|
|
|
Union Question- a business within a business that is publicly owned?
- Thread starter -D-
- Start date
Roadghost
Well-known member
I worked with a union for years and never, ever saw this happen. Cash to sway a vote? That's a textbook union-buster lie. Any organizer knows that offering to pay members to sway a vote would have the whole organizing vote annulled by the Labour Board. Unions rarely organize unless they are approached first by an employee willing to get cards signed. As for what you get for voting for a union, on average union companies offer better pay and better working conditions than non-union companies:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/00902/4168247-eng.html
Union employees remain at their jobs longer than non-union employees. In spite of the union-buster fantasy, unions legally must, and really do stick up for their employees. Unions do have to keep the dues rolling in to pay for their costs. They are always fighting cases before the labour board. In some cases the union has dropped the ball and in other cases they have simply not put for the the effort to defend indefensible employees with a bad attitude. On the whole however, they are successful at protecting employees from hostile management. In the private sector unions are in steep decline simply because competition from lawyers, better labor laws, bad publicity and subcontracted labour has put extreme pressure on them.
mbroyda
Well-known member
never ever saw this happen huh? LMAO, you need one more "ever" in there to really make it sound convincing
Hack
Well-known member
-D-
Banned
Yes, see bold, that explains it nicely.
People are veering off (understandably)
Private companies can do what they want. it is NOT TAXPAYERS $$$
As inreb states, the company belongs to the taxpayers, we hired and paid you based on x therefore how does someone come and setup shop INSIDE the taxpayers company to buffer/undermine what the taxpayer owned company set forth.
As for why a car company failed, don't blame the workers...it was the executives that decided to greenlight ugly cars that the market did not want to buy...the workers just put together their bad ideas.
-D-
Banned
ok let me try it this way
you, me and 100 other ppl work for taxpayers inc. a govt. corp where we review paperwork.
now you and I decide to create a union with the other 100 workers and present demands if not we lock up all the paperwork or hide them until we negotiate
what allows us to just start our company within a company that hired us?
mbroyda
Well-known member
Labour Unions in Canada are organizations that represent Canadian workers in their negotiations with employers. Labour unions engage in collective bargaining with employers to determine issues such as wages, the terms and conditions of work, and worker security.
you are not forming a company within a company, you are forming a worker union within a company, weather its government owned or not makes no difference, and you cannot lock up or hide any of the paperwork, the union negotiates an agreement which binds not only the company but also the members of the union (workers) to certain terms for a certain period of time.
all that is made possible by Canadian labour laws, lots more info available online about that
you are not forming a company within a company, you are forming a worker union within a company, weather its government owned or not makes no difference, and you cannot lock up or hide any of the paperwork, the union negotiates an agreement which binds not only the company but also the members of the union (workers) to certain terms for a certain period of time.
all that is made possible by Canadian labour laws, lots more info available online about that
Last edited:
-D-
Banned
thx
but let's remember that money is involved for the union members to be in the union for the company they are already employed by
its an association, a 'club'. Its not a business. Altougth many unions control vast amounts of money and investments and top union officers draw very good wages, not a business within a business.
Unions were very nessesary at a point in history, its possible the best before date has come and gone, but thats a whole other discussion.
Unions were very nessesary at a point in history, its possible the best before date has come and gone, but thats a whole other discussion.
The relationship between unions and management in most of the former empire is thoroughly broken. My guess, but I am not sure, is it is a British thing. In contrast around the world in other countries unions not only provide an efficient way to negotiate contracts they are trusted partners. In many cases they also have a seat on the BoD.
Unions are also a big part of the process when it comes to Total Quality Management in manufacturing. They are a big part of the process in first world nations like Germany and Japan that embrace TQM and JIT that still have well paying thriving manufacturing.
The problem here, unions fight management instead of working with them. Management fights unions instead of working with them. Both are the problem.
My guess this thread was started as another classic GTAM xxx (unions in this case) are victimizing me.
I have been in the commercial transportation industry for over two decades now, I have worked for nonunion companies and I currently work for a union company. My life is exponentially better where I am now versus previous companies where I was treated like a piece of crap or just another number in their Rolodex, disposable at the push of a button and replaced by someone else with a pulse and a crayon. I also got sick of favoritism, i.e. the bosses newly hired son (who had no experience or time in the company) skimming all the gravy while long tendered faithful employees got handed **** instead.
Not all non union companies are like that and it would be wrong to suggest all are in general, but the bigger they are and the more power they feel they hold over their employees can breed this sort of behavior in the hands of bad management.
I have, as part of my job, being into both large nonunion facilities as well as large union facilities.
It's been both my gathered and personal opinions that employees at unionized workplaces are generally happier, enjoy fairer renumeration, are not easily abused by management or bad corporate culture (MOST importantly), and generally have a better standard of living.
Yes, the CEOs and upper management may have to do with one less luxury car, mansion, or exotic vacation as a result of their employees making a better living wage. Too bad. They still almost always do just fine regardless.
There are are no shortage of "All union employees are overpaid lazy dbags" opinions out there, but that's often a stereotype of people who are looking in from the outside and seldom based on facts. It's also been my observation that many of the same people who are amongst the biggest critics of unions tend to be amongst those who would benefit most by being part of one.
Not always, but sometimes. Again, not stereotyping the other side of things either.
And to be fair, a small sliver of unionized shops I have dealt with over the years did have legitimate problems with the union overstepping or overprotecting to the point of things becoming dysfunctional, but it IS rare. Unfortunately public perception is that it's normal, not rare.
Not all non union companies are like that and it would be wrong to suggest all are in general, but the bigger they are and the more power they feel they hold over their employees can breed this sort of behavior in the hands of bad management.
I have, as part of my job, being into both large nonunion facilities as well as large union facilities.
It's been both my gathered and personal opinions that employees at unionized workplaces are generally happier, enjoy fairer renumeration, are not easily abused by management or bad corporate culture (MOST importantly), and generally have a better standard of living.
Yes, the CEOs and upper management may have to do with one less luxury car, mansion, or exotic vacation as a result of their employees making a better living wage. Too bad. They still almost always do just fine regardless.
There are are no shortage of "All union employees are overpaid lazy dbags" opinions out there, but that's often a stereotype of people who are looking in from the outside and seldom based on facts. It's also been my observation that many of the same people who are amongst the biggest critics of unions tend to be amongst those who would benefit most by being part of one.
Not always, but sometimes. Again, not stereotyping the other side of things either.
And to be fair, a small sliver of unionized shops I have dealt with over the years did have legitimate problems with the union overstepping or overprotecting to the point of things becoming dysfunctional, but it IS rare. Unfortunately public perception is that it's normal, not rare.
Last edited:
It's remuneration not renumeration.
I work union construction (not today however
). Management seems to resent us but they couldn't staff big jobs with out the union labour pool. They've also perfected the technique of pitting worker against worker. I was happier but poorer in non-union. Union work is paint by numbers, non-union you can really stretch your legs problem solving and your worth is recognized if not renumerated.
I work union construction (not today however
). Management seems to resent us but they couldn't staff big jobs with out the union labour pool. They've also perfected the technique of pitting worker against worker. I was happier but poorer in non-union. Union work is paint by numbers, non-union you can really stretch your legs problem solving and your worth is recognized if not renumerated.
Last edited:
I haven't worked a union gig since I was 17, and I dont miss it. Wife is in a union , RN. Shes laughs a lot about the 'guidelines' and workplace reality. If they voted out the union tomorrow I'm not sure she would care either way.
In many places the union is just a reality of having the job, I'm pleased they don't exist in my current industry, and I would actually change roles if one presented itself. I like being able to think for myself, on the days I think.
In many places the union is just a reality of having the job, I'm pleased they don't exist in my current industry, and I would actually change roles if one presented itself. I like being able to think for myself, on the days I think.
|
|
|
|
|