Miller plant in Ft. Worth

8,232 Views | 54 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by EX TEXASEX
Garrelli 5000
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jock 07 said:

I don't think it's contract brewing as I'm pretty sure they own the Lone Star label. Just glad they finally put the puzzles back on the caps.


Wrong beer. Pearl has puzzles.

Edit I'm the idiot looks like lone star has them too. Shows how little I drink it
Staff - take out the trash.
Double Diamond
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Do you think the Auto workers were wrong to strike? UPS? Just greedy workers who don't get how good they have it?
Sims
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Double Diamond said:

Do you think the Auto workers were wrong to strike? UPS? Just greedy workers who don't get how good they have it?
I dunno, you still haven't put out any facts to back up your statement. I'll let you know what I think once you come with the some facts I can look at and not just conjecture and your feelings.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Double Diamond said:

Do you think the Auto workers were wrong to strike? UPS? Just greedy workers who don't get how good they have it?
Yes.
cslifer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Why are they wrong to strike? Work is a transaction, the worker trades his labor for $$, striking is simply his leverage to get more $$. What should the worker do instead? Obviously he can quit, but I fail to see what is wrong with negotiating salary/raises/benefits. Unions have definitely made a huge mess of some companies/industries, BUT letting the employer have all the power isn't good either, we have seen how that goes.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cslifer said:

Why are they wrong to strike? Work is a transaction, the worker trades his labor for $$, striking is simply his leverage to get more $$. What should the worker do instead? Obviously he can quit, but I fail to see what is wrong with negotiating salary/raises/benefits. Unions have definitely made a huge mess of some companies/industries, BUT letting the employer have all the power isn't good either, we have seen how that goes.
Technically, if you go on strike, you HAVE quit. The company is under no obligation to bring you back at the end of the strike. Now, they generally DO, but...that's not mandatory.

And having worked in an industry that has numerous unions for 30+ years of my career, I can definitely say, they're greedy.

I've seen numerous examples of the unions being not just useless, but actually detrimental to the company.

Sims
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cslifer said:

Why are they wrong to strike? Work is a transaction, the worker trades his labor for $$, striking is simply his leverage to get more $$. What should the worker do instead? Obviously he can quit, but I fail to see what is wrong with negotiating salary/raises/benefits. Unions have definitely made a huge mess of some companies/industries, BUT letting the employer have all the power isn't good either, we have seen how that goes.
That's the thing...we don't know why they are wrong or right to strike most times because unions provide little to no actionable basis for their strikes when asked for public commentary. For example, in the Fort Worth example...

Quote:

According to the Teamsters, Molson Coors CEO Gavin Hattersley has earned more than $5.1 million as part of his salary since the local union went on strike on Feb. 17.

"Molson Coors is a total disgrace," Teamsters General President Sean M. O'Brien said in a statement. "This isn't a serious offer from one of America's biggest beer companies. It's an example of the willful disrespect it has for the American workers behind its products. Molson Coors doesn't care about Texas workers or their hard labor or the sacrifices their families have made to make the company rich.... It shouldn't be difficult for Molson Coors to agree to a respectable contract, unless their goal is to deprive workers of fair wages and strip them of good benefits and job protections."
All they've done is provide a CEO pay data point and said, THAT'S TOO MUCH.

If they would do a better job of communicating the why, they might find more supporters of their cause. The bolded section is just a bunch of nonsense.

  • Doesn't care about workers...proof?
  • Respectable Contract...what do they suggest that looks like?
  • Fair wages... which are?
  • Good benefits....such as?
  • Job protections....are factory workers tenure eligible...I don't follow on this one.
  • "Unless their goal is to deprive...." ... Sounds like good faith negotiations to me.
cslifer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I agree with you that often the unions are greedy, but at the same time we must admit that the companies are too. Also, as the poster below you said, we have basically no information as to why they are really striking. They would probably have much more support if they would actually put out solid reasons and numbers. Getting back to the original comment though, just saying they are wrong to strike without knowing why is in itself wrong. Just the same as saying all unions are bad or all companies are bad is also wrong. There are good and bad on both sides. There are definitely bad actors on both sides.
ABATTBQ87
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Battalion, April 9, 1986

91AggieLawyer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Double Diamond said:

Ghost91 said:

They're probably protesting that they're being asked to do work that they agreed to do when they were hired for a rate that was also agreeable.

