Are Unions still warranted?

[Der Alta]

I've been away from GTP for a bit, as my real world job has been consuming a good portion of my life.

I'm building a 34 unit condo complex in Massachusetts and it’s on a very fast paced schedule. Of the 34 units, 25 are sold, and we still have 8 months of construction to go. The units have only been on the market for about 4 months.

The process is running smoothly now that I've had time to get my fingers into it. However it has raised a few questions.

Here's the back story.

I work for a General Contractor and we bid 98% of the contract out. About the only thing we’re doing are the window trim and miscellaneous little things. Everything else is being taken care of by others.

We asked the carpenters union to send us a contractor to bid the rough framing portion of the project. We asked each of the 4 times that they called us inquiring if this was a union project. They finally sent one guy. He was a finish carpenter. He looked at the drawings for about 5 minutes and said he didn’t want to bid it.

Fast forward 3 months.
I have a guy show up on site asking to talk with the framers/drywallers that won the bid. We coordinate and when the framers are on break the head guy comes down to me with the union rep. A few pleasantries are exchanged and the union rep goes on his way. One week later, 4 guys show up holding picket signs.

It coincides with a day that I'm pouring concrete and have a police guy on site for traffic control, so I got lucky there.

The situation as it stands now.
3 days a week, I have 3-5 picketers holding signs out on Main Street stating that the rough framing company doesn’t give its employees fair wages or fringe benefits. These 3-5 guys hangout in front of the construction site and shoot the breeze with each other for 2 ½ hours, collect their $25 and go home. They're unemployed at the moment and the union sends them down to picket us.

So I have to ask myself "What are they hoping to accomplish?"

The inevitable truth is that we’re under construction and we’re going to finish it. The union can't stop that. The people of this town either hate this project, or love it. So they can't swing public opinion. The Framer has been running his company for 15 years, so he’s not likely to change.

Do the unions still have a purpose?

I'd like to know your opinion and thoughts

 

[Duke]

Let me preface this by giving DA a very hearty "Welcome back!" shout from GTP.

I'm surprised that the concrete guys' union didn't show up with the giant inflatable rat they use outside merit-shop building projects around here.

Unions have not outlived their usefulness as an institution. However, the way the institution has become organized and operated has long since become a dinosaur. The only places where unions have manageed to hang on as they have are places where they have gained an unshakeable grip on the political machine.

How many new car plants have been built in the northern midwest of America in the last 20 years? Compare that with how many of them have been built in the southeast. Talk about unions shooting themselves in the foot with short-term demands for job security and unbelievable wages.

Do you know that GM has plants that it is actually cheaper for them to keep running at a perpetual - and substantial - loss, rather that just closing them? This is because of union agreements that guarantee payouts to the UAW if a given plant closes. Smart for the union in the short term, incredibly stupid in the long term.

Unions, like I said, have a place. You are welcome to organize in order to best serve your needs as workers. But they invalidate themselves when they become compulsory, either for workers to join or for employers to deal with. You may create a union but you have no right to require or to intimidate me into joining it. You have no right to require or intimidate me into hiring your workers.

I knew an old guy who ran a small manufacturing business he had started for many years. He had a few hundred happy employees and he was a decent boss. A union guy came in and tried to convince the workers they needed a union. The boss called a general meeting and told them: "I've paid decent wages to you for 30 years. If you unionize now, the next morning you will find that gate padlocked and your last checks in the mail."'

They unionized anyway, he closed the factory the next week and retired. Was that constructive for the union? I would have done the same thing in his shoes.

 

[FoolKiller]

In my experience I would have to say, no. I worked quite a few union jobs while I was in college in order to pay my way. I asked early on if I had to pay union dues and they said yes, they didn't hire non-union workers. Why did I have to pay those dues? Why did I have to join the union? I never once saw the union representative in any of those jobs. The only people I know that did see the union rep were people who were about to get fired for things that I would have fired them for. The best part was when the union negotiated a higher entry-level pay that was higher than what I was making after my first merit raise. The increase affected everyone still making entry-level pay but no one else. Suddenly I was being punished for being a hard worker.

As I was in college at the time every dime counted but every pay check had union dues taken out. The dues weren't much but they were enough for an extra meal. It would have been nice to have had one more meal of something other than Ramen Noodles or maybe an extra CD or gas for a trip home. Never once did I see the union help me at all.

Since I have been out of college I have a non-union job and make more money, have much better benefits, and a retirement plan where I control how it is invested. I see people around me work harder because if they don't they get fired and there is no one to stop it. Our quality of work and the work ethic is better than any union jobs.

I have never once seen a union do a good thing for their employees. I don't think a guaranteed pay raise is a good thing because no one tries harder. Give a merit raise and you have employees who try harder and work better.

Unions had a time when they were needed but today I don't see it. There are laws to protect employees now. Unions have even gotten into government jobs and while I respect teachers I think that just handing them more money without results or review is a dumb idea. The same teachers from when I was in school that were in trouble with parents for screaming at kids or not helping when students were confused still teach today and I have decided I will go in debt to send my students to a private school where the teachers are held accountable.

If I owned a business and my employees unionized I would refuse to negotiate with the union heads, saying that I don't recognize their authority. If they protest I would mail them all their final checks and begin hiring new employees. I am sure there would be a lawsuit but they would all be violating any attendance policy I have in place. No one can bully me, my company, or my potential employees.

 

[Danoff]

Do the unions still have a purpose?

I'd like to know your opinion and thoughts

Yes. Unions still have a purpose. The purpose is to increase the bargaining power of employees with their employer. It's an attempt to join forces and raise wages above what they would be otherwise - and it's a fine practice.

However, the reason unions are a problem is because the governmnet protects them. If the government didn't protect them many of them wouldn't exist. The cost of products would go down and wages would be fair again (rather than being above market value).

We had a nice one here in california for a while. Grocery store cashiers went on strike against the major grocery stores here. They wanted more health care benefits (I guess they figured they shouldn't have to pay for the services they get). It's not like grocery store cashier is a career here - it's a job for high schoolers trying to make a few extra bucks.

The stores held out. It cost them tons of money and they raised prices after the dispute was over. But the government prevented them in large part from hiring replacement workers. Here's what should have happened.

Union: We're going on strike
Grocery Store: Fine, it's not like we can't find someone to replace you.

End of discussion.

Instead the unions wasted tons of money (some of it mine) and didn't really get anything in the end anyway.

 

[Swift]

The stores held out. It cost them tons of money and they raised prices after the dispute was over. But the government prevented them in large part from hiring replacement workers. Here's what should have happened.

Union: We're going on strike
Grocery Store: Fine, it's not like we can't find someone to replace you.

End of discussion.

Instead the unions wasted tons of money (some of it mine) and didn't really get anything in the end anyway.

Yeah, I can understand auto workers or something like that. But, could you imagine McDonald's workers going on strike? They would laugh and just get a whole bunch more 16 year olds.

 

[Danoff]

Yeah, I can understand auto workers or something like that. But, could you imagine McDonald's workers going on strike? They would laugh and just get a whole bunch more 16 year olds.

Not if they get a union and get government protection. Then McDonalds would be breaking the law to simply replace them all.

 

[Swift]

Not if they get a union and get government protection. Then McDonalds would be breaking the law to simply replace them all.

Hence the problem. Unions should be private and not directly tied to the gov't. I understand laws for the work place. But forcing private industry to hire or not fire certain people shouldn't be part of the federal government's business.

 

[Joey D]

Some unions serve a purpose, others do not. The UAW is a joke, the auto industry is so screwed up it isn't funny. Those guys don't deserve a job, they don't work and when the do they half ass the cars. They complain that they have to work to much, I'm sorry you don't get paid 40 bucks and hour to sit on your ass. Me and the UAW don't get along as some of you know for other posts I've made around here.

 

[kyle]

If you work hard and are underpaid for it, the probably so. If you don't work hard and are overpaid for it, then probably not.

