Need Insight with the Unions
 

I need some help - info on the workings or Unions, mostly Ironworkers, UAW and Teamsters. I'm looking for insight on real world storys and the dynamics of the unions and the politics. You don't have to respond on this thread, but you can e-mail me at mhollowa@nch.com if you can help. I will tell you why I need this info if you want - just e-mail me.

Any info provided would be appriciated! THANKS.

shameless bump

Post it here. I've been meaning to ask about unions myself. I am a white collar professionnal working in DC (few unions). I travelled to Baltimore for a trade show and saw they had union labor setting up the booths. I don't know any union guys, so I was curious for more information on what they do for you (aside from collect dues)? I am honestly really curious....

Sorry to hijack, but maybe it will serve as a bump.

I heard a teaser/blurb on the radio this AM about one WalMart location where the employees successfully unionized, and WalMart shut down
the store!

Wow! Walmart sucks but I could care less about Unions.

In the govt position I'm in I'm supposed to be a teamster and they collect dues (agency fee) from me but I haven't officially joined.

I had never worked in a civil service job before so I was naive to the possiblity of it being union. After I got my first pay check I had $35 deducted called "Agency fee" so I went to HR and asked about it.

"Oh, that's your union dues."

"What union?"

"Nobody told you? You're a teamster now."

f&*k.

Whenever I think about it I get pissed but it did help me once. When my wife was giving birth to our son I wanted to take "paid family leave" which our HR people didn't even know about. In CA SDI pays for men to take 6 weeks of Paid family leave covered under SDI rules (guarantees your job) and FMLA. The Union folks gave me all the information I needed to educate my HR people. I still ended up taking vacation and sick time instead like an idiot. Faced with that choice again I will take the sdi time, especially if I'm still in the government job.

On the other hand, the Union negotiates my salary and since I'm at the top of my pay scale and there are no jobs above mine save for my Director and the CIO - I'm stuck. I haven't had a raise in almost 2 years save for 2% cost of living. What does this mean? I have no motivation to work very hard because I simply won't be rewarded for it any more than if I didn't. It is frustrating because I have always been a very productive employee in the private sector and I'm used to be rewarded for it.

I'm considering other opportunities but with a new family started having the sick time that a govt job gives me and the ability NOT to have to work too hard and still get paid a decent wage - well those are hard to give up. Plus there is the CALPers retirement which is likely nothing to me since I likely won't stay 20 years. Also the benefits are paid for my family - not a bad deal either.

I'm thinking Superman will have some insight. Perhaps you can PM him.

Unions are a double edged sword. They were set up with the best intentions of protecting / aiding the worker. Just like everything else it is over run with corruption.

My Dad was a Teamster in NYC for 20 years. They came to his aid quite a few times, but, he knew for a fact the Local he belonged to was Mafia controled. This was in the 70's - 80's so I am not sure if this is still the case.

Good arguments can be made for pro and con.

I might. Just got back from a labor relations workshop.

Mikester, I understand your frustration. You seem sensitive to workers' position on at least some matters (you support attractive pay and benefit packages, I think), so I'll offer my assumption that besides the specific help you got on a one-to-one basis from the Teamster folks, they also sit at the bargaining table at which some of your pay and benefit issues are decided. They may have done much more for you and your colleagues over the years than just provide FMLA benefit info to you personally.

Wal-Mart is a scourge and should be taught a painful lesson. One of the most insane (because it is true) things I heard at yesterday's labor relations workshop concerns an agreement that can be created between an employer and a labor union in which the employer agrees that it will not interfere in workers' decision to certify the union as its bargaining agent, and will recognize that union if it secures votes from the majority of rank-and-file workers. That's crap and the reason it's crap is because the National Labor Relations Act already provides this (non-interference) protection from employers during organizing efforts. It's just that the NLRB is asleep at the wheel regarding enforcement. Wal-Mart should be fined a bazillion dollars and told unequivocally that it must deal in good faith for a change or seek markets outside my country.

Not sure what your specific curiosity is Mike, but I'll PM you in case I can steer you in the direction of some helpful resources.

