unions - yay or nay

[zCypher]

In today's world they're pretty much needed. They don't protect you 100%, but they at least introduce a certain level of barrier to prevent companies from doing unfair things like giving advantage to one person over the other etc. They also make it harder to layoff/fire which is probably the most important part. Without a union companies can do whatever the hell they want. And they will.

In this particular situation it's not good that the CEO got wind of the unionization though... he can just fire everyone to prevent it from happening. This is something that normally needs to be done fairly hush hush so management does not know. Once it's setup then it's too late.

One downside of unions is when they get too big, you end up with a bunch of people that are asking for ridiculous things. Then the company can just start looking at doing mass layoffs, and that, a union can't do too much about.

From my experience that doesn't turn out to be the case at all. Instead, you still get managers giving preferential treatment to certain people (good luck trying to prove it in many cases, but it's happening) - you still get some people being fired for next to nothing while others practically get away with murder, entire teams getting canned, etc. I don't think it offers the level of protection that a lot of people are thinking it does. What it does do is introduce a hell of a lot more bureaucracy!

The union uses the company as an excuse, the company uses the union as an excuse. It's a circle jerk of incompetence and often even complicit in shenanigans.

I'd say that if somehow done properly they'd be a good thing. But what I've seen first hand so far, nope no way.

 

[sourceninja]

...

 

[Drako]

Private sector unions can be a good thing.

Public sector unions should be illegal.

 

[Blue_Max]

This.

And unfortunately, that's the case in most companies. The few I've seen where it doesn't apply is generally when it's a private company governed by a good-hearted president who makes an effort to take care of their people. Those are very rare places. Unions exist because people treat people like crap.

It's been my experience than many unions are not much better, protecting the "little people" only as much as absolutely necessary but really only looking out for the management level and higher. They were rife with favoritism and became a club for the "cool kids" while the non get quietly discouraged so they'll "leave of their own accord".

 

[BurnItDwn]

If the company management seems apprehensive/against unionizing then probably unionizing will be good for the majority of the workers.

If the company leadership happily is pro-union, then likely they likely already treat their workers well, meaning the additional union protections may not really make much difference.

 

[PliotronX]

They are great for protecting the well being of humans that corporate machines dint give two shits about but for entry level jobs and new members they're a raw deal. My sister got her first job at an Albertsons for minimum wage and didn't want to pay the dues because she needed the money more than the union and they hassled her and somehow wrangled not only the dues but "back dues." essentially she was making less than minimum wage with no benefit to herself and in this instance she was in harms way handling chemicals without provided safety gear and got sick a lot working the meat counter. Unions have their place but they should not be everywhere.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I'm writing a paper right now for my labor relations class about dealing with the unions and I've used my real world experience to formulate my strategies in dealing with them. If you've never dealt with them or want to see some junk you should watch this documentary called Final Offer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjJp63qwm8A dealing with the 1984 UAW negotiations for the GM Canada plants. As for the UAW just google Black Rock and enjoy the read.

 

[DrPizza]

A better place for THEM... and that's the rub is that it works both ways. What I have seen in the Auto and Steel unions is that what they want detriments the company enough to where there may not be much of a company left in a decade or so. This year has been one hell of a year for the new contracts for the steel companies because steel prices were incredibly low, and labor + healthcare costs were still at a level that reflected old and better steel prices. What the union was fighting for could bankrupt some of these companies quicker than is comfortable, so they'd all lose their jobs anyway. There needs to be balance, and my experience is that unions are selfish and don't have the long term health of the company in their equation.

I understand the good that they bring, but it's not all good.

I've seen nurse's unions fight for smaller caseloads - places where prior to unionization, they had far more patients that recommended by organizations that had done research on things like error rates, quality of care, etc. The nurse's did not do this so they could sit around, but rather so the quality of care for their patients was much better.

Similarly, teacher's unions have fought for smaller class sizes - there's a body of research that demonstrates, especially in the younger grades, that smaller class sizes leads to more attention for individual students and better results. That doesn't automatically make every teacher a great teacher, but it allows great teachers to be possible. Unions and tenure give teachers the ability to advocate for their students - curricular decisions, special education decisions, etc. Special education is expensive - there are plenty of administrators out there who would love to minimize the number of students classified as special ed - and teachers who, without the right to due process, could be tossed aside in favor of teachers who don't advocate as strongly for students with special needs. While some problems with teachers unions and tenure are sensationalized and give a lot of the public an idea that they are more harmful than beneficial, it's undeniable that the students in states with teacher's unions outperform those in states where teacher's unions are outlawed. http://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions-are-illegal-2011-2

 

[Slew Foot]

Union membership should be mandatory for private sector employees. Companies are always looking to fuck over the workers as much as possible, the workers need to fight back.

 

[Jeff7]

This.

And unfortunately, that's the case in most companies. The few I've seen where it doesn't apply is generally when it's a private company governed by a good-hearted president who makes an effort to take care of their people. Those are very rare places. Unions exist because people treat people like crap.

- One who understands that people are a resource that you can invest in to get a good return, particularly if it's a specialized kind of job where a worker can take years to become very proficient and efficient.

- One who understands that they wouldn't have all that money without the people working for them.


There's a decent profit-sharing place where I work, and one of the things that helps earn it is process improvements. The payback is considerable thanks to the ideas generated. The company improves efficiency and profitability, and the workers get a good kickback in return. (Not some little token thing either: "You saved us $2M this year! Here's a $5 gift card for McDonalds." Every quarter, assuming the goals were met, there can be an extra paycheck that's higher than your regular weekly paycheck. It's a good motivator, not only to stay productive, but also to keep low turnover.
Amazing how that works.


