|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/02/2004 04:13:56 PM · #1 |
My union, the Communications Workers of America has been featured promiently in the show âThe West Wingâ in the last 2 weeks. Did you realize that there really is a Communicaitons Workers of America? We are the people that work for your phone company, newspaper and wireless communicaitons companies. Our brothers and sisters at SBC are fighting for several things which should matter to us all. Negotations at the bargaining table have stopped and a federal mediator is working with both parties to find a common ground.
Sticking points are the off-shoring of technical jobs and increased health costs. SBC has already sent many of itâs technical jobs overseas, cutting jobs here in the states. The giant corporation SBC was built by the people whose jobs have been cut. They are the voices you know as SBC. The operators, the information clerks, and soon more technical positions like the repair and data line testing may be off-shored. These are american jobs, jobs that were promised by President Bush in his previous campaign.
SBC would also like its remaining employees to shoulder more of their health care costs. SBC wants to more than double what its employees pay for their health care. All the while management at SBC is getting free health care.
So if you have a phone, DSL, read a newspaper, or use a wireless phone, I hope that you will let SBC or whatever other company you are involved with that off-shoring of technical jobs is not good for the country or the employees. The front line employees are the ones that built these companies up to what they are now.
|
|
|
|
05/02/2004 04:38:38 PM · #2 |
It is a world economy. I live in Pittsburgh PA and the steel industry was killed off 20 years ago by this. The electronics industry has been gone for decades.
Not all jobs will be off-shored. I am not driving my Ford to india for an oil change, and my McDonald's had better be cooking the food in the same building in which i am ordering it.
Two solutions -
1: DO NOT allow non-us persons to attend college in the US. Sorry, but we are training and educating the rest of world and then they take our jobs.
2: National Health Care. The US auto industry supports this (quietly) as it is a large part of the costs of doing business in this country - if it was nationalized then the US would be on an equal footing with Canada and other countries on this costly item
Here is a question I would like answered - Why are the US automakers moving assembly plants to Mexico and canada when BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Nissan and Toyota are building factories here in the US?
|
|
|
|
05/02/2004 04:39:09 PM · #3 |
| To the contrary I am advising my state legislators, my congressman, and our two senators that I am very much in favor of exporting jobs to foreign workers. I am asking that the first jobs they export are those involving our public servants. |
|
|
|
05/02/2004 04:47:23 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by garrywhite2:
To the contrary I am advising my state legislators, my congressman, and our two senators that I am very much in favor of exporting jobs to foreign workers. I am asking that the first jobs they export are those involving our public servants. |
Yeah, sure. THere are available unemployed 'polititians' we can outsource to in Iraq and Afganistan.
Me thinks we get what we elect, umm, deserve? Locally we just had out primary election and something on the order of over 50% of the voters were 65+. AARP runs the place!
As Dr Phil says, unless there is pain there is no reason to move/change. Leave Bush in for 4 more years and we will be in so much pain there will be change.
This week: gasoline at an all time high. Milk is at an all time high price. Beef prices up (why? japan et al is still embargoing the beef due to mad cow scare, so prices should be cheap (supply and demand, right?)).
|
|
|
|
05/02/2004 05:40:42 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
Originally posted by garrywhite2:
To the contrary I am advising my state legislators, my congressman, and our two senators that I am very much in favor of exporting jobs to foreign workers. I am asking that the first jobs they export are those involving our public servants. |
Yeah, sure. THere are available unemployed 'polititians' we can outsource to in Iraq and Afganistan.
Me thinks we get what we elect, umm, deserve? Locally we just had out primary election and something on the order of over 50% of the voters were 65+. AARP runs the place!
As Dr Phil says, unless there is pain there is no reason to move/change. Leave Bush in for 4 more years and we will be in so much pain there will be change.
This week: gasoline at an all time high. Milk is at an all time high price. Beef prices up (why? japan et al is still embargoing the beef due to mad cow scare, so prices should be cheap (supply and demand, right?)). |
Gary and bestagents,
Thanks for the words of support, now check out CWA.org for more information. CWA.
You might be interestted to check out the democratic party also. They are against the off-shoring of jobs.
