Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been a union member in the past, but my new role does not offer that possibility. I think someone who enjoys having everything laid out for them and in writing would appreciate the following:
- Knowing exactly where you stand in seniority, and that most business decisions concerning job bids, layoffs, weeks of vacation, and opportunities for overtime are based on this.
- Knowing exactly what your wage will be 6 months, 12 months, 18 months from now, and that everyone tops out in X number of years.
- Knowing that your direct actions and production are what keeps you employed or gets you in trouble, and your manager's perception of you (accurate or inaccurate) and annual reviews are not enforceable.
We have a segment of the business that is unionized, however, a company wide implementation of some of the same benefits allows us to partake somewhat:
- Double time over 51 hrs
- Triple time for holidays
- Tenure milestones for add'l weeks of vacation
- Generous shift differentials
- PTO stacks with worked hours to contribute towards overtime
Whether I was union or not, I was not old enough to join when the pension plan was still being offered to new hires. But I feel treated fairly and that I have a degree of autonomy.
Here we are again, the same o'l tug of war over the issues surrounding labor having a say in anything. The proposition that business has to treat it's workers fairly-- or the worker walks--is just not the reality of the American workplace. This is simply the "market talk" notion which then finds support in tales of how bad workers are being treated by unions. There are obviously many facets of American business and it's relationship with labor that get overlooked when the arguing over unions commences.
There are many failed businesses that never had any union affiliation, many failed workers who never belonged to a union, but the insistence of a belief's validity is pretty powerful, so, the beat goes on with the anti union folks who swear that America was done in by unions. Yes, they actually believe that those companies who ran away from America, union--AND--non union, were driven out by the devilish union bosses and their wayward supporters, never mind that their "new" workforce is a poorly compensated one often living in deplorable conditions, no, they are still just innocent saints, beaten down by an evil force..
That is pretty well said. For forty years and more I've watched unions get increasingly bad-mouthed and dissed and blamed. Very little of what they get blamed for is actually anything they are/were responsible for. There is a very good reason that the middle class saw a peak at the same times unions did. It is no accident that today we see so much less participation in unions, and so much more income inequality and so much harder for Average Joe to get ahead.
that isnt entirely accurate. sure, they are "part of the market" but there are laws in place to protect them and when those protections arent there; they are struggling to remain part of the market. so it is fair to question whether or not those laws are reasonable.
Almost all economic entities are protected by law. In the 1930s when the Wagner Act was passed the alternative to unions was possibly Red revolution. You know, Red revolution is a means by which the market makes corrections too. And history isn’t over.
Businessmen are generally pretty good at looking out for themselves.
Now I was a union boilermaker for 35 years, Local 1, Chicago. I made considerably more money than non union boilermakers, had better benefits and conditions. I made enough dough to put both my daughters through the U of Illinois paying every nickel out of pocket—tuition, books, housing, food-the whole shebang. Even bought a new car for them to run between Chicago and Champaign. I retired 14 years ago at 55 with an excellent pension.
Now if anyone can convince me being union wasn’t to my benefit I’ll call them Aristotle.
The benefit of others isn’t my concern, I mean that’s the way capitalism works, right—I look out for myself and you look out for yourself, right? And when someone disapproves of the success of others you accuse them of envy and being unAmerican, right?
I remember my first interaction with a union employee in lovely Gary IN at US Steel. I went to remove a cabinet door in one of the control rooms and a union electrician told me, "You can't do that - that's our job."
Didn't bother me one little bit. I stepped aside and asked him to remove all of the cabinet doors so I could access the equipment inside. That was 1985 and those union electricians were the best I've ever worked with.
If you were starting out today, do you think you'd have the same kind of job and success in Chicago?
All I see unions do is to be destructive to their workers/ members.
A very long time ago, unions did a lot of good, before there were laws protecting workers. That is no longer necessary because of the huge number of laws now in effect protecting health, safety, over time, benefits.
OregonWoodSmoke, I disagree. There's certainly a need for labor unions. Since the U.S. Congress's overriding President Truman's veto of the Taft-Harley act, organized labor's ability to organize an enterprise's employees has been increasingly diminished. Due to the weakening of USA labor unions, improvement of employees compensations, and/or working conditions, and/or security are more difficult to achieve and lesser than otherwise.
Gross domestic product, (GDP) is the nations total production of goods and service products. Trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDP and thus, also drag upon their nation's numbers of jobs.
Due to USA's chronic annual trade deficits of goods and the weakening of labor unions, the purchasing power of USA's median wage is less than otherwise.
OregonWoodSmoke, excerpted from the NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/08/o...uri-janus.html
… Owing largely to a sustained political assault on unions, their memberships have been declining since the mid-20th century — a trend that, not coincidentally, maps neatly onto rising economic inequality and falling wages. …
Excerpted from the Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/2017/10/why-wages-ar...ing-in-america
(excerpted from the Harvard Business Review.)
… The majority of Americans share in economic growth through the wages they receive for their labor, rather than through investment income. Unfortunately, many of these workers have fared poorly in recent decades. Since the early 1970s, the hourly inflation-adjusted wages received by the typical worker have barely risen, growing only 0.2% per year. In other words, though the economy has been growing, the primary way most people benefit from that growth has almost completely stalled. ...
I have limited experience with unions and realize my experience doesn't speak for all unions.
I was a non-union electrician, and then my company went union in order to bid on certain jobs.
Main differences on going union? Well my tools no longer ended up in the dumpster at jobsites, but I lost my vacation time, the health insurance choices were worse, and I made the same money, but now I had to pay dues and such, so I made less overall.
So from my perspective, it didn't really improve things for me too much. Your experience may differ
BostonMike7, your union did not persuade your employer to reduce vacation times or health insurance choices for all of their employees. If benefits prior to the union contract were superior to those of the union, your employer chose to reduce them.
BostonMike7, your union did not persuade your employer to reduce vacation times or health insurance choices for all of their employees. If benefits prior to the union contract were superior to those of the union, your employer chose to reduce them.
Likely lost at the negotiation table. I take it there wasn't a work stoppage.
Actually, most of those who don't want unions in the workplace are ignorant of the facts of union representation and labor history in general, and most, at some juncture in their career will be getting a real wake up call when they attempt to deal with HR on their own terms.
Unions never made people wealthy, but they have given rise to the idea of serving your own self interest, the same anti union types also never question why the business owner's interest is the only one deemed to be of benefit to the community or nation.
Conservatives usually whine about "handouts" to the poor, then turn around and support all that which creates a poverty stricken work force, including low wages, high profit margins, unequal educational opportunity, and a ton of other views which serve to impoverish people. most of America's poor are working, sometimes as many as three jobs. These people need representation beyond what the dept of labor can offer.
I am just against a Union being able to inject themselves into the business of an
employer and employee/potential employee.
I am just against a Union being able to inject themselves into the business of an
employer and employee/potential employee.
The employee is powerless to influence change as an individual, his coworkers' silence is acceptance of low wages and selectively enforced policies.
The employee handbook could be reduced to a single line. Like your profile says, "Love-it or leave-it Baby!!!!"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
