BS: Do we still need unions?

Subject: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:35 PM

Okay, this relates to a zillion folk songs!

I work at Boeing, as a computer programmer. Currently there are about 17,000 of us who are being potentially "organized" by the IAM (a very large union which already represents our machinists (the people that actually make the planes)).

The company is sending out electronic rivers of e-mails about why we should vote no. The union is going around to people's homes telling us why we should vote yes. My cow-orkers seem to think that if we are unionized we will automatically become hourly employees instead of salaried, and lose all our salaried perks (flex time, ability to take time off during the day for "personal business" and the like).

I come from a strong union family and am tending toward voting YES.

Any other union members out there? Former union members? IAM members? Is it worth it? Should I vote no? Why?

Thanks in advance. Let's keep this friendly, please.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:51 PM

Too often employees have a choice between greedy employers and crooked union bosses. Take your pick. I believe in unions because the history of the robber barons is just plain evil, far worse than the crooked union bosses.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Susanne (skw)
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:55 PM

When we've lost them we'll realise that we did!

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:58 PM

Hi Kendall, tell that to Barry & his cousin when their local planned to put out a contract on us because we spoke out against crooked/greedy officals. The real insult was when they said we weren't worth it. Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Noreen
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 06:58 PM

Since I got here before the likely candidates, I'll say yes- because the tripe wouldn't be so tasty without 'em...

Sorry,Alex... but it is friendly...

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Bert
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:00 PM

Yes, they are still necessary.

Bert.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Stevangelist
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:02 PM

As long as there are people driven by love for their jobs and families' welfare being supervised by people driven by the bottom line and 'upward mobility'... there will always be (and always be a need for) unions.

"...oh, you can't scare me, I'm sticking with the union..."

Stevangelist

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: RichM
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:02 PM

I listened to a radio program in Canada last night about a union drive to organize some workers right now.

The comment that struck me as profound was that employer talked about their "employees" and union talked about the "members".

The very sane comment was that employees and members are the same people! It all distilled down to the fact that it's important to have dialogue and consultation with the people involved. Both company and union should work together to make it a win-win situation. The adversarial approach is only one method of communicating. Why not try others?

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:03 PM

I'm generally in favor of unions, but they don't seem to work well in certain work situations - particularly in civil service and in small business. They can add a layer of bureaucracy or build a wall between labor and management wich can make it difficult to come up with common-sense solutions to problems. If a work situation is good and communication between management and labor is good, maybe there's no need for a union.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: ddw
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:13 PM

Well said, Joe. I don't have time to go into details now, but when the paper I work for unionized about 20 years ago we lost all kinds of perks, made management too scared to actually DO anything about deadwood workers and cost each and every employee about $500 to $700 a year in dues. So far the union has not protected one job when the big cuts came in the '80s and again in the '90s. They have not solved a single case of supervisor persecution or — as far as I can figure out — done anything useful for us.

They have settled for some of the smallest salary increases we have ever had, locked us into impossible schedules and generally screwed up the business of news gathering and processing.

For regimented (i.e. manufacturing) jobs they might make sense, but for lots of other kinds of work they are nothing but a pain.

david

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:18 PM

Here are just a few examples of how a small in numbers union has been working for freelance writers, through mostly volunteer efforts of members. It is the National Writer's Union, UAW 1981, AFL-CIO, of which I am a member:

QUOTE of the MONTH: "We've all heard the lines: unions are outdated. Working people needed unions at one point, but not any more. Employers are decent today; they treat their people ok. And for those who don't, the government provides protections...BULL! Today's decent employers are decent because unions FORCE them to be decent." Richard J. Perry 1991

Boston Globe Case Moves Forward: Starting his hearing with the observation "somebody doesn't want to answer some questions..." Mass. Superior Court Judge Ernest B. Murphy DENIED the Boston Globe's motion to stay yesterday afternoon (June 13th). The Globe made this petition last March, arguing that it shouldn't be required to answer discovery questions in Marx v. Boston Globe until the Tasini case has been decided by the US Supreme Court. But the Boston Globe case does not concern copyright---it is an unfair business practice case. Now the Globe must answer written interrogatories and produce documentation withheld by July 13th. Based on another court ruling in Massachusetts, it also looks likely that the freelancers involved in the Globe struggle will be certifiable as a class for further action. All this bodes well for ultimate victory against the Globe and for affirming the rights of all freelancers.

