Union Debate (A rant)

Topic: Union Debate (A rant) (Read 2416 times) previous topic - next topic

Union Debate (A rant)

April 22, 2005, 10:17:57 PM

Found this:
http://forums.autoweek.com/thread.jspa?forumID=31&threadID=14802&tstart=45
Personally, I am pro union. I kinda have one (a PBA), my wife, her brother, mother, father (retired), one of my uncles, 2 cousins etc,etc are all employed in professions that utilize some type of union for bargaining leverage. Some of what these guys say makes me sick!

Example:

Quote

the UAW (and others like it) were created to protect workers from UNSAFE work conditions and UNFAIR pay practices. Does anyone (besides them)think that these conditions still exist?

UMMMMMM YES! Ask anyone who has had a problem with their medical coverage from their employer not covering something that they were supposed to.

He then goes on to talk about how like $1000 of every new car sold goes towards health insurance costs. Health insurance costs are ridiculous due to the fact that so many out there DON"T HAVE IT AND GO TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM FOR NONSENSE AND THEN DON'T PAY SO THE COST HAS TO GET PASSED ON TO THOSE WHO DO PAY (THROUGH INSURANCE).
Blame the piss poor excuse for a welfare system in this country and Hillary's attempt to fix the HMO programs for that.

The way I see it those who are anti-union hear the horror stories about the few union types who abuse the policies set up by the union to ensure that the average guy is not left out in the wind and fired because of something miniscule in the scheme of things.

If you work a union job now and then one day the union disolved do you think you would be able to negotiate a deal for the rest of your career that would let you keep up with the increase in the cost of living? Let alone the experience that you offer as that time goes by?

Sorry about the rant.................

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #1 – April 22, 2005, 11:03:17 PM

I've never been in a union, but I've never been in an occupation that needed one. Auto techs are generally very well treated around here because they're in such high demand. There have been several attempts by the CAW (Canada's UAW) to certify the dealerships I'd worked at, and every single time it was voted down by the techs. I think there may be one or two unionized shops in metro Halifax, but the vast majority are non-union, and the techs are paid very well with all the benefits.

I suppose it's not as important here in Canada where health care is free, but I have read that health care costs and obligations are actually threatening GM's existence (there's articles about it in all the current industry rags). Jobs are going overseas and to Mexico because unions are "bargaining" themselves out of jobs. The manufacturers have to move the jobs to stay competitive with the rest of the world.

I am not union bashing, but I do believe that many (if not all) unions have become greedy. For example, the government liquor store workers here are unionized and are pulling in $30k/yr with full benefits, and their job is identical to the guy at the Kwiki-Mart pulling in $6 an hour. The government has thought about privatizing liquor sales as it is in most of the USA, but every time they mention it the union gets bent out of shape and muscles the gov't into changing their tune. They actually argue that corner store employees are not qualified to ask for ID (even though corner store employees must ask for ID when selling smokes and lotto tickets). So a case of 12 beer costs $17 and a quart of rum costs $23. Gotta pay those unionized employees, after all. And to make matters worse, it was recently revealed that a clause in the contract allowed a liquor store worker to go on sick leave indefinitely with more than full pay. This was achieved through using their 182 annual sick days (no joke). I forget how it worked, but after so many sick days the counter is reset, so they never run out. Meanwhile, while off on sick leave they are still acquiring more sick days (something like 5 new sick days for every ten days not worked). And to make matters worse, if they go off because they hurt themselves at work they get about 125% of their pay because their union clause forbids clawing back their pay when Worker's Comp pays them, so they get two pay cheques. After this was all brought out in public the practice was quickly stopped, but there are several dozen people off work that went off under the old system so they can stay off forever. It was even mentioned in Reader's Digest's "That's Outrageous" section.