Oh BTW, and FWIW, collective bargaining equals fairness. If the employer gets to bargain with each individual separately, then no worker has nearly the clout in those negotiations that the employer has. Divide and conquer.

On the other hand, if workers bargain collectively, then their clout rises to somewhere near the company's strong bargaining position. That's the essense of organized labor.

Mike,
I don't have any experience with UAW or the Teamsters, but I do have first hand knowledge of the CWA (Communications Workers of America). I supervisor 14 construction splicers and have lots of stories of the BS that I have to go through everyday.
Pete

I'll try to accurately relay a union story...

My best friend works in a machine shop. The shop employs about two dozen union and non-union people total. He is the production supervisor (or something like that) and is non-union. His father-in-law owns and runs the shop. From what I understand, the father-in-law began as a silent investor, and the guy originally running the shop really mucked things up. Because of this guy's incompetence, the workers in the shop unionized. Because of this guy's continued incompetence, all of the best worker's left the company...leaving only incompetent people.

Eventually, the father-in-law bought out the whole company and the idiot-manager left. In his efforts to turn the company around, he has been continually hampered by the union. He cannot fire any of the incompetent union member,s including one who continually shows up for work drunk. He has tried, been sued, and forced to reinstate the drunk. He brought on new workers, but can't pay them more than the incompetent workers, because the incompetent workers have seniority over the newer, more productive workers. Further, even when production is low, he can't lay anyone off because he'd have to lay off the new productive workers before the senior incompetent ones.

In a company of just two dozen people, what one worker does makes a huge difference in the company's financial picture. He has to lug around a half-dozen imbeciles. The father-in-law is a small employer, and is subject to the whims of the HUGE union. He has no bargaining power, because the union can easily find its members other jobs.

All labor laws favor the unions. Once a shop has become union (at least in Illinois), it can never be de-unionized. All of the non-union workers are keenly aware that if they say anything negative about the union and any union member hears it, they will sue the company out of existence. (They will claim that the company is trying to intimidate the union and its members.)

I don't think all unions are bad, but they seem to do more for themselves anymore than they do for their members. They also seem to have created a sense of entitlement and a disincentive to be productive. (Don't get me started on Caterpillar and the UAW...)

Superman = union theory
Legion = union reality

Collective bargaining would work if they didn't slant the laws. If a group of employees wants to strike, so be it. The test of whether they are really worth what they want will be if the owner prefers to simply replace them all. That is balance, and it's not something that happens anymore as the laws are scewed.

P.S. there is nothing wrong with WalMart in my opinion. They offer jobs at X wage. Don' want it? Don't take it. Pretty simple really. They don't "owe" you anything.

I disagree whole heartedly. In my meager experience working in the public and the private sector union employees typically have no reason to be productive. Where as non unionized employees must proove themselves daily with their productivity. While I myself am reaping the benefits of the Union in my work situation I would much prefer an employer who valued me for my productivity rather than my hours worked. Where I work now - that's the bottom line - did I work 8 hours that day. At my previous jobs I was salaried and while at times I worked overtime that I wasn't "paid" for there were many many other times where I can say I only worked 30-35 hours in a week and I didn't have to worry about showing up at 9 or 10 am instead of 7 or 8. My productivity was the key - was I getting the job done and was I contributing? The answer for me has always been "yes" simply because of one thing. The company had one single power over all of our dealings: I could be fired at any time for any reason more or less. My main job was to make sure that I gave them a reason to keep me - that should be every employees job. I also had power over the employer being that I was a productive employee who contributed to the business greatly - If I didn't get my way I could always leave. In fact, that is what it came down to - in my perception another employee was promoted over me who was likely near equally as "productive" individually but could not work with or as a team. I on the other hand had mentored all of our other engineers and this was a known fact. I went to my boss regarding the situation and instructed him that he needed to rectify it. I gave them 6 months to do so; they finally came back to me and said that "corporate said no." So - I found another job (I started looking the day I asked for my promotion) and gave my notice. When asked if there was anything they could do to get me to stay I told them they could retroactively promote me back to the date of the other employees promotion - shy of that I was out. The opted not to and so I left for greener pastures. I had worked in that company for a looong time and I really enjoyed that job but the reality is as an employee *I* individually have power - I can always leave even if it means I have to work at Taco freakin bell.

