Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!bagate!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmger!peterk From: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy Subject: Re: YOU PEOPLE HAD BETTER GET WIT THE PROGRAM!! (Was: Re: Commodore Business Machines) Summary: Unions Message-ID: <1420@cbmger.UUCP> Date: 26 Jun 91 12:32:29 GMT References: <4193@ux.acs.umn.edu> <1991Jun24.030715.511@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany Lines: 23 In article , rkushner@sycom.UUCP (Ronald Kushner) writes: > > Hehe, I never said I don't like unions, but a non-union company can trim > workers, cut pay, etc, whenever they like...So, Apple won't be as flexable if > they get a union in there. That's exactly the point. What you call flexible, we Europeans call Wild-West. If a company is more forced (also by laws) into responsibility also for its workers, then the whole climate changes. Then a management necessarily gets much more sensible for the changes of the company's situation, they do think and plan for much longer periods and thus provide more long-term stability. (Yes, this is exaggerated a bit to the idealistic view, but so you better see my point.) It's that short-term politics only seeing the next financial quarter, that is a typical weekness of US business, in my eyes. I won't state that European ways are ideal, but more tailored for long-term stability. And when you drive this policy to the extreme, what do you get? Japan Inc. Now they are again so extreme, that it's exaggerated. Perhaps a moderate middle way is the best. -- Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel // E-Mail to \\ Only my personal opinions... Commodore Frankfurt, Germany \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk