America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 19 years ago by tailgater. 21 replies replies.
honest union question
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
tailgater Offline
#1 Posted: Sun, Jun 27 2004, 7:28 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I don't want to use this thread to bash the unions.
I have a question that several union members could not answer.

A new supermarket has opened in my town. A small, quiet group of protestors have been standing across the street with signs asking folks not to shop there.

When I questioned them why they had the signs, they proudly exclaimed: "because that store is not union"!
To which a asked: "how does that affect you negatively?"

All I got was polite giberish.
So I was impressed with their peaceful protest, and they were indeed polite, but I repeat the question:
Why should members of a local union (presumably a supermarket union, but I didn't ask) be upset that a new store is NOT union?
JonR Offline
#2 Posted: Sun, Jun 27 2004, 8:10 PM EST
Joined: 02-19-2002
Posts: 9,740
Yo tailgator:

If the supermarket is new in your state it could mean it left it's original state to avoid a union organizational attempt for its workers and by law no further attempt can be made for one year.

Example: A long time ago here in Philadelphia, teamsters tried to unionize UPS, UPS moved to New Jersey and teamsters could not try again for one year.

However unions are allowed by law to picket a company that moves as long as they don't block entrances or exits to that company. In the case of UPS it would be a waste of time, however in the case of a supermarket it could cost them alot of business some times enough to force them to close.

I was a freelance teamster organizer for twelve years.

JonR


DrMaddVibe Offline
#3 Posted: Sun, Jun 27 2004, 8:30 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,507
Got milk?
lukin Offline
#4 Posted: Sun, Jun 27 2004, 10:58 PM EST
Joined: 03-31-2004
Posts: 2,205
as a member of a grocery store union I think I can answer this...every store that goes up and is not union is a threat to union workers. Basically we are part of a trade organization and certain stores have agreed to pay extra for our services and skills. Union stores usually have better customer service and faster checkout times. How does this affect us? This is the dirty little secret....

Fact of the matter is, we aren't carpenters or masons or anything close to this....a monkey could do our job and we all know it. When a non-union store opens across the way and is run just as effectively with lower wages and no benefits, it threatens to expose this secret and managemeent will realize that there not necesarrily getting the most bang for the buck. Our power lies in us being the most qualified for the job, and when there are others out there that wil do it for less money it threatens our position.

I am a republican and dislike unions. Unfortunately because I work at a grocery store, I have to be in one. Frankly, they have fought to raise our wages so high, that our company can't keep up with walmart and other non union stores. A person working in a grocery store thirty hours a week in my area will make more than a teacher....I know because I am going to have to take a paycut to do what I love. Unions stink, they promote mediocrity and communistic values and at least in this instance are past their prime and outdated. The high wages and benefits are going to force companies to shut down because they can't keep up. The union, in the end will have cost many people their jobs in order to serve their own interest. Ask those who live in Southern California
fritzthetiger Offline
#5 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 3:11 AM EST
Joined: 04-03-2004
Posts: 314
Honest Union question??? Honest and Union are an oxymoron.

Seriously, I believe that each individual plant, store, distributorship, etc should have a union (if the workers want it), bu these big ass political socialistic machines have to go; they're dinosaurs and they have lost most of they're power in policy.

Fritz
drnos Offline
#6 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 5:49 AM EST
Joined: 10-29-2003
Posts: 2,787
lukin hit the nail on the head with this one.

The pickets you saw were there because they were told to be. They were probably even paid to be there. I guarantee you that most of them have not thought this through as deeply as lukin has.

The non-union store will have a lower employee cost. They can charge lower prices and still make the same profit margin. The shoppers will favor the lower prices. The union stores will lose business to the non-union stores. This is bad for the union employers, hence bad for the union employees.

So when I see union pickets I always conclude: "they want me to pay more."
bassdude Offline
#7 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 6:37 AM EST
Joined: 01-13-2004
Posts: 8,871
I live in an area where steel mills are(were) the major industry. High union wages have caused major issues. The thing that always pissed me off was the desire for the laborors to slide on anything they could. I know a few guys who have been fired only to have the union get em back on. Any down time and these guys scatter like **** roaches in the light. Then the foreman has to search them out before they can get production going again. My Dad, uncle and many close friends work(ed) for the steel mill.

It is nice to see someone with Lukin's perspective.
plabonte Offline
#8 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 6:51 AM EST
Joined: 09-11-2000
Posts: 2,131
My wife worked for a union as a customer service rep. In other words she answered the phone and listened to customers complain about their monthly bill. I couldn't believe the amount that she got paid. It was 3 times what she would have made in a non union environment. Good for us pay wise but not so good for the company. And some of the people working there were complete idiots and didn't know how to do their job. So I don't buy the union are hiring the best people philosophy.

