Michigan legislature passes right to work bill

[tegid]

give people the false impression that they can expect to live off a wage if they do nothing to improve/make themselves desirable as employees.

I don't see how that's true: if people don't make themselves desirable as employees, they won't have a job and won't live off of any wage at all.

Regarding unemployment, any safety regulations and the like can also be said to increase it. Deniying minimum work conditions puts employment on a slippery slope that ends on something akin to slavery (and since we're talking about just removing regulation, not relaxing it, what's going to stop if from sliding all the way down?). Re: illegal immigration, exactly the same argument can be made PLUS the fact that people do something illegal is not, by itself, an argument to legalize it.

 

[AshburnerX]

If there are writers who will do the same work without residuals, why shouldn't we allow studios to use them?

Because they've tried this more than once and the end result is that writers who have to churn out scripts for next to nothing tend to turn out shitty scripts. It's killed more than one show. If people in a creative profession don't have the security and time to work through the creative process then they simply do no turn out quality work. It devalues the art form.

It's also done because any time a show or movie is being rerun, your essentially stealing employment opportunities for writers... or at least that was the case back in the 1940's-50's, when you basically only had ABC, NBC and CBS putting out new TV shows. This also covers things like transferring the material to a new medium (VHS, DVD, though I don't think Digital Content is covered yet, even after the recent strike) or to new markets.

It should be noted that basically the only people who get residuals are people who are with ether SWA or WGA.

 

[GasBandit]

The biggest problem with minimum wage laws is that without them, you have situations where people are working for nothing. With them, you have people working for a guaranteed minimum payment of $x.xx/hr. Sounds better than working for nothing, right? Unfortunately, the net result is that you have now redefined "nothing" as "$x.xx/hr" which is great for the people who were making nothing, but which is lousy for anyone who was making $x, because their wage has just become "the new nothing."

--Patrick

Despite "minimum wage" laws, people still work for nothing. We've employed them where I work, in fact - interns.

 

[AshburnerX]

Despite "minimum wage" laws, people still work for nothing. We've employed them where I work, in fact - interns.

We, as a culture, have basically decided that college/high school students need to do at least a few months of "free" service in their chosen industry to basically make sure they are actually cut out for it. It's incredibly unfair and probably necessary... but in the end, an intern really is no replacement for someone who actually needs that paycheck. An intern will just walk out if you mistreat them in the slightest.

 

[Covar]

I don't see how that's true: if people don't make themselves desirable as employees, they won't have a job and won't live off of any wage at all.

Out of curiosity when was the last time you worked a minimum wage job? Those jobs are filled with people not giving a shit, just doing enough to not get fired.

 

[strawman]

Because they've tried this more than once and the end result is that writers who have to churn out scripts for next to nothing tend to turn out shitty scripts. It's killed more than one show. If people in a creative profession don't have the security and time to work through the creative process then they simply do no turn out quality work. It devalues the art form.

So you are saying that the only thing standing between the awesome (hahaha) shows we are getting now, and entertainment ghetto, is the union forcing a higher minimum wage?

Well, I don't buy it. College campuses are filled with art from professional artists, not free art from students, because they know the value. There's no union forcing college campuses to hire only union artists to make sure that all campus art is "good".

 

[AshburnerX]

So you are saying that the only thing standing between the awesome (hahaha) shows we are getting now, and entertainment ghetto, is the union forcing a higher minimum wage?

Whatever your opinion on the actual content of the shows on TV right now, we really only need to point to the 2007-2008 Writers Strike to showcase just how far the quality can drop. Basically everything on TV was worse for an entire season and many shows didn't survive due to lagging ratings.

College campuses are filled with art from professional artists, not free art from students, because they know the value. There's no union forcing college campuses to hire only union artists to make sure that all campus art is "good".

That's a false equivalency. Solo artists who produce a physical work still retain ownership of that work in every regard except for the actual piece they sold. An artist who designs and constructs an outdoor modern art piece for a college may not own that sculpture itself, but he sure as fuck owns the rights to reproduce it and sell it until he sells those rights to someone else. In the case of a commission piece, said rights are usual part of the commission contract.

The only reason this is an issue for TV and film is because a script for these productions is worthless outside of the complete production itself. It's tied to the limitations of the form of presentation to it's audience. You'd need to completely re-write a movie to turn it into a stage musical and you likely need a different type of writer to do it, so any resulting production wouldn't have used THAT script as anything more than a basis for a rough draft.

 

[Covar]

Out of the talk shows which shows with writers brought in scabs? I don't recall scripted televsion doing so. I do remember shows being cancelled because of shortened seasons which didn't allow for struggling shows to grow ratings.

 

[Ravenpoe]

Out of the talk shows which shows with writers brought in scabs? I don't recall scripted televsion doing so. I do remember shows being cancelled because of shortened seasons which didn't allow for struggling shows to grow ratings.

