Union vs non-Union

1
I'm sure there are some of you here that belong to Unions, so i'm looking for someone in the know to shed some light on the whole Union vs non-Union debate. I'll start by saying that ever since I got separated from my ex 2 yrs ago I was forced to take a 2nd part-time job. The company I work for, who shall remain nameless, is anti-Union. With that said, i've seen my wages jump several dollars per hour due to the fact that they have a hard time finding bodies to fill positions, so it was more of a financial move to keep veteran workers from jumping ship and to retain new employees.

Anyway, I was talking to a new coworker who has been at the store for a month. He said his previous job was at a Union grocery store but they only paid him about $10/hr and on top of federal/state taxes he also had about 20% of each paycheck deducted for Union dues. Also, he said the store in question purposefully only hired part-time employees to work 28 hrs or less so as to avoid paying out benefits. In short, he sounded as though he was getting screwed and I wondered how the hell anyone could survive on less than $10/hr, let alone working for a Union. I've wondered the same about UPS which is Union, but all of the positions I see for openings all seem to be part-time, but at slightly better wages.

I'm not anti-Union or pro-Union but do consider myself pro worker. I guess i'm trying to figure out how the hell Unions works since I've always believed them to be pro worker and pro livable wage. Paying $10/hr doesn't seem very fair. Am I missing something?

Re: Union vs non-Union

2
Carl_Spackler wrote:I'm sure there are some of you here that belong to Unions, so i'm looking for someone in the know to shed some light on the whole Union vs non-Union debate. I'll start by saying that ever since I got separated from my ex 2 yrs ago I was forced to take a 2nd part-time job. The company I work for, who shall remain nameless, is anti-Union. With that said, i've seen my wages jump several dollars per hour due to the fact that they have a hard time finding bodies to fill positions, so it was more of a financial move to keep veteran workers from jumping ship and to retain new employees.

Anyway, I was talking to a new coworker who has been at the store for a month. He said his previous job was at a Union grocery store but they only paid him about $10/hr and on top of federal/state taxes he also had about 20% of each paycheck deducted for Union dues. Also, he said the store in question purposefully only hired part-time employees to work 28 hrs or less so as to avoid paying out benefits. In short, he sounded as though he was getting screwed and I wondered how the hell anyone could survive on less than $10/hr, let alone working for a Union. I've wondered the same about UPS which is Union, but all of the positions I see for openings all seem to be part-time, but at slightly better wages.

I'm not anti-Union or pro-Union but do consider myself pro worker. I guess i'm trying to figure out how the hell Unions works since I've always believed them to be pro worker and pro livable wage. Paying $10/hr doesn't seem very fair. Am I missing something?

First off, it sounds like your 2nd job employer is a rare one - one that sees trained workers as an asset and not a commodity. You got raises there. I don't see where a union will benefit you there.

I belong to a union that is totally self-serving (collecting dues is good, spending a nickel on the membership is out of the question) but as a by-product I get higher than industry average wages and decent health care. The only reason we have repeatedly voted to retain the union is that we get a contract that limits the abuses our company dishes out (they are really fond of abuse).
Filing a grievance is sketchy - incompetence or outright lack of interest by the union comes into play. Keep calling 'cause our rep ain't going to return your call. My union sucks but I'm better off with them.

That said, my union devotes a whole lot of effort into unionizing people making just above minimum wage and then collecting dues from them.

My experience is that my union being "pro worker" is just a side affect. Little wonder that companies are so successful at union busting.
Heller and McDonald are precedents to be followed, not obstacles
to be overcome

Re: Union vs non-Union

3
There always has been a rift between skilled trade unions and non skilled. This goes back before the afl-cio. I have always been in a construction union. My dues cover organizors and buisiness agents who protect our work. We also have a bunch of lawyers and we have a pension fund that has more than a billion dollars in it. My health insurance is covered and if something happens like a shop goes under or doesnt make payroll they are bonded before they can even hire us. I pay a small portion an hour to a training fund that put me through an apprentiship at no cost. This year i will make probably $150-160k and my union dues will be under $3000. Ive seen non union workers on jobs and honestly the biggest thing i see is our safety record is better because in part of our training. Never understood someone who thinks they can negotiate a contract themselves better than a room full of lawyers that a company has. My local walks in with the same or better lawyers.
Hey, careful, man, there's a beverage here! The Dude.
Skilled Labor Isn't Cheap - Cheap Labor Isn't Skilled

Re: Union vs non-Union

4
Union=good. Seriously, though, they can be quite good for workers and good for the company....if the company and the union can work together. I like to cite UPS as an example of a successful organization that has a strong union presence. Drivers are all Teamsters. Not sure too many people would argue that UPS is a poorly run company. Turnover is low and productivity is high. Win-win, as I see it.

