Let's Talk Unions again [Split]

[Antithesis]

Well, it may be splitting hairs but I'd like to offer my perspective on this issue as I haven't seen it from the teachers' side (and yet I've seen us at least partially called out for the current economic situation - laugh). The ATA is a professional association, I guess when you get down to the nitty gritty, it is a union (collective bargaining) but provides me with so many other benefits that I am not confident I would get without it like professional development and such.

Professional Associations/Unions are indeed very much a necessity for teaching, I think. It provides me with protection in case some kid decides he/she didn't like how I discipline them or teach them or whichever that I would not normally be able to provide myself. That IS necessary and is not necessarily a safety issue. You would see huge numbers of teachers leave if we were not unionized for exactly this reason. It's a risky enough environment as a teacher as-is.

Of course, I don't see how I, as a teacher, am contributing to this economic issue. Our recent contract negotiated wages that increase with whatever happens to the Alberta Weekly Earnings index. It seems fair to me. I don't see how such a blanket statement can be made when you have the CEOs leading corporations pulling in the paycheques they do.

All this being said, I can acknowledge a couple of counter points:

1. The CAW and ilk are currently painting a very bad picture of unions right now
2. That issue with the TAs in York is horrible too, and I don't see how anyone in their right mind could defend it

[Vulcan]

Wow, maybe the second time I've ever agreed with Hoz. I worked union construction for about 30 years and in my experience it was beneficial for both the companies and the workers. The unions and the companies both contributed to training and safety and most union locals understood they couldn't grab so much that they'd put the companies they had agreements with in jeopardy of going bankrupt. Sure there were disputes and sometimes strikes but in the long run I think both were happy.

We never had any union job security and could be layed off or canned at any time. Union seniority meant nothing other than for apprentices and I sometimes found myself having my previous foreman, general foreman or even super, working for me on another job. The union locals act as a hiring hall and this is supposed to go in rotation although it isn't perfect with some workers able to get hired on by request. This isn't that out of line as some journeymen specialize and have certain tickets that are required for a particular job.

When we worked most of us took pride in our job and wanted the company to succeed. There was a stigma attached to a job that went bad and it could follow the men on that job.

So what I'm getting at is there are many types of unions that have evolved for each situation and a blanket condemnation of all unions is just showing your ignorance. Like someone else alluded to, probably 90% of you are riding on unions backs to get the wages you're getting and you have the gall to besmirch unions.

[burn_this_city]

Why do most craft workers in the oilsands choose to work non-CLAC jobs over CLAC jobs? My buddy is a sparky, and he quit working union jobs after the guys smoking cigarettes for 10 hours a day gave him sh*t for putting in a solid days work. There has to be a reason my manhour unit rate tables are being multiplied by 4 or 5 over the gulf coast manhour rates. To clarify I work as a construction cost estimator..

[4X4]

For some reason I have different views on unions like Police, Fire and Teachers. Well, moreso for essential services, not quite so much for teachers. But with these kinds of unions, unions that are in place to (for lack of a better word) serve the public, I'm ok with them. The reason why is because it gives structure to how people progress through the ranks and theoretically eliminates favoritism. Well, it probably doesn't, but at the very least, it puts light at the end of the tunnel for people that take on some of these thankless jobs.
Afterall, without teachers and police and fire and EMS and stuff like that, society would be chaotic. I personally would never be happy working a job that has an upper limit, so I applaud the people that have a different set of programming... They're programmed to help society.

Unions in the private sector are the unions that I'm railing against. As someone earlier said, $35/hour is pretty steep to be putting valve covers on engines. But if that's what the market dictates, fine. But if people stop buying the product, then that guy should be out looking for another job. To me, it's as simple as that. I see no reason why private companies should be forced to put up with the demands of the people they're employing. And that is what unions have become. It's no longer about making sure that there are safety rails and living wages. It's so out of hand with some of these unions. And it's totally unnecessary, IMO. You don't need a union to drive trains. A buddy of mine works for CN. Some of the stuff he's told me is so pathetic. The stuff he gets away with is ridiculous. We regularly joke that if I was his boss, I'd have fired him a long time ago.
And there's my other buddy that still works for Canada Post. Same deal. He's got his whole overtime 'scam' figured out. Work these certain days and certain hours and you maximize your paycheque and minimize your hours worked. It's so frustratingly pathetic. And the mentality of trying to do the least while making the most is predominantly found in union environments, particularly in private sector companies that have massive unions that are antiquated.

