Is Harper going after the unions?

[cybercoma]

Wow.

Ok the Wal Mart wage might pay more in one area. Might pay less in another. It's SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

The more DEMAND you have have to hire employees, the higher the pay. (Tim Horton's in Calgary). The more SUPPLY of employees to work the same job, the LESS it pays.

This is how it SHOULD work in a FREE MARKET society (which we do NOT live in).

Intellectuals like yourself should never determine what a 'fair wage' is for certain work. That is basically communism.

How about intellectuals like the Labour Minister and the Conservative government? Should they determine what a fair wage is when employees are bargaining with their employer?

[mikedavid00]

How about intellectuals like the Labour Minister and the Conservative government? Should they determine what a fair wage is when employees are bargaining with their employer?

No they shouldn't.

They also shouldn't have laws to allow unions to 'stick up' the public. They should allow Canada post put the middle finger to the union and hire anyone off the street to work at a fraction of the pay with no benefits. I bet all the positions will be filled as we have huge unemployment in Canada.

Shipping prices will finally be corrected to the rate they should be.

Most importantly, prices will go down for consumers on many items and small business can finally compete with Americans when shipping a packages.

[Wilber]

The world would be a much better place if everyone worked for a fraction of the pay with no benefits. Not sure who we would sell stuff to but it would surely be a better place.

[CPCFTW]

The world would be a much better place if everyone worked for a fraction of the pay with no benefits. Not sure who we would sell stuff to but it would surely be a better place.

Canada would be a much better place if people were paid what the market dictated. The government already intervenes enough with minimum wage laws and progressive taxation.

If you're an incompetent high school drop out delivering mail for a living, you can still live off of a tax-free 20k/yr (which is roughly min. wage in ON). Maybe throw in some kind of bonus or profit sharing. As the less incompetent people are able to generate more wealth and create more jobs, the market will be able to bear higher and higher minimum wage rates so that the minimum standard of living continues to rise. A rising tide lifts all boats. Furthermore, as impediments to job creation (such as excessive labour costs from unionization, corporate taxation, etc.) are relaxed, the market may become saturated with jobs such that there is a shortage of labour. Companies will then have to raise their wages above minimum wage rates to attract employees.

Of course, there should be some way to ensure that the job creators have significant Canadian ownership or are heavily taxed for repatriating earnings to prevent too much wealth from being siphoned out of the country.

Edited June 27, 2011 by CPCFTW

[TwoDucks]

Well I got $40 a week to work 1.5 hours a day to deliver the Ottawa Citizen newspaper which was MUCH harder work than delivering letters. I also had to work 6 days a week.

And also, when I couldn't deliver my route because I had a fever (I was 11-12 years old), I was told to get my parents or a friend to deliver it for me but it had to be done. I remember on boxing day having to run out and deliver the papers. All the blizzard, snow, you name it. Those bags were SO heavy in those days. I also had to do collections.

So a postal worker, who works even less than a teacher (lets face it their both part time jobs), somehow deserved more than I did???

I don't follow how your paper route analogy bears any relevance here. Did you have to pay a mortgage/rent while you delivered papers at 12? Did you have to feed your family? I drive my car to work sometimes but that doesn't make me a racecar driver. On the other hand, your argument does suggest that maybe delivery kids should become more organized in order to demand better pay and better working conditions. My goodness, you've convinced me! They should start a union.

[TwoDucks]

The world would be a much better place if everyone worked for a fraction of the pay with no benefits. Not sure who we would sell stuff to but it would surely be a better place.

Agreed. All those uppity proletariats need a little hunger in their bellies to remind them who the boss is.

[mikedavid00]

Agreed. All those uppity proletariats need a little hunger in their bellies to remind them who the boss is.

Most all unions are part of big brother and protected by big brother. The proletariat are the victims of this.

[mikedavid00]

I don't follow how your paper route analogy bears any relevance here. Did you have to pay a mortgage/rent while you delivered papers at 12?

Here we go again.

It's not up to intellectuals to sit around a conference table and determine the pay of job occupations. That is communism.

Just let the market handle the pay rates and the natural pay and benefits will be fair to everyone I promise you... (as long as we end the practice of 'people flooding' our own labor markets).

Do you know why a surgeon gets paid so much? It's not his 'intelligence and skill'. In 2 months any surgeon can have you doing a hip replacement surgery. Yes YOU! It's a manual procedure. No experience needed.

But the reason why their pay is crazy is because there is a HUGE demand for them in the labor market! There is NOT a sufficient supply of medical specialists so the salaries of these people skyrocket.

Our gov't (as usual) creates this short supply of doctors and specialists; the gov't through use of institutions and credential-ism actually create a shortage of many medical professions which ends up driving up their wages. In many areas, pharmacists are getting paid $18/h. Some areas have far, far too many pharmacists. Other places like Hawaii really need them, so the pay goes WAY up. Especially for hotel chef's. You even get free room and board they are so desperate for chef's.

