World Bank: Unions Good for the Economy

[Jacob]

I suspect this will change no minds on languish but nonetheless here it is: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/afl/LabourNews/march11-03.html

[CountDeMoney]

Unfortunately, The World Bank is not interested in increasing shareholder value, Jacob.  That's all that matters.  Job creators, and whatnot.

[The Brain]

If wearing a turd as a hat was good for the economy I still wouldn't do it.

[The Brain]

which poster will emoquit because of this thread

[Maximus]

which poster will emoquit because of this thread

We should hold a vote

[Barrister]

I'd be more interested in reading the actual World Bank report, rather than an AFL article discussing it.

[garbon]

For the less sound-bite version, here's the press release from '03.

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,print:Y~isCURL:Y~contentMDK:20091655~menuPK:34463~pagePK:34370~piPK:34424~theSitePK:4607,00.html

[MadImmortalMan]

Nothing controversial here. I predict: No ragequits.

[Admiral Yi]

I predict that Seedy didn't read either of the links.

[derspiess]

Unions suck.

[CountDeMoney]

I predict that Seedy didn't read either of the links.

I predict that Jacob will suspect this will change no minds on Languish.  So there.  Nyah, nyah, nyah.

[DGuller]

So, if the World Bank says something, it must be true?  The mind just boggles.  I think I'm done with this place.

[Admiral Yi]

So, if the World Bank says something, it must be true?  The mind just boggles.  I think I'm done with this place.

You didn't read the links either, did you?  Yakie's headline is Timmytastic in its misrepresentationality.

[Jacob]

Unions suck.

Alright.

A serious question for you, derSpiess:

Who should represent the interests of workers?

Corporations, large and small, have a lot of power in relation to the individual worker. They have more money, in most cases they need any given worker much less than the worker needs them, and they have the organization and capital to influence both the public discourse and lobby the political system in directions favourable to them.

In theory, and often in practice, unions represent the interest of workers both in dealings with organized business interests and the political system; granted they do so imperfectly.

So lets say we get rid of unions. Either people stop joining them altogether or legislation render them utterly useless. How are the interests of workers represented?

- Are the interests of workers simply irrelevant?
- Are individual votes of workers and their ability to quit a job they're unhappy with enough to counter the spending and lobbying of organized business interests, so worker's interests will be represented just fine?
- Or is there some other, better way for interests to be represented?

And to be clear, when I say worker's interests I mean things like formulating and enforcing workplace safety and health standards, addressing grievances (sexual harassment, unfair and abusive treatment, plain old fraud victimizing workers etc) and the like?

[Jacob]

So, if the World Bank says something, it must be true?  The mind just boggles.  I think I'm done with this place.

You didn't read the links either, did you?  Yakie's headline is Timmytastic in its misrepresentationality.

To be fair, I just lifted the Headline from my source.

Of course... that is pretty Timmytastic 

But wait... I thought Timmy was your homeboy and you have his back in his Timmytastitude, so how is being Timmytastic bad in your eyes?