 

[Danoff]

If you work hard and are underpaid for it, the probably so. If you don't work hard and are overpaid for it, then probably not.

If you are underpaid then you should find someone who will pay you better. If you cannot, then you are not underpaid.

 

[Der Alta]

It is interesting to see the opinions and discussion on this. danoff's comment is my sentiment exactly. Your pay rate and fringe benefits are your responsibility. If you feel you are underpaid for the job you do, noone is holding you to that job.

I do find it odd that the Unions are concerned with the fringe benefits that a company gives. My thoughts are that a fringe benefit was something on the side that was given out of the owners good graces. For instance, I have a company truck and Company Amex for gas. I drive the truck to the site and home, and the company picks up the gas tab. 70 miles round trip, and he pays the gas. That is a fringe benefit. My bosses thought is that I need a truck because I work construction. It'd be just as easy if he were to tell me that the company truck stays at the site and if needed I can drive it.

So how can I compare fringe benefits?

So to further add discussion, what do my picketers hope to accomplish?

Perhaps the last laugh is mine, as the company who's name is on the picketers sign, is misspelled.

AO

 

[Danoff]

So to further add discussion, what do my picketers hope to accomplish?
AO

They want a bigger benefits package. They hope to rally enough support and awareness in the community that people will boycot your company - that way only the companies who offer the health care packages (because we obviously shouldn't be paying for doctors to work for us) will end up with the construction jobs.

 

[sicbeing]

Maybe I'm a bit too young to know, but what exactly are unions? or union workers? I've heard of such things, and my shop manager who I work for says they lie and may try to take our tech's who work for our company.

Why is that?

 

[Der Alta]

From websters dictionary: trades union \trades" un`ion\, or Trade union \Trade" un`ion\ .
An organized combination among workmen for the purpose of maintaining their rights, privileges, and interests with respect to wages, hours of labor, customs, etc.

There are Iron workers, carpenters, grocery store clerks, architects, truck drivers. The list goes on.

Jimmy Hoffa was a union organizer.

In that brief definition, it seems that is a great thing for anyone.

What happens though, is that the wages become so much, and the hours so short, the business is no longer profitable and it goes under.

I honestly think that the Union would rather see and unemployed union worker than an employed non-union worker.

AO

 

[sukerkin]

I think that this is one of those circumstances where there is a difference between the American and English approach to things.

We had a very tough struggle to get the existence of Unions acknowledged by the Powers That Be, who would have far rather been able to keep the working man ground down under the heel (starvation wages, no holidays with pay, no sick pay etc). The birth of such things as the Miners Union was paid for in the blood of slain workers and is the reason we have a Labour Party.

The very idea of giving up Unionisation is one that makes me a little 'excercised' in political terms and the success of the Convservatives under Thatcher in smashing the Unions is a contributory reason to the general decline in the economic wealth of the poorest in this country (just so that people don't think I'm talking un-supported nonsense or spouting Left-Wing-Doctrine, my first degree is in Economics).

The Unions did come to hold too much sway and went beyond getting what was fair for their members to getting what the employer could bear, even up to the point of bankrupting the employer.

That I don't agree with I have to say but the situation we have now, where Unionisation is critically weakened, is that employers are slipping back to paying so little that people voluntarily don't work and instead draw Unemployment Benefit because they're better off! A partial side effect of that is a third of my wages goes in taxes so that the government can afford the huge Social Services bill .

As usual with these things, I just get into my stride and I have to go ... hopefully I can look in on this tomorrow.

EDIT: A huge "Hi!" to DA by the way - now we know why you've not been around for a while .

 

[Grand Prix]

If it weren't for unions, we'd still be in the Industrial Revolution and have to force 4-year-olds to work in dangerous conditions for very little pay. Union organizers can get greedy, however.

 

[Zardoz]

Very few people have any idea of what went on in this country (the U.S.) before the rise of organized labor. Child labor, inhumane working conditions, and starvation wages were Standard Operating Procedure for every employer who could get away with it.

Sure, the unions, at the height of their power, went too far and shot themselves in the foot. Even today, they often engage in what has to be considered self-destructive behavior.

