Not all unions are bad...

[joey74]

For some reason I can't post on the "you bet im crossing the picket line" thread, so I thought I would vent in here.
My mother is the vice president of her union and a union educator- perhaps if some of those negative people got a chance to talk to her they would understand how vital unions are to the american workers. Yes I did say vital!!
My husband can't find a union job in my area because the big companies keep hiring people with no previous union experince. They do that for a reason--TO BREAK THE UNION...
You may not agree with one particular union, but that doesn't make them all bad. For the most part, many of them are there to PROTECT the rights of the workers.
I noticed a lot of people were mad and thought the workers from the grocerie store were greedy for wanting to keep their insurance the way it was? Are people really so simple minded as to think that this would be the last increase these people would receive??? That's not how it works, Every contract year after that the company would take a little bit more away from the employee's; that is unless they stand strong.
Unions are there to protect workers jobs; insure safe working enviornments; guarantee equal pay for ALL workers. Without unions a company can fire a person for no reason; give out raises to one person while another person has worked for the same company for years with no pay increase.
FYI: Bush is anti-union... In case you all didn't know, right now he is trying to pass a law that will abolish "overtime pay". That means those people who work hourly jobs can work as many hours as the company wants them to with no time and half; and for those people in a non union job-- they can be fired for refusing to work the overtime hours. THIS IS WHAT UNIONS ARE ABOUT...THEY ARE THERE TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE...DON'T LET A COUPLE CORRUPT UNIONS DISTRACT YOU FROM ALL THE GOOD THE OTHER ONES DO....
This is just my opinion, I realize those people who have be "programed" to dislike unions wont change thier minds, they have spent to long looking out for themselves and saying screw everyone else and what is better for the whole..

[jonette5]

AMEN! ITA!

[momfromTN]

Do you have proof of Bush's doing this? I would like to read it, please. :)
And no one said ALL unions are bad. And they DID do a lot in the past for people. But, we all know that some people who don't do their jobs are keeping them because of unions. And they do not pay enough to people when they are on strike, causing people who do NOT want to strike, but have to (which I feel is infringing on their rights) to have financial hardship. Where is the union when you cannot pay your mortgage or get groceries?
I understand the need to strike over terrible working conditions and low wages. But to be making the kind of money a lot of people in unions do (Ford, GE, etc) and then to strike because of having to pay a SMALL premium for health insurance, is silly. Especially this day and age, when big businesses are packing up to Mexico and other countries right and left, because of greed.

And, by the way, just because someone doesn't like unions, does not mean they are "programmed" to do so. You are implying that people are not smart enough to know their own minds. How do you know that a lot of us haven't done a LOT of researching and thinking about this subject? My uncles, dad and both grandpas are and were union men. I was in a union once too. So, by your standards, if you like unions, does that mean you are PROGRAMMED to like them? I think you have your own mind, as others do.

[Sha]

Just for reference, and just as I thought, it is not JUST over health benefits. They are trying to protect the wage tier and working conditions. I am glad I did not jump and criticize. There are alot more issues at stake here than medical benefits. I would like to know if anyone has a reference to this "striking over $15 " issue. I am not hear to cause problems, just something that interests me and I want to now learn all I can.
So many great points, but I keep learning that there are more pieces to the puzzle. Found out a cousin of mine in AZ will be striking soon also. He told me this AM that it is not just over medical, and he pays ALOT more than $15 a month for medical. His co-pays are very steep also. Have a great day...


UFCW Supermarket Workers Reject Employers' Offer, Vote Overwhelmingly To Protect Health Care and Retirement Benefits
Friday October 10, 3:13 pm ET


ANAHEIM, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 10, 2003--In elections this week at seven local unions of the United Food and Commercial Workers, almost 70,000 supermarket workers in Southern California voted overwhelmingly to reject the demands of their employers and to authorize their leaders to call a strike. The vote to reject the proposals surpassed 97 percent.