IMHO a union rewards longevity and not productivity.
Charlie Offline
#9 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 8:13 AM EST
Joined: 06-16-2002
Posts: 39,751
lukin

I appreciate your answer! However, the grocery union workers in Southern California were duped by the uion into a useless strike that cost them far more than they will ever get back.

Charlie
0patience Offline
#10 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 9:36 AM EST
Joined: 07-20-2003
Posts: 1,023
Unfortunately, not all unions are worth having around.
I am union and they have succeded in getting us a 2 year pay freeze, worse health insurance than we have ever had and cost me $100/month for all that.

Then they wonder why their support is starting to slip.
Guys doing the same job as me in non-union places are making the same as me, with the same benefits, but they aren't paying out $100/month for that.

Now, they are talking about a strike. Yeah, that'll solve everything. Get paid pennies on the dollar to strike, can't collect unemployment and don't get paid any wages. Yep, that's real helpful.
lukin Offline
#11 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 12:28 PM EST
Joined: 03-31-2004
Posts: 2,205
Charlie
I hoped that was he message that I was trying to get across...they thought the union would take care of them and instead the union led them into a fight in order to better serve the union....
bottom line is this, unions are businesses and need to make a profit just like anyone else. When union workers realize that, they see a whole different side of unions.
jd1 Offline
#12 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 2:57 PM EST
Joined: 02-14-2001
Posts: 3,118
Well said lukin.
I too was part of a grocery store Union as a young kid trying to make it on my own, and I almost lost everything I gained (from previous oil and gas drilling employment) to "support the union" and picket. They paid next to nothing for that 6 week period and I and many others had to find second jobs (even after settlement) in order to play catch-up. Thank God I had a family that wasn't about to let me slip back into a pit I just worked myself out of. Some families didn't make it and suffered horrendous losses; those that stopped picketing to find some kind of work where then black-balled by those that "towed the union party line." I'm sorry for those that feel they need a union to stay employed. I did it because I enjoyed the job at the time and it did pay decent wages. We did the grunt work stocking/cleaning shelves at night and unloading trucks. So yeah, I too was in the union but despised every second of it. I then moved and hoped to work for the same company in a different city because that was the union promise I was told, and that's where the union stabbed me in the back and wrote me off. Why? Because I was vocal. Could I prove it? Hell no. It wasn't worth it. After all, I had to feed my kids and finding work was more important than fighting a losing battle. Screw the unions and how they prey on the hardworking; and for those that use the unions because they are loafers and know their job is protected, well ....shame on you. Sorry for the soapbox, but that was a painful time in my young life.
mattmelcher Offline
#13 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 4:56 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2004
Posts: 96
hey pablonte-twice in your post you made an interesting statement

'My wife worked for a union...' and 'the union are hiring...'

It points out one of the problems with a union environment-people think (or better yet, act as if) they work for the union.

I currently am a manager at a company that is organized and most employees have union representation. I have been on both sides of the table. I have carried a picket sign and been on strike. I have had conflicts with the union and been in grievance meetings, etc.

I have seen people go to the union steward because there wasn't any toilet paper in the bathroom. I have seen people stand up in meetings and ask if the union approved this. People tend to loose perspective and forget who hired them and who's name is on the paycheck. I have no problem with collective bargaining and union representation during disciplinary meetings. After all, you gotta get something for the dues you pay. Beyond that, I think they overstep their bounds.

It's when there are things like the picketers at the grocery store. They are there because they HAVE to be. Why? Because the union said so. They are not able to make their own decisions because of the political reality of working in a union shop. Go along to get along.

Too many drink the union kool-aid and are hurt more than they are helped.
jgjam Offline
#14 Posted: Mon, Jun 28 2004, 6:26 PM EST
Joined: 05-16-2002
Posts: 909
I am in management for a non-union company and probably not very qualified to make judgement on most. We try to pay our employees a fair wage for the markets we are in and treat them with the same respect that we hope they have for us. We have an employment of a little over 500 and have dozens and dozens of employees that have been with us for over 10 years with several over 20-30 years. I personally feel that while unions have a place in some areas and situations that the vast majority today are out of place and serve no purpose except to falsely try and protect the lifestyles of a few individuals within each. Unfortunately as it has been pointed out in this thread the average worker generally ends up paying more of the price. A very sad situation as management of several of these union companies also changes their style to further erode decent working conditions in their fight with the unions. A vicious cycle...

John
rastusmcnair Offline
#15 Posted: Tue, Jun 29 2004, 5:15 AM EST
Joined: 03-01-2003
Posts: 1,845
I know we can all come up with union abuse stories just like we can all blame everthing on one political leader or another. But read Your history. Understand what many peoples lives were like before unions. Do union shops make things more expensive? Probably. But do You want Your children to wish for their dreams with a full time job that can't even support one person?