But their existence, even in their weakened condition, keeps employers honest to some degree. The threat of unionization is the only thing keeping many corporate executives from taking us right back to the bad old days of the Industrial Revolution. Don't kid yourselves about those guys. They would be only too happy to do it.

 

[Magic069]

First off DA, pretty brave thing your comapny is doing building Condo's. Those things scare me. To many owners, to much liablity.

I live in the South, and don't have much knowledge with Unions. I know some do exist here in South, but the general feeling down here is, down with Unions. I have heard many companies talk about unionizing down here, and each time a vote is taken the employees generally turn it down.

I think being that Florida is very Diverse, and has a large population of people that did live up North and worked for Unions, the opinion becomes clear to everyone. If you talk to someone here and ask for their short explaination of Unions, most will tell you, "theives and company distroyers." A lot of people feel that the Unions did nothing but take from their poket while trying to figure out ways to get a good company to close its doors.

As its already been mentioned, I think there is something to be seen in the difference between the value of a dollar here in the South and the value of that same dollar in a union built city.

Do the pay scale and the value equal out? Probably. The differences I see is that the cities in the South are growing, and the cities in the North are closing and having a hard time maintaining their identity. (Detroit, Pittsburgh)

 

[Magic069]

Very few people have any idea of what went on in this country (the U.S.) before the rise of organized labor. Child labor, inhumane working conditions, and starvation wages were Standard Operating Procedure for every employer who could get away with it.

Sure, the unions, at the height of their power, went too far and shot themselves in the foot. Even today, they often engage in what has to be considered self-destructive behavior.

But their existence, even in their weakened condition, keeps employers honest to some degree. The threat of unionization is the only thing keeping many corporate executives from taking us right back to the bad old days of the Industrial Revolution. Don't kid yourselves about those guys. They would be only too happy to do it.

But thats really the question here.

Good yesterday yes, no doubt!

Good Today? I don't really know.

Do you really think thats today society would allow such treatment? The media would kill to find out about such action going on here in the US. They would be all over it.

They jump on it when they find out a US company is sub-contracting with companies outside the US that practice in such a manner. Next thing you know, contracts are broken, and or the Amercian public more or less makes that company close its own doors.

 

[Grand Prix]

But thats really the question here.

Good yesterday yes, no doubt!

Good Today? I don't really know.

Do you really think thats today society would allow such treatment? The media would kill to find out about such action going on here in the US. They would be all over it.

They jump on it when they find out a US company is sub-contracting with companies outside the US that practice in such a manner. Next thing you know, contracts are broken, and or the Amercian public more or less makes that company close its own doors.

You missed the point train. If Unions were NEVER founded, we would have NO IDEA of what an unsafe workplace is in the first place! Look at China. They are still in their Industrial Revolution, even though the media looks down on them so much it's not even funny. Did the media stop them? Nope, and we (Europe, North America) would be in a similar state to China without unions.

 

[FoolKiller]

Very few people have any idea of what went on in this country (the U.S.) before the rise of organized labor. Child labor, inhumane working conditions, and starvation wages were Standard Operating Procedure for every employer who could get away with it.

As I said, unions had a time and place but now there are laws for the things they want. Today they force workers to pay them money and rarely do anything other than get involved with political squabbles. By getting involved with politics they will support a candidate even though 40% of the members disagree. So while those members intend to vote for one candidate their money goes to the other guy. How does that help? Occasionally they go on strike only to finally go back to their jobs for the same thing they kept saying no to. Good job guys.

When they do go on strike God forbid you want to keep working and make money. You might as well be asking to get killed. I had a friend who worked fro UPS in college and when the Teamsters went on strike against UPS he tried to keep working because he disagreed with them and wanted money. The picketers gave him a warning and said if he came back the next day he wouldn't be going home.