Unions even in theory leave a bad taste in my mouth.

The reason I don't care for walmart isn't because of their labor practices because I agree with you for the most part.

I wouldn't work there.

I don't like them because I prefer businesses that are more locally conscience. Walmart isn't; I shop at a local grocer, I buy parts from a local porsche fella (shout out to wayne); blah blah blah.

Plus, the quality of Walmart goods has gone down in my experience (I haven't shopped there in 5 or 6 years though) mainly since they stopped selling only american made goods.

Seriously - if a community says "Don't come here!" why would they argue with that?

I agree Mike, I don't shop there either. We have one 4 miles from here and it hasn't hurt anything. In fact there are retail shops going up like weeds. Oh well.

Sup, you seem to subscribe to the idea that if employees CAN get something from their company they should. Sort of a lawyers approach to he system, not what is proper or fair but rather "what can we get away with".

FWIW, if our guys ever went union we would shut the doors, no question.

Shut the doors, find a new location in town and start a new shop.

I used to be in a union! Then I got promoted... then there was a strike... then... err....
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1115221509.jpg

How many people that are in unions jobs, hire or go to union shops when they need something?? They usually go as cheap as they can, so they like all the benefits of being union, but grind everybody else............

15 years experience working in LA/LB harbors

It may just come down to that...but part of the problem is that they are in the Chicago area. They'd probably have to move to another state to avoid retribution from the union.

I agree 100%.


Legion's story.....Can the Father-in-law close down the business and open under another corporate entity? Union can't touch a dissolved business can they?

To put this delicately, there is an old Chicago "group" that controls the union, and the retribution feared is not legal.

"solidarity"....

More like, "you are with us or else..."

Hmmm...that complicates it but still...I would have a hard time letting the thugs win.

Yep, Chicago unions are still very old school, so is Jersey and Philly and...well you get the point. Anyway, here is a story for ya. My QC guy was from Jersey, his father owned a small (15 man) oil company. Not that kind of oil compnay, they delivered fuel oil to homes and such. Anyway he didn't go along with the union thugs and two of his tankers were blown up. Literally bombed!
His father sent him here to Michigan for college and sold the company.

Another story. My wife managed trade shows for a very large company years ago. Well one was in Chicago. She attempted to carry a small case in with her and the union dudes flipped. You cannot bring ANYTHING in yourself because that would be "stealing the food of the union mans table" So she had to sit there and wait for a special courier to carry her case (very valuable instrument) to the booth and they took their time. The rest of their stuff was the very last unloaded.....just a coincidence I'm sure:rolleyes:

A few buds here have very successful family businesses and avoid anyone who has anything to do with a union like Ebola. Both socially or business-wise. I mean these guys are petrified at the thought of a their places unionizing.

Try plugging and extension cord in at a show at the Jacob Javits center in NY.......

We do our share of trade shows and I always throw so chink to the brothers - a $5 spot can get you some serious attentionb and love at a major trade show. Give them some take homes like jackets and hats and knives and you can get "anything" done as soon as you need it.

Guys - this info is great. Mind you, I take the position of neither for or against the unions. The reason why I need it can be known if you e-mail me at mhollowa@nch.com. It is not to trash or support.

I think the unions have kind of over reached their original intent. Back when they were being formed, there were some real issues to deal with. The common working man was very much exploited by industrial America. Now that there are a miriad of labor laws in place that serve to protect working people from the abuses the unions originally fought against, they have gone looking for more. While no one can deny the appeal of the 40 hour work week, medical benefits, and other such concessions won by the unions, their focus seems to have changed a bit. Their protection of their lazy unproductive members is probably their biggest black eye. I have always seen one of their major responsibilities as providing a qualified, productive workforce for employers. Part of that would include cleaning their own houses. They appear to be wholey unwilling or incapable of doing that. Until they are, they will continue to be the scourge of industrial America. With a little re-alignment of their goals and values, they could be a tremendous asset.