Stand Up to the Washington Post TAKE ACTION!: The NWU is working to get the Washington Post to improve its all rights grab contract AND to pay freelancers better. But the Post thinks that freelancers find their contract just fine. If you write for the Post, make sure you let your editor know that you want better rates and terms. Even if you don't get what you want, you're sending a message to their management: that freelancers aren't going to take it anymore! If you want support in negotiating a better contract with the Post or any other publisher, request a contract advisor.

Freelance Photographers Build the Fight

Freelance writers aren't the only ones protesting low pay and unfair contracts. Photographers recently called an informal boycott of Forbes magazine until the publisher pays for on line use. Other targets have included stock photo houses Getty Images, Inc. and Corbis Corp (owned by Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates), Conde Nast, the New Yorker, Vogue, Vanity Fair, and Newsweek. And the boycotts are working. Last year, the target BusinessWeek upped its pay scale. Similar to campaigns the NWU is involved with in San Diego, Boston, and DC, these boycotts are being run not via picket lines but peer pressure: freelancers deciding on a voluntary basis not to work for a publisher until that publisher ups their pay and stops grabbing rights. To read how a freelancer photographer battled the New York Times, go to http://www/cjr.org/year/01/3/photo.asp .

8. BUY UNION! TAKE ACTION!

The next time you need a book or magazine, avoid union busting Amazon.com and try Powell's in Portland, Oregon. You can order books from them on the web and if you order through their union web site, 10% goes to the workers through a profit sharing deal negotiated by their union. Go to www.powellsunion.com/Bookstore.html

Union - yes

kat

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Justa Picker
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:19 PM

Musicians don't.
Just a good, straight entertainment lawyer will do.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:20 PM

once you are a union member, the UNION (read:union bosses)tends to decide what you do and when you do it. The union's main concern seems to be consolidating power and exerting leverage with the company...still, NO unions would mean the company could not be trusted...The machinists may need it, but I'm not sure the office workers do...I guess YOU are the best judge of whether issues abound the will need union intervention...

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:20 PM

Wouldn't a gay entertainment lawyer be just as good?

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Justa Picker
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:32 PM

I get the humor MT, but just in case, you might have misinterpretted straight = honest.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: catspaw49
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:34 PM

I think either would work Alex as long as you weren't playing multiple instruments.......In that case you need a "Bi" lawyer so you can swing both ways.

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:36 PM

Yes.

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:37 PM

(yes to us needing unions)

Jon

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Lin in Kansas
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 07:43 PM

John In Remote Kansas (JIRK) on LIK's cookie.

mousethief –

This is not an easy one to answer; but the answer comes out YES. You do need a union. Whether the monster IAM is YOUR best answer leaves me a little uncertain.
I too, was once at Boeing. As an engineer, I can assure you that being a union member at Boeing does not take away any professionalism you may possess, and does not make you any more of "an hourly worker" than the company already considers you to be. I'm sure you already fill out a time card. You are probably classified as a "salaried exempt" employee – that will not change. (Ask me later what you're exempt from.)
I joined Boeing in Wichita many years ago, when we had our own local union. Officers were elected from the membership, and were unpaid. The only compensation they got was that Boeing (per the contract) paid them their regular salary while they were conducting union business, and excused them from regular duties (sometimes grudgingly) for union business.
I was a member of my union's (5 person) executive committee for a time. In this capacity I had a thorough education in the kinds of things that the union can do, and needs to do, to benefit the members. I also learned a lot about the kinds of things the company is willing to do to people "to benefit the bottom line."
Unfortunately, the great majority of the membership seemed to think that "the union," which they considered some sort of paid hired help, should do it all for them. It was very difficult to get people to participate – although they were all quite willing to complain.
The local engineers' union affiliated with the Seattle monster union (SPEEA), and personal representation died. The residual benefits – a contract, with some enforcement – were still worth a lot, BUT ---. (The good old days are gone, forever??)
Without a union, you have no contract with the company. You are "an employee at will of the company." They can do anything they want to (and probably will eventually) – and they are under no obligation to treat you the same as they treat everyone else. Get a contract.
Boeing management is not responsible to you. Their only concern is with making the stockholders happy. The union is responsible to you – although whether it will make you happy depends on whether you and all of your fellow members will give it the support necessary.
Having a union rep is a little like having a congressman working for you. Ya gotta watch 'em all the time – but if everybody else has one, don't you need one too?

