Unions

[shivvyman]

Unions are socialist's wet dream. In reality, they are a collection of inefficient individuals banding together to wreak havoc on the capitalist system.

Take a look at any successful Fortune 500 Business. The vast majority are non-union. You'll find a few here or there, but everyone knows Unions simply reduce productivity and increase the wage rate. As you can imagine, the rest of us suffer in the long run.

[GCJayhawker]

Unions possess both good and bad qualities.  What I do love is the people who say unions are the worst thing to ever exist and are useless all the while enjoying benefits of a workplace that unions help to make possible.

[0.42]

Thought this was going to be a gis thread (tobias bait post)

[CNS]

Thought this was a railroad thread

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

[Cire]

Thought this was a post antebellum America thread.

[Mikeyis4dcats]

I think they are both in some industries.

Construction wise, they are good because you get a ready pool of labor that all have a good level of training.  That said, they are fucks sometimes too as they drive the cost of work up like crazy both on union jobs as well as on public money jobs because the Prevailing Wage rates very closely shadow union rates.
Too difficult of a question to answer without a whole lot of DNR length posts.

She kept rambling about prevailing wages, her husband is a union worker in Junction.

I have a low union iq but why shouldn't a company be able to hire whoever they want at whatever bid they choose? She thinks union workers should do every construction job

In many states, if something is funded by public money, they open the bidding up to both union and non union companies but use prevailing wage requirements to level the playing field.  Otherwise, no union would win any public money job ever.  For example.  Most non union laborers get somewhere in the low $teens/hr while many prevailing wage rate classifications pay laborers in the $thirties/hour.  The state requires the latter of non-union shops so that the union companies that pay laborers a similar wage can compete for the job.

I don't agree with the practice, as all it does is ensure you and I pay more for what we get at the government/municipality level, but thems the rules.

a lot of trades even out though....carpenters for instance.  We are a union shop, and our guys make just under $30/hr base rate, and prevailing wage in Shawnee County for a carpenter is only $14.60.

[p1k3]

I'm pretty sure we have have this thread before but my general thought is anti union because I believe that I am more valuable to my employer than the majority of the employees.

This is a great point. Very hard to separate oneself from the rest of the employees in a union shop. For instance, at my job in California the most senior union dude made $20. He worked there 35 years. Average wage was probably $14, but even the second most senior guy only got like $17.

Plus union dues must really suck.

[wetwillie]

I'm pretty sure we have have this thread before but my general thought is anti union because I believe that I am more valuable to my employer than the majority of the employees.

This is a great point. Very hard to separate oneself from the rest of the employees in a union shop. For instance, at my job in California the most senior union dude made $20. He worked there 35 years. Average wage was probably $14, but even the second most senior guy only got like $17.

Plus union dues must really suck.

A California union job that makes 40k a year sounds made up.  I know you aren't lying but it just doesn't make sense.

[CNS]

I think they are both in some industries.

Construction wise, they are good because you get a ready pool of labor that all have a good level of training.  That said, they are fucks sometimes too as they drive the cost of work up like crazy both on union jobs as well as on public money jobs because the Prevailing Wage rates very closely shadow union rates.
Too difficult of a question to answer without a whole lot of DNR length posts.

She kept rambling about prevailing wages, her husband is a union worker in Junction.

I have a low union iq but why shouldn't a company be able to hire whoever they want at whatever bid they choose? She thinks union workers should do every construction job

In many states, if something is funded by public money, they open the bidding up to both union and non union companies but use prevailing wage requirements to level the playing field.  Otherwise, no union would win any public money job ever.  For example.  Most non union laborers get somewhere in the low $teens/hr while many prevailing wage rate classifications pay laborers in the $thirties/hour.  The state requires the latter of non-union shops so that the union companies that pay laborers a similar wage can compete for the job.

I don't agree with the practice, as all it does is ensure you and I pay more for what we get at the government/municipality level, but thems the rules.

a lot of trades even out though....carpenters for instance.  We are a union shop, and our guys make just under $30/hr base rate, and prevailing wage in Shawnee County for a carpenter is only $14.60.

I think that depends.  When we do commercial it is high, when we do multi unit housing, it is always much lower.  For example, my elect will get 60 on some jobs and high teens on others.  Not all prevailing wage is equal.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

[p1k3]

I'm pretty sure we have have this thread before but my general thought is anti union because I believe that I am more valuable to my employer than the majority of the employees.

This is a great point. Very hard to separate oneself from the rest of the employees in a union shop. For instance, at my job in California the most senior union dude made $20. He worked there 35 years. Average wage was probably $14, but even the second most senior guy only got like $17.

Plus union dues must really suck.

A California union job that makes 40k a year sounds made up.  I know you aren't lying but it just doesn't make sense.

Yeah I know, but this was in the Fresno area. The shittiest part of California. Unemployment was well over 20%+ when I lived there.

[sys]

don't know much about trade unions, but i've worked at a union work site for the last year or so.  they get paid like madmen, and they actually do have some of the crazy rules that you think sound like made up crap (like only x can do y, etc).  on the other hand, the employer gets some benefits too.  they are almost more like ind. contractors than employees, so the employer has a lot of flexibility (like they can say we need 20 electricians this week, 100 the next, then 50 the next, and the union takes care of it).