So it's not about an actual skill persay, it is actually what is in demand. It might be that digging with a shovel might be a far more required and demanded skill than a pharmasist. The difference is, the pay SHOULD reflect that instead of big brother skewing the job market ensuring that every medical profession is in short supply so they get paid more.

-Unions are bad.

-Gov't run Institutions and credential-ism is bad.

-Immigration flooding our job market is REAL BAD.

-Gov't payscales that are 'templated' are bad.

-Gov't subsidization of industry is bad.

-Gov't protectionism, ponzi schemes are bad.

-Gov't cartels are bad (the dairy cartel, wheat board, etc. etc.)

-Gov't ownership of anything that can be private sector is bad (hospitals as an example).

Oh by the way, joining the union in Canada Post is MANDATORY. So again, there is no freedom of association or you would be free NOT to associate with the union.

[mikedavid00]

I should also note that when I was younger I used to be very pro union,. Pro Police. And still considered myself very right wing.

I was drinking the Koolaid fed to me by the media.

Once you get older and understand how the economy works.. specifically who does what in society and how the money flows, you realize that you in now way, shape, or form live in a 'free' country.

The downfall to everything that is evil in our society is the gov't. When they put their hands in something, it fails miserably.

If there was no gov't, we'd be so far ahead in humanity. There would be cures for major diseases and society would be so much better.

What's happened in the last 15 years is gov't has grown bigger than it's ever been and we've now moved towards fascism and are soon approaching a police state. Where I live, we now got cameras up at intersections aiming to get innocent citizens accidentally going through red lights. It happens to all of us. But big brother is there to 'get us'.

We have a new cast system. The civil service, union cast (3 of 4 unions are the civil service). To get into a union, you have to be a friend of family member to get in. This takes us back to the royalty days of kings and queens. You were a 'noble' or 'peasant'. To be a noble, you had to be born into a noble or royal family with few exceptions. Most people though were just peasants that got their money TAKEN from them to give to the nobles and royalty.

The exact same thing is happening now, except the 'noble and royal' class is 1 out of every 4 people. It's TOO LARGE! Unsustainable!

[Shwa]

What's your claim, that it enshrined in the constitution that Canada post workers are the highest paid in the mail delivery business?

No what I am saying is that comparing Crown corporation pay scales with those of a similar private enterprise is dumb on many levels. One of which is the Constitutional mandate which Crown corporations are responsible for; the other is the length of time the union has been in operation. Etc. All you can say is "because" which is a slick dodge off the cliff.

So you're saying the mail carried by private courier companies is different? The union is trying to say it's the same mail isn't it?

Is it? I am telling you that the Federal Government has a Constitutional obligation toward the mails. Private couriers do not. Coins minted at the Franklin Mint are not legal tender.

[Shwa]

I hadn't thought of that. You're right. Much of the chief supplier to WalMart is also heavily unionized, after its own fashion.

I am just trying to source out these "free-market-only" theoreticians who claim to have some objective method of determining fair wage when they always - and I mean always -forget to factor in how ubiquitous unions are - and always have been - especially in the "free" Western world.

AS IF unions, negotiating in good faith, are somehow outside of the pristine "free-market-supply-and-demand" constructs they continualy fantasize about. Their theories are about 900 years too late if we start with the guilds and likely never existed except in fantasies when we consider the group affect on economies as a whole.

Because, you know, group effect on supply-and-demand has never existed.

[charter.rights]

Individual bargaining as well as collective bargaining are essential to the free-market system. No executive, or workers goes to a potential employer and lets them dictate the terms of their employment. Otherwise if employers called the shots it would be fascism.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Individual bargaining as well as collective bargaining are essential to the free-market system. No executive, or workers goes to a potential employer and lets them dictate the terms of their employment. Otherwise if employers called the shots it would be fascism.

Oh crap, I agree with you.

[Wilber]

Agreed. All those uppity proletariats need a little hunger in their bellies to remind them who the boss is.

Yup, need to go back to the days of work houses, debtors prisons, 14 hr shifts with half day off Sunday and child labour.

Something like this

[fellowtraveller]

Individual bargaining as well as collective bargaining are essential to the free-market system. No executive, or workers goes to a potential employer and lets them dictate the terms of their employment. Otherwise if employers called the shots it would be fascism.

That coneviently overlooks the reality that 'individual baragining ' is not allowed to co-exist with collective bargaining. Memebership in the union is purportedly optional but every worker on the site is obliged to pay dues and accept the collective agreement, no exceptions.

There is no substantive difference between the actions of free market capitalists and unions.

Unions exist to promote the interestes of their members, full stop. All the usual fluff about 'social conscience and special activism ' is pure fluff, a circlejerk that has been perpetuated by Union communications professionals for decades now. It's about the money, of course. Same for the employers their responsibility is to make money for shareholders, no different objective than the union just different shareholders..

[charter.rights]

That coneviently overlooks the reality that 'individual baragining ' is not allowed to co-exist with collective bargaining. Memebership in the union is purportedly optional but every worker on the site is obliged to pay dues and accept the collective agreement, no exceptions.

There is no substantive difference between the actions of free market capitalists and unions.

Unions exist to promote the interestes of their members, full stop. All the usual fluff about 'social conscience and special activism ' is pure fluff, a circlejerk that has been perpetuated by Union communications professionals for decades now. It's about the money, of course. Same for the employers their responsibility is to make money for shareholders, no different objective than the union just different shareholders..

Wrong.

Management bargains individually, even if there is a union. So that shoots your theory down altogether.

Collective bargaining is essential even for manages who basically set out their own wages....in many cases in proportion to the collective wages.

[cybercoma]

Canada would be a much better place if people were paid what the market dictated. The government already intervenes enough with minimum wage laws and progressive taxation.

So then you agree that Bill C-6 should have never been passed because essentially the government legislated employees wages, not the market, and the arbitration was not fair because the government did not allow the arbitrator any decision making powers. Right?

[noahbody]

No what I am saying is that comparing Crown corporation pay scales with those of a similar private enterprise is dumb on many levels. One of which is the Constitutional mandate which Crown corporations are responsible for;

So gas jockeys at Petro Canada chould've been making $50K a year when they were making $6/hr across the street at Esso? Crown Corporations should be responsible to the taxpayer.

the other is the length of time the union has been in operation. Etc.

How is that relevant?

Is it? I am telling you that the Federal Government has a Constitutional obligation toward the mails. Private couriers do not.

Their mandate is limited to letters... not parcels or direct mail. They also don't have to deliver into the community.

[Remiel]

-Stop Immigration.

-Stop Unions.

-And ideally, stop public schools and universities. Stop credentialism.

Do you not think you should, at the very least, be adding corporations to that list?

Corporations are basically unions for employers. And they get ridiculous benefits, i.e. limited liability. Would a truly free market not require that everyone be fully responsible for the consequences of their actions? If so, limited liability would be the antithesis of that.

[Guest Derek L]

Do you not think you should, at the very least, be adding corporations to that list?

Corporations are basically unions for employers. And they get ridiculous benefits, i.e. limited liability. Would a truly free market not require that everyone be fully responsible for the consequences of their actions? If so, limited liability would be the antithesis of that.

Corporations are responsible to the shareholders…….do you invest in RRSP etc?

If so, you have a more direct interest in the economic health of a corporation then with a union……Unions are only responsible to their members.

Go buy some REM stock (good time for it) and then go join several unions……which has less red tape?

[Shwa]

So gas jockeys at Petro Canada chould've been making $50K a year when they were making $6/hr across the street at Esso? Crown Corporations should be responsible to the taxpayer.

Crown Corporations ARE responsible to the taxpayer. Legally. Through laws and such. For example: through constitutional responsibilities. DHL has no legal obligation towards the taxpayers now do they? So... should workers at the Royal Canadian Mint putting out our coinage be paid the same as Franklin Mint employees putting out non-legal tender Elvis commemorative coins? Go ahead, make the comparison.

How is that relevant?

Because contracts are usually negotiated on an increase basis which, over time, has the cummulative affect of being more than the negotiated contracts of relative newcomers to any particular industry. It seems to me that you believe Canada Post ought to be beholden through some twist of logic, to relative newcomers on the parcel delivery scene.

Why should they? The only answer you have give is "because." As if "because" exists as a self-evident truth merely because you said so.

Their mandate is limited to letters... not parcels or direct mail. They also don't have to deliver into the community.

Why shouldn't they? They are making a profit, therefore being responsible to the taxpayers.

[Remiel]

Corporations are responsible to the shareholders…….do you invest in RRSP etc?

If so, you have a more direct interest in the economic health of a corporation then with a union……Unions are only responsible to their members.

Go buy some REM stock (good time for it) and then go join several unions……which has less red tape?

"Corporations are responsible to their shareholders" is pretty much exactly the same thing as "unions are only responsible to their members". Union members are shareholders in the union, and corporate shareholders are members of the corporation (as opposed to employees of the corporation).

[Guest Derek L]

"Corporations are responsible to their shareholders" is pretty much exactly the same thing as "unions are only responsible to their members". Union members are shareholders in the union, and corporate shareholders are members of the corporation (as opposed to employees of the corporation).

Apples and oranges.......From sitting here in BC, I can buy REM stock when I please, but I can't join the Ontario teachers union......

[Remiel]

Apples and oranges.......From sitting here in BC, I can buy REM stock when I please, but I can't join the Ontario teachers union......

Sure you can. Become a teacher, get a job in Ontario, ad BANG! you're in. Besides, you are completely ignoring private corporations, which makes your example even more useless.

In any case, my question was not addressed to you anyway.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Remiel

[GostHacked]

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?

Why was GM not allowed to simply fail? I sure as fuck don't get a bail out if I go bankrupt.