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: GUEST,aesop
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:00 PM

Yes, we need unions! Without a union each employee has to negotiate as an individual, instead of collectively. People can be paid different salaries for doing the same work. And alone, you have nothing to bargain with. You can be fired at the whim of management. Many people in this country still endure horrible working conditions and poverty pay, and they have no recourse but to be unemployed or work for another employer who is just a bad. In most other countries it is even worse. Employer and employee have different interests. The employer wants the most work for the least cost. Cheap labor. Without unions, the employer has all the power. If some union leaders are corrupt, throw them out. But don't throw the unions out with them.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Amergin
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:01 PM

BillD, it depends on the union...some unions are very democratic....the IBU and the SIU are two examples....

Alex, what I suggest you do, is to seriously investigate this union...investigate their track record and how they represent the worker....and then weigh them against the track record of Boeing....hope it turns out good for you!

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: bobby's girl
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:14 PM

Watch Tolpuddle man, and then ask the question again - i think you will find the answer will be Yes

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:15 PM

Like any human organisation a union can be subverted by people who are into exploiting their members and doing well for themselves. It happens in churches, political parties, clubs, musical groups...

And that only happens because people let it happen and don't take responsibility for keeping things the way they are supposed to be, and changing them back to the way they used to be when they've gone wrong.

And of course you need unions - and in these times of fragmentation and short-term contracts and all that stuff which makes individual employees so vulnerable, you need them more than ever.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: dwditty
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:25 PM

Yo, Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: InOBU
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:28 PM

Damn straight (or gay if you perfer) we need Unions! When I had a cist in my throat, next to my vocal cords, the insurence companys didn't give a damn if I lived or died, but my union (I was a projectionist and a Teamster) My Union came through for me, and for my Dad (Teamster, Actors Union, Union Bar man, Union Waiter, Union caol miner... etc...) the Teamsters came through for my Dad and Mom when he was in his last illness and the insurence companies and hospitals were robbing him blind.
My daddy was a miner, and I'm a miner's son, and I'll be with you fellow workers, untill this battle's one... Which side are you on? The UNION!
In ONE BIG UNION!
InOBU
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: bbc
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:30 PM

I have mixed feelings about unions & jobs w/ built-in security. When I worked for the government (civil service), the highest paid person in my dept. did almost nothing, but his job was secure until he chose to leave it. I have been working now for 10 years as a teacher, an automatically unionized position here in the U.S. (Is it in other countries, as well?). I can be a member of the union or not, but the same dues are deducted from my paycheck, either way, & much of that money goes to support the political party I don't agree w/. Although I understand the historical need for unions to protect the legitimate rights of the workers, what I have seen in my work experience is the weakest workers being protected--ones who, by merit of their work, probably should lose their jobs. For me, tenure is mixed w/ this in my mind, so I may be a bit muddled. Last spring, my union almost went to strike trying to get a new contract. I felt most of the demands were unreasonable. Generally, I'd prefer to be evaluated on my own merits, given the choice.

respectfully,

bbc

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: thosp
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 08:40 PM

yes more than no -- but i certainly understand the sentiment regarding corrupt union officials

peace (Y) thosp

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Bugsy
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 09:24 PM

Too right we do!

The only problem I see with the unions (after having been involved for many years) is to get the unions to act more in line with the interests of the workers, not the workers in the interests of the union.

Most union officials, in my experience seem to think that the rank and file are there to help implememnt their policies. Rather, the officials should be there to negotiate in the interests of their members.

Once we cant acheive that goal, JEEZ! There's no stopping us!!!!!!!!

CHeers

Bugsy

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 09:29 PM

Unfortunatly, powerful unions are one of the reasons so many manufacturing jobs have gone south. The greedy ones on both sides are to blame. For most of my adult life, I worked as a state then as a federal law enforcement officer, and we had no union. But, if I were a coal miner, you bet your bippy I would be in a union.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: northfolk/al cholger
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 09:43 PM

I'm surprised that I beat brother Mick to this post. I am a Union staff worker... and a big union boss, only in the sense that I'm 6'5" and weigh in at_____. I am employed by a very progressive, and aggressive international union. I have witnessed every misuse of honest hard working people that you could ever imagine.