Currently my mother is a secretary at a factory that is struggling to turn a profit. As a secretary she is part of management but she is extremely worried that the factory will be shut down as non profitable any day now. she keeps seeing different sections closed and sent to Mexico and she believes that the first time the union goes on a long-term strike the place will be shut down and she will be out of a job. She hears what goes on and knows what the executive rumblings are. The union now has better benefits than the management and still complain that it isn't enough. It has gotten so bad that they keep cutting back on management benefits.

But their existence, even in their weakened condition, keeps employers honest to some degree. The threat of unionization is the only thing keeping many corporate executives from taking us right back to the bad old days of the Industrial Revolution. Don't kid yourselves about those guys. They would be only too happy to do it.

Have you reviewed US labor laws recently?

You missed the point train. If Unions were NEVER founded, we would have NO IDEA of what an unsafe workplace is in the first place! Look at China. They are still in their Industrial Revolution, even though the media looks down on them so much it's not even funny. Did the media stop them? Nope, and we (Europe, North America) would be in a similar state to China without unions.

And he said unions were good yesterday, not today. So he is saying their being founded WAS good. After that he says that we can't go back to what we were then because of media. And saying the Chinese are an example to look at is bad since their media is censored. Do you think they see news stories everyday about how bad their work conditions are compared to America's? They don't. Even American media gets delayed and censored by the government. Very few people in China realize how bad they have it. Those who do try to get to America or don't care because they are one of the few wealthy tied to the government. They think we have it bad compared to them.

 

[Zardoz]

...Have you reviewed US labor laws recently?...

Do you think laws are never revised or abolished completely? Do you think that could never happen in the U.S.?

Look at the trends: Wider and wider gap between executive pay and employee pay, steady reduction in benefits, more and more jobs "outsourced" to the third world, no real effort made to control the infinite source of cheap labor that illegal immigration really is, etc., etc.

If the labor movement vanished this afternoon, what to you think would happen tomorrow morning?

 

[Magic069]

All I had to say, was said, Thanks FoolKiller.

 

[FoolKiller]

Do you think laws are never revised or abolished completely? Do you think that could never happen in the U.S.?

Look at the trends: Wider and wider gap between executive pay and employee pay, steady reduction in benefits, more and more jobs "outsourced" to the third world, no real effort made to control the infinite source of cheap labor that illegal immigration really is, etc., etc.

If the labor movement vanished this afternoon, what to you think would happen tomorrow morning?

What do you mean by labor movement? If you mean anyone ever caring about fair wages, then of course everything would turn bad because no one would care.

If you just mean unions, then I doubt our anti-corporation media would ever allow things to go back to the way they were. People already boycott companies because they have sweat shops in other countries. Do you think they would turn a blind eye to a sweat shop right here in our country?

I would even support unions being there as a representative of the workers but why force me to join if I want to work for that company? Why do I have to agree to teh strike? Why do I have to pay dues to help support causes that I don't want to support or possibly even believe in?

Also, why do unions think it is fair to give a flat raise to everyone when some people are better workers and bust their butts a lot more than others? Why do they oppose merit raises? Some of those workers deserve more money while others don't deserve any, much less their jobs.



You're welcome, Magic069.

 

[Zardoz]

...I doubt our anti-corporation media would ever allow things to go back to the way they were. People already boycott companies because they have sweat shops in other countries. Do you think they would turn a blind eye to a sweat shop right here in our country?...

You think all media is "anti-corporate"? You've never heard of Fox? And you think the media is in charge? You don't think the corporations are?

You think boycotts have any effect? You think people give a rat's ass about sweat shops existing here, or in other countries? Then how do explain Wal-Mart?

 

[FoolKiller]

You think all media is "anti-corporate"? You've never heard of Fox? And you think the media is in charge? You don't think the corporations are?

You think boycotts have any effect? You think people give a rat's ass about sweat shops existing here, or in other countries? Then how do explain Wal-Mart?

Most media is anti-corporate. It is always something along the lines of look what Evil Conglomo Corp. did today. It is rare they mention the philanthropic side of corporations.

Since when was Wal-Mart a sweat shop? I worked for Sam's in college. I made more there than I did at my union grocery store job and I got part-time benefits. Odd how that works.

