Mass defection from the AFL-CIO

[lehighguy]

My whole family has been union. My grandfather traveled the country organizing unions. My mother was union shop steward for her local. My Dad's a teamster.

None of them are involved with the union much anymore. At some point they realized it has nothing to do with fair compensation. The union started representing the laziest and stupidest of its memebers. It also forgot that companies pay those wages, and that they need to remain competitive. Increases in wages need to be accompanied by productivity increases. However, instead of working in this win-win framework the unions choose class warfare and win-lose. Well win-lose became lose-lose for American industry and workers.

Being involved in actual union negotiations, rather then some bitchy complaining worker, makes you have to deal witht eh real problems companies face. My guess is most non-corrupt union leaders, like my mom, quit a long time ago because the institution was bankrupt.

[Hamish McBagpipe]

I negotiate collective agreements every week. I have not encountered a situation where it would be to my advantage to put the company out of business.

[ QUOTE ]
Being involved in actual union negotiations, rather then some bitchy complaining worker, makes you have to deal witht eh real problems companies face.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, aren't you better off at least BEING at the table, discussing the problems, than not having any say at all?

[ QUOTE ]
The union started representing the laziest and stupidest of its memebers

[/ QUOTE ]

You mean the union wasn't representing the lazy and stupid people previously? Not allowed. Most of the time the so-called lazy and stupid people are there before the union gets there, in fact, that may be the reason they formed a union. They need protection because they are all lazy and stupid. But more likely this is just a very judgemental remark on your part. Anyway, how is it the company allowed all these lazy and stupid people into their business in the first place and didn't do anything about it? This usually comes down to either management incompetence or due process. I have to represent the guy who stole from his workplace even though everyone knows he's guilty and that he will lose his job. You can't begrudge him a fair hearing. Can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. If management does their job lazy workers should have an ironclad case built against them. I've never encountered a union that wants its members working around a bunch of lazy and dim people.

It is too bad your Mom quit. But the institution is not bankrupt, there were, most likely, simply problems within that particular small local.

[lehighguy]

My mom works a government job. So by definition management is incompetent.

Nevertheless, the demands that the workers made were rediculous. They wanted 10 minute smoking breaks every hour on the hour. The demands were so rediculous my mom didn't even want to represent them anymore.

They never did any work. Sometimes management would try to fire them. Either because they were stealing, showed up late for an entire month, or weren't cometent at thier work. The union would always threaten strike or action or something. Everyone knew they deserved to be fired, but the union wouldn't allow it.

The real losers in this situation were the better employees. They ended up doing the work the lazier ones didn't do. And they had no hope of getting extra pay for extra work. Pay was based on senoirity only.

The enviorment the union has created has made business impossible. It has sapped any incentive employees might have had to do a good job. And if it was a private business rather then a government agency it would have gone bankrupt a long time ago.

[Hamish McBagpipe]

Well, this is a different scenario altogether. Even as a strong union man I am not altogether in support of public service unionism. I have seen what you described and sympathize.

I represent employees in both private and public sectors. When I go to the bargaining table at a private firm and pound the table demanding this and that, the usual dog and pony show, someone is there to say "#&$& you" or "maybe there's some room there". (I've actually had an owner say he'd rather the place burn to the ground than give me another dime in wages, but this guy was great to deal with) So, I know where everyone's coming from and usually I know right away where the settlement range is going to be.

When I go into bargaining at a public service establishment it always gives me a headache. First of all, there is rarely anyone on the management side who can give me a yes or no answer. As well, the budget is coming from down from the mountain. The money needed for any contract settlement is so ethereal it is very hard to pinpoint. But the bottom line it is tax payers money we are dealing with. It is tough for me to say, "OK, that's it, we're hitting the bricks", when essentially the employees would be going out on strike against the public.

The problem you describe can arise when it is a union like the Postal Workers. Totally insular and perhaps, dare I say it, in need of being decertified. But again, don't throw it all out because of this experience. There is a difference between the guy who needs a union working in some sweatshop and the guy who sits around, doesn't do a lick of work, is the first to fire in grievances, and gets paid 20 or more dollars an hour, virtually untouchable. It doesn't normally work that way.

[lehighguy]

Maybe it doesn't work that way in a lot of unions. But it certainly seems to be the case for large swaths of unionism in the US. Hence the decline.

I think if unions really want to do good by thier employees they would spend less time fighting with management and more time making sure thier workers developed the skills they need to succeed in todays marketplace. They should also be more open to layoffs, expecially in industries that are in decline.

If unions started to work with management, acknowledging that business needs to be profitable in order for people to get paid, then they would be much more effective. From what I understand some European countries have been more successful in this regard (Ireland). However, in America, France, Germany, and elsewhere union leaders still try to wrap themselves around class warfare and totally outdated ideas.

[Hamish McBagpipe]

At the end of the day, yes, I believe that there is a fundamental irreconcilable difference between employees and employers. We are not on the same team. Working with companies to remain competitive is fine. Becoming a kicked-around toady sweating his b#lls off, so that someone else can make record profits, for years before getting booted out the door without recourse because you had to take your daughter to the doctor? I'll pass. Unions should be open to layoffs? That is not a union's business. Their function is to protect those jobs. Anyway, no lay-off clauses are almost non-existent nowadays.

No, not everyone can be said to be exploited just because they work for someone else but anyone who believes that there is no place at all for labor unions has given up on any sense of fair play.

[lehighguy]

Don't get me wrong. My Dad's in a union, and my mom is still part of the union. They were very upset when Reagen broke the aircraft controller strike. They just think that the way unions are managed today is hurting the American worker alot more then its helping him. If the union got its act togethor they would support it.

However, I think that will take a century.

[Hamish McBagpipe]

You sound interested enough to join this new umbrella organization. SEIU or HERE is trying like crazy to get new organizers. I did it, and it is a heroes job. You should look into it, the whole business is truly a blast, I'd rather die than go to the other side. Not because of the ideology, but because human resource people and labor relations managers are doing a god awful boring job. I think a lot of posters here should get involved as well. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Cosimo]

[ QUOTE ]
Becoming a kicked-around toady sweating his b#lls off, so that someone else can make record profits, for years before getting booted out the door without recourse because you had to take your daughter to the doctor?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, what? It sounds to me like more people want these jobs than there are jobs available, and the union is there to ensure that those that get there first are guaranteed continued employment, regardless of the value that they bring to the company.

It's unfortunate that some people try to raise children without the financial resources to do so safely, but luckily people still have the right to appropriate funds from other individuals to pay for these things, and that individuals are being denied the freedom of association so that the God Given Right to Bear Children Without Responsibility can be maintained.

[Hamish McBagpipe]

[ QUOTE ]
It sounds to me like more people want these jobs than there are jobs available

[/ QUOTE ]

The vast majority of people want to work to support their families. There is no real freedom of movement in the labor market for most people. Abandoning the workforce is not a realistic option.

[ QUOTE ]
It's unfortunate that some people try to raise children without the financial resources to do so safely

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you suggesting some kind of eugenics program? Actually, my statement was meant to emphasize ANY crisis at home, in health, or family, that would leave you vulnerable to the whims of management.