Support NeoGAF

[zulux21]

it's partially because while a good number of unions have legit benefits, a lot of the entry level jobs to places that have a union only really screw you.

I had a summer job once that had a union I was required to join. I was a part time high school worker, and the union fee was something like $75 per month.

I got to earn exactly ten cents over minimum wage before Union fees (so i think it was $5.25 an hour), saw no benefit from the union as it basically only protected long term employees, and ultimately I made like 35% less than minimum wage at the job after the fees (and had to pay for my uniform out of my first paycheck, which lead to me getting like a $25 paycheck for 20 hours of work the first paycheck, and yet when I quit they demanded my uniform back with no money returned to me)

that soured me on unions in general for a long time. I understand they can be quite useful to a lot of jobs, but a good number of them are just about making the union the most money as possible as well regardless if the employees get any real benefit from them.

 

[Angry Grimace]

Because strikebreaking is legal in the US so it unions lose majority support thanks to NLRB v. Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co.

 

[Junior Mint]

Up here in Canada they are starting to tip the scales towards another racket that takes money away from workers. The security they offer is not for me but I understand why many people like them.

Exactly... unions are probably useful to balance out interests under a private company. For a government department, they just protect and overpay idiots while crippling progress. It's how we end up with stuff like having train conductors on subway trains that are AUTOMATED.

 

[prophetvx]

This is a-ok with me and my coworkers. We work in "customer service" and we put in our eight, and we're out. We mind our own business, no body trying to undermine anyone else, because we're all safe at our jobs.

Lack of unions is where you get people "bragging" that they've never called out sick and demonizing those that do.

As I said, they have their place.

I'd never want to work under a union again as it would likely hold back my salary by tens of thousands.

They are extremely useful when it comes to public services, service industries, trades and entry level positions. Unions often get a bad wrap because they protect mediocrity, you are not an individual, you are one of a collective. Your performance is irrelevant unless you operate outside of reasonable tolerances, which is great from a job protection standpoint, but frustrating when you are not seeing growth in line with your performance. Union leaders often get paid a small fortune, some provide a good ROI, many don't.

 

[TaterTots]

Because people who aren't in unions don't realize the perks they get are in part thanks to years of work from unions, but they don't wanna pay dues, because they're indivuduals and don't care about the dude working beside them.

I think I paid around 10 bucks a month or something for dues. Hopefully, that isn't the case.

You've done all this research and you've not figured out and seen numerous articles about this?

This thread doesn't seem set up to want to answer any questions but "lol stupid US"

As I stated in the OP you quoted, most of the negativity I've seen have come from management. I believe that's because they cannot be a part of an union. So, are you for or against it?

 

[Big Blue]

As NYer, I see it from both sides. Unions are great for workers' rights, and since my mom worked in healthcare I had some of the best health insurance anyone could get. Benefits do help families. With that said, especially in the public sector, they can make lives difficult for citizens. For example, the MTA's payroll alone is more than its revenue and the average salary is $90,000. A lot of it is overtime that is pretty much required due to union restrictions. That makes it more difficult for about 10 million people.

https://medium.com/@johnnyknocke/th...-dollars-a-year-and-nobody-cares-d0d23093b2d8

 

[night814]

Cheap labor, no benefits and being able to fire you whenever they are done with you.

This is it, bosses and owners want to be able to get rid of anyone at anytime.

 

[Gallbaro]

A original goal, but quickly abandoned goal of unions was to advocate for the rights of all workers and advance the well being of labor through more general social welfare reforms. The UAW was very altruistic when it started, but when the unions gave up on general political reform, economically they sealed their own faith.

From a economics point of view, labor is suppose to be the flexible variable expense that you can ramp up/down/move as is required. The more flexible your labor is, the less financial reserves you need and the more you can invest/return to shareholders (depending on which avenue gives your shareholders a greater internal rate of return opportunity.

Private sector unions have seen a huge reduction in rolls through bankruptcy. Our sky rocketing health care costs + pensions + direct wages, create lower worker productivity (because union labor costs more and is less flexible) increase their costs. As new non-union shops popped up and provided a better value products because the did not have the legacy costs.
-It is interesting though that most management from the 50's massive union expansion knew that they were agreeing to impossible terms with their organized labor, they basically budged for extreme growth in revenue. But they really just wanted the short term production without a strike rather than a long term company. You cannot really blame the unions for grabbing all they could.