Some 85 percent of workers eligible to vote did so in an unprecedented turnout of support for rejection of the offer.

According to the UFCW, the three supermarket companies -- Albertson's, Safeway (Vons) and Kroger (Ralphs) -- have been working together to impose a package of severe cuts in benefits for their employees. In addition, they aim to set up a "second tier" of wages, benefits and working conditions for new employees -- in effect making them second-class citizens in their own workplaces.

Workers have also announced that they will only target one supermarket chain in order to avoid inconveniencing their customers. Workers at the two other supermarket chains will urge their employers to allow them to stay on the job and not to act on Employer threats to lock the workers out of the stores. The other chains are urged by the seven locals on behalf of their customers and neighbors not to spread the dispute by engaging in a retaliatory lockout.

The seven local unions represent supermarket employees and other workers from Bishop in the north to the Mexican border in the south and from the Pacific Ocean in the west to the Nevada and Arizona borders in the east.

The 1.4-million-strong United Food and Commercial Workers International Union is the largest private-sector union in North America. It represents employees of supermarkets, pharmacies, health agencies and other companies and organizations throughout the United States and Canada.

Prepared Statement from today's press conference:

UFCW STATEMENT

OCTOBER 10, 2003

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUPERMARKET STRIKE

CORPORATE GREED VS. HUMAN NEED

OVER THE PAST SEVERAL DAYS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUPERMARKET WORKERS HAVE BEEN VOTING ON A CONTRACT OFFER FROM THREE OF THE LARGEST SUPERMARKET OPERATORS IN THE COUNTRY.

THEY HAVE BEEN CONFRONTED WITH A STARK CHOICE -- GIVE UP HEALTH CARE BENEFITS NOT FOR ONLY THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES, BUT TO SACRIFICE FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SUPERMARKET WORKERS.

IN UNPRECEDENTED NUMBERS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUPERMARKET WORKERS TURNED OUT TO VOTE AND SENT A CLEAR MESSAGE THEY WILL FIGHT FOR AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE.

THEY DELIVERED A MANDATE TO THEIR UNION IF NEEDED TO SAVE HEALTH CARE, STRIKE TO PROTECT OUR FAMILIES, STRIKE TO SAVE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE FOR THE NEXT GENERATION OF WORKERS.

THESE WORKERS ARE HEROES; THEY ARE WILLING TO MAKE THE SACRIFICE TO TAKE UP THE FIGHT TO SAVE HEALTH CARE.

THIS IS A FIGHT FOR ALL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WORKERS. THIS IS A FIGHT FOR ALL SUPERMARKET WORKERS, UNION AND NON-UNION, HERE AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY. BECAUSE IF THESE THREE SUPERSIZE, SUPER-PROFITABLE SUPERMARKET CHAINS CAN CUT BENEFITS HERE, THEN EVERY WORKER IS AT RISK.

(WE ARE DISTRIBUTING THE STRIKE VOTE TOTALS TO YOU. YOU CAN SEE WORKERS ARE COMMITTED. WORKERS ARE DETERMINED TO SAVE HEALTH CARE.)
WE ARE ANNOUNCING THAT ON OCTOBER 11, WE WILL STRIKE ONE OF THE SUPERMARKET CHAINS. WE WILL LIMIT OUR JOB ACTION TO A SINGLE CHAIN, SO WE WILL LIMIT THE INCONVENIENCE TO OUR CUSTOMERS.

WE ARE ASKING THE EMPLOYERS TO ALSO RESPECT OUR CUSTOMERS AND NOT TO TAKE RETALIATORY ACTION AGAINST WORKERS THROUGH A LOCK OUT. THERE SHOULD BE NO LOCK OUT.

AFTER ALL, THE CUSTOMERS ARE THE ONES THAT WE DEPEND ON FOR OUR JOBS AND THE COMPANIES FOR THEIR PROFITS.

