The Employee Free Choice Act.....

[Avatar4321]

And an employer owes anyone a job why?

Because its someone elses responsibility to employ him. He has no responsibility for any of it.

 

[DiveCon]

Oppose.

No secret ballot and binding GOVERNMENT arbitration?

Just say no to more big brother gov.

that about nails it for me

 

[driveby]

THATS IT?.......guess no one ever gets the flu......can you at least accumulate the days you dont use?

The job is unskilled labor, i don't know any other company in this type of business that gives any paid sick days.......

well maybe they need a union....

why ? so they get 10 paid sick days per year and use them whether they are sick or not ?

"It's a sunny, 80 degree day and i feel perfectly fine, but fuck it, i have 10 sick days, i'm gonna use one today, hell i'll use another tomorrow if it's another nice day"....

Maybe we don't need a union ......

 

[Patriot2009]

[

In control of thier own destiny unless they get crossways with a manager intent on getting rid of them so he can put his halfwit brother-in-law in thier spot! They have absolutely no protection even if they're the best worker the company ever had.

And an employer owes anyone a job why?

Who said an employer owes anyone a job?

 

[Patriot2009]

Nope, you must not have been around very many unions. That's the response you get from a union employee if you ask them to do anything remotely outside of their "job description". To which i always replied " do it and file a grievance later if you want or you'll be terminated for insubordination".....

As I said, the complaint of a manager who isn’t able to manage his time and area of responsibility.

Ahh grasshopper, your statement lacks substance. What does a marginal employee have to do with a supervisor's time management skills ? When you have to manage with limited resources and you have to find creative ways to get the most out of your limited resources. I also made it a point to speak with said employee(s) after the shift and gave the old "teamwork" speech and no greivance was ever filed against me.

Ah, so now he's a marginal employee rather than one who is reminding you that your employer made a contract with him and his coworkers promising that he would not be worked outside his classification.

There's two possibilities here. One, you couldn't plan ahead enough to efficiently use the workers in the way that your employer agreed that they would be used. Two, your employer mismanaged its workforce in such a way as to force you to do so by undermanning and imbalancing the various classifications set up in the contract. For example, the employer needed twice as many pipefitters as it need welders. But, hired twice as many welders as it did pipefitters. Either way, it wasn't the workers fault or his union's fault at all. An employee who asked you to live up to your agreement isn't therefore a marginal employee. And, it's dishonest to intentionally violate that agreement!

And, the fact that no greivance was filed doesn't prove that you were right. It merely shows that your workers were probably more reasonable than you're leading us to beleive.

BTW, I find it incredible that this one incident that you are describing was all that there was and that no greivances were ever filed against you.

And, one other thing. I'm a former union officer. Now I'm a small business owner. I just happen to be one who beleives that if an employer agrees to a contract, he should abide by that contract rather than seek ways in which to violate it or circumvent it. Dishonesty never profited anyone in the long run and what you say you did was dishonest.

As I pointed out. Your practice, and I suspect your fellow managers, of violating the contract has a hidden price both in terms of productivity and the cost of handling employee greivances. And, when you lose a greivance in arbitration, your employer pays a second time for all the work time that was lost by the employee who was supposed to have done the work to start with.

 

[Patriot2009]

Patriot, I'm calling Bullshit. Unions do not operate through arbitration and the courts. They operate through peer pressure. Some call it threats and intimidation. You can talk it up all you want to, but the fact is that if you don't toe the line, the goon squad will be paying you a visit.

The days of the so-called goon squad have long since passed away. Workers are better educated and trained than ever before and they understand that they not only have rights that their employer mustn’t violate but that the union can't violate either. The truth is that the workers will sue their unions just as fast as they’ll sue their employers. They simply won’t stand for the kinds of union abuses that once were common in some unions.

Listen, I’m not saying that all unions are perfect or that there aren’t still some that aren’t operating in the best interest of their members. But to argue that all unions are bad is simply myopic. We just ended 8 years of what historians will probably judge as one of the worst presidencies in history (If you want to argue that point I’ll be glad to in another forum). But that wouldn’t justify the notion that all presidents are bad and that we should therefore throw out our form of government and adopt something else.

The criticism about the example that Driveby gave is that his worker complained that he was being ordered to work outside his classification(“That’s not my job!”). The reason that we find ourselves talking about arbitration so much here is that the pending legislation includes provisions for arbitration and grievances are settled in two ways. Many are settled in negotiations between the employer and the union at the local level and the rest are settled in arbitration. Sometimes, particularly in discipline cases, an employee may not be happy with the outcome of his case (the union loses in arbitration) and will resort to the courts in an effort to get a different decision. The union is always involved in those cases, sometimes, as a codefendant.