Today private sector unions in NY and Philly, pretty much only in construction, for example are really tools of "fuck you, got mine." The private unions are institutionally racist, and are more concerned about creating labor scarcity to elevate pricing than insuring broad protections for labor. Philly unions will literally burn down Amish barns. The scarcity they try to enforce, drastically increases costs. Union works rules in NYC are one of the reasons, among many reasons largely related to the political nature of the MTA, the construction costs per mile are 5 times as much in Paris.
-Big exception to this statement is health care. Which has been represented by exceedingly fair unions.

Public sector unions (sticking with examples I know):
-Correction Officers Benevolent Association: This union literally protects murderers and assailants everyday, especially since most of the people under their "protection" are innocent. But politically powerful, so most politicians blame the buildings (jails) for beating and murdering innocent children.*
-Patrolmen/Sargent Benevolent Association: Same as above but to a lesser degree, thin Blue Line and all that crap.*
------*Surprisingly these are actually very racially diverse unions.
-Firefighter's Union: Brown people are still in court trying to gain access to this union.
-LIRR Unions = Coordinated disability scams.
-Transportation Workers Union = Low productivity labor, basically all labor is in the top 20% income percentile. In the last round of contract negotiations Cuomo gave in to every single contract demand without negotiation. Recommended fix the current MTA issues is to hire more people rather than search for efficiencies.

So a lot of the resentment for public sector unions in the political power they have. People naturally vote in their own self interests and politicians want to get elected, so PBA type unions get political protections for their crimes and other municipal unions get to demand more revenue, while no one focuses on costs.

Private sector definitely needs a new wave of unionization though, hopefully more as the mass social movement the original organizers intended rather than what we got.

 

[TaterTots]

Some unions are good and some are bad. I was part of a union when I worked for the Canadian government and all I saw was that it protected lazy ass workers and got them raises for simply not being bad enough to be fired - not that they could be fired without going through what seemed like years worth of processes anyways.

This is the common negative I keep coming across, but it's always from management. What I do not understand is if they're doing their job well enough to keep it, why shouldn't there be raises and such? Better than someone no call no showing or stealing in the place.

 

[SpecX]

Honestly, it's because many unions have gone from "protecting the worker" to "protecting their own profits/interests."

My SO works as a nurse and her union has done an exceedingly crap job in negotiations because it only looks out for the older workers at the expense of the younger workers.

When unions have gotten so big that they can't effectively represent their constituents as a whole, and end up picking-and-choosing winners-and-losers, you're naturally going to see some resentment.

In these cases the union feels a lot more like a mafia protection racket than an organization that's looking out for a worker's best interests.

And that's not even touching the topic of public sector unions, like Police Unions.

I honestly believe that unions would be a lot more beneficial to workers (and better accepted in the US) if they were smaller and better represented the worker groups, as opposed to these national, mega-unions that are just in it for the $$$.

I kind of feel this way as well. I'm for Unions when they can properly protect and do right for the employees when employers are at their worse. The way the automaker unions were acting though did kind of burn me since they dug in their feet and watched as GM and Chrysler burned to the ground when breaks were needed. I get those companies ultimately fucked up, but the unions benefited from the good times and should also make sacrifices during the bad which did ultimately happen.

When a union decides to punish a company for their mistakes as the risk of everyone losing, then I'm against that, but when it's to protect the people, then I'm for them.

 

[Timbuktu]

As NYer, I see it from both sides. Unions are great for workers' rights, and since my mom worked in healthcare I had some of the best health insurance anyone could get. Benefits do help families. With that said, especially in the public sector, they can make lives difficult for citizens. For example, the MTA's payroll alone is more than its revenue and the average salary is $90,000. A lot of it is overtime that is pretty much required due to union restrictions. That makes it more difficult for about 10 million people.

https://medium.com/@johnnyknocke/th...-dollars-a-year-and-nobody-cares-d0d23093b2d8

Indeed, as a Londoner, the most frequent experience for many people with unions is with public transport and the frequency they call strikes. I guess tube drivers are lucky to have a strong Union, but others in the public sector don't get paid anywhere near as much with much tougher jobs.

 

[Fenderputty]

Because people who aren't in unions don't realize the perks they get are in part thanks to years of work from unions, but they don't wanna pay dues, because they're indivuduals and don't care about the dude working beside them.

I work in project management. For some reason most of the PM's are republicans. Our wage scale is set by the Union though. Can't have a PM making less than a General Foreman, for example.

