# Do you guys need to own a truck/tools?



## guvnor (Jun 13, 2009)

Just curious, when you are in the union are you required to own your own truck, and/or your own tools to bring to job sites? 

Im going to apply for apprenticeship soon and I have an old Ford F150, im wondering if I should hold on to it in the meantime.


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

guvnor said:


> Just curious, when you are in the union are you required to own your own truck, and/or your own tools to bring to job sites?
> 
> Im going to apply for apprenticeship soon and I have an old Ford F150, im wondering if I should hold on to it in the meantime.


You will need your own transportation. As far as tools, they have a very specific tool list that you will be required to have - which really, isnt all that much. Hand tools is about as far as that goes.

~Matt


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

You need reliable transportation for you and your personal tools, those that are requested by the union and a list of those tools should be provided.

Any traveling from job to job on work time should be provided, any tools above the basic hand tools are provided.


----------



## guvnor (Jun 13, 2009)

Thanks guys. 

I knew you needed transportation of some sort, but wasnt sure if you needed to own a "work truck" or not. 

Do you find its better or more convenient to own a truck? Like for driving on rough jobs sites or anything? Or is it not really an issue.


----------



## al13nw4r3LC76 (Apr 6, 2009)

you mean I'm not supposed to be carrying my GL Hydraulic KO Set that goes up to 4"? ............ JK Imagine the looks that would get you. ha!


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

guvnor said:


> Thanks guys.
> 
> I knew you needed transportation of some sort, but wasnt sure if you needed to own a "work truck" or not.
> 
> Do you find its better or more convenient to own a truck? Like for driving on rough jobs sites or anything? Or is it not really an issue.


 
After 12 months with a car at age 17, my primary vehicle has always been a truck or van. Mainly because I destroy cars, with tools, camping gear, kayaks, diving gear, and the like.


----------



## knowshorts (Jan 9, 2009)

guvnor said:


> Do you find its better or more convenient to own a truck?


500 pounds of rabbit fit in the back of a 150 a lot better than the back seat of a Geo Metro.

How old is the 150? Early 90's? If it is, keep it. Great truck.


----------



## Boneshaker (Jul 31, 2009)

They don't care how you get to work, you could ride a skate board for all anyone cares as long as you are there at 7:00am with tools in hand.


----------



## Toronto Sparky (Apr 12, 2009)

You bring your own "work truck" and you will not be union for long.. 
Union guys don't like it when one carries extra tools and/or material in your personal vehicle. It gives you an advantage and that is ani-union.


----------



## Frasbee (Apr 7, 2008)

Toronto Sparky said:


> You bring your own "work truck" and you will not be union for long..
> Union guys don't like it when one carries extra tools and/or material in your personal vehicle. It gives you an advantage and that is ani-union.


Well if everybody else bought the extra tools, nobody would have an advantage.

I think they call that "raising the bar".


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

knowshorts said:


> How old is the 150? Early 90's? If it is, keep it. Great truck.


"Ford" and "great truck" aren't words that go together. :laughing:


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Toronto Sparky said:


> You bring your own "work truck" and you will not be union for long..
> Union guys don't like it when one carries extra tools and/or material in your personal vehicle. It gives you an advantage and that is ani-union.


 They love this type of thing when I worked out of local 379.  Not me.:no:


----------



## william1978 (Sep 21, 2008)

Peter D said:


> "Ford" and "great truck" aren't words that go together. :laughing:


 Amen!!!:thumbsup:


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

guvnor said:


> Thanks guys.
> 
> I knew you needed transportation of some sort, but wasnt sure if you needed to own a "work truck" or not.
> 
> Do you find its better or more convenient to own a truck? Like for driving on rough jobs sites or anything? Or is it not really an issue.


99% of the time...it's not an issue.
The 1% of time, there is a "paved" road...sometimes it's just 3/4" QP..but a "paved road" nonetheless.




Boneshaker said:


> They don't care how you get to work, you could ride a skate board for all anyone cares as long as you are there at 7:00am with tools in hand.


I've seen a guy use one of those little gas powered "razors"....made for a quick trip from the bus/train station...all 200# of him looked pretty dam silly :laughing:



Toronto Sparky said:


> You bring your own "work truck" and you will not be union for long..
> Union guys don't like it when one carries extra tools and/or material in your personal vehicle. It gives you an advantage and that is ani-union.


It's not a question of "like"...it's a question of rules...the rule is: No company material/equipment in personal vehicles "unless paid at the current IRS mileage guidelines".

The question I have is:
When some malcontent breaks into/steals a man's personal vehicle - whose insurance pays....and what do they pay for?
Does the man's ins. pay for the contractors loss?
Does the contractor's ins pay for the man's loss?

It's really a messy situation at best.




Frasbee said:


> Well if everybody else bought the extra tools, nobody would have an advantage.
> 
> I think they call that "raising the bar".


I think they would be called contractors :blink:
Not exactly....but I see carpenters humping everything from extension cords, skil saws, lasers, ladders, etc to/from their own vehicles.
The way the carpenter's contract is written it seems they are producing various "contractors"...framers, trim men....etc...basically requiring everything they need to open a shop. 
IMHO, ultimately dragging wages down...like we see with today's economy and the flurry of gibberish at CL.


----------



## Lucky (Sep 16, 2009)

If you go on a job with 424, you carry ONLY, ONLY, ONLY, what is on the tool list or you take the excess tools home or back to camp. A good steward will tell you ONCE!!! Most fellow workers I know carry a small toolbox, usually plastered with union stickers.
Lucky


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

> Originally Posted by Boneshaker
> They don't care how you get to work, you could ride a skate board for all anyone cares as long as you are there at 7:00am with tools in hand.


