48.9% of Unions members work for the Government

[Benton]

(01-30-2016, 01:47 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Yes but why does the Union help keep the bad teachers employed.    All unions do this .... They work their tails off for the worst employees while the best get held back so they can protect the worthless.    

I would like to see these changes.  

1. No more taking unions dues out before guys are paid.    Each member writes a check for dues.  

2. Membership voluntary so people can negotiate their own deal.

3. Unions can not do any policital lobbying/campaigning.    They can make recommendations on which candidates to donate towards.   Then members donate themselves.    

4. No federal employee should even have the option to be in a union .

eh, I'd disagree. Do some lazy guys get protected by unions? Sure. But they also get protected by nepotism, favoritism, racism, and a half dozen other isms. If youve ever worked a nonunion job with more than 10 coworkers, youve asked yourself at least once how half of them still have a job.

that's got nothing to do with unions, but everything with an abundance of stupid people. If anything, sometimes unions get those guys out as they're dangerous to other workers.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(01-30-2016, 01:47 AM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Yes but why does the Union help keep the bad teachers employed.    All unions do this .... They work their tails off for the worst employees while the best get held back so they can protect the worthless.

Why do defense attorneys defend people they know to be guilty?  Answer, because that's their job.  

Quote:I would like to see these changes.  

1. No more taking unions dues out before guys are paid.    Each member writes a check for dues.  

The primary right wing talking point.   Why wouldn't you allow for people to agree to dues being taken directly from their paycheck?

Quote:2. Membership voluntary so people can negotiate their own deal.

You don't really mean this.  You think you do but you don't.  Due to reciprocity any contract deals negotiated by the union have to be conferred on all workers.  If you allowed this not to be the case you'd be creating a bureaucratic morass in which you'd have to accurately track thousands of different deals; pay scales, vacation and sick days... pretty much everything for thousands of different employees.

Quote:3. Unions can not do any policital lobbying/campaigning.    They can make recommendations on which candidates to donate towards.   Then members donate themselves.

   
I'm down with this, as soon as you extend this to all corporations as well.  Either allow only private individuals to donate or allow money to come from any entity.  This is the most blatantly obvious, and thus the most inane, of the right wing talking points to eliminate unions.  It's so blatantly one sided and hypocritical it cannot be logically defended.

Quote:4. No federal employee should even have the option to be in a union .

There's your advocacy for freedom again.  Why federal and not state, county or city?  What's so evil about federal employees that you want them treated as second class citizens?

[Vlad]

(01-30-2016, 11:18 AM)Benton Wrote: eh, I'd disagree. Do some lazy guys get protected by unions? Sure. But they also get protected by nepotism, favoritism, racism, and a half dozen other isms. If youve ever worked a nonunion job with more than 10 coworkers, youve asked yourself at least once how half of them still have a job.

that's got nothing to do with unions, but everything with an abundance of stupid people. If anything, sometimes unions get those guys out as they're dangerous to other workers.

That hasn't been my experience at all. Currently work for a large corp. and everyone pulls their weight, great place to work. Prior to this gig worked for an non-union division of GE. No problems.

Working in a union shop prior to those two gigs was the only time I ever asked myself why these people had jobs...but the answer was quite evident, its a union shop.
Not pulling their weight, with this entitlement union member attitude because management cant touch them. The "I refuse to do that task because it isn't in my job description" used to roil me...and were not talking about tasks that require special training but rather simple jobs.
That job is why I don't have a favorable view of unions.

[StLucieBengal]

Sociopathicsteelerf Wrote:Why do defense attorneys defend people they know to be guilty?  Answer, because that's their job.  



The primary right wing talking point.   Why wouldn't you allow for people to agree to dues being taken directly from their paycheck?



You don't really mean this.  You think you do but you don't.  Due to reciprocity any contract deals negotiated by the union have to be conferred on all workers.  If you allowed this not to be the case you'd be creating a bureaucratic morass in which you'd have to accurately track thousands of different deals; pay scales, vacation and sick days... pretty much everything for thousands of different employees.


   
I'm down with this, as soon as you extend this to all corporations as well.  Either allow only private individuals to donate or allow money to come from any entity.  This is the most blatantly obvious, and thus the most inane, of the right wing talking points to eliminate unions.  It's so blatantly one sided and hypocritical it cannot be logically defended.


There's your advocacy for freedom again.  Why federal and not state, county or city?  What's so evil about federal employees that you want them treated as second class citizens?

1. Fire bad workers . No need to protect them. Reward those who are doing it right

2. I think it's important that people have to knowingly pay the bill. They can pay quarterly or whatever. It also allows people to decide to stop being a part of the Union.

3. Possibly. But I think the employers would adjust and would reward those who did.

4. We agree on this .

5. We should have less federal jobs anyway. I would say no public employees could unionize but state and local workers are a little different

[Benton]

(01-30-2016, 02:26 PM)Vlad Wrote: That hasn't been my experience at all. Currently work for a large corp. and everyone pulls their weight, great place to work. Prior to this gig worked for an non-union division of GE. No problems.

Working in a union shop prior to those two gigs was the only time I ever asked myself why these people had jobs...but the answer was quite evident, its a union shop.
Not pulling their weight, with this entitlement union member attitude because management cant touch them. The "I refuse to do that task because it isn't in my job description" used to roil me...and were not talking about tasks that require special training but rather simple jobs.
That job is why I don't have a favorable view of unions.

understandable but anecdotal. I work for a non union corp. My experience is pretty well the opposite. One for instance is I asked for a report two years ago. No shit, three years. Every few months I ask for it again. The woman responsible for it makes an excuse as to why she forgot and then... Nothing. I honestly think she doesn't know how to run it. But guess what? She replaced someone equally inept.

with a union she'd be gone. As it is, her supervisor doesn't want to train anyone else.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(01-29-2016, 12:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: There is zero incentive to be the best.

https://www.greenleaf.org/what-is-servant-leadership/

Quote:WHAT IS SERVANT LEADERSHIP?

Servant leadership is a philosophy and set of practices that enriches the lives of individuals, builds better organizations and ultimately creates a more just and caring world.

http://www.gotquestions.org/servant-leadership.html

Quote:Question: "What is servant leadership?"

Answer: Servant leadership is best defined by Jesus Himself: “Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:26–28). In the Christian realm, all leadership should be servant leadership.

Any teacher, especially one who pretends to be Christian, who espouses "there is zero incentive to be the best" about their chosen profession doesn't know anything about service, leadership, teaching, or Christianity.  Which leads me to the conclusion you're lying about being a former teacher, also.



A psuedo-libertarian blaming poor teachers for his lack of incentive to be the best is equal parts hilarious and pathetic.

[StLucieBengal]

(01-31-2016, 08:30 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: https://www.greenleaf.org/what-is-servant-leadership/


http://www.gotquestions.org/servant-leadership.html



Any teacher, especially one who pretends to be Christian, who espouses "there is zero incentive to be the best" about their chosen profession doesn't know anything about service, leadership, teaching, or Christianity.  Which leads me to the conclusion you're lying about being a former teacher, also.



A psuedo-libertarian blaming poor teachers for his lack of incentive to be the best is equal parts hilarious and pathetic.

Lol you are free to believe whatever you wish.

[GMDino]

(01-29-2016, 12:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Locked in pay scale.   So a teacher who has 10 years expierence and has mailed it in and a teacher with 10 years expierence who stays on the cutting edge of their profession while showing progress within the classroom.....  They both get paid the same.

There is zero incentive to be the best.   Your pay is the same whether you just show up and watch movies or actually have in depth lessons.

I've been thinking about this line.

I take a lot of crap in my personal life because I have always said money isn't what motivates me.  I'd work for free if everyone else would not want paid for water and electricity and the like!  


So the "incentive" has always been to do a good job.  And to get better at my job.  And to contribute to the company doing better.  

What comes to me monetarily after that is nice, but not the incentive to me.  It is the feeling of a job well done.


Of course that might just be me.  I don't have the desire to be the richest or own the biggest house of best car.  I want my family to be comfortable and to be successful in their own right.

Back to unions:  I am no fan of them.  My dad (and the people he worked with) were screwed over during a labor dispute that was part union and part early 80's "greed is good" from the company he worked for.

But I understand the power of large numbers negotiating with the person holding the purse strings too.  As someone else said  earlier you can't have 100 people with 100 different contracts...it would be a logistic nightmare.  And given that greed is an incurable disease you can't just hope or pray that the company will treat everyone fairly.  Thus the need for negotiations on equal footing.

[Belsnickel]

(02-01-2016, 09:48 AM)GMDino Wrote: I've been thinking about this line.

I take a lot of crap in my personal life because I have always said money isn't what motivates me.  I'd work for free if everyone else would not want paid for water and electricity and the like!  

I'm like that as well. I'm an accountant, accountants in firms and corporations can make some serious money. I've never wanted that. My desire has always been government or non-profit work, which is decidedly not where the money is as an accountant. I want to be able to claw myself out of debt and be able to afford a family, but that's about it. I don't want lavish things, I've never taken a vacation, I don't need the high paying power careers, I just want to be comfortable.

[GMDino]

(02-01-2016, 10:31 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'm like that as well. I'm an accountant, accountants in firms and corporations can make some serious money. I've never wanted that. My desire has always been government or non-profit work, which is decidedly not where the money is as an accountant. I want to be able to claw myself out of debt and be able to afford a family, but that's about it. I don't want lavish things, I've never taken a vacation, I don't need the high paying power careers, I just want to be comfortable.

Yep.

Although we do always take vacations.  Not something I did growing up, but we go somewhere every year for at least a few days and up to a week.

We've been fortunate to make enough to have a nice life.  And the kids haven't wanted for much either.

But the life I'd have to live to make lots more money isn't worth the offset I get from being home very night.

[Brownshoe]

I used to be a government employee (State of Ohio), and the union was a great benefit for the job I had. It helped me pay for my college, and it actually made my job a lot more tolerable. In the end they couldn't save my job from being privatized though. I don't blame them, because Kashic was going head hunting as soon as he got in office (senate bill 5 and such). After working in the public sector I don't know how there isn't more unionized jobs in the private sector.

[Benton]

(02-01-2016, 11:15 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: I used to be a government employee (State of Ohio), and the union was a great benefit for the job I had. It helped me pay for my college, and it actually made my job a lot more tolerable. In the end they couldn't save my job from being privatized though. I don't blame them, because Kashic was going head hunting as soon as he got in office (senate bill 5 and such). After working in the public sector I don't know how there isn't more unionized jobs in the private sector.

Two reasons.

One, they aren't always needed. Small businesses are roughly half the jobs in the U.S. I don't know how many of them are unionized, but I'd guess a much smaller percentage than those employed by large businesses. And, generally, small businesses are less likely to have a union for a lot of reasons, but one of the biggest is the direct contact between management and workers. When you see your boss on a regular basis, or when your boss has to work in your working conditions, there's a better understanding between the two. Likewise, smaller businesses employer fewer people, so there's less of a need for employees to come together to get training or corrective action for employees who aren't pulling their weight or who are putting others in danger.

Two, misinformation. You can see it in this thread or open up Facebook. There are people who have been lead to believe unions are all about protecting the lazy, bleeding companies dry of profits and supporting socialism. Those people have been mislead by a very well-funded effort to reduce worker rights and wages through misinformation. It also helps politicians score points with a segment of voters, and some donors.

[GMDino]

(02-01-2016, 12:03 PM)Benton Wrote: Two reasons.

One, they aren't always needed. Small businesses are roughly half the jobs in the U.S. I don't know how many of them are unionized, but I'd guess a much smaller percentage than those employed by large businesses. And, generally, small businesses are less likely to have a union for a lot of reasons, but one of the biggest is the direct contact between management and workers. When you see your boss on a regular basis, or when your boss has to work in your working conditions, there's a better understanding between the two. Likewise, smaller businesses employer fewer people, so there's less of a need for employees to come together to get training or corrective action for employees who aren't pulling their weight or who are putting others in danger.

Two, misinformation. You can see it in this thread or open up Facebook. There are people who have been lead to believe unions are all about protecting the lazy, bleeding companies dry of profits and supporting socialism. Those people have been mislead by a very well-funded effort to reduce worker rights and wages through misinformation. It also helps politicians score points with a segment of voters, and some donors.

One reason I am at my current job was that it was a small business with one owner.  The job previous to that was expanding rapidly and you could feel the growing pains from it.

We are a non-union shop, but the owner treated the employees great.  He has since passed away and the new bosses are not quite as generous, but they do enough to keep them relatively happy.

I've never worked in a union environment.  Closest I came was my time in radio, but I didn't work in a market where that was needed and then I got out of the business.

[CKwi88]

Yay I'm part of the 50%.

I love it. Working for the state of CT has some great perks.

[Brownshoe]

(02-01-2016, 12:03 PM)Benton Wrote: Two reasons.

One, they aren't always needed. Small businesses are roughly half the jobs in the U.S. I don't know how many of them are unionized, but I'd guess a much smaller percentage than those employed by large businesses. And, generally, small businesses are less likely to have a union for a lot of reasons, but one of the biggest is the direct contact between management and workers. When you see your boss on a regular basis, or when your boss has to work in your working conditions, there's a better understanding between the two. Likewise, smaller businesses employer fewer people, so there's less of a need for employees to come together to get training or corrective action for employees who aren't pulling their weight or who are putting others in danger.

Two, misinformation. You can see it in this thread or open up Facebook. There are people who have been lead to believe unions are all about protecting the lazy, bleeding companies dry of profits and supporting socialism. Those people have been mislead by a very well-funded effort to reduce worker rights and wages through misinformation. It also helps politicians score points with a segment of voters, and some donors.

I see why small businesses don't have unions, but people just don't realize how much big businesses bend over their employees if they get the chance. Unions can help bad employees keep their jobs, but that happens so few and far between. There are much more positives than negatives in Unions.

[Belsnickel]

(02-01-2016, 11:15 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: I used to be a government employee (State of Ohio), and the union was a great benefit for the job I had. It helped me pay for my college, and it actually made my job a lot more tolerable. In the end they couldn't save my job from being privatized though. I don't blame them, because Kashic was going head hunting as soon as he got in office (senate bill 5 and such). After working in the public sector I don't know how there isn't more unionized jobs in the private sector.

(02-01-2016, 12:21 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Yay I'm part of the 50%.

I love it. Working for the state of CT has some great perks.

See, I can't sit here and say I don't have some perks being an employee of the Commonwealth, and especially at a state university as there is some additional pros to that. But the study presented last year to us and our legislature shows that we are the only state where the public employees, taking into account benefits, are more poorly compensated than the private sector in our state. When you don't take into account benefits there are a handful more that are in the same boat, but we drop significantly lower.

Not a union to be found for public employees here.

[Brownshoe]

(02-01-2016, 12:43 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: See, I can't sit here and say I don't have some perks being an employee of the Commonwealth, and especially at a state university as there is some additional pros to that. But the study presented last year to us and our legislature shows that we are the only state where the public employees, taking into account benefits, are more poorly compensated than the private sector in our state. When you don't take into account benefits there are a handful more that are in the same boat, but we drop significantly lower.

Not a union to be found for public employees here.

I don't know about you, but when I worked for the State I had pretty good benefits. I got 3.15 hours of vacation (which after 5 years of employment you got more, and more after 10 and so on) every two weeks and I got an additional 3.15 hours of sick time (which there is no increase with seniority) along with that. I had a better retirement plan than I have seen in the private sector. The health, vision, and dental plan were all cheaper and covered about the same amount as what I have now too.  They also gave me $5,000 a year for any college course I wanted to take, and they gave me 5 hours a week I could take off of my scheduled work days to go to school. I know I was in OCSEA side of the union, because I was working in the prison system (and because I was working there I might have had better benefits than other state employees).

[Belsnickel]

(02-01-2016, 02:15 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: I don't know about you, but when I worked for the State I had pretty good benefits. I got 3.15 hours of vacation (which after 5 years of employment you got more, and more after 10 and so on) every two weeks and I got an additional 3.15 hours of sick time (which there is no increase with seniority) along with that. I had a better retirement plan than I have seen in the private sector. The health, vision, and dental plan were all cheaper and covered about the same amount as what I have now too.  They also gave me $5,000 a year for any college course I wanted to take, and they gave me 5 hours a week I could take off of my scheduled work days to go to school. I know I was in OCSEA side of the union, because I was working in the prison system (and because I was working there I might have had better benefits than other state employees).

All of those things I had in the private sector. Now, my current leave situation is much better here than in the private sector (and what you had in the public sector). But my employer match for retirement is worse and my insurance is worse.

I get a day of leave a month for vacation, 64 hours of sick time, 16 community service, and 40 hours of family/personal time. The vacation is the only time that isn't 'use it or lose it', but I'm maxed out on what I can roll from one year to the next, so I'm usually losing that as well.

[BmorePat87]

My biggest complaint are laws that force you to pay a representation fee. I have to pay either way, so that pretty much makes me join the union. Why not pay the extra 25% of the dues and get the legal benefits?

Other than that, my local union isn't that bad. I like the president. He met me once and remembered my name when I saw him a year later. They care about getting Special Ed teachers more time to work on our IEPs and caseload. My only complaint is they focus a lot on days off and benefits and less on updating pay scales. That said, the county I live in that borders the one I work in hasn't given their teachers a step increase in nearly 6 years. At least I have gotten a step each year.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

Individuals have little to no bargaining leverage when negotiating an employment contract in most situations.  You aren't going to be able to negotiate significant changes or incentive bonuses or benefits to a company's standard offer for the position.  Anyone who thinks differently either hasn't negotiated an individual contract or is naïve.  My particular contract prohibits me from even discussing compensation with other employees which would allow me to use that information in a negotiation.