Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Union Nonsense

I am so sick and tired of hearing about unions and strikes.  Nobody should have the "right" to strike.  If you don't like your job, or if you don't think you're being treated fairly, then what you DO have the "right" to do is quit your job.  Go find a job somewhere else if you think you've got it so rough.

Your success or failure in your career should be entirely up to you, and how hard you're prepared to work.  Don't hide behind union representatives whose only job is to create conflict in order to secure their own jobs.

If you are a public employee that relies on my tax dollars to pay your salary, and feel that I'm not paying you enough, or somehow not treating you fairly, multiply my frustration by 10, and that's how much hatred I have towards unions.

Time to abolish all unions and create a level playing field for all.

Just had to get that off my chest.

8 comments:

  1. THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE THE RESULT OF ONGOING DISCUSSIONS I'VE HAD WITH FRIENDS ON FACEBOOK WHERE I POSTED THIS SAME THING, WHERE SOME OF THEM DIDN'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH MY OPINION. WHILE FOR THE SAKE OF THEIR PRIVACY I WON'T BE POSTING THEIR COMMENTS, I AM POSTING MY RESPONSES, WHICH I THINK MAY GIVE YOU A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT THEY TOOK ISSUE WITH. THESE COMMENTS REPRESENT AND EXPAND ON MY OPINION. WHETHER OR NOT YOU AGREE/DISAGREE WITH THEM IS UP TO YOU :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Respectfully, I don't think I am. I'm not picking on any one union with my comments, I have a fundamental problem and disagreement with ALL unions. All I want is a level playing field. As long as there are unions, that can't happen.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have all the respect in the world for police, fire, and EMS workers, and know that generally speaking within ALL unions, there are those that work very hard at what they do. The problem as I see it though is that there is also a large segment of the union population that soak the system, and take advantage of the fact that they are protected, thus giving unions as a whole a bad reputation. The solution: remove the union factor altogether, and let people sink or swim based on their own strengths and weaknesses. Just like the private sector. Level playing field.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Okay, for all you union supporters out there, here's a scenario for you. Let's say you have the right to strike. Let's say you have the right to consciously decide to walk out on the job for which your employer is paying you to do. It's a free Country, right, so let's make sure we're not infringing upon your rights to do whatever you want to do. In that same line of thinking, is it not also reasonable to extend the same rights to an employer to make decisions of their own? Let's not forget, the employer is the one who is financially invested in the success of the company. They are the ones that built the business, took out loans, maintain insurance, manage their debt, and generally do what they have to do to ensure your paychecks don't bounce when you deposit them. Whereas employees come to work, collect a cheque, and go home, the employers are the ones with all the risk. Does that not entitle them to have the same freedom to make decisions that the employees have? If the employees, the people which are being paid to do a job, consciously decide to walk out on their jobs, and go on strike, does the employer not also have a right to make a decision of their own, to either enter into negotiations with the disgruntled workers, or release them all from their contracts, and hire replacement staff? What right does an employee have to essentially take their employer hostage until they can get what they want? Isn't that what a strike is, a hostage situation? Either they give you what you want, or you cripple their business? What gives you the right to take a job, accept payment for that job, walk out on that job, and then not think you should be fired for your actions? What gives you that right, and how is that fair?

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's a shame the impact union mentality has on good people. I have the greatest respect for teachers, but can't ignore the current dispute. I have read "Bill 115, Putting Students First Act, 2012" in its entirety, and strongly recommend that others do the same, as it very quickly becomes obvious what the real issue is. Don't read a union-prepared condensed version, read the whole thing. Nowhere in there does it say anything to suggest that we will lose the quality education system we have now. Some could argue that the current education system is in fact flawed when students are unable to take part in extra-curricular activities, or are unable to even attend school due to strikes and routine union disruptions. Is that the system we're trying to protect and maintain? Is teaching still the noble profession it once was, or has an overwhelming sense of entitlement tainted it forever? What Bill 115 does deal with is collective bargaining rights, the right to strike, salaries, and the administration of banked sick days (which I also completely disagree with the concept of by the way). The union spin doctors will have you believe that the issue is teachers rights, and therefore Bill 115 must be opposed, but that's only a half-truth. What they don't mention is what collective bargaining, the right to strike, salaries, and banking of sick days really all boil down to, and that's money. It doesn't take a genius to see that. The union wants to protect the right to strike, and protect their right for collective bargaining, because they want to protect their ability to ask for even more money. It's not about rights, it's about money, plain and simple. What they fail to understand is that it is we the public that pay the teachers salaries. In case you haven't noticed, we have all been hit hard by the poor economy. The private sector has taken its share of hits too. I'm sorry, but we simply don't have the money to pay teachers more right now. We work 12 months a year, yet still don't have the money to pay for your unused sick days that you've managed to accumulate, simply because you have more sick days and vacation days than you can even use, on top of the two months each year you have off. We don't have the money to routinely increase your salaries when we are struggling to maintain our own salaries, or taking reductions to our pay to maintain our unprotected jobs in this poor economy. We don't have the money to spend on extra daycare when you decide not to show up for work for no other reason than to attempt to prove a point. So when I hear that the "haves" are complaining and want the "have nots" to give them even more, I don't exactly have much sympathy. Teachers already have it REALLY good. You knew that when you went to Teacher's College and that was probably to some degree a factor in your decision to pursue that profession. If you've suddenly decided you are no longer happy with your chosen profession, then you are free to leave at any time and pursue something that you feel will better suit your needs, rather than stick around causing disruption and distraction to students. There are hoards of people lining up in Teachers College as we speak that will gladly take your place. All Bill 115 does is make an attempt to stop the madness. Please, read Bill 115 for yourself and make up your own mind, don't take my word for it. If students really do come first like everyone claims, don't you think "Bill 115, Putting Students First" accomplishes just that? It even says it right there in the title! The longer the teachers unions fight Bill 115, the more obvious their real motives are.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The reality in all this is that we're all on one side or we're on the other side. Whether people choose to vocalize which side they're on is another story, but rest assured, they've chosen a side. Who's right, and who's wrong? Maybe we both are, and the truth is floating around somewhere in the middle. One thing is certain, trying to convince someone that their side is wrong on this subject is next to impossible. That doesn't mean it's still not worthy of discussion, and I respect everyone's right to an opinion, even if it differs from mine. I've enjoyed hearing everyone's side of the story, but this is exhausting. I'm going to bed :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I respect what you're saying, but if that's true, and there are so many teachers that question what the union is doing, why isn't anyone doing anything about it? I read something in the newspaper today that said the teachers union was threatening their union members saying essentially that if you don't obey them, and if you don't tow the union line, regardless of your individual beliefs, you will be fined $500 per day for your disobedience. Not only that, they want any union member who is aware of any other union member who is showing signs of disobedience to report that disobedience to union management so that the offender can be dealt with. What the hell is that?!! Is THAT what you willingly signed up for? Aren't these union representatives there to represent YOUR beliefs, not their OWN hidden agendas? Just one of the many reasons I don't support the idea of unions. The other issue that I'm seeing regularly now is that teachers are saying "it's complicated", and "it's not about the money", and that "anyone who thinks this is about money is showing their ignorance", but that's all they say. It's easy to say what it's not about, but why is nobody explaining what it IS about then? As I mentioned before, I've read Bill 115 in its entirety, and as far as that goes, it's not complicated at all. If teachers are opposed to Bill 115, then that part is pretty straightforward. Call me ignorant if you want (I've been called worse), but I've read it, I understand it, and money is precisely what it's about. If anyone thinks otherwise, I suggest they read it again. Now, if there's more to it than that as the teachers union says there is, please teach us! All we as the public hear is that it's about Bill 115, so if that's not the case, what else is there? Please, tell us what the REAL issues are! I'm not narrow minded. I'm willing to listen.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If you want to get the public to support you, you're going to need to do a better job of explaining to us what the real issues are. One thing you said that I strongly agree with is that "the focus needs to be on good teachers". You're absolutely right about that. That's what should happen. The problem however is that because of the way unions are structured, good teachers, bad teachers, and indifferent teachers all get lumped together, so that can't happen. Good teachers, in my humble opinion, suffer because of the union, and are painted with the same brush as the bad teachers. That's not fair, but that's the way it is. When you join a union, you join the collective group, and are no longer able to stand out as an individual. Once you lose your individuality, many union members become complacent. Complacent workers become lazy workers. Lazy workers drag the system down. In the private sector, lazy workers don't last very long, and rightfully so, or if they do, they aren't paid very much, and again, rightfully so. In the public sector, lazy workers ride out the remainder of their careers under the safety net of the union, laughing all the way to the bank. I'm not saying all public workers are lazy, I know there are good ones out there, but there are also an awful lot of not-so-good ones too. I did a job placement for several months back in school with one of the municipal building departments here in the GTA, and one week into that experience, vowed that I would never allow myself to enter into a union. They were supposed to start work at 8:30am, but most of them trickled in closer to 9am. They talked amongst themselves for an hour or so, nothing work related, just general gossip and such, and then when 10am came around, the entire department drove to a nearby coffee shop, and continued chatting for another 45 minutes. FINALLY, at around 11am, they actually did some work. One hour's worth until noon. They took the full hour off too. Shortly after 1pm, They all came trickling back in, chatted a bit more, then did another hour worth of work, before taking off to that same coffee shop once again, taking another half hour off, before going back to work. At 4pm, a half hour before their work days ended, they began cleaning up their desks so that the moment the clock reached 4:30pm, they were gone. We the public are paying them for an 8 hour work day, yet if we're lucky, we maybe get 3 hours of work out of them each day. This wasn't a one time thing either. Over the span of those several months, that same schedule repeated itself day in, day out. That's not right, but that's the type of behaviour that unions breed. It's outright abuse of taxpayer money. Yet another reason I disagree with the concept of unions.

    ReplyDelete