Unfortunately, I see organized labor as being in decline, and I attribute this to the passage of so-called "right-to-work" laws in many states. I also think that many people have forgotten about the hard-fought gains won by labor fights in past generations. Many of such gains have been slowly eroded over the past few decades. So slowly that new generations of workers know nothing of what it means to be part of a union. And unions aren't just to win concessions, but to keep them from inevitable erosion. Businesses, after all, exist to make money, and employees are seen often as nothing more than a cost of doing business, not as an asset to cultivate and respect for mutual benefit. Without the counter force of organized labor, businesses are free to exploit employees as the see fit. And that is precisely the direction in which the pendulum has been swinging for some time.

I have years and years of experience as part of a bargaining unit, and some years not as part of one. Without a doubt, I would go union every day of the week, and twice on Sunday. :lol:
Hell is where:
The British are the chefs
The Swiss are the lovers
The French are the mechanics
The Italians make everything run on time
And the Germans are the police

Re: Union vs non-Union

5
I've seen unions fight for workers' rights and also seen the actions of the Sheetmetal Workers Union here in St Louis actively line their pockets while their jobs were shipped to South Carolina. My politics run strong with Trade Unionism so I would like to see the weaker unions (Food Services, 9/11 exposed just how weak that union is especially in NYC) strengthened and other unions reformed to allow rank and file to have better steerage and control. Such is the views of an Anarcho-Syndaclist.
In a bacon, egg and cheese sandwich the chicken and cow are involved while the pig is committed.

Re: Union vs non-Union

6
rltriumph wrote:There always has been a rift between skilled trade unions and non skilled. This goes back before the afl-cio. I have always been in a construction union. My dues cover organizors and buisiness agents who protect our work. We also have a bunch of lawyers and we have a pension fund that has more than a billion dollars in it. My health insurance is covered and if something happens like a shop goes under or doesnt make payroll they are bonded before they can even hire us. I pay a small portion an hour to a training fund that put me through an apprentiship at no cost. This year i will make probably $150-160k and my union dues will be under $3000. Ive seen non union workers on jobs and honestly the biggest thing i see is our safety record is better because in part of our training. Never understood someone who thinks they can negotiate a contract themselves better than a room full of lawyers that a company has. My local walks in with the same or better lawyers.
thanks for the clarification. I think that's the big difference -- skilled vs non-skilled. I honestly don't see how retail Unions can thrive on an already competitive playing field, especially when low hourly wages reign supreme.

If you don't mind me asking, what specifically does one do in construction to make $150-160k/yr? I'm definitely in the wrong line of work :shock:

Re: Union vs non-Union

7
I'm pro and con Union....back in my Dad's day as a union steward and then Foreman in a machine shop (60' thru the 80's) the union had an apprenticeship program and trained newbies to a standard by guys/with guys who were journeymen. They had a brotherhood that joined together to control the quality and training of new machinists and as well protected each other by keeping the company from playing one machinist against another for wage. This is gone now - experienced techs and skilled labor shares *nothing* to maintain job security...it's every man for himself and that's the way the company wants it.

The down side is that once the unions dominated the companies they asked for more, and more, and forced the companies to outsource work to other countries because the companies couldn't afford to pay guys sweeping the floor in a union shop $17 an hour. The unions came about to keep the companies from exploiting the workers...at their heyday they became bullies and destroyed the very companies they dominated with greed. Now the greedy companies have paid politicians to enact laws that have destroyed the unions - not lawful to force union membership (right to work states) and no right to collectively bargain. So, now we need unions again but they have been hamstrung and cannot force companies to pay fair wages or train workers.

The pendulum swung all the way to one end, then all the way to the other. Now the pendulum is frozen in the companies court...they paid the politicians instead of paying the craftsmen.

VooDoo
Tyrants disarm the people they intend to oppress.

I am sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Re: Union vs non-Union

8
unions, like nations, are only as good as the membership.
anybody working(as opposed to owning) is frankly, just "day labor", no matter what has been promised.
contracts, pensions, all of that can go up in smoke in a heart beat.
anybody working should have a factual overview of the history of labor and unions. should also have an overview of capitalism and markets. this will add to the workers sense of "reality".
if a worker can pay the bills and get past just breaking even at the end of every month, then the worker is saving and that's the beginning of building wealth, that's where the fun begins.
be safe. have fun.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot] and 3 guests