Originally Posted By nemopoppins retlawfan, in your post 13, you prove my point that unions are still necessary. And you also illustrate that even if you or a certain amount of individuals are willing or able to find a limited better situation elsewhere, it still leaves the labor market depressed because of the inequality in power. Since most of us do agree that while it might not immorally be the object of a company to maximize profits, it is immoral to agree with rampant profitmongering at the expense of the quality of human lives. Thus, unions are necessary and we should be, in general, pro-union.
Originally Posted By retlawfan I don't know about "rampant profitmongering" by Disney, as that is not my point. Free market economies work when they are just that, free. What the profits of the company are, is not the issue. The issue is should a union, or anyone else for that matter, dictate to a company what they should be paying their employees. To that my answer is no. Employees are free to accept employment or not. If they choose to work for $10, $15, or even $50 per hour, it is their choice to accept the job or not. As far as safety concerns are involved, the original and very important reason for unions to be formed, we now have many levels of government to take care of that, such as OSHA.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>I don't know about "rampant profitmongering" by Disney, as that is not my point. Free market economies work when they are just that, free. What the profits of the company are, is not the issue. The issue is should a union, or anyone else for that matter, dictate to a company what they should be paying their employees.<< You're talking in circles. You speak of freedom, yet you maintain that workers should be deprived of the freedom to form unions. Companies and unions are both organizations formed by individuals to maximize their profit potential, yet according to you one's OK and the other isn't. The issue is also should a company, or anyone else for that matter, dictate to a union what they are going to pay for their labor. (World Events, here we come.)
Originally Posted By retlawfan <<Companies and unions are both organizations formed by individuals to maximize their profit potential, yet according to you one's OK and the other isn't.>> You make a good point here. I never thought of it that way. I guess the difference is who gets to decide how much anyone is permitted to earn? Is it up to the Union leadership that the CEO or stockholders makes too much, and that more should go to the workers? What would they base this on? To look at this a little differently, Do you ever go to the grocery store? If the grocery store stated that they wanted to charge 20% more for all your groceries, because they thought you made too much money, would you continue to shop there, or would you cross the street to where groceries are now 20% cheaper? Why is that any different than employment? If you can make more up the street, why not go there?
Originally Posted By nemopoppins Let's see, in your free market terms, more people will buy food at store number two now. Store number two can raise its prices 19% and still have the price advantage. Uh oh, the poorest 10% of the people can't afford to satisfy their hunger any more, but that's okay because both stores are making at least 19% more than they used to while only losing 10% of their business. Gradually another store or two can open and each can charge 1% less until the market levels again. Several children died of starvation along the way but the market worked itself out. Plus, your two stores had a handy spike in profits along the way. Good thing 80% of the consumers who could afford to travel to the next town to shop weren't allowed to band together and boycott. That might have brought about a market correction too quickly and your stores wouldn't have gotten that extra profit that is the only meaningful object of a company.
Originally Posted By frailejon <<<<<^^From the above article: <<"It's changing my opinion of Disneyland," said tourist Amanda Kosato, who was visiting from north of Melbourne, Australia. "Taking away entitlements stinks.">> I wonder if this was an isolated opinion from the spectators or if it was/is shared by many more tourists.>>>>> You notice the woman quoted was from Australia, where they have socialized medicine. Most Australians I have run into are appalled (and rightly so, in my opinion) that not everyone in the US has health insurance.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>To look at this a little differently, Do you ever go to the grocery store? If the grocery store stated that they wanted to charge 20% more for all your groceries, because they thought you made too much money, would you continue to shop there, or would you cross the street to where groceries are now 20% cheaper? << Plus, you're assuming facts not in evidence - that there's a store across the street. Two other points to ponder: (1) Why *wouldn't* they go work at the higher-paying hotels in the same immediate area? Of course they would. I don't think Disney Magic is a factor when it comes to cleaning hotel rooms. There have to be other forces at work here. Since the turnover at DL is reportedly unnaturally high, I think it's safe to say that they are leaving when they can, and that Disney is taking advantage of an excess of unemployed unskilled labor, who perhaps can't get transportation to higher paying jobs in the field. Whether that's fair or not is, I guess, a matter of opinion. Seems to me that the wage savings for Disney wouldn't be worth the headache of training everybody else's hotel staff, but I'm not Disney. I wonder if there's some residual Eisnerism at play here? (2) nemopoppins's example works the other way too. As Anaheim's largest employer, Disney's keeping the wages and benefits unnaturally low affects the entire market. That's why it's worth it for union members from other hotels to join the picketing - even though they are making more money than the Disney folks, their wages and benefits are still being held lower than they probably should be because of Disney's intransigence. I should probably reiterate one more time that I think this particular union's leadership are idiots. Unfortunately being unskilled and uneducated can also extend to deciding who to vote for to lead your union.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Well it even hit the papers here in the UK! Pictures of Mickey, Peter Pan and Snow White being cuffed and into police cars. Personally I think employment rights are important, but sometimes Industrial Relations tactics are stupid. Everytime I have not liked what my employer has done, I have weighed up the advantages and disadvantages, and gone to another job if it were that bad. What these people are doing is terrible, and would probably do more harm than good.
Originally Posted By frailejon >>Since the turnover at DL is reportedly unnaturally high, I think it's safe to say that they are leaving when they can, and that Disney is taking advantage of an excess of unemployed unskilled labor, who perhaps can't get transportation to higher paying jobs in the field. Whether that's fair or not is, I guess, a matter of opinion.<< As I said before it's a particualirly stupid thing for DL to do something that causes high turnover; high turnover is a major financial issue for businesses due to ads, training and hiring. Where I work, they underpay -for many of the positions-compared to comparable places and as a result there is an extremely high turnover. I don't approve of this union's tactics, though for many reasons already listed. >>As far as safety concerns are involved, the original and very important reason for unions to be formed, we now have many levels of government to take care of that, such as OSHA. << Unions were also formed to help people make fair wages. Libertarians are fond of saying that there doesn't need to be a minimum wage law. Considering the problems people I know have had with mimimum wage laws at businesses- as well as overtime laws- this is ludicours wishful thinking. I grew up in a state with a strong history of unions. Even when I worked at Taco Bell workers knew basic labor laws. Here in Arizona, where unions are not very strong, I had to argue with someone as to whether time and a half (as a minimum; employers can pay more, of course) was required for overtime. I finally had to show her that labor law chart to prove it.
Originally Posted By nemopoppins >>>2) nemopoppins's example works the other way too. As Anaheim's largest employer, Disney's keeping the wages and benefits unnaturally low affects the entire market. That's why it's worth it for union members from other hotels to join the picketing - even though they are making more money than the Disney folks, their wages and benefits are still being held lower than they probably should be because of Disney's intransigence.<<< Oops, mawnk, I thought that's what I was saying in my posts, but you did put it much better. I do wish the union representing the DLR hotel workers hadn't made the same mistake. They had an important message but their attempt at expressing it may have actually caused opposition to their noble cause.
Originally Posted By retlawfan OK, folks. I guess we just don't see eye to eye. You know my opinion now. I believe the Employer has a choice as to how much to offer employees, the employees have a choice as to what they'll accept, and the consumer can decide to support the company or not. All individual choices. Also, regarding this original story. my opinion about unions aside, they certainly don't help their case when they inconvenience so many people in the process of the protests. If people want to protest something, which they have every right to do, they should do it where they do not get into so many peoples way. I think this ends up hurting their cause in the end. For example, when there were protesters who scaled the Golden Gate bridge during the Olympic torch relay, and they caused a huge traffic back up, more drivers interviewed were angry at the protest than sympathetic to the cause. Maybe these groups just need a better PR firm...
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt I'm not sure how anyone could argue in favor of the unions in this case. They are completely out of line in their tactics in this instance and the reasons why are beyond obvious.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<OK, folks. I guess we just don't see eye to eye. You know my opinion now. I believe the Employer has a choice as to how much to offer employees, the employees have a choice as to what they'll accept, and the consumer can decide to support the company or not. All individual choices. >> Except that some individuals are more equal than others. Large corporations have a lot more power than indivdual people.
Originally Posted By nemopoppins Please don't fault the workers. I hope they do get their fair wage scale and their healthcare. Maybe their representatives did make a big mistake with this protest, but they can still win in negotiations. And Disney isn't all bad; there's a lot they do right. A whole lot, or we wouldn't even be here. I think I'll leave a bigger tip next time I stay at the DLH.
Originally Posted By retlawfan <<And Disney isn't all bad; there's a lot they do right. A whole lot, or we wouldn't even be here.>> Very true. And, if they ever do just cross that line where people feel they are not being fair to their employees, we all have the choice and maybe even the responsibility to no longer give them our business. I don't think they've crossed that line, but I do recognize that it is possible. <<I think I'll leave a bigger tip next time I stay at the DLH.>> Good idea. I try to leave a very decent tip for the hourly employees who work at Disney - from waiters to housekeeping. I try to do what I can, and I know that every bit helps.
Originally Posted By jdub <<I try to leave a very decent tip>> But, WHY? If the employees think they deserve more money than their basic wage provides, they should either get a second job, or find work in another profession!
Originally Posted By nemopoppins Ooh, jdub. Don't get me started. Really, there is no room in our economy for EVERYONE to have such opportunity. And what would we do if everyone could leave the housekeeping? Ah, I did know that mentioning the tip thing would open up a whole new can of worms.
