Pay Cuts

[Roy Pitchford]

Before I address any specific comments:
I do not hate unions. I do not believe all unions are bad.
I DO believe that most unions have too much power and often are looking out for their OWN interests and gaining power, not the interests of the people they represent.

OK Roy, let's look at these situations.

And WHY does the present not look as rosy for the private sector?

Because union contracts are strangling corporate income sheets and making it difficult to grow? What were the largest financial commitments of GM at bankrupcy? Wasn't it union legacy costs?

I would suggest that there's been a concerted effort to de-unionize the private sector. Without collective bargaining agreements and union stewards to protect their interests, it looks to me as if our country is once again becoming a virtual 19th century sweatshop with many risks and few benefits to thousands of workers.

I'm not with a union. I am not exploited. I am paid well and have decent benefits. I do not need them handed to me on a silver platter. Even if I had no benefits, I might pay to get them myself. If I didn't, isn't that my choice?

Of course, the unions (albeit indirectly through the PAC process) have taken an interest in the political arena! This is America, after all, and Political Action Committees are a part of that process. They are not generally, I do believe, "tools" for a particular political party. Even unions who generally support candidates of one party may well support some on the other side of the aisle.

It was going on well before the era of PACs.

SEIU has been bussing their people to townhalls to support the democrat-lead health care reforms. I have not heard of any union that is doing the same to be against HR3200.

As far as running one's own retirement? That sometimes can work well...BUT far too many of my friends just lost significant portions of their own investment portfolios, due in part to adventurous risky self-decided investments.

That's a double-edged sword. It can cut both ways, I do believe...

I may be generalizing, but I view this situation similarly to other forms of government regulation. When the government takes my money and holds it (in theory) for me, I feel as though they are saying that I must be too stupid to do it myself. Its a slap to the face to be insulted like that.

I lost investment money too, but it is the right of any American to succeed or fail. If you fail, pick yourself up, dust yourself off and try again. You learn more from failure.

[Gary Rice]

Roy,

Whether you might be for or against unions, or whether some unions were historically "good" or "bad" at some point would not be the issue here, I don't think.

Nor would the issue be, that you (fortunately!) are apparently doing well with your own employment situation without having a union to represent you.

Good for you.

There are two types of labor- skilled and unskilled.

Unskilled labor often seeks to unionize fairly rapidly, in order to protect their interests. Skilled labor, on the other hand, oftentimes thinks that their skills alone will provide them the security they need, in order to leverage a good job and a favorable salary/benefit package.

Sometimes, they might even be temporarily right, UNTIL the day the boss gets mad, OR finds a college kid with similar or even updated skills...OR the employee gets sick, and suddenly becomes a drain on the company's medical plan, OR some unforeseen personality problem or office gossip rears its head...etc...etc.... At that point, the scenario can indeed change, and change rapidly, and often at the whim of the employer. Then you as an unrepresented worker, skilled or not, may have nowhere to go, but out to the parking lot.

Good luck getting the next non-union job too....particularly if a prospective employer sees any potential red flags with hiring you.

I have known too many friends who have been in non-union situations, sometimes fired just months before they might have otherwise received a company pension...or perhaps they lost their jobs, POSSIBLY due to their health or personality situations...BUT they could not prove it, due to administrative shenanagans....

Without a union, you have NO recourse but your own expensive court battles, if you feel you have been wronged.

Are unions perfect? Do they always effectively do a great job? I think we know that answer to that- but again, it's for the defense of your due-process rights that they exist.

As far as union/corporate legacy costs, or financial commitments to retirees go, Most ALL of those issues were agreed to by collective bargaining laws. One look at the salary of many CEO's should convince you that workers too, need to be able to share in a company's future, IF that's what was agreed to...at the bargaining table.

And yes Roy, at the last, unions certainly do look out for their own interests. At least for the most part, that interest should be that of their membership.

I'll leave you with a poignant example of how skilled labor, choosing to stay non-union, can hurt its own interests.

40 years ago, bands would play clubs around here for say, $200. Today, they still do.

See a problem for working musicians there?

Because there's always a group of young non-union musicians coming up, who'd rather get a hot-light suntan than be paid a living wage, many bands so often still virtually starve, while living on dreams.

If they'd treat their music like a profession, perhaps they could be receiving more than gas money these days.

Even many of the old guys who still play music out around here will probably be playing forever, due to their not contributing to a union pension fund. No medical, vision, dental either in their old age- except whatever modest Social Security they might draw.

I would not think that they could save too much for retirement either.

They do get the hot lights, though, and maybe a few bucks at the end of a long night...

There are union musicians who do get good salaries and benefits, but there are so many other musicians who choose not to affiliate with the union, and therefore will not receive so many advantages otherwise available to them.

Sad...

[Roy Pitchford]

[quote="Gary Rice"]Roy,

Whether you might be for or against unions, or whether some unions were historically "good" or "bad" at some point would not be the issue here, I don't think.[/quote]That's not the issue, yes, but I wanted to make sure I put it out there.

[quote="Gary Rice"]Then you as an unrepresented worker, skilled or not, may have nowhere to go, but out to the parking lot.[/quote]And looking for another job...it may be hard, it may be tough. Maybe you find something better or maybe not, but you adjust and move on.

[quote="Gary Rice"]As far as union/corporate legacy costs, or financial commitments to retirees go, Most ALL of those issues were agreed to by collective bargaining laws. One look at the salary of many CEO's should convince you that workers too, need to be able to share in a company's future, IF that's what was agreed to...at the bargaining table.[/quote]I'm not saying they should get nothing. Did the company agree to it these contracts? I would say conditionally yes. It was under duress. If the choice is the contract the union wants or a complete strike which would cripple the company, most companies seem willing to sign on the dotted line.

[quote="Gary Rice"]40 years ago, bands would play clubs around here for say, $200. Today, they still do.

See a problem for working musicians there?[/quote]
Depends, how good are the musicians? If they're any good, they would be worth more than $200. The Stones make a little more than $200 per performance the last time I checked.

[quote="Gary Rice"]Because there's always a group of young non-union musicians coming up, who'd rather get a hot-light suntan than be paid a living wage, many bands so often still virtually starve, while living on dreams.[/quote]
If that's their choice, let them starve then. They have a variety of options to deal with it, none of which need to involve unions.

[quote="Gary Rice"]Even many of the old guys who still play music out around here will probably be playing forever, due to their not contributing to a union pension fund. No medical, vision, dental either in their old age- except whatever modest Social Security they might draw.

I would not think that they could save too much for retirement either.[/quote]
Soooo, they can't open and contribute to savings accounts? Why does a union pension have to be involved at all?

[Gary Rice]

Savings accounts?

Perhaps its time for a little thread drifting...

Although it is oftentimes incredibly difficult to do for people barely able to make their daily bread, I would always hope that people would try and learn to save some money, even if only a few dollars a week.

To save and plan, particularly for one's later years, is probably one of the most most sensible things that a young person can do.

Far too often however, it seems to me that so many people live from moment to moment. If they would only realize the value of long-term planning...

True, the rags-to-riches tale is a fundamental part of the American Spirit, as is pulling one's self up by our own bootstraps, but the oft-untold tale is that of rags-to-riches, and back to rags again...oops.

Musical groups do occasionally go from living in the back of their vans, to mansions. Some may even go back to living in those vans AFTER living in their mansions, (oops, again) but that's another story.....

I certainly feel that unions are one excellent way of providing workers with several important protections, but... to the following extent, I would have to agree with Roy here:

One's BEST security is always going to be one's personal integrity, and one's job performance.

Do a good job as an honest, decent person, and that goes a long way towards achieving success in life. This I do believe.

Back to the banjo....

[Roy Pitchford]

Browser crash just sucked up my reply...try this again...

To save and plan, particularly for one's later years, is probably one of the most most sensible things that a young person can do.

I'll take that as a compliment. I have no debt besides a mortgage and more than $20K saved in various places.
And I'm under 30.

Far too often however, it seems to me that so many people live from moment to moment. If they would only realize the value of long-term planning...

Agreed.

True, the rags-to-riches tale is a fundamental part of the American Spirit, as is pulling one's self up by our own bootstraps, but the oft-untold tale is that of rags-to-riches, and back to rags again...oops.

I certainly feel that unions are one excellent way of providing workers with several important protections, but... to the following extent, I would have to agree with Roy here:

One's BEST security is always going to be one's personal integrity, and one's job performance.

Protection....union-imposed savings would be a protection. Protection from what? Lack of sensibility?
If I may take a step back and look at a bigger picture for a second.
I see someone (in this case the unions, but it could just as well be the government) with their fingers in my life, telling me what I should or should not do.

Answer me this:
Don't we each have a right to make our own choices?
Shouldn't each of us suffer the consequences (good or bad) of those choices?

[Gary Rice]

Roy,

First of all, thanks for showing up on this rough and tumble 'deck, and for your thoughtful posts. This is what community dialogue should be, I really do believe.

Welcome aboard.

I'm probably close to twice your age, and therefore have a different, and not necessarily any "better" perspective than you do. I am delighted to hear that you are planning well for those rainy days. They do come, but from the perspective of many more years on this earth than you've experienced, I'm happy to report that the bad times (usually and hopefully) do not tend to last nearly as long as the good ones do.

But when they do arrive....it's nice to have some preparation.

The thing that amazes so many of "my" generation is the relatively conservative nature of so many of the young people. It drives us to distraction....We, of the '60's, had to battle our conservative parents, and now some of us have to battle our conservative grandkids! We are surrounded!

We wanted to change the world, but in our wildest dreams, I don't think that any of us saw this train coming! (smile)

It might surprise you to know that I would agree with you that all of us keep as much control over our own lives as possible...and if people should learn anything at all, they need to know that bad choices do indeed have bad consequences.

A police record, for example, will close a great many doors. Time and again, I tried to drill that simple fact into my students before I retired. As a country, we seem to be exceeding unforgiving to ex-convicts. Whether that helps them return to a life of crime would be another debate.

But one mistake.....and there go so many opportunities....

Here's my own bias...Growing up with speech and hearing difficulties, I fought long and hard for the rights of those having "differences", because society can be unkind and unfair in that respect too.

I've been a fighter for the underdog, or for people treated unfairly, for just about all of my life. That's why I was active in a union, and also as a Special Education teacher.

You see, I believe that people do indeed want to be independent, and have control over their own lives, but as we know, life is not always fair.

When that happens, hopefully I (and the union) will be there.

Back to the banjo....This has been a good debate with you!

[Roy Pitchford]

It has been a good debate and I thank you for it.
I've been in a few other conversations that did not go as well...one person simply stopped talking to me, thinking we were at a complete impass and the other, well, I'm not sure I could describe what happened.

Quickly, let me also say this. We started off with what I feel were fairly different points of view. We could have descended to uncivil or even downright dirty levels. Instead, we both kept level heads, stated our points and, in the end, we found we had several things we could agree about.
It fills me with hope.

I look forward to our next encounter.

[Gary Rice]

Roy,

Thanks again for your thoughts and kind words.

Hope is something that we both share.

Too often, the concept of "hopes and dreams" has been abused by politicians left, right, up and down.

Learning to learn from each other has long been an American tradition that made us, as a people, the hope of the world.

Lately though, power seeking individuals of virtually all stripes and at virtually all levels of government and society, seem to find value in dividing us into uncompromising camps, and zero-sum games (a political term meaning that the only way for me to win, would be for you to lose)

Just today, for example, there's talk about not letting school children see a presidential speech about education next week because it might be politically offensive to some.

And perhaps... it even could be? Only....

I've never heard of such a thing in the past in this country. To not allow young people to hear something related to their own interests, and trust them to arrive at their own conclusions?

Where does this kind of thing end?

I'll tell you where. We've seen it before, have we not?

On the battlegrounds of any (un)civil war that you would care to name- from the fields of Gettysburg, or any other conflict you might care to name- where brothers (and sisters too!) came to blows over this point or that....

Are there things in life worth fighting for? No doubt about it...but I'm a firm believer that debate is safer than destruction.

We either learn to get along, and listen to each other, or the concentration camps start up again....

Our debate here, yours and mine, has been a model for what we as a people can, and indeed must do. We must recognize that differences of opinion are not causes for condemnation, but are opportunities for problem-solving and consensus building, even though at first, the exercise might seem to be time-consuming or even impossible.

Takes a little work, (oh yeah) but when it happens rightly, all of those hot-headed rabble-rousers start to lose their power, and common sense again prevails in the land....

Again, thanks for your thoughts!

Back to that weathered old banjo....

[Ahmie Yeung]

Back to the original debate of this thread, one factor that was not considered is the difference in the top-salary-earners in public v private sector work. Heads of government agencies are not paid millions of dollars, I doubt there are many (if any) who break out of the mid-six-figures (reminder: president's salary is $400k/year). How much do your average heads of a private non-union company earn compared to that, and especially compared to the heads of a private union company? Unions serve to equalize the wages of ALL employees in the company - when they're arguing for higher wages for the low-level workers, their argument is rather bolstered if the big wigs in the company are making 400 TIMES what the average worker is (which is NOT uncommon). In many cases, a modest cost-of-living wage increase could easily be afforded by a few execs taking a little bit of a wage haircut (or skipping their "bonuses"). Public sector wages have kept cost-of-living increases, whereas private sector wages have been stagnant and losing ground via inflation for nearly a decade - this is NOT because the private sector is being so much more efficient, but because they are able to screw over their employees much more effectively, especially by dangling the threat of outsourcing over their heads at every opportunity.

I was a teacher in Virginia, where there's no collective bargaining by law. The union was virtually worthless. Not all unions are created equally because not all state laws are equally favorable to unions (particularly where conservatives have held state power for an extended period of time). Ohio has stronger unions, which has advantages and drawbacks to the local community. My husband taught at Hope High for a year, which was run by White Hat Management, a for-profit charter school organization. The teachers there were not union, and were paid about 70% of what CMSD teachers are paid with comparable years of experience, and the charter school employees had to contribute 3x more toward insurance premiums for much lower quality coverage than we have now that he's working for CMSD and unionized. The management (they don't even deserve the title of administrators, I swear they learned everything they knew from studying how managment worked in the Dilbert cartoons) at that school was a joke, teachers were talking on their cell phones and even SLEEPING while students were in their classrooms. Thank God it's gone, but it drained a significant amount of money from CMSD via vouchers while it lasted, and into the pockets of for-profit individuals running it. Even without the pay difference, our family's support of unionization increased with that one year of non-union teaching. Unions may sometimes protect teachers who really should be encouraged to retire, but as one stop at a job fair for the schools will show, it also increases the quality of applicants. The only reason my husband worked at Hope High was because Ohio Dept of Ed dicked around with getting his license transferred from Virginia long enough that the public school districts looked at him like he might be red flagged or something because of the delay (it took nearly 10 months even though Ohio was supposed to have full parity with Virginia - meaning a professional license from Virginia should be shown and then an Ohio one pretty much automatically awarded. It was a mess).

Incompetence happens everywhere, but there's more hope of getting the people in higher levels at least job-switched in public sector if they REALLY screw around. We are, after all, their ultimate "bosses" so we can organize, complain, and have them transferred to somewhere that they'll do less damage if not outright fired - depending on if they actually did something that their union can't protect them from or not. Try that with a mid-level or higher person at your HMO or Target. Sure, you can get a low-wage entry level person fired for being rude to you or whatever (since they have no union to protect them and are employed "at will"), but higher than that and it's not going to happen no matter what, unless THEY piss off their higher ups directly.