The cost of union labor

[Superman]

Oh, and BTW, the oft-repeated statement I see very often here, this conclusion that labor unions were once a good idea but are now just completely unnecessary, useless and antagonistic......that's an incorrect statement. With certainty. That statement is an over-generalization made by someone who is not fully informed. For example, in my area the labor unions have, not only the best, but basically the only...training programs and training facilities. Construction jobs are considered unskilled labor by ignorant people. Go down to the local Millionaire's Club (out of work, mostly homeless men) and put a crew of Iron Workers together, and have then erect red-iron while one of them runs the tower crane. That would be funny if it were not so dangerous. On-the-job training for tower crane operators? Right.

[onewhippedpuppy]

I've just never understood why these skilled union guys can't go to work on their own, or for someone else? Other than extorting inflated rates and strong-arming others, what purpose do unions serve? Things get built just fine elsewhere without using a union. God knows skilled workers are in demand, what is the point?

[onewhippedpuppy]

Supe, that's total BS. Any quality construction company will train their employees to do the job at hand. Sure there's the fly-by-nighters, but you get that anywhere. There's always other jobs out there.

[Andras Nagy]

Hi Paul,

I'm an architect, and we also have horror stories about unions.

How about when we design displays for Clients, and the display is manufactured/prefabricated in the Client's city, and then gets shipped to Chicago, Dallas, wherever - the display must be plugged into the electrical outlet by a union electrician, charging 1 hours' time to plug it in; the carpet that we sent along with the dispay must be rolled out by a union laborer, charging one hour to roll it out; any prefabricated plumbing part of the display can only be quick-connected to plumbing by a union plumber charging one hour to join the two haslves, etc. etc.

Is it any wonder that America is in trouble with costs of doing business?

[Tim Hancock]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

I've just never understood why these skilled union guys can't go to work on their own, or for someone else? Other than extorting inflated rates and strong-arming others, what purpose do unions serve? Things get built just fine elsewhere without using a union. God knows skilled workers are in demand, what is the point?

+1

[Tim Hancock]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Supe, that's total BS. Any quality construction company will train their employees to do the job at hand. Sure there's the fly-by-nighters, but you get that anywhere. There's always other jobs out there.

+2

[Tobra]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

I've just never understood why these skilled union guys can't go to work on their own, or for someone else? Other than extorting inflated rates and strong-arming others, what purpose do unions serve? Things get built just fine elsewhere without using a union. God knows skilled workers are in demand, what is the point?

They can also use their influence with their Democratic representatives to delay projects being done by companies that are "unfriendly" to their views.

Here in Sacramento, one of the big hospitals was attacked by the SEIU. Seems the hospital would not make union membership mandatory. The SEIU filed lawsuits to delay a hospital expansion project, claimed the environmental impact studies that had already been reviewed were flawed(that went on a few months) but it turned out to be a ploy, they folded their tents on that part of it when they would have actually had to make some argument supporting their position.

Another beneficial act in this same battle was to pressure the state employee union to drop their contract with this same hospital. This was for the same reason as the obstruction of the expansion project, but they said it was because the hospital charged too much. Hospital's response was essentially, "What do you think would be fair? We will set our fees wherever you think we should" Response was, no it is too late, we can't work with you. Then something like 50,000 people in the union had to get new doctors in another managed care system that was overloaded.

That part of it worked out fine for me though. I had literally hundreds of patients that came to see me and paid me cash on a fee for service basis rather than the regular capitated rate I would have gotten. Actually that deal worked out pretty well for everyone but the Cal Pers union members, but hey, they had their guys looking out for their best interests, right Supes?

[Superman]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

I've just never understood why these skilled union guys can't go to work on their own, or for someone else? Other than extorting inflated rates and strong-arming others, what purpose do unions serve? Things get built just fine elsewhere without using a union. God knows skilled workers are in demand, what is the point?

I'm happy to answer these questions, but I'm just sad to waste the time with folks whose minds are made up emotionally and aren't listening as a consequence.

Union workers don't work for the union. They work for the contractors. One of the main functions of a union hiring hall is to match workers and construction contractors. It is a centralized place where workers can go, and a centralized place where contractors can go. Contractors explain the specific tasks to be performed and the skills needed, and the dispatcher finds workers to fill those specific needs.

Houses get built elsewhere without unions, but five story parking garages that cover nine football fields (that is our next project) don't. I'm very serious here and, frankly, testing folks' ignorance. Try building a $230 million rental car facility while also trying to avoid the union hall. The unions aren't going to come out and make trouble for your project. If you try to build it without them, you'll have all the trouble you need....of your own making.

[lendaddy]

lol, I know you're serious Sup but it's still funny.

