×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Unions
9

Unions

Unions

(OP)
So, are they a good thing or a bad thing, neither, both?  I have not worked with unions so do not offer an opinion one way or the other.  I've seen them mentioned within a few individual posts and thought to start a thread for discussion.

RE: Unions

WOW!  That's a loaded question that is likely to get a heated debate.  I'm hesitant to respond simply because of the emotionally charged subject this is.  I'm sure several people are curious about this thread, but are unsure of how to tactfully state their views.  I know I am, but here it goes.  Since this is going to be a personal opinion/biased subject, I'll try to explain my bias.

I grew up in a blue collar home.  My father was a factory worker and represented by a union.  The union saved him and hurt him equal amounts.

Personally, I think unions are outdated.  They served their purpose during the industrial revolution when working conditions were miserable and corporations abused their employees.  Lately, unions serve no purpose because the economy was hot and white and blue collar workers alike were better off on their own.  Well, the (US) economy has gone south again and unions seem to have some value, but they need to be redefined.  Bringing back a union organization like decades ago will only hurt the represented.

When I went to work for an aerospace company as an engineer, I was represented by their engineering union, whether or not I joined the union.  I couldn't negotiate my own contract so I got stuck with crap I couldn't use and couldn't get benefits that were useful.  Then, we went on strike.  Being raised in a union house, I understood the importance of picket lines.  I chose not to cross the line, but I also chose not to picket.  I didn't spend years in school earning a degree to walk the picket line.  In the end, I didn't get any pay for the months on strike (thankfully I had a hefty savings) and since I wasn't a member of the union, I didn't get any backpay.  BUT I WAS STILL REPRESENTED BY THEM SO I HAD TO TAKE WHATEVER CONTRACT THEY NEGOTIATED.  At least I still had the respect of my coworkers by not crossing the line.  Those that did cross the line got alienated once the strike was over.  It would have been helpful if our union would have had a guaranteed strike fund to help those people with families afford to eat.  I can see why some crossed and others didn't, but that's why I don't care for unions.

So now you know my viewpoint and why I am biased towards that viewpoint.

RE: Unions

I have watched more than a few plants collapse under the weight of arcane union contracts and the abuse of union power.  Unions make it too difficult to fire dead weight or even promote good people based on merit.  Union OT rules promote malingering until that time-and-a-half clock starts a-tickin'.  One IE I knew said the most important thing to know on his job was where the union guys hide parts.  Thanks to unions, Racine, WI is turning into a ghost town.

On the upside, I have seen the difference between union and scab work in the building trades (mostly HVAC).  Union work was always of noticeably better quality.

I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.

RE: Unions

2

Unions themselves are neutral.  They serve to protect the workers from the imbalances of power that exist in the workplace.

It is how unions use or abuse their power that makes them good or bad. That is the same as management. They too can use their power in the workplace for either good or bad, management is not inherently good or bad either.

If management is perceived by unions as abusing its power then the union will react with a hard line. Work to rule campaigns, strikes, grievances are all part of the unions parcel.

If management is not abusing its power and is treating the workforce with respect and doing so in a fair and impartial manner, then unions will also respond in a fair and impartial manner. Problems will be resolved and discussed without the issues being personal.

Of course that’s in a perfect world and we humans do not live in a perfect world.  Lots of people on both sides of the table come to the meeting with loads of old baggage. This baggage gets in the way of doing anything productive for both parties.

I think that unions would do a lot better if they cleaned house. They know who the deadbeats and incompetents are among their ranks. Kick some of them out and act more like labour brokers where they guarantee a good worker, skilled in his trade and one who follows safe work practices. Remember worker safety was one of the main starting points for unions. My biggest fights with unions has been when I have removed workers from site due to their unsafe practices.  (These comments apply more to construction unions that use a hiring hall than manufacturing unions.)

Unions must also recognize that management has some rights in the workplace. One of those is to make a profit. If the union uses (or abuses) its power in the workplace to make the company unprofitable then the company will fold and the work will go elsewhere, often overseas.

Two parting observations:

1) Unions are among the worst employers. When I worked for the government, the union representing the clerical workers had their clerical workers go out on strike. The workers simply wanted to have the same contract as the members got from the government.

2) Union management is made up of people who are on leave from their normal worker position to serve in the union. If they leave the union management they will take a drastic loss in pay and status. This high pay comes out of the pockets of those poor downtrodden workers that the union management is claiming to represent.


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com

RE: Unions

Can't argue too much with your comments above.  Just a few other slants on unions:

1.  Unions exist to provide power/leverage to a job/career when the large supply of individuals in that job/career exceed the demand.  Back in the industrial revolution, there was an increasing supply of urban "labor" who could be mistreated by the "owners" because the owner could simply fire them individually and hire 20 more like them.
    Point:  Unions originally represented high-supply low-skilled worker bees.

