GOP mulls national right to work law...Because they love you

[North Buffalo]

A right to work state recognizes the right to unionize. Unlike other states, you are not forced to join a union just to work. With regard to pay and benefits, there are many unions, each with their own contracts and negotiations. Some are more powerful than others. Speaking for myself, I make about 35% more in hourly wage than telecom techs make working for companies with a non-unionized workforce, and I have excellent health insurance provided to me free of charge. The drawback of a unionized workforce is that it creates a very real "us vs them" mentality between labor and management, which I believe is detrimental to the business, and ultimately to the customer.

That I understand though Unions are not the only ones that create that tension. My wife is a nurse in a non-union shop in ny and management constantly creates tension with the nurses. Docs are catered too and this ortho OR hospital is losing nurses rapidly because of this poisoned atmosphere. It happened on Capitol Hill in certain offices when I was there. Staffers avoided those office which had nothing to do with politics. It crossed party lines, but we served at the descretion and salaries were and are relatively low even for public servants.

[IDBillzFan]

That I understand though Unions are not the only ones that create that tension. My wife is a nurse in a non-union shop in ny and management constantly creates tension with the nurses. Docs are catered too and this ortho OR hospital is losing nurses rapidly because of this poisoned atmosphere. It happened on Capitol Hill in certain offices when I was there. Staffers avoided those office which had nothing to do with politics. It crossed party lines, but we served at the descretion and salaries were and are relatively low even for public servants.

 

While I can empathize with the situation at your wife's workplace, the reality is that poisoned atmospheres create high turnover, high turnovers create inefficiencies, inefficiencies erode margins, and once the pocketbook gets hit, people who own/run the company tend to adjust personnel to eliminate the poisoned atmosphere.

 

It doesn't often happen quickly, and many times it's corrected long after the quality people are gone, but in the end, when you find yourself at a bad job, you only have to ask yourself a few questions:

 

Can you change it?

 

If the answer is no, can you live with it?

 

If the answer is still no, then, well, what are you waiting for?

 

You can always go get what your worth. Always. But it's up to you, not someone else to make that happen.

 

Here's an example: The Buffalo News is in the process, apparently, of developing new contracts for the workers. The newspaper will do promotions about how great it is, and when they do, left wing-nutbag-turned-sports writer Timmah Graham is often times tweeting "If the newspaper is that great, it can afford to give the workers the contract they want."

 

This is stupidity. If you want to make a point to the newspaper, quit and get what you're worth somewhere else. And if you can't, come to terms what your current market value and take the steps necessary to increase your value.

 

Unfortunately, self-important people are usually crappy as self-awareness and, ultimately self-accountability, so the easy, lazy, progressive thing to do is complain that you're not getting what you're worth because 'the man' is out to get you.

[North Buffalo]

While I can empathize with the situation at your wife's workplace, the reality is that poisoned atmospheres create high turnover, high turnovers create inefficiencies, inefficiencies erode margins, and once the pocketbook gets hit, people who own/run the company tend to adjust personnel to eliminate the poisoned atmosphere.

 

It doesn't often happen quickly, and many times it's corrected long after the quality people are gone, but in the end, when you find yourself at a bad job, you only have to ask yourself a few questions:

 

Can you change it?

 

If the answer is no, can you live with it?

 

If the answer is still no, then, well, what are you waiting for?

 

You can always go get what your worth. Always. But it's up to you, not someone else to make that happen.

 

Here's an example: The Buffalo News is in the process, apparently, of developing new contracts for the workers. The newspaper will do promotions about how great it is, and when they do, left wing-nutbag-turned-sports writer Timmah Graham is often times tweeting "If the newspaper is that great, it can afford to give the workers the contract they want."

 

This is stupidity. If you want to make a point to the newspaper, quit and get what you're worth somewhere else. And if you can't, come to terms what your current market value and take the steps necessary to increase your value.

 

Unfortunately, self-important people are usually crappy as self-awareness and, ultimately self-accountability, so the easy, lazy, progressive thing to do is complain that you're not getting what you're worth because 'the man' is out to get you.

Too easy to blame the left or progressives. Bad management is bad management whether the left is complaining about the mannor the right is complete laining about the union... Complaining is usually not a good sign in general. Self important ceos raping and pillaging a company while cutting workforce in the name of downsizing is also a bad sign.

[Azalin]

That I understand though Unions are not the only ones that create that tension. My wife is a nurse in a non-union shop in ny and management constantly creates tension with the nurses. Docs are catered too and this ortho OR hospital is losing nurses rapidly because of this poisoned atmosphere. It happened on Capitol Hill in certain offices when I was there. Staffers avoided those office which had nothing to do with politics. It crossed party lines, but we served at the descretion and salaries were and are relatively low even for public servants.

 

Of course unions aren't the only ones creating tension - I'm not implying that. The labor/management relationship always has the potential for clashes. Adding unions to the mix adds another dimension to an already adversarial relationship. LA is right though - if you are unhappy in your job, and you can't change the situation, then at some point a person needs to understand that it's on them to do something about it. A union can't solve everything.

[North Buffalo]

Of course unions aren't the only ones creating tension - I'm not implying that. The labor/management relationship always has the potential for clashes. Adding unions to the mix adds another dimension to an already adversarial relationship. LA is right though - if you are unhappy in your job, and you can't change the situation, then at some point a person needs to understand that it's on them to do something about it. A union can't solve everything.