FOLLOWING TODAY'S MEETING WITH THE COMPANIES AND THE FEDERAL MEDIATOR, WE WILL ANNOUNCE THE TIME AND THE TARGET OF THE STRIKE.

WE WILL MAKE AN EFFORT TO AVOID A STRIKE, BUT WORKERS WILL NOT GIVE UP ON HEALTH CARE. WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR MORE. WE ARE ASKING TO KEEP THE BENEFITS THAT WE HAVE.

WE HAVE PASSED OUT SOME INFORMATION ON COMPANY PROFITS AND HEALTH CARE COSTS.

I WANT YOU ALL TO NOTE EMPLOYERS' PROFITS HAVE RISEN 10 TIMES FASTER THAN THEIR HOURLY CONTRIBUTION TO WORKER HEALTH CARE.

THEIR PROFITS OVERALL HAVE GONE UP 91% SINCE 1998.

YOU WILL ALSO SEE THAT WE HAVE CONTAINED HEALTH CARE COST. THE INCREASED COSTS FOR HEALTH CARE FOR THESE EMPLOYERS HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE.

THIS IS A BATTLE BETWEEN CORPORATE GREED AND HUMAN NEED, AND WE ARE ASKING OUR COMMUNITIES TO STAND WITH US -- WE ARE YOUR FRIENDS, YOUR NEIGHBORS, WE SERVE YOU EVER YDAY IN YOUR LOCAL SUPERMARKET. WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT.

IF THE SUPERMARKET GIANTS WIN, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LOSES. THESE COMPANIES WOULD DRAIN OVER 328 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BECAUSE WHEN THEY CUT HEALTH CARE FOR WORKERS, THEY RIP OFF CALIFORNIA.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact:
for UFCW
Ellen Anreder, 818-591-7480
818-416-9400 (cell)
Barbara Maynard, 323-850-1356
323-855-8739 (cell)




link to my reference (http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/031010/105433_1.html)

[momfromTN]

Well, quite frankly, that is the only info I have received, so that is what I commented on. Now, if the working conditions are terrible, etc, fine. But if it WAS for the health insurance, then I stand by my comments. I just hope it ends peacefully.

[Kelsey1224]

I have been working for over 30 years. I currently work for Disney which does have unions...particularly in film production, maintenance, etc. However, these people are in the minority of the 120,000+ people employed by Disney nationwide. Somehow, the rest of us are able to get excellent benefits and perqs without benefit of a union. Prior to coming to Disney, I've worked in numerous businesses. Guess what? No union. Yet...I got a fair wage, pay increases based on merit, benefits, vacation, etc.

As I have said before. I truly believe that unions did wonderful things for the labor force. When I look back in history at working conditions, I absolutely shudder. But, with the exception of a few industries, I believe unions have become obsolete.

BTW...I have a Master's Degree in Human Resources Management. Part of my coursework included Labor Laws, union negotiations, as well as an extensive study of unions, their beginnings, development and impact on society. Plus, I'm the daughter of a business agent for Operating Engineers. I think I have a fair understanding of unions.

For those of you who have benefited from unions...that's great.

However, it is possible to have a different opinion that is an educated one as well. I will respect your right to have a different opinion and hope that you can do the same.

[Kelsey1224]

BTW...here is a link to a local radio station which lists the specifics of the S. California grocery strike:

http://www.kfi640.com/main.html


Also, it is common practice for employers to change benefits and make it effective for new employees. Employers reserve to right to amend and change any benefits. However, to keep current employees happy what they will frequently do is "grandfather" existing employees so that they keep the old benefit.

This happens all the time. It doesn't make anyone a "second class" employee. If you are hired after the benefit is changed, then you know exactly the terms under which you are accepting the position. The hiring process is a two-way street. Just as an employer offers a job, you, as the employee, have the right to not accept it.