In answer to your question about factories moving out of the country and others moving in. The answer is the same in both cases. Tax/labor/shipping savings. The US corps that are moving jobs out of the country realize savings on labor, taxes, and benefits. The companies moving in realize savings locally (tax breaks) and lower shipping costs to get their product to the consumer. Not great, but it works for them. |
|
|
|
05/02/2004 05:58:41 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
This week: gasoline at an all time high. Milk is at an all time high price. Beef prices up (why? japan et al is still embargoing the beef due to mad cow scare, so prices should be cheap (supply and demand, right?)). |
Let's keep things in proper perspective - that is, base price comparisons not on "real" dollars, but on inflation adjusted dollars. 1) The highest average price for gasoline was in March 1981 when the price hit $2.85 in today's dollars; 2) The highest average price for milk was in 1974 when the price ( adjusted for inflation ) was over twice what it is now.
Ron |
|
|
|
05/02/2004 06:02:06 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
2: National Health Care. The US auto industry supports this (quietly) as it is a large part of the costs of doing business in this country - if it was nationalized then the US would be on an equal footing with Canada and other countries on this costly item. |
I agree on this point, especially...our school district's choice for insurance has gone up on our premiums AGAIN (727.00 a month for my husband and myself) AND the copays for visits and meds AGAIN, and we might be losing the little pittance of a state supplement (500.00 per year) that was going to help the cost of rising insurance premiums. Whew! You can't afford to have insurance, but you can't afford not to these days. I have supported national or socialized (if you will) medicine for a long time, but people just don't think it's smart. Well spending more than half my salary a month on insurance doesn't seem smart to me, either.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 01:42:22 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Originally posted by bestagents:
2: National Health Care. The US auto industry supports this (quietly) as it is a large part of the costs of doing business in this country - if it was nationalized then the US would be on an equal footing with Canada and other countries on this costly item. |
I agree on this point, especially...our school district's choice for insurance has gone up on our premiums AGAIN (727.00 a month for my husband and myself) AND the copays for visits and meds AGAIN, and we might be losing the little pittance of a state supplement (500.00 per year) that was going to help the cost of rising insurance premiums. Whew! You can't afford to have insurance, but you can't afford not to these days. I have supported national or socialized (if you will) medicine for a long time, but people just don't think it's smart. Well spending more than half my salary a month on insurance doesn't seem smart to me, either. |
I don't know the answer to this onw either. My wife's emplyer is where we get coverage, and each year it goes up about what her raise is..so we are always falling behind. Interesting that the policy runs July-June, and the annual deductible is $500 effective July 1. But Jan 1 isa new year, so we start again on the $500 - effectively making it $1000 a year. We are generally healthy, but had a baby last october so we had the $500 to pay then,and then start over 2 months later. I bet it starts again in July...
Our school district has a new contract - the district still pays 100% of the premiums - it was the #1 item on the contract neg lost, and the one they were going to strike over if they (teachers) had to pay ANYTHING toward their health coverge.
Then when we had the baby, the total bill was about $5000. The insurace paid 51%, and that was OK by the hospital. Try and pay only 51% of the bill if you have no insurance - you will be forced to pay it ALL.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:01:11 PM · #9 |
| There is a simple solution to health care costs. Everyone cancel their coverage. I am very very serious. It is out of control. If no one had insurance, hospitals couldn't charge $8.00 for 2 aspirins...etc. And a downward spiral would insue. We need to take a lesson from Canada's system and start over without the greed. |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:02:13 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by TommyMoe21:
There is a simple solution to health care costs. Everyone cancel their coverage. I am very very serious. It is out of control. If no one had insurance, hospitals couldn't charge $8.00 for 2 aspirins...etc. And a downward spiral would insue. We need to take a lesson from Canada's system and start over without the greed. |
true dat! |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:12:01 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
This week: gasoline at an all time high. |
If you want expensive gas, come to the UK. (79p - about $1.50 - a litre at the mo?) :-) |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:16:32 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
Here is a question I would like answered - Why are the US automakers moving assembly plants to Mexico and canada when BMW, Mercedes, Honda, Nissan and Toyota are building factories here in the US? |