Yes, I think people care about Boycotts. How do you think the Ronald Reagan movie got taken off TV? My cousin lead a campaign to stop Fruit of the Loom from dumping chemicals in the Cumberland River in Kentucky.

And when I say boycott I am not talking about online petition or a half-hearted attempt by thge Southern Baptist Association to get Disney to quit allowing homosexuals in the park, or whatever it was (Full disclosure: I am Southern Baptist). I knew ministers who ignored that boycott. Butt if a company is forcing four-year-old children to work 60+ hours a week, then I am pretty sure peopel won't buy their stuff.

Real boycotts work, whining and begging people who disagree with you to stop buying their stuff doesn't.

[EDIT] By the way, can you answer my previous questions? They are some of my problems with unions. I will quote them here to refresh them.

Also, why do unions think it is fair to give a flat raise to everyone when some people are better workers and bust their butts a lot more than others? Why do they oppose merit raises? Some of those workers deserve more money while others don't deserve any, much less their jobs.

 

[Grand Prix]

And he said unions were good yesterday, not today. So he is saying their being founded WAS good. After that he says that we can't go back to what we were then because of media. And saying the Chinese are an example to look at is bad since their media is censored. Do you think they see news stories everyday about how bad their work conditions are compared to America's? They don't. Even American media gets delayed and censored by the government. Very few people in China realize how bad they have it. Those who do try to get to America or don't care because they are one of the few wealthy tied to the government. They think we have it bad compared to them.

Of course the Chinese media is censored. I was referring to the world media in general. The media doesn't have any power over the governments and corporations of the world. In fact, it is the opposite. The media wouldn't care if working conditions drop because A) The corporations control the government, and B) The government controls the media. We would be exactly like China.

 

[FoolKiller]

The government controls the media.

Ok, I don't know how the whole media/government thing works in Canada, but in the US the media is all privately owned. The only control the government has over media is decency laws. The media is known as "the watchdog of the government."

The process the government would have to go through to actually control the media would be so long and drawn out and then probably overturned by the Supreme Court.

The only time government tried to control the media to that degree was when John Adams was president and he wanted anyone who publicly spoke against him or his party thrown in jail. When Jefferson took the presidency he overturned those laws.

You have to realize that many of America's founding fathers were newspaper publishers and wanted freedom of the press. Too many of them had been threatened with fines and jail time for speaking against the English monarchy. Benjamin Franklin even had his newspaper shutdown.

American media strives to be like Edward R Murrow, who is famous for having Senator McCarthy on his show and proving him to be on nothing more than a political witch hunt by looking for and blacklisting suspected communists.

The only media agency the US government has that kind of control over is NPR and PBS, but they don't even push that too hard.

 

[Magic069]

Of course the Chinese media is censored. I was referring to the world media in general. The media doesn't have any power over the governments and corporations of the world. In fact, it is the opposite. The media wouldn't care if working conditions drop because A) The corporations control the government, and B) The government controls the media. We would be exactly like China.

Basic sum up:

End of Unions = End of Democracy

Interesting.

 

[Grand Prix]

Ok, I don't know how the whole media/government thing works in Canada, but in the US the media is all privately owned. The only control the government has over media is decency laws. The media is known as "the watchdog of the government."

The process the government would have to go through to actually control the media would be so long and drawn out and then probably overturned by the Supreme Court.

The only time government tried to control the media to that degree was when John Adams was president and he wanted anyone who publicly spoke against him or his party thrown in jail. When Jefferson took the presidency he overturned those laws.

You have to realize that many of America's founding fathers were newspaper publishers and wanted freedom of the press. Too many of them had been threatened with fines and jail time for speaking against the English monarchy. Benjamin Franklin even had his newspaper shutdown.

American media strives to be like Edward R Murrow, who is famous for having Senator McCarthy on his show and proving him to be on nothing more than a political witch hunt by looking for and blacklisting suspected communists.

The only media agency the US government has that kind of control over is NPR and PBS, but they don't even push that too hard.

The Republican party and the corporations the party members own have no influence over CNN?