[ginna74]

yeh so another thread shouldn't have been made :(

[mrsswede]

momfromTn asked about the Bush law about overtime...this is from another board (CMT.com):

Subject : $22,100
Name : rocksaltandnails

Date : 09/19/03 03:10 AM
According to proposed changes by the Dept. of Labor, $22,100/year is a living wage, and if you earn that much or more, you may no longer be entitled to overtime pay for overtime work. Whereas I usually make it a point NOT to get involved in political threads (too much of it at work every day), after reading dimrock's original post under "Re: Evidence" and his reference to the proposed changes in overtime pay regulations. I've gotta speak up.
The DOL is proposing changes that will take away the rights of up to 8 million workers in this country to receive OT pay for OT work. The majority of targeted workers are currently classified as exempt, "white collar", and a lot of you may think, well, that's not me. THINK AGAIN. The proposed DOL changes loosen the definition of an exempt employee, and move millions of workers to an exempt status. Targeted classifications include licensed practical nurses, EMTs, those doing set-up work in factories, health care technicians, some surveyors and inspectors, some teachers, and hundreds of other classifications who currently are entitled to OT pay for OT work.

These changes could have devastating effects on the millions of American workers (and their families) who count on OT pay to help make ends meet. And the changes will have effects far beyond the immediate reduction in income, and will be long-lasting. Reduced income means many families may have to forego health insurance because they will no longer be able to afford the premiums. Who picks up the cost? Pension contributions are based on $$ earned - less OT $$ coming in, less $$ into pension funds. From working poor to retired poorer. Who picks up the cost?

I could go on for pages on this, I won't. I will urge you to plug "overtime pay" into your favorite search engine and implore you to read up on the issue. Take advantage of one of the many sites that will allow you to easily e-mail your representatives in D.C. so that you can let the current administration know that you expect it to live up to its commitment to working families.

Thanks for the taking the time to read this and allowing me the soapbox Peace to all.

I think it's worth looking up.

joey74, you made a lot of very good points.

[ladybreaker]

THE DOL IS NOT PRESIDENT BUSH!!!!!!!!SHEESH!!!!!!!!

[mrsswede]

"THE DOL IS NOT PRESIDENT BUSH!!!!!!!!SHEESH!!!!!!!!"

Okay, so look here:

http://www.aflcio.org/yourjobeconomy/overtimepay/underattack.cfm#bush

BUSH's Proposal Could End Overtime Pay for Millions of Workers

Some of the most important employment protections for working families today are part of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which sets minimum standards for wages and overtime. Under the FLSA’s overtime rules, some 80 million workers must now be paid time-and-a-half in cash when they work for more than 40 hours a week. Millions of these workers depend on cash overtime pay to make ends meet.

In fact, under the BUSH proposal, a worker eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) could be ineligible to receive overtime pay. (A single worker making less than $33,178 and caring for two or more children could be eligible for the EITC, a federal income tax credit for low-income workers.)

The BUSH overtime proposal to change overtime regulations would deny overtime pay and the protections of the 40-hour workweek to millions of workers. It would affect a wide range of the approximately 80 million workers currently protected by making it much easier for employers to claim that these employees are exempt from overtime pay.

Under the BUSH overtime scheme:

Millions of salaried workers making between $22,101 and $65,000 who now are eligible to receive overtime pay could be reclassified as executives or administrative or professional employees—and would no longer qualify for overtime pay.
Relatively low-salary earners who have supervisory responsibilities or management-related responsibilities would be penalized, as would workers with advanced education or specialized training. Some of the jobs affected are police, firefighters, nurses, retail managers, insurance claims adjusters and medical therapists.
Employees not covered by the new rules also could be hurt: By reclassifying many of their workers as exempt from overtime pay, employers most likely would assign overtime only to them and eliminate overtime for other workers. Police and firefighters are among those potentially affected.
Anyone making $65,000 or more a year likely would lose overtime pay, effectively eliminating many middle-income wage earners’ much-needed extra pay.
According to the U.S. Department of Labor’s own estimates, the BUSH administration’s proposed rule changes could mean between 2.1 million and 3.3 million workers would face unpredictable work schedules because of an increased demand for extra hours for which employers would not have to pay time-and-a-half.

The BUSH administration claims its plan would give overtime protections to more workers by allowing anyone who earns $22,100 or less to automatically qualify for overtime pay. But many of those workers, such as fast-food employees, already are covered.

Many working families depend on overtime to pay bills—especially during the current economic recession that has resulted in stagnant and declining wages, increasing costs of health care, prescription drugs, child care and other essential expenses. The BUSH proposal would cut into many of those families’ paychecks.


Not sure how this would affect people that raise game roosters...

[ladybreaker]

you can leave my roosters out of this--thank you.--lol

[mrsswede]

Didn't mean to offend. I just wanted to point out that this IS a Bush administration proposal. I found a lot more info on this, but just wanted to give the gist of it all. I'm trying to keep my personal opinions out of this whole thread. (unions & the OT proposal...Bush administration, etc.)

Best wishes to the roosters. :)

[zitra]

My point in the other thread was, as was alot of people's, had nothing ot do with the unions, but the fact that we should not have to shop at a differnt store that may have higher prices, thus getting less food for our $, for our children/family. I have no problems with unions, but if people started picketing a store here, that happened to have the best prices, I would still go to that store, becuase I beleive gettign the most for my $ for MY family is more important for me..let the picketers do what they want for their families, but also let me do what is best for mine!!

[joey74]

Hey everyone, I just wanted to say that I am sorry if I offended anyone. In retrospect I shouldn't have said anything; I broke my own rule by commenting on anything that I feel a passion for. I realize that the effects of union vary depending upon where you live. They just happen to be very important in my little old town. (we have 3 of the top ten manufacturer's head quarters located here) and like I said my mother is vice president of her local. I see how much work she does and all of the good that comes out of it.
Thanks for posting the info mrsswede; My server was down all last night so I couldn't respond. I am terrified at the prospect of no overtime pay. My entire family rely's on overtime. My husband works 80 hours a week just so we can get ahead. If there was no overtime it would be devistating to a lot of people.

Have a great day everyone...

[HumblePie98]

My husband is a Union member and Thank the LORD he is!!

He had worked at RSVP for 2 years WITHOUT a raise, no health insurance!! When they got the Union in things really changed! They got the raises they deserved and has job secruity. I LOVE The UNION!! My Husband is a member of the IAM Internation Assoication Of Aerospacemen and Machinist










I think that everyone should have health insurance. What's the difference if you were part or full time. If it were you losing the insurance you would have been upset to!!

[ieatalot]

I wrote this yesterday but I couldn't get on BBS for some reason after I tried to post this.

momfromtn here is the info about the overtime pay http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:h1119ih.txt we all will be in a lot of trouble if this passes. I will probably have no choice but to get another job to pay my bills again.

I am a member of UNITE! union, they suck but thats all we have in my plant so I have no choice. Our president sleeps with the company. Our contract is renewed every 4 years & we get screwed every 4 years. My ins. went from $4.50 to $35.00 last year (this is every week) who knows what it will be next year.

While I don't support strikes, sometimes you are forced into having one. When you look at the millions that we made for the shareholders & the conditions we are forced to work in, its sickening. We need better working laws for everyone in this nation, not just a unioned employee. Unions shouldn't have to be in place to ensure a decent wage & decent benefits but until you actually have ONE person in politics that cares more for the people & not just the shareholders things will never change.

I am making more money an hour then I was when I first started there & now I am bringing home less every week. We still have one more year until our contract is up & I bet we will be on strike when it does come up. I will be supporting a strike this time.

[joey74]

good luck with the contract next year "ieatalot"... I know how horrible it can be...how you worry what you will have to give up now just to get a cost of living raise!
My parent insurance deductable went from $400. a family to $1,200 a year (who in the hell goes to the doctor that much?? unless you have medical problems you would never meet your deductable).
good luck

[Anthill]

I believe in UNIONS. My Father was in one, his father was in one, my Mother's father was in one and so on. When my Husband got out of the service that was the one thing I stressed to him was a UNION job. It's security, they fight for you etc. He works for the Railroad. When I got my first real job, I was 18 turning 19 in a couple of weeks, and would be off my parents insurance. I took this job because of INsurance Plan. I might not get paid alot of money, but they paid for my insurance. As the years went by and I am still here they kept changing our INsurance plan but at least they paid for it. So again I didn't care that I wasn't making the money that other people were making doing my job because they had to pay for thier insurance. AFter I got married, I joined my husband's insurance he didn't have to pay. THat is ONE reason he took the job because insurance was paid for. Now they are up for contract and they want the Union to pay for their own insurance while Management (not in the Union) doesn't have to pay. We are mad that they are changing this rule regardless of how inexpensive it is every month, irregardless of the fact that for 10 years he never had to pay. ONce they start charging they now have a foot in the door and think well they didn't blink when we charged them 75.00 a month what's a $100.00 with limits on it etc. LIke I siad choices were made based on what he was offered and now it's too late for him to go anywhere else he would have to start at the bottom and work his way back up to where he is. Do I want him to strike of course not, but if that is the way to go then YES.

[fatesfaery]

Originally posted by joey74

FYI: Bush is anti-union... In case you all didn't know, right now he is trying to pass a law that will abolish "overtime pay". That means those people who work hourly jobs can work as many hours as the company wants them to with no time and half; and for those people in a non union job-- they can be fired for refusing to work the overtime hours. THIS IS WHAT UNIONS ARE ABOUT...THEY ARE THERE TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE...DON'T LET A COUPLE CORRUPT UNIONS DISTRACT YOU FROM ALL THE GOOD THE OTHER ONES DO....
This is just my opinion, I realize those people who have be "programed" to dislike unions wont change thier minds, they have spent to long looking out for themselves and saying screw everyone else and what is better for the whole..

I had a job a few years ago working for a BMW supplier (we did most of their interior components for the Z3 and the SUV). BMW is determined to be non-union and they won't use suppliers who are union, but BMW is a great place to work and has fantasic pay and benefits, but some people who worked for their suppliers weren't so lucky. I still made really good money and had good benefits, but nothing compared to BMW.

The company I worked for got further and further behind on orders, so we started working 12 hour shifts 6 days a week. It was mandatory overtime. We had a point system and if you didn't stay the extra 4 hours or come in on Sat. you got points. If you reached the point limit, you got fired.......so losing your job for refusing to work overtime isn't new.

If this is passed into law, will it matter if you belong to a union or not?

[harloo]

ITA OP. It amazes me how the public does not realize that the unions protect the blue collar workers. Not all unions are corrupt.

If their were no organization of blue collar workers then coporate american would have their way. I appauld them for striking and I am unselfish enough to understand their concerns.

[joey74]

I think unions will make a difference in whether this pases or not. I know (at least with the unions I am familar with) that they are trying to make people aware and telling them how to go about expressing their oposition to this.
I think that your situation might have been different if you job was union. Wouldn't it have been nice to for the workers to be able to negotiate their hours... I know a couple of companys in my area that have been trying to go to 12 hour shifts for years now. But the union has their members vote on the issue. The majority rules and the company cannot implement new hours with out a contractual agreement.
That is just my opinion

[charlahinkle]

Ok, now I'm going to comment on the whole overtime issue.. Did you realize that they can make anyone salary. All they have to do is base actual hours worked on $5.15 an hour + overtime. Two years ago I was making 17,500 a year as an assistant manager at Hardee's inc.. I was working 56 hours a week. That boils down to $6.00 an hour. Not figuring in any overtime. My hourly employees were making more per hour than I was. And I had to pay $200 a month if I wanted single coverage insurance.