I mean that's just my guess.


Um no. They are protesting greed. It's always strange to me the people who stand next to massive corporations over humans.

Corporations are made up of humans. Do you not own stock? Even if YOU don't, the rest of us do. That stock is what finances the property, plant and equipment that provides the jobs for those individuals. Without that investment, there is no job.

Why is it greed for the business to not want to pay inflated wages but it isn't greed for the workers to want those wages?
cslifer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You are absolutely right! The problem arises when trying to decide if the workers are just being greedy or the company is being cheap. Maybe if a group of representatives from both sides of the equation were to sit down and negotiate they could come to an equitable solution.
Sims
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cslifer said:

You are absolutely right! The problem arises when trying to decide if the workers are just being greedy or the company is being cheap. Maybe if a group of representatives from both sides of the equation were to sit down and negotiate they could come to an equitable solution.
They have, 40+ official meetings.
cslifer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Great! Sounds like the process is working. Some negotiations take longer than others in order for folks to find an agreeable common ground. Both sides appear to be using the leverage they have available to them (as they should) and I am confident they will eventually hammer out a contract that works for everyone.
Secolobo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Whining about cost of living but still going to vote for who the union bosses tell them to.
If they're lucky maybe Biden will come picket with them.
91AggieLawyer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Secolobo said:

Whining about cost of living but still going to vote for who the union bosses tell them to.
If they're lucky maybe Biden will come picket with them.

This is the inherent contradiction of unions: complaining about the "greed" of management while simultaneously existing mostly/only for the union management. If union management is supposed to serve their constituents, why do they make far more money than the people they serve?
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cslifer said:

I agree with you that often the unions are greedy, but at the same time we must admit that the companies are too. Also, as the poster below you said, we have basically no information as to why they are really striking. They would probably have much more support if they would actually put out solid reasons and numbers. Getting back to the original comment though, just saying they are wrong to strike without knowing why is in itself wrong. Just the same as saying all unions are bad or all companies are bad is also wrong. There are good and bad on both sides. There are definitely bad actors on both sides.
Digging a little more into it...and reading between the lines:

I'm going to guess THIS is the reason:

Quote:

Conversely, Teamsters representatives said 86% of the employees at Molson Coors competitor Anheuser-Busch voted in late February to approve a new five-year national contract that increased pay, improved health care and retirement benefits, and protected all members' jobs.
The Teamsters are trying to force the other contract on Molson Coors...the same way they do their negotiations with the Big 3 auto makers...
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cslifer said:

I agree with you that often the unions are greedy, but at the same time we must admit that the companies are too. Also, as the poster below you said, we have basically no information as to why they are really striking. They would probably have much more support if they would actually put out solid reasons and numbers. Getting back to the original comment though, just saying they are wrong to strike without knowing why is in itself wrong. Just the same as saying all unions are bad or all companies are bad is also wrong. There are good and bad on both sides. There are definitely bad actors on both sides.
But...even without that...

I haven't seen a union strike in all my time since I've had to work with them that was really valid - every one I've seen has just been the union wanting exorbitant demands met when they ALREADY had a good deal.

When I worked at Bell, it was amusing to watch the union go on strike once IN JULY in Texas...and when the union finally caved and accepted a deal, it was WORSE than the final deal on the table when they went on strike. Not only that, they found that the union had been DELIBERATELY doing slow downs in order to force Bell to pay OT on lots of programs...
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cslifer said:

You are absolutely right! The problem arises when trying to decide if the workers are just being greedy or the company is being cheap. Maybe if a group of representatives from both sides of the equation were to sit down and negotiate they could come to an equitable solution.
Today's unions have taken a DELIBERATE adversarial position against management and work to convince all the members that the company is out to screw them.

It's hard to negotiate when one side has already poisoned the negotiations...
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sims said:

cslifer said:

You are absolutely right! The problem arises when trying to decide if the workers are just being greedy or the company is being cheap. Maybe if a group of representatives from both sides of the equation were to sit down and negotiate they could come to an equitable solution.
They have, 40+ official meetings.
Two months without regular pay and only strike pay...which is like $200/wk or something like that.

Pretty soon, they'll figure out that NO deal will ever make up for all that money they lost...
EX TEXASEX
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SanAntoneAg said:

Just drove past the Miller brewery. What are the union folks protesting?
Lisa's dental plane !!!

?noredirect
#FJB
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.