[redforever]

Well, I used to be a teacher. For anyone who doubts that unions reward seniority, all you have to do is look how teachers are paid.

It is a scale for years worked, period. Every year you work, you get another raise, if that is in your current contract. And you try and talk to the teacher's union about letting their teachers pay be related to the quality of teaching in the classroom. They say the teachers are already evaluated by the principles of the school and that should be sufficient. They wont hear of teachers being evaluated by an outside body.

Not only that, the union as well as many teachers, believe that there is no need for Grade 12 diploma exams, that it should purely be on the recommendation of the teachers involved. Tell me, how will our education equate worldwide if we do not meet standards?

And it is almost next to impossible to get rid of a bad teacher, unless they do something horrendous like sexually exploit someone in their teaching care. The bad teachers simply get shuffled around from one school to another until they retire.

And teachers only get their teaching certificate from the union, not from Alberta Education. So teachers can not be fired unless the union takes that teaching certificate back from the teacher. Iin essence, the School Board can not actually fire the teacher, they have to discuss and recommend to the union.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Why do most craft workers in the oilsands choose to work non-CLAC jobs over CLAC jobs? My buddy is a sparky, and he quit working union jobs after the guys smoking cigarettes for 10 hours a day gave him sh*t for putting in a solid days work. There has to be a reason my manhour unit rate tables are being multiplied by 4 or 5 over the gulf coast manhour rates. To clarify I work as a construction cost estimator..

If you're referring to the Christian Labour Association of Canada, most people think it's in the pocket of business and not a real union.

Having said that, the one time I worked at the oilsands it was a clusterfock where you couldn't do a decent job if you wanted to. It was also the only time we ever went on strike against our union. Our international had made some sweetheart deal not in line with other trades which we corrected. It was mindnumbing and the food was lousy. I couldn't get out of there fast enough.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Sorry I didn't have time to read all the quality posts here, I will come back later and read them. But there are a few comments about how unions protect the lazy and useless workers. I am in a union as I work for the government. I am a union activist. One thing that I can say for sure is that the retention of these lazy, unproductive workers is by and large NOT the unions fault. It is managements. Within the public service anyhow. Management has no will to take on these useless piece of crap employees. They are scared that they will be taken to a Human RIghts Commission or be sued personally. They lack the knowledge how to document the people the right way so that they can build a case against them to actually fire them. I don't know how many times I have seen cases where severe disipline has been recommended by lower managment only to be quashed by upper management.

In my area it is NOT the union protecting these people, it is the lack of training and willingness of management to deal with them.

Just a side not. Although I am a active member in the union, I to have several problems with how the union operates. I only agree with about 50% of what they do and stand for. That is why I am activily involved, to try and change it.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Poison

So that if your boss or someone in power has something against you (Not for your work performance) you cant be tossed to the curb. (And if you think it doesnt happen that way in the workforce youre wrong)

If they don't like me they should be able to fire me. People shouldn't be forced to keep employees that they don't like.

So that youre guaranteed a decent pension, quality of life, wage increase so that the upper management aren't eating caviar at your expense etc etc etc.

You can get those things easily without unions. If that is the way the company is run then quit. They likely aren't worth it to work for anyways.

Personally I don't want to work for a company that is forced to do these things but would rather screw their workers if given the option. Most likely they will just find other ways to screw you anyways if thats how they want to operate.

I could go on and on, and for the amount of people ripping the unions here the only point(s) ive seen made is the "lazy" angle, which can be argued for non-union jobs, as well as the driving up wages angle, which can be argued as well for non-union jobs (ie. oil)

The difference between the lazy workers in the private sector and in union jobs are that the lazy people are fired much quicker and much easier when unions are not present to ensure their rights to get paid for doing nothing.

Bottom line is we live in a democracy and you can CHOOSE on whether you want to be in a union or not, if you choose not to work in one then keep your ignorance to yourself.

