Labor Union Myths By Bob Hubbard

[Big Don]

In a word, no. The inflation adjusted price of postage is lower now than it was in 1900. The only time it has been cheaper in real terms was from about 1920-1933 and 1942-1971.

Do you ever bother to collect actual data and information before you spew right wing interpretations of everything?

I actually talk to my friends who are now, or have been, in leadership positions in a couple of the postal unions and base what I said on what they have told me. Incidentally, they (collectively) aren't happy, the unions wanted postage to be 2 cents higher.

 

[Big Don]

And last but not least where do I go to put my application in for the $50.00 an hour job picking lettuce????

I emailed McCain the day after that "promise" was made. Alas, I got no response.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Gordon,
I included Canada as my sources indicate that the Canadian flavour of unions is a slightly modified version of the American.

Nicholas,
I'll be honest, I don''t have an answer for you. You've obviously gotten a raw deal, and it sounds like the systems broken in your area. The question I hve though is, are you a member of a union or do you think that unionizing would help your situation? You're sadly right on alot of the abuses, but in my experience, if you aren't playing ball with the unions poltics, they leave you hang.

 

[Twin Fist]

The unions provided a service 100 yars ago, now?

they are nothing but leeches.

children in factories?

thats a simple bold face fantasy.

there are LAWS now. there is OSHA now

that sort of turn of the century crap could never happen,

What do unions provide? they make it impossible to fire worthless workers

they make american made cars too expensive

they drove damned near all the manufacturing jobs overseas

If people would just educate themselves, they would see that they dont need unions.

Unions aren't perfect? Sometimes they are corrupt or violent or worse for their members? Welcome to Earth, nothing is perfect here. Meanwhile, collective bargaining is the only method the workers have to compensate for the power of management. Without that, we just go back to the way things once were - company towns, children working in factories, and all that. Putting all the power on one side OR the other (management or labor) just leads to abuses. Why does our government have this intricate set of checks and balances after all? It isn't because our leaders can always be trusted.

 

[Twin Fist]

the american steel industry? killed by unions

the american car industry? killed by unions

glen beck was talking the other day about a speaking date he had in philly

he had to pay $400 for some union guy to carry a case of bottled water to the green room

why $400?

minimum 4 hour shift

mandatory to use union labor

for a job a 12 year old could do in 15 seconds

$400

there is a reason every single union is controlled by the mob...........

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Do a show at the Buffalo Convention Center, and you reportedly can't plug in your own gear. You have to have a Union Electrician come over and place your plug in the socket. $50 per plug fee I heard, and a **** storm if you don't.

Quite a number of events are going to the non-union hotels with event space instead.

 

[MBuzzy]

I've been on both sides and have seen both sides, objectively to the best of my ability. No matter what system, there will always be abuses and places or single, instances where things don't work, but it is normally an "n of 1" situation.

My personal opinion....Unions are a thing of the past. They most certainly were needed and they performed a service vital to this country's development, but like so many things, when they were no longer needed, they failed to abdicate the throne. They have stayed around and have refused to give up their stake. There are now so many federal regulations protecting people and other venues for airing grievances, that they aren't necessary anymore and they are starting to have a very negative effect on business.

Why do you think that so much American manufacturing has been outsourced? Why are so many American factories closing? Think about it....because the companies want to send work elsewhere? No, because it is CHEAPER to. They can no longer afford the wages that have grown entirely out of proportion.

I knew a construction worker who made $55.00 to tie rebar....that is ALL he did. In fact, he was not allowed to do anything else and adamantly refused. Therefore, the company had to pay him to sit on a job site all day long, whether he was working or not and making more than the engineer that designed the building and his job was the tie wire around steel. Not dangerous, not difficult. Don't get me wrong...I have a GREAT deal of respect for workers like that, they provide a great service and are NEEDED, but we simply can't afford to pay him $114,000 a year to tie wire onto steel. So they are forced to outsource....I hate to say it and it greatly pains me....but they can pay a mexican off the street with ZERO training $5.00 an hour to do the exact same job and they will probably bust their *** and do a lot more than just tieing wire.

I understand that everyone has to eat and has to look out for themselves and I agree with that. With the way that job security and the economy is right now, you have to. I realize that what I'm about to say is VERY VERY unpopular, but try to look at it from the employer's point of view. Now, I'm not necessarily talking about Bill Gates here or extremely large, greedy companies, but in a way, they are all the same. Everyone is just trying to make a living and every company has to do what is in their own best interests. When a Union forces a company out of business because wages or benefits are too high to fit in the profit margin....who wins? Everyone loses their jobs just the same. And where does the Union go? In the case of my hometown - they left and tough luck to all of the workers who lost their jobs. As did in so many of the small coal mining or steel towns in PA....the unions forced wages too high, the corporation pulled out and the town DIED. Literally, PA is littered with DEAD towns...in my hometown, you can't go downtown anymore for fear of being shot....20 years ago, they were one of the largest steel producers in the world and EVERYONE had a job. Now, it is a cesspool.

Again, to look at it from the other perspective, when I had union employees, I was forced to allow them to go "work at the shop" or "visit the union" for as long as they wished, any time they wished and I was not allowed to ask why or for how long. I had one employee who I got less than 30 hours of work out of per week in a tragically undermanned shop. But, since I was "management," as they loved to say, I had no rights. I couldn't complain or get any more work out of them.

One union that I was forced to be a member of, I worked part time and the dues were $150 per year, in a job that I barely made that much in three months. If I was full time, different story, but I couldn't do that. And even if I was full time, that still wouldn't change the fact that all of my check had to come from the union office, so they took over a month to get to me - with administrative fees already subtracted.

There may still be some situations where a union is doing good things, but they are becoming few and far between and I believe that in the near future, the unions will work themselves out of jobs.

The point is....there is always another perspective and abuses go both ways.

 

[CoryKS]

Unions can block many individuals from getting a job in the first place by artificially raising the cost of hiring them above their perceived value to the company.

Say a man applies for a job. He has limited work experience and none in the industry for which he has applied. The employer decides that with a little training the man could be a satisfactory employee but determines the value of his work to be $9.50 an hour, owing to the time needed to train him and get him up to optimal production. He can extend an offer to the man, who will either accept or reject it. Suppose, though, that the union in this shop has negotiated a minimum wage of $13.75. The employer will not hire this man. Establishing a high minimum wage does not automagically raise the value of the worker to the company.

Also, by limiting the ability of an employer to fire suboptimal employees, companies tend to get very selective about whom they will hire. I worked for a company where on your first day people would ask, "So whose kid are you?" because the only way to get a job there was if an employee - a good employee - could vouch for you. Unknown quantities were not something they were willing to take a chance on because once they're in it's damn near impossible to get rid of them.

 

[MBuzzy]

Also, by limiting the ability of an employer to fire suboptimal employees, companies tend to get very selective about whom they will hire. I worked for a company where on your first day people would ask, "So whose kid are you?" because the only way to get a job there was if an employee - a good employee - could vouch for you. Unknown quantities were not something they were willing to take a chance on because once they're in it's damn near impossible to get rid of them.

This is an excellent point - it is impossible to get rid of a union employee. So when they are substandard, you can't fire them. Therefore, crappy workers end up staying around forever, dragging down the organization and everyone around them.

Another example...I had an employee who was impossible to get to actually do work. And when he DID do work, the work was so far substandard that it had to be redone. Not to mention the fact that the guy was over 40 sick leave says in the hole....but there was nothing that could be done. Because of the Union regulations, I couldn't even file a complaint against the employee, because there was already an "administrative action" against him, which had been going on for over a year. Therefore, that entire year, he was basically immune to any punishment or further administrative action. Without those, I couldn't do the paperwork required to even BEGIN to think about firing him. Even if I did, the firing process took over 6 months and needed over a year's worth of paperwork to back it up. So basically his personnel file in my desk just grew and grew and grew and I was one person short, because if he WAS actually at work, he was barely working and when he was working, it was worthless. Another "n of 1" but just another in the long line of bad experiences that I've had with unions.