[Mikeyis4dcats]

I think they are both in some industries.

Construction wise, they are good because you get a ready pool of labor that all have a good level of training.  That said, they are fucks sometimes too as they drive the cost of work up like crazy both on union jobs as well as on public money jobs because the Prevailing Wage rates very closely shadow union rates.
Too difficult of a question to answer without a whole lot of DNR length posts.

She kept rambling about prevailing wages, her husband is a union worker in Junction.

I have a low union iq but why shouldn't a company be able to hire whoever they want at whatever bid they choose? She thinks union workers should do every construction job

In many states, if something is funded by public money, they open the bidding up to both union and non union companies but use prevailing wage requirements to level the playing field.  Otherwise, no union would win any public money job ever.  For example.  Most non union laborers get somewhere in the low $teens/hr while many prevailing wage rate classifications pay laborers in the $thirties/hour.  The state requires the latter of non-union shops so that the union companies that pay laborers a similar wage can compete for the job.

I don't agree with the practice, as all it does is ensure you and I pay more for what we get at the government/municipality level, but thems the rules.

a lot of trades even out though....carpenters for instance.  We are a union shop, and our guys make just under $30/hr base rate, and prevailing wage in Shawnee County for a carpenter is only $14.60.

I think that depends.  When we do commercial it is high, when we do multi unit housing, it is always much lower.  For example, my elect will get 60 on some jobs and high teens on others.  Not all prevailing wage is equal.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

don't know anything about residential, only commercial.   About half of our projects are prevailing wage.   Heavy/highway rates do suck.   We've had a few projects with them, on quasi-building jobs.   I've always worked with the contracting officer to get them to use building rates as much as possible.   We did a parking lit job once and the fence sub raised the issue that the H/H rates for a laborer were like $35, so she worked with us to get it reclassified at a more reasonable rate.

[schreds21]

In the private sector, unions, like OSHA, have outlived their purpose.  There was a time when they protected individual workers both economically and physically.  In the public sector (firemen, police, teachers, etc.) they still have their usefullness.

[Mikeyis4dcats]

In the private sector, unions, like OSHA, have outlived their purpose.  There was a time when they protected individual workers both economically and physically.  In the public sector (firemen, police, teachers, etc.) they still have their usefullness.

I'm no union fanboy, but this is a trite argument.    Without unions, unscupulous businesses can and will take advantage and employees will have no recourse.    I've seen several companies go open shop, and within a couple of years the employees were paid crap, and working conditions went to hell.

They have their most usefulness in construction, as CNS Casey said, as a mechanism to provide consistent, skilled labor.     Personally, I think the public unions (fire, teachers, etc.) are a joke.

[CNS]

Those who say that osha isn't needed don't know many contractors.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

[Mikeyis4dcats]

Those who say that osha isn't needed don't know many contractors.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

yeah.   and we won't even start discussing manufacturing or heavy industry.   the stuff I've seen, even WITH the threat of OSHA....

[star seed 7]

Those who say that osha isn't needed don't know many contractors.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

 

Funny cause it's true.

[schreds21]

Those who say that osha isn't needed don't know many contractors.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

yeah.   and we won't even start discussing manufacturing or heavy industry.   the stuff I've seen, even WITH the threat of OSHA....

Don't know about manufacturing or heavy industry but they are out of control in commercial construction.

[Pete]

Why do any of you give a eff if other people unionize?  What's it to you?

[Mikeyis4dcats]

Those who say that osha isn't needed don't know many contractors.

Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk 2

yeah.   and we won't even start discussing manufacturing or heavy industry.   the stuff I've seen, even WITH the threat of OSHA....

Don't know about manufacturing or heavy industry but they are out of control in commercial construction.

 

[p1k3]

Why do any of you give a eff if other people unionize?  What's it to you?

ever try managing them? They're a pain in the ass.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I don't really understand why anybody takes a hard stance on either side of this debate, really. LOL at anti-union people getting butthurt about some guy who makes $30 per hour to push a broom. Props to the guy who found somebody willing to pay that rate. Also, LOL at the union dudes who protest non-union workers for taking a job that they are unwilling to do without charging double the going rate.

[kim carnes]

In the private sector, unions, like OSHA, have outlived their purpose.  There was a time when they protected individual workers both economically and physically.  In the public sector (firemen, police, teachers, etc.) they still have their usefullness.

I'm no union fanboy, but this is a trite argument.    Without unions, unscupulous businesses can and will take advantage and employees will have no recourse.    I've seen several companies go open shop, and within a couple of years the employees were paid crap, and working conditions went to hell.

They have their most usefulness in construction, as CNS Casey said, as a mechanism to provide consistent, skilled labor.     Personally, I think the public unions (fire, teachers, etc.) are a joke.

no one has a gun to their head.  If they don't want to do it, they can walk away.

[p1k3]

In the private sector, unions, like OSHA, have outlived their purpose.  There was a time when they protected individual workers both economically and physically.  In the public sector (firemen, police, teachers, etc.) they still have their usefullness.

Actually public sector unions are the absolute most useless. They're borderline criminal.

[Pete]

Why do any of you give a eff if other people unionize?  What's it to you?

ever try managing them? They're a pain in the ass.

Get a different job.