My guess is because a good percentage of Americans will only buy Americam made products. When they said their cars are made in America by Americans their sales in America went up. Thus the higher cost of building them here ended up being cost effective due to increased sales.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:21:22 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Thus the higher cost of building them here ... |
Cars aren't necessarily more expensive to build in the US than in Europe (in the case of BMW and Mercedes). In fact, they're most likely cheaper. The dollar is fairly weak, certainly against the pound, and I can imagine against the Euro, so in fact, it's quite reasonable to move manufacturing to the US to firstly save on labour costs, and secondly to reduce shipping. |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:24:47 PM · #14 |
| We should start a photographers union to stop all the off-shore outsourcing of photography! How dare people outside the US take pictures and sell them here. That's more pictures we could be selling! They are taking food out of our mouth. Shame on DPC for promoting this outsourcing activity by selling photos taken outside the US on this site. If we all band together we can put an end to it! |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:28:17 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Originally posted by louddog:
Thus the higher cost of building them here ... |
Cars aren't necessarily more expensive to build in the US than in Europe (in the case of BMW and Mercedes). In fact, they're most likely cheaper. The dollar is fairly weak, certainly against the pound, and I can imagine against the Euro, so in fact, it's quite reasonable to move manufacturing to the US to firstly save on labour costs, and secondly to reduce shipping. |
Good point there. But it's still cheaper to build them in Mexico, Canada, Japan, Korea... then in the US. I'm guessing they chose to build in the US over the others partially to appease the "buy american" crowd. |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:34:50 PM · #16 |
Some observations on health care in the U.S.:
When I was a wee lad, back in the 1940's, most doctors had an office, staffed by ONE person, usually an LPN ( licensed practical nurse ), who made office appointments, performed routine services ( like shots, etc. ), took care of making sure that the doctor's supplies were current, and handled administrative functions, like billing. Most people paid their bills as best they could. If not, it was not unknown for the Dr. to be "paid" in barter goods - chickens, vegetables, or whatever else had value in the market. During non-office hours, you could call the Dr.'s home if it was an emergency. Routine illnesses were diagnosed over the phone, and prescriptions called in to the local pharmacy for pickup by the patient. Scars were common; surgeries rare; and doctors seldom, if ever, got sued. There was no health insurance. So, if it didn't require stitches, didn't involve broken bones, or didn't appear to be life threatening, people took care of it themselves.
Now, a single doctor needs a staff of 5 or 6 just to run his office, never makes house calls, and pays around half of his/her total income for malpractice insurance. He/she cannot examine a patient of the opposite sex without an attendant ( who must be paid ). One person on staff spends most of their time processing referrals ( which must be approved by the insurance company ); another full-time staffer spends all of their time arguing with the insurance company for payment of services that were already performed that the insurance company deems were not "necessary". People must see a doctor if they get a hangnail, earache, upset stomach, skin rash, or sneeze unexpectedly. You can't get a referral without seeing your primary care doctor. And, of course, you "must" see a specialist ( with THEIR staff of 5 or 6 ) for just about anything besides a routine physical. It used to be X-rays were sufficient for most things - now we "need" Ultra-sounds, Cat-Scans, or MRI's. If surgery is necessary, we must have a "team" of surgeons instead of just one - AND we won't tolerate the idea of having a scar afterward.
That's why health insurance is so high.
Oh, and a couple of other reasons: when we buy health insurance, we cannot opt OUT of coverages we don't want or need - for example, a single individual pays the same amount whether they are male or female, old or young. How many single MEN, or post-menopausal WOMEN do you know of who require maternity coverage? Doesn't matter, it's built into the rates. How many MEN need coverage that includes Birth Control Pills? How many WOMEN need coverage that includes Viagra? Again, it doesn't matter, it's in the rates. The list goes on and on and on.
Ron |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 02:41:35 PM · #17 |
I can't even go to work in my own province. Last year I worked as a surveyor in Voisey's Bay, Labrador where INCO is building a mill to process nickel concentrate. This year I was told that all jobs have to be filled by one of three native groups or other Labrador residents. The thing that really ticks me off is the guys who are working there now are guys I trained last year. So essentially because I'm a 'non-native' Newfoundlander who happens to live in the insular part of the province, I'm not allowed to work there. If it was the other way around it would be deemed discrimination of the highest order.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 03:29:09 PM · #18 |
Im an employee of an SBC company (cingular wireless) although I am NOT a union employee, I still do not like how the union employees got/get treated.