The system just needs equilibrium. I mean if your union thug employee disrespects a valued customer you should be able to fire them(assuming a pattern). I mean common sense is right out the window. The unions have so many laws to hide behind it's unreal. A guy has to just about shoot someone to be fired, even then the union would probably dispute:)

Again, it's about playing the game now. If they can extort more they will, even if their children are the end victims. look at GM, buh bye (unless a huge bailout) they cannot afford their contracts any longer. Not just wages but benefits, mainly health benefits. It's just not realistic anymore.

My father worked his entire adult life for the NMU, retired as an officer, our family vacations were spent in the islands with Joe Curran, the man who started the NMU, my fathers body guard still checks on me and my mother til this day, to make sure no one is giving us any trouble. So, I do have a bit of insite (I also spent a fair amount of time in the Union Hall) to what goes on, growing up union. At one time Unions were really needed, and very important to helping the American workers work in a safe enviroment, but those days are long gone and unions are now for people who get a job on their own, too stupid, most vote dem, go figure. 2 years after my father retired, a Fed Judge froze all the retirement funds to the people who worked their entire lives paying into the fund, 40 years of work, down the drain, union did nothing to help, Mr. Curran had passed, and with him, the last of anything good about unions. My business partner, a retired United Airline pilot, who paid into the funds, has had most of his medical, taken away, and it was the union who tossed those who had already paid in their dues under the bus, he has watched is union retiremen shrink the last few years. Yea, the union will take care of you, sure they will. Unions are one reason why business are outsoursing, and on the walmart thing, I don't shop there either, but it is their right, as the ones who invested in building their company to use who ever (legal, not illegals[they should be busted for that] )they feel will best represent their business. One of our former musicans worked for the phone company, but spent more time trying to convert, union business than doing what he was being paid to do, as has been pointed out, a nonunion worker has reason to work, a union worker just expects to be paid for less work. Go watch how your unionized city workers work (mine use to be a client, so I have seen it first hand) even if you just need a invoice signed, they would make you wait until their 15 minute smoking break was over, just to sign their name and the biggest union failure, the teachers union, no wonder our youth are so stupid, the teaches put the union business above teaching. Like I said, at one time Unions were needed, but now they do much more harm than good, and using that sheep mentality, try and keep dems in power, as without unions, many of their supporters wouldn't have jobs.

You seem to be pretending that employers do not get away with "what we can get away with." I have a strong feeling that you are a fair and honest and respectful employer that would be rewarding to work for. But you are a capitalist and I hope you are going to go NO FURTHER attempting to argue that "get what you can" is a market force that should sometimes be in play and sometimes not be in play in markets. Either you are a fan of so-called "freedom" and market forces, or you just wish they always worked in your favor and against those whose interests might compete with yours.

Quote:

FWIW, if our guys ever went union we would shut the doors, no question.

And here you pretend that things are okay now, but that you are certain that with the advent of a bargaining agent everything would go to he11 in a handbasket. That's like saying that you are happy driving your 911, but if you ever had to drive any other car, any other car that's ever been produced, you would never enter a motor vehicle again. Taht might make someone think that no other car could possibly even come anywhere close to the performance of a 911, but you would only fool a complete idiot and where's the fun in that?

Sorry for pickin' on ya, Len.

What I mentioned above is only theory. I have heard and seen inappropriate behavior on the part of labor representatives. I have also seen employers terminate older and middle-aged workers whose pensions were going to vest next week. Mike, if you want your daily performance to be the only thing between you and the streets, think hard. If you want to assume that all employers are going to be kind and honest enough to not terminate you shortly before your retirement vests, then I'll be happy to pray for you and the rest of the lambs.

Employers are very often quite honest and respectable. I am not, as is commonly believed, their enemy. I help them all the time and I understand them and I admire and support them. But I also know that business is business, and also that not all employers are as straight-up as Len probably is.

