[PettyBlue]

Is is time for a drivers union in Nascar?Yes, delawareonline ¦ The News Journal, Wilmington, Del. ¦ Leverage lies in forming drivers' union or no, ESPN - Some drivers support notion of panel, not union, to help NASCAR's issues - Nascar What say you people?

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by PettyBlue

Is is time for a drivers union in Nascar?Yes, delawareonline ¦ The News Journal, Wilmington, Del. ¦ Leverage lies in forming drivers' union or no, ESPN - Some drivers support notion of panel, not union, to help NASCAR's issues - Nascar What say you people?

I cut and pasted the following from my statement in a parallel thread I just posted:
"My personal opinion of organized labour is so low I won't dwell on it here. Suffice it to say that I really don't want to see major closed-wheel racing go the way of American professional stick&ball sports and American manufacturing."

I was born and raised in a union town (UAW Local 662 and 663 made up fully 40% of the adult male town population) and have seen up close and personal what organized labour can bring. IMNSVHO labour unions outgrew their need about four decades ago.

Thanks but no thanks.

[jks812]

I don't think they need a union. I'd like to see them use DJ and JG's option. Have a panel of drivers that would meet with Nascar often, but then every couple of months or so, meet with all the drivers at once. But the biggest thing they need to do is actually listen to the drivers. The drivers are the ones putting everything on the line every week, they're the ones in the cars, they're the ones that know what makes a race good and what makes it boring.

[PettyBlue]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

I was born and raised in a union town (UAW Local 662 and 663 made up fully 40% of the adult male town population) and have seen up close and personal what organized labour can bring. IMNSVHO labour unions outgrew their need about four decades ago.

Thanks but no thanks.

Can you expand on why you feel this way Bob?What did the union do to you or your town,if I may ask?

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by PettyBlue

Can you expand on why you feel this way Bob?What did the union do to you or your town,if I may ask?

(a) It ruined the area's work ethic. People had jobs from which they could not be terminated. The only thing which kept production at any semblance of a moderate standard was automation.

(b) It ruined people's self respect. Every three years. like clockwork, the Union struck the local plants (Delco Remy with 14 plants, Guide Lamp with 3) for frivolous reasons. About 30%-40% of the strikers immediate went on welfare because they were so caught up in their exorbitent wages and the toys these wages could buy that they had zero money saved.

(c) It ruined the city. Anderson, Indiana was a city, in 1959, of 50,000 plus people with a vibrant but inflated economy. Then, two or three decades ago the high cost of doing business, caused primarily by organized labour, Anderson went the way of a lot of other industrial towns in this country. It closed. The factories are now all vacant lots and misc. warehouses; the town emptied and one high school and four secondary schools actually closed. Now Anderson is comprised of basically two blue collar groups of people. One is the retired GM employees whose exorbitant and ruinous wage scale and benefits allow them to live in a bit of comfort with free insurance and a pension that they began getting around age 50. Group two are younger people who, since only one major industry has come to town since GM was forced out, have no future. Lots of drinking, drug abuse, broken marriages and broken dreams before they finally get up the nerve to move away.

Yeah, Unions sure are great. They've done so much for the auto workers of the Midwest, the Steelworkers of Pennsylvania, the textile workers of the NE and the aircraft workers out in the NW.

This is just the start of my negative feelings about unions. I could go into the fact that unions are modeled on the Marxist principle of dealing with others in groups and not as individuals. Just look at the first Union organizers... Eugene Debs, Big Bill Hayler, Mary Harris (Mother) Jones. Card-carrying Communists, every one!

I could also go into the fact that their hierarchy has long been a haven for criminals who have ordered criminal acts performed during organizing efforts (do the names John L. Lewis, Walter Reuther, Dave Beck, and of course, Jimmy Hoffa strike a bell?)

My friend, I think it best if I get completely out of this discussion . I'll give you that trade union have some merit. But labour unions? They one one of my "hot buttons."

I regrett if my words have inflamed or offended. I am award that just the word "Union" stirs a long of strong feeling, both ways, in many. However, it's not a deal breaker. After all, my most favourite driver was Curtis Turner and Hell! He tried to organize NASCAR into the damn Teamsters! If I can deal with THAT, I can deal with anything!

Peace out.

[PettyBlue]

Bob,I have no feelings oneway or the other about unions.I ask and you answered,for that I thank you.ps Peace out?Lol,pretty grovey for an old guy.

[SpaceCadet]

Nearly all the up close and personal experiences I have had with unions have been glaringly negative. The union my husband is represented by is ineffective. I see nothing gained by driver's having a union.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by SpaceCadet

Nearly all the up close and personal experiences I have had with unions have been glaringly negative. The union my husband is represented by is ineffective. I see nothing gained by driver's having a union.

As I recall they had an Advisory Board formed after the Union flare up back in the '60's. I thin it was comprised of Bill Senior, two team owners, two track owners and two drivers - I recall that Ned Jarrett was one of these - and they met to discuss safety issues, purse money, and rules.

For the life of me I can't remember why it disappeared. But something akin to that might be workable today?

[SpaceCadet]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

As I recall they had an Advisory Board formed after the Union flare up back in the '60's. I thin it was comprised of Bill Senior, two team owners, two track owners and two drivers - I recall that Ned Jarrett was one of these - and they met to discuss safety issues, purse money, and rules.

For the life of me I can't remember why it disappeared. But something akin to that might be workable today?

Much better idea. And believe it or not, even though he's a hot head, I would include Stewart on that board.

[DOF_power]

There is a thing called GPDA (grand prix drivers' association) in F1 who's main agenda is safety.

A bit more info:

When and Why the GPDA Was Founded: The Grand Prix Drivers' Association, known by its acronym GPDA, was founded in 1961 because drivers wanted more say over the organization of races both in terms of safety and payment.



