[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

Sure, start a business servicing the oil industry in Alberta. Or go all in on a computer store when puters are selling like hotcakes, then watch your business dwindle away as sales start dropping, as happened to a friend of mine. He has an MBA, didn't make him able to forecast that trend.

As for jobs for India, more and more, jobs, even or especially the high level ones will be done by computer. If you know how to play with the big boys in finance, you're golden. Otherwise, even people who feel very secure will probably have a rude surprise at some point.

Yep, everyone is still stuck in the white collar mindset when it comes to this stuff. People have been bilked into believing the only way to financial success is with a university degree, but not everyone is cut out for it. Nor does it guarantee job security. And although very little guarantees job security these days, it's pretty hard to outsource work like plumbing or electrical work to places like India.
Of course, there's no guarantee there either as we've seen what Indians and Pakistanis in Canada have done to wages in the trucking industry.

[DrCaleb]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Of course, there's no guarantee there either as we've seen what Indians and Pakistanis in Canada have done to wages safety in the trucking industry.

FTFY.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Of course, there's no guarantee there either as we've seen what Indians and Pakistanis in Canada have done to wages safety in the trucking industry.

FTFY.

Well both really. Let me put it this way, my buddy drives straight truck on expedite and he makes less/hour today than my uncle did driving expedite through the 80s.

[OnTheIce]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

You are aware that many of these union leaders are part of the 1%?

Proof please.

The unions are notoriously tight-lipped about this. the Conservatives have tried to get legislation passed to push salary and expense disclosure but the unions are fighting tooth-and-nail to prevent this.

I can tell you that back in 2002, 13 years ago, the President of the CAW was making $130k.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... /?page=all

His replacement, Jerry Dias has only suggested he'll be in the 140k range:
http://www.thestar.com/business/2013/08 ... anada.html

[andyt]

If those are current figures, they they are not in the 1%. When the head of our ferrirs corp was making 1 million, and many CEO's earn more than that, 140k for the pres of a big union doesn't seem outrageous at all.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

And to further OTI';s post, from the Globe and Mail way back in 2001: Labour's top 10
The top 10 earners among executives of Ontario's unions:
1. Robert Brown, director of Canadian Affairs, Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, $162,000
2. Malcolm Buchanan, general secretary, Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation, $154,000
3. Chris Dassios, general counsel, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Power Workers' Union, $154,000
4. Peggy Nash, assistant to the president, Canadian Auto Workers, $150,000
5. Raj Dhaliwal, director of human rights, Canadian Auto Workers, $146,000
6. Claire Ross, general secretary, Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association, $143,000
7. Kevin Corporon, president, United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local 1000A, $142,000
8. Larry O'Neill, international representative, Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, $141,000
9. James Forster, associate general secretary, Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation, $141,000
10. Robin McArthur, Canadian director/vice-president, United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, (Retail-Wholesale) $140,000.


I hardly doubt those salaries have remained stagnant over the last 13-14 years.

[BeaverFever]

As Andy said, none of those figures are 1%, and anyway how much do you think that the leader of a national organization, who is responsible for bargaining face-to-face with millionaire CEO's and heads of government is supposed to earn anyway? 15 bucks an hour?

FTR, in my department alone there are over a dozen people who earn at least as much the salaries listed above (a couple earn much more), not one of them is an executive. Another dozen or so more are not far behind in the 120k-140k range. Together, they make up about a quarter of the employees.

It's funny that when it comes to executive pay, you guys say it's nobody's business what a company pays, and yet you think what Unions pay their leaders out of Union dues is somehow everybody's business.

[fifeboy]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

As Andy said, none of those figures are 1%, and anyway how much do you think that the leader of a national organization, who is responsible for bargaining face-to-face with millionaire CEO's and heads of government is supposed to earn anyway? 15 bucks an hour?

FTR, in my department alone there are over a dozen people who earn at least as much the salaries listed above (a couple earn much more), not one of them is an executive. Another dozen or so more are not far behind in the 120k-140k range. Together, they make up about a quarter of the employees.

It's funny that when it comes to executive pay, you guys say it's nobody's business what a company pays, and yet you think what Unions pay their leaders out of Union dues is somehow everybody's business.

+5

[OnTheIce]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

As Andy said, none of those figures are 1%, and anyway how much do you think that the leader of a national organization, who is responsible for bargaining face-to-face with millionaire CEO's and heads of government is supposed to earn anyway? 15 bucks an hour?

FTR, in my department alone there are over a dozen people who earn at least as much the salaries listed above (a couple earn much more), not one of them is an executive. Another dozen or so more are not far behind in the 120k-140k range. Together, they make up about a quarter of the employees.

It's funny that when it comes to executive pay, you guys say it's nobody's business what a company pays, and yet you think what Unions pay their leaders out of Union dues is somehow everybody's business.

Ignoring of course that those salary numbers are 12-14 years old.

Union members, not the general public, have a right to know where their money is being spent. Whether it be on salaries or political causes, they should be able to see who makes what and where their dues are going.

[OnTheIce]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

It's funny that when it comes to executive pay, you guys say it's nobody's business what a company pays, and yet you think what Unions pay their leaders out of Union dues is somehow everybody's business.

On this, you have it twisted.

When it comes to executive pay in a private company, it's nobody's business how much they want to pay that particular person. The board makes those decisions and pays the individual what they are worth.

Nobody is asking that it be kept private because it rarely is kept quite. The part about it being nobody's business is when people say it's too much.

Notice how much easier it is to get the salary information of CEO's and managers of private companies, who don't have to disclose salary details, but can't from a union?

Union members should know where their money is going.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

The 25 right to work states also have high rates of unemployment in comparison to states that do not have that legislation.

Facts are stubborn things.

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Union members should know where their money is going.

Absolutely. That's not an argument that union execs earn too much money, compared to their membership but especially compared to execs in govt and business. I was actually surprised how low the figures were, compared to the other groups. Seems union leaders aren't being piggies at all. If CEOs of private companies earned the sort of remuneration that union leaders do, income inequality in Canada would be drastically reduced.

The union leaders also don't get stock options.

[BeaverFever]

$1:

Notice how much easier it is to get the salary information of CEO's and managers of private companies, who don't have to disclose salary details

They do have to disclose if their shares are publicly traded. It's much harder if they're private companies.

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Union members should know where their money is going.

Absolutely. That's not an argument that union execs earn too much money, compared to their membership but especially compared to execs in govt and business. I was actually surprised how low the figures were, compared to the other groups. Seems union leaders aren't being piggies at all. If CEOs of private companies earned the sort of remuneration that union leaders do, income inequality in Canada would be drastically reduced.

The union leaders also don't get stock options.

Yup, so much for that argument. Let's look at some of the CEOs on the business side:


Gerald W. Schwartz, Onex Corporation, $87,917,026

Nadir Mohamed, Rogers Communications Inc., $26,769,973

Michael M. Wilson, Agrium Inc., $23,818,740

Donald J. Walker, Magna International Inc., $19,557,600

Steven K. Hudson (partial year, Element Financial Corp, $18,865,028

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

The 25 right to work states also have high rates of unemployment in comparison to states that do not have that legislation.

Facts are stubborn things.

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

I stand corrected. 5.0 in Right to Work states, on average. 5.2% in other states. Marginally better employment in Right to Woirk states, marginally less income in right to work states.