 

[kirblar]

As NYer, I see it from both sides. Unions are great for workers' rights, and since my mom worked in healthcare I had some of the best health insurance anyone could get. Benefits do help families. With that said, especially in the public sector, they can make lives difficult for citizens. For example, the MTA's payroll alone is more than its revenue and the average salary is $90,000. A lot of it is overtime that is pretty much required due to union restrictions. That makes it more difficult for about 10 million people.

https://medium.com/@johnnyknocke/th...-dollars-a-year-and-nobody-cares-d0d23093b2d8

To expand on the Overtime issues (they have similar issues here in DC w/ the WMATA metro system) - because Overtime is so lucrative, it will lead to an incentive for the membership to understaff itself so that its members can regularly get the 48+ hour work weeks.

 

[Gallbaro]

Indeed, as a Londoner, the most frequent experience for many people with unions is with public transport

Yes, but because your labor can strike the underground is much more efficient and effectively run than the subway. NYC labor cannot strike, so there is no real negotiation tool for work rule reform.

To expand on the Overtime issues (they have similar issues here in DC w/ the WMATA metro system) - because Overtime is so lucrative, it will lead to an incentive for the membership to understaff itself so that its members can regularly get the 48+ hour work weeks.

The WMATA dispatchers union has literally caused people to die. Fucking amateur hour in that dispatch center, but they all drive BMWs and Mercedes.

 

[Nevasleep]

When I worked a blue collar job, the on-site union guys still looked out for us younger employees (who were part time) without having to pay dues.

I've never felt like a union would work with retail jobs I've had though, not much camaraderie. Also some unions just seem too willing to cause disruption.

 

[darscot]

Here is a funny union brothers and sisters story. I know someone that is union and is way over paid. Everyone in the union knows it so instead of most of them losing their jobs they agree that new hires would be on a completely different and much lower pay scale. So the senior people are full time make great wage. Jr people are part time make shit. So guess what the Sr people do, they pay the Jr to do their jobs. They literally pay someone Jr cash to go in and do their shifts. The Sr people just sit home and still make enough to pay the Jr and make profit. They sublet their jobs. Can you imagine trying to pull that shit. All completely protected by the union.

 

[Septimius]

As NYer, I see it from both sides. Unions are great for workers' rights, and since my mom worked in healthcare I had some of the best health insurance anyone could get. Benefits do help families. With that said, especially in the public sector, they can make lives difficult for citizens. For example, the MTA's payroll alone is more than its revenue and the average salary is $90,000. A lot of it is overtime that is pretty much required due to union restrictions. That makes it more difficult for about 10 million people.

https://medium.com/@johnnyknocke/th...-dollars-a-year-and-nobody-cares-d0d23093b2d8

Just a reminder that average salary and median salary are two extremely different things. If one guy makes 40$ million a year, that's gonna pull up the average by a huge amount.

 

[HyperCroutons]

Maybe its because I'm from a blue-collar area but I never really noticed too much hate for unions near me but unions overall are a good thing. I've had good experiences with unions even if they keep around some of the lazy or bad workers.

 

[Gallbaro]

Just a reminder that average salary and median salary are two extremely different things. If one guy makes 40$ million a year, that's gonna pull up the average by a huge amount.

No, not in the MTA. The median and mean are not skewed.

 

[KahooTs]

They're designed to protect the lowest common denominator.

 

[Magwik]

They're designed to protect the lowest common denominator.

This is literally just wrong.

 

[Syriel]

As I said, they have their place.

I'd never want to work under a union again as it would likely hold back my salary by tens of thousands.

They are extremely useful when it comes to public services, service industries, trades and entry level positions. Unions often get a bad wrap because they protect mediocrity, you are not an individual, you are one of a collective. Your performance is irrelevant unless you operate outside of reasonable tolerances, which is great from a job protection standpoint, but frustrating when you are not seeing growth in line with your performance. Union leaders often get paid a small fortune, some provide a good ROI, many don't.

When I worked for a division of the Federal govt, I had a union complaint filed against me.

I was working in the IT department, documenting a new system. Part of that required setting up a network of virtual servers on a single machine. This is something that I was told wouldn't be possible and I would have to wait for a second system to be ordered, and someone to setup a physical network for me.

Rather than wait a few weeks, I went to my boss and told him that if he just gave me the hardware that we already had, I could have it up and running in a week. He said fine. I got it done in three days. Boss was thrilled. I was happy because I wasn't bottlenecked.