Basically what I'm saying is that they currently CAN screw anyone.. It does not matter what the current administration passes.

[fatesfaery]

My hubby is a shift supervisor for a plastics company. He worked for Tyco Inc. in SC and NC for 13 years and was on salary, never drew a penny over his salary if he worked over 80 hours a week (which he often did). That's the main reason he quit and we moved to GA. The company he works for now is smaller, he's still salary, but he gets overtime pay for anything over 40 hours.
When he worked for Tyco,they (Tyco) were trying to sell the plastics dividion, so there were constant rumors flying, they changed insurance carriers about every six months........and then all the problems with their CEO embezzling millions of dollars.....

[schsa]

Anyone who is in a supervisory position is considered exempt from overtime. This is considered a salaried position and overtime should be computed into the salary. If it was not, your husband should have been speaking out for a salary increase.

It has always been my feeling that if a company deals fairly with its employees and is competitive with the other companies in the area, there is no reason for a union. Unions had a place at one time but in today's workplace no one will willing work for a company that does not offer medical insurance, disability, and other basics that are part of doing business. If your company is competitive in the market, they will offer raises to good employees.

I would not consider working for a company that did not offer me basic benefits. I would not work for a company that did not reward me with a decent raise for the work that I do. I would not work for a company unless my salary did compensate me for the overtime I put into the job.

Anyone who accepts that sort of job is compromising themselves if they know that better jobs are out there. I realize that some of you live in areas of the country where there are job shortages but that is not nationwide.

Unions don't always benefit the people who support them. I would not join a union. I would rather find a better job with a better company.

[fatesfaery]

Oh, he was earning decent money, 46K a year. but it doesn't seem like such great money when you're working with no days off, 18 hour shifts.
My brother also works for Tyco and he has refused supervisor jobs for years because he would actually have to take a pay cut.
Hubby's makeing the same base pay now, but with overtime pay he'll end up makeing around 52K. And he's not working as much overtime with this company.
Of course, the cost of living around Atlanta is a lot higher than it was in SC & NC.

[Kelsey1224]

Originally posted by schsa
Anyone who is in a supervisory position is considered exempt from overtime. This is considered a salaried position and overtime should be computed into the salary. If it was not, your husband should have been speaking out for a salary increase.

It has always been my feeling that if a company deals fairly with its employees and is competitive with the other companies in the area, there is no reason for a union. Unions had a place at one time but in today's workplace no one will willing work for a company that does not offer medical insurance, disability, and other basics that are part of doing business. If your company is competitive in the market, they will offer raises to good employees.

I would not consider working for a company that did not offer me basic benefits. I would not work for a company that did not reward me with a decent raise for the work that I do. I would not work for a company unless my salary did compensate me for the overtime I put into the job.

Anyone who accepts that sort of job is compromising themselves if they know that better jobs are out there. I realize that some of you live in areas of the country where there are job shortages but that is not nationwide.

Unions don't always benefit the people who support them. I would not join a union. I would rather find a better job with a better company.

Absolutely perfectly stated! In most markets, companies need to be competitive and they need to attract the best candidates for the job. To do this, they need to offer fair salaries and a good benefit package.

This is not only for "professional" positions. For example, in Orlando, FL there are several theme parks. Universal "upped" their benefits package to steal employees from Disney. Disney had to up their benefits as well.

I really have a problem with "automatic" raises which are given to union employees. The brief time I was in a union, we all got the same raise. Productivity meant absolutely nothing. Merit meant absolutely nothing. As a result, it bred mediocrity. I am a hard worker and competitive by nature and I resented that I got the same raise as several of my co-workers who did a fraction of the work I did.

Once our job was reclassified as non-union, pay increases changed to being based on our productivity. I found this to be fair!