BS: Do we still need unions?

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 20 Jun 01 - 04:37 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Jun 01 - 11:35 AM

Wow John, thanks for the very informative post! Yeah, to me it kinda boils down to a few things, not least of which is: which would I rather be rewarded for, ass-kissing ability, or tenure? Since I'm lousy at sycophancy, I'll take tenure.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Lin in Kansas
Date: 20 Jun 01 - 09:42 AM


John In Remote Kansas (JIRK) on LIK's cookie
[We gotta get me my own email address. I want my own cookie.]

To Mousethief
According to a small item buried on page 14A of our local newspaper this morning, you get your chance to vote on Thursday. Although I don't have any inside knowledge, based on precedent with Boeing unions, some of the things you might expect:
PC2 clericals could get a local charter much like the shop workers, with strict seniority rules and published payrolls. I believe, however, that you are one of the PC6 people, and you could expect an organization – and eventual contract – more like the existing Engineering and P&A groups.
Washington State permits union shops, where you can be required to be a union member in order to work there. Because Boeing does business in so many places where this is not permitted, it ain't gonna happen. Washington state also permits dues checkoff. What this means is that, if you work in a bargaining unit represented by a union, you can be required to pay dues even if you choose not to be a member of the union.
The shop unions at Boeing in Washington State have been working to get dues checkoff for many years, and may have succeeded for some shop locals, but the company has to agree to make it part of the contract, and it is unlikely to happen for a "professional" bargaining unit. (If dues checkoff is contracted, nonmembers usually pay less than full dues.) There is possibly some justification for this, since the union must "represent" all members of the bargaining unit, whether or not they are members of the union. That's the LAW.
I'm not sure about Philadelphia, Huntsville, California, etc where Boeing has facilities, but Kansas is one of those "Right to Work" states where the dues checkoff is NOT legal.
If representation is approved, you will eventually get a contract. In all likelihood, it will not immediately change things by very much. The important thing for the union to do now is to establish a baseline and terms for negotiation. If they do that well, then they have done well.
Having a contract is a good thing. The next time someone tells you that they prefer to make their own contract – ask to see a copy of it. It don't exist. Some may point to their hiring offer as though it is a contract, but the first time you accept a change in that agreement (your first raise?) that contract is superseded and you are an employee at will (if you made through probation).
One of the MOST important results of having a contract is that the union is entitled to have proof, from the company, that the company is in compliance with the contract. This means that the union will soon know, and will tell you if you ask, what the pay ranges are for your skill code, and the distribution of pay by experience, years of service, and other criteria. While they are generally (in the white collar contract case I would expect for PC6) not permitted to tell you what any specific other person is earning, at least you have a chance to know where you stand within the group.
Even if you could write your own individual contract, you wouldn't know if it was a good one unless you know what everyone else is earning for doing similar jobs. Ask Boeing for yourself if you don't mind being ridiculed – you know how much you'd find out that way.
Especially with Boeing's penchant for "merit" raises – given only to those with warm lips or other meritorious performance qualifications, it sometimes seems – it is also helpful that the union can tell you, in general terms, how those raises are distributed. It's important to know if you are k(colloquial term deleted) impressing the right bosses when you plan for your future.
Boeing at Everett alone has approximately 60 open "human rights/discrimination" complaints at any given time. A very few years ago one of their "facilitators" indicated that they settle about 30 per month. They have only been taken to court once, so far as I know, and that was in a class action involving several hundred claimants. When I tried to consult an attorney about a personal difficulty with Boeing, I was told by one attorney (who answered the receptionists phone by mistake) "Boeing has such a record of harassing attorneys that they would drive me out of my practice if I took a case against them." Two receptionists said that the attorneys in their office would not even consider taking a case against Boeing for the same reason – almost as if they were all reading from the same script. Thirty eight other qualified attorneys simply refused to return my calls. My union was helpful, to a degree, but even with their help it seemed more rational for me to take the early retirement that Boeing offered at about that time.
Hopefully, you will never have a problem. But if you do, do you think you can do it alone?
Representation – yessss maybe. INFORMATION is the most important thing you can get from being in a bargaining unit at Boeing.
Keep your ears up – and good luck.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Jun 01 - 01:11 AM

Are you saying that I'm suggestible?

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 19 Jun 01 - 09:16 PM

I'm not worried, MT's ass is not worth that much! Besides, that was a suggestion, not an order.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 19 Jun 01 - 08:53 PM

kendall - It's not considered proper to "watch your ass" anymore. It's a form of sexual self-harassment! I am shocked that you would recommend such behaviour to Mousethief! A woman in a local business here has brought a lawsuit against herself for this very abuse, and is seeking damages to the extent of $3 million.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jun 01 - 02:16 PM

I was talking to a young friend at the weekend who is working at a mind-numbing job for our (recently-established) minimum wage. In order to get this job he'd had to sign a form waiving his (recently established)right to a maximum working week of, I think, 40 hours. True, nobody twisted his arm to make him sign it, but there was not much option. we still need unions, and I think the unions are missing out by not bringing in the unemployed in some way.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 19 Jun 01 - 01:25 PM

Go for it MT! but, watch your ass, this means WAR LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 19 Jun 01 - 11:24 AM

Kendall, you know I agree with you on 75 to 90% of everything you say of a political nature; all that's really necessary any more is to tease you for your misspellings.

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: wdyat12
Date: 19 Jun 01 - 10:48 AM

Well said psycodelek.

wdyat12

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: GUEST,psycodelek
Date: 19 Jun 01 - 10:42 AM

having had some experience as a steward comittee member etc in the iam i can tell you that A:yes you do need a union& B: you are the union! the members are the deciding factor in any union situation if you need to strike,negotiate or just talk about a problem unionized workers have a step that non union folks dont-i gaurantee that the many times i`ve stepped into an office to confront a supervisor about blatant harrassment-that in a non union shop that man or woman would be gone if the union wasnt there to document,observe&mediate the problem-on the other hand unfortunately there are problems with some union officials toobut being a democratic not autocratic process that is easier to take care of-VOTE EM OUT!! i hope this helps&i hope i havnet wandered on to much-thanks

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Edain42
Date: 19 Jun 01 - 10:25 AM

IMHO as Vice President of my college's student Union, I believe that a properly organised Union is vital. It is unfortunate that some unions have now become corrupted and no longer look out for their member's interests as a top priority. I think you have to be careful and check just exactly what join a particular union entails before commiting yourself to anything.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 08:26 PM

MT, I'm surprised to see that you didn't have more to say than just commenting on my spelling mistake. Not like you at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 08:16 PM

look back in history where company goons killed and maimed workers who simply wanted safe working conditions

You don't have to look back in history, just look further afield to the places where the same type of employers are still doing exacly that. And in many cases they are the very same companies, who've just shifted their scenes of operations to places where the unions and the laws are weaker.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Matt_R
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 07:26 PM

D-O-W-E-N-E-E-D-U-N-I-O-N-S oh no.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Spud Murphy
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 07:21 PM

Every Rheems tank has two unions: one for the hot side and the other for cold.

Spud

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: IvanB
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 07:13 PM

No, that's Rheims.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 06:44 PM

It's a Cathedral too, right?

Alex

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 06:43 PM

LOL!

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: mousethief
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 06:28 PM

Rheems is the brand name of a water heater tank.

alex

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 06:27 PM

There are rheems of anecdotal evidence to support your statement Barry, and, I would agree that unions have gone too far. But, look back in history where company goons killed and maimed workers who simply wanted safe working conditions. Do we want to return to those thrilling days of yesteryear when children worked in sweatshops for 10 cents an hour? To the time when, if you were hurt on the job, you were fired with no recourse? When you were worked like a borrowed mule for 10 to 12 hours a day fgor $8.00 a week? with no health benefits at all? You have a better chance of getting rid of a crooked union boss than a crooked company boss.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Spud Murphy
Date: 18 Jun 01 - 06:11 PM

I really believe it would be extremely difficult to do a whole lot of plumbing without them. Esspecialy plumbing repairs. Can you imagine having to unscrew your whole bathroom just to get at a clogged drain?

Speakin of unscrewin things, I had a friend who (in partnership with his lady friend) was trying to make a baby. With no success.

Turns out, she was left handed, and every time he screwed, she unscrewed.

Spud

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Jun 01 - 10:50 PM

Yeah, Barrie, you've made a lot of good points about corrupt unions, and I would not disagree...

But the reason you can't buy much "made in America" stuff is that big American corporations decided to move a lot of jobs to countries where the people are little more than slaves.

It didn't happen because North American workers unionized.

Until there is social justice (meaning some measure of wage and material parity) in the whole world, not just in the richer parts of the world, this will keep happening. We have got to start thinking and acting as one world community rather than trying to preserve dying social systems behind borders...borders which money can cross in a mere second, at the tap of a computer key.

