from being taken advantage of by corporations, which does happen alot. But a shockingly large amount of them have stupid rules and ulterior motives which make them more of a hinderance then a help.

Give me proof of workers in Canada that have been abused. By abused, I mean denied the rights that are set by the labor board.
flag marty660
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 18:41 Quote
bonfire wrote:
marty660 wrote:
When Unions fight simply for the worker's rights and for the worker's, they make sense - it helps keep the workers from being taken advantage of by corporations, which does happen alot. But a shockingly large amount of them have stupid rules and ulterior motives which make them more of a hinderance then a help.

Give me proof of workers in Canada that have been abused. By abused, I mean denied the rights that are set by the labor board.

Well I'm sure I could bring up stuff from ancient history. All around the world that stuff happens mate.

I agree, there isn't a real reason in Canadian society to have unions. But if workers didn't have the right to unionize, and make a point to their company, I assure you, the only people getting money would be the people at the top.
Basically my point is that as long as the threat is there, worker abuse won't happen.

To me a good example of workers being abused is Giant Mine in Yellowknife. I'm not sure about the labour board's rules, but under new corporate ownership the workers started to get treated worse and worse, perhaps even their pay was reduced (I really can't remember). Now this time the union idea backfired (lots of fighting and a whole crew of young miners killed, quite sadly, a real tragedy), but it serves purpose that workers do get taken advantage of.

I'm not suggesting this is a high point for unions, I'm just saying workers do get abused.

My Dad actually worked with the guy who killed them in some mine in '75 someplace in Saskatchewan or Manitoba, and later on he was his police escort... just an interesting fact.

Note that Sweden has one of the better economies in the world (8th best GDP per capita, actually) and something like 95% of their workers are unionized.
flag gibson19
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 18:43 Quote
marty660 wrote:
Note that Sweden has one of the better economies in the world (8th best GDP per capita, actually) and something like 95% of their workers are unionized.

They always pay about 50% of their income to taxes
flag marty660
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 18:52 Quote
gibson19 wrote:
marty660 wrote:
Note that Sweden has one of the better economies in the world (8th best GDP per capita, actually) and something like 95% of their workers are unionized.

They always pay about 50% of their income to taxes

Their still rich as f*ck though.
That's one thing people don't realize about taxes... if you've elected a good government (not a sh*tty one that'll waste it all on champagne), you actually get taxes back in a better manner. Free university for higher taxes? I'll take that anyday.
Mind you if say Dion got in and he raised taxes like crazy, we'd probably all be in the poor house because it would by him his caviar.
flag gibson19
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 18:55 Quote
Ya the thing about sweden is that as a whole they are very intelligent and thus they make a lot of money... Partly due to the fact that they are all well educated due to how their tax money is redistributed...
flag marty660
Posted: Sep 11, 2008 at 19:00 Quote
gibson19 wrote:
Ya the thing about sweden is that as a whole they are very intelligent and thus they make a lot of money... Partly due to the fact that they are all well educated due to how their tax money is redistributed...

Yep. It takes really good governmental planning, which is something most countries seem incapable of. It also takes a lot of selflessness which I don't think North American workers have; we're always in the rat race and we're not laid back enough, we're taught the only thing we have is ourselves, which is true in our system but could be different.

...it might also hurt us that we're taught that all the government is for is to steal our money...Wink

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.187809
Mobile Version of Website