Topaz Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 (edited) After the way the Tories went after Air Canada, a private firm, with only one day strike, one has to wonder if they are going to make war against the unions in this country. I don't think it would be a good idea for various reasons. The head of the CAW said they were very close when the Tories decided to go back to parliament and get them order back to work. Harper has to remember that people that belong to unions are Tories also and if things get nasty they will get nasty with their vote in the next election. Not all unions are the same, there's bad one and there good ones, just like political parties. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/stephen-harper-prepared-wage-war-canada-unions-210611103.html Edited June 18, 2011 by Topaz Quote
Shady Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 The head of the CAW The CAW didn't seem to mind the billions in bailout money they received a couple of years ago. Quote
Wilber Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 The CAW didn't seem to mind the billions in bailout money they received a couple of years ago. That's interesting, I thought it was the auto companies that got the bailout money. Which government cut a cheque to the CAW? Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
scribblet Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/air-canada-gets-bailout-from-ottawa/ Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
CPCFTW Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 (edited) That's interesting, I thought it was the auto companies that got the bailout money. Which government cut a cheque to the CAW? That's interesting, I thought the CAW and Air Canada workers needed an auto company and airline to work for. Which employer hired these unions after Air Canada and GM went bankrupt? Edited June 18, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
Jack Weber Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 That's interesting, I thought the CAW and Air Canada workers needed an auto company and airline to work for. Which employer hired these unions after Air Canada and GM went bankrupt? That's interesting... Perhaps if these blessed companies treated their employees in a dignified manner (which,historically speaking,they have not),those employees might not have felt the need to organize??? Ya'know...Things like actually paying into a pension plan instead of taking pension holidays and then crying poor expecting the employees to take the hit for the bad decisions of managment? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Wilber Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 That's interesting, I thought the CAW and Air Canada workers needed an auto company and airline to work for. Which employer hired these unions after Air Canada and GM went bankrupt? They do, so why say it was the CAW that was bailed out? Companies don't hire employees they don't need. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
CPCFTW Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 That's interesting... Perhaps if these blessed companies treated their employees in a dignified manner (which,historically speaking,they have not),those employees might not have felt the need to organize??? Ya'know...Things like actually paying into a pension plan instead of taking pension holidays and then crying poor expecting the employees to take the hit for the bad decisions of managment? Hahaha "pension holidays". You mean not going bankrupt holidays? Companies would have just gone bankrupt earlier without those "holidays" because the union pension demands are unreasonable and a company can't compete in a globalized environment while taking on investment risk for unskilled labourers. Companies have done everything they can to extend their lives for the worker's benefit by hiding the true economic impact of pension liabilities from creditors and investors, and by seeking government bailouts. Quote
CPCFTW Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 They do, so why say it was the CAW that was bailed out? Companies don't hire employees they don't need. Does a bankrupt company need employees? Quote
Wilber Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 (edited) Does a bankrupt company need employees? Why do you insist it is always the employees who are responsible for bankruptcies? Management runs the company. That's why they get the big bucks remember. You insist management get the big bucks because of their supposed skills, then blame the employees when they screw it up. Edited June 18, 2011 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
CPCFTW Posted June 18, 2011 Report Posted June 18, 2011 (edited) Why do you insist it is always the employees who are responsible for bankruptcies? Management runs the company. That's why they get the big bucks remember. You insist management get the big bucks because of their supposed skills, then blame the employees when they screw it up. Because that argument is asinine. Air Canada revenue is over 2.5 billion a quarter and you guys think the CEO getting paid 4 million a year is the reason the company was nearly bankrupt. Hmmmm was it the 4 million CEO compensation or the 2 billion pension deficit that almost bankrupted the company? Then management tries to cut labour costs by negotiating a more reasonable pension for unskilled labour and you claim that they are evil for doing their job of trying to make the company profitable rather than on the verge of bankruptcy. Edited June 18, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
Wilber Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 (edited) Because that argument is asinine. Air Canada revenue is over 2.5 billion a quarter and you guys think the CEO getting paid 4 million a year is the reason the company was nearly bankrupt. Hmmmm was it the 4 million CEO compensation or the 2 billion pension deficit that almost bankrupted the company? So management has no control over the solvency of a company but the employees do. Why the hell do we pay them 4 million then? At AC and most other companies, the executive pension plan is the richest of all by the way and it ain't DC. I was thinking more of the one who was paid upward of 70 million to gut the company of billions of its most profitable components in order to distribute the proceeds to ACE share holders. If you are looking for the biggest reason AC has been flirting with bankruptcy the past few years, look no further. AC has not been meeting its pension deficit obligations for several years and it is still in danger of bankruptcy. Then management tries to cut labour costs by negotiating a more reasonable pension for unskilled labour and you claim that they are evil for doing their job of trying to make the company profitable rather than on the verge of bankruptcy. I don't claim management is necessarily evil but they are no less a necessary evil than employees. If you insist on management, employee relations as being confrontational and it is management's job to get as much as they can for as little as possible from their employees, you also have to recognize the right of employees to do what they can to protect their own interests. Edited June 19, 2011 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Shady Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 So management has no control over the solvency of a company but the employees do. I'd say both parties share the blame. But the CAW didn't mind the car companies getting billions in bailouts a couple of years ago. It saved their jobs, and it paid their salaries, pensions and benefits. Quote
