Page 17 of 26 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 258

Thread: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

  1. #161
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    12-03-16 @ 04:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    52,569

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    easy.. pass a law saying that 3rd party has the power to impose it's terms... .and give it exclusive power to demand those terms.
    Yeah, but if you ask me if a contract has term that was put there by a third party and can not be removed then the contract is invalid. Yeah, I know I just made 99% of the contracts in the US invalid, but oh well.

  2. #162
    Sage

    gdgyva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    near Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,501

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    as a union representative, i negotiated everything except wage rates and benefits ... those were established by congress


    not with most unions. normally, there will be a job description and an associated wage rate
    of course, the employee who prefers to negotiate for him/herself is free to instead apply at a non-union company


    under a union shop arrangement, that might also be possible, however, you would negotiate that unique provision as a principle, that could be applied to other employees who fit the circumstance, and not for a specific named employee

    while you are inquiring about the approach to your two labor-standards impacted managers, you may want to also ask HR if this specifically named vacation recipient exposes your company to any potential EEOC litigation under race, age, and/or religious bases


    as above, possible, but only with defined criteria, not a named employee. this unique circumstance may also be one that places you in jeopardy of a title 7 action for disparate treatment of women. would encourage you to broach HR about it

    a handbook of conditions of employment negotiated by the employees' union representative and management's representative ... for any union shop
    such unilateral determinations should never be found acceptable by any competent labor rep


    in a union shop, you would go thru all of it

    now, kudos to you, for operating a company that apparently has not had its employees feel the need to elect a bargaining unit representative
    if employees feel they are being treated fairly, they have no reason to seek union help
    we are good as far as what individuals have negotiated in the past

    our HR lawyers have made it abundantly clear what we can do, and what we cant do

    most shops arent union shops.....and what i described is what you find at most mid-sized to larger companies

    and no, we have never had unions.....

    the market is extremely competitive in our area (wash dc) for employees

    we have a very transient population due to the military and government

    we have three of the top 10 counties in the country on a per capita income basis and another 3 in the top 20

    so either you pay fairly, or you dont keep good employees.....period
    “Most of the shadows of this life are caused by standing in one's own sunshine.”

    Ralph Waldo Emerson

  3. #163
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your left... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:00 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    26,635

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    no. that is union busting 101
    paying non-union more than union undermines the union
    First, I'm presuming only some would be paid higher, only the ones who excel. Those who don't excel wouldn't.

    But even if all non-union did get paid more... so what? Maybe the union members should rethink their membership. Why is it union busting if an employer pays more to non-union employees, but not "non-union busting" if the union negotiates a higher wage? That's the kind of dishonest doublespeak that gives unions a bad image.
    Huntsman / Kasich 2020

  4. #164
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    12-03-16 @ 04:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    52,569

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    no. that is union busting 101
    paying non-union more than union undermines the union
    Like anyone here besides union supporters care. If I negotiate a better deal than you then that is your problem, not mine.

  5. #165
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your left... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:00 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    26,635

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    who was the management representative who allowed such BS to be negotiated under the contract?
    Your question doesn't address the question regarding who the freeloader was in this scenario. Dodge denied.
    Huntsman / Kasich 2020

  6. #166
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    12-03-16 @ 04:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    52,569

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    you don't have to

    you instead only have to seek employment from non-union employers. normally the ones that pay less, and offer fewer benefits and nominal job security

    that contract arrangement you entered into with the unionized employer, includes a provision that by virtue of your willful, voluntary employment with said company, you have also agreed to become a member of the bargaining unit. whether you agree to become a union member is another choice you personally make. but your contract for employment with a firm having a union will compel you to agree to be a bargaining unit member UNLESS you are a member of management and/or you are within a job which is prohibited from being within the bargaining unit

    in the federal sector, those excluded positions are normally those where the employee is involved in making personnel decisions, even in a non-management capacity

    and as an aside, even tho the manager at the company CANNOT be a bargaining unit employee, represented by the union, (s)he CAN be a dues paying union member, entitled to vote at union elections (but not hold representative office). i helped LOTS of management officials in their careers and they responded by joining the union as dues paying/supporting union members
    You're really not all that good at dodging arguments. We both know that the contracts makes anyone that agrees to employment agree to union membership and instead of actually facing my question on why that is legitimate, you instead try to dodge by saying someone can just get work elsewhere.

  7. #167
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your left... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:00 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    26,635

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    it's not "bs" .. it's common... especially in the trucking industry (Teamsters dominated)...jobs are strictly defined and workers are not allowed to go beyond those definitions under the guise of stealing work from another worker.
    if this guy was hired as a fueler, there's nothing else he would be allowed to do....
    if the terminal had a janitor, he wouldn't even be allowed to push a broom to fill his time when he wasn't fueling.

    I made a ton of money off of such "bs" rules... a ton.
    my night were busy making service call to the terminals to do things the drivers weren't allowed to do.. such as adjusting their mirrors, checking/adding oil to their trucks.. replacing a mudflap or a marker light bulb.
    if I could string together 2 or 3 simple jobs, I could make close to a grand a night.
    I absolutely loved hearing that phone ring at night.

    Conway ( non-union) is another story... there were no simple night calls for me there... they actually had their drivers do the simple things.
    being a non-union company, they also had much better equipment.. such as trucks with electric mirrors
    Seriously? That's even worse than I thought.

    What happens if they're on the road and a bird hits a mirror and knocks it out of whack? Do they pull over and wait for a union approved maintenance guy to come out and adjust it back? (I'm being facetious, but it wouldn't knock me over if you said 'yes'.)
    Huntsman / Kasich 2020

  8. #168
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,329
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    sometimes they can't go with contractors, per the union contract.

    for example.. in my case i was allowed to service both Roadway and Yellow freight... simply because they had no physical maintenance shop.
    part of the deal was that if a terminal had a physical shop, they had to employ union mechanics.
    neither terminal had a physical shop in Vegas, so they were allowed to contract for maintenance services...or they could build a shop.
    it was , by far, more economically sensible to contract out than to have to buy more land and build a shop... so that's were I came in.

    my first move after winning those contracts was to head down to the Roadway terminal in San Bernadino ( they had a maintenance shop) and poach experienced mechanics that were already familiar with their equipment and procedures.
    one of those former union mechanics was the guy I sold my business to in the end.
    You're right - sometimes we cannot - but there are ways around it. For example, adding additional duties that are outside the scope and job title of the union who would do the work. Then the union would have to spend time and resources to make available those who could do the job or they'd have to reclassify the job title and identify the required training. By the time they did that - the time frame for the work would have to expire so a contractual exception is issued, contractors are hired and the do the work.

    It gets hairier if the work which has to be done is ALSO in a union building... in that case, we're screwed.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  9. #169
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    73,358

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    are you saying i'm incorrect in my estimation that you dislike freeloaders?

    the irony of you not comprehending my words after commenting on my comprehension is amusing.
    which you are unable to explain in direct English without pretending you are oh so clever that you can wrap your words in vitriolic insults.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  10. #170
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,496

    Re: Supreme Court to Weigh Dispute Over Union Fees

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Haha, it undermines the myth that unions help.
    if the unions did not help the employees, then why do many employers expend so much time and money trying to keep the unions out?
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    Quote Originally Posted by BrewerBob View Post
    The Democrats couldn't be more tone deaf if they had their eardrums incinerated with a hot poker.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Why confuse things with facts?

Page 17 of 26 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •