Union Questions

[glossyp]

Re: Union Questions

Thanks for all of the information shared thus far. Like pz, I've already learned a great deal. Prompted by some of the points made in the thread, I asked the neighbor a couple of more questions.

It appears that the high rate of his current union dues is because of the educational requirements he needs to meet to stay in/get promoted. He is attending a four-hour class once a week after work (this is after getting up and being on the job site by 5am which means he is out the door at 4:30am) and he must pass rather rigorous testing at each step. This will continue for the next 18 months. Once he finishes school, the dues will drop some though he is not sure how much.

[Ms_Aloha_Nui]

Re: Union Questions

This is an interesting topic.....I was married to a union journeyman carpenter who was a union journeyman laborer prior to getting into the Carpernter's Union - Local 745....I think..this was a few years ago when Walter Kupau was still the treasurer.
When my former husband joined the union there was a one-time initiation fee (although I don't remember what the amount was as it was back in 1989). I do know that he had to pay it up front before they would even put him on the 'Job Call' list. In addition to that fee, there was a monthly fee (aka Membership Dues) of $25 and then 'working dues' were taken out of his paycheck weekly. The last I knew the working dues percentage was 3% of the his gross pay so it fluctuated whenever his hours fluctuated. I too thought that this was a bit much but we had medical (dental, drug, vision, and chiropractic) coverage for the entire family that we did not pay a penny for. Our co-pays were not much and we had great prescription coverage as well.
There was also a pension plan that was totally employer funded and a 'vacation fund' that was totally employer funded. The last I knew the vacation fund was paying $5 an hour (this money was deposited with a Trust Fund and the members were paid distributions on December 1 of each year.

There were a variety of other benefits such as life insurance that we did not pay for but I don't seem to recall them.

So yes, maybe this guy is paying 'x' amount of in dues and the like but the return on that investment is better than what the banks are paying right now.

Nuff sed!

[Pretender]

Re: Union Questions

True, although I thought I made myself clear that I was talking about all state employees who were eligible for union membership rather than those who are not. Note that I did specifically talk about employees who could make the decision to join (or not join) unions like HGEA, UPW, and so forth. The folks you are talking about have no such choice.

Those state employees who conduct labor negotiations on behalf of the state obviously wouldn't be eligible to join those unions. For that matter, neither do directors and deputy directors of the various departments. Naturally, those state employees are not subject to mandatory union dues, since they have no union to join.

Sorry Frankie, I can see your point. Was a little thrown off by your comment differentiating UH and state employees and your comment that it costs little more to be a union member. At least for HGEA units 3, 4 & 13 and UPW unit 1, you do not have to pay anything more to join the union.

[mapen]

Re: Union Questions

I used to work for one of the local airlines (I won't say which and the 3 hours pay per month rule is how much dues I was paying.

As far as answering the question about what the union did in the workplace, it created a system where all work related scheduling, duties, perks, or security were extended to the most senior workers first. The most senior workers had first crack at their choice of holidays, schedules, parking spaces, breaks, and, as I found out, would be the last to get layed off since the union made sure the newly hired was the first to get fired.

The union created a workplace environment where workers with the most seniority held sway in absolutely *all* matters without regard to the employee's merit, skill, reliability, productivity, or ability to perform the job.

[D'Alani]

Re: Union Questions

The union created a workplace environment where workers with the most seniority held sway in absolutely *all* matters without regard to the employee's merit, skill, reliability, productivity, or ability to perform the job.

In our bargaining agreement there was this one sentence that stated "everything being equal, seniority will prevail" so if you had more skills, or even a better attendance record you could possibly get the job instead of the person with more seniority. So that brought on a few grievances but the language of the agreement always prevailed.

[Frankie's Market]

Re: Union Questions

As far as answering the question about what the union did in the workplace, it created a system where all work related scheduling, duties, perks, or security were extended to the most senior workers first. The most senior workers had first crack at their choice of holidays, schedules, parking spaces, breaks, and, as I found out, would be the last to get layed off since the union made sure the newly hired was the first to get fired.

That certainly is one negative that is common with union shops. It is the same old bellyaching heard by folks on the low end of the seniority totem pole.

But what is the alternative? I can answer that for you.

In non-union shops, I've often seen management play favorites when it comes to things like scheduling, vacations, and perks. Or sometimes, it's the opposite. They punish you with undesireable work shifts or duties because you do things they don't like. (For instance, refusing to perform unethical or maybe even illegal things on the job. Or even speaking out against things you don't agree with.)

Now, before you say that the management you work under are the most fair and impartial people in the world, let me warn you. You'd be surprised at how people can change when they are no longer bound by rules and regulations. Power can and does corrupt. In some hotels, the managers that everybody thought were fair when Local 5 was around suddenly had their own clique of favorites when the place became non-union. In that kind of situation, instead of complaining about incompetent seniors getting first crack at scheduling and vacation times, you could be complaining about the brown-nosers and those on the "inside" with management getting favorable treatment.

Alas, labor unions have their pros and cons. But the same would also be true if you didn't have a union at your workplace. No system is perfect.

[Nords]

Re: Union Questions

That certainly is one negative that is common with union shops. It is the same old bellyaching heard by folks on the low end of the seniority totem pole.
But what is the alternative? I can answer that for you.

If it wasn't for management, there'd be no need for unions...