verizon target of union love

[billc]

Hmmm...the unions involved in the strike are sending the workers back to work, without re-doing the contract. They say that they are going to continue to negotiate around more focused areas of the dispute, but something doesn't smell right. The article below points out that if the unions continue their strike, the unions will have to start paying strike pay to the strikers, which would cost the union millions of dollars. This money of course will be spent by the unions to buy votes for Obamas election, not to support the striking workers who pay union dues.

http://biggovernment.com/laborunionreport/2011/08/20/breaking-verizon-strikers-head-back-to-work-without-new-agreement/

This back to work agreement comes just before the CWA would begin paying up to $300 per week in strike benefits to its striking members, saving the union up to $10 million per week out of its union treasury.
[Note: It is unknown whether the IBEW has any strike benefits for its members.]
While it is likely the parties will eventually get a contract, going back to work without an agreement in hand is hardly a victory for the unions, as their ability to mobilize 45,000 members to walk back off their jobs at a later (and undetermined) date will be severely diminished.

Of course, helping the union leadership buy politicians to keep the leaderships money supply up is the purpose of unions, isn't it?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

An anonymous reader writes "Verizon today announced that the approximately 45,000 wireline employees represented by the CWA and IBEW that have been on strike will return to work beginning Monday night, August 22nd, without new collective bargaining agreements. Since the strike began two weeks ago, Verizon has been battling criminal acts of sabotage against its network facilities and union picketers intimidating non-union replacement workers and illegally blocking garage and work center entrances. One union picketer even went as far as to instruct his young daughter to stand in front of a Verizon truck to illegally block it from coming back to a Verizon work center in New Jersey. Verizon said the wireline employees now on strike would be working under the terms of the contracts that expired on Saturday, August 6th. The contracts will be extended with no specific deadline for achieving new collective bargaining agreements so that the parties can take the time required to resolve the critical issues, the company said."

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/08/21/1156204/Verizon-Employees-End-Strike

One union picketer went as far as to instruct his young daughter to stand in front of a Verizon truck to illegally block it from coming back to a Verizon work center in New Jersey. While his daughter stood as a human shield, the union picketer used extremely profane language in an attempt intimidate the replacement workers while his daughter watched.

http://www.securityweek.com/verizon-battles-network-sabotage-workers-strike-using-extreme-tactics

Such a good father. Such good teaching he's giving her. Such a great roll model.

Since August 6th, Verizon has encountered more than 110 acts of sabotage against its network facilities, in some spots temporarily affecting service to thousands of customers across the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast, including police stations and other emergency responders. In most of these cases, service was restored within 24 hours, Verizon said. “Many incidents have been cutting through traditional copper lines or fiber cables, with most incidents affecting 100-300 customers at a time. In one incident, lines were cut at a State Troopers’ Barack yesterday,” a Verizon spokesperson told SecurityWeek.

• An outage due to stolen electronic equipment in Cedar Grove, N.J., affecting a local police department, among other customers.

http://www.securityweek.com/verizon-battles-network-sabotage-workers-strike-using-extreme-tactics

Nothing makes me want to support these hard working under compensated folks more than hearing about how they put public safety for thousands at risk.


Tell me again how I should sympathize with these people?

 

[granfire]

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/08/21/1156204/Verizon-Employees-End-Strike

http://www.securityweek.com/verizon-battles-network-sabotage-workers-strike-using-extreme-tactics

Such a good father. Such good teaching he's giving her. Such a great roll model.



http://www.securityweek.com/verizon-battles-network-sabotage-workers-strike-using-extreme-tactics

Nothing makes me want to support these hard working under compensated folks more than hearing about how they put public safety for thousands at risk.


Tell me again how I should sympathize with these people?

not with those people.

As usual, because some people are twits (and CPS should have a talk with them) does not mean the whole thing is bad.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

135,000 of 196,000 Verizon Employees Pay Toward Healthcare Premiums. Union Employees Pay Nothing.
While the cost of healthcare continues to increase at rate of 8-10% per year, Verizon’s union employees pay nothing toward their healthcare premiums. “Verizon pays more than $4 billion annually on healthcare,” a Verizon spokesperson told SecurityWeek. “Verizon has 196,000 employees, and 135,000 of those contribute to healthcare, except for our union represented employees who pay nothing toward healthcare premiums,” the spokesperson added.
According to a memo from William Huber, president of IBEW, Local 827, Verizon wants to tie pay increases to performance and require union workers to contribute to company health plan premiums, something the majority of American workers do. It is also reported that Verizon is looking to freeze pensions at the end of the year, and eliminate sickness and death benefit programs, and cut the sickness disability benefits in half from 52 weeks to 26 weeks as well as reduce sick time.

Let me see if I get this right.
The Union is upset that their members are being asked to contribute to their own health care, like the majority of American workers do.
They are also upset that Verizon wants to give deserving employees pay raises, rather than just an auto-bump for time-in regardless of if you're a top performer or the guy who finds a comfy spot to nap all day.