Heroes?

 

[AshburnerX]

Out of the talk shows which shows with writers brought in scabs? I don't recall scripted televsion doing so. I do remember shows being cancelled because of shortened seasons which didn't allow for struggling shows to grow ratings.

I don't think Conan brought in anything... Jay Leno did (of course).

Heroes?

Yeah, that second season of Heroes basically killed it. It lingered for 3 more seasons but the ratings weren't even half of what they were before.

 

[PatrThom]

Despite "minimum wage" laws, people still work for nothing. We've employed them where I work, in fact - interns.

Ah, but interns aren't working for nothing. They are being paid in practical experience, which they value highly enough that they have agreed to work for no money.
I was referring more to people who work for no compensation at all.

--Patrick

 

[GasBandit]

Ah, but interns aren't working for nothing. They are being paid in practical experience, which they value highly enough that they have agreed to work for no money.
I was referring more to people who work for no compensation at all.

--Patrick

Is there really a difference? The second group is gaining experience, too. Maybe they don't value that experience as much as the first group does, but I would still assert that it's because the first group sees it as a stepping stone to a higher position, whereas the second group wants an escalator.

 

[PatrThom]

No argument there. I'm sure you've had some interns where you could tell they were raring to go, itching to climb a lot of stairs, and others who just sat there hitting the "door close" button over and over again, waiting for it to rise.

--Patrick

 

[AshburnerX]

I honestly wish we could see a resurgence of the apprenticeship system. If you put years into a kid, you damn well knew if he could handle the work or you told him to beat it. But no one wants to eat the cost training anyone anymore and that's what's lead to the glut of college graduates with meaningless degrees.

 

[Krisken]

I honestly wish we could see a resurgence of the apprenticeship system. If you put years into a kid, you damn well knew if he could handle the work or you told him to beat it. But no one wants to eat the cost training anyone anymore and that's what's lead to the glut of college graduates with meaningless degrees.

And no one willing to hire them without experience.

 

[GasBandit]

I honestly wish we could see a resurgence of the apprenticeship system. If you put years into a kid, you damn well knew if he could handle the work or you told him to beat it. But no one wants to eat the cost training anyone anymore and that's what's lead to the glut of college graduates with meaningless degrees.

It's something I've wondered about... for the last 50 years, every parent has said to their kid, you gotta go to college. You gotta go to college. If you don't want to be a janitor and plunge toilets all day, you gotta go to college.

Thing is, when everyone goes to college, is it so special any more? And they come out expecting a job to just be waiting there for them to fill. They think, "ok, now the hard work is over, I put in my time, where's my 60k+ starting salary with benefits that I was guaranteed by virtue of a 4 year degree?"

 

[Krisken]

Or they're thinking "Holy shit, why did I put myself into debt for $100k for a job that pays $20k a year?"

 

[GasBandit]

Or they're thinking "Holy shit, why did I put myself into debt for $100k for a job that pays $20k a year?"

That they are. And then they think what I said. And then they think what you said again. And then they think what I said again. And then they get credit cards. And then, mark my words, they will vote for the next candidate who puts student loan forgiveness on his platform.

 

[AshburnerX]

It's something I've wondered about... for the last 50 years, every parent has said to their kid, you gotta go to college. You gotta go to college. If you don't want to be a janitor and plunge toilets all day, you gotta go to college.

Thing is, when everyone goes to college, is it so special any more? And they come out expecting a job to just be waiting there for them to fill. They think, "ok, now the hard work is over, I put in my time, where's my 60k+ starting salary with benefits that I was guaranteed by virtue of a 4 year degree?"

You were an apprentice blacksmith or cobbler or whatever for four years, you damn well knew enough to do that job for the rest of your life (though you probably weren't a master ether). It's still the same in some regards: you have 4 years work experience in a line of work and your always going to be able to find work doing that. It's just basically become impossible to GET those years of experience.

 

[Bowielee]

People who believe a 4 year degree will net them a 60K starting salary job didn't do their research. It's sad, because I'm going to school with a lot of them. I went into my psychology degree knowing full well that I would need at minimum a masters degree to net a decent job.

There was a NYT article not to long ago that cited Industrial/Organizational psychology as one of the least employable jobs with the lowest salaries in the country. Which is true if you only get an undergrad degree. If you get a Master's, however, the job market is extremely good and extremely lucrative. In fact every degree listed in that NYT article is a career that requires at least a masters to succeed in.

 

[tegid]

Out of curiosity when was the last time you worked a minimum wage job? Those jobs are filled with people not giving a shit, just doing enough to not get fired.

It's been a few years, and I was the only employee in that position. But I've seen that happen in non minimum wage jobs too.
Anyway, so what? That just shows the standard effort required for that paying grade. Maybe it should be higher, but I don't understand the idea of 'these people don't give a shit, they should be payed half of what they are making now, tops'. If that effort's not good enough, they shouldn't be working there and that's it.