 

[Carol]

With all the discussion of labor history, a landmark piece of federal legislation has been ommitted from the discussion. It is perhaps among the most important pieces of legislation in history, certainly the most important for the American worker. It was groundbreaking for its day, and is still vigorously enforced to this day.

It is the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, also referred to as simply the FLSA. It is the FLSA that defines the 40 hour work week, requires overtime pay, establishes a minimum wage at the federal level, determines what sort of jobs are exempt from overtime legislation, and defines a multitude of parameters regarding the payment of wages. Example, the FLSA definition of a volunteer:

In administering the FLSA, the Department of Labor follows this judicial guidance in the case of individuals serving as unpaid volunteers in various community services. Individuals who volunteer or donate their services, usually on a part-time basis, for public service, religious or humanitarian objectives, not as employees and without contemplation of pay, are not considered employees of the religious, charitable or similar non-profit organizations that receive their service.


[snip]

Under the FLSA, employees may not volunteer services to for-profit private sector employers.

This was New Deal legislation initiated by President Roosevelt, however, much of the depression-era legislation affecting (and sanctioning) labor unions set the stage for this legislation. The legislation was passed with the support of the union lobby in congress. Unions are today still very active politically, lobbying for legislation such as the Family and Medical Leave act of 1993.

Despite the baggage associated with some union activities, labor unions held an important part and history, and still play a role in the American workplace, despite diminishing numbers.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I would like to see some examples of where a union moving in has honestly improved wages, benefits, etc for the workers compared to other local non-union shops. Preferably from this century.

 

[Big Don]

The Davis-Bacon act of 1931 is a nice little piece of Jim Crow that the Democratic party (the party of labor unions) likes. It is based in racism.

It has been argued by critics that this law is a . It was passed, goes the charge, to prevent African Americans from bidding on government contracts. he Depression-era act was introduced (so argue latter-day critics) _after whites complained that African American workers had been hired to build a Veteran's Bureau hospital in Long Island.
Congressional representative John Cochran of Missouri said that he voted for the Davis-Bacon Act because he had, "received numerous complaints in recent months about Southern contractors employing low-paid colored mechanics getting work and bringing the employees from the South."
Congressional representative Clayton Allgood of Alabama said that he voted for Davis-Bacon because, "Reference has been made to a contractor from Alabama who went to New York with bootleg labor. This is a fact. That contractor has cheap colored labor that he transports, and he puts them in cabins, and it is labor of that sort that is in competition with white labor throughout the country."

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Unions played an important part, however their time is past, IMO. I'm concerned that the stacked deck will become more stacked, with the appointment of Rep. Hilda Solis for secretary of labor.

"I am humbled and honored," Solis said. "As secretary of labor, I will work to strengthen our unions."

This worries me, but doesn't surprise me.

Labor unions and political observers praised Obama's selection to head the Labor Department.

On Friday, Harold Meyerson, editor at large of the American Prospect, wrote an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times praising Solis' experience with labor issues in her Los Angeles district.

"[She's] a product and champion of the labor movement, a staunch environmentalist, an ardent feminist and one of the gutsiest elected officials in American politics. Solis personifies the best of the new Los Angeles," he wrote.

Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, said in a news release Thursday, "The daughter of two immigrant workers and union members ... she will be a secretary of labor working men and women can finally count on to stand up and fight for them."

Obama has enjoyed the support of organized labor since the campaign season, when the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest labor organization, endorsed him for president, calling him "a champion for working families."

