PonyFans.com

Would have been a massive can of worms. Reasoning being that since most of the teams in the "league" are public entities, it wouldn't promote stability.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/17/news/co ... index.html

I was confused by the NLRB's statement that seemed to suggest that it had no jurisdiction over state schools. Aren't big state schools typically strongholds of unionization?

Digetydog wrote:I was confused by the NLRB's statement that seemed to suggest that it had no jurisdiction over state schools. Aren't big state schools typically strongholds of unionization?

Lawyers can better answer, but States are sovereign and not subject to the NLRB decisions. NLRB was set up to regulate non public labor issues. The NLRB has no jurisdiction or influence over States.

Insane.

Northwestern is a private institution, but their players can't unionize because other colleges are public? That's like saying pilots can't unionize because lots of pilots work in the miltary.

The Northwestern players aren't asking for anything unreasonable. It's shocking that players aren't already guaranteed lifetime medical treatment for injuries sustained on the field. I'd like to see some players go on strike.

BigT3x wrote:Insane.

Northwestern is a private institution, but their players can't unionize because other colleges are public? That's like saying pilots can't unionize because lots of pilots work in the miltary.

The Northwestern players aren't asking for anything unreasonable. It's shocking that players aren't already guaranteed lifetime medical treatment for injuries sustained on the field. I'd like to see some players go on strike.

1) you can't really go on strike if you aren't in a union.
2) they shouldn't be able to unionize because they aren't employees.
3) unions don't guarantee a better outcome. If the NFLPA didn't exist, the NFL wouldn't be able to treat players like crap.

BigT3x wrote:Insane.

Northwestern is a private institution, but their players can't unionize because other colleges are public? That's like saying pilots can't unionize because lots of pilots work in the miltary.

The Northwestern players aren't asking for anything unreasonable. It's shocking that players aren't already guaranteed lifetime medical treatment for injuries sustained on the field. I'd like to see some players go on strike.

Barf, no unions....they would kill college sports like they killed the northern auto (and other manufacturing) industry.

JoeKidd wrote:

BigT3x wrote:Insane.

Northwestern is a private institution, but their players can't unionize because other colleges are public? That's like saying pilots can't unionize because lots of pilots work in the miltary.

The Northwestern players aren't asking for anything unreasonable. It's shocking that players aren't already guaranteed lifetime medical treatment for injuries sustained on the field. I'd like to see some players go on strike.

Barf, no unions....they would kill college sports like they killed the northern auto (and other manufacturing) industry.

I was around when the US auto industry started going downhill. The unions didn't kill the industry. Their European competitors put out better cars by more highly paid workers and the Japanese put out fuel efficient models while Detroit continued to build bulky gas guzzlers. The geniuses in the board rooms were dinosaurs and they blamed the poor slobs on the assembly line for their problems.

Didn't you juat blame the works too, sayimg they do an inferior job compared to the euros?

Like typewriters, labor unions served a purpose 100 years ago. Today, they are obsolete and a crutch for the lazy and talentless.

Topper wrote:

JoeKidd wrote:

BigT3x wrote:Insane.

Northwestern is a private institution, but their players can't unionize because other colleges are public? That's like saying pilots can't unionize because lots of pilots work in the miltary.

The Northwestern players aren't asking for anything unreasonable. It's shocking that players aren't already guaranteed lifetime medical treatment for injuries sustained on the field. I'd like to see some players go on strike.

Barf, no unions....they would kill college sports like they killed the northern auto (and other manufacturing) industry.

I was around when the US auto industry started going downhill. The unions didn't kill the industry. Their European competitors put out better cars by more highly paid workers and the Japanese put out fuel efficient models while Detroit continued to build bulky gas guzzlers. The geniuses in the board rooms were dinosaurs and they blamed the poor slobs on the assembly line for their problems.

While the management at the US automakers wasn't stellar, the fact that only Ford managed to avoid bankruptcy (by the skin of its teeth) indicates that management wasn't totally to blame.

Essentially, they were stuck managing a business with enormous fixed costs and a union unwilling to make the changes necessary to save the business. Instead of dealing with devastating strikes, management was forced to build (and sell) cars that included costs (pensions, health insurance, excess employees) that the Japanese and Germans didn't. For years, they lost money on every compact car and most mid-sized cars. The only reason Chrysler and GM lasted as long as they did was the fact that all three big automakers were propped up by enormous gross profits made from selling full-size PU and SUVs.

Eventually, the Japanese and Europeans proved that cars could be made profitably in the US IF the UAW wasn't involved.

Digetydog alluded to it, but if you're going to blame management and not unions you have to wonder why all domestic and foreign companies that build cars in the US are increasing their production facilities in right to work states rather than in unionized states. A "blame management" strategy has no answer for that general pattern.

You also would have to ignore massive pension obligations everywhere a union is involved. I don't begrudge the workers for getting a sweet deal. If only the politicians would stop guaranteeing it at taxpayer expense.

I'm quite sure incompetence at the management level had something to do with it (which is why Ford has only been in better shape the last 5 years), but it isn't the only reason.

PonyFan32 wrote:Digetydog alluded to it, but if you're going to blame management and not unions you have to wonder why all domestic and foreign companies that build cars in the US are increasing their production facilities in right to work states rather than in unionized states. A "blame management" strategy has no answer for that general pattern.

You also would have to ignore massive pension obligations everywhere a union is involved. I don't begrudge the workers for getting a sweet deal. If only the politicians would stop guaranteeing it at taxpayer expense.

I'm quite sure incompetence at the management level had something to do with it (which is why Ford has only been in better shape the last 5 years), but it isn't the only reason.

The specs are the same regardless of where it was built. A bad GM car built in Germany is still a bad car by the designs and material not by the workers. Same is true for the opposite.

IMO both the unions and mgmt are to blame. The unions kept asking for excessive pay/benefits etc and mgmt continued to reward themselves with big pay packages while not adjusting to a dramatically changing market place. Very few designers were given the ability to design the cars they wanted to design but had to design what would be approved by mgmt.

For years American car builders designed there cars to last a short period of time so they could get another sale once the car went out on the owner. Then the companies like Honda and Toyota started building cars that lasted longer and captured the market. Just 2 different strategies. I would not by a Ford or GM union or no union.

redpony wrote:IMO both the unions and mgmt are to blame. The unions kept asking for excessive pay/benefits etc and mgmt continued to reward themselves with big pay packages while not adjusting to a dramatically changing market place. Very few designers were given the ability to design the cars they wanted to design but had to design what would be approved by mgmt.

I'd agree with this, but ultimately, the buck stops with management, not unions, so I apply more of the blame to them.

Poor quality, ultimately that's managements responsibility, not the workers.

Producing gas-guzzling cars in the early '70's while Toyota was introducing more fuel efficient cars rests totally with management.

Completely losing out on the executive baby-boomer market to BMW & Mercedes, that's on management. My grandfather could afford any mass produced car in the world, so he did, as he only drove the finest, a Cadillac. Drive near the ocean in Southern CA and it seems laughable today; for every 1 Cadillac there must be 250 BMWs.

Also, I've read before that management figured out decades ago (I believe in the early '70's) that the pension agreements they negotiated with unions were unsustainable as workers were retiring too early with too generous a pension package. Once again, management wasn't pro-active in addressing this enormous problem. Like our government, they kicked the can down the road (who knows, they probably thought US taxpayers would ultimately bail them out).

So IMO, management killed Detroit, with a nice assist from unions.