Likewise, unions are often forced by unscrupulous employers bent on violating the contract as much as possible to turn to the courts as a last resort to enforce the contracts they have with that employer. This sort of thing has been much more common than you may think. But that has been less so in recent years because the government has made it so much harder to enforce contracts through its use of regulatory fiat.

Something that you need to remember is that arbitrators aren’t government employees. They’re private contractors so to speak who offer their services through organizations such as the American Arbitration Association (AAA). So, when somebody claims that the employer is forced into submitting to a government arbitrator, they are simply wrong. And, as I pointed out earlier, the vast majority of arbitrators are much more sympathetic to the company point of view than they are to that of the unions. Take, for example, a dismissal case. Many times, even in cases where the case involved a clear-cut abuse and violation of the contract by the company, arbitrators are loathe to pay back pay when they return the employee to work. So, they simply ignore the lost pay and reinstate the worker to his former job.

As a manager, a person should be pleased when a case goes to arbitration because the rate of decisions in the favor of the company is twice as high as it is for the unions. Personally, I hated arbitration when I was a union officer, for that very reason. It wasn’t a fair system. Many more cases were decided in the favor of the workers when they were settled in local negotiations.

 

[Patriot2009]

The job is unskilled labor, i don't know any other company in this type of business that gives any paid sick days.......

well maybe they need a union....

why ? so they get 10 paid sick days per year and use them whether they are sick or not ?

"It's a sunny, 80 degree day and i feel perfectly fine, but fuck it, i have 10 sick days, i'm gonna use one today, hell i'll use another tomorrow if it's another nice day"....

Maybe we don't need a union ......

If your company agreed to pay for sick days used by workers who may not be sick then they shouldn’t be surprised when the employees do exactly that!

You’re mad because your company agreed to something that you don’t agree with.

That sounds like a personal problem to me.

I suppose you piss and moan when a worker takes paid vacation days but stays at home without taking a trip too, right?

Maybe not at your company, but, many have agreements that require employees to use vacation days for days when they are sick after they have used up thier sick days, paid or not.

 

[michiganFats]

Patriot, I'm not arguing that all unions are bad. IMHO collective bargaining is essential to freedom and prosperity. I am saying that Unionism is an industry, there is a lot at stake, and things don't work they way they should, especially in large unions where the underlings can operate in relative obscurity.

Many of your posts revolve around the way things should work, not the way they do work. The fact is, arbitration and legal action only occur when the company is perceived to have done something wrong. Workers have no recourse when it is the union itself that is guilty of wrongdoing. Theoretically they do, but in the real world, you rock the boat, you pay for it.

The goon squad is not dead. You cause problems on the floor, and your car gets worked over before the whistle sounds. Or the more subtle stewards will refuse to back you on a legitimate grievance. Anyone who wants to understand how unions actually work shouldn't read law, they should read "Lord of the Flies". Powergames, perks, and threats of violence are just as alive today as they ever have been, and God help you if you are Piggy.

I could also post at length about the "out of town talent" that is routinely brought into town during strikes. I won't because that's not something that's handled at the floor level, the higher-ups did that all own their own.

 

[Patriot2009]

Patriot, I'm not arguing that all unions are bad. IMHO collective bargaining is essential to freedom and prosperity. I am saying that Unionism is an industry, there is a lot at stake, and things don't work they way they should, especially in large unions where the underlings can operate in relative obscurity.

Many of your posts revolve around the way things should work, not the way they do work. The fact is, arbitration and legal action only occur when the company is perceived to have done something wrong. Workers have no recourse when it is the union itself that is guilty of wrongdoing. Theoretically they do, but in the real world, you rock the boat, you pay for it.

The goon squad is not dead. You cause problems on the floor, and your car gets worked over before the whistle sounds. Or the more subtle stewards will refuse to back you on a legitimate grievance. Anyone who wants to understand how unions actually work shouldn't read law, they should read "Lord of the Flies". Powergames, perks, and threats of violence are just as alive today as they ever have been, and God help you if you are Piggy.

I could also post at length about the "out of town talent" that is routinely brought into town during strikes. I won't because that's not something that's handled at the floor level, the higher-ups did that all own their own.

In your union, the conditions may have been as you say. But, your experience doesn't make it the rule.