I also have the advantage of working in the construction industry, which is very different in terms of labor law. It is the only place where "pre-hire" agreements can be negotiated. Also, all the workers on our project serve at the pleasure. When workers are terminated here, that's it. No need for any explanation.

There are many other assertions and principles here in this thread that I'd like to address, but time is short and I probably am surounded by too many trees to be able to report what the forest looks like.

Yep, unions can be bad. Yep, businesses can be bad. But businesses can be good. And labor leaders can be good. I happen to be plying my trade in a labor community that is perhaps the best in the nation. Certainly nothing like some of the stories I see here.

Lube,

I tried to email you but got some weird verification deal in return. Is this really you or am I about to spill my CPUs guts all over the net?:)

Same deal in Philly Convention Center, it's insane. You rarely see a repeat convention after the organization sees what they have to deal with, with all the union thugs.

Unions had thier place 60 years ago, not needed anymore IMO.

Again, I rarely see this kind of ugliness in my labor community. We're a strong labor town, but this is not Chicago. You can carry your stuff into the trade show. You can plug stuff in. The union reps I work with, some more than others, work very hard to give my contractors every assistance available. Some of my labor partners have saved my contractors bazilions of dollars in litigation costs, lost contracts, etc. Workers fired for good cause are spoken to by the labor reps, behind closed doors, and they either straighten up or go down the road. We have contractors here that would turn white as a sheet if they really thought they might lose their relationships with the labor community. Of course, we also have some labor leaders that the entire industry, union and management (and myself) will rejoice at their departure. So, I disagree with some of the generalizations here. Let me ask you this:

These labor laws that make unions obsolete. Do they prevent an employer from terminating a worker the day before pension vesting? Be careful with your answer here and be sure you are familiar with the "employment at will' doctrine. Also, and I'm especially interested in your answers to this one: The organization that is responsible for enforcing these labor laws that make unions obsolete.....are these the same gubmint organizations that you report cannot effectively sharpen a pencil? And you believe this renders unions obsolete? If your answer is yes, then I'd guess you are part of the management team as opposed to the bargaining unit.

I think unions are still needed; if they just disappeared, we'd be right back to the exploitive practices that spawned unions in the first place. OTOH, unions need to figure out how to get out from under the mob image, and it seems they took on an agenda that was outside their original scope.

No, its me - it is my spam guard SPAMLION, just click on it (the link) and it will verify that you are a real you and not spam.

I couldn't agree with you more.

Getting rid of the 'mob image' would require heads to roll at the top of many unions--something the entrenched union management will fight tooth and nail (using union dues to fund the fight I might add). It's almost as if union member need a new union just to represent them to their union.

As far as being outside of their original scope, I think the unions fear that if they are not "moving ahead" (i.e. demanding more), they will end up making real concessions (like making union member pay for some of their own health care).

Now more than ever are we free to move to another job, state, hell, even country if we wanted (still waiting for the liberals to leave, as promised when President Bush won) or start your own business. 70 years ago, not many average American workers owned cars or had the the ability to move, but today almost everyone (including illegal immigrants who pool their money to buy a car) has at least one car and are free to go where they choose. The only thing keeping people back is themselves and making bad decisions, so with that in mind, unions have run their course because workers will always be needed and as long as is competition between businesses, the best workers will always have a job, and if they go under contract, they don't have to worry about being forsed out the day before the retire. The only people this doesn't work for is the ones who want the government to take care of them. Why do some of you feel that those who worked, invested their money & time to build a business shouldn't be able to run them the way the see best? As Judge Elihu Smails said in Caddyshack,
and they shouldn't earn $20 an hour to do it.


Sup, you sound like the kind of union guy of old, the kind who puts what is really important first, not always union dues. BTW, in FL. construction worker can and do work as much or as little as they like, some screw up on one site (a guy got drunk and passed out in the walkway he was smoothing on a Tue. Wend. he was fired (his profile had hardened in the walkway) Thurs. he was back to work at a differnt builder, same site. So, you don't need a union if the work is there and you are willing to do it.