Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (189289)	10/4/2001 5:53:32 PM
From: Bob	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769669

Everyone already has that ability on their own. A union is not required for that. BobP

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (189289)	10/4/2001 6:42:37 PM
From: Srexley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769669

That's a legit response. Giving a worker security is a tangeable benefit. Whether it is worth the membership dues I would not know without seeing what a company has offered. I have responded to you in the past about my dislike for unions, but I do have respect for Joe worker and want him (or her) to have stability and make an honest wage. My main beef with unions is that they reinforce the false notion (imo) that people need the union to succeed. They may have once, but not anymore imo. A smart company will treat their employees fairly because in most cases they are the companies' greatest asset. If someone is unhappy with their situation they can go to another company. I know that is not always easy, but almost nothing in life is. The unions do little (more like nothing imo) to encourage the individuals to advance. They foster the false notion that "you can't succeed without us". They make the management the enemy, and the most succesful companies don't have that adversarial relationship between worker and management. Is there anything other than the written contract?