Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Unions 9
- Thread starter PSE
- Start date
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
-
3
- #29
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
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
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.
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.
ornerynorsk
Industrial
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!
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.
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.
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
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
Check out to see what unions REALLY think of their members.
(Hint: Cash cows)
(Hint: Cash cows)
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 !!!
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
- Status