In the 70's I rode a bike to work. NO ONE could understand why, I would get offers all the time for a ride home,.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Lucky said:


> If you go on a job with 424, you carry ONLY, ONLY, ONLY, what is on the tool list or you take the excess tools home or back to camp. A good steward will tell you ONCE!!! Most fellow workers I know carry a small toolbox,



I would be ashamed to work like that.

When it gets to the point when the union starts sending guys home for having to many tools it shows how far out of touch the union has become.


----------



## Lucky (Sep 16, 2009)

So Bob, do you really think it is fair to your fellow workers if you have $10,000 worth of tools and they have the tool list? (In 424, the tool list would run about $250 to $300, if you use Klein or equal.) That is what the tool list is all about, fairness. An old hand could bring $10,000 worth, benders all the way from 1/2 emt to Flip top to 4" hydraulic, threading tools, cordless or corded power tools, ramset or Hilti. We generally work for name brand contractors, Fluor, Bechtel, KBR, not for Mom and Pop contractors. I would blush to have your attitude. Not a union attitude at all. You are mout of touch with what the union is. Anyway, the stewards only send the EXCESS TOOLS home, unless the fellow workers bring the stuff back. 
Lucky


----------



## lectric_hand6855 (Jan 24, 2009)

Also, I don't think it would be a bad idea to at least add a cordless drill to the tool list.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Lucky said:


> So Bob, do you really think it is fair to your fellow workers if you have $10,000 worth of tools and they have the tool list?


Hey news flash ....... life ain't fair, deal with it. Life is a competition.




> I would blush to have your attitude. Not a union attitude at all.


No I will never have 'the union attitude' if that means being less productive just to be fair to other members.


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

guvnor said:


> are you required to own your own truck, and/or your own tools to bring to job sites?


To the job site, no. If you get into the program, they will probably provide you with the basic hand tools and bags. Don't go out and buy stuff until you know for sure, other wise you could be wasting your money.

Should you have tools, hell yes. The only thing holding me back from having a full-on working resi-commercial operation, is about seven dead 18V dewalt batteries, and all the necessary paperwork.

Well, I don't have a 'Macho' in the garage, they're around a grand a piece, but you would be surprised by what else is in there.

Should you advertise that you have all these tools to your coworkers? Probably not, unless you are certain that you know the person well enough to talk in confidence. These things take time to accumulate, I may have tools, but I also watch an early-90's 19" television bought from walmart, so plan accordingly.


----------



## Toronto Sparky (Apr 12, 2009)

Union life is not a competition. 
Knowledge is what you need to be a great union electrician, not the most tools.


----------



## RUSSIAN (Mar 4, 2008)

Does the mechanic with $40,000 in tools fix your car better then the guy with $20,000? maybe, but his debt is twice as much, maybe he"s more concerned with his tools then your car. Yes there are mechanics with $40,000 in tools and boxes. Why, because they are in competition with each other, not who can do a better job but who has the latest box, or air tool.
Anyway the point to the tool list is because not everyone has the ability to replace drills and benders and K.O sets etc while some guys do. Is the guy who doesn't have kids or debt or whatever a better wiremen, doubtful. in fact the guy who needs the money the most is probably the harder working, showing up everyday kinda guy(again, not always). When I worked nonunion I bought 2 drill sets in 3 years. My dewalt cost $300 and I was making $12.00 an hour at the time. I still have the drill and the batteries are worthless.... 
Nowadays the contractors replaces the batteries and I worry about the work I'm doing, not my $300 drill.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Toronto Sparky said:


> Union life is not a competition.


Well that is just sad.

I guess your also into kids sports that do not keep score 'Everyones a winner' 




> Knowledge is what you need to be a great union electrician, not the most tools.


Is it fair to the idiots if you use that knowledge? 

How is that different from have better tools?

Knowledge is a tool.








RUSSIAN said:


> Does the mechanic with $40,000 in tools fix your car better then the guy with $20,000? maybe, but his debt is twice as much, maybe he"s more concerned with his tools then your car. Yes there are mechanics with $40,000 in tools and boxes. Why, because they are in competition with each other, not who can do a better job but who has the latest box, or air tool.
> Anyway the point to the tool list is because not everyone has the ability to replace drills and benders and K.O sets etc while some guys do. Is the guy who doesn't have kids or debt or whatever a better wiremen, doubtful. in fact the guy who needs the money the most is probably the harder working, showing up everyday kinda guy(again, not always). When I worked nonunion I bought 2 drill sets in 3 years. My dewalt cost $300 and I was making $12.00 an hour at the time. I still have the drill and the batteries are worthless....
> Nowadays the contractors replaces the batteries and I worry about the work I'm doing, not my $300 drill.



Spin it however you want, but the bottom line is forcing people not to use tools they may want to use to be more productive is hard to justify. :whistling2:


----------



## Notelitus (Sep 18, 2009)

miller_elex said:


> Well, I don't have a 'Macho' in the garage, they're around a grand a piece,


What is a Macho?


----------



## Notelitus (Sep 18, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Spin it however you want, but the bottom line is forcing people not to use tools they may want to use to be more productive is hard to justify. :whistling2:


Most locals consider their tool list a minimum, meaning you could bring more. I'm sure they would frown upon you bringing in your own ladder and rotary hammer, etc. But if someone doesn't like me using a spintight (nut driver) because it's not on my tool list, they are going to have to go pound sand.




Celtic said:


> It's not a question of "like"...it's a question of rules...the rule is: No company material/equipment in personal vehicles "unless paid at the current IRS mileage guidelines".


I'm in NJ too, what local are you in that has this in the bylaws? I never looked myself, but it was explained to us that a contractor can not force you to use your own vehicle for company work. If you choose to use it, that is ok, and you can except reimbursement. However, there is no demand that you get paid if you don't require it.

I used my own vehicle multiple times over the years, mostly because I just didn't mind doing it and it helped out a lot. Only once did I ask for reimbursement because it was using a lot of gas. 

Like I said, I never looked it up myself, but I remember talking about it in class as an apprentice and recently I asked a BA just to make sure it was still current and he confirmed it.

Using your own vehicle is another thing that the other guys or shop stewart might have issue with, but they can pound the same sand as before.


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

Notelitus said:


> Using your own vehicle is another thing that the other guys or shop stewart might have issue with, but they can pound the same sand as before.



Hopefully....your employer won't tell you to pound sand when some malcontent breaks into your car to steal the company tools....or steals your vehicle for the tools and content.

Can you imagine the paperwork cluster fork over this issue?

The employer will be none too happy that his tools have been boosted - are YOU going to reimburse him....your insurance company?

Will the employer believe that YOU didn't steal/break them....maybe doing sidework with all his tools...or because your xmas wasn't up to par?


It's potentially a messy situation at best.


You should read your CBA, By-laws and Constitution and think: 
Why is this in here?


----------



## Lucky (Sep 16, 2009)

I was raised union mainly by my grandfather, who was a railroad telegrapher. Bob, you obviously were not raised union. Unions originally werre organised to decrease the inevitable competition between workers. However, you have benefited from this decrease in competition. Whether you are or are not union, the wages and benefits won by the unions over the last 100 years have increased your living standards. Electrical workers used to have some of the worse working conditions; the work was extremely dangerous, due in part to a total lack of safety training, and of course to the employers rush to get the work done. Personally, I have seen more safety awareness, and training since I started working in the trade, over 40 years ago. Ladder safety, wearing of fall arrest equipment, wearing hearing protection, even wearing gloves all have become part of working union. Your experience in the trade itself seems to reflect my own. I am a JW in both construction and maintenance work. The last 30 years have spent working union in the Alberta Tar Sands; previous to that I worked in the hardrock mining industry, mainly underground as an electrician. Safety awareness and training is pretty thorough in the Tar Sands. This is driven by the unions, including the IBEW. I saw the lack of safety awareness with non-union companies such as Ledcor. When I worked in the tool crib on an open job I was on, I used to get safety reports. Invariably, Ledcor's safety practices were not up to union standards. I saw some Ledcor workers using an extension ladder as a scaffold. My GF did not believe me until I showed him the situation. I must admit I did not believe it myself until I took a second look. The ladder was removed when the client safety person came into the situation. This is what working non-union means for the workers involved. My impression was they never got the kind of safety training union workers get as a matter of course. Lower wages, inferior benefits are only part of the problem. Little or no representation on the job also is a problem. 
Jobs I worked on ranged in price from a few hundred thousand dollars to 10 billion dollars, so the companies involved could afford to work safe. No Mom and pop outfits in the Tar Sands.
Lucky


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

Well said Lucky.

Unfortunately, today, there is no shortage of people trying to undo the sacrifices made by your grandfather's generation. Sadly, these folks are all beneficiaries of those sacrifices. I am all for healthy competition. But when an unsafe practice kills you dead, that $40 an hour package is all worthless. Same to be said for guzzling three rockstars a day and burning out at 30. The money don't mean sh1t if you don't have your health.

Thanks for putting the day back in perspective Lucky.


----------



## RUSSIAN (Mar 4, 2008)

Bob Badger said:


> Well that is just sad.
> 
> I guess your also into kids sports that do not keep score 'Everyones a winner'
> 
> ...


No it's not. Every tool I need that is not on the list is at the job waiting for me, or will be the the next day. Every man on the job has the same opportunity to be productive. Less competition means less back stabbing, less a$$ kissing and an overall better sense of comradery(in my experience)
Not everyone treats life as a competition. I could care less what other people are doing, and have no desire to be better then them.


----------



## Notelitus (Sep 18, 2009)

Celtic said:


> Hopefully....your employer won't tell you to pound sand when some malcontent breaks into your car to steal the company tools....or steals your vehicle for the tools and content.
> 
> Can you imagine the paperwork cluster fork over this issue?
> 
> ...


 I've used my truck to haul material or tools around the jobsite and I've gone out to get material or tools from the shop or the supply house. Never a realistic time when something would be stolen or when i could use it for sidework during the workday:laughing:


> You should read your CBA, By-laws and Constitution and think:
> Why is this in here?


Like I said, it's been confirmed multiple times that the only issue is that a contractor can not force you to use your vehicle, and you can require payment if you choose to use it. That is what our bylaws say. Again, what local are you quoting this bylaw from? What local requires "IRS mileage guidelines" payment or whatever that was you said earlier?


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

RUSSIAN said:


> No it's not. Every tool I need that is not on the list is at the job waiting for me, or will be the the next day. Every man on the job has the same opportunity to be productive. Less competition means less back stabbing, less a$$ kissing and an overall better sense of comradery(in my experience)


As the union loses it's market share.



> Not everyone treats life as a competition. I could care less what other people are doing, and have no desire to be better then them.


Somehow that just seems like a strange statement. have you check for your nad's lately.


----------



## Notelitus (Sep 18, 2009)

Lucky said:


> Bob, you obviously were not raised union. Unions originally werre organised to decrease the inevitable competition between workers.


Actually, unions were started to propagate the socialist ideal. The propaganda was that unions were for the workers and better treatment etc. etc. But the people pushing unions, the people who started it everything, had one goal in mind...