2.  Other than explicit laws, there is no check on union power.  As the union gathers in more careers under its umbrella, owners are forced to deal with an equivalent to labor-extortion..."pay us X or else we'll put you out of business".
     Point:  Unions have no natural check on their power.

3.  Labor unions tend to de-professionalize and de-motivate careers.  My wife is a public school teacher in a right-to-work state in the US.  Many of her co-workers claim to be "professionals" and try to behave as such, but with the union hovering over them, they end up a sorry bunch as many are not motivated to perform beyond what their "contract" demands and do the absolute minimum to satisfy the contract.  No one is ever fired or feels threatened with poor work causing employment problems.
     Point:  Unions take the fizz out of professionalism.

4.   Labor unions will always tend toward political activism because of point 2 above.  They create Political action committees to force/sway politicians into their camp by promising blocks of votes from their membership.  Individual union members are forced to pay dues which support politicians or laws that are contrary to their own conscience.
     Point:  Unions get political fast, and make democracy a joke.

RE: Unions

JAE

I cannot argue with your point #1 since it is simply a historical fact.

I disagree somewhat with point #2, there is one check on their power, except it’s removed from their actions. If unions make costs increase to the point where the company is unprofitable it will go out of business. The unions will blame this on bad management or foreign competition, the management will blame this on foreign competition or high unionized labour costs. Foreign manufactures if asked, would blame this on bad management and high unionized labour costs (or take the credit for being better managers.)

Point #3 I also agree with. That sort of behavior is what I was referring to where I think that unions should start to act as labour brokers where by hiring union workers, management is assured that they will perform to some minimum standard. Of course in practice this would be highly subjective, but there are always some workers that everyone knows are shirking their duties and misusing the power of the union. The best union reps that I have worked with will not always take the worker's side if the worker is clearly in the wrong.

Point #4 is one that I believe applies to all special interest groups be they unions, or any other special interest group.  Any special interest group will, on the theory that the squeaky wheel gets the grease be able to mount a concerted political effort and have an effect far beyond their numbers. For example the NRA has only 3 million members but is a major player in the gun control debates.




Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com

RE: Unions

RDK - your point on point 2 well taken.  No direct limit on power but ultimately they hurt themselves (witness the US auto industry in the late 1970's and 1980's when Toyota et al took over.

On point 4, I always end up relating to what my wife is doing in the teaching biz.  If you read any of the material from the NEA (National Educational Association) it is very slanted toward getting more money into public schools and supporting the party that promises the cash to supporters.   This is a far cry from engineering societies and associations that focus on the technical aspects of the profession.

The NEA spends a far less amount of their time and money on developing new teaching methods and concepts than they do in the contract negotiation/politica arena as compared to engineers.  

RE: Unions

To answer a few comments, unions don't tell their members to go out on strike, the members decide themselves, it is the union leadership that simply organizes the the strike. It is more difficult to end a strike, however. A recent case in the UK involving firefighters saw a negotiated settlement and an end to a strike, even though most members of that union wanted to continue the strike - so much for militant union leaders.

The second point about unions delivering block votes for politicians doesn't apply in democracies where there is a secret ballot. In the UK the unions founded and support the Labour party, even though many of its members actually vote for another party. Most union members are biased towards the Labour (democratic) party however, probably because of their social convictions.

Unions do work where there is honest and open discussions between the management and labour, and are usually welcomed by management as a means of discussion with a single representative person. Any negotiated change in working practices is usually agreed upon by most of the membership and is accepted by all of the membership.

They also serve to protect those in the workforce against some management who would prefer to see safety and conditions deteriate to increase their profits, which sadly still happens today as it did yesterday. Where they can go wrong, however, is not to consult with their membership, when they are often seen as another arm of management.

RE: Unions

corus...your second paragraph - well, it sounds fine and I agree that individuals still vote their own conscience in a secret ballot.  But in a union, you get inundated with quite a bit of one-sided propaganda for the party line and the "advertisements" by the union tend to be very convincing to the rank and file.

The point I was making, however, was not that the votes get guaranteed by the union, just that all their concerted efforts go to that end instead of toward a professional role of aiding and advancing the profession.  

RE: Unions

(OP)
Interesting comments, both historical and otherwise.  Perhaps some contributors can offer some tips\insights on working within union environs.  From the political action side, even though the rank and file members vote according to their own consciences, the union itself can endorse and financially support candidates.  Which would have the larger effect.  I would think financial support.

Keep em coming

RE: Unions

To work in a union environment is much the same as working in a non-unionized environment.

Treat all people with respect.
Be honest with all.
Be fair to all.

If the environment is so poisoned by the past conduct of either or both management and the union so that nothing can realistically happen then get out.