My parents are both government employees, and they're both unionized. They get 30 vacation days a year (six weeks at 5 days/week). They get 10 "family illness" days. Then there's the "bereavement" days (five a year). They also get 30 sicknesses (not sick days - sicknesses) a year. For example, if they go off work for two days it counts as two of their allotment, but if they go off for three it counts as one "sickness". If they're off for longer, that "sickness" can last for up to 120 days before they start drawing long term disability at 95% pay (tax free). After two years they go on a permanent disability at 75% tax free. It's not as bad as the liquor store workers (though it is the same union) because they can't accumulate days like the L.C. workers could, but still, they're only expected to show up at work for less than half of the year while getting full pay. And they wonder why the government, when they're trying to save money, wants to have layoffs.

And when I ride my father about this he says "Hey, we got those benefits fair and square!". They got them by threatening to strike and thus shut down the entire health care system if they did not get them. The government then threatened to label them as "essential services" and thereby remove their right to strike, so what did they do? They staged an illegal walkout. The government obviously could not fire its entire health care staff, and they certainly couldn't hire replacements with the "striking" employees picketing every entrance, so it had to relent. The union literally extorted the benefits out of the government. Does that mean that if I ram a gun down the throat of a convenience store clerk and demand his money that I got it "Fair and square"?

I fully agree that unions were originally invented to ensure safe working conditions and fair pay. The problem is that unions have really, REALLY stretched the "fair pay" part. Like I said: $30k/yr for a cashier? Unions are still very necessary in a few cases, but there comes a point when the employer should be able to say "30 SICK DAYS??? ARE YOU NUTS?!?!?!?"

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #2 – April 22, 2005, 11:51:58 PM

I have been on both sides, as a union employee and in management. I started working for my present employer the week they voted in their union (UAW). I think my experience as a supervisor in a union plant was the main reason I was hired. They are in process of negotiating their 2nd contract, and had to take a "break". Seems as though things were getting a bit heated and the corporate team and the international commitee decided to take over for awhile. They will be voting May 1, but I'm really not sure why!? Sounds funny, but the UAW got what they wanted during the first negotiations with this plant (a neutrality clause throughout the other plants under the same corporate name, allowing them to walk in and start a union drive without resistence) and were willing to back this plant to walk out on strike in order to get it (the strike lasted 3 days), but don't seem to be as interested now. 90% of the people here had no idea why they were walking out when it happened. These people here were used as puppiess in a little game, and they will start seeing the results now. If our plant goes on strike, we shut down one of Ford's biggest money making plants, and @3000 union people will be without jobs (only about 400 from our plant). What do you think will happen?? It was all political in order for the UAW to get their hands in several small plants worldwide, and since ours opened the door, the people here are stuck with the repercussions. Sad really...but true. :disappoin

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #3 – April 23, 2005, 12:46:30 AM

well, i dont want to get into a rant or realy go on. i just wanted to say im pro union. other than out health insurance needing a little work i have no complaints for the most part. im a new england union carpenter. some of the politics are a little screwed but are slowly getting worked out. im not a very political person and frankly am embarrased that im not involved in politics on any level and i dont always know whats going on. as far as i am concerned with my union i see on a personal level what its done for me and how i have benifited by being a union member. i have pretty good insurance, great anuity, good pension, good vacation, free education and training available, all kinds of outreach / carpenters assistance programs that i can take advantage of, generally MUCH safer work enviornment than non union, proper training in osha/safety/scafolding, lots of required (5 years) on the job training as well as school, i stack of people there to help you if you have any problems.

ive worked for some small non union companies. so far they have been a joke. half the pay, absolutely no bennies, every one of them have asked me to do some very stupid, risky and dangerous things. weather it was the "easier" way, or would save them a little money or get something done quicker. one, i told them to piss off and find somebody else to do it. another i walked off. another i was fired from. the guy that realy needs that job is faced with making the same decision. most of the time with these non union companies you are technically "self employed" and are 1099. if the guy gets hurt hes pretty screwed. he also has nobody to mediate any problems. basically, its much better to not be alone. im not saying all non union companies are the same or are bad.