It's either justice everywhere...or justice nowhere. It's the whole world's freedom that you've gotta fight for now, not just America's.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: bbc
Date: 17 Jun 01 - 09:12 PM

Yup, but it was worth reading. Thanks, Barry.

bbc

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jun 01 - 02:17 PM

That's a very long paragraph Barry. Makes my eyes spin trying to read it.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 11:49 PM

I'd buy american but my american truck was only assemblied here with parts from other countries, I'd have bought my computer american but had no idea if we even made one, didn't get an american TV because my choice was veerrryyyy limited. Are the things I buy more expensive because they're union made or american made & I can't get some of them to last as long though I paid a good deal more for them. I'm watching the Big Dig & it's something like 14 million over budget & it's a locked in union project, ride by toss a granade durning work hours & you're bound to get 15 non working workers who'd fall over each other if they had to do something. I'm still in construction after 30 yrs both non union & union the non union guys come in every day, they'll work hard & they're skilled not only in their own trade (roofing) but well & are skilled in carpentry, sheet metal, masonary & a few other areas & they get paid well & accordingly to their level of skill/s. I've also been part of union crews (10 yrs) when coming in depends on the time of day & how heavy the head is but some will still show up drunk, refuse to get there hands dirty (it's a job for an apprentice & the deadweight can't be fired) wouldn't think of driving a nail & would hold up the job for a few hrs waiting for the GC to send over a carpenter. I think it's time the unions got themselves a reality check & took their hands out of the pockets on the business that provide their members with their daily bread & at the very least formed a partnership where all benifit not just the officials & the shareholders. If only my eyes & ears hadn't been walls the stories that would shock most I wouldn't be able to tell. & by the way, I see some posts above that talk about it's your union if it's bad fix it, try that in a construction union along the northeastern part of the U.S. The union member murder rate in Philly when I was a member in Boston was sky high, in Boston my cousin & I were put on a hit list & this was what my uncles fought for? There are no lesser of 2 evils you either side with yourself & what's right or you don't & swallow what ever comes along. What pisses me off is that the down side of unions never gets any air play as if it was an anti-human thing to do, don't hide the bad from public sight that side needs the most attention & needs to be exposed before any real changes on a national & an international level take place but then again there are to many hands in to many pockets. Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 09:01 PM

Well said, Little Hawk.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 08:53 PM

Yes, we still need unions...well run, responsible unions that have in mind the health and welfare of their membership, and the employer, and the community, and the world at large.

The very same argument follows with: governments, police forces, medical personnel, military forces (defensive ones, that is), churches, and any other such officially organized groups in society.

You've got to keep a close eye on all of these things. They are needed, but sometimes they get way out of hand.

What we don't need is corrupt unions run by greedy union bosses, and we don't need unions that are so adversarial in attitude that they screw up the whole situation to the detriment of all involved parties. I saw one like that in action at a company I know, and things have only gotten worse there...for everyone.

Be that as it may, I shudder at the thought of a society with no unions. Hello, slavery....hello, dark ages.

We actually need a world union that secures basically equal rights for all workers in all areas...in other words, share the world as one people, instead of making the many work like virtual slaves for the few. It couldn't be done overnight...it would have to be phased in a bit at a time...but it would be an ideal worth aiming for.

Gee, that was what the IWW had in mind way back then. Of course, they just called 'em Communists, and arrested them, beat them up, or shot them. "Communist" sure is a handy label when you want to keep the lid on the boiling social pot, isn't it?

Actual Communists, as you may recall, do not like unions one bit when it interferes with their governmental one-party power monopoly. They have some other nasty word to call them, like "counter-revolutionaries" or "subversives". Ha! Tyrants of the right, tyrants of the left...they will always hate unions, and brand them as agents of the other side.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Hillheader
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 08:43 PM

McGrath

Thanks for the comments and to an extent I agree.

However if a person continually feels he is at odds with the committee of the club and cannot change that committee, (the local representatives as just appointed - I have been in four years and yet to see notice of an AGM or election) does he stay as a member of the club? No point in raising the matter, the membership at large do not want to take the time and trouble to be involved.

We do need Unions, but the Unions representatives need to remember just who they represent. I recall the old analogy of Cummunism i.e. "All are equal - but some are more equal than others". Did they all have dachia's by the Black Sea?. My lot were not leading the Union - they were running like hell to try and get to the front!!

The problem we have is that Unions are necessary but once established the rank and file do not devote the time and effort to make sure they are representative so you get a small group of people who are self perpetuating and self effacing. They will do all they can to ensure that they retain the percieved power and position they hold.

There is a limit to the number of times you hit your head on the wall before concluding it's sore - and thus time to stop.

I have three choices. I can accept that I am led by a shower of idiots (why should I - I pay these cretins) or try and change it (not possible - the committee is a closed shop) or resign. It's not my style to back away from a fight - especially where principles are involved -but I see no other way. It's either fight a battle I know I will not win or walk away - making my protest by withdrawing my support.

The bottom line is we do need Unions - but Unions also need us to take an active part.

Davebhoy

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 08:07 PM

Greg, I think that unions indeed have a lot to do with it, in addition to competition in keeping down the cost of goods. A company simply cannot manufacture a television in Rochester, New York for the cost of manufacturing one in Malaysia. And if the Rochester Company tries to compete with the Malaysian Manufacturer, they will find out how just how little the "Made in America" stamp means to the modern consumer. There's no doubt that obscene profits are being made, and that few corporate CEOs are worth anything like the hundreds of millions they are banking yearly. I am really not defending corporate employment and manufacturing practices....I'm just trying to say how I think it is. Now the question is, if a Sri Lankan family is eeking out an existence on a small farm, their lives hanging on the success or failure of a harvest, who are we to say that an opportunity for them to go to work in the Fruit-of-the-Loom Factory for $6 a day isn't a good option for them, taking into consideration their present situation?

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Greg F.
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 06:44 PM

So its OK to exploit the Sri Lankins et. al., as long as they're happy in their ignorance with the pittance that they're getting? I think not.

The reason that companies are moving to the third world is NOT Unions, but GREED; not happy with a fair rate of return on investment, they want obscene levels of return: that's why we're seeing erosion of production.

Need Unions? Absolutely!! Without the backing of my Union & Union Attorney, I'd have been terminated on trumped-up charges. The playing field is NOT level; management always has the upper hand.

Best, Greg

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 04:49 PM

Good point, McGrath. But what workers in this country consider a Living Wage would constitute Impossible Wealth in places like Sri Lanka. One one-hundredth of an American Wage is very reasonable to them. As long as these facts remain, we will see erosion of industrial production among the Developed Nations. And I wonder if we, as consumers, would be willing to pay the much higher prices on goods that would be inevitable should we help the Sri Lankans achieve our wage-level?

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: R!
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 04:46 PM

AND another thing - although the Mister has been retired for a good dozen years, quite a long time ago his union had negotiated company-paid medical coverage for retirees. Last year his $37,000 hip replacement surgery and follow-up rehabilitive therapy was fully paid for. My old pal is healthy, happy, and free of pain and I'll have him around for many more years. We would never have been able to afford it on our own.

A number of years ago I traveled to Tolpuddle to stand by the Martyrs' Tree and silently thank those brave men for taking a stand.

Peace

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 04:39 PM

The workers in third world sweatshops still face "long hours of dirty and dangerous work to put slave wages in their pockets". It's in the interests of workers in the wealthy countries to help them organise, and back them when they do.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 04:26 PM

In the old days, Unions had the power to achieve their objectives by shutting down the operation of the mill or factory, or threatening to do so. Nowadays, the unfortunate fact is that there is a global economy in place, and many companies are multi-national concerns who view labor as simply an intrinsic cost that, when it exceeds a given percentage of the bottom line, must be altered, eliminated, or moved. These corporations have no hesitation in moving their operations lock, stock, and barrel, to third world countries where labor is plentiful and cheap. The old confrontational style (raise our wage or we'll shut you down) no longer holds water. Unions should realize that they have a mutual vested interest with management in keeping their companies as profitable as possible. There also needs to be a perception that the talents required for unskilled assembly line work (bolting the left front wheel on Dodge Caravans) are not so rare that an hourly wage of 20 dollars can be justified.

Unions are confronting a different world than the one of 70 years ago, when American workers faced long hours of dirty and dangerous work to put slave wages in their pockets. The wage base is also much more white collar oriented, with workers performing unique and individual tasks, and negotiating their own salaries with management. The industrial-based economy has gradually been replaced by the entrepeneurial, information-based economy. These are presenting challenges which, I believe, Unions have thus far failed to address.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 03:59 PM

The members rejected the bent deal the union bureaucrats told them to accept, so that means you've got the numbers son your side, davebhoy, so go get 'em. Like any organisation, unions are only as good as the members ínsist on them being.

And that was a good example of something that's been overlooked by a lot of the posts in this thread. Unions aren't just about looking after Number One, they're about using the strength of numbers to protect the weaker and the more vulnerable. Even if you think you'll never be one of those (and you could be wrong), you still need to be part of the organisation that will stand up for them, if you want to be able to respect yourself. That's solidarity, and if you don't believe in solidarity, I'd say you've resigned from the human race.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Dave Swan
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 03:20 PM

We most surely do.

Dave Swan International Association of Firefighters Local 2683

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Hillheader
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 01:12 PM

Our company wanted tie strings to a pay rise. New employees were to be have holiday entitlement capped and must accept Sunday as a rostered work day if the company decided it should be. The Union recommended acceptance of this offer because "It did not affect current employees" and "It was the best we would get". Neither valid reasons in my view and the first is certainly not what unions are supposed to be about. These changes were seen as the thin end of a wedge (change new employees now, come back for the current ones later - playing both groups against each other no doubt).

A ballot was held and the members rejected the offer by 2 to 1. The union has issued a notice saying that the members are to be applauded by their high principled stand in matters which did not directly affect them!!

When I asked were the union leaderships principles were that they could recommend acceptance in the first place, it was blank stares in response.

I support Unions (with a capital U) but struggle to justify continuing in this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 12:40 PM

Kendall,

Not 50 years. I'm gonna be 60 next month. Cannot believe it !

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: wdyat12
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 12:24 PM

America still builds Aegis destroyers, but I can't afford one. I'm not so sure General Dynamics wants to move to China to build US Navy warships after the drydock fiasco. Bath Iron Works would have built the drydock right the first time with union labor.

wdyat12

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 07:48 AM

If the day ever comes that the workers in ,say, Mexico, China, Taiwan, etc. and the workers in the USA, Canada, the UK etc. are all making the same wage, fine. Prices would drop accordingly and we would have a world economy. That would be great. Taint gonna happen, why? GREED. Right now, some of our bigger companies have gone south, not because of high labor coasts (those are passed on to the consumer) but because of their friggin' bottom line! They now get a product made for a fraction of the cost when it was made here, but, do the prices come down to reflect that? Buy American whenever possible. Otherwise you are selling your country down the river.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: GUEST,Mac Tattie
Date: 16 Jun 01 - 04:06 AM

Yes.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Allan C.
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 11:28 PM

What an odd question! Of course we need onions! How the hell can you make a decent stew or even begin to create some good chile without them? They add an amazing amount of flavor to almost any dish. When yellow onions are sauted in melted butter their surprising sweetness becomes wonderfully evident. A nice, thick slice of a big red one can add delicious bite to a sausage and egg biscuit. The white ones can provide the perfect compliment to fried beef liver. Chopped scallions are part of what makes a "wilted" lettuce salad the treat that it is. One of the very best things you can do with onions is...
What?!
Oh.

Nevermind

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: R!
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 10:32 PM

Are the corporate execs greedy? You bet. Are the union bosses self serving? Of course. Unions are necessary, though. How much you gain - or lose - as a union member depends on the skills of your bargaining committee and the willingness of the members to forsake their pay and walk the line. I've been a union member for over 30 years. The union has negotiated some very good benefits for me. It has also protected the lunkheads that can't muster the energy to get out of their own way. That's life. When my employer reduces 10,000 plus jobs, I'll still be at my desk working. My union negotiated a no lay-off clause for the duration of my contract. The eighteen days I spent on strike seem much more palatable than the possibility of unemployment. Union members have a responsibility to be informed and active in order to keep their union honest. Good luck to you.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 09:43 PM

