Unions

[MB1008]

Internal regulation comes from a good HR team in addition to numerous labor laws.

There seems to be a misconception about employers freely firing people for no good reason. Any fortune 100 or fortune 500 company doesn't become one by firing people for no good reason. There are a number of labor laws that protect employees from this. I don't see anything wrong with turning over underperformers. I wouldn't necessarily go to the extreme of 'Top-Grading' on a yearly basis (good book by the way for job seekers), but keeping around bad employees for the sake of the ‘process’ is ludicrous.

Another misconception has to do with talent retention. Any company that cares about sustainable growth cares about retaining top talent and continuous improvement.

A non-unionized free market keeps companies from overpaying for personnel costs. Labor laws, an open market (for corporations and employees), in addition to a need for top talent retention keeps mid to large size companies from ‘mistreating’ employees.

EZ BAKE - A few thoughts on your questions...

1.) Back when there weren't many labor laws, unions use to be good to mitigate employee working conditions. Though, now, given as many labor laws as there are, there isn’t as much need for babysitting working conditions. Now, it seems unions stand for 'higher than market' wages and benefits. Take AA for example. I know some AA union mechanics (some friends and some family) that make well over 6 figures and have for years. That’s not including pensions and other benefits. These are great benefits and all, but they’re much higher than what AA would be paying if they EITHER went to the free market (ie. the same market that ‘regulates’ their revenue and non-personnel costs) and acquired new non-union talent OR de-unionized(if that’s a word) and offered former union employees a career with adjusted wages/benefits based on current market conditions. This would easily cut the wages/benefits in half (if not more) and they probably would not be sitting in the financial condition they are now. In addition, from my understanding, it’s difficult for management to cut underperformers and/or incentivize good performers in unions.

Having said this, I am a firm believer in being paid an honest day’s wage for an honest day’s work. Though, I think it is up to the open market to decide what an honest day’s wage is for the different skills/professions, not union bosses/collective union members.

2.) I think issues can arise from any union, not just from the ones that are headlined in the news.

3.) Wouldn’t ever happen. If unions ceased to exist tomorrow, there would definitely be an awkward transition period that would probably mean slow to no service/etc., but that would ultimately lead to higher profits, which leads to higher re-investment, which leads to higher employment rates. No corporations wouldn’t $#!t on employees. Though, there might be a ‘reality check’ for union workers with respect to what the other 90% of the workforce lives in.

4.) The damage from unions is measured in higher than market personnel costs with lower than average performance/efficiencies (ie. lower profits than what the company would have without a union). I’m not certain on your accusations of union workers, though I wouldn’t be surprised if it were the case based on stories from friends/family I have that work for unions. Having said that, I do know that anything you mentioned would not fly in your average fortune 500 company. Those situations are an easy ‘you’re fired’ where I’m from.

 

[FullAuto]

We brought in the union at my previous job. I voted against it. Once it came in, after a few years, I became the Treasurer and then Vice President of the local. If you can't beat them, take over and run the joint. I discovered the treasurer prior to myself had stolen funds. The previous President was involved. I represented some of the biggest piles of crap in society. We had the NLRB on speed-dial. We screwed our contractor. We screwed the federal gov't. And it was all legal. When the federal employees had their pay frozen, we negotiated so we never got less than a 5% raise. I started at great pay for the job. When I left after 9.5 years, we had our starting pay over doubled what I started at (which was still good pay at the time). Taxpayers would puke if they knew what we got away with (and still do).

In the private sector, how well do you think a company would perform if their employees used 2-3 weeks of vacation per year, used 5 sick days per year, had 10 holidays, then missed an additional 30+ business days per year unexcused? That was 10% of our non-management employees... literally. We had two employees that in a calendar year had taken their 2 weeks vacation, 5 sick days, 10 holidays and missed over 70 additional business days. I think the high one was 83 unexcused days missed. I represented a girl that had over 40 unexcused days missed, negotiated her onto the "employee improvement program" which consisted on showing up to work for 30 consecutive calendar days without a call off. This was January so we had 2 holidays that month. She called off the second week and received a reprimand. LOL

We did have our good employees but about 40% were worthless and would have been fired if we weren't union. It was a total joke. I could tell tons of stories.

 

[TerryMiller]

People don't like unions because Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck tell them to.

Every forum thread has the potential for a meaningless and ridiculous comment, even when all other comments are substantive and informative.

This was the typical BS comment, totally unworthy of being written. Long before I ever even heard of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, I had determined that unions were not necessarily a good thing.

For instance, I've yet to have someone explain to me why it is such a "good thing" for the unions to donate millions and millions of dollars to political campaigns? (Speaking of union leadership here, not necessarily union members.) Wouldn't those millions and millions be better served as benefits for the union members?