There are lots of jobs where you can't choose to be in a union and are forced to pay dues and be associated with those pieces of crap.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

Well, it may be splitting hairs but I'd like to offer my perspective on this issue as I haven't seen it from the teachers' side (and yet I've seen us at least partially called out for the current economic situation - laugh). The ATA is a professional association, I guess when you get down to the nitty gritty, it is a union (collective bargaining) but provides me with so many other benefits that I am not confident I would get without it like professional development and such.

Professional Associations/Unions are indeed very much a necessity for teaching, I think. It provides me with protection in case some kid decides he/she didn't like how I discipline them or teach them or whichever that I would not normally be able to provide myself. That IS necessary and is not necessarily a safety issue. You would see huge numbers of teachers leave if we were not unionized for exactly this reason. It's a risky enough environment as a teacher as-is.

Thats odd because my wife is a teacher and every thing that she and I have seen from the ATA has been negative. Teachers losing out on positions because they needed to fill the job with an incompetant teacher from another school, teachers that are woefully inadequate keeping their job over more qualified but less experienced teachers because they have "seniority" and teachers screwing up but getting off without punishment because the union stepped in.

[brownie]

There are many different types of Unions which work in different ways. I am in a Unionized trade mostly working in the oilsands and doing power plant shutdowns. There are many guys that don't give a $h!t about how much work they do. But there are ways around getting rid of them. A company may need 20 guys for a job so they hire 40 and then after 2 to 3 days just say some work got cancelled and lay off all the deadwood. Those guys also don't get as much work as the rest. I have been on the Non-union side when I first moved out here and can tell you that union work is safer, better training, benefits, pension and all around better work enviroment. Besides Do you think Non-unions wages would be so high if it wasn't for unions?

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't see that happening in the day and age that we're in. Maybe in developing companies, but not in a market place where your competing not only for the best people, but the best public image working towards recruiting and building your company.

On the second part. I have trouble seeing a Union agreement as being a suicide pact, and that's what the agreements in the auto industry that were negotiated in better economic times is. Unions remove a lot of the abilities for companies to show any kind of agility in the market place. The big three can't adapt to the credit crunch and on coming recession unless the union agreement allows them to renegotiate wages and employment levels until the crisis passes.

I don't disagree with you. Without a doubt unions make things tough for companies.That is where a union needs to see the writing on the wall, be flexible and work with the company.

UAW and CAW are prime examples of unions who will follow the Air Traffic Controller's Union into infamy(when Reagan fired all of them, way back), IMO. They will go down screaming, "We won't budge" and in 5 years time all their members will be working elsewhere.

There is definitely some ying and yang to unions. On one hand they protect the workers from dicks (manager, principal, etc...) who will trash people because they can, promote a safe working environment, improve the negotiation footing of the small guy. ( I refuse to say working class...that is so 1930's)

On the other they promote inefficiency, protect slackers, and prevent organisational flexibility.

BTW： People have been making really good points on this topic on BOTH sides!

[Antithesis]

Originally Posted by moon

Thats odd because my wife is a teacher and every thing that she and I have seen from the ATA has been negative. Teachers losing out on positions because they needed to fill the job with an incompetant teacher from another school, teachers that are woefully inadequate keeping their job over more qualified but less experienced teachers because they have "seniority" and teachers screwing up but getting off without punishment because the union stepped in.

Well, I'm not going to say that's not your experience, but it's certainly not mine. Some of the benefits the union brings me - like legal protection, and yes, the protections relating to discipline - are, to me, like the Children's Hospital - glad they're there, but hope to never need to use them.

I mean, obviously you're looking at this from a very anti-union POV and there's nothing wrong with it, but when you take a job as a teacher for a public system, you take everything that comes with it. There's benefits and there's costs, sure, but if you're working the job then you are implicitly, if not explicitly, agreeing to them.