Wilber Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 I'd say both parties share the blame. But the CAW didn't mind the car companies getting billions in bailouts a couple of years ago. It saved their jobs, and it paid their salaries, pensions and benefits. There are always two sides, I just reject the assertion that all the problems are due to the employees. One problem with the auto companies is that the pensions were 100% company funded. That is not the case with Air Canada. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
cybercoma Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 After the way the Tories went after Air Canada, a private firm, with only one day strike, one has to wonder if they are going to make war against the unions in this country. I don't think it would be a good idea for various reasons. The head of the CAW said they were very close when the Tories decided to go back to parliament and get them order back to work. Harper has to remember that people that belong to unions are Tories also and if things get nasty they will get nasty with their vote in the next election. Not all unions are the same, there's bad one and there good ones, just like political parties. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/stephen-harper-prepared-wage-war-canada-unions-210611103.html If the Tories legislated them back to work, I would be behind the unions 100% if they stayed off the job in protest. I would also be behind a general strike in that event as well. Quote
cybercoma Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 Hahaha "pension holidays". You mean not going bankrupt holidays? Why don't they just make their employees work 5 days a week and only pay them for 3? You know... so they don't go bankrupt. Quote
Sandy MacNab Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 Why don't they just make their employees work 5 days a week and only pay them for 3? You know... so they don't go bankrupt. Why not pay 'em 5 days for 5 days of productive work. On many occasions I've watched 5 doing the work of 3 - city employees - which means I and many others are paying far too much in property taxes. Quote
cybercoma Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 Why not pay 'em 5 days for 5 days of productive work. On many occasions I've watched 5 doing the work of 3 - city employees - which means I and many others are paying far too much in property taxes. Says you. Let's all watch you work and nitpick. Quote
Sandy MacNab Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 Says you. Let's all watch you work and nitpick. Well, let's all watch you defend feather-bedding and sloth at the taxpayers' expense. Quote
cybercoma Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 Well, let's all watch you defend feather-bedding and sloth at the taxpayers' expense. Again, so YOU say. Quote
Jack Weber Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 Why not pay 'em 5 days for 5 days of productive work. On many occasions I've watched 5 doing the work of 3 - city employees - which means I and many others are paying far too much in property taxes. Ah yes...The free marketeer "productivity" buzzword... Productivity is really less people doing more work for less money... More downward spiral,race to the bottom upwards wealth redistribution stuff your vulture capitalists just love... Oh...I forgot...The vulture capitalists,and thier willing advocates, are the new global humanitarians... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
CPCFTW Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 (edited) There are always two sides, I just reject the assertion that all the problems are due to the employees. One problem with the auto companies is that the pensions were 100% company funded. That is not the case with Air Canada. The problem with Air Canada is that it is in an industry with tiny profit margins, a huge amount of fixed costs, and mostly uncontrollable variable costs such as fuel. There are not a lot of places to make cost-saving cuts, but bloated labour costs from ridiculous pensions for unskilled labour is definitely one of them. Being a CSR at an airline is no more a career than being a CSR at Wal-Mart. If you want a pension, get a real career. A DC pension is more than fair. Edited June 19, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
bloodyminded Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 There are always two sides, I just reject the assertion that all the problems are due to the employees. Yes, it's an interesting paradigm, an interesting worldview. "The company"--ie owners, CEO's, managers, and the biggest shareholders--are always blameless...in fact, nearly sublime; and are innocent victims of those who decidedly are not "the company"...its own employees. It's a perfect example of (top-down) class warfare mentality. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Jack Weber Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 Yes, it's an interesting paradigm, an interesting worldview. "The company"--ie owners, CEO's, managers, and the biggest shareholders--are always blameless...in fact, nearly sublime; and are innocent victims of those who decidedly are not "the company"...its own employees. It's a perfect example of (top-down) class warfare mentality. I always find it interesting that when the"class warfare" thing is brought up,it's usually conservatives who try to push it aside by saying "no one wants to hear that stuff anymore"... It's usually because they are not the recipients of that warfare being waged upon them..... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
bloodyminded Posted June 19, 2011 Report Posted June 19, 2011 I always find it interesting that when the"class warfare" thing is brought up,it's usually conservatives who try to push it aside by saying "no one wants to hear that stuff anymore"... It's usually because they are not the recipients of that warfare being waged upon them..... And, more fascinating, sometimes they are, but have been informed that the fault always comes from weird directions, rather than from those with the most power and influence. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.