I worked at one industrial plant where they had an informal policy of hiring their employee’s children who were university students for summer positions. One student returned to work for the plant after graduation, in a non-unionized position. This EIT was making less as a junior engineer than he had made as a floor worker the summer before.

This plant had different washrooms for hourly unionized and salaried non-unionized positions. One day the poor fellow was leaving the plant and on his way out stopped and used the unionized washroom. He was seen by people with whom he had worked for the past few summers and who had worked with his father for 20 tears.

A grievance was filed against a managerial person using the unionized washrooms and the EIT had to formally apologize to the unionized workers. He overnight went from being a friend to the unionized workers to having the strongest anti-union sentiments I have seen in a long time.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com

RE: Unions

I'm suprised that there should be discrimination in the workplace against union and non-union as in the UK it is illegal. In the US I have no idea.
I think that the problem doesn't lie with being in the union and being allowed to use the washroom but that management have their own washrooms and flatly deny those facilities to the general workforce. In kind, the workforce deny the management the use of their washrooms, and who can blame them. Sadly these demarkations only cause divisions between workers and mangement and heighten the 'them' and 'us' attititude prevalent in some industries.
The Romans had the best idea where everyone sat down together. Face facts, if your suit is down around your ankles, we all look the same.

RE: Unions

(OP)
Corus,

I have heard that in some cases, a union can be very agressive when it came to protecting their "turf".  I had a colleague (his story) who had several grievances filed against him because he went and retrieved a piece of equipment that he ordered for evaluation and set it up (about 3 hours work).  The grievances filed against him were from 3 different unions, one was for helping unload the equipment upon arrival, the second union filed because he moved it to where he was going to evaluate it, and the third filed because he plugged it in and hooked it up.  He about lost his job.  When he order a competitive piece of equipment for side by side comparison with the first, he allowed the process to take place "normally".  Two weeks later, the equipment was in place for him to test with.  He was so disgusted he left vowing never to work in a union shop again.

I am perhaps hopefully thinking that tales like these are not commonplace (anymore?).  If posters have advice for working with unions feel free to chime in.

RE: Unions

Actually, his story is not too far off.

I got disciplined once because a union worker was lifting a heavy object with a small overhead crane.  He was operating the the crane with one hand, and guiding the part with the other.  All he was doing was turning the part over to work on the backside on his workbench.  Since this was a quick task, he didn't balance the load properly and the part would have fallen, crushing his hand had I not helped.  A supervisor saw me and reported me for performing unionized tasks.  The only thing that saved me was that fact that safety was an issue.

A second similar story deals with setting up load cells to get force values on a tool I was modifying.  The test had to be done in conjunction with assembly line operations, so the timing was mid second shift.  Problem is, we would never know when specifically (day and time) we were able to perform the tests because the line may be accelerated or delayed for any number of reasons.  Since we needed the union transports to move the load cells and DAQs, we missed several weeks worth of opportunities trying to schedule the equipment move.  Finally, the test engineer got permission to transfer the equipment himself in his own vehicle so we could set up for testing.  Thankfully, the Test engineer is the one who actually sets up the load cells (installs them on the hardware to measure) so we didn't have to wait for union crews on that.  But, we did have to wait for a union electrician to come and plug in the DAQs to the wall outlet.  HOW FRIVOLOUS!  We stopped the line for 3 hours waiting for him to do what a kindergardener can do safely.  He was supposed to unplug it too, but we said screw it and did it ourselves so we could go home.  Thankfully, no one reported us for that.

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

RE: Unions

Luckily I have never had the kind of first hand experiences that PSE and Swertel describe.  I do not work in a manufacturing envirionment and would not want to.  I have too many friends who have come close to losing their jobs due to union complaints for actually touching a part.

The examples I've heard about union members and the filing of these complaints has really turned me against unions in general.  I would never take a job where I had to walk on eggshells every day in fear that some union member would complain and get me fired.

RE: Unions

I think it should be remembered that where demarcation exists and unions have their 'turf' it is because management have agreed to this, and in some cases insisted on it. The reason is safety. A job may take only a few minutes but it can only take a split second to injure someone. Letting any untrained person do a job can lead to accidents or death. This also leads to the company being sued for malpractice or negligence, which in the US is something not to be dismissed, I hear. This could also lead to the closure of the company and subsequent loss of jobs. There will always be silly examples of someone refusing to do a simple job, however the principle is sound and should be adhered to if you all want to keep your jobs, and lives.

RE: Unions

Keep in mind that "union" is a collective and "union members" are human beings, like you and me, who belong to that collective.  I worked 11 years in a union shop. I will acknowledge that there good and bad people who were union.  

Typically the bad people were either distrustful of management/white collar (often for good reason), or else they were just unpleasant in general (and other union members disliked them as much as we did).