Having worked at as many levels of a union as I have allowed me to see how the union really works and to associate with others in other unions and get a view of how they worked as well. At times, I was one of the so-called outside talent that came into town during a strike. Not once have I ever seen anything unethical or illegal done on those occasions. Not once!

The one thing you're right about is that abuses that are perpetrated by union officers against rank and file members are almost always done by poor local officers like the stewards. But, they're democratically elected by the rank and file. Rarely do they last very long if they engage in the kinds of conduct you describe. If they do, shame on the rank and file for allowing themselves to be hoodwinked in such a way.

 

[michiganFats]

You've never seen the goon squad in action? Ever? I'm calling Bullshit again. I am now convinced that not only have you never spent day one on the floor, you've never been associated with a union in any way shape or form. Either that, or you are such an idealist that your brain won't allow you to process any information that may conflict with your ideals.If I were a betting man, I'd go with option one.

After that last claim of yours, I'm done. I'll sit back and let another union member step up and I'll be curious to see their reaction to your claims.

 

[jillian]

Elvis pull you head out. those with sense enough to poor piss out of a boot with directions written on the heal don't stay in assembly for 25 years except in Detroit. Assembly is an entry level position in most companies unless it involves welding or machining in which case you aren't being paid as little as minimum wage unless you are stupid.

easy for you to say while you're sitting in mommy and daddy's basement posting.

i so love compassionate conservatism.

corporatists NEED those people. It's what keeps them in private jets.

 

[driveby]

As I said, the complaint of a manager who isn’t able to manage his time and area of responsibility.

Ahh grasshopper, your statement lacks substance. What does a marginal employee have to do with a supervisor's time management skills ? When you have to manage with limited resources and you have to find creative ways to get the most out of your limited resources. I also made it a point to speak with said employee(s) after the shift and gave the old "teamwork" speech and no greivance was ever filed against me.

Ah, so now he's a marginal employee rather than one who is reminding you that your employer made a contract with him and his coworkers promising that he would not be worked outside his classification.

Union employees, look out for themselves and do as little as possible. I'll chalk your statement up as lack of experience, in a fast paced environment, you always have to be prepared to improvise.

There's two possibilities here. One, you couldn't plan ahead enough to efficiently use the workers in the way that your employer agreed that they would be used. Two, your employer mismanaged its workforce in such a way as to force you to do so by undermanning and imbalancing the various classifications set up in the contract. For example, the employer needed twice as many pipefitters as it need welders. But, hired twice as many welders as it did pipefitters. Either way, it wasn't the workers fault or his union's fault at all. An employee who asked you to live up to your agreement isn't therefore a marginal employee. And, it's dishonest to intentionally violate that agreement!

Spoken like a true " its all about myself" union fool. Workers call out, specs change on the fly, adjustments have to be made quickly. I'm talking about unskilled workers, not pipefitters and welders. Managers have to produce no matter what the circumstances. How do you "plan" that three workers are going to call out today, then five tomorrow, then one the next day, then none the next day ? You don't, you have to improvise when those things happen. Liberals and union clowns live in the theoretical world too much.

And, the fact that no greivance was filed doesn't prove that you were right. It merely shows that your workers were probably more reasonable than you're leading us to
beleive.

It proves i got the job done without incident.

BTW, I find it incredible that this one incident that you are describing was all that there was and that no greivances were ever filed against you.

It happened a few times, i never said it happened only once. With a solid thank you and a motivated explanation of how they really helped the company that day, no greivance was filed. If you don't believe me, so what, you're the type that only believes what your union people tell you. I bet they lie to you more than i would.

And, one other thing. I'm a former union officer. Now I'm a small business owner. I just happen to be one who beleives that if an employer agrees to a contract, he should abide by that contract rather than seek ways in which to violate it or circumvent it. Dishonesty never profited anyone in the long run and what you say you did was dishonest.

Unions aren't dishonest ? rigghhhtttt Neither are politicians....

As I pointed out. Your practice, and I suspect your fellow managers, of violating the contract has a hidden price both in terms of productivity and the cost of handling employee greivances. And, when you lose a greivance in arbitration, your employer pays a second time for all the work time that was lost by the employee who was supposed to have done the work to start with.

You said that you've never worked in a union manufacturing environment, i did for 11 years. One that had over 400 employees and four different locals all in the same plant. You know what they say about experience.....

 

[WillowTree]

Keep the secret ballot.. If you cannot do that then you own the intimidation label.

 

[Patriot2009]

Keep the secret ballot.. If you cannot do that then you own the intimidation label.

What good is a so-called secret ballot if the keeper of the voter rolls withholds them and falsifiys them and the government aids and abets it?

The value of a secret ballot election is preserved only if it is conducted in an open, fair and transparent manner. Otherwise it isn't a real secret ballot election to start with. It's a sham!

That's what one gets in the current system.

 

[driveby]

well maybe they need a union....

why ? so they get 10 paid sick days per year and use them whether they are sick or not ?

"It's a sunny, 80 degree day and i feel perfectly fine, but fuck it, i have 10 sick days, i'm gonna use one today, hell i'll use another tomorrow if it's another nice day"....

Maybe we don't need a union ......

If your company agreed to pay for sick days used by workers who may not be sick then they shouldn’t be surprised when the employees do exactly that!

You’re mad because your company agreed to something that you don’t agree with.

That sounds like a personal problem to me.

I suppose you piss and moan when a worker takes paid vacation days but stays at home without taking a trip too, right?

Maybe not at your company, but, many have agreements that require employees to use vacation days for days when they are sick after they have used up thier sick days, paid or not.

Ummm, try to keep up, the company i've been with the last six years is NOT a union compnay. I think that 3 paid sick days per year is fine the other clown chimed in and said 3 was not enough and that they need a union. I don't piss and moan about anything, if a guy has earned five weeks vacation, he's entitled to it and can take it however the hell he wants to take it. We'll give vacation days for sick days, even let the guys use them on bad weather days ( they do outside work ). So you're really making a lot of hysterical, union biased assumptions there friend.

So while were making assumptions and all, since you're a newb, maybe i can assume you're just a troll spewing a bunch of union rhetoric ?

 

[Care4all]

It's people like you that will turn Michigan into a welfare state.

given the union control of that state...i would say you are already there.....unfortunantely the unions and the car companies can no longer foot the bill......

I would think the auto slowdown would affect Califonia, too, No? all the computerized systems in cars these days?

We had a small business here in Maine that closed last month and laid off about 70 people that made semi-conducters I believe, for the auto industry....

I didn't think Maine would be affected at all by the downturn in the American auto industry...

70 people may seem like very few people, but in the very small towns we have from mid state Maine on up....70 people could be 10% of the town's working population!!!

 

[WillowTree]

Keep the secret ballot.. If you cannot do that then you own the intimidation label.

What good is a so-called secret ballot if the keeper of the voter rolls withholds them and falsifiys them and the government aids and abets it?

The value of a secret ballot election is preserved only if it is conducted in an open, fair and transparent manner. Otherwise it isn't a real secret ballot election to start with. It's a sham!

That's what one gets in the current system.

The right to vote without intimidation is what you get with a secret ballot you DUmb Nazi.

 

[editec]

Unions will not regain their ability to keep salaries in the USA back in line with America's wealth until


1. We do something sane about free trade

2. Union Workers once again start beating the crap out of scabs.

(Yeah that's right unions weren't given the right to collective bargainsing they had to take it by force in much the same way that most of the wealth of the world was originally based on some grand THEFT.)

 

[Patriot2009]

Keep the secret ballot.. If you cannot do that then you own the intimidation label.

What good is a so-called secret ballot if the keeper of the voter rolls withholds them and falsifiys them and the government aids and abets it?

The value of a secret ballot election is preserved only if it is conducted in an open, fair and transparent manner. Otherwise it isn't a real secret ballot election to start with. It's a sham!

That's what one gets in the current system.

The right to vote without intimidation is what you get with a secret ballot you DUmb Nazi.

Name-calling, the last refuge of the uninformed and ignorant who have nothing else to say in favor of thier position.

One can see that you haven't lately been the target of daily employer "informational" meetings in an organizing campaign...in which threats of job cuts and doom and gloom predictions are the order of the day and the union is forced to stand beyond the curb under police scrutiny!

You don't have a clue as to what intimidation is!

 

[DiveCon]

Keep the secret ballot.. If you cannot do that then you own the intimidation label.

What good is a so-called secret ballot if the keeper of the voter rolls withholds them and falsifiys them and the government aids and abets it?

The value of a secret ballot election is preserved only if it is conducted in an open, fair and transparent manner. Otherwise it isn't a real secret ballot election to start with. It's a sham!

That's what one gets in the current system.

great, then you must support the Photo ID requirement to vote for elections too
right?
and why have a secret ballot, lets have everyone sign their ballots so we can be sure that everyone that votes is a legit voter

right?