GM Strike

ShinerBock wrote:


So you are able to speak with every person representing you including the President?

Well I'm sure most replies, if I get one, come from staff. And the president does not represent me.

JRscooby wrote:
Can you name the union where the rank and file members do not vote to decide who will represent them when it comes times to decide how to spend the money?

I was talking about political candidates. Like the example I stated earlier with my brother and IBEW where the union was giving money to politicians that don't share the same policies and values as 90% of their members. They are essentially forced to give money to get people they don't agree with to get elected.

Please explain to me how if the leadership of the of the union, that is spending union money, disagrees with 90% of the members, the members do not vote that leadership out of office.

JRscooby wrote:
Bet you only cashed 2 out of 3 paychecks too.

Huh?

It has been proven often that if a plant organized, the wages went up, not only at that plant but other plants in the same industry, and other plants in the area.

JRscooby wrote:
On the macro level, before unions where widespread, maybe the church insisted business close on Sunday, but work 6 days a week was normal, and the best your kids could hope for was a job as "good" as yours. Then there was I time when a man could work 40 hours, and have money and time to enjoy something like a camping trip. After about 30 years of class warfare, we are again to the point when it is very hard for a family to get time off all the jobs needed to spend a weekend camping. But I got mine, you are on your own.

I am on my own and I prefer it that way. I became an expert in my field by my own merit which is why the last two companies I worked for sought me out to work for them. Because of this, I am able to negotiate pay, vacation, retirement, and stock options. Our healthcare sucks, but I am more than compensated in my bonuses for it. I don't want to be in a situation where someone else is negotiating my pay because I would have to make the same as everyone else that may or may not have a lower work ethic.

Good on you. But think about staffing a organization where many people do basically the same job. Can you say "Race to the Bottom"?

ShinerBock wrote:

Like JRscooby is when he calls people in right to work states "freeloaders". I don't think anyone called a union worker a name like that in this thread.

Whoa! Back up there! I don't think I called people in right to work states "freeloaders".
Say 10 people working side by each, all doing the same work, all getting paid the same, union negotiated rate, working under the same union negotiated work rules. 6 are paying the dues, 4 are not. Now say work gets slow, company decides need to cut staff, and wants to lay off the oldest because he will soon be eligible for the union negotiated retirement. By the so called "Right To Work" laws I have read, if the contract says the least senior workers should be first cut, union must represent the one the company want to cut, even if he has never paid a dime in dues. What do you call that old guy? If you paid dues, does that change his name?

Lantley wrote:
I'd like to think that the days of needing unions have passed us by . However I'm simply not naive enough to believe big corporations will do the right thing.
We have start ups that can't decide that people who work for them everyday are employees.
We have GM that thinks it's OK to have an employee work as a temp for multiple years with no real policy in place to become a full employee.
Unfortunately I believe unions still have their place. Just as unfortunate, unions bring their own bureaucracy,greed and corruption to the table.

Very well said.

I'd like to think that the days of needing unions have passed us by . However I'm simply not naive enough to believe big corporations will do the right thing.
We have start ups that can't decide that people who work for them everyday are employees.
We have GM that thinks it's OK to have an employee work as a temp for multiple years with no real policy in place to become a full employee.
Unfortunately I believe unions still have their place. Just as unfortunate, unions bring their own bureaucracy,greed and corruption to the table.

JRscooby wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
My Dad used to work for a utility company and I remember him telling me about when he attended a training course for a day in Houston and during a morning break the men went to a break room. When entering the room he was told the non union break room was down the hall. What he noticed in the union break room was a table full of pastries, Houston Chronicle news papers at every table, juice, bottle water and soda on ice and coffee dispensers full of coffee. When he entered the non union break room there was a coffee maker which they made coffee themselves and a vending machine.

I can understand that. With the non-union group, who was in charge of the break refreshments? And paid for them? Should the non-union workers be allowed to free-load?

The Utility company my Dad worked for was in charge of these break rooms since it was the companies training facility. From what I understood the union required these accomodations in their break room. I can't speak about the other non union workers but I know my Dad's comment was he saw nothing but waste in the union break room and was simply there because it was a required training program and Free loading is simply not in the culture of a small group of men who worked hard and efficient.

JIMNLIN wrote:

You loaded your question with your own opinions about what that political party long term goals are hense is the reason you won't get a answer.
Those claims have been around the union/company negotiations world for years spouted by anti union media pundits and their political supporters.

Have you been watching the political debates and gone to the candidates websites to see their views on that side? How about their voting record? It mirrors what I stated. Heck it even says it on wikipedia.

JIMNLIN wrote:
Seem like some that bash unions or union members like to tell a story about about one incident that was told to them by their 3rd wifes 2nd cousin or a 2nd-3rd party and base their bias on one or two incidents.

The story I told earlier happen to me, not anyone else.

JIMNLIN wrote:
Anywayz like all political threads or bash the union worker threads this could go back and forth with nothing new posted but the same old theories...opinions....retoric....bilge and propaganda we saw on the last union bashing thread.

Like JRscooby is when he calls people in right to work states "freeloaders". I don't think anyone called a union worker a name like that in this thread.

I have not bashed union workers at all in this thread either. I have stated my distrust and happening about the unions I have dealt with along with their general political affiliations and spending, but I have not bashed a union worker.

My question was about how can unions can support a political party whose long term goals will be worse for US jobs. You didn't answer that yet quoted my question. Hence the reason why I said you did not answer my question(yet you quoted it).

You loaded your question with your own opinions about what that political party long term goals are hense is the reason you won't get a answer.
Those claims have been around the union/company negotiations world for years spouted by anti union media pundits and their political supporters.