As a senator, Obama co-sponsored the Employee Free-Choice Act, which was designed to make it easier to create unions in the workplace. Supporters of the plan, including the AFL-CIO, said it would increase the number of union members in the United States and lead to better wages and benefits for workers.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/19/transition.wrap/?iref=mpstoryview


Read these:
Labor Unions: Socialism's Shock Troops
The Labor Movement and Socialism
Socialist Party USA

Then, lets consider the question of is a Socialistic system really the right one for a Republic who values individual rights and freedoms.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

The Davis-Bacon act of 1931 is a nice little piece of Jim Crow that the Democratic party (the party of labor unions) likes. It is based in racism.

Labor Unions have --cost-- the American Economy over $50 Trillion in the past 50 years.

In a study published jointly in late 2002 by the National Legal and Policy Center and the John M. Olin Institute for Employment Practice and Policy, economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway of Ohio University calculated that labor unions have cost the American economy a whopping $50 trillion over the past 50 years alone.

http://www.questforexcellentschools.org/article.aspx?ID=4417

 

[Big Don]

All of my cousins work in underground construction, they profit from Davis-Bacon as often as possible, and they are the first to tell you what a crock prevailing wage is.
$22.50 per hour. My cousin Mike got paid $22.50 an hour to sit on the back of a truck and hold a hose. Why? Because government funds paid for a portion of the project, and therefore, he HAD to be paid prevailing wage.

 

[Makalakumu]

Are they complaining? Because I don't think I got paid that to teach physics, especially when I first got out of college. I know for a fact that the teacher's union holds me back from a higher wage. They put me on the same level as a guy with a Phys ed degree, but I should be getting paid comparable to what other people with my degree have in the market. This is one of the reasons it is so damned difficult to find science or math teachers...

 

[BlackCatBonz]

Are they complaining? Because I don't think I got paid that to teach physics, especially when I first got out of college. I know for a fact that the teacher's union holds me back from a higher wage. They put me on the same level as a guy with a Phys ed degree, but I should be getting paid comparable to what other people with my degree have in the market. This is one of the reasons it is so damned difficult to find science or math teachers...

so, a person with a phys ed. degree is not worth as much as a person with a science degree?

care to elaborate?

is the lower rate of pay justified by the amount of actual teaching experience?

Teaching is a craft that must be learned in addition to the actual subject being taught......yes, some people are natural teachers...but you can't expect to start at the top.

 

[GBlues]

Gordon,
I included Canada as my sources indicate that the Canadian flavour of unions is a slightly modified version of the American.

Nicholas,
I'll be honest, I don''t have an answer for you. You've obviously gotten a raw deal, and it sounds like the systems broken in your area. The question I hve though is, are you a member of a union or do you think that unionizing would help your situation? You're sadly right on alot of the abuses, but in my experience, if you aren't playing ball with the unions poltics, they leave you hang.

No, I'm not involved in a union. Me and a few guys tried to find one for drilling, and we were unable too. Here is the thing for me, I think if it's done right, yes it would help the situation out a great deal. The problem with unions, is that there job is to look out for the employee. If they aren't then they're ripping people off, and your not getting your money's worth for your dues. On the other hand you can go too far that way, and the employees take advantage of the situation like at the post office. The unions there are constantly trying to to get more for the employees, and most of them don't work worth a crap. My wife had finally made it to regular, but it comes with a 3 month probationary period. You may not get any complaints against you for any reason, if you do then they fire you. Well, she got a complaint, and it was, " She works to fast." that was it, had to fire her. She was doing a good job, but, that was all it took. Now had she been in the union, things may have been different. She was paying her dues for 2 months, but was not recognized by the union. The post office didn't recognize her being in the union. Yeah, some unions are bad. Some employers are bad. If unions are done right, and the employers are doing the right thing, and the employees are doing the right thing, it's a good thing. Many people join the unions in the hopes that they'll have use it. I think of the unions as like the shotgun in my house I have for just in case, and pray to god that I never have to use it. I don't need or want trouble, you know. The same with a union, but I think alot people lose site of the fact, that anything we abuse, will eventually become a plague on society.