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #4 – April 23, 2005, 01:50:51 AM

Unions get a bad image because they constantly being used by the "bad worker" the slug that isn't doing his/her job and needs the union to get him/her out of trouble. The "good Employee" will most likely never need a union in their entire carrer.

NOW I"M NOT saying that only bad workers need unions or anything like that, I know there are some special cirspoogestances that good people are about to get screwed and the union helps them out. I'm all for that. I actually had a union help me out when I didn't even call them. Quick story, years ago I was a member of local 1776 for a supermarket job I had in high school through college (9years) Anyway my rep calls me up one day and says "hey we were doing an audit on the union dues and we found out that you been being paid $1.75/hr less than you were suppose to get". For almost 2 years my rate was all screwed up, some how I missed a raise when I got a promotion and never noticed. I got like a $6,200 retro check that summer

taxes killed me that week.. the company was pissed and gave it to me in a lump sum

But for a union to help someone get out of trouble because they are late everyday or got caught stealing etc... is so wrong it's not funny

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #5 – April 23, 2005, 02:09:03 AM

Quote

Unions get a bad image because they constantly being used by the "bad worker" the slug that isn't doing his/her job and needs the union to get him/her out of trouble

i totaly agree on that too. ive run into a ton of scabs. alot of journyman carpenters that knew somebody to get in as a carpenter and skipped the whole apprentiship. alot of them dont know what they are doing or just plain dont care, and basically kiss ass and stand in line and collect a paycheck every week. what realy gets me is the ones who have the bosses/formans fooled. i cant count how many guys that "have been doing this for so and so many years" doing things wrong. its always the first thing they say when a lowly youngin apprentice such as myself points something out to them. i finally finnish up my apprenticeship in a few months...yay!

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #6 – April 23, 2005, 09:39:00 AM

Quote

But for a union to help someone get out of trouble because they are late everyday or got caught stealing etc... is so wrong it's not funny

And there is the biggest problem with unions. A local and absolutely shameful example:

A nurse at the QE2 Health Sciences Centre (same hospital my parents work at) was caught stealing narcotic medications (Codeine, Morphine, etc). Her name was pasted all over the newspapers for her shameful crime, and yet the Nova Scotia Nurses Union was hell bent on defending her actions, demaning an apology from the hospital for releasing her name, and demanding that no punishment would be doled out. The nurse got off scott free aside from public embarrasment.

Six months later, the SAME NURSE was caught again. Because the administration was keeping an eye on her she could not outright steal the drugs out of the cabinet, what she was doing this time was making up patients' doses but only giving them half of what the doctor ordered. If a doctor felt that a patient should have 30mg of morphine to ease their pain, the nurse gave them 15mg and took the rest herself. She admitted that she was taking the drugs at work, and that she worked stoned. When she was caught the union cried bloody murder again, and once again she got off scott free (her "discipline" was to be moved to another dept after a short paid suspension). Now the hospital is subject to several lawsuits from patients who suffered unneccesarily at the hands of this nurse. Patients lie there in pain while this nurse was stoned out of her gourd. I'm not usually a big fan of lawsuits, but had I been in this bitch's care I'd be on that lawsuit bandwagon too, but I'd be adding the NSNU as a defendant because they not only enabled, they promoted her behaviour.

Now, when unions are used as shame302 says (safe conditions, fair pay, decent training) I'm 100% pro-union, but when they get so power-mad and corrupt that they defend the actions of a criminal union member it's time to take another look at this whole union thing.

In the real world (I always use the term "real world" when ribbing my father about his cushy job) that nurse would have:

Been fired on the spot, with no ifs, ands or buts
been scorted off the property and into the back seat of a police car
been charged with theft
been charged with wreckless endagerment of people's lives, or at the very least, criminal neglect
Had her name dragged through the mud with nobody to try to make it nice for her
Had her nurse's license permanenlty revoked (maybe not the first time, but on the second offence, anyway)
been sued herself by the patients she neglected and abused

Instead, she got

three month paid vacation
new job

Yeah, the union was doing a lot of good for society here. Even other nurses (my sister included) are outraged that their union went to bat over this criminal. I know it is an extreme case of a corrupted union, but I'm sure it's not that isolated...