I week later my boss let me know that someone had filed an official union grievance against me because I had "exceeded my scope of work." Boss wasn't upset with me, but it tied his hands. For the rest of my time there, about half of it was spent getting paid to do nothing (I was told to bring in some books to read) because when I needed things done, I had to wait for others to do it, even if they were simple tasks that I could easily do myself.

This is the common negative I keep coming across, but it's always from management. What I do not understand is if they're doing their job well enough to keep it, why shouldn't there be raises and such? Better than someone no call no showing or stealing in the place.

Because when some people always slack, other workers have to work harder to make up for it. It can be demoralizing when you're always covering for others, and they get the same rewards.

 

[JustSurvive]

They can be good and bad. Good because they can negotiate for you better bad because they protect shitty employees who should have been fired ages ago. I work for a retail company that has a very strong union. I'm part of the union as well but in a supervisory role. what makes it tough and makes my job ten times harder is terrible employees who the union protects. If these people were fired I honestly would like my job but I have to babysit around 10 people because they don't so their fair share of work and slack of at the first chance while the remaining people work their ass off and have to cover most of the work. Its terrible and extremely demoralizing. Sometimes I wish we didn't have a union, just so that we won't be stressed out as much.

My wife worked at a supermarket chain that had a union for a few years and this was the kind of stuff she would tell me about all the time. I was infuriated to hear how little people worked and the shit they got away with all the time, "no call no shows", taking long breaks, just hiding in the backrooms to kill time. I believe the only person she saw get fired her entire time there was because they were stealing.

 

[Host Samurai]

I find it funny how the UFC fighters who want to unionize and want more pay are the same ones who vote republican.

 

[Brinbe]

Because rich ass people will fight to make you think they suck. And they have the resources to make that opinion known. 1% propaganda is right.

 

[CrocMother]

People change jobs so much these days, too. That has to be a big factor in the decline of unions.

Back in the day, you expected to stay in one career your whole life. So unionizing came more naturally. These days hardly anyone sees themselves staying exactly where they are 10 years into the future.

 

[n00bsauce87]

I bet people don't frown on police unions. That's probably the only one caz reasons

 

[KahooTs]

This is literally just wrong.

You calling this person a liar?

Maybe its because I'm from a blue-collar area but I never really noticed too much hate for unions near me but unions overall are a good thing. I've had good experiences with unions even if they keep around some of the lazy or bad workers.

 

[Magwik]

People change jobs so much these days, too. That has to be a big factor in the decline of unions.

Back in the day, you expected to stay in one career your whole life. So unionizing came more naturally. These days hardly anyone sees themselves staying exactly where they are 10 years into the future.

You could also argue the lack of unions and future prospects and protections lead to people changing jobs more often.

 

[Divvy]

This is the common negative I keep coming across, but it's always from management. What I do not understand is if they're doing their job well enough to keep it, why shouldn't there be raises and such? Better than someone no call no showing or stealing in the place.

They're not though, they are just impossible to fire. I get more complaints like this from coworkers who have to pick up the slack.

I mean, I support unions and I wish my industry had them, but in not about to pretend that modern unions in NA do not have a host of problems.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

My wife worked at a supermarket chain that had a union for a few years and this was the kind of stuff she would tell me about all the time. I was infuriated to hear how little people worked and the shit they got away with all the time, "no call no shows", taking long breaks, just hiding in the backrooms to kill time. I believe the only person she saw get fired her entire time there was because they were stealing.

My wife left her union job due to coworker incompetence and her having to shoulder the burden. And instead of getting rid of the person they get raises.

 

[LSauchelli]

Unions are also famous for being incredibly crooked. Over here, in Argentina, a little while ago a Union leader died and his daughter is now whining and demanding all the millions that her father supposedly had. She's basically admiting her father was a crook but still demands all the money he stole or laundered as if it were really now hers.

 

[norm9]

Here is a funny union brothers and sisters story. I know someone that is union and is way over paid. Everyone in the union knows it so instead of most of them losing their jobs they agree that new hires would be on a completely different and much lower pay scale. So the senior people are full time make great wage. Jr people are part time make shit. So guess what the Sr people do, they pay the Jr to do their jobs. They literally pay someone Jr cash to go in and do their shifts. The Sr people just sit home and still make enough to pay the Jr and make profit. They sublet their jobs. Can you imagine trying to pull that shit. All completely protected by the union.