----------



## Notelitus (Sep 18, 2009)

RUSSIAN said:


> No it's not. Every tool I need that is not on the list is at the job waiting for me, or will be the the next day. Every man on the job has the same opportunity to be productive. Less competition means less back stabbing, less a$$ kissing and an overall better sense of comradery(in my experience)


Tell me, how is ANYTHING you just explained better for the customer?

Do you think Ed Hill would say the words that you just did?


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Notelitus said:


> Actually, unions were started to propagate the socialist ideal. The propaganda was that unions were for the workers and better treatment etc. etc. But the people pushing unions, the people who started it everything, had one goal in mind...


Excellent point. Unions are fundamentally socialist in their guiding principles. In fact, what some have even admitted in this thread bears this out.


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

Peter D said:


> Unions are fundamentally socialist in their guiding principles. In fact, what some have even admitted in this thread bears this out.


Well then, lets talk about socialist Canada, socialist Germany, socialist Japan, oh, and lets not forget about the nation founded on prophecy, socialist Israel. Israel was founded by socialist labor leaders to be a worker's paradise, check your Hebrew history.

We can go round and round on this one, 

lets bring up capitalist Mexico, or capitalist China, how about the capitalist Phillippines, or capitalist Indonesia? If you would rather work in the Mexican economy, where it is freely competitive, no regulations to hold you back, then you've really got your head screwed on backwards.:thumbup:


----------



## RUSSIAN (Mar 4, 2008)

brian john said:


> As the union loses it's market share.
> 
> 
> 
> Somehow that just seems like a strange statement. have you check for your nad's lately.


Are you really equating market share to company supplied tools???? Market share directly equates to lower wages, lower overhead and anti union sentiment.
My nads are fully in tact and I stand by my statement. Maybe it's a west coast thing, but I don't "keep up with Jones's" nor do I go to work worried about my job because "Joe blow" has better tools then me.

Brian, for someone who operates a union shop, you sure are anti-union:laughing:


----------



## RUSSIAN (Mar 4, 2008)

Notelitus said:


> Tell me, how is ANYTHING you just explained better for the customer?
> 
> Do you think Ed Hill would say the words that you just did?


The customer doesn't care about anything but the price and the product. It's not my job to sell the product, only install it in a professional, productive manner. 
And for the record, before the recession 3 of the top 5 shops in the country, terms of revenue, were based in 332. Properly run businesses can thrive even while paying there employees top dollar:whistling2:

What part would Ed Hill have a problem with it?

And when did I say anything about the customer???


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

RUSSIAN said:


> Brian, for someone who operates a union shop, you sure are anti-union:laughing:


Actually I see both sides of the issue, if the open shop guys were spreading the BS as deep as the union men I'd be giving them the other side of the story.

I have always said for the worker being union is the best way to go. What I do not like is the BS and propaganda that some swallow hook line and sinker.

Be proud of being union but cut the other side some slack.

The union is not open to everyone. 

In addition look at the apprentices wondering what to do as they sit and wait for work. And one union poster noted he husband is NOT ALLOWED to work at a job outside the IBEW, SEEMS STUPID TO ME.

I think a change in attitude in the union would benefit them a lot more than dragging a giant rat out to complain that men are doing work in their "AREA"


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

RUSSIAN said:


> Not everyone treats life as a competition. I could care less what other people are doing, and have no desire to be better then them.



:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

Then by all means stay wrapped up in the protective arms of the union. 

Me, I like to know I personally earned what I get and that is was not received through the intimidation and extortion of past trade members. :whistling2:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

RUSSIAN said:


> The customer doesn't care about anything but the price and the product.


I agree.




> It's not my job to sell the product, only install it in a professional, productive manner.


Well it should be your concern unless you want to be sitting on a bench.






> Properly run businesses can thrive even while paying there employees top dollar:whistling2:


They sure can, and they do not have to be union to do so.


----------



## al13nw4r3LC76 (Apr 6, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> They sure can, and they do not have to be union to do so.


They dont have to be union to receive the best wages but GENERALLY Union wireman make much more then a non union wireman. Go ahead tell me that is brainwashed Brian.....


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

al13nw4r3LC76 said:


> They dont have to be union to receive the best wages but GENERALLY Union wireman make much more then a non union wireman. Go ahead tell me that is brainwashed Brian.....


If you read any of my post you see I support that idea, BUT there are exceptions.

What you seem to be missing in all this is not that I am anti union I am anti PIN HEAD and you seem to want to fall into this definition.

Uninformed, narrow minded, unwilling to expand your knowledge base and swallowing everything that is spoon fed you.

I know you are an apprentice and may or may not have any real world experiences but TRY expanding you field of knowledge.


----------



## wwilson174 (Apr 25, 2008)

brian john said:


> If you read any of my post you see I support that idea, BUT there are exceptions.
> 
> What you seem to be missing in all this is not that I am anti union I am anti PIN HEAD and you seem to want to fall into this definition.
> 
> ...


If you read BJ's posts you will quickly see that he prefers the ad hominen style of debate where instead of defending his position on the subject he personally attacks his protagonist with personal attacks and insults. those who choose this style of debate do so because they feel that their position on the issue is not strong enough to stand on it's own so they resort to name calling and otherwise abusive remarks. When I personally encounter this behaviour I just declare victory and move on! BillW.


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

wwilson174 said:


> If you read BJ's posts you will quickly see that he prefers the ad hominen style of debate.


He used to be civilized.

Maybe he's been going to them townhalls lately.

Maybe B. John still thinks WND is a real news website.

People on both sides are never going to change their minds, no matter how much we try to reason with each other. Its best to respect the difference, and not antagonize each other.

This union sub-forum is a lightning rod for union-haters. They all want to come here and speak their piece about how they were wronged by the IBEW.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

It would be very difficult to try to pin the 'anti-union' label on Brian when he has operated as a union contractor for so many years.


----------



## wwilson174 (Apr 25, 2008)

MDShunk said:


> It would be very difficult to try to pin the 'anti-union' label on Brian when he has operated as a union contractor for so many years.


 
I personally know many union contractors who are anti- union, they are union for other reasons than admiration. BillW


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

wwilson174 said:


> I personally know many union contractors who are anti- union, they are union for other reasons than admiration.


This is true. Many union contractors are union out of necessity, not because they give a rip about the union way of life. As Marc says, the union is a great temporary labor organization. :thumbsup:


----------



## wwilson174 (Apr 25, 2008)

miller_elex said:


> He used to be civilized.
> 
> Maybe he's been going to them townhalls lately.
> 
> ...


Best words I've read all day!


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

Many times I have stated my points, I feel union is best for the men. I see little or no benefit for owner. Other than knowing your men are taken care of and have some of the best benefits and pay around. I have also stated I do not use the hall for a man power source.

When any men attack the other side I copt an attitude, especially when the poster NEVER worked the other side, but simply is posting when he was taught in apprenticeship school.

The only argument I know of that open shop men use is, They like working 12 months a year, they do not want the union hassle or paying dues. The answer to these
When I was working in the field I missed one day, dues are minimal compared to the regular high pay and benefits (for the most part). And I have been hassled some by PINHEADS, for wearing a Hat from a store that was on the no shop list and for working too hard on one occasion.

From the union side I have seen all sorts of things, from lies, to name calling, to salting, to the inflatable BIG RAT and on and on. I know the two sides will never meet, BUT I think the union would win more backers (electricians and the general public) if they avoided these tactics.


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

Brian John, don't think we don't appreciate you, because believe me, we do. Too bad you are not the typical owner out there, it would even be great if more PM's had your attitude in regards to the men. 

We could all use more Dale Carnegie advice. Both sides, up and down the aisle. Everybody go out and get a Dale Carnegie book today. If you have one, pull it down off the shelf and dust it off. People who have read Dale Carnegie books know what I am talking about. If you don't know, well, now you know.


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

brian john said:


> Many times I have stated my points, I feel union is best for the men. I see little or no benefit for owner. Other than knowing your men are taken care of and have some of the best benefits and pay around. I have also stated I do not use the hall for a man power source.


That doesn't make any sense. 

The union doesn't give the men the benefits, YOU do. You pay for everything, and I bet you could get away with the same coverage for less than paying the hall to do it for you. 

The benefit of the union to the owner is A) being able to charge more by having union labor and B) jobs that require union labor. And then there is C) trailing far behind, the ability to have unlimited (and extremely expensive) manpower at your call, which you say you don't use anyway...

Other than that, why would you choose to be a union contractor? You say it's for the men, but the men only need the benefit of a union if you aren't treating them right in the first place. If you are treating them right, the hall is nothing more than a parasitic drain.

So tell us the truth...


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

I love these one hit wonders who appear out of nowhere and just dive right into the fray......never to be seen again.


----------



## paul d. (Jul 13, 2008)

Electriad said:


> That doesn't make any sense.
> 
> The union doesn't give the men the benefits, YOU do. You pay for everything, and I bet you could get away with the same coverage for less than paying the hall to do it for you.
> 
> ...


 1st post... welcome . i think.


----------



## RUSSIAN (Mar 4, 2008)

I can't speak for every local, But I pay for all of my health care, and about a 1/3 of my pensions, the contractor only pays a portion on my pensions.


----------



## RUSSIAN (Mar 4, 2008)

Bob Badger said:


> I agree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I mean ALL their employees, not just the select few that the owner deems worthy. I know this is a big problem with open shop guys. But IMO and in my area this system works best. Union wages are high here, and they should be. We still make less then the fitters and tin knockers, yet have more schooling, more tools, more responsibility and could possibly kill someone if not careful. But market share is down and we get what we can. Unfortunately the larger open shops around here do partake in shady business practices(yes they have been cited and fined) which make it hard for the smaller union shops to compete. The larger union shops still hold pretty strong as most large jobs are union jobsites


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Electriad said:


> That doesn't make any sense.


You're the one who's not making sense. How's about backing up and giving Brian a big "Thank You" for employing, and giving specialized training to, your brethren?


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

RUSSIAN said:


> I mean ALL their employees, not just the select few that the owner deems worthy.


But if the person is not worthy why should they get paid as well as someone who is?

Workers are not identical clones, each one is different.

Is it fair to the better worker that the less skilled or motivated get the same pay?




> Unfortunately the larger open shops around here do partake in shady business practices(yes they have been cited and fined) which make it hard for the smaller union shops to compete.


Are you saying all the open shops do shady things and Union shops do not?

Please don't try to give me that bull.

Just as each worker is different each owner / management is different.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Bob Badger said:


> But if the person is not worthy why should they get paid as well as someone who is?
> 
> Workers are not identical clones, each one is different.
> 
> Is it fair to the better worker that the less skilled or motivated get the same pay?


It sure sounds like he's saying that everyone should be paid the same. I thought I had entered Bizarro Land when I read that.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

One thing I would like to see implemented is step grade pay raises, few 1 year JWs are as savvy as a 5th year JW. Maybe a slow increase in pay to full scale?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

brian john said:


> One thing I would like to see implemented is step grade pay raises, few 1 year JWs are as savvy as a 5th year JW. Maybe a slow increase in pay to full scale?


