Unions: I need an intellegent discussion on their validity

[smoothmoniker]

Originally Posted by SteveDallas

You know, when Mrs. Dallas lived in the NYC burbs of NJ, she got lots of gigs through the local chapter. It was definitely worth it. She hasn't gotten a single gig from the local here in 15 years. I think she oughta drop it, but she doesn't want to.

I have never, ever, gotten a gig through the AMF. The only reason I don't drop my membership is because it's impossible to do anything in this town that touches TV or film without being a member. All of the industry gigs are closed shop.

-sm

[Griff]

My present gig is a non-union position on a university campus as well. If we were unionized, we probably would not exist and a buch of kids with autism wouldn't get the services they need. It is very expensive to keep the staff to student ratio we need. That would not be doable in a union shop. We have some very good people who could be getting fat in the public schools, but find this much more rewarding. That said, we have a lot of turnover based on burn out and financial issues. I'd say if you feel like you're making what your financial backers can afford and your boss isn't a complete SOB, I wouldn't bother.


edit: There is also the point that folks who can't or won't do the job tend to leave. In a union environment, they might just stay on the teat...

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by LabRat

Yesterday, I actually had 2 people come to my HOUSE (40 miles form work) to get me to sign the 'card' for an election. (I did not!!)

There are limitations on organizing at work. By signing the card you are saying you would like to put it to a vote of employees, not joining a union. The need X number of cards to force a vote. Once they have that, then they start campaigning for votes. If they win the vote, then they start campaigning for members. Not all union "shops" are closed "shops". There are a myriad of laws, state and federal laws that govern what the company/union contract can entail, depending on the type of relationship between the company and the public/government.

Traditionally unions were a blue collar thing but in recent years more and more white collar groups have been organizing. It's easy to see why when you look at the stats for people in white collar jobs regarding the rise in hours worked, unpaid hours, unused vacation and sick time, decreasing benifits and pressure, pressure, pressure.

There is also the point that folks who can't or won't do the job tend to leave.

Unless they are connected....bosse's wife's nephew... then they stay and you get the boot just before your pension is vested.

A lot of companies are getting smart and slacking off the adversarial attitude. They have come to realize the people that know how to make the place more efficient is the people that do the job. They are looking for easier, faster ways to do it constantly and it's to the companies advantage to spread this knowledge around to all the employees. They are using Employee Involvement programs to do it, and they've been wildly sucessful. The auto companies found the bosses were giving orders that were actually detrimental to efficiency. The troops knew it but had no say. Now they do, the bosses listen and production/quality/efficiency goes up.

[tw]

Originally Posted by LabRat

What I would really appreciate fellow Cellarites, is anyone's $0.02 on unions.

Adversarial unions are created by adversarial management. Too often, when management is blaming the union, they forget to notice why the problems originally exist.

In some places, the union does perform well for their people. For example, in GM where plants are innovative, I have seen unions workers intentionally violate union rules only because they want to help out fellow employeess - unionized and otherwise. In some union plants where the work required worker independence, the union negotiated special conditions for those plants that provided workers with more freedom to decide what did and did not need be done. However where GM was making crappy products, top management was always then quick to blame the unions.

One of the many AT&T long distance blackouts in NYC was created by management who did not understand what that red light meant. When batteries died at 2 PM (cutting off the AT&T long distance service to NYC and even shutting down all airports), then Robert Allen was quickly blaming unions for *again* creating problems. But the union guys were all out on a training program. Robert Allen just knew it must have been the unions. Just another reason why AT&T was a dying company for so many decades.

One union guy just happened to stop by about the same time Robert Allen was preaching before the press. He found managers running about in chaos without any idea why the switching station had shut down. He corrected the open switch that management never bothered to comprehend in many union warning memos.

Unions have attempted to unionize Honda on multiple occassions. But Honda does not go about blaming their employees since 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. Employees rejected the union because they don't have adversarial (and therefore anti-innovation) management.

You must decide whether the management is there to blame the employees for problems, or to deal with problems at the source - management. Therein lies a criteria for unions. Unions are a symptom of and therefore created by bad (and self serving) management.

Is your management bad? One ball park criteria is their salaries and bonuses. Generally the worst management also tends to be the best paid. Go figure. But that has historically been the trend with but a few very obvious exceptions.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by tw

Adversarial unions are created by adversarial management. Too often, when management is blaming the union, they forget to notice why the problems originally exist.

Sometimes. I ran into a problem in a local school system while attempting to do some Sp Ed research. The research I was doing happened to coincide with a major blow up between the union and administration. In this case the union is resisting Federal Law. Teachers unions are notorious for being run by old teachers who know everything about education. These tend to be the same folks who don't want non-typical students in their classrooms.

Which union you join is a biggy as well, in education the choices are not good.

[LabRat]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

There are limitations on organizing at work. By signing the card you are saying you would like to put it to a vote of employees, not joining a union. The need X number of cards to force a vote. Once they have that, then they start campaigning for votes. If they win the vote, then they start campaigning for members.