I have seen people unfit to return to work because of injury and illness, on the job or off, threatened, to return or else...often against doctors orders.

I have seen a litany of contract violations from employers that know that their pockets are deep enough to endure the cost of ongoing arbitration costs.

We all have witnessed the continuing shift of wealth, from the working "middle" class to the inordinately rich and powerfull upper 1% of the US population.

It is a fact that the wage value of the average CEO of a US company, has climbed from 30 times in 1973, to 475 times the wage rate of the average worker...

there is NO other organization responsible for the american dream as we have known it, only the U S Union Movement, and the dream may be dying... or being murdered.

I work very hard to organize new members, educate and mobilize current members and protect the health and retirement packages of our retirees.

All workers deserve a wage that allows a regularly improving standard of living, health care benefits, pensions that afford comfort and dignity, in retirement...

Much of this is eroding, because Unions represent a small enough segment of the work force, (11%), that there is not enough collective strength to guarantee the continuation of these benefits.

So, yes we do need Unions, and we also need to change the culture of unions and members, who must think of our unions as a movement, not as an insurance company, to whom you pay your premium and collect your benefit.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: toadfrog
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 10:19 PM

Hey Mousthief! Generalized philosophical opinions about unions are just about useless to you. What you need is specific advice about a particular union at Boeing. Lin in Kansas knows a little bit about your situation; the rest of us don't know nothing. But I would say, the worst thing a union could do to you would be to do nothing, and that real bad things can happen when the employer has a free hand.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 10:47 PM

Albert "the Mad Hatter" Anastasia along with Louis "Lepke the Butcher" Buchalter first became heads of the Garment Industry unions & the Garment Industry itself in New York in the 1930's which paved their ways to head the unions that dealt with all the waterfront activies amassing for themselves & their organizations great wealth & power & from there they found out how to branch out. By the way they were also the founding & controling heads of Murder INC. As far as I'm concerned for blue collar unions the apple hasn't fallen far from the tree. I've never worked for a non union company that would've concidered my death a benifit instead of concidering giving me death benifits. I've also never work with more thugs & criminals than my 10 yrs as a member of a construction union (the president who planned my hit had already served time for murder while the BA was serving time for extortion). My wages were higher as a non union employee & I worked as many hrs as I wanted rather than starve every other 6 months. Do we need union, yea, like a hole in the head. Barry, who's still alive & kicking

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: IvanB
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 10:50 PM

bbc, you made a statement that much of the money you give to the union, whether it be in dues or representation fees, goes to support the political party with which youy don't agree. As a person who held several statewide offices in a union for state employees (including stints as treasurer and as president), I was well aware of federal election laws which forbade any direct contribution of union funds to candidates for federal office. To have done so could have jeopardized our tax exempt status. On the other hand, we were allowed to form political action committees (PAC's) and solicit voluntary contributions from our members to be used in support of candidates who, in our opinion, helped in furthering our legislative goals.

If you have proof that your union is making direct contributions to a political party or candidates you should contact the Federal Elections Commission.

As a union leader, I was made aware of the many abuses to which management is prone when there is nobody performing a watchdog function. I also saw the extreme reluctance of most members to get involved, so it was certainly the ideas of a small group of involved individuals that usually got 'pushed.' But, believe me, the 'perks' of a few hours off to perform union business and the pittance paid by the union for legitimate travel expenses were well offset by the headaches those people endured from both management and the great majority of uninvolved members.

Yes, unions will always be necessary and this is one guy who'll never begrudge the mostly honest and hardworking union members and reps the perks they manage to get from the system.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:01 PM

It's simply a matter of which greedy crooked creep you want for a boss. You will have one or the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: GUEST,JamesJim
Date: 14 Jun 01 - 11:04 PM

The up or down vote to unionize is not a problem, provided those who do not wish to join are not forced to do so (unfortunately, that's not the way it works). As many have said, this is a complicated issue (not as cut and dry as it was many years ago). Today it would seem that each situation must stand on it's own. In GENERAL, if I worked on the line at General Electric, I'd want to belong to a union. If I worked in a white collar job where the company must compete with many other employers for top notch employees, I wouldn't. The technical difficulty of the job (education & training) would seem to make the difference. The more educated/trained I am in a particular field, the more leverage I would have with my employer (or their competitors). It all hinges on how in demand my services are.