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #7 – April 23, 2005, 11:41:22 AM

Greed has come into play in many cases which is unfortunate. However, to take the union out of a profession where there is none just makes no sense to me. A common ground must be found.

I can see a young powerhungry management type demanding more and more out of some fresh new employee who has not had time to yet get all his necessary training and safety briefings etc. The new guy gets hurt. Does that manager care? No....."Hire someone else to replace him" he says. Let's be real, workman's comp that is through the state and federal gov't won't pay the bills (not up here ayway) A good union would have kept that guys job and made sure he had money to pay his bills until he could return to work.

I see powerhungry management at my job as well. Example: I'm on overtime finishing up some paperwork. I've been there for about an hour past my shift. Now every five minutes or so this one guy in particular keeps asking when I'll be done and then I have to stop and show him, where I'm at. Finally, at about 8:15 (my shift ends at 7:000 he asks again. I reply, "If you stopped asking every five minutes, I would have been HOME ALREADY."
Every time I see this guy he does it to someone. Just in his nature. Somehow he thinks that saving overtime will make him look good. The supervisors have their own PBA as well and he's running for a now vacant delegate spot. I'm curious to see if he'll try to chase other supervisors out the door if they are on overtime.

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #8 – April 23, 2005, 11:44:55 AM

Union's have outlived their usefullness. One save my grandfathers job many years before I was born, but they were still useful then. In my lifetime all I've seen is unions saving the jobs of drug abuse or lazy workers that only got the job because they had a friend in the company who's also lazy. Between bean counters and union's american made products have gone downhill so fast its obvious why the puppiesanese markets are taking over. Hell, ford would be out of business if they weren't charging outrageous amounts for trucks that are dirt cheap to produce. Nissan, Toyota, and Honda are charging those segments now and they're probably better made so we'll see how long things last.

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #9 – April 23, 2005, 04:15:58 PM

Quote

And there is the biggest problem with unions. A local and absolutely shameful example:

bottom line is that for EVERYTHING out there designed to be a good thing there are ALWAYS scumbags that abuse it or misuse it...

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #10 – April 23, 2005, 06:16:44 PM

OMG I cant believe you guys. I see some very shinny examples of what corporate america wants its workers to believe....... I am pro union and VERY outspoken about it. I wished this topic hadnt of come up in this forum but since it did I must reply before it gets locked. Is it wrong that union employees try to get as much as they can from their bargining agreement? I see everyone here bashing the fact that union employees have it so much better than everyone else.... Is that wrong? Wouldnt you want to get as much as you could in return for an honest days work? You guys have fallen for the type of B.S. that corporate america wants you to buy into. What about the executives that make millions and reap huge bonuses while its employees work at or below poverty levels? What about companies that send its work overseas and say that its to cut costs and never pass the savings on to the consumer? Unions were and still are the best friend a worker can have. I read all the time that people are saying that unions are costing people their jobs which is bullshiznit. Company greed is what is costing people their jobs. If a company is struggling to stay above water you dont see the top executives taking pay cuts to help the company....No its the little guy that gets the shaft. The company I work for went bankrupt from the owners stealing the money. The new owners asked the bankruptcy judge to approve them 30 million in retention bonuses for the top exec's while the workers cant even get new tools to keep the doors open for business. In this country the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. Now more than ever Unions are needed to help the working class man.

I truely thought some of you were smarter than this. Since when is it the unions fault that a companies products are cheaply made? More likely its the company that is cutting quality to fatten its pockets. If an employee does something wrong and the company has the proof of it no union on earth can save that job. Ive seen it happen with my own eyes. The law is the law and if you break it and your caught your finished. Im sure you dont have half the story on the Stealing Nurse story. I better stop writing before I say something to end some friendships and pray for this thread to get locked or deleted.

