Ubnionism and racist immigration policy

@Wilso,

Amen Wilso.

I am a strong union supporter...that being said, they have been by no means perfect, and many unions have lobbied and fought hard against immigration, believing that immigrant workers (especially Asians and Africans, eg) will work for low wages and in poor conditions, thus destroying conditions for home born workers.

Also, they have often reflected the racist views of society at large.

The union movement here was a key force in maintaining the so-called "White Australia Policy" right up until the late sixties/early seventies.

But I am still sticking to the union!

1 Reply

@dlowan,

I'm not suggesting they're perfect. You only have to go back to the old BLF days to see that. But as far as immigration/work visas etc are concerned these days, most of what I hear from the union movement is demands that foreign workers are not exploited. ie. That they get the same benefits as any employee.

1 Reply

@Wilso,

Well, here's where it becomes important to listen to the people whom the union activism is supposed to benefit. Granted, one consequence of paying immigrants the same wages as the natives is that some immigrants get a raise, compared to a world without unions. But another consequence is that other immigrants get priced out of the Australian labor market and must stay home, condemned by the Australian unions to work for much lower wages than the laissez-faire, non-union wage in Australia would be. These locked-out wannabe immigrants would strongly disagree that Australian unions are doing them a favor.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Australian unions no longer prevent immigration.

The government decides who will come in, based on a balance between humane and economic forces.

Australian unions ARE forces in attempting to prevent foreign workers from being exploited when they get here.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

That doesn't change the effect, which is to prevent some willing workers from getting there in the first place -- because there is no work for them in Australia for wages that would be attractive for them, but are considered exploitation by Australian workers.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

What on earth are you saying?

That a country has no right to determine minimum working conditions?

If that IS what you are saying, there is no point in further discussion between us on this matter, because our principles are clearly not within conversational distance here.

Do you think that Australia asks people if they are willing to work for next to nothing in sweatshops and says you can't come in if they say yes?

That we prosecute workers being exploited sewing together haute couture in their homes for a couple of dollars a day?

2 Replies

@dlowan,

A good point and one which will be visited, of course, by our new Supreme Court Judge--Sotomayor -during the Supreme Court's 2009-2010's season.

The political calculus, of course, is whether decisions benefitting immigrants will gain more votes for Obuma than a decision slowing down immigrant access to jobs will do. It must be remembered that Obuma received only 48% of the White Vote.

0 Replies

@dlowan,

The starting point for this sub-thread was the claim that unions benefit foreign workers. I am saying that to evaluate this claim, you have to look at the actual consequences to all foreign workers -- including those who would be immigrating without union policies, but can't come because of them.

Unions exist to benefit their members. One benefit of unions to their members is that they keep wages high -- by, among other things, excluding competition that might undercut them. Although I would indeed prefer completely open immigration, and would indeed prefer minimal legal restrictions on wages, that's not the point I'm arguing at the moment. For the moment, I'll settle for calling things what they are: Australian unions benefit their own (domestic) members, benefit some foreigners, and hurt other. That's their right. But there's no need to pretend they are doing foreign workers, as a group, a favor.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Quote:

Unions exist to benefit their members. One benefit of unions to their members is that they keep wages high -- by, among other things, excluding competition that might undercut them.

Unions... excluding? How is this not an contradiction in terms?

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

Okay, let me address your hair-splitting by rephrasing the sentence: "One benefit of unions to their members is that they keep wages high -- by, among other things, excluding from their members' labor markets competition from non-members that might undercut them."

Better?

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Not hairsplitting at all Thomas.. it is a strategic truth.

Unions have always had membership drives with the goal of getting as many people in a labor market as possible to join the union.

Times have changed since the days it was possible to combine this with nationalism and make union only include workers from one country. Labor market can no longer be defined by country.

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

Quote:

Labor market can no longer be defined by country.

Then why is the AFL-CIO supporting the "Buy America" campaign? If the whole world is one big labor market, that makes no sense, does it?

1 Reply

@Thomas,

And, Mr. Thomas, after the Administration has bumbled through the GM mess, it appears likely that the new organization( GOVERNMENT MOTORS) has decided to OUTSOURCE a good deal of their production.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas, these days surely it's more a matter of unions attempting to retain jobs for their members. "Keeping wages high" is a bit of a pipe dream in the current economic climate.

3 Replies

@msolga,

Msolga--surely, one of the problems which caused GM to implode was the ridiculous fringe benefits( pay even when not working) GM granted to the Union to keep the peace. The truth is that the greedy GM workers shot themselves in the foot and they are now reaping the whirlwind while Toyota in the southern states of the US has grabbed a large portion of the market share.

0 Replies

@msolga,

You've got a point there, MsOlga.

0 Replies

@msolga,

Unions have generally done a very poor job of retaining the jobs of their members. Indeed most of the industries that unions in this country have infected are now dead or dying. (In nature an intelligent parasite does not usually kill its host: unions, it turns out, are very primitive parasites that kill theirs.) It is no accident that the current head of the AFL/CIO is the former head of the Government Employees Union.

Unions are just a legally sanctioned way of suppressing competition in the labor market. They provide a temporary benefit for the "insiders" (that is until the company fails), and do so at the expense of the "outsiders" whether immigrants or others.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Unions have generally done a very poor job of retaining the jobs of their members. Indeed most of the industries that unions in this country have infected are now dead or dying. (In nature an intelligent parasite does not usually kill its host: unions, it turns out, are very primitive parasites that kill theirs.) It is no accident that the current head of the AFL/CIO is the former head of the Government Employees Union.

Unions are just a legally sanctioned way of suppressing competition in the labor market. They provide a temporary benefit for the "insiders" (that is until the company fails), and do so at the expense of the "outsiders" whether immigrants or others.

BULL-*******-****.

1 Reply

@Wilso,

It's always nice to hear a factual, reasoned argument from a union supporter.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

It's always nice to hear a factual, reasoned argument from a union supporter.

I'm not just a union supporter asshole. I'm a union member. Thanks to my membership in a union, I earn roughly $250 a week more than non-union members. Should I give it up and lower the living standards of my family just to keep a fascist **** like you happy? Maybe you'd like to provide some evidence to back up your worthless rant. I didn't see anything reasoned in your pile of ******* drivel. Just an obvious ideological union opponent.

1 Reply

Ubnionism and racist immigration policy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know