Unions - Best Foot Forward . . .Err . . Best Fist Forward

[spartan]

If you're not a dues paying member, you don't get to vote on issues like how much will be deducted from your check for the pension fund.

True, but you can take solice in that 2% raise and the extra week worth of vacation days they got for you. I suppose the argument is that you should get that for free? Kinda like...I don't know...a moocher?

You still haven't addressed the question of why Unions cannot simply negotiate for their members. If you are not a member of the Union you don't get the Union negotiated benefit.

[olafberserker]

In my case, I also do not get any union representation if I feel I have a grievance.  I'm on my own.

And you wouldn't be if there were no union?

not sure your point jacka$$, but mine was that I do not get ALL the benefits of union members since I am not a union member.   In other words, there are benefits to membership even if nonmembers benefit from contract negotions.

Hope that clears things up for you.

[VinBucFan]

If unions are so beneficial then why force people to be members?

[olafberserker]

I'm not forced to be a member

[jbear]

Here's the scheme.

First, non-dues paying employees receive the same pay and benefits as the dues paying union members......There's the carrot.

But, then later on and after the unions have been emasculated...out comes the stick.

Yeah, the stick like in all the other right to work states.  Poor us.   

[CBWx2]

If you're not a dues paying member, you don't get to vote on issues like how much will be deducted from your check for the pension fund.

True, but you can take solice in that 2% raise and the extra week worth of vacation days they got for you. I suppose the argument is that you should get that for free? Kinda like...I don't know...a moocher?

You still haven't addressed the question of why Unions cannot simply negotiate for their members.

For starters, federal laws prohibit it in many cases, and for finishers, how many organizations do you think are willing to negotiate separate contracts for union and non-union members in the same positions?

Whether unions exist in a workplace or not, companies typically don't vary greatly in pay, benefits, etc. from worker to worker. Every person that does a particular job usually starts at about the same rate, and gets raises or benefit increases at the same rate. The only difference between union and non-union workplaces is that the union ones typically pay more and have better benefits.

If you are not a member of the Union you don't get the Union negotiated benefit.

Yes you do.

[jbear]

If you're not a dues paying member, you don't get to vote on issues like how much will be deducted from your check for the pension fund.

True, but you can take solice in that 2% raise and the extra week worth of vacation days they got for you. I suppose the argument is that you should get that for free? Kinda like...I don't know...a moocher?

Contradiction?  I thought you liked moochers? 

I'm sure you'll just say, you're just putting it like the conservatives put it when they're talking about the 48% but uh... I'm getting the idea that you aren't a big fan of someone mooching off the union.  Even to the point that you don't have a problem denying a job to anyone who doesn't want to join a political organization with an agenda that many people find distasteful.   At least stop hating and be consistent.  Can't only have a big heart for those collecting public assistance.  Fiscal conservatives are people too. 

[CBWx2]

LOL

http://www.ijreview.com/2012/12/24948-union-thugs-attack-injure-conservative-comedian-steven-crowder/

Oops...

[CBWx2]

If you're not a dues paying member, you don't get to vote on issues like how much will be deducted from your check for the pension fund.

True, but you can take solice in that 2% raise and the extra week worth of vacation days they got for you. I suppose the argument is that you should get that for free? Kinda like...I don't know...a moocher?

Contradiction?  I thought you liked moochers? 

I'm sure you'll just say, you're just putting it like the conservatives put it when they're talking about the 48% but uh... I'm getting the idea that you aren't a big fan of someone mooching off the union.  Even to the point that you don't have a problem denying a job to anyone who doesn't want to join a political organization with an agenda that many people find distasteful.   

Who's being denied a job? You either choose to work there, or you choose not to. No "denying" is taking place. Aren't you right wingers big on choice? You don't want to work for a union, work for a place that isn't unionized. There are plenty to choose from.

At least stop hating and be consistent.  Can't only have a big heart for those collecting public assistance.  Fiscal conservatives are people too. 

If you don't see a distinction there then you are either a moron, a jackass, or both.

[spartan]

For starters, federal laws prohibit it in many cases, and for finishers, how many organizations do you think are willing to negotiate separate contracts for union and non-union members in the same positions?