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #11 – April 23, 2005, 06:38:29 PM

This sure makes for some interesting reading. I'm not really qualified to comment on unions with any sort of authority.. they just don't seem to fly down here in the South.. but I do have to say that being an apologist for a thieving druggie is rather shameful, no matter how pro-union someone is.

My first fiance was a cocaine addict (amongst other problems) before I met her. That should have been a red flag to me right away, but I put it out of my mind.

When she stole some jewelry from my mother and her own mother caught her with it, I should have dumped her right there.. but my own feelings for her gave me the ability to forgive her for it. When she later stole jewelry from my father, I also let it go. Then we had our breakup.. her behavior had been more and more erratic over time.. and friends were coming to me asking me if she was on drugs or something. Isn't hard to figure out that she probably went back to the blow. The breakup was so messy that it even landed me in the hospital at one point. Not only do I have to live with the memories of that, which I've tried hard to block out for almost a decade now, but I have to live with the shame of favoring a thieving druggie TWICE over my own parents.

One thing is right, though: This thread is probably gonna get ugly.

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #12 – April 23, 2005, 07:44:42 PM

Quote

If an employee does something wrong and the company has the proof of it no union on earth can save that job. Ive seen it happen with my own eyes. The law is the law and if you break it and your caught your finished. Im sure you dont have half the story on the Stealing Nurse story. I better stop writing before I say something to end some friendships and pray for this thread to get locked or deleted.

Bullshiznit, Bullshiznit, Bullshiznit. Had the nurse only been caught once I could almost (but not quite) see giving her a second chance, but the second time she was caught she should've been thrown in jail like anyone in the real world would have been. I know the story, my parents who work in the same hospital as that nurse know the story, and my sister that is in the same union as this nurse knows the story. The whole province knows the story, and most likely everyone in Canada knows the story, because much to the Nova Scotia Nurse's Union's chagrin, the story was pasted all over the newspapers, TV news and radio. Also published was the union's reaction, which did major damage to the reputation of unions in general. Charges were not pressed because the union pressured the hospital into not pressing charges. With no charges being pressed, the RCMP had no work to do. And the thieving nrse is still nursing, and because she did not get punished, she's probably still thieving.

If unions want to improve their very tarnished image, they should distance themselves as far as possible from things like this. Had that nurse been wrongfully accused I can see the union standing up for her. Hell, I can even see the union standing up for her until she is found guilty. This woman, however, ADMITTED TO STEALING DRUGS FROM WORK, TAKING THOSE DRUGS WHILE AT WORK, and NEGLECTING HER PATIENTS WHILE STONED AT WORK!!!!! People were suffering undue pain as a direct result of this woman's neglect, and her union stood up for her!!! And you defend her union, and then have the nerve to denounce us as stupid because we have a different opinion than you? Weasle, with all due respect, it is statements such as this that drive your cause further into the ground.

Unions do not affect me. I am self employed. I live in a country with free health care. I do not give a rat's ass about "Corporate America" because, well, I'm not American. I can honestly say that I am an unbiased bystander in the union/nonunion debate because whatever the outcome it will not affect me. When I read ignorant statements like yours, however, I do tend to get pushed to one side of the argument.I grew up eating food that unionized jobs provided, and I also watched about 1500 jobs go to Mexico when Volvo pulled out of Halifax. This was shortly after the so-called "bargaining", which is nothing more than a union holding a plant hostage, gave the employees a big raise and a bunch of benefits. Now the employees have no jobs. And it's happening all over North America. It happened in Quebec, where a union attempt at a Wal-Mart resulted in Wal-Mart closing the store. BAM - 500 or so employees in the pogey office.

Your union is just as guilty of propaganda (actually, probably moreso - it certainly worked on you) than any corporation. Unions making unreasonable demands DO destroy jobs. Do you hate the manufacturer for sending the jobs overseas? Hate all you want, but you must remember that no matter what your shop steward tells you, the corporation is not a charity. They are in it to make money, and they cut costs to make more money. When they make more money their shares go up, which pleases stockholders. When the employees unionize and get greedy the company pulls the pulg and heads overseas. It's business, and in a global economy your unions can't do a ed thing about it.

How 'bout a unionized shop on one side of the street versus a non-unionized shop on the other? The unionized shop is forced to pay its employees 50% more than the "going rate". The non-union shop pays its employees the going rate. The unionized shop is forced to charge $75 an hour labour to pay its mechanics the $25/hr their union demands. The non-union shop charges $60 an hour and pays its employees $15/hr. Both sets of employees get the same benefits because the non-union shoop must offer incentives to lure employees away from other non-union shops. Which shop do you think will get more business? This is why there are very few union shops in this area. The unionized employees of the (now closed) Chrysler store in Dartmouth could tell you all about it as they watched non-unionized Dodge dealer's business boom.

Believe it or not, Weasle, these big, bad corporations would not exist if there was not money to be made. Henry Ford did not start building cars because he wanted people to have cars, he did it to make money. Nowadays Ford moved those Volvo jobs for the same reason - they are in it to make money. They can't cut costs by using cheaper materials because the competition uses good components. The costs must be cut somewhere, and if they can get the same labour at half the price, you can kiss the American jobs goodbye. And the problem is even more profound in small businesses where the owner can't afford a huge increase in payroll expenses.

Like it or not, in a global economy, the greedier the unions get the more they shoot their own feet. Jobs will move to cheap labour markets. Protectionist tarriffs would not work because it would drive consumer prices so high there would be open revolt. The only way unions will prevent this is to stop the greed. Which, of course, will not happen, because greedy, self-serving entities are not known for looking to the future. instead, they'll continue to put out "Unions good, free market competition BAD" propaganda and try to maintain the status quo. And they'll try to label anyone that does not agree with them as "unintelligent".

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #13 – April 23, 2005, 07:53:50 PM

And once more, I'm not anti-union. When required, unions are a good thing. I'm anti-stupidity, and a union defending a thieving nurse not once, but twice, is sheer stupidity. So is a million paid sick days a year. So is a cashier earning $30k for a job another cashier is earning $15k/yr at. And before it is suggested that all cashiers should make $30k/yr, let's think about what this would do to the economy. A dollar bottle of pop would now cost $2. A $2 gallon of gas would now cost $3. And a skilled worker now earning $30k/yr would now want $50k/yr because he would (rightfully) expect to be paid more than a cashier. This, in turn, would make the $50k earner want $80k. And let's not forget that unionized cashier that started this whole mess - he would not be content to earn the same $30k/yr than the non-union cashier, so he'd want $45k/yr. And so on.

When used for FAIR wages and FAIR benefits, unions are good. The key wod is FAIR, a word that many (not all, and probably not even most, but certainly some) unions have long forgotten the meaning of.

Re: Union Debate (A rant)

Reply #14 – April 23, 2005, 11:00:12 PM

Quote

I see everyone here bashing the fact that union employees have it so much better than everyone else.... Is that wrong? Wouldnt you want to get as much as you could in return for an honest days work

How is EVERYONE here bashing unions? Like I said....I'm in one (well, a PBA, a slight difference) and am thankful for it. Some are for some are against.

Quote

One thing is right, though: This thread is probably gonna get ugly.

I hope not. It's good to see other people's perspectives.

Quote

as far as i am concerned with my union i see on a personal level what its done for me and how i have benifited by being a union member. i have pretty good insurance, great anuity, good pension, good vacation, free education and training available

Same goes for me here. The delegate who works the same shift as me is a stand up guy. We've had a guy once who was abusing the system. My delegate had suspicions of what this guy was doing and so did supervision (nothing illegal, but against job policy and he was becoming a burden to those who worked around him). A warning was given, it was not heeded and the guy suffered for it. His punishment was fair however due in part to my delegate. The job wanted to fine him 45 days pay ( a severely stiff penalty) With some negotiation 10 days was settled upon along with being placed on 6 month supervisory probation.