. True but a Union helps balance an uneven power relationship in a potentially adversarial setup. That dimension i would argue is better for the worker in the long run, but id company is failing it is too easy to blame union for ressons for the failing, ignoring the underlying issue.

[Azalin]

. True but a Union helps balance an uneven power relationship in a potentially adversarial setup. That dimension i would argue is better for the worker in the long run, but id company is failing it is too easy to blame union for ressons for the failing, ignoring the underlying issue.

 

That's unionist dogma. The employer/employee relationship is based on one of mutual gain, and while the intent of unions is to prevent exploitation of labor, an automatic byproduct of that is to pit hourly vs management. Unions most definitely inflate wages - not to mention the cost of health insurance, and as I've already stated I'm a beneficiary of that. But, "that dimension" will not be better for an hourly employee if they price themselves out of a job. In the end, a person should be paid what they're worth, not necessarily what they demand. Businesses, large or small, exist to provide services or products to consumers and to make money. labor is usually a company's greatest expense, so it's naturally going to be held under tight control.

[IDBillzFan]

Too easy to blame the left or progressives. Bad management is bad management whether the left is complaining about the mannor the right is complete laining about the union... Complaining is usually not a good sign in general. Self important ceos raping and pillaging a company while cutting workforce in the name of downsizing is also a bad sign.

 

Let me make this easy for you. I have no problem with unions at all except for two things: mandatory union membership/dues and tenure

 

Eliminate them and we're all good.

 

But you can't eliminate that, because then you eliminate the money-laundering scheme that gives millions to union bosses who give millions to political campaigns to elect far left nutbags who force company employees to give millions to unions in the form of dues. And then protect some workers by giving them "tenure" so no matter how crappy they are at a job, you can't fire them.

 

Helluva scheme if you can get away with it, I guess.

Edited March 6, 2017 by LABillzFan

[Azalin]

 

Let me make this easy for you. I have no problem with unions at all except for two things: mandatory union membership/dues and tenure

 

Eliminate them and we're all good.

 

 

That's the beauty of a right to work state - you can choose whether or not be in the union - if you're not, you don't pay dues. Of course, the down side of that is that you earn the ire of unionized coworkers, which can really suck when people won't work with you. You're also compelled to work during strikes, which only makes coworker relationships even worse.

 

 

Just curious, what percentage does a union worker pay in dues?

 

It varies considerably from company to company, union to union. I think my dues amount to 1 hour's pay/week.

[DC Tom]

It varies considerably from company to company, union to union. I think my dues amount to 1 hour's pay/week.

 

That's around what I remember the AFT locals' dues being, for what I saw of them.

 

Have our pro-union posters made the argument that unions are vital to worker safety? As though OSHA doesn't exist, and without unions every blue collar worker is going to go back to being paid in company scrip?

[grinreaper]

 

Let me make this easy for you. I have no problem with unions at all except for two things: mandatory union membership/dues and tenure

 

Eliminate them and we're all good.

 

But you can't eliminate that, because then you eliminate the money-laundering scheme that gives millions to union bosses who give millions to political campaigns to elect far left nutbags who force company employees to give millions to unions in the form of dues. And then protect some workers by giving them "tenure" so no matter how crappy they are at a job, you can't fire them.

 

Helluva scheme if you can get away with it, I guess.

I'd throw "work rules" into the discussion too. Picture a production line with 50 people going down. The line mechanic comes and locates the problem. It's a loose wire that could be fixed in 5 seconds. No, the union doesn't allow the mechanic to fix it, he must call an electrician who is going to take 10 minutes to arrive while 50 people stand around with their thumbs up their asses. It's inefficiency built in by the unions to allow more union members.

[IDBillzFan]

I'd throw "work rules" into the discussion too. Picture a production line with 50 people going down. The line mechanic comes and locates the problem. It's a loose wire that could be fixed in 5 seconds. No, the union doesn't allow the mechanic to fix it, he must call an electrician who is going to take 10 minutes to arrive while 50 people stand around with their thumbs up their asses. It's inefficiency built in by the unions to allow more union members.

 

Years ago I was setting up a 10x10 pop-up booth for a show at McCormick Place Convention Center in Chicago. I had three signs with Velcro on them that stuck to the back wall. Union came by and made me take them down and hire a 'decorator' for minimum 2-hours of work to put them back up on the wall.

 

But hey...progress, amirite?

[Rockpile233]

I am pro-union for many reasons, all of which remain intact in a right to work environment.

 

I work for a large company employing union labor. The locals have already been reforming for some time addressing many of the issues being actively pushed in nonunion agendas. I work in an industry where quality is of paramount importance and training through the apprenticeship is training of the highest quality. Even the state programs in schools, where a good portion of the nonunion labor flows out of, are tought by union men and women. Selling value will excel in any environment.

 

The other reforms (nepotism, floating useless people, etc) have been largely eradicated.

 

This of course amounts to sound leadership and by no means addresses the public sector, but the amount of anti union garbage that is constantly reinforced is a little much. Sure you can make OSHA or poor exploited worker cracks, and yes unions should probably refocus or get phased out, but considering those were reasons unions actually needed to form you sound a little salty.

Edited March 6, 2017 by Rockpile233