 

[PatrThom]

So basically, what we're all saying here is that in order to succeed in your career of choice, you need to work harder at it than any of your peers AND you need to stay committed, keeping the hammer down and driving hard even after everyone else has pulled up/dropped out.

Huh. It's like commitment inflation.

--Patrick

 

[Bowielee]

So basically, what we're all saying here is that in order to succeed in your career of choice, you need to work harder at it than any of your peers AND you need to stay committed, keeping the hammer down and driving hard even after everyone else has pulled up/dropped out.

Huh. It's like commitment inflation.

--Patrick

This is the nature of our culture. Always has been.

 

[Adam]

Union is...everyone together against the employers. I. Um. IT's the word.

That's a fundamental misrepresentation of what a Union is supposed to do - and every union person worth their salt from the bottom of the rung all the way to the top executive would argue you on that point.

The job of the union is to represent the employees to the employer. It's not meant to be an US against THEM philosophy and unions have been making great strides to make their membership understand that. The union isn't meant to support individuals, it's meant to even the playing field between the collective rights of the employed and the needs and desires of the business. If you are fighting against the employer, the union does not want you because it represents a lot of money, time and work to 'make things work'. I'm not surprised you would think it's an antagonistic relationship because frankly, to you and your simplistic world view everything will always be "Good guy versus bad guy" but the best relationships in the world can be between a union that understands the role it has to play, and a company that understands the role the union plays.

One of the most successful union people I know personally, the head of the Canadian Labour Congress, practiced what he called 'intelligent militancy'. You didn't fight for the sake of fighting.

 

[Eriol]

Adam, I kind of agree with you, and I kind of don't. Somebody once said "whatever company has a union, deserves one." What they meant was that if a company treats its workers well, gives reasonable compensation, etc, etc, then a union isn't needed. When a company wants to exploit every last bit of person away from their workers, does everything possible to pit them against one another, etc, then a union is a good thing. Thus I'm kind of in the mindset that if a company was that good toward the people working for them, there's no need for a union. If they're not, then the union itself is not the problem, they're the symptom of the problem with the company.

Are there exceptions both ways? Absolutely. There's predatory unions looking to get more influence in companies both big and small (why does a 5-employee welding company need a union?), and companies where it's pretty much a "why is there a union here? Oh well, seems to work out." But I think the general rule stands.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

I don't see it as antagonistic, I more am saying it's not going to work if a union has like. Not a full, united front.

 

[Adam]

Adam, I kind of agree with you, and I kind of don't. Somebody once said "whatever company has a union, deserves one." What they meant was that if a company treats its workers well, gives reasonable compensation, etc, etc, then a union isn't needed. When a company wants to exploit every last bit of person away from their workers, does everything possible to pit them against one another, etc, then a union is a good thing. Thus I'm kind of in the mindset that if a company was that good toward the people working for them, there's no need for a union. If they're not, then the union itself is not the problem, they're the symptom of the problem with the company.

Are there exceptions both ways? Absolutely. There's predatory unions looking to get more influence in companies both big and small (why does a 5-employee welding company need a union?), and companies where it's pretty much a "why is there a union here? Oh well, seems to work out." But I think the general rule stands.

I would like to agree with you that a union wouldn't be needed if a company treats its workers well, gives reasonable compensation, but I've worked for too many companies that did treat workers well and give reasonable compensation where the union was just a holdover from days passed. And the union now sits there as some kind of vestigial labour department; not really adding any value to the employee/employer relationship while acting as a buffer for employees to do less and less work. At some point, there has to be the option to decertify. As it is, decertification drives are ugly, ugly, ugly affairs moreoften than not driven by ugliness of third parties to that employee/employer relationship.

Canada recently passed a law stating that unions have to register their financials with the CRA in order to keep their tax exempt status. This means that the general public will get full knowledge of union finances including how much money they are spending on political activities and how much money their executive makes, no different than any other organization with tax exempt status. The unions are flipping their wigs saying that this is one of the worst assaults on unions in decades while the union membership are actually fairly supportive.

 

[Krisken]

That's because every entity hates transparency. Doesn't mean they aren't wrong in this instance, or that they are inherently bad.

 

[Adam]

That's because every entity hates transparency. Doesn't mean they aren't wrong in this instance, or that they are inherently bad.

The invisible man doesn't hate transparency.

 

[Bowielee]

I'm basically torn about the right to work movement. On the one hand, I can see where unions are coming from in that when they do collective bargaining, the people who don't kick in union dues are basically freeloading off those who do. On the other, I've been witness to some pretty shady dealings from unions, so I think the right to belong to one should be optional.

I like the idea of competition between unions. Then again, I've been a pretty vocal opponent of any sort of monopoly on these boards so it's not that surprising.