The good union guys were great to work with, but knew the system.  I worked with a test technician for 6 years whom everybody in my department highly respected (and treated that way).  It was interesting that our opinions of him were in contrast to some engineers' opinions of him at times--some thought he was a first-rate jerk. Why?  Because they treated him like a monkey, instead of the bright guy that he was. He had an easy response for them--kill them with red tape.  While the rude engineers were filling out their (contract-required) paperwork and grumbling, we coasted to the front of the line. George took care of the paperwork for us (he didn't have to by contract; he liked us and wanted to repay our kindness in the most direct way he could).

In short, treat people with respect (as Rick suggests).

One note--I do not mean to imply that any people with negative stories were not respectful; I'm just relating my own experience.

Brad

RE: Unions

Brad

Some of the negative experences may be the result of other people's disrespect.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com

RE: Unions

I have never worked in a union plant where there was not an adversarial relationship between management and the union. I have worked on both sides of the fence, and can understand the viewpoint that each group adopts. If you treat your employees poorly, there will be repercussions. An example of this is a strike. During strikes, the members of the management ranks here are forced to work on the shop floor. They work the jobs that the union employees normally do, and working directly under the managers that the union employees report to gives you an entirely new perspective. Several of the management people gained a new appreciation for the position that the union takes on specific issues.
I myself have had more problems dealing with managers than with union employees. And strikes usually bring out some pretty volatile reactions from management. Not fun.


RDK states, "To work in a union environment is much the same as working in a non-unionized environment.

Treat all people with respect.
Be honest with all.
Be fair to all."

This has never been my experience. Not even close.


                                          Maui

RE: Unions

I read a union "war story" recently.  Turns out a generic tier-II manufacturer had recently had a union move in.  The manufacturing company brought in a nationally known "negotiator" to manage the "changeover" - (i.e. Pull the union out from under the company, if he could.)

This man's name was Tom Foley, but you might better recognize him as the guy that recommended to President Reagan to fire all the Air-Traffic control guys during the notorious 80's strike.

The first thing Mr. Foley did was to encourage the payroll department to stop automatically deducting Union dues from employee paychecks.  Well, it might seem like a small change, but when the employees had to start sitting down and writing out checks to the union it affected their "allegiance" considerably.  Half the membership dropped. Over the course of two years of this type of "negotiation", the local Chapter finally pulled out of the company.

A brilliant, simple, straightforward solution.

Quite surprisingly, however, was a statement that Mr. Foley made in the article.  He said "Any manufacturer that gets a Union chapter undoubtedly deserved it..."  

He goes on to say "Employees will work for crappy wages, benefits, and long hours.  You start neglecting safety and working conditions, however, and you are just asking for trouble.  Keep everyone safe, and your risk drops significantly."

RE: Unions

Unions should learn the wisdom of cooperative confrontation, and that is not double talk. Management is there to run the plant to carry out a manufacturing or other mission at economical cost. The workers are there to work and earn money to support themselves and their families. This is simple enough.

My experiences in a union environment have generally been negative:
- During a construction project one of the steel workers objected to my contracting with a small non-union fence erector. I sent the crew home and called them back a few weeks later after the construction was complete.
- I had some words with the union steward in my office, and he wouldn't let me get a word in edgewise. I said that if he wouldn't let me speak in my own office then get the hell out of here!
- The plant was closed when operations were moved to an operating alternate location. The union was warned, but they continued to make trouble. The plant is now leveled to the ground.

RE: Unions

One of my first job interviews after retiring from the military was with the railroad company serving Southern California.  There were five interviewers, one of them the union rep and he had full voting powers on who to hire.  Of course I did my song & dance routine of how I will use my military experience to be a productive worker and will try to help others every chance I get.  The union rep said: "we are interviewing you for a technical job, if I catch you lifting a cargo, I will have you fired."  That was a pretty shocking statement to me.  There were 15 other people interviewed that day and we were getting free lunches anyway so I stayed but planned to leave after lunch.  We were supposed to stay after the meal to listen to some pep talk from the Big Guy and a video presentation of the company.  As I walked to my van after eating, I also noticed 11 others heading for the parking lot.  I lit a smoke just to observe, maybe they just want to relax in their vehicles.  They all left, from that experience I never had a warm fuzzy for unions, first impressions are powerful.  I suspect the union guy did the same stunt on all the interviewees.  

RE: Unions

One thing that you have to realize about a lot of union executives is that they are voted into their positions from the rank and file workforce.

This means that if the janitors are unionized, it will be a janitor who will be the union president. While I do not want to be disrespectful to janitors, they usually are janitors because they do not have the capabilities to be senior executives or to earn big money on their own. (I picked janitors because when I worked for the government one of the union executives was a janitor.)

Some union executives are good managers who with a different start in their careers may have ended up in a management position or actually want what is best for their rank and file but there are some who are simply janitors playing at executive managerial levels.

