Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

A random thought:

Historically, labor unions in the US have tended to be strongly pro-Democrat, and "progressive / liberal" Democratic politicians in the US have tended to be strongly pro-union.

And this makes perfect sense. Both groups hold, as a core value, the notion that individuals are not well-suited to making decisions about their own lives, and that people achieving unequal outcomes (in terms of income, prestige, etc) is unfair, even if said inequality directly reflects differences in motivation, intelligence, work ethic, etc.

Thus, in in order to ensure that everyone is equal and experiences the best possible outcome, it is better to turn control of your life over to a strong central authority than to make decisions for yourself.

fooger03

iTrader: (2)

Thinking about those GM Employees who would rather be working than taking an unplanned and unpaid vacation right now, I wonder what their view is on the statement "Right to Work is a Lie!"

I also wonder if the union fully grasps how much influence it had on the recent closure of multiple GM plants and the loss of - what - 15,000 jobs. There are a lot of long term consequences for the short term gains they seek every time a contract renegotiation comes around. I wonder where the whole US auto manufacturing industry would be today were it not for the greedy claws of the UAW - both in the workplace and in the lobbying offices.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Yeah, the UAW is possibly the dumbest example imaginable, for the specific reason that it is extremely easy for automakers to avoid the union entirely by moving production offshore.

Most successful unions I can think of represent fields in which it's not possible to move the labor. Electricians, pipefitters, school teachers, police officers, grocery store employees, Teamsters, baseball umpires, etc.

Erat

iTrader: (5)

Ironically, all of my friends and family who are in the skilled trades continue to go to work(a lot union workers). Particularly at these facilities that are not running production. It's the skilled tradesmens dream. Even if they aren't supposed to "walk across the picket line".

I also find it a little amusing that you tend to never see UAW workers for one of the non big 3 going on strike. Perhaps it's due to location, people are just glad to have jobs in BFE Alabama, or perhaps it's a different culture.


Do not let this post make it seem like i'm "pro GM" they are slimy ******** that screw over a lot of people.

And while i'm at it, **** Obama and the bailout. They should have let these companies die / go bankrupt / restructure like any other company. Worst thing that we could have done was bail them out.

dleavitt

iTrader: (1)

It wasn’t a bailout of GM as much as a bailout of the UAW and their benefits.

I’ve heard people refer to GM as a Pension and Health Insurance provider that sells cars to fund its operations.

Savington

iTrader: (31)

Wasn't your last thread about the Electoral College?

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

While dleavitt's comment is on point. Unfunded pension liabilities are more than 50% of Chicago's annual budget deficit, and the reason why we still have more total debt than the GDP of Luxembourg.

But what really bugs me is that unions tend to ultimately be harmful to the very workers who they represent collect revenue from. A few personal examples from my own workplace, which is roughly 75% union / 25% non-union:




None of these things seem desirable to me. In fact, I turned down an otherwise fairly lucrative job offer in LA a few years ago, because it would have required me to joint NABET.

I really don't understand why so many people seem to think that union membership is a good idea, to the point of basing their whole political ideology around it.

Schroedinger

Organized labor got too crazy for even the Democrats, who abandoned the cause in the 1990’s. In my opinion that turn of events was the most important factor in shaping today’s US political landscape. Ford Motor Company is the biggest healthcare provider in the entire world, think about that for a moment. That said, I also think that organized labor was the key to prosperity and growth of the middle class that we saw in the 1950’s and 60’s. Shame things got so out of control.

z31maniac

^I've never been Union and I've worked for a multitude of multi-billion companies..........I've never seen more than 3 days paid leave for bereavement. The fact is for paid leave and holiday leave...........America is WAY behind the curve on this. For me it's really annoying to see people with the same or lesser title in a different country get DRAMATICALLY more paid leave. We always tease the people in Barcelona about how much leave they get, then I looked up our office in Manila:

21 paid holidays. 20 days of vacation. 3 special emergency days. 3 weeks of sick leave. 3 days for WEDDINGS! And there were a few more. Yes, you can get special paid leave when you get married.

14 paid holidays*. 18 days of vacation (after 3 years 13 before that). 2 weeks of sick and 3 days for bereavement.

*They count 14 paid holidays, but, they always shut down the last week of the year between Christmas and New Years Eve........and FORCE us to use our PTO for those days, then count them as paid holidays. Hows that for a crock of ****?

bahurd

iTrader: (8)

I was a union member for a few years early in my career (Steelworkers). It was a long established one and had a cozy relationship with the company. I left the union for a better position in the company after college graduation and left the company after realizing the new ownership was going to ultimately close it after raiding the pension cash (thank Reagan). In that case, the union earned it's dues while the company was in business keeping hourly wages and benefits at the top of the surrounding area. Labor costs had nothing minimal to do with the company going under ultimately.

To your question above, some people take the right to organize every bit as serious as others take the right to bear arms. While continued employment isn't an outcome, isn't joining something like AARP another form of organizing? Looking at it from 50k feet...

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

This may have been true of moderate democrats, but I don't think it's the case anymore, where being moderate is not politically fashionable.

Among the top three contenders at the moment:


Joe Biden received an 85% lifetime approval rating from AFL–CIO, and was a co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill intended to "amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish an efficient system to enable employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations [unions], to provide for mandatory injunctions for unfair labor practices during organizing efforts, and for other purposes."


Elizabeth Warren recently earned high praise from AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka, for a bill which she recently introduced called the Accountable Capitalism Act. In addition to destroying the US economy as we know it, that bill would also have the side effect of requiring 40% of the board of directors of major corporations to be union members, and contains the specific text that "the Securities and Exchange Commission, in consultation with the National Labor Relations Board, shall issue rules to ensure that director elections at United States corporations are fair and democratic." (It would also require companies with annual revenues of $1 billion or more to obtain a “federal charter” in order to exist.)

She also made this statement at an event in Massachusetts: "Here’s my promise, you give Democrats power in Washington, you give us back the House and the Senate, and Democrats will be there for unions and for workers!"


Col. Sanders, unsurprisingly, is the top nut. His recently released Workplace Democracy Plan has the specific stated goals of doubling Union membership in the US by 2025, repealing Section 14(b) of the Taft Hartley Act (which gives individuals the right to opt out of union membership if they do not with to be a member), giving federal workers the right to strike, and tons of other stuff. Strengthening unions is literally the sole aim of the plan.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

I'll be honest, I really don't know much about what the AARP does, aside from lobbying congress and selling medicare supplement plans.

Diamond Dave

This is a slightly older article on an issue that's moving through legislative review in Oregon right now. The Grocer's Union is seeking to limit the number of self-service kiosks in grocery stores. Not because it saves grocery stores money to have inexpensive kiosks monitored 6:1 by a cashier. No, they oppose them because: 1) since people of color are disproportionately higher ratio of checkout clerks, Kiosks have a disproportionate negative impact on black people 2) elderly and people with disabilities lack the confidence to use them

Oregon Labor Union Wants Voters to Limit Grocers to Two Self-Checkout Stations Per Store

BGordon

Sounds bogus to me. Since China is Communist and has the largest population I would guess that they are the largest block falling under the definition of "Health Care Provider" in the world.

I have heard that the US Government employees constitute the largest health car block in the USA, specifically the military and federal employees.

Perhaps Ford is the largest corporate employer health care provider.

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

Caveat, I'm talking out my ***. I don't think Ford is a "provider". FoMoCo has employees who through the company have access to healthcare insurance plans. They may be able to choose from many healthcare plans from multiple insurers as a benefit of being a Ford employee. Ford likely subsidizes or even provides at least a small insurance plan for "free" as a benefit of working there. However, that employee then goes to an actual doctor for actual healthcare. That doctor (or NP, or holistic practitioner, or PA, or whoever) is the "provider". He/she can be a single individual in private practice or just one of a hundred working at a local hospital.

Ford is just a car company (YES, I KNOW THEY SELL TRACTORS AND TSHIRTS AND ALL SORTS OF OTHER **** TOO, **** OFF!).

However, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Ford_Hospital this place seems pretty legit.

Schroedinger

Told to me by a relative who was a lifer in HR at Ford, and whose main job it was to negotiate with the labor unions. He's been retired a while so the information may be dated. But you have to remember that they self-insure for health insurance, and provide full-boat benefits not only to employees but to all past employees with pensions going back to the 1950's.

Whether or not it's true depends on how you frame the question. Largest private provider, largest corporate provider, etc. I don't know. All I know is that it's millions of people, which leads to a pretty eye-popping cost.

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

Ford may collectively have the largest number of people under the umbrella that they play a role in their health coverage.
The term "provider" is reserved for people who actually practice medicine.
Ford is not a "provider" as it relates to the medical industry.

https://www.fordretireebenefits.com/home/

According to the website, for uses...
Medical: Blue Cross, Blue Shield of Michigan
Dental: Metlife, Midwestern, and United Concordia
Vision: Davis Vision

Somebody can click on the "COMPARE YOUR MEDICAL PLAN OPTION" and tell me if it's any good.

If you listen to Michael Moore though, the soclialized medicine in Cuba is way better than what we've got. I will openly complain about the absurdity of some medical regulations... like the fact that my CPAP is a "medical device" and you need a prescription to buy one. You don't need a prescription to buy an ambulance, but a CPAP, oh yeah, gotta make sure they don't fall into the wrong hands.

hks_kansei

I'd lean towards agreeing with that to a degree.

From what I understand about the US healthcare system (and it's worth noting, i've never actually been to the US, so the secondhand info i'm going from may be way out of the ballpark)
Also worth noting that I come from a nation which has government provided healthcare, and private healthcare.


But it seems like the privatized nature of it (and hospitals) leads to a huge amount of wastage and increased costs.

Since insurers are paying the bills it's in the interest of hospitals/drug cos to have high prices to make more profit, and to also prescribe/use a lot of the drugs/equipment regardless of need.
And you end up with a system where the medical providers, and the insurance providers, essentially can hold the end consumer (the patient) to ransom.




Here in Aust there's 2 tiers of cover, government (medicare) and private.

Everybody is entitled to Medicare, which is levied at 2% of your taxable income (plus an additional 1% to 1.5% if your income is >$90K, and you do NOT have private health insurance)
Private health insurance tends to be around about $3-5k per year, less a government discount which is means tested

Medicare covers hospital visits in full, covers most of a doctor visit (some places bulk bill, so it covers the whole lot), and also reduces the costs of a lot of medications. It does not cover dental.
Private healthcover gives you access to private hospitals, and covers additional stuff like yoga and crap, and covers dental (all to a certain point, usually you still end up with an out of pocket cost from most things)

As a rough example, last time I went to the doctor a 30min consultation was $30, a thing of ventolin was $10, and when I went to the ER to have my finger put back together it was free.




How do the US costs rank in comparison?

Cost of health insurance premiums:
Cost of a doctor's visit:
Cost of a basic presciption (say ventolin for asthma):
Cost of an ER visit for a basic injury:


the way people in Aust talk, it sounds like in the US if you break a leg and cant afford insurance you may as well just die.

z31maniac

It largely depends on how good the coverage you have through your employer is, assuming you're not poor on Medicaid or old and on Medicare. Then do you have an HMO/PPO-type plan or an HSA-type plan.

For example, I work for a very large, international software/IT company. Our health benefits are AMAZING. My girlfriend was diagnosed with Rheumatoid Arthritis almost 2 years ago (she is on my health insurance). These medicines are horrifically expensive, even with my HSA plan, we pay nothing out of pocket for what equals up to tens of thousands of dollars in medicine per year.

I share part of the resistance to "Medicare for all" because that **** wouldn't be nearly as good as what I have now. And that's how a lot of Americans feel.............."Wait, you guys can't handle keeping the pot holes fixed, but now you want to control healthcare?"

bahurd

iTrader: (8)

Decent read on healthcare “for all” using private system; Netherlands universal health care with a private market

For me...

Currently on Medicare so $400/qtr (Part A) + $165/mo (Part B) + $28/mo (Part D)

I pay nothing out of pocket.

Prior to Medicare. Self-employed with pre-existing condition so forget private health insurance for anything related to the pre-exisitng condition.

Annual cost of “insurance” for both me and my wife = $27,000 (ACA because of pre-existing condition)
Annual deductible = $7,500 each so $15K
Doctor visit = $50

My pre-existing condition was for something that happend 19 years ago with no occurence since. But... if something related happened to put me in the hospital it could easily cost $250K+

For a year, my wife bought private insurance to get the cost down. Pre paid $6,000 annual policy. 1st claim denied because she forgot to disclose a prior pinched nerve which the insurance deemed “related” to her claim.

If the US ever moves to “universal health care” most employers will pay to move the employees off their backs because of costs.