Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The strike by west coast port workers is entering it's second week. It's estimated to be costing the economy $1 billion a day.

Forest companies are complaining they can't ship out raw logs, fish companies can't ship out our fish to be sold or processed in China. Car buyers will have to look at models made in N America...

So what are your thoughts?

Posted

Their base general pay is over $48/h.  They can kindly stfu and they should be legislated back to work.  

  • Like 1

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

Their base general pay is over $48/h.  They can kindly stfu and they should be legislated back to work.  

Shouldn’t they be allowed to negotiate for their wages?   Supply and demand?  If the CEO of the Port (Vancouver) can get $1.2 million in salary, where’s the issue with these salaries?

Posted
20 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Shouldn’t they be allowed to negotiate for their wages?   Supply and demand?

This isn't a supply and demand relationship.  You could find 50,000 people in Vancouver right now who would work for those wages.  These sorts of unionized labor monopolies are more akin to medieval guilds than any sort of free-market environment.  

20 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

 If the CEO of the Port (Vancouver) can get $1.2 million in salary, where’s the issue with these salaries?

Uh the CEO, who's climbed as high as he/she has, with the presumable skillset, knowledge and experience they have, should make substantially more than the average dock worker, don't you think?  Otherwise...just go be a dock worker.  

  • Like 1

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
9 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

You could find 50,000 people in Vancouver right now who would work for those wages. 

You think there are 50,000 trained longshoremen in Vancouver?   LOL

10 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

should make substantially more than the average dock worker, don't you think? 

You bet!    And they always will.  They’re not asking for CEO wages, are they?

Posted
11 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

the average dock worker, with the presumable skillset, knowledge and experience they have, should make substantially more

which is what a lot of people seems to think the workers are asking. More to do with job security for the few that can actually afford to live here.
They've always been one of the highest paying jobs you could get so begrudging what they do get now isn't advancing anything at all.
Give it a bit longer, intervene if it's obvious they can't settle. That's what the employers are hoping for, they'll get the better deal.

My snide remarks were because the few media interviews I've seen were from company execs involved in shipping work & jobs out of the country.

Posted
1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

You think there are 50,000 trained longshoremen in Vancouver?   LOL

No, but I think there are 50,000 who could learn and be trained reasonably quickly.  These guys aren't exactly splitting the atom.  

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

You bet!    And they always will.  They’re not asking for CEO wages, are they?

Great, so why are you bringing up CEO pay then?  ?

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
9 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

You think there are 50,000 trained longshoremen in Vancouver?   LOL

You bet!    And they always will.  They’re not asking for CEO wages, are they?

 Nope but, they can easily train and when the strikers see others getting their jobs, they will be back quick.

But when someone brings up the president or ceo or director wages during these discussions then that someone is trying. to make foolish comparisons.

 

  • Like 1

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted

So-called "replacement workers" are actually just scabs. A scab is the lowest, most toxic substance on earth. 

Before legislating the employees back to work, the minister should quietly inform the employers that the legislations will impose a 20 year contract that will give the workers everything they are asking for plus backpay for wages lost in the strike... or the employer could negotiate a fair deal. 

  • Like 1

A Conservative stands for God, King and Country

Posted

Why does a manager deserve more pay than the people who actually do the work. Employees are not subordinates. They are part of the same team. The manager is the team member who organizes the tasks the team performs. The manager is not superior. The best managers are those people who listen to the people who do the work

A Conservative stands for God, King and Country

Posted
26 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

So-called "replacement workers" are actually just scabs. A scab is the lowest, most toxic substance on earth. 

Before legislating the employees back to work, the minister should quietly inform the employers that the legislations will impose a 20 year contract that will give the workers everything they are asking for plus backpay for wages lost in the strike... or the employer could negotiate a fair deal. 

The employer has offered a fair wage increase. $48 per hour is pretty good wages in anyone eyes and they want more.

15 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Why does a manager deserve more pay than the people who actually do the work. Employees are not subordinates. They are part of the same team. The manager is the team member who organizes the tasks the team performs. The manager is not superior. The best managers are those people who listen to the people who do the work

Where is the managers pay in dispute or even talked about? Besides, a managers job is far more complex and overreaching than the labourers job.

Why is a longshoremans truck driver job piling up containers worth more than a truck driver making deliveries in the Vancouver streets?

Bottom line is each and every job has its worth. Some more than others even though they seem to be the same.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted
39 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

The employer has offered a fair wage increase. $48 per hour is pretty good wages in anyone eyes and they want more.

Where is the managers pay in dispute or even talked about? Besides, a managers job is far more complex and overreaching than the labourers job.

Why is a longshoremans truck driver job piling up containers worth more than a truck driver making deliveries in the Vancouver streets?

Bottom line is each and every job has its worth. Some more than others even though they seem to be the same.

If that were the case, the manager’s secretary would be the highest paid person in the unit.

A Conservative stands for God, King and Country

Posted
6 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

If that were the case, the manager’s secretary would be the highest paid person in the unit.

Lemme see, you equate a secretary to a manager?? A person that gets told what to do as opposed a person that tells what to do with the skills and knowledge and experience of the staff they manage??

P;ease, we understand you are a union person but, we also know unions have outlived their usefulness. Unions and union demands are a big source of higher costs and inflation.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Lemme see, you equate a secretary to a manager?? A person that gets told what to do as opposed a person that tells what to do with the skills and knowledge and experience of the staff they manage??

P;ease, we understand you are a union person but, we also know unions have outlived their usefulness. Unions and union demands are a big source of higher costs and inflation.

Ahh, but usually it is the secretary who has the experience to tell the manager what to do. There are some good managers out there, but they are rare. Most managers get their job because they are sycophants 

Edited by Queenmandy85

A Conservative stands for God, King and Country

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Ahh, but usually it is the secretary who has the experience to tell the manager what to do. There are some good manager out there, but they are rare. Most managers get their job because they are sycophants 

Yeah sure..... She has lots of experience out on the waterfront or docks or assembly line . LOL

Yes, there are good managers ...and poor ones too. Then again, there good workers out there... and poor ones too.

I strongly disagree, most managers today got their jobs because they qualified and met or exceeded requirements. The days of nepotism are mostly long gone.  Bad managers in strong union organizations very quickly become ineffective and lose their positions.

The sycophants are actually within the longshoreman and teamsters unions in Vancouver (and maybe elsewhere). An old but still valid article

https://vancouversun.com/news/staff-blogs/organized-crime-and-the-port-part-one-of-my-series

Edited by ExFlyer
  • Like 1

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted
2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

So-called "replacement workers" are actually just scabs. A scab is the lowest, most toxic substance on earth. 

Right...someone who's looking for work is the lowest, most toxic substance on earth.  ?

2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Before legislating the employees back to work, the minister should quietly inform the employers that the legislations will impose a 20 year contract that will give the workers everything they are asking for plus backpay for wages lost in the strike... or the employer could negotiate a fair deal. 

A fair deal is what they could negotiate on the open market, without a union monopoly.  ?

  • Like 1

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
17 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

It looks like we have different experiences.

How? Why?

I have worked in the military where you did what you were told...like it or not.
I worked as a contractor without benefits.
I worked as a public servant with the mighty PIPSC behind me. I have seen negotiations go in many directions...the give and take and in the case of some, the take was good for the employer and the members got extra hourly wage increase but lost things like some pension benefits. The PS gave away the cost of living adjustments for their pensioners. They gave away some health benefit for those that were over 65.

My take is that the only ones that do well are union executives. That having their members off work without pay for 2 weeks takes almost the entire negotiated contract to catch up with what they lost in wages for the 2 or more weeks off.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.

Posted
1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

Right...someone who's looking for work is the lowest, most toxic substance on earth. 

It’s a moot point as scabs are illegal in BC, aren’t they?

1 hour ago, Moonbox said:

A fair deal is what they could negotiate on the open market, without a union monopoly

Why would it only be a fair wage settlement if workers have to give up their Charter right to freedom of association?  

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

It’s a moot point as scabs are illegal in BC, aren’t they?

Maybe?  I don't know or care, at any rate, because I didn't bring it up.  I was just responding to the hysterics/hyperbole.  

54 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Why would it only be a fair wage settlement if workers have to give up their Charter right to freedom of association?  

They have their freedom of association, but that doesn't mean anyone has to accept their holding economically critical infrastructure hostage in order to press demands for way-above-market wages and benefits.  I get it if you're a crane operator or something specialized, but we're talking about a $100,000 base general pay rate here for the lowest schlub, before benefits.  There's nothing fair-market about that.  

Edited by Moonbox

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
4 hours ago, Moonbox said:

but that doesn't mean anyone has to accept their holding economically critical infrastructure hostage in order to press demands for way-above-market wages and benefits.

Last I checked, striking was perfectly legal and withholding labour was a perfectly legitimate form of bargaining. 

Posted
33 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Last I checked, striking was perfectly legal and withholding labour was a perfectly legitimate form of bargaining. 

Nobody said it wasn’t legal, or whether collective bargaining was “legitimate”.

 

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted
On 7/10/2023 at 5:36 PM, herbie said:

The strike by west coast port workers is entering it's second week. It's estimated to be costing the economy $1 billion a day.

Forest companies are complaining they can't ship out raw logs, fish companies can't ship out our fish to be sold or processed in China. Car buyers will have to look at models made in N America...

So what are your thoughts?

I think that the PM should declare martial law and send the cops to beat them up. 

If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed.

Bug-juice is the new Kool-aid.

Ex-Canadian since April 2025

Posted
2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I think that the PM should declare martial law and send the cops to beat them up.

Presumably the army gets sent to beat the cops into submission when they go on strike.

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Presumably the army gets sent to beat the cops into submission when they go on strike.

Actually i'm pretty sure the cops aren't allowed to strike.  I believe i read that somewhere - essential service something something.  I  KNOW the army can't.  I mean seriously - NOBODY would be crossing THAT picket line :)

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,907
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    derek848
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • stindles earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stindles earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Doowangle earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Doowangle earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Barquentine went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...