So now you have a janitor, one who has worked his way up through the union ranks to a senior level. These positions are usually elected. If he loses an election he will return to cleaning toilets at night.  If he continues to win the elections he will continue to get a significant paycheck from the union, meet with senior executives in boardrooms and travel around the country with an expense account, negotiating contracts and doing other things that he would only get to clean up after as a janitor.

How does he get elected? He has to impress all the other janitors that he is standing up for them against the big bad management. He starts off at a shop steward level and works his way up through the union hierarchy with the same method of operation. He takes the workers side to absurd extremes in every instance.

It doesn’t matter if the worker was disciplined because he was clearly at fault, he takes the issue beyond normal advocacy for the workers rights, he accuses management of having a bias against that particular worker. He threatens to have technical guys fired if they lift cargo, he blusters in negotiations and threatens strikes and walkouts (See brothers and sisters, we were forced to strike and walk picket lines in the rain because of the bad evil management practiced here. Excuse me while I get back in my limo and go sit in a fancy boardroom and try to talk some sense into those SOB’s.)

I often think that in some instances the union executives exploit the workers more than does management.

In other words what is in the best interest of the workers, having a secure job with low conflict levels and mutual respect in the workplace is not in his best interest. Conflict is what gets him elected and re-elected. Conflict is what gets him the four-fold increase in salary, the expense account and the recognition.

Conflict is what you get.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com

RE: Unions

RDK, Very well stated and thought out!  A star for that.

What does anyone feel unions could do to improve their image or their effectiveness?  It seems as though unions have become pretty toothless in the wake of all the outsourcing and international trade agreements.  Should unions go global?  Possibly align themselves with human rights organizations?

RE: Unions

'Wish I said that' response to the railroad union chief in zqew05's story: "If that cargo had fallen on you, I'm sure you would change your mind."

RE: Unions

funnelguy,
You ask a very good question.  In many ways, the unions in the USA have accomplished all the goals that they initially sought a century or so ago, and then some.  Now a serious issue is the loss of jobs in the USA to lower wage countries, including engineering jobs.

It seems counterproductive for unions to try to stop a company from subcontracting with non-domestic vendors.  The real solution would seem to be getting serious about organizing workers in the low-wage countries.

The early years of union building in this country were brutal, though, and it would probably be worse in other places today if the unions try it there.  Still, that's what apparently needs to happen.

RE: Unions

I do not wish unions to go away because I grew up in an Asian country where business is almighty.  On the other hand, unions have become almighty and abusive themselves.  Unions have become a tool for union leaders to enrich themselves financially and powerwise.  I am for unions if they truly represent the wellbeing of the majority.  That includes working with management so they don't end up closing and outsourcing the factory because of confrontational attitudes, especially trying to protect one bad apple because that is how union reps maintain a good reputation with the workers, they don't really care for the common people, just themselves.  

RE: Unions

In response to RDK and the example of janitors. I did some research on the background of union leaders and how they are trained as they progress up their ladder. Bill Morris of the GMB union is an example of an immigrant engineer who became the leader of one of the biggest unions in the UK, and who now sits on many advisory councils. Another example is Ronald Reagan, a one time trade union activist, and once an actor and, some will say, was always an actor, who became president. This is his quote from the ronaldreagan.com web site :

"I'd had to join the union and wasn't very happy about it. Make me join the union, whether I wanted to or not, I thought, was an infringement on my rights. I guess I also was a little uncertain as to why actors needed to have a union.


But as I spoke to some of the older career actors I met at Warners and discovered how much they'd been exploited in the past, I began to change my mind. Major stars had no trouble negotiating good contracts and working conditions for themselves but that wasn't the case for the supporting players, many of whom had been blacklisted by the studios and deprived of work after they'd tried to form a union. Once I'd become a believer in the union..."

I've no doubt Ronald Reagan thought he was a good trade unionist, and also thought air traffic controllers (for example) were bad trade unionists. There are also good and bad companies, CEOs, and people in general. That's life, but life is better if you're a star and not a supporting player. Some people recognize that and become leaders, even if they did start off in a supporting role to a monkey.

RE: Unions

3
Just a quick comment from someone who has his life affected daily by this issue.  

My company recently settled with it's union, giving each member a $3K signing bonus, and some very nice guaranteed raises for the next several years.  Two days later they announced that the company was in "hard times" and the benefits and overtime structure of the entire salaried workforce was going to be modified.  This is the third time in two years that a gift to the unionize employees is going to be shouldered by the salaried work force.  

We currently have our best and brightest Engineers leaving in droves, knowing that the company does not value them, and those that are staying are talking about forming a salaried union just to protect what we have from being given to the currently unionized force.  I myself am looking for another job.  

RDK had it right.  Unions have become too powerful and are not focused on helping the workers as much as they are on perpetuating their own existence.  The old ways are out of date.  We need to come up with something new or we will price ourselves right out of business.

DP

RE: Unions

dporte17,
More than 20 years ago I worked for a Fortune 500 company which almost exactly duplicated your current situation.

The division I worked in had instituted pay freezes and benefits cuts for salaried workers.  The union struck when their contract ran out.  Management tried to extract the same concessions from the union, but the membership was having no part of that.  So, many of the salaried workers went out to the shop to make product as best we could.  I was physically threatened by 2 spineless wonders while getting my morning coffee at a 7-11.  Ultimately, mamagement gave in to union demands and a contract was signed.  Some of the more obnoxious machinists would brag about their paychecks to the salaried employees.

Every possible mistake that could be made, was made.  But all of these mistakes were the fault of management.  Management chose to enact a unilateral wage freeze instead of instituting layoffs based on productivity.  Management chose to allow differing compensation between salaried and union personnel.

I asked a HR director what he thought the effects of those events would be.  He allowed as how "these are challenging times", but didn't see any basic lack of soundness in the actions.  Amazing.  They laid him off before I quit.  My department went from 6 to 3 to 2 to 1 when I left.  HR couldn't believe I would get a 33 percent raise "in the current economy".

My division was merged with another division at the same location.  Both failed and no longer exist.

When management ceases to manage, the best and the brightest are the first ones out the door.  Certainly the unions share in the blame, but aren't the failings properly laid at the feet of management?  Management needs to concentrate more on productivity, and less on cutting costs.  Especially when they don't have the guts to do it properly.  If you reward mediocrity, you will get mediocrity.

Sounds like you are working for a loser company.  Keep your chin up, keep doing the work, and look for another company.  A company with some vision.

RE: Unions

Unions are nothing more than an evil, bloodsucking cancer in this day and age.  It has always been my philosophy that if you don't like your job, LEAVE!!!  Don't try to strong-arm a company that you don't like working for in the first place to pay you a higher wage and more benefits to inefficiently perform your job.  It's un-American, egocentric, self-centered, and it is killing our great nation!

RE: Unions

To: ornerynorsk
I don't know what country (or planet) you are from, but here on Earth in the USA job-hopping isn't as easy for engineers as it used to be.  This is because of:
1.  Downsizing, right-sizing, PIPs ("Profit Improvement Programs"), etc. = layoffs;
2.  Unbridled corporate mergers which almost always result in 1., above;
3.  High immigration rates as a result of Congressional give-away programs -- viz. H1B and L1 visas -- and refusal to control the borders (numbersusa reports that 80% of US population increase in the last decade has been due to immigration!);
4.  Offshoring, where US companies avoid taxes and enjoy cheap labor (and engineering) by setting up operations on foreign soil.


Some corporations raise avarice and arrogance to an art form by importing workers and then forcing the US workers to train them before being canned.

There are probably more reasons, too, but these are probably the most pernicious.

It might still be possible in some parts of the country to change jobs on a whim, but to many, if not most of us, that door is closed.

RE: Unions

Bruce is correct in that job-hopping doesn't solve the problem as most companies have similar terms and conditions with only slight variations. In the UK this is because employers are part of the EEF, the Engineering Employers Federation, where they decide amongst themselves future policies that they would like to impose. You could call it a union but that would be unfair. It would be no surprise if the USA didn't have such 'unions' too.
I was once told that the removal of overtime pay was necessary because most other companies didn't pay overtime pay. To me this ridiculous argument seemed to be a good reason to keep overtime pay as it would then attract people to the company. Having being 'synergised' and downsized some time later, the company eventually folded.
Of course you could always job-hop to another country like China where they don't have unions.

corus
http://www.corusresearch.com

RE: Unions

Unreal.  I've heard similar stories, though.  Makes you wonder if unions care anything at all about their credibility or public perception.

RE: Unions

Check out www.nrtw.org to see what unions REALLY think of their members.
(Hint:  Cash cows)

RE: Unions

I don't like unions because they expend their resources on politics instead of the little guy and they are abusive of their powers.  Notice that the union leadership spends membership money on their generous expense accounts.  But unions are a counterbalance to abusive management.  So.... where do we have a way to influence a positive outcome?  A highly expereienced Safety Officer at my production facility was offered twice the amount of salary as what he should normally get.  Why?  Supply and demand.  The company was desperate for a safety guy or else the feds will shut us down so they did what needed to be done.  The lesson here is:  be proactive, find a niche job, keep your skills up-to-date so you are in demand.  One last thing, Aa lot of jobs can not be outsourced oversea..... LEARN THAT JOB !!!

