Society/Culture Why do the working class hate unions?

Remove this Banner Ad

Thegibbsgamble said:
Long service leave
Maternity leave
Sick leave
Superannuation
Oh@s
Public Holidays

All things uniuns fought for.

If you don't like uniuns, go on, give them things up. Put your money where your mouth is scab.
Click to expand...

Living off faded glory is part of the unions problem, if they were running the Essendon or Carlton membership campaign it would go something

Join because we were once AFL powerhouses with 16 premierships most of them won before the introduction of color TV.
 
Bombermania said:
Living off faded glory is part of the unions problem, if they were running the Essendon or Carlton membership campaign it would go something

Join because we were once AFL powerhouses with 16 premierships most of them won before the introduction of color TV.
Click to expand...
Hang on. This thread is about how working class people did not support unionism, and eventually they themselves got screwed for that.

Faded glory, Yep. But doesn't that beg the question that the working class shot themselves in the foot when they followed the tropes of newscorp and left the unions?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

RegHickeyStand said:
Hang on. This thread is about how working class people did not support unionism, and eventually they themselves got screwed for that.

Faded glory, Yep. But doesn't that beg the question that the working class shot themselves in the foot when they followed the tropes of newscorp and left the unions?
Click to expand...
The working class haven't left unions, the working class left unionized industries and the unions haven't followed.

The modern working class includes white collar jobs, even some management roles.
 
RegHickeyStand said:
You do understand unions are made up of workers? People unionize. Or they don't.
Click to expand...
Don't patronize me with your bullshit. How do you expect workplaces with less than 5 employees to unionize without external assistance?
 
Nuggs Bunny said:
Don't patronize me with your bullshit. How do you expect workplaces with less than 5 employees to unionize without external assistance?
Click to expand...

Try to be civil. Everyone who doesn't share your beliefs isn't necessarily a bad person.

Over the past 10 years in the building industry, I have dealt with plenty of building companies with much larger workforce and who are not unionized. I'm talking white collar workers. And they get nowhere near the money the unionized tradies get.

When I first started in the workforce many years ago most were in a union. Example would be a person working for a large enterprise goes to a small company. He doesn't drop his union card. He still works under the award. His boss knew it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

RegHickeyStand said:
Hang on. This thread is about how working class people did not support unionism, and eventually they themselves got screwed for that.

Faded glory, Yep. But doesn't that beg the question that the working class shot themselves in the foot when they followed the tropes of newscorp and left the unions?
Click to expand...

The nature of the working class has changed, the earlier working class were mostly European so they had a culture of us against them but more recent migrants and younger people (under 35) have a culturally different view towards work and for many wages are far higher than what earlier generations enjoyed.

Historically workers saw themselves as staying in their place but if you say to a 25 or 30 year old today that you are a worker so don't go looking for career progression to management, they will give you a funny look, the other thing is what constitutes work, there is an increasing part of the working population in jobs that is not considered work by old timers in the union movement.

This may sound bleak but there will always be a place for unions but they need to do a better job of connecting with today's workforce.
 
Bombermania said:
Living off faded glory is part of the unions problem, if they were running the Essendon or Carlton membership campaign it would go something

Join because we were once AFL powerhouses with 16 premierships most of them won before the introduction of color TV.
Click to expand...
I challenge you to try and consider the other side of the coin. The faded glory of the union movement was not purely self inflicted. Just ask yourself who benefits the most from a fractured weak labour movement? Workers? Union bosses? Business owners? Just read the history of labour relations in this country. It's all there.

We have just exited to golden age of the current market system. Unions are not as vital when times are good but we are entering a new era.

You're mostly old land owning petit bourgeois on here so it doesn't really affect you. The young are realising they aren't getting a fair shake and they are rightfully pissed.
 
Steinfreo said:
I challenge you to try and consider the other side of the coin. The faded glory of the union movement was not purely self inflicted. Just ask yourself who benefits the most from a fractured weak labour movement? Workers? Union bosses? Business owners? Just read the history of labour relations in this country. It's all there.

We have just exited to golden age of the current market system. Unions are not as vital when times are good but we are entering a new era.

You're mostly old land owning petit bourgeois on here so it doesn't really affect you. The young are realising they aren't getting a fair shake and they are rightfully pissed.
Click to expand...

Young people might be unhappy with things but at this stage it hasn't translated into a surge in union membership.
 
Last edited:
Bombermania said:
Living off faded glory is part of the unions problem, if they were running the Essendon or Carlton membership campaign it would go something

Join because we were once AFL powerhouses with 16 premierships most of them won before the introduction of color TV.
Click to expand...
What more do you want unions to do?