 

[ez bake]

For instance, I've yet to have someone explain to me why it is such a "good thing" for the unions to donate millions and millions of dollars to political campaigns? (Speaking of union leadership here, not necessarily union members.) Wouldn't those millions and millions be better served as benefits for the union members?

So, all unions donate money to political campaigns? Corporations without unions do not?

 

[cmhbob]

My primary experience with a union was as a non-union admin person in a union food service warehouse. They authorized the union about 3 weeks after I got hired. I was originally a warehouse clerk, pushing papers for the drivers.

I know that when the first one-year contract was up, the union walked in demanding several things, including an across-the-board raise. I forget exactly how much they were asking, but they got it, without management even blinking or making a counter-offer. Because mgt was prepared to offer a higher raise, but the union was in a crappy mood, and demanding this and demanding that. They walked in with an attitude of "We're going to show them how strong we are," and got screwed because of it.

A few months after that, I got promoted to an inventory control position. I was responsible for making sure we had the right amount of product in the right locations. We had a replenishing crew that would grab product from any old place and expect the admin people to fix the numbers in the computer. Occasionally they did it because the computer was having them make stupid moves, or they were short on time. Most of the time, it was because they were lazy. I got permission from my supervisor to start physically correcting some of these error, meaning I grabbed a lift truck and started moving stuff. The union's response was to file a grievance because I was "taking work away from union workers." Really? Work that you guys are not willing to do? They lost the grievance, and I lost what little respect I have for unions.

I was a cop for a while too, at a "small private Midwestern college." Prior to my boss getting legislation passed, colleges like my employer had to do all sorts of gymnastics to have law enforcement capability on campus. My boss drafted legislation that allowed private colleges to establish police departments. Before the FOP would support it, he had to write in that any experience officers gained at a private college PD could not be applied towards police experience when dealing with pensions and retirement. They also would not allow us to join the FOP as full members, only associate. i passed the exact same course as many officers in that state, and they said, "That's not good enough." Screw 'em.

 

[MB1008]

So, all unions donate money to political campaigns? Corporations without unions do not?

That seems like an Apples to oranges comparison based on the purpose of the two distinct entities.

Unions are (supposed to be) looking out for the welfare of their members, whereas, corporations are looking out for the value the company brings to its shareholders. I would think there are a lot more regulations that could impact a companies bottom line than there are regulations that impede the welfare of union members.

Just thinking out loud...

 

[Jim Corrigan]

Nah man, it wasn't that ridiculous. For instance, I've seen the regurgitate logic here multiple times:

"Unions force companies to pay more for personnel, thus making goods and services go up."

That's rhetoric you're learned from white collar rich guys, and you are continuing to eat it up and spit it back out. Why do goods and services have to go up if workers are paid more? Why wouldn't the management take a pay cut, or restructuring take place to ensure the business is still sustainable? Sounds to me like you are admitting that workers taking a pay cut is what drives down costs for goods and services in the first place. You admit CEO's and business owners would never take less (greed) and would pass the prices down to the consumer. But then you condone a laborer for using his or her right to assemble and get as much as they can (greed)?

 

[Lurker66]

Look at question 3 and ask the reverse. What would it be like if 93% of the workforce Unionized?

Dont kid yourself, the price of goods and services might rise, but when wages increase, the economy booms like mad. Im not trying to paint a pretty picture.

Companies will still produce and make profits, workers benefit, the nation benefits.

I dont care how much profit a company makes as long as i benefit some. If i see huge profit margins such as wal-mart, and most workers are part time, min. wage workers. That tells me Wallys is skirting the law and getting stockholders RICH on the backs of a poor workforce. That doesnt sit right with me.

OTH, mom n pop stores, small private business with small numbers of employees, shouldnt be burdened with Unions.

 

[Vamoose]

If you work for a living you can thank unions for health insurance, the 8 hour work day, 5 day work week, worker safety laws, workman’s comp, minimum wage, child labor laws, building codes, certification of skills, public schooling and retirement benefits. None of those magically appeared as a result of someone's gracious benevolence. They were earned with blood and sweat.

 

[Lurker66]

If you work for a living you can thank unions for health insurance, the 8 hour work day, 5 day work week, worker safety laws, workman’s comp, minimum wage, child labor laws, building codes, certification of skills, public schooling and retirement benefits. None of those magically appeared as a result of someone's gracious benevolence. They were earned with blood and sweat.

sooo true. Too bad "right to work" has the opposite effect. I see many "workers" here on this board defend companies and vote to protect a companies bottom line, yet dont and wont ever own a business.

Reminds me of slaves fighting for slavery.