RE: Unions

ZQEW05 says "unions are a counterbalance to abusive management."  Wish it were so!  Today's reality is that the unions do not ask the workers if they want to be represented.  They go directly to management to insist on unionization of the work force.  This is not always met with resistance because it relieves the management of having to manage employees on an individual basis -- performance reviews, wages, etc.  It is all done by all-inclusive "exclusive bargaining" contract.  Inclusive because it includes all employees in the "bargaining unit."  Exclusive because it excludes individual bargaining or any other group bargains.  Although union wages might be higher, the cost can apparently be offset by savings in the industrial relations department and management man-hours not expended on employee management.

According to NRTW, the unions are doing this because they have found that the employees do not want to be represented.  As a result, the unions were losing too many representation elections.

I realize that I might sound anti-union.  And, I guess I am -- as they are presently manifested.  However, I think the union concept is fundamentally good and should serve as a foil against abusive or incompetent management, as ZQEW05 suggests.  Unfortunately, unions started with good reasons and good intentions eventually fell victim to the activists with an ax to grind and few scruples as to how the grinding gets done.  I suspect that this is because the other members don't pay close enough attention to figure out what is happening until it is too late.  I have seen this happen in other, non-union organizations.

RE: Unions

BruceP,

Point well taken, I never worked in a union shop but my wife did for about two years then she quit out of frustration because good job performance was not a factor in pay raises or promotions.  You have a point wherein companies use the union as a tool to get people to do their bidding.  I am profoundly anti-union as it is practiced in the present context but I do not wish for them to go away.  If only the government can find a legal mechanism to eliminate the unions' power to dominae and intimidate union members in general.  Unfortunately our politicians are too beholden to union powerbrokers

RE: Unions

In my view, unions played a very important role in the development of our country (I'm in Canada BTW, but I think it applies equally in the US).  That said, I think the role of unions in society is diminishing, and unless they evolve, they will become obsolete.  Unfortunately they will not just disappear, but mostly likely drag down significant portions of the North American economy with them.  

Right now the people in the world who need unions don't have them (the people in developing nations who often aren't given the basics necessities of life through work) while many of the people who have unions don't need them!  

BruceP - nice link BTW!  The other side of the story.

Dave.

RE: Unions

(OP)
Good post dporte17.  A star for that.

RE: Unions

Absolutely!

RE: Unions

As unions in the USA represent only 20% of the workforce it's difficult to imagine how they can bring down the american economy, still, when things go wrong it's convenient to have a whipping-boy somewhere.
Given the low number of holidays americans have compared to the rest of the world, together with the continual erosion of employment conditions/insurance etc, and the proposed removal of over-time pay, they're probably as relevant today as they were yesterday in both developed and under developed countries.

corus

RE: Unions

Unions are out-dated.

I worked for one and the only problems, as I see it, that I had on the job were caused by the Union.

The non-union workers I talk to don't want a Union.

The 'hard-working' union workers I talk to don't want a Union.

The only people I talk to that want a Union are lazy and stupid union workers and if it wasn't for their Union they would not have the job that they complain about regularly.

RE: Unions

(OP)
Corus,

Could you bring down a building if you took out 20% of its foundation?  While I believe that unions still have significant economic influence, I would say that the greater impact that unions (in the US) have today lies in the political arena.

Regards,

RE: Unions

Not having done the calculation, I would have thought that a 4 sided building would still stand if one of the walls was removed (25%). although the building wouldn't be very comfortable to work in without the contribution from that 25%.

As far as those wanting a union being lazy and stupid, I again refer to Ronald Reagan's words :

"I'd had to join the union and wasn't very happy about it. Make me join the union, whether I wanted to or not, I thought, was an infringement on my rights. I guess I also was a little uncertain as to why actors needed to have a union.


But as I spoke to some of the older career actors I met at Warners and discovered how much they'd been exploited in the past, I began to change my mind. Major stars had no trouble negotiating good contracts and working conditions for themselves but that wasn't the case for the supporting players, many of whom had been blacklisted by the studios and deprived of work after they'd tried to form a union. Once I'd become a believer in the union..."

Some people believe that Ronald Reagan was lazy and stupid, however, so Massey may well have a good point about union workers.

corus

RE: Unions

(OP)
Corus,

I haven't done the calculation(s) on a building either, though experimentally I had a crude mockup fall over when I removed less than 20% of the foundation (taken from a corner rather than from a single wall).

I had heard the Reagan quote before.  It strikes me as someone using inequities of the past to justify actions in the present.  Unions did some great things for workers in the past.  Today, at least to me, they seem to be more like guilds.

Regards,

RE: Unions

A Story from Moncton New Brunswick.........

Union employee shows up at the office drunk and carrying a loaded shotgun. He is angrily looking for the CEO and CFO. Long story short...........he was convicted of carrying a loaded weapon with intent to harm. Neither intended "target" was hurt (nor were they found by the "disgruntled" employee). He was sentenced to jail for 2 years.