I am not a union member, and am fully aware of their abuses. But We should recognise the Growing income gap between many members of our society. One theory I've heard is that unions saved us from the violent social upheaval that many countrys experienced in the 19th and 20th centurys. They may have to do it again.
bassdude Offline
#16 Posted: Tue, Jun 29 2004, 5:34 AM EST
Joined: 01-13-2004
Posts: 8,871
rastus, I agree that unions were needed then. I see them serving no purpose at this point other than to piss a lot of folks off. I have a website that shows all the major union scandals and how they ripped off the workers they were supposed to protect. I'll have to post that later.
lukin Offline
#17 Posted: Tue, Jun 29 2004, 7:53 AM EST
Joined: 03-31-2004
Posts: 2,205
Rastus,
If I honestly believed that union cared about their members as much as they did then...I would be a supporter of them. I have seen too many people live and die thinking the union will come in and save them at the last moment only to lose their jobs and everything else. The unions served their purpose at some point in history, but we have laws now that prevent companies from the kinds of abuses that were going on. Companies still abuse employees, but not nearly to the extent that they did then. Heck , even walmart has started to offer benefit packages, and in my mind they are one of the worst companies you can work for. Unions CAN be good, but for the most part are only out to serve themselves.
tailgater Offline
#18 Posted: Wed, Jun 30 2004, 7:04 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Whether or not unions CAN be good is irrelevant.
They simply are NOT needed in America 2004.
Governmental agencies and laws protect the workers from the abuse and dangerous work conditions of the past. A federal minimum wage prevents slave labor, and beyond that, good ol' fashined capitalism should dictate the wage for each job.

The very first thing most union employees learn is that they themselves are worthless (and worth less) without the union. They look at their pre-dues paycheck and rejoice in the higher wages.
It's as if they couldn't earn it on their own.

The economic prosperity of this country relies on supply and demand. When a union "forces" an inflated pay scale it skews everything towards an unrealistic target.
Many jobs have been lost BECAUSE of the unions.
Because of their often unjust wages.
because of their myopic job functionality.
Because of their inbred complacency.

It's not the only problem facing Americas workforce, but it's certainly a big one.

It's sad when the best, most positive thing that can be said of something is that it was important 100 years ago.
lukin Offline
#19 Posted: Wed, Jun 30 2004, 9:08 PM EST
Joined: 03-31-2004
Posts: 2,205
tailgater hit it right on the head...

whenever I complain about the union at work (which is very rare because its worse than blasphemy to most people there) they always bring up all of the good things that unions do. I always respond in the same way: I am a hard worker that could and should be earning this kind of money and benefits anyway. Every other job I have worked in, I was advanced quickly because of my hard work and determination. The only thing the union does for me is let me know that all of my hard work is basically for nothing since it will never get me advanced, promoted or get me a pay raise. THe only thing that is on my side is time, meaning every six months or so, I will get a raise only because it is in our contracts, not because I am a hard worker. It inspires complacency and mediocrity.

Our contract is coming up soon, and you should hear people talk excitedly about what they're going to get and how they will really stick it to mangement and all that crap...They can't wait to participate in a strike which will do nothing more than hurt our store, our customers and our jobs. Let the free market decide and let the chips fall where they may...

of course if anyone at work heard me talking about this, I have no doubt that they would not hesitate to slash my tires or threaten me or my family, no matter how well I have treated them before.
lukin Offline
#20 Posted: Wed, Jun 30 2004, 9:17 PM EST
Joined: 03-31-2004
Posts: 2,205
heres a link that should explain exactly what union leaders are all about...I should know, he's my union president :(

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/8913223.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp&1c
GYPSY Offline
#21 Posted: Fri, Jul 2 2004, 12:52 PM EST
Joined: 07-02-2004
Posts: 276
OK, I'm new to this site and was just kinda floating around checking things out. Low and behold I read this topic which is very near and dear to me. I am a union member, Local 6201, who recently went on strike. At the time I questioned our VP thru and thru about their motives. To my suprise he was very responsive and informative about the process. I always thought my union was very weak and slow to react, because of my upbringing in a unionized home. My father was a dock worker in Jersey most his life, very strong union. Anyway, there are some good points being made on both sides of the coin here. I have seen people get thier jobs back that probably didn't deserve them in the first place. I've heard the people who think the union pays them. I've seen managers, who were trying to do what was best for the company, be transfered because of union witch hunts. At the same time in non-unionized jobs, I've seen the classic "who you know" hire and fire routine go on. Someone's nephew needs a job type thing (which I personally fell victim to). Some receptionist wouldn't blow someone. All that mess. And has anyone ever actually tried to utilize the EEOC. Do you realize how long of a process that is? Try years. Then if you do get your job back all the systems will have been changed or upgraded and you just might not be able to make the grade. So if there is a choice I'm definitely Pro-Union.
tailgater Offline
#22 Posted: Fri, Jul 2 2004, 6:50 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Gypsy,
I read your post.
You are Pro-union.
I re-read your post.
Why are you pro-union?

The only "positive" you mention is the fact that some people in non-union jobs get hired or fired based on who they know.

Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top