Whether unions exist in a workplace or not, companies typically don't vary greatly in pay, benefits, etc. from worker to worker. Every person that does a particular job usually starts at about the same rate, and gets raises or benefit increases at the same rate. The only difference between union and non-union workplaces is that the union ones typically pay more and have better benefits.

Lots of companies already negotiate with their employees. How do you think non unionized companies do it now?

With regards to the Federal Law, I would interested knowing who pushed and the intent of the law, i.e. did Organized Labor push for it? And, what can be made can be unmade.

[CBWx2]

For starters, federal laws prohibit it in many cases, and for finishers, how many organizations do you think are willing to negotiate separate contracts for union and non-union members in the same positions?

Whether unions exist in a workplace or not, companies typically don't vary greatly in pay, benefits, etc. from worker to worker. Every person that does a particular job usually starts at about the same rate, and gets raises or benefit increases at the same rate. The only difference between union and non-union workplaces is that the union ones typically pay more and have better benefits.

Lots of companies already negotiate with their employees. How do you think non unionized companies do it now?

The same way unionized companies do, except the workers don't typically get to negotiate. In the corporate world, salaries and benefits are regularly negotiated. In the hourly wage world, places usually have a set rate that you start at, and a set benefit package that you start at, if they have benefits at all.

For example, when I was younger I worked at a hospital that was non-union. They started at $11.00 an hour to do this job, and the benefits were not great. I opted not to even get the healthcare that they offered because the deductibles were so high it wasn't even worth it. I worked there for 6 months before I got hired for the exact same position by a county run facility that was unionized. The starting pay was $13.00 an hour, the healthcare was excellent, and the benefits were head and shoulders better than anywhere else in the area. I personally didn't negotiate pay or benefits at either place. It wasn't really even an option. The rate was set at both places before I even got there.

With regards to the Federal Law, I would interested knowing who pushed and the intent of the law, i.e. did Organized Labor push for it? And, what can be made can be unmade.

Fair question. But I wonder who would be pushing to unmake it? Perhaps, the Koch brothers, and other anti-labor forces?

EDIT: I forgot to mention that at the non-union place, the workers there had complained that they hadn't gotten raises in years because of a wage freeze implemented by management. At the union facility, wage increases were yearly until you maxed out in the 5th year, as required by the union contract.

[dbucfan]

My family and I have been members of the international unions for construction trades - because one can't work on many federal, state and local government projects unless they belong to a union.

While working at a mall under construction the job superintendent allowed a non - union company (ABC workers) to work on a mid size store.  A helicopter flew over the mall.  Everyone was told move away - a man came out of the copter, walked into the construction office and shot the superintendent killing him.  No one knew or saw anything.  I finished my time in school - and got the hell away from the unions. 

[mrjack535]

Crowder didn't deserve to be hit in the face.  However, he obviously wanted to start some sort of trouble.

[spartan]

With regards to the Federal Law, I would interested knowing who pushed and the intent of the law, i.e. did Organized Labor push for it? And, what can be made can be unmade.

Fair question. But I wonder who would be pushing to unmake it? Perhaps, the Koch brothers, and other anti-labor forces?

EDIT: I forgot to mention that at the non-union place, the workers there had complained that they hadn't gotten raises in years because of a wage freeze implemented by management. At the union facility, wage increases were yearly until you maxed out in the 5th year, as required by the union contract.

To answer the question, maybe people like me that would like to see people join a Union if they wanted, but not if they did not.

And to you edit, you're saying you got a raise whether you earned it or not and whether the hospital could afford it or not? You don't see a problem with that?

[CBWx2]

you're saying you got a raise whether you earned it or not and whether the hospital could afford it or not? You don't see a problem with that?

The word "earned" is subjective. Any company can come up with a reason why any employee hasn't "earned" a raise. If a person is doing a crap job, fire them rather than keeping them there and not giving them raises. People should get raises every year to account for cost of living increases.

Although I never didn't get a yearly increase in wages when I was there, there were years where the increase was less than others based on the financial outlook of the facility. It was taken into account, and we didn't get anything that the facility didn't think they could afford to give.

The non-union facility, however, implemented a wage freeze that lasted for long after the place had gotten past it's financial troubles. The place wasn't hurting for business when I worked there. In fact, it was one of the more expensive facilities to go to in the county, and their rooms were always full. They chose not to lift the freeze because they didn't want to. They were spending the money on everything other than their employees.