Men Who Made America

[nvbirdman]

Has anybody been watching this program on the History Channell?
Last night they had a segment about Andrew Carnegie calling in the Pinkertons to supress a strike by the steelworkers at the Carnegie plant and a number of steelworkers were shot.
It is amazing to think that the steel in the guns used by the Pinkertons was probably manufactured by steelworkers at the Carnegie plant.

[.22-10-45]

Last night was my first time viewing..I have read that during a strike at Remington, the workers were armed with repeating Winchesters!

[gnoahhh]

Interesting show, and very informative. I just wish they didn't re-cap everything after every commercial break! (I guess that's how they stretched a half hour worth of info into an hour.)

I think those guys were what the country needed to propel us to the top of the heap, but when their time was up, it was up. I remember my great-grandfather (born 1880) ranting about the Homestead Strike where the Pinkertons (at Frick's behest) used too much force and killed a bunch of strikers. He was a Pennsylvania coal miner at the time and the coal he was mining went straight to the steel mills. He said they debated whether to strike too in support of the steel mill guys, but didn't in the end when the National Guard got called out. Tough times back then. Guys risking their lives working 12 hours a day, six days a week, for about 20¢ an hour.

[gnoahhh]

Interesting show, and very informative. I just wish they didn't re-cap everything after every commercial break! (I guess that's how they stretched a half hour worth of info into an hour.)

I think those guys were what the country needed to propel us to the top of the heap, but when their time was up, it was up. I remember my great-grandfather (born 1880) ranting about the Homestead Strike where the Pinkertons (at Frick's behest) used too much force and killed a bunch of strikers. He was a Pennsylvania coal miner at the time and the coal he was mining went straight to the steel mills. He said they debated whether to strike too in support of the steel mill guys, but didn't in the end when the National Guard got called out. Tough times back then. Guys risking their lives working 12 hours a day, six days a week, for about 20¢ an hour.

[shooter93]

The Pinkertons and Baldwin Felts agencies were hired thugs and murderers in their day. The job was to suppress the workers so profits increased. From the steel mills to the mine wars it was always the same. That is most likely the single biggest reason why to this day labor does not trust management.

[troyboy]

This is a reminder of why we have labor unions. So many forget how it was because things are so easy today....

[gnoahhh]

Amen.

[popper]

Pretty silly, like most TV productions - not much real fact.

[EdZ KG6UTS]

Pretty silly, like most TV productions - not much real fact.

The machinery in the 'steel mills' look like nail heading machines.

EdZ

[Oreo]

The reasons labor unions do not trust management haven't changed. There will always be immoral people willing to enrich themselves by treating others like owned livestock.

Its easy to demonize unions as socialist thugs but the truth is TODAY unions and corporations are opposite arms of the same beast. They both use their money and power to corrupt the laws against each other for profit at the expense of the individual.

[Jeff82]

I could have done without the snippets from Donald Trump, Donny Duetsch and Jack Welch. They just irritate me. Otherwise, I thought it was a good series.

[Firebricker]

Watching now not bad show. I'm glad to see the History channel doing at least some history instead of all reality ****. FB

[MtGun44]

Pretty uneven treatment, leftist views dominate.

"Making a fortune" and "Being rich" are bad things in this series. Taking over "their own
steel mill" is a heroic thing for workers to do. And it is NOT "their own" mill, it was Mr.
Carnegie's mill.

Is shooting strikers a good thing? Of course not, but when I lived in WVA, anyone that
disagreed with the unions had their car or truck or even houses shot up - live ammo, no
jokes. IIRC, the workers shot at the detectives sent to evict them from the company
property.

Hostess will probably be liquidating the company starting tomorrow because the union thugs
have decided that they are worth more than the customers can afford to pay for cupcakes
and ding-dongs. Unions put the steel industry out of business, many others on the ropes.

Is there a need for unions? Absolutely no question "YES!". Are a lot of unions totally out of
line today and destroying companies more than helping their workers? YES. I can't talk unions
with my carpenter friend because he gets so wound up at how the union thugs are stealing from
him and totally corrupt. I have no personal contact but when the membership hates the union
it has to make me think that they are not doing what they should be.

Bill

[popper]

Is there a need for unions? Absolutely no question "YES!". I watched a complete show last night. It was a reasonably fair show, both sides of the labor/management argument. What they DIDN'T use was the work 'socialism', union rise was the start of it. If one investigates the world wide working conditions in 1904, US workers were well paid and well off. Most governments were still dictatorships. Look at the working conditions in Ireland, Rhur valley, Russia, etc. So my response to Mtgun44's comment - no, working conditions would have gotten better without unions. Go investigate who the union leaders were at the time. Research factory conditions around the civil was era. Then make your dicision. Pinkerton was a gun-for-hire agency started in 1850 to function as a hired police force. US police was not well formed at that time.

[Hamish]

Bill beat me to it. It is a very interesting subject, a good program, presents the facts, but hmmm,,,,. The timing.

About 4 months ago TCM was showing an old Ernest Borgnine movie about how the government first implemented security procedures for it's employees in sensitive positions. I am an old movie nut, and had never heard of it.

The message was "Trust us, we are the Government, and we know what we are doing."

The "Men who" shows are totally innocuous to those of us who see it for what it is. But how do you think the indoctrinated masses view it?

My tin foil hat just keeps getting heavier,,,,,

[MtGun44]

This is totally weird for me, my general view is anti-union and it seems like many
are doing more harm today than good.

BUT ----- I happen to know a few major carrier airline pilots very well personally
and the company policy of at least one major airlines is clearly "screw the employees
every chance you get, lie to them as necessary". This absolutely amazes me, I cannot
see how this can be a good company policy, but it sure makes the workers cling hard
to their union. They are still getting screwed by management regularly, every possible chance.

When Southwest Airlines is financially kicking everyone's butt with NO union and
the workers and management are all very happy, and their competitor that is losing
money most of the time has management hating the workers and the workers hoping
managers have a stroke, something is really wrong. How in the world is this good for
anyone? Customers see surly, angry workers and workers try to do the absolute
minimum and never help polish the company brand.

So - I tend to believe that the market can work really well without unions (look at all the
non-union car factories in the south, where apparently the workers and management get
along and make great cars at competitive prices) but for some reason, it seems like some
companies cannot figure out that honey is more attractive than vinegar.

Bill

[starmac]

Does that terrible airlines force their employees to work for them, or can they go to work elsewhere?
I don't really doubt that unions were needed at some time, but what really has changed, people are not forced to work at any job and hasn't been since slave days.

[DRNurse1]

Mt Gun 44:

Well said. One factor that impacts these events is competition. If unionized companies in an industry compete on an even footing with non union companies, the non uninon company should win. When the government gets into it and supports unions by altering the competition, then it is anyones guess, but the unions should win since they are better able to 'support' politicians (read-buy votes).

Now, what happens when the union becomes an industry? My profession is unionized by different unions in different areas of the country. These unions compete with eachother for the union dues from my brethren.

Hammish, I have some more tin for you. Just leave me some.

[nvbirdman]

In this economy if you have a job you may feel that yes, you are forced to keep working there.

[starmac]

I am lucky so far, I have never felt like I was forced to stay on a job, bad or good.

[Oreo]

Remember that in the days of Carnegi (sp?) factories would pay their employees not in dollars but in currency only good at the company store. These people had to pay rent to the company to live in company owned housing. Once you were employed there you were trapped and it was very hard to just quit and leave. The companies did that on purpose and some companies would still do it today if they could.

Not all businessmen are the beacon of republican capitalism. Many are very elitist liberal progressives. IMO, they get the unions they deserve.

[waksupi]

The company currency and stores were usually in mining districts, and not widespread.

[10x]

The reasons labor unions do not trust management haven't changed. There will always be immoral people willing to enrich themselves by treating others like owned livestock.

Its easy to demonize unions as socialist thugs but the truth is TODAY unions and corporations are opposite arms of the same beast. They both use their money and power to corrupt the laws against each other for profit at the expense of the individual.

"The institution is run for the benefit of those who control the institution." Spiro T. Agnew...

[Adam10mm]

I bet the slaves and American Indians would take issue with that program.