I don't know I don't have the answers either, I just feel like something has to change especially in my home state. If it doesn't I feel like maybe there will be large problems here. People all over the country are losing jobs, there losing there homes, there vehicles, and nobody is trying to protect them. IT's like Moe my driller at the first drilling company told me once, " I f I don't protect you, who's going to protect you. I'm your driller that's my job." I was being blamed for a lot of mistakes that weren't mine, and he was watching my back. Not many people have some one that will go to bat for them, Moe was a special kind of driller, and I was very lucky to have him.

Anyways, yeah I think unionization would help a great deal if it was done properly, and not abused. On the other hand, I think no matter what happens there will always be people that abuse the protections that they are given. Look at food stamps, and SSI, and all the programs that we have in America, to help people get a hand-up instead of a hand-out. Instead of trying to find a job, and getting off of food stamps and Assisted living, they take advantage and abuse it, and do everything in there power, to stay on it as long as possible.That is not what it's for, it's not to ensure that you can be lazy, but that you can survive long enough to go back to work and take care of yourself. If it's there people will abuse it, and there is nothing that you can do to prevent it. However, because a few abuse these, (wonderful) programs. Should we stop helping those that really need and use it for the intended purposes? I don't think so. I think that if it helps those that it was meant to help, then it was a good thing. Same with the unions, if they do what they are supposed to do, and people that need them, have the help that they need when they need it, and they don't abuse those gifts, then yeah, it's a good thing. That's what I think. It ain't perfect, but everybody should have the option to choose a union. Matter of fact, maybe that is the problem, you go to work for someone that already has a union, and it's not doin a good job, maybe the employees need to tell the union your fired, we want a new union. And then find one. That would be much better I would think. Give the employees the right to fire there unions. So they can find a union that really and truly wants to serve their needs. Hey, I should be a politician.

What do you think about that IDEA! That's freaking ground breaking huh. Bet unions would try much harder to do the right thing, when it meant not doing it would get there butts canned. Whoooooo!! Man That is a freaking great IDEA!!!! Yeah!!!

LOL!

 

[theletch1]

so, a person with a phys ed. degree is not worth as much as a person with a science degree?

care to elaborate?

is the lower rate of pay justified by the amount of actual teaching experience?

Teaching is a craft that must be learned in addition to the actual subject being taught......yes, some people are natural teachers...but you can't expect to start at the top.

But isn't that what the unions advocate to an extent? Sure, most have a 2 year climb up the salary ladder but after that the guy that's been there for 3 years is making the same thing as the guy with 30 years experience. IMO, yes, the lower pay IS justified by the actual amount of teaching experience... a true meritocracy drives people to excel instead of sitting on their asses collecting a paycheck for doing the bare minimum.

 

[MBuzzy]

Yeah, some unions are bad. Some employers are bad. If unions are done right, and the employers are doing the right thing, and the employees are doing the right thing, it's a good thing.

If the employer is doing things right....and the employees are doing things right....why would you need a union? For that one time when things don't go right? That seems like a bust in the cost-analysis area. Create a constant evil which causes a lot of problems, just in case we need it someday.

I don't know I don't have the answers either, I just feel like something has to change especially in my home state. If it doesn't I feel like maybe there will be large problems here. People all over the country are losing jobs, there losing there homes, there vehicles, and nobody is trying to protect them.

I really don't think that today's situation has much to do with unions. People are losing jobs because of the bad economy and there is NOTHING that unions can do to fix that. In fact, the unions are making the problem worse. In a depression or recession, when profits are down, companies release workers to compensate. Those workers then have to find different jobs or go into some very hard times, which is a horrible thing. But when the corporations are not allowed to release the people that they can no longer afford to pay, what do you think happens? Sure, they keep their jobs for a while, but soon, the corporation can't afford to pay ANYONE and they go bankrupt and EVERYONE loses their jobs. It sucks royally....but the good of the many outweighs the good of the few. And either way, those union protected jobs go away anyway once the whole company goes under, which just happens faster when their options for compensation are taken away.