I didn't sign, but I took a card to read it. First sentance sounds like I'm telling who I want to represent me, not just saying 'sure have an election, s'ok by me!! Fishy Fishy.

"I hereby designate Service Employees Internatiuonal Union ("SEIU") local 199 as my collective barganing representative. I understand that this card will be used by the Union to request that an election be conducted by the Public Employment Relations Board."

Date_______ Signature__________________________

And, here there are no limitations about what we talk about on our breaks, including unionizing --or not. Since I work with 95% men, I occasionally wish there WERE...

[staceyv]

you guys forgot this:

[LabRat]

I guess I just don't see the NEED. We have boatloads of vacation and sick leave...from the first day I started here, I earned 12hrs of sick and 16hrs of vacation per pay period (month). By the time I had my daughter, my accumulated time gave me a 100% paid maternity leave, AND i was even adding to my time while away, so when I came back, i still had a couple days to spare! Pay is what Pay is. We aren't exactly doing research for profit, and anyway, I'm not at this to get rich. My boss gives me what he can, I see the budget, and he gives me extra flexability instead of extra $$. To me, knowing my boss understands and supports that I'm a mom first, and a scientist second is worth millions.

The Operations Manual covers everything from hours to work, to grievance procudures, to raises to you name it. AND ITS FREE! I don't have to pay a monthly due to be covered by it.

[be-bop]

I've got no experience of how unions work in the States but 'Ive been working in various jobs for around 32 years(God is it really that long) and I have been a member of a few unions even getting into being a union Rep.
Ive never found it to be other than a positive thing..
Over here there are usually other benefits to being a member (IE) death benefit insurance,eductational stuff, legal help plus the protection that membership brings that management just cant fire your arse on a whim.
The UK may have better employment rights than the states I don't know but union subs are usually not that expensive,give it a try if not for you.you can always come out again.

[Razorfish]

To sum up my views I would say there are two sides to the coin.

Good
Unions are designed to protect those with trade skills, more specifically, trade skills that don't transfer over to other lines of work very well. If you have an occupation that is very specialized (examples: pipefitter or electrical lineman) it may be in your interest to be represented by a legal entity that can fight back when managment tries to push you under the carpet. For the most part I would say unions spring up in situations where workers feel that management does not care for them. This can be seen in large work environments with many people doing similar, highly specialized jobs. No one enjoys being seen simply as a cog in a machine by their boss so unions fight back for them.

Bad
Unions are notorious bullies. Why does it cost so much to make a movie? Unions have managed to get a strangle hold on all jobs related to movie production. You want to produce a movie you have no choice but to hire union help. As a producer you may feel its unwarranted to pay set extras $1300 a day but you don't have much choice when your whole studio is union. Related to union dues, I have seen many unions set up for the purpose of profit making (a few top managers making money off workers). If you can get 1000 workers to give you $10 a month then your making a good profit. Not all unions are scams but many are pretty closed lips about where union dues go.


Related to your job LabRat it sounds like you have no real need for a union. Your pay resembles that of a contracted employee. If there is work you get paid, if there is no work your out. The understanding between you and your employer is what brings up the question of wheater a union is needed or not. But for the record, I seriously think some people set up unions for the purpose of self profit and an excuse to bully more money out of their employers.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I have seen unions workers intentionally violate union rules only because they want to help out fellow employeess

Union rules is a misnomer. It sounds like unions make the rules when in fact the rules are spelled out in the contract which the union and company come up with jointly.
Of primary importance to a union is the safety and welfare of there members. That's why things like electricity, chemicals, dangerous equipment, etc, should only be handled by people that are trained to handle it safely. You don't want someone that doesn't have a clue, operating a crane over your head.
"Hey, something spilled, I'll wipe it up. says the helpful employee. What if it's acid? What if it's flammable? What if it's a live 440 volt line laying in the spill?
Way too many people die at work in this country. In non-union shops everyone is at risk when the foreman, under pressure to produce, take shortcuts. No safety switches, no belt guards, no warning signs, no fire bottles.
One thing that will always underlie any agreement is "Managements right to manage". They run the show and it's the unions only job to make sure the management doesn't violate the contract. If something isn't covered by the contract the union can request the company sit down and work out an arrangement to cover the situation. But, the union can't force anything unless the company violates the contract or the law.

[lookout123]

you are absolutely right in all of that Bruce. In a manufacturing or trades environment i think unions are close to a necessity.

in Labrat's situation i don't see any positive for her.

[LabRat]

Thanks for the input all. I'll keep you posted on the progress.

[LabRat]

Last night, at 7:00pm two more representatives stopped by my home to get me to sign a card. I told them that I thought that it was confidential who signed or not. The last 2 who were at my house told me XXX (a well known RA on campus) signed a card, there was no way I'd sign one. How am I supposed to trust anything I was told? After that, they said g'night. Hopefully that'll be the end of it.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by lookout123

you are absolutely right in all of that Bruce. In a manufacturing or trades environment i think unions are close to a necessity.

in Labrat's situation i don't see any positive for her.

I agree in that her situation is unique.