Im sure many of you have heard, but Cingular Wireless purchased AWS (AT&T wireless) outright and next year there will be many more layoffs and such for each company.
James |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 03:39:08 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by jab119:
Im an employee of an SBC company (cingular wireless) although I am NOT a union employee, I still do not like how the union employees got/get treated.
Im sure many of you have heard, but Cingular Wireless purchased AWS (AT&T wireless) outright and next year there will be many more layoffs and such for each company.
James |
I'm a union member also, L.I.U.N.A. Local 1208. That's one thing I meant to say. My rights as a union member have been taken away from me because the government signed an 'adjacency' clause and gave extra rights to natives groups in Labrador. In many cases the jobs are being filled by people with little or no experience as a result.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 04:26:55 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by louddog:
My guess is because a good percentage of Americans will only buy Americam made products. When they said their cars are made in America by Americans their sales in America went up. Thus the higher cost of building them here ended up being cost effective due to increased sales. |
So much of cars and their parts are not-us made, and the overwhelming majororiy of buyers of cars
A) don't care where it is made
B)assume Ford/GM/Chrysler is US made, Toyota/Honda/Subaru/Nissan is Japanese made, etc. regardless of the truth or 'content' of a car.
And while Doctors' malpractice costs are rising, and they have a staff of 5 or 6, I have yet to see any Dr's driving used chevy's. New Cadillacs, BMWs, etc sure, but not older Fords or Dodges!
Interesting to try Health Insurance like auto insurance...get a basic amount for $X (hospitalization, big bad nasty things). Maternity, doctor visits, prescriptions, etc are optional.
Of course you still have the pre-existing condition 'problem' - I wouldn't pay for prescription coverage UNTIL i need continuing prescription for a chronic condition, my wife would not pay for maternity until pregnant, etc...
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 04:45:49 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
And while Doctors' malpractice costs are rising, and they have a staff of 5 or 6, I have yet to see any Dr's driving used chevy's. New Cadillacs, BMWs, etc sure, but not older Fords or Dodges! |
And most folks don't spend anywhere near as much time or cash up-front ( college and graduate studies, residency, etc. ), and on a continuing basis to get/maintain the experience/credentials to make enough money to afford Cadillacs, BMW's etc. Nor do most folks put their career, not to mention someone else's life at risk based on the accuracy of their decisions and actions. In my estimation, medical professionals are getting a return based on the amount of their investment in themselves, and I don't feel that they should be denied that just because someone else didn't invest as much, or as wisely.
Ron |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 04:50:27 PM · #22 |
| Even the military is getting outsourced, read this :Beyond the law |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 05:00:53 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by bestagents:
Then when we had the baby, the total bill was about $5000. The insurace paid 51%, and that was OK by the hospital. Try and pay only 51% of the bill if you have no insurance - you will be forced to pay it ALL. |
When I was born in 1971 it cost my parents about $7.50 to have me. When my sister was born in 1981 the cost was about $3000. Granted I was born in an Air Force base hospital and she was born in a local hospital and there were 10 years separating the two events but I just don't see how you can get away with charging multiple thousands of dollars for a regular healthy slap them on the ass and get them out the door birth.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 11:04:32 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Some observations on health care in the U.S.:
When I was a wee lad, back in the 1940's, most doctors had an office, staffed by ONE person, usually an LPN ( licensed practical nurse ), who made office appointments, performed routine services ( like shots, etc. ), took care of making sure that the doctor's supplies were current, and handled administrative functions, like billing. Most people paid their bills as best they could. If not, it was not unknown for the Dr. to be "paid" in barter goods - chickens, vegetables, or whatever else had value in the market. During non-office hours, you could call the Dr.'s home if it was an emergency. Routine illnesses were diagnosed over the phone, and prescriptions called in to the local pharmacy for pickup by the patient. Scars were common; surgeries rare; and doctors seldom, if ever, got sued. There was no health insurance. So, if it didn't require stitches, didn't involve broken bones, or didn't appear to be life threatening, people took care of it themselves.