Oh, you mean, like in the regular work world? And not like the Bizarro-Land work world created by the unions?


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> You're the one who's not making sense.


I disagree for the reasons that I stated. If you'd like to challenge the points, go right ahead. Saying that the sole reason your company is signatory is for the men does not make any sense. The contractor can give the same benefits for less cost if he doesn't have to pay the union as an expensive and many times thieving middleman.


> How's about backing up and giving Brian a big "Thank You" for employing, and giving specialized training to, your brethren?


Why exactly would I thank Brian for being a signatory contractor? Are you really that self righteous to believe something like that should happen??


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Electriad said:


> The contractor can give the same benefits for less cost if he doesn't have to pay the union as an expensive and many times thieving middleman.


Yeah, explain to me how an independent contractor is supposed to supply transferable benefits to his men?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Electriad said:


> Why exactly would I thank Brian for being a signatory contractor? Are you really that self righteous to believe something like that should happen??


Isn't that one of the stated goals of the IBEW? Namely, unionize electrical work? To that end, you should thank the signatories for helping you toward that goal. Why wouldn't you?


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Yeah, explain to me how an independent contractor is supposed to supply transferable benefits to his men?


Why transferable? He just said he keeps his men working even in slow times.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Electriad said:


> Why transferable? He just said he keeps his men working even in slow times.


Hey, you're the one who said that an open shop can provide the same benefits. :whistling2:


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Isn't that one of the stated goals of the IBEW? Namely, unionize electrical work? To that end, you should thank the signatories for helping you toward that goal. Why wouldn't you?


 I couldn't care less about the IBEW goals. If I did, I would go on a long drive around the country to thank every signatory contractor 

My question here is how Brian John could say he is doing it for the men. 

In your last post you gave one small item that might be a reason, yet my reply seems to refute that. Any other possible reasons?

Unions are a parasitic drain, they mainly only benefit the worker and only in the case of the employer not willing to give the amenities that the worker wants without a group strongarm. 

The only small benefit to a contractor is unlimited skilled men at your call, which he said he doesn't use. Other than that, it is like I said earlier:



Electriad said:


> The benefit of the union to the owner is A) being able to charge more by having union labor and B) jobs that require union labor. And then there is C) trailing far behind, the ability to have unlimited (and extremely expensive) manpower at your call.


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Hey, you're the one who said that an open shop can provide the same benefits. :whistling2:


I was clearly being specific to Brian Johns situation, I said that earlier. This is about his company, and the fact that he says he does it for the men.


----------



## BryanMD (Dec 31, 2007)

Electriad said:


> I was clearly being specific to Brian Johns situation, I said that earlier. This is about his company, and the fact that he says he does it for the men.


Because unlike most "install crew" EC's who compete against each other for the plain vanilla work... Brian specializes in testing and does it very well.

Because of this specialty especially... he has the option with almost no competitive recourse to EASILY go merit shop and still keep almost everyone of his employees and almost everyone of his customers.

But he doesn't. Why? Because he recognizes that the IBEW benefits package is better for his men. Wages he already exceeds the contract on.

Getting through yet?


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

BryanMD said:


> Because unlike most "install crew" EC's who compete against each other for the plain vanilla work... Brian specializes in testing and does it very well.
> 
> Because of this specialty especially... he has the option with almost no competitive recourse to EASILY go merit shop and still keep almost everyone of his employees and almost everyone of his customers.
> 
> ...


No, you are not "getting through yet". Out of your entire post, the only reason you gave why he would be a union contractor is, "Because he recognizes that the IBEW benefits package is better for his men.". That's funny because that is exactly what I said he could do better paying himself instead of paying the union to do it in my first post.


----------



## knowshorts (Jan 9, 2009)

brian john said:


> One thing I would like to see implemented is step grade pay raises, few 1 year JWs are as savvy as a 5th year JW. Maybe a slow increase in pay to full scale?


So then you would have a 10 year apprenticeship? That ain't gonna happen. Yet, I firmly believe, that once a guy turns out, he is just a 100% apprentice (for the next 5 years). And under no circumstances, should a guy who just turns out, run a crew.


----------



## BryanMD (Dec 31, 2007)

Electriad said:


> No, you are not "getting through yet". Out of your entire post, the only reason you gave *why he would be a union contractor* is, "Because he recognizes that the IBEW benefits package is better for his men.". That's funny because that is exactly what I said he could do better *paying himself* instead of paying the union to do it in my first post.



1) *why he would be a union contractor *isn't the issue. That goes back to when he formed his company and is based in him being an IBEW electrician. The issue is why he chooses to REMAIN a signatory contractor.

2) despite being able to *pay himself* better he chooses to remain an IBEW signatory contractor. Why? "Because he recognizes that the IBEW benefits package is better for his men."

3) *what magic is the hall giving him*? Absolutely none.

One more time.... are you getting it yet?


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

knowshorts said:


> So then you would have a 10 year apprenticeship? That ain't gonna happen. Yet, I firmly believe, that once a guy turns out, he is just a 100% apprentice (for the next 5 years). And under no circumstances, should a guy who just turns out, run a crew.


I've always agreed with you on this issue on paper. 

However, out in the real world I have seen many crews run by "6th year apprentices" that were run well and made money. 


I do believe there should be a pay grade, but not based on duration. I think you should be paid by the job you are doing. I just can't see an "electrician" who is moving material and throwing lights into a ceiling make the same exact wage as the men who are doing the hard work, the jobs that require skill, experience, responsibility, etc.


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

BryanMD said:


> 1) *why he would be a union contractor *isn't the issue.


Well then why are you in this conversation? That is *exactly* the issue at hand.

Apparently *you* are the one who isn't getting it yet...



Brian John runs a company with specialized services and good men that he is willing to pay over union scale, is that correct? He keeps his men working and he doesn't call in to get any men out of the hall, again, correct? Sine he is a signatory contractor, he pays massive amounts of money to the hall for the men's benefits, correct? This is what I read directly from here. 

Knowing this, what magic is the hall giving him for his men that he simply can't pay for himself? 

My simple contention is that being a signatory contractor is not giving his men any special benefits. Being a signatory contractor is a benefit to the company itself in this case.


----------



## BryanMD (Dec 31, 2007)

Electriad said:


> My simple contention is that being a signatory contractor is not giving his men any special benefits. Being a signatory contractor is a benefit to the company itself in this case.


Which is what makes you wrong.
Your contention may apply to the other 100 signatory companies in the local... but it doesn't apply to highly specialized work the same as it does to the regular plain vanilla "install this and move on " EC contracting work.

Brian doesn't need the union to succeed and probably never did.
The training his men use everyday isn't in the JATC (or ABC) curriculum.

The transferability of the benefits available ONLY through the union can not be compared to what ANY merit shop offers. 

I'm not saying I agree with Brian. On a business level he is nuts; but on a personal level he is an honorable gentleman. That is rare today.


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

BryanMD said:


> Which is what makes you wrong.


 Why am I wrong? You haven't given a reason yet.



> Your contention may apply to the other 100 signatory companies in the local... but it doesn't apply to highly specialized work the same as it does to the regular plain vanilla "install this and move on " EC contracting work.


 That's the second time you said this, but it still doesn't change anything.


> Brian doesn't need the union to succeed and probably never did.
> The training his men use everyday isn't in the JATC (or ABC) curriculum.


I'm sure you are right, he doesn't need the union to succeed, I never said he did. All I said is that the union is a benefit to the company itself, not the men. He could give the same benefits to his men himself, he doesn't need to go thru the union to do it. And you haven't said a single thing to refute that. If you were to tell me that the union gets magical benefits much better than what Brian John can purchase himself, then THAT would be a reason. But I know that's not the case, if anything, *for the money*, the IBEW benefits package is substandard. For the same money Brian John is shipping off to the hall each month in boatloads, he could buy an equal or possibly better retirement and health package.


ETA your edit:



> The transferability of the benefits available ONLY through the union can not be compared to what ANY merit shop offers.


 As I stated for the third time now, that does NOT apply to Brian John's company because he keeps his men. What don't you understand about that?


----------



## BryanMD (Dec 31, 2007)

Electriad said:


> ...I said is that the union is a benefit to the company itself, not the men...


Care to explain what you men by that?
I'm completely baffled on this point.



> ...if anything, *for the money*, the IBEW benefits package is substandard...


That is very (VERY) arguable.
In a few months when the national health care reform laws get enacted and the transferability of HI especially happens it will be a very different picture.

But the retirement plan is still much more stable than anything any but the VERY largest EC's can match and then there are real questions about solvency to deal with.

So, on the whole I haven't seen a better benefit package available to everyone vested in the organization. Have you?




> For the same money Brian John is shipping off to the hall each month in boatloads, he could buy an equal or possibly better retirement and health package.


As I said... I think he is nuts to do it. That he doesn't need to and personally gets no direct benefit from doing it.

The ONLY rational conclusion is that he does it for the men.
Stoic martydom aside... I don't see anything to challenge the assertion.


----------



## Electriad (Sep 20, 2009)

BryanMD said:


> Care to explain what you men by that?
> I'm completely baffled on this point.


 Sure, I will post this for the *third* time:




Electriad said:


> The benefit of the union to the owner is A) being able to charge more by having union labor and B) jobs that require union labor.


Simple, right? These are the reason why he is a signatory contractor, not because it's better for the men.


> That is very (VERY) arguable.
> In a few months when the national health care reform laws get enacted and the transferability of HI especially happens it will be a very different picture.
> 
> But the retirement plan is still much more stable than anything any but the VERY largest EC's can match and then there are real questions about solvency to deal with.
> ...


 I have no doubt that a small company contributing the same amount as if they were a signatory contractor could buy a pension just lucrative.




> As I said... I think he is nuts to do it. That he doesn't need to and personally gets no direct benefit from doing it.


 Of course he does, I stated the reasons 3 times already, do i have to post it a fourth?


> The ONLY rational conclusion is that he does it for the men.


In what way does he do it for the men? How do the men, who he keeps all year and don't go to the hall, benefit from being union when he pays them above scale and he could give them equal or better benefits package if he didn't have the union skimming off it? 

Are you aware of how the union works? Do you understand that Brian John pays for his men for 2,000 or more hours to get the same benefits (pension included) as men who only worked as little as 1,200 hours? That money that Brian is paying the hall for "his men" goes to the entire group. Are you really trying to tell me that he can't do better himself?


----------



## gilbequick (Oct 6, 2007)

Bottom line: It's his company he can do what he wants.


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

Bob Badger said:


> But if the person is not worthy why should they get paid as well as someone who is?
> 
> Workers are not identical clones, each one is different.
> 
> Is it fair to the better worker that the less skilled or motivated get the same pay?


Drive the old 'n slow folks off the jobs!!!!
Get the young 'n fast man working!!!!!
Anyone with any disability ranging from a stubbed toe to a severed limb is banished!!!!!