Seem like some that bash unions or union members like to tell a story about about one incident that was told to them by their 3rd wifes 2nd cousin or a 2nd-3rd party and base their bias on one or two incidents.

Anywayz like all political threads or bash the union worker threads this could go back and forth with nothing new posted but the same old theories...opinions....retoric....bilge and propaganda we saw on the last union bashing thread.

JRscooby wrote:


Well, you seam to think I get my info from unions. As a matter of fact, any time a politician is asking for my vote, I look at his donor list. If he is telling me something, check the list. If I see a ad paid for by dark money, I use logic, and the politician's donor list to make a guess about how well that politician will represent me. And when I have a question about the stance my rep is taking, I will ask them for a explanation. What's more, I write down what I need to remember for the next election.

So you are able to speak with every person representing you including the President?

JRscooby wrote:
Can you name the union where the rank and file members do not vote to decide who will represent them when it comes times to decide how to spend the money?

I was talking about political candidates. Like the example I stated earlier with my brother and IBEW where the union was giving money to politicians that don't share the same policies and values as 90% of their members. They are essentially forced to give money to get people they don't agree with to get elected.

JRscooby wrote:
Bet you only cashed 2 out of 3 paychecks too.

Huh?

JRscooby wrote:
On the macro level, before unions where widespread, maybe the church insisted business close on Sunday, but work 6 days a week was normal, and the best your kids could hope for was a job as "good" as yours. Then there was I time when a man could work 40 hours, and have money and time to enjoy something like a camping trip. After about 30 years of class warfare, we are again to the point when it is very hard for a family to get time off all the jobs needed to spend a weekend camping. But I got mine, you are on your own.

I am on my own and I prefer it that way. I became an expert in my field by my own merit which is why the last two companies I worked for sought me out to work for them. Because of this, I am able to negotiate pay, vacation, retirement, and stock options. Our healthcare sucks, but I am more than compensated in my bonuses for it. I don't want to be in a situation where someone else is negotiating my pay because I would have to make the same as everyone else that may or may not have a lower work ethic.

JIMNLIN wrote:

My replies are toward the thread about GM unions and unions in general as far as the employee goes. However your interpretation of unions and their political supporters and how the system is working for them is a bit exaggerated.
Nothing short sighted about company/union agreements.

My question was about how can unions can support a political party whose long term goals will be worse for US jobs. You didn't answer that yet quoted my question. Hence the reason why I said you did not answer my question(yet you quoted it).

JIMNLIN wrote:

LOL...wrong again with more exaggerations.
Lets flip this . I see your influnced by company and their political party machines.
Us vs them scare tactics is real and is working for unions and companies alike and very alive in the non union shops I've worked in.

People are biased from what they read or hear mostly from their political ties and shows in their comments about unions in general (pro or con).
Just like politics I'm not going to change your or anyones mind.... on the GM union contract thread in general...and no one is going to change mine.

Actually I used to be a Kool-aid drinking union guy until one day I saw a union shift leader post the blame on a young guy who I went to orientation with at a paper mill I used to work evening shift at in college. The union leader was the head forklift driver who delivered paper roles to the corrugator machine. Everyone knew he had a cot out behind all the roles and purposely overloaded the machine so he could take a nap. One day, the regional GM was taking a walk through the warehouse with the plant manager and they stumbled upon the cot.

The union shift leader blamed it on the new guy who just had his third child and was so excited to have a good job. I told the truth about whose it was, but the union leader got everyone else to back him. So they fired the kid I went to orientation with and black balled me from that point on. After that, I was a little more skeptical about all the BS propaganda they used to drive into us to hate white collar workers and upper management. I found actual facts proving it was BS, but it made no difference since the rest were just too hooked on the kool-aide.

Later on, when we were in contracts for a pay increase, the talks stalled for weeks and the union leaders told us it was because the company was not meeting our demands. About six months before this, I started dating an intern that worked in office around the executives. I asked her why the company is trying to low ball us and stall the talks. She said they weren't and that they agreed to all of the contract from day one, but the union said they wanted a few weeks to look it over. So the union was telling us that they were fighting for our rights, but in actuality they were purposely stalling the talks to make it seem like it was the companies fault.

I also have friends and family members with their own horror stories about the unions they were apart of. Don't get me wrong, there are good stories too, but it was what I stated above that made me verify all the propaganda the union was feeding us to find out that most was not true, not a political party as you stated. Basically, I caught them in one lie, then another, and they lost my trust so I started checking whether everything else they were telling was a lie too which most of it was.

ShinerBock wrote:

time2roll wrote:

JRscooby wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
My Dad used to work for a utility company and I remember him telling me about when he attended a training course for a day in Houston and during a morning break the men went to a break room. When entering the room he was told the non union break room was down the hall. What he noticed in the union break room was a table full of pastries, Houston Chronicle news papers at every table, juice, bottle water and soda on ice and coffee dispensers full of coffee. When he entered the non union break room there was a coffee maker which they made coffee themselves and a vending machine.

I can understand that. With the non-union group, who was in charge of the break refreshments? And paid for them? Should the non-union workers be allowed to free-load?

So did the Union actually pay for those pastries or did they bully the training camp to provide if the union sent enough people? Did the training camp give a union discount on the classes on top of providing snacks? We will never know.

Another aspect is if it was at a hotel conference room. Most hotel conferences I have booked come with those kind of things as a part of the package. This kind of stuff is generally supplied at all training seminar's I have been to that lasted a day. If this were the case, then the union guys would be dicks for not sharing something that was free.

This was a safety training class and the facility was the utility company’s.