there is no one forced into paying dues without a union agreement in this country, no one.
you cannot be compelled to pay someone money for nothing with no documentation.
give me a break, union contributions are nothing compared to big business.
Without government enforced unionization, unions would only be in very small sectors with highly skilled workers. Stamping sheet metal and teaching kids to finger paint is not highly skilled in anyway. The overwhelming vast majority of union members are in monkeys can be trained to do this jobs.
as a union representative, i negotiated everything except wage rates and benefits ... those were established by congressmost of those benefits are set by the company
not with most unions. normally, there will be a job description and an associated wage ratethe employee handbook says x, and that is what you get unless you negotiate separately
under a union shop arrangement, that might also be possible, however, you would negotiate that unique provision as a principle, that could be applied to other employees who fit the circumstance, and not for a specific named employeei have one employee that gets 6 weeks off a year.....he visits family in the middle east
as above, possible, but only with defined criteria, not a named employee. this unique circumstance may also be one that places you in jeopardy of a title 7 action for disparate treatment of women. would encourage you to broach HR about iti have another who negotiated pay for 3 months maternity, not the normal 6 weeks
a handbook of conditions of employment negotiated by the employees' union representative and management's representative ... for any union shopin today's world, most of those things are covered in every companies handbook (at least any company over 100 people)
in a union shop, you would go thru all of itso other than really salary/wage there isnt a whole lot to go through
I'm kind of curious how a contract can be seen as valid with terms imposed on both parties by a third party.
Why is it that when I answer a question either no one hears me or no one reads it? They just stupidly ask the question again like I never said or wrote anything. I already said I'm doing business with the employer not the workers.
probably because it is recognized that you are very ignorant of the labor laws which prevent that
Management can't do a thing - the employee files a grievance, the union backs their laziness ... the amount of documentation and evidence to win at a grievance is fairly high and when a manager has a real need of these guys to work, they suddenly develop a vague sickness or require mental evaluation with a psychologist and go on light duty required by a union physician. Even if you get them out - guess who takes their place? Someone just like the one who just left... Good management decides to bypass the unions and go with contractors.
Why should a contract with group A include membership to group B? Why must I agree to join a union when I agree to get a job? Are unions so inept that they must latch themselves onto other contracts?
easy.. pass a law saying that 3rd party has the power to impose it's terms... .and give it exclusive power to demand those terms.
as a union representative, i negotiated everything except wage rates and benefits ... those were established by congress
not with most unions. normally, there will be a job description and an associated wage rate
of course, the employee who prefers to negotiate for him/herself is free to instead apply at a non-union company
under a union shop arrangement, that might also be possible, however, you would negotiate that unique provision as a principle, that could be applied to other employees who fit the circumstance, and not for a specific named employee
while you are inquiring about the approach to your two labor-standards impacted managers, you may want to also ask HR if this specifically named vacation recipient exposes your company to any potential EEOC litigation under race, age, and/or religious bases
as above, possible, but only with defined criteria, not a named employee. this unique circumstance may also be one that places you in jeopardy of a title 7 action for disparate treatment of women. would encourage you to broach HR about it
a handbook of conditions of employment negotiated by the employees' union representative and management's representative ... for any union shop
such unilateral determinations should never be found acceptable by any competent labor rep
in a union shop, you would go thru all of it
now, kudos to you, for operating a company that apparently has not had its employees feel the need to elect a bargaining unit representative
if employees feel they are being treated fairly, they have no reason to seek union help
First, I'm presuming only some would be paid higher, only the ones who excel. Those who don't excel wouldn't.no. that is union busting 101
paying non-union more than union undermines the union
no. that is union busting 101
paying non-union more than union undermines the union
Your question doesn't address the question regarding who the freeloader was in this scenario. Dodge denied.who was the management representative who allowed such BS to be negotiated under the contract?
you don't have to
you instead only have to seek employment from non-union employers. normally the ones that pay less, and offer fewer benefits and nominal job security
that contract arrangement you entered into with the unionized employer, includes a provision that by virtue of your willful, voluntary employment with said company, you have also agreed to become a member of the bargaining unit. whether you agree to become a union member is another choice you personally make. but your contract for employment with a firm having a union will compel you to agree to be a bargaining unit member UNLESS you are a member of management and/or you are within a job which is prohibited from being within the bargaining unit
in the federal sector, those excluded positions are normally those where the employee is involved in making personnel decisions, even in a non-management capacity
and as an aside, even tho the manager at the company CANNOT be a bargaining unit employee, represented by the union, (s)he CAN be a dues paying union member, entitled to vote at union elections (but not hold representative office). i helped LOTS of management officials in their careers and they responded by joining the union as dues paying/supporting union members
Seriously? That's even worse than I thought.it's not "bs" .. it's common... especially in the trucking industry (Teamsters dominated)...jobs are strictly defined and workers are not allowed to go beyond those definitions under the guise of stealing work from another worker.
if this guy was hired as a fueler, there's nothing else he would be allowed to do....
if the terminal had a janitor, he wouldn't even be allowed to push a broom to fill his time when he wasn't fueling.