[bluntus logicimus]

Way too long a thread for me to wade through. Read the 1st couple of pages and picked u on a theme. Apologies if someone already addressed this. Not all unions are the same. Not all employers are the same. Not all employer-union relations are the same. And finally, it takes two to tango. Any language in a collective agreement is jointly authored by the two parties and agreed to. No one is imposing anything on the other party.
Some examples of misinformation being spread via generalities
1.) On seniority – It does not guarantee promotions. It does get you more vacation time on an entitlement grid, it does provide you with an upper hand in posted positions (as long as you meet all of the qualifications), and yes, on a time-based wage increment scale, you get more money the longer you are there but there is a cap.
2.) On hard work – I call bullsh1t to the generalization that non-union businesses are more productive, profitable and visionary than a non-union business. I suspect other factors are more responsible if differences do exist.
3.) The concept of performance plans, incentives and team bonuses exists in unionized businesses as well. For the non-believers, flip through collective agreements of employers in progressive industries to see how creative and how very much like a non-union employer the performance environment can be.
4.) Finally, hard workers and specialization/personal career development initiatives are also rewarded, through special project pay, achievement bonuses and even overtime and standby pay can be lumped in here.
5.) Yes, it’s hard to fire someone in a union environment but a lot of that has to do with poor documentation and inconsistent practice – both of mgmt origin.

If you’ve read this far . . . I work in labour relations for the employer. Our company does very well – our union relationships are commendable – things get done – what we do with our unions is a best practice and other companies seek out our experiences and knowledge to get to the same place.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Poison

Yup, employees get promoted just because of their seniority....... This just gets funnier.....

Every union job I have ever had has been required to post higher paying jobs and the job was awarded to the one with the most seniority.

[Bobblehead]

I think promotions depend upon the union, industry and agreement.

To make a blanket statement that all union promotions are due to seniority is false, no matter how much anecdotal evidence is provided.

[CaptainCrunch]

http://business.theglobeandmail.com/.../Business/home

From a few days ago. At this point, I'm starting to think that the Canadian bailout will be a big waste of money, and it might be better for the Canadian Auto Industry to die and restructure.

Stupid short sighted thinking by the Canadian Auto Workers.

[Poison]

Originally Posted by moon

If they don't like me they should be able to fire me. People shouldn't be forced to keep employees that they don't like.



You can get those things easily without unions. If that is the way the company is run then quit. They likely aren't worth it to work for anyways.

Personally I don't want to work for a company that is forced to do these things but would rather screw their workers if given the option. Most likely they will just find other ways to screw you anyways if thats how they want to operate.



The difference between the lazy workers in the private sector and in union jobs are that the lazy people are fired much quicker and much easier when unions are not present to ensure their rights to get paid for doing nothing.



There are lots of jobs where you can't choose to be in a union and are forced to pay dues and be associated with those pieces of crap.

Allright so obviously alot of people had differing views for me to tackle, ill use moons as a foundation to try to retort to as many as possible.

Companies shouldnt be forced to keep people they dont like? Really?
So if this said person is doing their job just fine you have to ask why this person was fired?
Race? Color? Sex?
Yes we have human rights etc that would protect you regardless of unions but like i said in an earlier post good luck trying to get a complete stranger who doesnt know your job to prove you were doing your duties just fine and there was obviously another factor that came into play that contributed to their termination..

Its funny as well moon, you mentioned in your second paragraph if you dont like the way the company is run then quit, but you finish off your post saying some jobs require you to be union and associated with those "pieces of crap" (which by the way shows your maturity and intelligence level)

So follow your own rule bud, if you dont like the way the company is run (ie workers are union) then dont apply!!!

Also it was mentioned earlier that someone was mistreated and terminated unjustly and were glad no one was there because they didnt want their job back or work for that company.

Thats fine, noone is going to force you to try to get your job back if you dont want it, for some that may however it sure is nice to know you have someone that will go to bat for you and prove you have done nothing wrong.
They will also fight for compensation if you are found to have been let go without reason so you have that option as well, its not just about getting your job back.

[PsYcNeT]

Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly does a union do with any extra cash collected from dues each year?

Do they re-imburse union members, or throw a pizza party, or what?

[Poison]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly does a union do with any extra cash collected from dues each year?

Do they re-imburse union members, or throw a pizza party, or what?

There are full time jobs within the union that need to be paid somehow......

When your pounding the pavement because your company locked you out you receive a weekly paycheque, nothing close to a living wage longterm but sure nice to have for some type of income.

I could go on but that gives you an idea on where those dues go to, though the pizza party is a nice thought.

[Shin Pad]

I don't know about all unions, but the electrician union in northern alberta uses some of its funds to subsidize bids by electrical companies in southern alberta, to help them undercut non-union electrical company bids. The practice is called MERFING.