The union argued that this was not a "fireable" offence in accordance with the current contract and they battled for this guy to keep his job!!!

RE: Unions

LAZY and STUPID, ALL????  --- that's a pretty broad statement. Have you met them all???

RE: Unions

See The Tick's post of 1 Dec for a link to that story.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com

RE: Unions

IETECH:

The word "ALL" does not appear in my post.

Notice the phrase "I talk to" does.

RE: Unions

Appologies --- you did qualify your statement. - even among those you talk to, there must be at least one with a relatively positive opinion.

I am not a union member at this time but have been in the past and found during my membership that there were those who were dissatisfied, but the opinions were predominantly positive towards their union.

Sorry for reading between the lines.

ietech

RE: Unions

This is going to be rather long - but I hope you'all will bear with me.

If you've clicked on my profile, you'll find that I work for a branch of the US government.  My job involves inspecting the engineering work done by other people, and, as with many government jobs, there is a certain amount of politics, especially for those in management.

Not too long ago, I did an inspection at a plant and had some concerns about the quality of their engineering products as did several other inspectors. (I'm deliberately trying to be vague here!) My concerns were such that, for various reasons, I ended up sending a couple of very carefully worded e-mails to one of our upper managers.  In these e-mails, I (again carefully) expressed my concerns (ok, I may have been doing some CYA'ing) about the proposed course of action my management was taking.  In the e-mails I stressed that I was expressing my beliefs as a professional based on my activities.

My company supposedly has a "differing professional concern" policy and an "open door" policy where employees are supposed to be able to feel free to raise concerns.  (So this is where the Union comes in...)  However, today I had the "opportunity" to talk to some representatives of the Office of Inspector General - with the interview being transcribed for the record - about my concerns and why was I raising them.

My feelings, when told I had this wonderful opportunity, were, for some reason, not entirely positive.  So, as I am a member of a Union, I asked my Union steward to come with me to the interview.  It started off with one of the IG folks saying that he wanted me to lay out my technical concerns in general so he could "judge the merit of the concerns."  Let's just say that it went down hill from there and finished with my stating that I felt I was being retaliated against for raising concerns.

At the end, one of the IG investigators stated that, from what they were told, I had a very good reputation within my organization and that when I said I had concerns, that got management's attention - because I had the reputation of being right.  They also acknowledged that I had not done anything wrong.  However, that sure didn't explain why I was grilled for over 1-1/2 hours on technical issues.

Today, I was glad that I was a Union member.  My Union steward helped me prepare for this meeting and made sure the interview was conducted properly and that all pertinent facts were brought up.  He's also ensuring that appropriate paperwork is kept in case there is any actual retaliation (rather than just an attempt to intimidate me).

While it's easy to blame Unions for everything that's wrong, they do exist for a reason - to make sure that management doesn't trample on employee rights.  And, as I've tried to describe here, it's not just "lazy, stupid, gun-toting idiots" who sometimes need Union protection.  Sometimes it's people who are trying hard to do "the right thing" in their job.

Oh, and by the way, just because someone's a janitor doesn't make them stupid.  I know one senior utility manager who started his career as a janitor.

Patricia Lougheed

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.

RE: Unions

Reading this thread I have to wonder, what replies I would recieve if I posted a question "Fillipino's, good or bad?"

reply #1) I knew a Fillipino once, he was fat, stupid and lazy! Fillipino's are no good.

reply #2) If it wasn't for a Fillipino man, I would be dead! They are the best folks on the planet!

Several (not all of course) that have replied to the union question have formed strongly held opinions based on a very limited amount of anectdotal evidence. Not very engineer like if you ask me.

And, lumping all unions (like lumping all Fillipino's), from all sectors in one big pot, good or bad, ignores the fact that there is a wide variety in how the organizations work as well as their philosophy.

I have personal experience in what I consider the extremes of the spectrum. The NEA (school teacher union), which in my opinion serves only to furthur a political agenda, and ends up hurting, not helping, the teacher members, is on one extreem end. On the other we have several of the building trade unions, which operate with a different philosophy than they did a few years ago. They have shifted to emphasizing training and productivity as the only way they can survive.

My little company is signatory with one of the construction unions and I can guarantee the hands we get out of the hall are better trained and more productive than the non union counterpart. That doesn't make them better people (I have good friends on both sides), or one choice or the other evil, it just means they have available huge training resources, and most take advantage of them.

It also means the people we employ can feel free to take the kids to the doctor when they get sick, they have insurance. They can also look forward to a pretty fair retirement, and live comfortably during their working years. They make premium wages for the craft but we expect a lot from them, they produce or they are gone. Period.

All my opinion of course, but based on quite a few years experience, up close and personal.

JTMcC.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources