USPS and unions

[Embar Angylwrath]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... print.html

In a nutshell, the USPS is broke. If it were a private enterprise, it would have filed for bankruptcy protection. Since it isn't, it has to ask Congress for changes. And guess what.. the labor unions are throwing a fit over that, because the changes require (OMG) reductions in personnel and benefits... just like every other non-governmental arganization has to grapple with.

This is a great example of how PSUs are breaking the back of governments. They don't want to "pay their fair share" a mantra commonly spouted from the left. They'd rather drive the organization into the ground. And when I say this, I don't mean rank and file union members, who I think are, for thelarge part, decent people. It's the union leaders that guide them. Its not hard to see the vested interest they have in shifting tax dollars from your pocket to their members.

[MeGusta]

I think that "pay their fair share" has been lost on you. Postal workers are hardly in the top 5% of the nations wealthiest.

I do, however, think that the USPS is a dinosaur and must change rapidly or become extinct.

[Embar Angylwrath]

More union antics againt free speech/

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/08/ ... cket-line/

@ MeGusta... nevermind.. you're a troll.

[Jarochai Alabaster]

How on earth do you get "more union antics againt free speech" from that article?

[Kulaf]

Since when can unions demonstrate in front of businesses to pressure workers to form a union?

[Ddrak]

This is a great example of how PSUs are breaking the back of governments. They don't want to "pay their fair share" a mantra commonly spouted from the left. They'd rather drive the organization into the ground.

No - it's an example of how one PSU is behaving badly, and I can show just as many examples of non-public unions behaving exactly as badly. In fact, we have very little manufacturing left over here thanks to Union abuse. I still maintain that all workers have the fundamental right to bargain collectively if they choose to do so.

Its not hard to see the vested interest they have in shifting tax dollars from your pocket to their members.

Isn't that exactly WHY you form a union? To get more dollars in your paycheck? I take it you're suggesting that workers don't have a right to bargain for higher pay, or did you just not think your statement through?


I'm wondering the same thing as Jaro as well - which free speech were you talking about in that article? I despise picket lines as a general rule, especially when they are to force adoption of a union from external interests but I don't see a limitation of freedom of speech here?

Dd

[MeGusta]

@ MeGusta... nevermind.. you're a troll.

Oh yes, I am a troll. Apparently trolls have a way better grasp of what democrats mean when they say "Pay their fair share" than you do. You should aspire to troll, your current offering have been colorless and entirely without merit.

[Embar Angylwrath]

The police union targeting people who honk horns at another union's members.. that's the union antic against free speech. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.


@Dd - When I said "lining the pockets"... I meant lining the pockets of union leadership. They go and get unsustainable pay and benefits for tehir members, so the members keep them in their well paid positions. Not knowing or understanding that they are ultimiately doing a disservice to the union members, since, as you so rightly pointed out, they end up destroying the company that employs them (no more manufacturing due to unions...).

[Lurker]

The police union targeting people who honk horns at another union's members.. that's the union antic against free speech. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.

You misread (didn't bother to read) the article you posted. The horn honking was in support of the union demonstration.

[Ddrak]

The police union targeting people who honk horns at another union's members.. that's the union antic against free speech. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.


@Dd - When I said "lining the pockets"... I meant lining the pockets of union leadership. They go and get unsustainable pay and benefits for tehir members, so the members keep them in their well paid positions. Not knowing or understanding that they are ultimiately doing a disservice to the union members, since, as you so rightly pointed out, they end up destroying the company that employs them (no more manufacturing due to unions...).

Pretty sure the police union had nothing to do with ticketing people? That was just cops enforcing the law in a not-so-thoughtful way.

And yes - that's the part of unions that I detest and why I generally vote to keep unions small when I can.

Dd

[Partha]

It's always....interesting.....to watch Embar hack on unions and the poor.

They go and get unsustainable pay and benefits for tehir members

The real question is, WHY is it 'unsustainable'? After all, postal workers have been unionized for over 40 years. They've been to the bargaining table 88 times, and 64 of those 88, both sides agreed to the deal. When was the magic point it became 'unsustainable'? No one can say, until they look at today.

Of course, the number one reason the USPS is suffering is not that they pay their workers too much, but that they collect too little revenue for what they do. After all, if you go and compare, a UPS driver can make more than a USPS mailman - USPS mailmen have a higher floor, but a lower ceiling to their salary. The difference is, UPS does not have to carry bulk mail or nonprofit mail and give it a discount. Well, that and the USPS has to account to a regulatory commission enacted by law. UPS doesn't have to jump through hoops anytime they want to change prices.

But, since Embar is impervious to facts that don't fit his narrative, it doesn't matter, now does it?

[Kulaf]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArzS-nGiTPs

[Partha]

Funny how you saw that part about spending more than they're taking in and automatically thought the only solution was to privatize the police departments and shit, right?

[Jarochai Alabaster]

I like how they only give the individual employee cost figure for police, and still don't mention what the retirement benefits cost on their own. They also never give a comparison for what other programs the cities are spending on, what revenue sources they have or the amounts of their revenues. Or, for that matter, the opinion of any other economist beyond that one fag (We all heard him - total poofter*) who squarely blames pensions.

If the cities need to downsize their police staff and they aren't seeing an increase in crime - cool. If retirement packages are breaking the bank, raise the retirement age and cut back on the packages 10 or 20%. Maybe increase ticket fines. Maybe increase local sales and road taxes. Maybe tighten up the tax laws around those marijuana dispensaries.

I love how everyone's screaming "There's a problem!" and apparently can't come up with any solution other than just eliminating benefits altogether. WTF ever happened to middle ground and compromise? WTF ever happened to creative solutions?


*And why the fuck does Chrome constantly tell me I'm spelling shit wrong when I'm not, but it leaves "poofter" unmolested?!

[MeGusta]

The union is not bankrupting the postal service. The business model is. It is easier to blame the workers instead of the management, though.

[Kulaf]

I don't think either Partha or Jaro can grasp this situation. This has nothing to do with unions. The problem is pensions. It just happens that the only people who seem to have/depend on pensions are either public serivce or private unions......so you think I am picking on them.

The unsustainable model here is employers paying money to people they no longer employ.

[Embar Angylwrath]

It's always....interesting.....to watch Embar hack on unions and the poor.

They go and get unsustainable pay and benefits for tehir members

The real question is, WHY is it 'unsustainable'? After all, postal workers have been unionized for over 40 years. They've been to the bargaining table 88 times, and 64 of those 88, both sides agreed to the deal. When was the magic point it became 'unsustainable'? No one can say, until they look at today.

Of course, the number one reason the USPS is suffering is not that they pay their workers too much, but that they collect too little revenue for what they do. After all, if you go and compare, a UPS driver can make more than a USPS mailman - USPS mailmen have a higher floor, but a lower ceiling to their salary. The difference is, UPS does not have to carry bulk mail or nonprofit mail and give it a discount. Well, that and the USPS has to account to a regulatory commission enacted by law. UPS doesn't have to jump through hoops anytime they want to change prices.

But, since Embar is impervious to facts that don't fit his narrative, it doesn't matter, now does it?

I'm quite aware the USPS isn't getting the revenues it once did. And so it has to change if it wants to survive. But the union doesn't really want to participate in the change. They'd rather have 100% of nothing than 50% of something.

[Jarochai Alabaster]

I don't think either Partha or Jaro can grasp this situation. This has nothing to do with unions. The problem is pensions. It just happens that the only people who seem to have/depend on pensions are either public serivce or private unions......so you think I am picking on them.

The unsustainable model here is employers paying money to people they no longer employ.

Where did I say you're picking on unions? Seriously, show me what I said that in any way suggests anything of the sort. The only time I even used the word "union" in this thread was to point out that Embar's link to the "honk if you support unions" thread didn't show anything at all relating to "more union antics againt free speech."

Did you even bother to read my post in response to the report you linked?

[MeGusta]

I'm quite aware the USPS isn't getting the revenues it once did. And so it has to change if it wants to survive. But the union doesn't really want to participate in the change. They'd rather have 100% of nothing than 50% of something.

The union should throw a fit. The management of the USPS is going after the low hanging fruit which is wages and benefits instead of going after fundamental business model changes that would make the system sustainable in the long term.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I'm quite aware the USPS isn't getting the revenues it once did. And so it has to change if it wants to survive. But the union doesn't really want to participate in the change. They'd rather have 100% of nothing than 50% of something.

The union should throw a fit. The management of the USPS is going after the low hanging fruit which is wages and benefits instead of going after fundamental business model changes that would make the system sustainable in the long term.

LOL... wages and benefits are part of any business model. And they are looking at other issues too, not just wages and benefits. Guess you're too educated to know that. They are looking at streamlining branch locations (they don't need them all now), eliminating Saturday delivery (unions threw a fit over that) http://www.nalc.org/postal/reform/index.html and the USPS backed off.

Read that site carefully, if your education didn't already cover that in genius class. You'll see just how the union mindset works. Look at the blurb where the unions just don't care whether or not their future healthcare is funded or not.. they point to the obligation of all ratepayers to reimburse USPS for costs, even if there is no money. If that isn't a grand example of "fuck you, we got ours", I don't know what is.