Now, a single doctor needs a staff of 5 or 6 just to run his office, never makes house calls, and pays around half of his/her total income for malpractice insurance. He/she cannot examine a patient of the opposite sex without an attendant ( who must be paid ). One person on staff spends most of their time processing referrals ( which must be approved by the insurance company ); another full-time staffer spends all of their time arguing with the insurance company for payment of services that were already performed that the insurance company deems were not "necessary". People must see a doctor if they get a hangnail, earache, upset stomach, skin rash, or sneeze unexpectedly. You can't get a referral without seeing your primary care doctor. And, of course, you "must" see a specialist ( with THEIR staff of 5 or 6 ) for just about anything besides a routine physical. It used to be X-rays were sufficient for most things - now we "need" Ultra-sounds, Cat-Scans, or MRI's. If surgery is necessary, we must have a "team" of surgeons instead of just one - AND we won't tolerate the idea of having a scar afterward.
That's why health insurance is so high.
Oh, and a couple of other reasons: when we buy health insurance, we cannot opt OUT of coverages we don't want or need - for example, a single individual pays the same amount whether they are male or female, old or young. How many single MEN, or post-menopausal WOMEN do you know of who require maternity coverage? Doesn't matter, it's built into the rates. How many MEN need coverage that includes Birth Control Pills? How many WOMEN need coverage that includes Viagra? Again, it doesn't matter, it's in the rates. The list goes on and on and on.
Ron |
defenetly going to have to agree with you on this one Ron.
this goes back to issues i often voice concern and rage against, which is the rapidly failing health of average americans in this day in age due to getting poor or even no nutrition in there daily diets. if we werent sick all the time we wouldnt need the doctors so much...
a little story to show my point:
i work with a girl who is 31. she is about 100 or so pounds overwieght with bad skin, bad hair, overall she dosnt look so good. she also has emotional problems and a plethera (sp?) of health problems.
she is allways talking about her health problems, "the doctors said this, doctors said that" or "couldnt sleep last night, im so tired. was up all night w/ stomach pains. doctors dont know whats wrong". this girl sees the doctors at least once a week.
now, i share a desk with her (she gets off work when i start) and in this desks drawers is any number of different types of candies, gum and other "snacks". when she used to work 3rd shift, she would come in after me with a to-go container of any/all fast food you could think of and a big ass big gulp of mnt dew or some other soda. or sometimes when she was feeling down, red bull. she would also bring in a bag of some kind of "midnight snacks" as she called them, which would usually consist of a bag of oreo's or some other bag of cookies or chips.
so all that being said, and considering she has her insurance pay for what i would think to be thousands of dollars a month in doctor bills ALL of which are not needed if she didnt inflict these health problems on herself.
so.. reform of national health care? or reform of it being IMPOSSIBLE to find ANYTHING healthy (exept water) in 90% of all convinient stores and quick eat caffaterias.. since those are where many people get there food from in this fast paced society.
the FDA needs fixed up too. the food peramid they teach us in school is a bunch of friggin bs. i accually had someone tell me the other day when they were eating cheese (yes just cheese) that it was a healthy lunch cause cheese has calcium... *sigh* |
|
|
|
05/04/2004 06:05:10 AM · #25 |
Before replying, remember that I am not tryig to be rude, just honest.
If you're upset that your job may be offshored, then do something about it besides piss and moan.
My job was offhsored. I rejoiced. I got to stay home with my daughter while I started my own company and created my own job that will NEVER be offshored.
People assume that they are entitled to a job. Granted, it'd be nice for everyone to have one, but times will come when industries and attitudes shift. If you are not prepared for these shifts, then you will be hit broadside by them.
Companies that are not responsive to paradigm shifts go out of business. The same happens to people who become compalcent in their job or their skills assuming the fact that they are stable.
The Telecom industry has been in a horrible flux for the better part of the past decade, and the workers in that industry should have seen it coming instead of just going to work every day assuming it wouldn't.
Take this opportunity to brush up on new skills, enhnace existing skills, and perhaps think of things you could do to start your own business.
Don't wait until the ink is dry on your pink slip to do it, do it NOW. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 05:53:54 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 05:53:54 PM EDT.
|