I made a ton of money off of such "bs" rules... a ton.
my night were busy making service call to the terminals to do things the drivers weren't allowed to do.. such as adjusting their mirrors, checking/adding oil to their trucks.. replacing a mudflap or a marker light bulb.
if I could string together 2 or 3 simple jobs, I could make close to a grand a night.
I absolutely loved hearing that phone ring at night.:lol:
Conway ( non-union) is another story... there were no simple night calls for me there... they actually had their drivers do the simple things.
being a non-union company, they also had much better equipment.. such as trucks with electric mirrors :lol:
sometimes they can't go with contractors, per the union contract.
for example.. in my case i was allowed to service both Roadway and Yellow freight... simply because they had no physical maintenance shop.
part of the deal was that if a terminal had a physical shop, they had to employ union mechanics.
neither terminal had a physical shop in Vegas, so they were allowed to contract for maintenance services...or they could build a shop.
it was , by far, more economically sensible to contract out than to have to buy more land and build a shop... so that's were I came in.
my first move after winning those contracts was to head down to the Roadway terminal in San Bernadino ( they had a maintenance shop) and poach experienced mechanics that were already familiar with their equipment and procedures.
one of those former union mechanics was the guy I sold my business to in the end.
are you saying i'm incorrect in my estimation that you dislike freeloaders?
the irony of you not comprehending my words after commenting on my comprehension is amusing.
Haha, it undermines the myth that unions help.
which you are unable to explain in direct English without pretending you are oh so clever that you can wrap your words in vitriolic insults.
if the unions did not help the employees, then why do many employers expend so much time and money trying to keep the unions out?
By contrast, the biggest gaps come in fields such as "protective service occupations" (a difference of $459 a week) and "construction" (a difference of $383 a week). Protective service occupations includes correctional officers, police, firefighters, animal control workers, lifeguards, and security guards.
"Unions do more to raise the wages of workers with less-than-average education than they do to boost the wages of those with better-than-average education," said Gary Burtless, an economist with the Brookings Institution. "Unionized Ph.D.s do not gain as much from being in a union as high school dropouts, though even unionized Ph.D.s may enjoy a bit better job security and receive bigger helpings of health and retirement benefits than their non-union counterparts."
• If you include fringe benefits, the difference between union members and non-union workers grows.
According to BLS data from 2011, workers’ pay plus benefts for a 40-hour week was $1,508 for a union employee and $1,083 for a non-union worker. That’s a gap of $425 -- more than double the gap in the figures cited by Perez.
"Unions are typically more successful in getting good fringe benefits – especially health benefits, sickness pay, and retirement benefits – than in raising workers’ money wages," Burtless said.
Our ruling
Perez said. "If you have a union job, you're making on average $950 a week. If you have a non-union job, you're making $750 a week."
His figures are correct, but with an asterisk -- Perez should have specified "median" when he said "average." In general, though, his overall point is backed up by the data. We rate his claim Mostly True.
it was written in direct English and you comprehension problems are not mine to deal with.
it's very telling that you see the words "right wing" as an insult though.... very telling indeed.
how very right wing of you....
enough of your right wing politics.
incompetent management cannotManagement can't do a thing
only AFTER management initiates its efforts to discipline- the employee files a grievance,
the union, under federal law, MUST fairly represent the employee... the union backs their laziness
you are correct on this point... the amount of documentation and evidence to win at a grievance is fairly high
never heard of a union physician; but i cannot say they do not exist. normally, the bargaining unit employee will be required to have a doctor's note attesting to the medical circumstance faced by the employee. should the physician's concern for the employee's health be disregarded?... and when a manager has a real need of these guys to work, they suddenly develop a vague sickness or require mental evaluation with a psychologist and go on light duty required by a union physician.
sounds like yet another instance of management incompetence: consistently hiring weak applicantsEven if you get them out - guess who takes their place? Someone just like the one who just left...
that's an approach - UNLESS the union was savvy enough to negotiate provisions that defined the circumstances in which a contractor could be hiredGood management decides to bypass the unions and go with contractors.
incompetent management cannot
competent management would document their issue to assure the employee was properly disciplined
only AFTER management initiates its efforts to discipline
notice now why it is so important for management to do ITS job in this matter?
the union, under federal law, MUST fairly represent the employee
but as a long time union official, be assured that the union cannot defend the indefensible and win
again, see now why it is so important for management to fulfill its obligation and document its basis for discipline?
do that, and the wayward employee should not prevail
you are correct on this point
it is usually management which initiates the action and labor which pursues the grievance
and unless labor can demonstrate why management operated outside the provisions of the contract, management's disciplinary action will stand
never heard of a union physician; but i cannot say they do not exist. normally, the bargaining unit employee will be required to have a doctor's note attesting to the medical circumstance faced by the employee. should the physician's concern for the employee's health be disregarded?
but again, if the employee is acting outside the provisions of the contract, all management has to do is enforce the contract terms and document how the employee is acting outside of them
sounds like yet another instance of management incompetence: consistently hiring weak applicants
that's an approach - UNLESS the union was savvy enough to negotiate provisions that defined the circumstances in which a contractor could be hired
the best management operates so well with the employees' needs in mind that the employees do not feel the need to seek union assistance
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?