But that kind of leadership isn't sufficiently common to make unions obsolete.
(Yes, I do acknowledge that some unions have become bloated themselves, turning into the very things they were made to fight. But....paid time off, worker's comp, OSHA, weekends, ~40hr workweek, those are nice things to have too.)

 

[Bart*Simpson]

Unions are essential.

I'm a member of SEIU 1000 and they're working hard every day to make the case that unions are NOT essential!

I've twice now needed a union rep to assert my Weingarten rights and where the fuck has SEIU been? Too busy.

Both times I had to bring in my own counsel, at my own cost.

So what the fuck do I need SEIU for?

 

[Puffnstuff]

You know if you have to make a statement and request a union rep that the company has to obey the Weingarten Line Rule and wait for the rep before asking any questions or you making a statement of any kind.

 

[Bart*Simpson]

You know if you have to make a statement and request a union rep that the company has to obey the Weingarten Line Rule and wait for the rep before asking any questions or you making a statement of any kind.

Yep, and my two complaints to the NLRB from 2013 and 2014 are still unanswered.

 

[LTC8K6]

I'm a member of SEIU 1000 and they're working hard every day to make the case that unions are NOT essential!

I've twice now needed a union rep to assert my Weingarten rights and where the fuck has SEIU been? Too busy.

Both times I had to bring in my own counsel, at my own cost.

So what the fuck do I need SEIU for?

SEIU is lovely.

http://www.americanexperiment.org/2016/07/union-skims-off-3-medicaid-benefits-political-slush-fund/

 

[zerocool84]

Here in California, unions own the state. They are too powerful here in our state for the most part. The politicians allowed this to happen because the unions buy off the politicians. Unions can definitely be good but here in California, they have too much power.

 

[TuSpockShakur]

Public sector unions bad.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Yep, and my two complaints to the NLRB from 2013 and 2014 are still unanswered.

I feel your pain. When I was a member of the USW my rep would just sit there silently while managers did all of the talking. When it was over I'd have gotten as much help from a frozen grapefruit. The thing is that they increased our dues from a standard fixed fee per pay period to a percentage per pay period to increase their take while they lost membership to fund their extravagant union operations.

Unions are a business just like our employers and their goals do not match the members goals like they did when they were first conceived. For union members who think that their reps are doing a bang up job just remember that negotiations are just theater and each side does its part to fulfil the expectations of their audience.

 

[nexus5rocks]

Anyone that wants merit based compensation will be against unions.
Anyone that needs a union to negotiate their salary for them (usually low skilled laborers) will be for unions.

 

[Sonikku]

I've seen nurse's unions fight for smaller caseloads - places where prior to unionization, they had far more patients that recommended by organizations that had done research on things like error rates, quality of care, etc. The nurse's did not do this so they could sit around, but rather so the quality of care for their patients was much better.

Similarly, teacher's unions have fought for smaller class sizes - there's a body of research that demonstrates, especially in the younger grades, that smaller class sizes leads to more attention for individual students and better results. That doesn't automatically make every teacher a great teacher, but it allows great teachers to be possible. Unions and tenure give teachers the ability to advocate for their students - curricular decisions, special education decisions, etc. Special education is expensive - there are plenty of administrators out there who would love to minimize the number of students classified as special ed - and teachers who, without the right to due process, could be tossed aside in favor of teachers who don't advocate as strongly for students with special needs. While some problems with teachers unions and tenure are sensationalized and give a lot of the public an idea that they are more harmful than beneficial, it's undeniable that the students in states with teacher's unions outperform those in states where teacher's unions are outlawed. http://www.businessinsider.com/states-where-teachers-unions-are-illegal-2011-2

Too bad Americans have been conditioned to believe they're better off without unions.

 

[gorcorps]

Too bad Americans have been conditioned to believe they're better off without unions.

What part of America are you talking about? Here in the Midwest it's a union mecca

 

[Ackmed]

I have a union at work, and glad I do. They bargain for us as far as wages and other things. I pay one overtime hour per month for it, and we're better off with it in my opinion and for the vast majority of our workers think so too. We're a strange animal though, Federal, but private at the same time. Operated by DOE.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Depends on the industry, the one place unions never belong is in the service industry.

 

[MrPickins]

Yay and Yea are not the same...

 

[Mai72]

We are going thru a period of massive disruption. What worked 30 years ago does not work today. Back then, we didn't have globalization. We didn't have automation at the level we are currently seeing. The world economy is rapidly changing. Are unions still needed?

I feel that unions are old relics from the past. Back in the day, you graduated from high school and you were able to find a $25 an hour job working at a plant. Unions were there to protect the worker. You contributed a percentage of your paycheck, and in return you were taken care of. Life was also much different. The cost of living was much cheaper. And it was simpler.

Fast forward to today. Many people work remotely. Many don't do factory work anymore, and who would want to do that type of work anyway? IMO, it's the age of the entrepreneur. Because of the net, many people are working in their homes and even in other countries. You also don't need a union if you want to hustle. Why would I need someone to represent me when I can easily obtain money from the marketplace?

 

[Puffnstuff]

No matter how you slice it union density in the private sector has been declining for several decades now and I don't see any reason for it to stop. In the public sector it's been the exact opposite as governments expand so there's a shift but union density overall is not increasing.