Who the Members of the GPDA Are: The GPDA is made up of active Formula 1 drivers and test drivers. But not all drivers need to join the group. Some drivers join, then quit, then join again.




Areas in which the GPDA Represents Racing Car Drivers: The GPDA represents racing car drivers in areas such as safety, rules changes, insurance polices and even the image of F1 drivers. It also represents drivers in relations with the FIA, and it works closely with team engineers over car safety needs.




Where and When the GPDA Meets: After the tire safety fiasco at the U.S. Grand Prix in 2005, the GPDA began to meet at every Grand Prix race.




How the GPDA Operates: The association is organized entirely by the drivers. It has no Web site, it issues no regular press releases and has only one employee for paperwork, a secretary based in Monaco. The budget comes from fixed annual dues and further payments depending on the number of points a driver earns at races. Leftover money is transferred to the following year's budget or given to charity. Membership of GPDA is not compulsory. The members vote to decide their leaders.



The Division of Authority Within the GPDA: It is made up of a group of directors and a president, all of whom are drivers, but votes on problems are usually unanimous. Currently there are three directors of GPDA, one of whom is the chairman. Pedro de la Rosa is the chairman and Mark Webber and Fernando Alonso are the other directors.






What the GPDA Has Done: It fought for boycotts over the safety of racing circuits, such as Spa-Francorchamps in Belgium in 1969 and the Nurburgring in Germany in 1970, and then in 1976 after Niki Lauda's nearly fatal accident there.
It organized a drivers' strike in 1982 at the South African Grand Prix over its contract with the sport's governing body.
After a decade of silence, it re-emerged in 1994 after Roland Ratzenberger and Ayrton Senna were killed at Imola, and Michael Schumacher became a director.
The GPDA worked with a team doctor to calculate the medical needs at test tracks and got the teams to agree to pay the costs.

Maybe something like this would work for NASCAR drivers too ?!

[Measure]

Bob, those are some interesting concerns, but I don't think they apply to this situation.

Instead of Comparing to labor unions, we should be comparing to unions in other professional sports.

Baseball probably has the strongest player's union, and they have been able to get a lot of leverage from MLB, with the last work stoppage being over 10 years ago.

Football probably has the weakest, as once when they went on strike, the owners used replacement players, and the fans didn't notice.

In NASCAR, I think the fans would notice. If Jr and Jeff Gordon didn't show up to a few races, people wouldn't show up to watch the race.

NASCAR is different from other sports, in that there will never be a need for a salary cap. The cars cost more to build and operate, and the drivers from what I understand get a set amount of their winnings.

So the union wouldn't be about money, but giving drivers a real voice, and leverage against NASCAR for their own interests.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Measure

Bob, those are some interesting concerns, but I don't think they apply to this situation.

Instead of Comparing to labor unions, we should be comparing to unions in other professional sports.

Baseball probably has the strongest player's union, and they have been able to get a lot of leverage from MLB, with the last work stoppage being over 10 years ago.

Football probably has the weakest, as once when they went on strike, the owners used replacement players, and the fans didn't notice.

In NASCAR, I think the fans would notice. If Jr and Jeff Gordon didn't show up to a few races, people wouldn't show up to watch the race.

NASCAR is different from other sports, in that there will never be a need for a salary cap. The cars cost more to build and operate, and the drivers from what I understand get a set amount of their winnings.

So the union wouldn't be about money, but giving drivers a real voice, and leverage against NASCAR for their own interests.

Sorry, Measure. I know you honestly believe everything you state and I respect that and will defend your right to say it to the death.

However, organized player unions still have their origins in Socialism and the de-emphisizing of collectivism over individualism. They have hurt professional stick&ball sports far more than they have helped, from both the ownership and the fan point of view.

The day NA__AR drivers or crew member organize into a trade or labour union is the last day I ever support the sport by even watching it on TV!

[Measure]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

Sorry, Measure. I know you honestly believe everything you state and I respect that and will defend your right to say it to the death.

...

The day NA__AR drivers or crew member organize into a trade or labour union is the last day I ever support the sport by even watching it on TV!

Well, I have to say I also respect your opinion, but I feel my favorite drivers should have more control over the actions of NASCAR, and a Union is the only way I know of to really give drivers more power over the sport.

I don't think that the NASCAR front office should continue to have absolute power.

The panel idea brought up seems interesting as well. Not as powerful as a Union, but if the drivers commit to it, it could do some good.

[PettyBlue]

Originally Posted by Measure

Well, Not as powerful as a Union, but if the drivers commit to it, it could do some good.

Agree,as in a fund for the old drivers so no handout by the great Nascar father France family is needed.Also the top notch med team as was discussed in other threads could be there for present drivers.

[simple simon]

wow ... so many feelings on the subject ... where do i start ?

Originally Posted by Measure

Baseball probably has the strongest player's union, and they have been able to get a lot of leverage from MLB, with the last work stoppage being over 10 years ago.

with the current state of MLB i think that is one of the worst examples you could have given ..... it has been reported that in the 90's the MLB Commissioner and owners tried to institute a much tougher drug testing policy .. the players union would not allow it ... today as a result we have the steroids mess in baseball ...... you can argue that the reporting is one-sided .. but i will say that the players have never denied that this is a fact

i think there is no way NASCAR drivers should be allowed to have a union .... and i do think it would be much like a labor union ..... let's say Texas pisses off Tony Stewart .. then he can ask his union to boycott and not go to the race at Texas Motor Speedway .... how would that go over with all of you ?

how about if NASCAR does a post-race inspection and finds 5 cars with problems .... but the union tells NASCAR it cant penalize those drivers .... or maybe the union only allows NASCAR to penalize 3 of them ..... think it cant happen ?

unions are a bad idea