Maybe the Union should think about this: If the company goes under because they played hardball, their 61,000 members will be out pounding the pavement looking for work in a dying industry during a economic down time, under 10-15% unemployment.

It'll make it hard for those Union bosses to keep up the payments on their luxury homes, fancy cars and lavish lifestyle paid for by the union rank and file's dues.

I still say, they can sod off.

 

[ETinCYQX]

There was a time when all men carried swords too.

Today, neither are needed.

You don't carry a sword?

 

[RandomPhantom700]

And yet still no responses to my questions. Just more brandishing flaming pitchforks at favorable articles.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I don't need to.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

I don't need to.

Yeah, I mean, he's got the banhammer, what's he need a sword for? :rofl:

 

[Carol]

Yeah, I mean, he's got the banhammer, what's he need a sword for? :rofl:

LOL!!

Rock...Paper........BanHammer !!! :lol2:

 

[Bob Hubbard]

And yet still no responses to my questions. Just more brandishing flaming pitchforks at favorable articles.

[h=3]Labor Union Myths By Bob Hubbard[/h]

 

[RandomPhantom700]

[h=3]Labor Union Myths By Bob Hubbard[/h]

I've looked over some of the thread, not all of it. Frankly, I think it should be linked to any thread that mentions labor or union activities.

I think the main disagreements though, can be boiled down to two issues: 1) Whether unions and corruption are inherently linked, and 2) whether collective bargaining and the rights guaranteed by the FLSA will remain after the elimination of worker's unions.

I am of the camp that believes that not all unions need be corrupt, but acknowledge the risk and propensity for it, and that trying to eliminate unions threatens the very rights that so many use to justify calling unions outdated. I have no doubt that eliminating the right to collectively bargain (which is what youd' have to do in order to "kill unions") will put FLSA and OSHA in direct jeopardy.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Unions at one time were needed. In some places today, they still are. The problem with unions is they have forgotten their mission, and become corrupt, bloated, inefficient and cash-cows to the higher ups, while doing more to harm the workplace than help. Hardball tactics don't foster good relations. Holding lines on things the business needs to do to stay competitive only puts the business at risk of failure, taking the jobs with it. Do I want the right to collectively bargain eliminated? No. What I want is a level playing field, where both sides must play fair, where thugs are prosecuted, and where I can work for whomever I want. Right now, things are unbalanced, unions have way too many special privileges, and in my opinion don't 'return fair value' to the workforce.

 

[Darksoul]

-Isn't dismantling Unions and what union members get simply a redistribution of wealth? I thought we were against that...

(Sorry, I couldn't resist

Andrew

 

[Empty Hands]

-Isn't dismantling Unions and what union members get simply a redistribution of wealth? I thought we were against that...

It's a good point. It takes a special frame of mind for the same person to make the argument "we shouldn't raise taxes on rich people, they deserve what they earn and you're just jealous" and then later say "teachers (and other government workers or union workers) have better pay or benefits then others, **** them we should take that all away."

Or for some of the very same people to argue that "$250,000 /yr really isn't that much money, that isn't rich, that's barely middle class" and then say later "teachers have an average pay of $60,000 /yr, that's living high on the hog, they are overpaid." Really, there are video clips of the very same people making the exact same pairs of arguments I've caricatured above.

 

[billc]

Well, since no one said take it all away your point is not quite accurate. Some may say they are overpaid, but the key for me is when they make 60-90k a year, with 2 months off in the summer, at least, and two weeks at christmas, one week in the spring, all the federal holidays, plus several days a year where the kids are either off half the day or the whole day, and then they say they are not paid enough. This is on top of some really bad performance out of the kids in math and science. Many also have top notch pensions and medical benefits, until of course the unions became greedy and refused to help out these states that are so in the red they may never get back in the black. That is also on top of the tenure system where 2-3 years on the job they become virtually unfirable because the cost of firing them becomes prohibitive. I am a firm believer that you should be paid as much as you can get. However, when the people paying your salary are losing their jobs and their homes, you should probably be a little sympathetic to them when they suggest, hey, you might want to actually throw in a little more or at least a little toward your healthcare and retirement.

I once saw a little article in a local paper by a teacher who made the case that with all the overtime they work, they are actually underpaid. She really weakened her case when she pointed out that she made 80k a year, but that was only from august to june. She had to make that money stretch through the summer, and that was really tough. I would like her to explain that math to someone making 80k a year who works the whole year, with 2 weeks of vacation, maybe christmas eve and christmas day off, and works just as many hours as she does, but all year round.

I think the lack of sympathy shown to the taxpayers paying their salary is where a lot of the irritation with teachers and public employees comes from. It is not necessarily that they make 60k a year and people think they make too much. At least from what I hear and see.