[ben parrish]

I worked a trade show in Vegas a few years for the medical company I worked for. As I was taking supplies through the door (on a hand truck) a guy comes up to me and tells me that I can't carry those things. I was puzzled by his remark and asked him which door I should use. He said that the door wasn't the problem; I had to use the Union labor for carrying loads. I laughed out loud and told him to get real and started walking off. He followed me and kept telling me I had to use them....I kept laughing and told him that it wasn't going to happen and to get lost.
I watched this happen to others that actually folded and paid the crazy extortion fee.

OH YEAH, UNIONS SERVE NO OTHER PURPOSE OTHER THAN FILLING THEIR COFFERS WITH MONEY FROM IT'S MEMBERS WHILE DRIVING UP THE COST OF GOODS AND SERVICES FOR US ALL
Just look at the automible and airline industries in America; paying bloated wages while going down the tubes.
And we wonder why companies are sending jobs overseas

[Superman]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Supe, that's total BS. Any quality construction company will train their employees to do the job at hand. Sure there's the fly-by-nighters, but you get that anywhere. There's always other jobs out there.

Nope. They won't. The VIGOROUSLY avoid doing this. Heck, they resist using apprentices even though demographically, those same contractors are going to be in deep trouble in eight or ten years. DEEP trouble. There is no end in sight to large projects in this area. It will increase over the foreseable future. The supply of skilled journey-level workers will fall sharply over that same period. Each separate contractor wants somebody else to underwrite the expense of doing the training. And herein is a lesson for those of you who think you know it all. Here, the contractor is putting its money where its needs are.....and they are NOT interested in sub-skilled workers at any cost. They want only fully-skilled, fully-experienced workers. At any price. Because the alternative is just too expensive.....at any price.

And finally, just so you guys understand, short apprenticeship programs are four years long. That, gentlemen, is how long it takes to develop enough skill to be called a "journeyman." And again, for one fifth the price, contractors will pass on a second-year apprentice in favor of the five-times-more-expensive journeyman. At least, this is the preference of the contractors who are good contractors. They guys who prefer cheap labor.......are a pain in the ass. Their projects run over budget and behind schedule.

[onewhippedpuppy]

So Supe, answer me one question: I own a large commercial construction company. I bid on and win the contract for said large parking garage. What keeps me from hiring licensed construction professionals to work on said parking garage? As in, hiring directly, like companies work in the real world?

[Superman]

Guess what proportion, what percentage, of the cost of a large project goes to direct labor costs (wages and benefits for the workers). guess.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

So Supe, answer me one question: I own a large commercial construction company. I bid on and win the contract for said large parking garage. What keeps me from hiring licensed construction professionals to work on said parking garage? As in, hiring directly, like companies work in the real world?

I do not understand your question. Honestly.

[ben parrish]

Originally Posted by Superman

Try building a $230 million rental car facility while also trying to avoid the union hall. The unions aren't going to come out and make trouble for your project. If you try to build it without them, you'll have all the trouble you need....of your own making.

Super, how does the union make it better or safer? How does John Q. Public, who needs to rent a car from this facility benefit? He certainly will have to pay more for the rental because the company has to charge more to pay the "union tax" for the structure. Who benefits other than the union?

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by Superman

I do not understand your question. Honestly.

I own the company, let's just say I'm doing electrical, and I need X licensed electricians, and Y journeymen at a lesser rate. Why can't I put an ad in the newspaper for these electricians, and hire them on as employees? As a large electrical contractor I will move on to the next project, and still use these employees? Why do I have to use union labor?

I should add, there's always a number of jobs in our newspaper for licensed whatever, along with journeymen. Maybe things are more socialist in WA.

[URY914]

Projects, LARGE project get built in the US and the world over without unions. How can this be???

[gr8fl4porsche]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

So Supe, answer me one question: I own a large commercial construction company. I bid on and win the contract for said large parking garage. What keeps me from hiring licensed construction professionals to work on said parking garage? As in, hiring directly, like companies work in the real world?

Nothing

But here in St. Louis, you would have pressure from every union and permanent pickets in front of your construction site.

You're free to use whatever worker or contractor that you want, but you will be pressured to use union contractors. In the end your building or structure will be built without unions - happens everyday.

[Andras Nagy]

Hi Super,

A hiring hall is one thing, a union hiring hall where only the union can say who works and who doesn't is another. You are correct, we would not want an unskilled craftsman building our hotels, wiring up the intricate wiring, and plumbing the fancy fixtures.

Please re-read my post and the others about the lengths unions go to with stupid and counter-productive rules and practices. It is these kinds of practices that we believe do a dis-service to the American businessman, drive costs up on all projects on which they work, and ultimately drive businesses out of business.

No one is debating a fair wage for fair labor. It's when unions impose un-fair wages on un-fair labor that everyone gets hurt. Ultimately, the unions will suffer (they do already) because of their corruption and the waste that they engender.

Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how's your SC? Still have the Smokey Quartz Metallic?

[onewhippedpuppy]

With the shortage of construction workers, and labor in general, the fair wage for fair labor argument is moot. Skilled tradesmen can make damn good money without unions, which will only improve as the shortage worsens.