The focus now seems to be more on defending hard won rights rather than trying to fight for greater benefits. Finding the right balance between mid/lower level employees and their employer is nothing like winning AFL premierships.

It's a symbiotic relationship with the goal of benefiting all involved parties. For some reason, the right seem to be offended by that idea.
 
Evolved1 said:
What more do you want unions to do?

The focus now seems to be more on defending hard won rights rather than trying to fight for greater benefits. Finding the right balance between mid/lower level employees and their employer is nothing like winning AFL premierships.

It's a symbiotic relationship with the goal of benefiting all involved parties. For some reason, the right seem to be offended by that idea.
Click to expand...

The comment was "part of the problem"

When you are asking people for high yearly fees then what that person is looking at what value does that service offer for tomorrow but some unionists seem to think that what they did and in some cases decades ago is all that matters and while it is important to have a history just as Essendon and Carlton do but unions need to focus more on today and how they can benefit members which of course some unions already do.
 
Evolved1 said:
What more do you want unions to do?

The focus now seems to be more on defending hard won rights rather than trying to fight for greater benefits. Finding the right balance between mid/lower level employees and their employer is nothing like winning AFL premierships.

It's a symbiotic relationship with the goal of benefiting all involved parties. For some reason, the right seem to be offended by that idea.
Click to expand...
They don’t have any near the power they once did after Gillard and shorten set up fair work. Now companies can make greenfield agreement leaving unions out of it and a casualised work force.
 
Bombermania said:
The nature of the working class has changed, the earlier working class were mostly European so they had a culture of us against them but more recent migrants and younger people (under 35) have a culturally different view towards work and for many wages are far higher than what earlier generations enjoyed.

Historically workers saw themselves as staying in their place but if you say to a 25 or 30 year old today that you are a worker so don't go looking for career progression to management, they will give you a funny look, the other thing is what constitutes work, there is an increasing part of the working population in jobs that is not considered work by old timers in the union movement.

This may sound bleak but there will always be a place for unions but they need to do a better job of connecting with today's workforce.
Click to expand...
I'm learning reading this thread. Hadn't thought about it in this detail.

Some of the most unionist characters I came across in my early working life were low and mid level clerks. I remember one guy who was a manager and also a unionist tell his state manager boss when he went out on strike with the rest and not stick with management (he was in charge of 50), "I gotta work every day with these guys, you don't"

And every shop steward I saw in the factories had a pommie accent and a chip on his shoulder. Especially the good ones lol

Now the only union people I know are CFMEU onsite tradies. They work in the factories but are always looking for union conditions and pay.

The big end of town spent years in politics and brainwashing in the media and restructuring the workforce to emasculate the unions. The unions had something they wanted: wage money. And they wanted it.
 
QuietB said:
So what is the "structural problem"?
Click to expand...

the structural problem with most government departments are:
- poorly motivated staff
- silo approach and demarcation
- cover your arse mentality rather than effectiveness
- change of government = change of management direction

If we were to buy into a conspiracy theory re ASIC, we wouldn't see the systematic failure across so many departments. Instead it's just a structural problem of how departments are run, structured and operate.
 
It's a pretty simple decision making process for most people.

Q1. Is there a union presence in your field/place of employment that you know of? If yes proceed to Q2.

Q2. Do you believe being a union member will positively impact your employment, and by extension do you believe not being a union member will negatively impact your employment?

How many people say 'yes' to both of those questions?
 
Power Raid said:
the structural problem with most government departments are:
- poorly motivated staff
- silo approach and demarcation
- cover your arse mentality rather than effectiveness
- change of government = change of management direction

If we were to buy into a conspiracy theory re ASIC, we wouldn't see the systematic failure across so many departments. Instead it's just a structural problem of how departments are run, structured and operate.
Click to expand...

That isn't much different than what one finds in many corporate or medium size businesses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

nut
Why do countries with high union memberships have happy countries?
2
Replies
43
Views
1K
GreyWind
GreyWind
Rotayjay
Society/Culture Working from home vs forced back to the office
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
278
Views
16K
peetoo
peetoo
Chief
Society/Culture The Impact of AI on Society, School, and Work
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
149
Views
9K
Number37
Number37
S
Society/Culture Which is the best unbiased media outlet in Australia?
2 3
Replies
52
Views
3K
ElectricG
ElectricG
Carringbush2010
Society/Culture Why do less intelligent people gravitate towards fringe extremist views?
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
314
Views
12K
Spearman
Spearman
Blue Arrow
Covid-19 Covid Inquiry, why no Royal Commission?
Replies
23
Views
1K
Werewolf
Werewolf
Grin
Society/Culture Why do less intelligent people gravitate to conservative/right wing ideology.
76 77 78 79 80
Replies
2K
Views
68K
Chief
Chief

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top