[MtGun44]

The problem with "go work somewhere else" is that with airlines with unions, EVERYTHING is based
on union seniority. So, once a pilot has invested 5 -10 yrs with a company, and gained
pay and more importantly, ranking in choosing schedules (choosing schedules to make
your life work better - which means different things to different people) and when many
more people are hired behind you, and when there are LOTS of laid off pilots out there
that cannot get a job, you are largely locked into the company, even if you hate them.

Of course, SW doesn't have a union, but I would guess that they still have seniority, and
there are probably about 10 or 20 pilots looking to win every single job that opens up there.

Sad situation, not obvious from the outside.

A company that treats the workers well IN THEIR OWN BEST INTEREST is intelligent and can
often be really successful. When lack of trust and cooperation invades, it seems impossible
to reverse.

Bill

[starmac]

In other words his bad job is better than he can expect to get in his profession if he goes elsewhere.

I am curious here though, does it take 5 or 10 years to figure a company is sorry or do they treat their employees good until they have been there long enough that they can't find a job that suits them as well.

I guess I just think different, I just can't wrap my mind around working for a company very long that I think treats me bad.

[MtGun44]

I tend to agree, but there were good times in the industry for the first 10 yrs, then
a lot of bankruptcies and more competition, so the sloppy and inefficient old airlines were
not making any profits, had to start cutting back on pay. Once this started, the tension
with the unions seems to have gotten completely out of hand. What seemed to be a
good company when there was little competition and low fuel costs, is not so nice when they
are struggling and their inefficent route structure, antiquated management style and
older equipment plus dramatically higher fuel costs makes it harder.

One of the things that is not obvious to the casual observer of the airline industry is that
the system is not as quickly self correcting as other industries. Suppose there are too many
gas stations in a town, pretty quickly the least efficiently run or well located ones will be
out of business. So the supply of gas stations will fairly quickly adjust to the market, and
the closed gas stations are typically turned into some other kind of business. If there were
some desperate stations shaving margins to the bone, they don't have quite as much pressure
and profits can move up a bit. If they move up too much - people will open new gas stations and
drive the profits back down.

With airlines, there is a real problem. When they go bankrupt, the aircraft are still there, still
able to fly and get sold off at a loss. So, now somebody who wants to be in the airline
business and can convince money lenders has bought a bunch of jets for a fraction of
the normal price because all the airlines pretty much have what they want already. SO -
instead of the airline going out of business causing a reduction in the number of seats chasing passengers,
it actually lowers the cost structure for some of those seats (planes cost less, fuel and
pilots about the same) so they can sell cheaper tickets. Darn, now the non-bankrupt airlines
are in WORSE shape and the industry is still oversupplied with airline seats and it is
really, really difficult to make a profit - especially if you bought new airliners, keep them up
well and pay your staff good salaries. You have to be INCREDIBLY efficient in your business
practices - like SW is to make it work.

EVENTUALLY, the old airplanes don't make any sense to keep flying, so they are gone, but
they do hang around a LONG time and continue to make the system slow to adjust to new
situations. I have several friends that dearly loved being airline pilots that got "furloughed" and
eventually figured out they were not going to be rehired, or the company went bankrupt. They
are pursuing other careers, usually not in aviation.

Bill

[DRNurse1]

In other words his bad job is better than he can expect to get in his profession if he goes elsewhere.

I am curious here though, does it take 5 or 10 years to figure a company is sorry or do they treat their employees good until they have been there long enough that they can't find a job that suits them as well.

I guess I just think different, I just can't wrap my mind around working for a company very long that I think treats me bad.

Good discussion here. Starmac, I traveled for 10 years when my non union staff job treated me badly. It took me about that long to find another place where I felt appreciated. The organization talked the talk and walked the walk that I respected. Now, changes are afoot and the organization is slipping from that original philosophy.

My Dad taught me independence, and I have managed to keep my family safe, fed, and clothed with a little left over. Now, some of that preparation is being threatened by the economic situation. That is making me delay moving on until I find another talking-walking organization.

Each worker has to make the decision to stay or move for themselves. Unions and companies just make that decision less clear/ more difficult for the average folks, especially when the Union and the company treat labor as a commodity rather than the unique contribution of the individuals.

Mt Gun 44: You are making a strong argument against unions. Maybe the Unions need to evolve in our newer economy?

[1Shirt]

I go along with MTGun44 about 98%.
1Shirt!