well Im in favour of Unions although they may not always serve the best interests of the workers. Both my parents worked for a large printing/packaging company. My mother full time and my father worked on an oncall basis for a couple of years. when a full time position in his expertise became available he applied for it. The position was offered to a younger pressman from abroad who didnt have the experience but also happened to be English as the manager (My father who was in his early 50s at the time complained to the union which did nothing because from their point of view, a younger worker will pay more dues) it is also against the human rights code to discriminate against an employee on the basis of age. He was asked his age during the interview (although they would have known that anyway) the other employee was 40. Anyway he never got far with human right as they fought it in court and it was hard to prove discrimination. Later the union got greedy, the employees were quite well paid some had $35/hr which in the late 80s was pretty good and still is (even Canadian) but they wanted more as they figured the company was making money. The company opened up a plant in Sparks NEvada and paid people there 1/2 as much and gradually moved all their equipment south and shut down. Ive seen technology change also shut down all the union shops in the graphics prepress industry in Vancouver, 10 years ago they were all unionized now there isnt a single one left. As smaller and more competitive shops opened up and you didnt require people with as much expertise as it was all computerized now the shops with the high salary employees couldnt compete. Recently a large printing company that had been unionized also went out of business putting 50people out of work. All the paper company reps feel it was the high labour costs. But it was mainly dumb management decisions, like selling their old building which was small but instead of buying a bigger place they rented (for a fortune) a huge bldg and only used a 1/3 of it. (and similar decisions). On the other hand I run a small business with 4 employees and it can be a pain when the pressman spoils a job and I have to pay him overtime & the extra paper to do it right.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: kendall
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 09:29 PM

...and 50 years just disappeared like minutes in his mind.. ( Old Blue Ox, by Dave Mallett)

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 09:21 PM

Before there was a Folk Alliance, there was an organization we called HEY RUBE. We got together at a camp in the woods near Stevens Point, Wisconsin and formed H.R. so we, as folksingers, might get a living wage scale as well as health insurance. Utah and me and Tracy Schwarz and about 50 other guys and gals. We were fed up with going on the road for a month and comin' home breaking even or maybe $50.00 ahead. We met many good people and musicians out on our roads less travelled and had the songs and the memories to prove it. But after 30 years of doin' it we woke up to the fact that we were bot twenty years old any more and we'd be retiring some day. Hopefully!!!

The organization did get a health policy but few of us could afford it when it became available. The gig list helped a few; mostly those folks who could've gotten the jobs without the list anyway. (It just gave us some phone numbers.) Later, the Folk Alliance took the Hey Rube idea and did it in a more professional manner---to say the least. I think we in Hey Rube were more in the mold of Woody G. than Stan Rogers and/or John McCutcheon.

Now I've been forced by my health (or lack thereof) to "retire". I find myself wishing there had been a union---a strong body that could, through solidarity, get some of the gravy. But, alas, we did it the only way we could---our ethic and individualism, as is the case with many Americans, insisted we were like the trappers of old--on our own hook. It was a grand run, but maybe we should've taken at least some of the elders advice way back when.

Cesar Chavez had the idea. For folks who have little or nothing, a union is at least some self esteem. At most, it can make for a decent standard of living when various forces conspire to keep poor people "in their place".

Unfortunately, many unions used their success to turn good Democrats into Republicans who turn their backs on the unions as soon as the checking account gets over a few thousand bucks; the same folks then take personal credit for their success and, looking back forgetfully, wonder why they might need a union.

We do have short memories sometimes.

I'm no better. I was never in a union except when I drove a cab for a couple o' years.

Maybe I'm payin' the price.

I've told Big Mick Lane here in this forum how much I admire him and his work. I talk the talk-------where he walks the walk !!!!

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Gareth
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 08:37 PM

"So join the Union while ye may, Don't wait untill your dying day, Cos that may not be far away, Yer durty Blackleg miner O,"

Speaking as Treasurer MSF Cardiff 668 Branch I look at it this way. Your Union subscription is a cheap form of insurance against employer risk. I should know, earlier this year I had a work problem, a non union shop (office) a supervisor who did not like me possibly because I was better qualified and experienced. I had a need for legal intervention. MSF dealt with the matter, and the problem was solved without any nastyness. Otherwise I would have been out, and at the age of 50, with a history of heart trouble, the odds on me finding paid employment here in South Wales would have been small. And I have a Dog, and Computer to support.

Yes we still need Unions - the trouble is many people do not realise that they need a Union untill it is to late.

Join Now ! When you realise you need one it may past the time to join.

Gareth.

PS Bush/the right/Tory Party are against Unions - the question is why ??.

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 07:52 PM

"Fellowship is life, and lack of fellowship is death" - William Morris (A Dream of John Ball)

Subject: RE: BS: Do we still need unions?
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 15 Jun 01 - 04:58 PM

YES At the school where I work we are currently going through a very bad situation and without the help and support of the union it would have ended in a number of teachers becoming ill but because we were able to act as a group with backing the management are having to take notice and action is finally (hopefully not too late)being taken.