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 12:02 AM

I wish people in Third World countries could or would organize around their own wages and working conditions. Until this occurs, jobs will continue to slide out from under countries with strong unions. It's hard to be patient until the day these countries' people rise up and stop their own oppression... respecting their self-determination means leaving this up to them... but it is hard to think of friends in unions bargaining in a setting where a company can just shift the jobs to a unionless hell when the bottom line starts to look too mushy.

Sometimes I think about being that kind of missionary... to go to the Third World and tell the people there it could actually be different. Then I get overwhelemed again by what is before me to do right here at home.

But I dream of a world where all workers get up in the morning knowing their work will be valued and that the conditions under which it is done will not kill them. Actually I dream even higher than that-- a world where people do what they do because they are good at it and like doing it, and where no one preys on the workers because everyone understands the value of cooperation and does their own part.

But then I was raised to think fairness is possible. I dunno. But I dream anyhow.

Alex, maybe if your union stinks you should get involved in it and make it a good one.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 12:11 AM

Boeing has a history of treating its white collar workers like an infinitely replaceable commodity.

For people opposed to tenure, here's my thinking: which would I rather have rewarded, tenure (time on the job), or ability to kiss the boss's ass? Since I'm no good at the latter, I'll take the former.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 12:13 AM

Oh, also, in praise of the Teamsters: my grandfather tells of a time when IAM was on strike at Boeing at Thanksgiving or Christmas time, and the Teamsters came by and GAVE them frozen turkeys -- one for every person on strike at the time.

Alex, an apple that obviously didn't fall far from the tree!

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: wdyat12
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 12:55 AM

We don't need unions anymore if we want third world wages, unhealthy working conditions, and environmental catastrophe, to name a few.

wdyat12

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 01:11 AM

As long as an employer can sack someone for taking time out sick, but not allow the same employee to retire on health grounds because they aren't sick enough, then yes, we will need Unions.

As long as there is a minimum wage that is below the standard cost of living we will need big people to fight for the little ones.

As long as there are employers scurroulous enough to screw every last ounce out of an employee, in conditions you wouldn't keep a rat in, for pay that wouldn't keep a bug alive.

As long as there are people who are afraid NOT to go to work because their money is docked or their home lives threatened.

And Flexi time isn't a perk, it's a sensible way of ensuring that the full open hours are utilised because there will always be people who need to come in early and leave early or others who are later. I voluntarily work longer hours (6 day week already this week) so that I can spend better time with my family/take time for appointments in working hours, without lessening the service I give to my employer, and thus, my employer gives to their customer.

Go and ask the Liverpool Dock workers if we need a Union. Go and ask my friend Pam who was sacked as per the first para. and reinstated because the Union intervened.

LTS - the fact that I was born and brought up in the same community as the Tolpuddle men (5 miles down the road) is nothing to do with this, no, not at all, it doesn't colour my judgement one little bit!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: bbc
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 05:36 AM

IvanB,

I don't have direct proof of how my union spends my dues, but I know the union always *strongly* encourages us to vote for Democratic candidates & I have heard, repeatedly, that monies from the teachers' union are given to the Democratic Party. I happen to be a Republican. I do resent that my money is taken, whether I support the union, philosophically, or not. This year, I am a member solely because it is the only way I can get help w/ dental benefits (I'd be out the money, anyway.). I am not against all unions, but I think some have gotten carried away. And, the only times I had disputes (both of which ended w/ me losing my job), the union wasn't able to help at all.

bbc

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 05:59 AM

bbc my friend, if we ever find ourselves back in the days before unions when the bosses worked people like borrowed mules, then dumped them like so much useless junk, you will become a democrat! Thats the problem with being young. no recollection of how it was back then. Of course I dont remember when Henry Ford turned his goon squad against workers who only wanted decent working conditions, but, it's this "history thing". Men were killed and maimed for striking for a living wage.In those days, if you were hurt on the job, tough tuggin', you were out on your ass with NO recourse.No workmans comp, nothing but charity. If we were really not able to learn from the past mistakes of others, we would still be in a cave somewhere trying to invent fire.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Linda Kelly
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 06:44 AM

Employers in the UK would return to Victorian conditions at the drop of a hat without unions. In fact, we already see this with short term contracts which only benefit the employer and stop people having long term commitments and flexible working hours, which frankly in my experience means flexible for the employer and very little else. How many major companies in the UK on a regular basis, break Health & Safety regulations, end up in court being fined for accounting irregularities and are seen to lose cases where employers have been forced to take them to arbitration?. Why have we no end of self regulatory and regulatory bodies -because we can trust companies to do the right thing -no exactly the opposite -because most companies would try to get away with as much as possible- and that includes paying as little ad providing as little as possible for their employees. You only have to look at the drop in the number of companies providing a pension scheem to employees to know that profits come first and foremost. Do we need unions -now like never before.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: GUEST,Roger the skiffler
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 06:54 AM

You betcha. I can't remember when my profession got a pay award that wasn't below inflation/going rate or paid on time but without our union, we'd be even worse off.
RtS (though I felt foolish marching behind the banner "Rectify the Anomaly" - blame the academics!)

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Bagpuss
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 06:54 AM

Has anyone seen Bread and Roses, Ken Loach's first 'Hollywood' film? I haven't seen it yet, but it is about organising unions for illegal immigrant workers. Looks good, but then I love all Ken Loach films.

Bagpuss

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: InOBU
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 07:31 AM

Dear Geordie Trade Union Sisters and Brothers...
Not only do we still need Unions, I still need my Yorkshire District National Union of Miner's badge. Any of you who have friends in the NUM... I did a concert for them during the big strike in the 80's here in NYC. We raised more $ than the AFLCIO, (which in essence scabbed on the NUM). Well, I was given a NUM badge as a thank you, Blue and gold witha shield and two figures of miners, and the letters "NUM Yorks Dist". I was so proud of it I wore it during many progressive battles. I lost it in the Canadian wilderness working to stop Hydro Quebec from taking Native Land (an issue hot again folks...)
I have been trying to replace it for YEARS!
SO please pass on the story if you know any members of that Union, the band I played with then was "The Miner's Son and the Quarryman's Daughter" I being the Miner's Son and Trudy of Callaghan's Quarry - Meath being the Quarryman's Daughter.
All the best,
Larry

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 07:48 AM

In this country (England) unions have separate political funds, and if you don't want to put any money into them you don't have to. Any money to further a political end (such as backing the party in favour of a minimum wage) has to come from the political fund.

However companies don't have the same restriction - I very much resent knowing that money I spend as a customer goes to support political parties I detest. And they don't even have to ask the shareholders.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Gervase
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 08:42 AM

It's mostly been said - yes, we do need unions. And, if you don't like what your union's doing, remember that it is your union and get involved.
(That said, there are some crap unions, at least in the UK. The NUJ takes the biscuit for being the most inept, politically flaky and absurd union around - but at least it tries to look after the interests of low-paid hacks on provincial papers, who make up the bulk of its membership)

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Mooh
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 09:54 AM

In its simplest terms, the relationship you should have with the employer is one of equality. They have the need for labour and you have the labour. They have the money and you have the need for money. It should be a fair exchange with no continued advantage to either side.

The Unions and the Union movement are an effort to offset the discrimination which is inherent in the labour laws of virtually every jurisdiction on the planet. These laws provide for the continued advantage which employers enjoy over the workers and their efforts. Without the Union movement employers would be able to use workers as a disposable commodity, even more so than they do already.

A Union in the workplace does not necessarily mean an end to any of the things which you might consider an advantage pre-Union, unless they are bargained away, or illegal.

Imho, there are very few dishonest "Union bosses" compared to dishonest employers, in either the private or the public sector. Though I wouldn't characterize myself as having been a "Union boss", as I was answerable to several others in the Union hierarchy, I was nonetheless a full-time salaried Union Representative employed to settle contracts, grievances, troubleshoot, conduct meetings etc for a major international Union. Even I had a Union, separate from the one I represented. It was sort of a white collar blue collar job.

Some of the most oppressed workers are just those who Mousethief describes, and they need a Union as much as anyone. The systemic ghettoisation of "pink collar" and white collar workers has ensured the employer's superiority for as long as there's been employers.

My advice is to research the Union in question and the labour laws of your jurisdiction. Ask tough questions, get firm answers, and keep your eye on Union democracy.

Solidarity Forever.

Mooh.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: LR Mole
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 10:49 AM

Once, having this discussion with a friend, he said, "Look: better a corrupt union than no union, because management will NEVER give you a break." Certainly some situations are more complicated than that. But many are just that simple.