:thumbup:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Celtic said:


> Drive the old 'n slow folks off the jobs!!!!
> Get the young 'n fast man working!!!!!
> Anyone with any disability ranging from a stubbed toe to a severed limb is banished!!!!!
> 
> :thumbup:



So even when I slow down as I get older I still have a 'right' to get paid as much as the faster guys doing _the same_ work?

I think not. 

The actual grunt work of electrical construction is a young healthy mans game

I need to find other ways to be a an asset to the organization or I should expect to get let go or my pay reduced. The fact I did my job well in the past does not earn me a free ride in perpetuity.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

I find it ironic that I am in the good physical shape that I am at my age and at the same time I am the guy that is more often than not sitting down in front of a computer screen troubleshooting or turning something on or off as the so called "young healthy men" stare at the screen with utter bewilderment. What do I know? I'm just a junior dinosaur in training to be put out to pasture.


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

randomkiller said:


> I find it ironic that I am in the good physical shape that I am at my age and at the same time I am the guy that is more often than not sitting down in front of a computer screen troubleshooting or turning something on or off as the so called "young healthy men" stare at the screen with utter bewilderment. What do I know? I'm just a junior dinosaur in training to be put out to pasture.



I don't know what you know, as far as the rest I know I work for a living.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

I am a union contractor for three reasons.

1. I was union at the time I went in business.

2. I felt the union was best for the men, as a small company starting out it is hard to impossible to put it all together for to offer the benefits the union offers it men.

3. Many of my customers (at that time) were union and while they did deal with open shops many preferred a union contractor.

I can offer better benefits than the union does and I do. 

When I was an apprentice (helper) I worked for several **** heads (and several excellent men) and I said to myself that when I became a JW I would not treat apprentices like they treated me and other apprentices.

When I was a JW I worked for some excellent shops and some lousy shops (union and open shop) I said to myself I would try to treat my men better than the shops I had worked for.



> The benefit of the union to the owner is A) being able to charge more by having union labor and B) jobs that require union labor.


I charge NO MORE than other shops, non-union and/or union. I have stated before that my friends with open shops that are the same basic size as my shop, laugh at me and wonder why I am union. They live a somewhat higher life style than I do. Several of these shops are run by ex-union men.

In our area there are few jobs that require union labor, those days are over. There are some companies (quite a few) that are open shop that only do Davis Bacon work.


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

Bob Badger said:


> So even when I slow down as I get older I still have a 'right' to get paid as much as the faster guys doing _the same_ work?
> 
> I think not.
> 
> ...































:laughing:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Celtic said:


>


I have much better hair.:laughing:




I was thinking of you the other day while doing some electrical work in a bakery I had to stop while a women was moving a whole cart full of freshly baked pies.:thumbsup:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> I have much better hair.:laughing:


Actually, your hair looks about the same. :whistling2:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Actually, your hair looks about the same. :whistling2:



Don't be a hater, I know your just jealous an old turd like me has more hair then you.:laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Don't be a hater, I know your just jealous an old turd like me has more hair then you.:laughing:


Well, let's see...

Go bald...

Or go gray...


Hmmmmmm....those choices aren't very good, are they?  :laughing:


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Peter D said:


> Well, let's see...
> 
> Go bald...
> 
> ...



Gray? .......... your being kind.:laughing:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Bob Badger said:


> Gray? .......... your being kind.:laughing:


Good point. Going white....


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

Bob Badger said:


> I was thinking of you the other day while doing some electrical work in a bakery I had to stop while a women was moving a whole cart full of freshly baked pies.:thumbsup:



:laughing:

It's a sick world when some internet nonsense makes you chuckle in the real world for no apparent reason [to those nearby] :thumbsup:


BTW, I'd a tripped her, grabbed that cart and ran like a madman down the street hooting, howling and hollering the whole way. :laughing:


----------



## Celtic (Nov 19, 2007)

If you dose your head with grecian formula, it takes 10 years off.











Bald guys....stock up on GLH-9


----------



## Bob Badger (Apr 19, 2009)

Celtic said:


> :laughing:
> 
> It's a sick world when some internet nonsense makes you chuckle in the real world for no apparent reason [to those nearby] :thumbsup:


Yes, exactly like that. :laughing:


----------



## knaack134 (Jan 20, 2009)

I do enjoy this site because the taboo union subject can be discussed. But there is so much uninformed crap dished out. 

Where I am their is a "SUGGESTED TOOL LIST" provided in the contract. I wish everyone who states their opinions about these lists would look at the contract language in their local (be you union or not). 



As far as I am concerned a smart contractor wants you installing and or maintaining electrical equiptment for as much of your 8 hour shift as possable, not dragging in your own personel gangbox every morning. Thats what foreman (with company vehicles) and truckdirvers are for.

I have been fortunate to have come up with a good company. As a foreman, I would be in so much trouble from my boss if I didn't have adequate (shop supplied) drills, sawzalls or any other power tool on site that would make people work faster. 

I guess I am looking at this from the business owners viewpoint. I would rather supply the power and specialty tools to my men and create an enviornment where they could work efficiently, than wait around to hire guys driving around with ten grand in tools.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

knaack134 said:


> I
> 
> not dragging in your own personel gangbox every morning.
> 
> ...


 But there is so much uninformed crap dished out.


Having worked around open shops and union companies I have not seen employees dragging in gang boxes, unless the company truck stops by to drop one off and never saw or heard of anyone waiting to hire a man with his own tools. 

Most shops I know do not want employees to bring their personal power tools to the job, because when it is lost or broken the man whines he wants a new one. SO the EC would end up buying a man a NEW replacement tool for a possible 10 year old POS. ECs buy their own new tools and let employees use them as it should be.


----------