That person isn't overpaid if that's the contract they agreed upon. Theyre paid what was negotiated.

Maybe you could benefit from a better union negotiator if you don't think you're paid enough for your time.

 

[Magwik]

You calling this person a liar?

No I'm just calling you one.
Lazy and shit workers get by with or without unions in literally every place. It's not exclusive to unions, you know. The criticism that they protect shit people completely overlooks all of the jobs they have protected, all of the regulations that keep workers safe (especially in factories), and keep people in general leading a better life and actually making a living.
I'm sure it's easy to criticize something you have no experience with though.

 

[Hierophant]

depriving people of their rights is like 90% of US history

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

isn't that a result of the commie scare that the US went through. You gotta look at the US with a lens that pushes everything to the right by a lot.

 

[manzoman96]

All I know was when I worked at a Giant supermarket in high school, a good portion of the job training was anti-union propaganda. I haven't entered the actual workforce yet so I can't really say for myself if they are good or not.

 

[bionic77]

Because Americans are stupid and have been brainwashed to believe unions, minorities and the government have been holding them down.

The bill for this ignorance came due and owing in 2016...

 

[darscot]

That person isn't overpaid if that's the contract they agreed upon. Theyre paid what was negotiated.

Maybe you could benefit from a better union negotiator if you don't think you're paid enough for your time.

You completely missed the point I was making. They don't even go to work and you think they earn their wage, LOL.

P.S. I'll negotiate my own wage thank you very much.

 

[KahooTs]

No I'm just calling you one.
Lazy and shit workers get by with or without unions in literally every place. It's not exclusive to unions, you know. The criticism that they protect shit people completely overlooks all of the jobs they have protected, all of the regulations that keep workers safe (especially in factories), and keep people in general leading a better life and actually making a living.
I'm sure it's easy to criticize something you have no experience with though.

Despite your attempt at obfuscation your position is that of denying unions protect bad workers and bad employees in a topic where both workers and employers are relaying first hand accounts of just that. Either you're the liar or they are.

 

[Skellig Gra]

Plenty of terrible unions out there. I’ve been a part of several. Not sure why people seem to be so blindly in favor. A lot of them represent the polar opposite extreme of what they are fighting against which can be just as bad.

 

[DietRob]

Because Republicans are brainwashed.

 

[balohna]

Unions are great, the United States and the broader corporate world are just capitalist hellscapes that frown on anything vaguely in the interest of workers.

 

[Gluka]

I've always wondered. Are there any reputable studies showing that American unionized companies are less likely to fire unqualified or incompetent workers compared to non-union ones?

This anecdote gets so much discussion for what it is.

 

[g11]

In theory unions are great but in practice it doesn't always work out like it should. Anyone who thinks unions are nothing but good, remember it's a policemen's union that is generally protecting and backing even bad cops who shoot innocent people. Not that that's why unions get a bad wrap among the common man, but they have their faults regardless is my point. I like the idea of a union and collective bargaining, but like anything there should be limits, as there should be limits to what corporations can do.

 

[mrkgoo]

I read the thread title as "unicorns". I'll also admit that I decide to read the posts that way.

 

[prophetvx]

I've always wondered. Are there any reputable studies showing that American unionized companies are less likely to fire unqualified or incompetent workers compared to non-union ones?

This anecdote gets so much discussion for what it is.

Pick any public service you want.

 

[Froyo Love]

Some unions are good and some are bad. I was part of a union when I worked for the Canadian government and all I saw was that it protected lazy ass workers and got them raises for simply not being bad enough to be fired - not that they could be fired without going through what seemed like years worth of processes anyways.

Inflation means if you aren't getting raises to match the increased cost of living on a regular basis, you're continuously getting pay cuts to your real income.

 

[sechsterangriff]

Unions are necessary. But here in Europe sometimes they're more like extensions of political parties than organizations that truly have the best interests of workers at heart.
There are cases of unions like these implementing scorched land strategies where their influence made things much worse for workers and companies already at risk of closing.

 

[Megalosaro]

I had to work alongside the ILWU for 8 years. They're the biggest load of lazy scumbag c********** I've ever met in my life. The stuff that they would get away with infuriated me. Rampant sexual harassment, physical harassment, intimidation, and it legal activities including drug dealing. Worst yet you couldn't complain about them either because they were Union, one of the strongest in the country, and if you complain about one of their workers there would stop working for the whole day. I saw someone gets fired for reporting them sexually harassing a female cruise guest. F****** hated it