quote:

And I'm supposed to be incensed about the longshoremen who works 90+ hours a week and pulls down well over six figures because society tells me that man should make dogshit compared to a college graduate? Kiss my ass. Good for these guys.

I'm happy that these guys got their due.

Bunch of butt hurt people upset about the blue collar man getting a damn good wage. Get over it.

You really think it's about classism? I'm blue collar or gray collar. It took my entire working career to break $40 and I hold a degree, license, and multiple certifications. They are crying about getting $40 p/h and threatening to shut down the economy.

I'm butt hurt about extortion. As for union workers, maybe they are different in other lines of work, but the only experience I have with them is being annoyed waiting for them to finish their multitude of breaks and work their 4-5hrs a day they do actually work.

So there you go that's why this blue collar worker who works in a job that can kill you every day you show up or requires 12+ hour days and typically works (actually works non-stop) for 50-60hrs a week thinks they are whiny entitled babies. They should be grateful to have a good job like that. Not threatening to bring the economy to a halt. I don't think we should bow down to mobsters.

quote:

Personally, I'm all for blue collar workers making what they can. Considering the cash higher ed and .gov workers pull down for destroying this country........yeah, not bothered on the money issue at all.

So, These guys should make more than the person who drops 100K++ on education so they can teach your kids so maybe they don't have to work manual labor. How about the public works guy who patches your roads or runs the equipment that re-paves them, or plows your snow...they don't make what these guys are gonna pull down... But yeah, they are paid by our taxes so who needs them...

60

I think they are overpaid. If they hate the OT etc. I'km sure there are plenty of legal workers that would love to make 85 k after 6 years.

They have been making crazy money for ever!
https://www.latimes.com/busine...-20150301-story.html

I find it strange that they just say 63 percent and don't mention that its over 6 years. Still a huge yearly raise

quote:

Originally posted by 1860ARMY:

So, These guys should make more than the person who drops 100K++ on education so they can teach your kids so maybe they don't have to work manual labor. How about the public works guy who patches your roads or runs the equipment that re-paves them, or plows your snow...they don't make what these guys are gonna pull down... But yeah, they are paid by our taxes so who needs them...

60

Its more accurate to see that this is a niche situation where they have a unique hold on the country at the moment, and are leveraging it. I don't condone what they're doing or their leadership, but long-term these dudes will all largely be replaced by robots.

Yes, I much more despise the high paid parasites who are in higher ed or .gov, who contribute nothing to our country and are actually participating in our demise.

I'm a blue collar guy who gets overlooked just like the trades you mentioned. No one calls me a hero when I walk into an all-glass 12 story office building in downtown Fort Lauderdale, summertime and the chiller(s) have been down for a couple hours.

Even when I get the machines running again.

Can't wait for them to be on the unemployment line because they were too stupid to see what they had was absolutely awesome. Sometimes folks like this get wrapped up in the nonsense that the upper echelon of the Union tell them without thinking it all the way through. Gonna be funny watching them cry foul after their own actions put them out of work!

quote:

Originally posted by soflaac:
Personally, I'm all for blue collar workers making what they can. Considering the cash higher ed and .gov workers pull down for destroying this country........yeah, not bothered on the money issue at all.

Long term these dudes jobs are going away no matter how hard they squeeze us currently. Thats reality.

Demand like theirs are what is destroying this country. This is more that "we need to earn enough in order to live." This is a Union President living in a multi million dollar mansion and threatening to shut down a country.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
butt hurt about extortion.

On this, I'm pretty sure we can all agree.

quote:

Originally posted by Rightwire:
Shutting down a country for a 62% wage increase is extortion. There is no other way to describe it. No other job segment other than a UAW organized one could demand a ridiculous wage increase like that.

And on that, too.

- - - -

I've never worked in a union environment (thankfully), but I can guarantee you that if I had ever told any of my employers I wasn't going to work unless they caved to my demands, I'd have been on the street quicker than a cat can lick its @$$, probably with a boot print on my butt.

That union president's brazen speech about "we will cripple you, you need us" sort of reminded me of the old joke about the body parts debating over who was going to be the boss... the butthole won because he threatened to stop everything else up.

When they pulled that shit here they just shut down the port and the ships went elsewhere.

More than just the union slobs lost out on that one.
Lots of trucking went away also.
Drivers out of work and we lost of a lot of truck traffic in the shop.

I thought I read that Desantis had elected to send in the Guard to man the Florida port(s), but the dock workers signed a temp back to work agreement.

I was interested to see how much their membership would react to the ports in Florida being at least partially open while the other states were out of work.

As Florida is a right-to-work state, our local had 'national signers' (big shops) with mine being one of those. In the event of a strike we were obligated to man our work, while the smaller union shops would be on the picket line.

Didn't Reagan order air traffic controllers back to work during his admin? This seemed like a similar scenario.

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:
Didn't Reagan order air traffic controllers back to work during his admin? This seemed like a similar scenario.

And fired the ones who refused. The Gipper didn't mess around. FJB doesn't have the balls to anything near to this.

https://www.history.com/this-d...-traffic-controllers

On August 5, 1981, President Ronald Reagan begins firing 11,359 air-traffic controllers striking in violation of his order for them to return to work. The executive action, regarded as extreme by many, significantly slowed air travel for months.

Two days earlier, on August 3, almost 13,000 air-traffic controllers went on strike after negotiations with the federal government to raise their pay and shorten their workweek proved fruitless. The controllers complained of difficult working conditions and a lack of recognition of the pressures they face. Across the country, some 7,000 flights were canceled. The same day, President Reagan called the strike illegal and threatened to fire any controller who had not returned to work within 48 hours. Robert Poli, president of the Professional Air-Traffic Controllers Association (PATCO), was found in contempt by a federal judge and ordered to pay $1,000 a day in fines.

On August 5, an angry President Reagan carried out his threat, and the federal government began firing the 11,359 air-traffic controllers who had not returned to work. In addition, he declared a lifetime ban on the rehiring of the strikers by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). On August 17, the FAA began accepting applications for new air-traffic controllers, and on October 22 the Federal Labor Relations Authority decertified PATCO.

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:
Didn't Reagan order air traffic controllers back to work during his admin? This seemed like a similar scenario.

Reagan fired all the atc folks who went on strike, then hired replacements. I think the union had 13,000 members at the time, Reagan whacked 11,000 of them.

REAGAN: "...And will be terminated. End of statement."

So strikes off, want to bet Biden/Kamala promised him a job as Labor Secretary as soon as they win or if they lose he can go back on strike to make the next president look bad.

US ports are rated among the lowest in the world for efficiency.
The strikers want to keep us in the early 20th century in that regard with the "no automation" clause.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news...cient-for-containers

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
US ports are rated among the lowest in the world for efficiency.
The strikers want to keep us in the early 20th century in that regard with the "no automation" clause.

I think that's the big issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:

How do I get a 62% raise?

Join a union. Maybe the ILA?

quote:

Originally posted by 229DAK:

quote:

Originally posted by Krazeehorse:
Didn't Reagan order air traffic controllers back to work during his admin? This seemed like a similar scenario.

And fired the ones who refused. The Gipper didn't mess around. FJB doesn't have the balls to anything near to this.

Apples and oranges.

Unlike air traffic controllers, port workers aren't federal employees. So the President doesn't have any say in that.

There's plenty to be pissed at Biden about. But not firing employees that don't even work for him simply isn't one of them.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:

How do I get a 62% raise?

Join a union. Maybe the ILA?

Yes. Anyone who think that pay package looks too sweat should consider dropping the air conditioned 9-5 in the home kitchen and join that union. Most stand around and scoff at shit work, laughing that you couldn’t pay me enough to that. Then complain about the pay it takes to get someone to do it.
The only bad guy here is that million a year fat cat.

quote:

Most stand around and scoff at shit work, laughing that you couldn’t pay me enough to that. Then complain about the pay it takes to get someone to do it.
The only bad guy here is that million a year fat cat.

And the repetitive process could be done more efficiently by automation. So there would be less "shit work".
It's the "million a year fat cat" union boss who wants to prevent that. Because that would mean fewer longshoremen, which would mean less union dues, which would be less power for him.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
US ports are rated among the lowest in the world for efficiency.
The strikers want to keep us in the early 20th century in that regard with the "no automation" clause.

I think that's the big issue.

That's the crux of this...and the record profits that the shipping industry made since the last contract. As Sal has repeatedly pointed out on his YT Channel, What's Going On with Shipping, since pandemic shutdowns, the shipping companies made an insane amount of money (rivaling tech), and the unions want a cut of it. Automation is the direction the industry is going, as overseas ports are nearly all fully-automated and the US West Coast ports automation is already being utilized. The automation is focused on moving the containers around the yard and getting them onto chassis for the truckers to move-out.

I can see this contract being the last one for these guys. The ports will bide their time, buying the necessary infrastructure and machinery so that when the big change happens, they can do it in one fell-swoop.