kroger owns payless. kroger is union, payless is not. kroger owns alot of nonunion grocery stores. this could cause a breakoff of the union (( Wikipedia Teamsters )). what i am wondering is there any movements to unionize payless stores in indiana.
Kroger purchased Pay Less back in `1999 and still it is non-union and goes under the old name. i do not understand it and think they should at least change the name to kroger. but maybe by doing so then it would become a union site. so by keeping it under the pay less umbrella - for management sake - it is alot easier
__________________
I am no longer part of the oppressed, evil workforce of Kroger! Can you say "Hallelujah"
This doesn't exactly answer your question, but unions will be pretty much history within the next 5--10 years. I'm not against them, but they are simply no no longer economically viable---especially in this irreversible global market we are in. It's a big reason why America's auto industry is in so much trouble; why am I gonna pay as much for a car as I could a house? Gimme a Hyundaii . . .
This doesn't exactly answer your question, but unions will be pretty much history within the next 5--10 years. I'm not against them, but they are simply no no longer economically viable---especially in this irreversible global market we are in. It's a big reason why America's auto industry is in so much trouble; why am I gonna pay as much for a car as I could a house? Gimme a Hyundaii . . .
yeah, damn us, americans, for demanding more from our employers than a chineese slave laborer! How dare we think of actually trying to make a living for ourselves!
all i can say it "[citation needed]"
__________________
Would you like fries with th... I mean, your milk in a bag?
I didn't say I liked it, but there clearly are long-standing problems that the most staunch union supporters cannot deny.
Meanwhile, peeps should focus on skills for jobs which dictate a more competitive edge. Whether that comes as a college degree (which ya better be damn careful these days what you major in), or, more realistically, a trades certification, with the right career path you won't necessarily need a union.
I didn't say I liked it, but there clearly are long-standing problems that the most staunch union supporters cannot deny.
Meanwhile, peeps should focus on skills for jobs which dictate a more competitive edge. Whether that comes as a college degree (which ya better be damn careful these days what you major in), or, more realistically, a trades certification, with the right career path you won't necessarily need a union.
All i can see in your post is "ACCEPT YOUR TABLE SCRAPS AND BE HAPPY, YOU DOG!" Unions are formed mostly arround low-to-mid paying jobs because those are the people who need the help the most.
Not everyone comes from a well-to-do family situation and can afford to go to college or get a certified degree.
What are these "long standing problems" you speak of? Having to pay more for labor provided? That's not a problem it's just an inconvenience. You think it's fair for an employeer to just walk over to an employee that has been working for them years and years to tell them "you're fired" just because they are getting old?
Unions are safety nets and under that net is poverty.
Again, your statements are baseless and I would like to see you place citations to back them up otherwise you're just trying to be a fearmongering anti-union advocate today.
__________________
Would you like fries with th... I mean, your milk in a bag?
and all I see in your responses are a lot of emotion-based rhetoric. I'll say this one last time, and you can take it however you will: I am not against unions. I wish conditions could return to those of the 1970s, when American unions enjoyed probably their last great hurrah. But it ain't so, and throwing rocks at me isn't gonna change the FACT that there are good reasons union activity is less than 10% of American labor.
If I ever feel the need to justify, prove or otherwise seek your better esteem, Bag Boy, I'll certainly include citations, bibliographies, hyper links and a table of contents. Til that happens, I guess you'll just have to go with what I've got.
and all I see in your responses are a lot of emotion-based rhetoric. I'll say this one last time, and you can take it however you will: I am not against unions. I wish conditions could return to those of the 1970s, when American unions enjoyed probably their last great hurrah. But it ain't so, and throwing rocks at me isn't gonna change the FACT that there are good reasons union activity is less than 10% of American labor.
If I ever feel the need to justify, prove or otherwise seek your better esteem, Bag Boy, I'll certainly include citations, bibliographies, hyper links and a table of contents. Til that happens, I guess you'll just have to go with what I've got.
now now. You call my statements emotion-based but, in actuality, i make no outlandish statements that i can't back up or I refuse to elaborate on like: "long-standing problems that the most staunch union supporters cannot deny." or "unions will be pretty much history within the next 5--10 years" all the while pulling "magical spaghetti numbers" from the air like "union activity is less than 10% of American labor"
I'm not looking to ask for justification from you for my sake. I'm legitimately wanting to understand your statements so I can validly contest them, where applicable.
__________________
Would you like fries with th... I mean, your milk in a bag?
Nice work, FedUp! 12.4% is a lot better than the numbers I've been hearing on Fox, CNN and N.P.R. I genuinely hope the figures continue to climb and we can see a return to the strongest economy in the world.
