# why is union better



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

chrisdoan1 said:


> just trying to find out :laughing:


should have posted in the union topics area.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

better for whom? employee? contractor? union bosses?


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

The pay and paid benefits are the main reason to go union. Having your interests handled by collective bargining. Better working conditions, safer job sites and proper tools and equipment to do jobs. 

From an IBEW site:
The chance to work for all kinds of contractors providing good wages and employer-paid insurance and pension plans. The training is the best around and you don't have to pay for it. On average, U.S. union workers consistently earn more than nonunion workers. One of the many benefits of belonging to a union is financial. In 2002, a union worker brought home $153 more each week than the nonunion worker. For minority workers, the advantages of union representation are even more dramatic. In 2002, for example, African-American union members earned 29 percent or $138 per week more than their nonunion counterparts.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

chrisdoan1 said:


> just trying to find out :laughing:


Geeze. Just read the threads in this section to get both sides of the issue. 

The question as asked is impossible to answer. Well, not impossible but all you will get is opinions on both sides.

I'm staying out of this one.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

DUH!

What's the date today????

Oh man, I totally miss this one. The laughing emoticon wasn't even enough clue for me. :jester:


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

*IT PAYS TO BE UNION!*​Union membership brings many benefits to working people. One of the major benefits includes weekly earnings. The data below show that union workers, on average, made $161 or 27% more per week than nonunion workers in 2003. Furthermore, when breaking it down to both industries and occupational categories, the union difference becomes even clearer.

Get Answers​
Frequently asked questions 
What's in a contract? 
What are my legal rights? 
What gives us the legal right to bargain collectively? 
Election Process 
What do organized religions say about unions? 
Jobs and Skills represented by the IBEW 
Tell me more about the IBEW. What is its overall structure? 
Tell me more about a local union and how it works.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

Well I am convinced!

As of 5:06PM EDT I have folded my business and applied to the union. They told me I would receive journeyman wages right off the bat because of my varied and extensive experience.
I start tomorrow (April 2, 2008) in NYC, a mere 2+ hour ride to my new digs. The 5 hours a day travel time will be well worth it for the exorbitant sum of money I will be making. 

Wish me luck! :thumbsup:


----------



## Mountain Electrician (Jan 22, 2007)

:laughing:


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

randomkiller said:


> The pay and paid benefits are the main reason to go union. Having your interests handled by collective bargining. Better working conditions, safer job sites and proper tools and equipment to do jobs.
> 
> From an IBEW site:
> The chance to work for all kinds of contractors providing good wages and employer-paid insurance and pension plans. The training is the best around and you don't have to pay for it. On average, U.S. union workers consistently earn more than nonunion workers. One of the many benefits of belonging to a union is financial. In 2002, a union worker brought home $153 more each week than the nonunion worker. For minority workers, the advantages of union representation are even more dramatic. In 2002, for example, African-American union members earned 29 percent or $138 per week more than their nonunion counterparts.


apparently math and comparisons are not a strong point though


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

oldman said:


> apparently math and comparisons are not a strong point though


you'd have to see the whole article.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

randomkiller said:


> you'd have to see the whole article.


no i don't....i just have to see the "more dramatic" difference for minorities....compared to the average union employee


----------



## Louieb (Mar 19, 2007)

Random dont forget the 4percent kick back er I meant working dues,deducted..Good gig if you are working,real ugly these days if you aren't.heard Local 102 members are so steamed they might picket their own hall!


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Louieb said:


> Random dont forget the 4percent kick back er I meant working dues,deducted..Good gig if you are working,real ugly these days if you aren't.heard Local 102 members are so steamed they might picket their own hall!


I wouldn't know about not working. Other than vacations and sick days I haven't been out of work. And with the dues taken out I still do better than any non union electrician in my area.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

random, what local are you out of?


----------



## John (Jan 22, 2007)

oldman said:


> random, what local are you out of?


And what are you paying for union dues? :shifty:


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

I still do better than any non union electrician in my area.[/quote]

You mean you have talked to every non union electrician and compared pay checks and bennie packages. You should have posted that fact months ago.:thumbup:


----------



## joeyuk (Feb 27, 2008)

I am a "A" member of local 164 in North Jerseywhich happens to border 102 territory. You pay just under $300 per year in dues and we pay 2% of your gross working assessments per month. The percentage varies local to local. They are called working assessments because they are only paid when you are working. For that matter your dues are waived on a month to month bases if out of work. 
Additionally 164 has a supplemental unemployment fund which pays members $250 per week so long as they are seeking work thru the hall. 

Local union 102 is a bit of a sore subject in this area. And that is all I have to say about that local.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Louieb said:


> Random dont forget the 4percent kick back er I meant working dues,deducted..Good gig if you are working,real ugly these days if you aren't.heard Local 102 members are so steamed they might picket their own hall!


Kick back? You mean union dues and/or dues assessments? Geez, you think that after deducting that chump change from a union member's paycheck it brings him closer to nonunion wages?


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

> The pay and paid benefits are the main reason to go union. Having your interests handled by collective bargining.


This is generally true the BIGGEST advantage IMO is if a open shop fails, your wages, retirement, health and welfare may not be the same elsewhere. Portability of bennies major plus with union. 




> Better working conditions, safer job sites and proper tools and equipment to do jobs.


This may be location dependent, pretty much the same for open shop VS union in this area.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Bkessler said:


> I still do better than any non union electrician in my area.


You mean you have talked to every non union electrician and compared pay checks and bennie packages. You should have posted that fact months ago.:thumbup:[/quote]

Tell me you know of any non union electricians that make close to $45.00 an hour working for a contractor in northern NJ. I'm talking $ per hour only not with benefits.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

John said:


> And what are you paying for union dues? :shifty:


 

Local 3 and @ $300.00 per year


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

brian john said:


> This is generally true the BIGGEST advantage IMO is if a open shop fails, your wages, retirement, health and welfare may not be the same elsewhere. Portability of bennies major plus with union.
> 
> Never thought about that, having always had them I took them for granted.
> 
> ...


 
It maybe location dependent but, I have seen some good ones in the past.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

One issue often brought up is having to pay dues..Dues are minimal at best and not even a thought.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


UNTILL you realize some of these dues may go to a candidate that you do not approve of.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

Union PAC's definitely are not on the same wave length as me...

Brian John - as a union contractor, what are your feelings? most of the benefits of unions listed here are real, but they are all favorable for the electrician. Why are you a union contractor, and what makes it better for you as a contractor?


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

brian john said:


> This is generally true the BIGGEST advantage IMO is if a open shop fails, your wages, retirement, health and welfare may not be the same elsewhere. Portability of bennies major plus with union.


Not only that, what if, after 4 years in an open shop, it fails or you leave? No vested pension.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

brian john said:


> One issue often brought up is having to pay dues..Dues are minimal at best and not even a thought.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> 
> 
> UNTILL you realize some of these dues may go to a candidate that you do not approve of.


Dues and assessments do not get contributed to politians, or political parties. Every union's finances are under a microscope with all the lawsuits from nonunion contractors who still insist that unions are a monopoly, or are misusing members funds to bribe officials, or have an unfair competitive advantage.

Most unions have a seperate PAC fund which contributing to is voluntary. And there's a signed release on file from every member that contributes.

Unions can back any candidate they want with those pac funds, but can only suggest that voting for a particular candidate would be better than another. What you actually do in the voting booth is up to you.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

> Why are you a union contractor, and what makes it better for you as a contractor?


You answered your own question.



> the benefits of unions listed here are real, but they are all favorable for the electrician


There is little or no benefit for me.

I have hired all my own men, I do not want the majority of guys that are bench sitters from the hall (DC has had full employment for a long time, no good guys sit on the bench).

I hire apprentices from off the street when transfer time comes the apprentice I am suppose to receive never shows up, call the hall. Oh he was lost in the swap ( HUH?), So then I am short manpower not once not twice but three times.

I hire a guy and want to give him a period of time to determine if he is good before I give him over scale bennies, hall him telling him that they can get him over scale elsewhere.


I have little interface with the local, basically they do good by the men.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

While obviously bias there is some truth here.


----------



## nap (Dec 26, 2007)

while Brian John has some good points, hopefully it is that way in few locals. Typically, there are hands that have been through a good apprenticeship available in a short period of time. It is also understood that sometimes a hand is only needed for a short time and getting cut loose to reutrn to the hall, although everybody hopes they get to stay, is a normal and accepted situation.

In other words, in most locals, there is typically a pool of available workers without a lot of the problems required when hiring somebody off the street, or from another contractor that an open shop deals with.


----------



## RUSSIAN (Mar 4, 2008)

randomkiller said:


> Local 3 and @ $300.00 per year


Is that I.O dues or I.O and local? I paid a hell of alot more then that last year, but also got a 3% return in February.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Local 3 combined local and IO dues are $181.00 bi annually, and assessment is 1% of gross wages. $80.40 refunded bi annually for reasons that are too confusing to explain here. SO $362.00 yr - 160.80 yr = 201.20 annual dues.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

$350.00 a year plus 2%


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

*pensions*

Remember when IES sh1t the bed back in 2005?

They were the largest rollup at the time. Bigger than encompass?
Anyways, Encompass had a union shop here, those guys kept their pension. When IES went bankrupt, guys were losing alot of money. It just plain evaporated as the stock price fell from $12 down to $1.50.

The best hands learned their lesson, they went from a place where they made $28 an hour with $110 a week coming out of the check for health... to a place where they made $32 an hour with nothing coming out for health and another $6 going into retirement every hour. Hard workers, every one, they will never see the hall again, far from it, the over-time just keeps coming.


----------



## RUSSIAN (Mar 4, 2008)

Hhhmmm, we pay 7% out of our check, 3% back at the end of year. The other 4 is broken down to paying the next year up front and then IO, I dont remember the details at the moment. I think our local dues are $245 a year or something, I'll have to look at my ticket.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

miller_elex said:


> Remember when IES sh1t the bed back in 2005?
> 
> They were the largest rollup at the time. Bigger than encompass?
> Anyways, Encompass had a union shop here, those guys kept their pension. When IES went bankrupt, guys were losing alot of money. It just plain evaporated as the stock price fell from $12 down to $1.50.
> ...


the same would happen to any union pension fund that is tied to a stock...how many pensions were lost due to Enron stock?

but a decent non-union shop will offer/provide their employees with 401K, and IRA's....both of which can be transferred...


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

oldman said:


> the same would happen to any union pension fund that is tied to a stock...how many pensions were lost due to Enron stock?


None. Annuity pensions are not tied to any one stock, they're spread amongst diversified portfolios of funds that include stocks, bonds and mutual funds. This is required by ERISA. Enron employees lost their 401k's, NOT their pensions because they did not have any pension plan. And their 401k's were required by their employer and required to be reinvested with the very company they were employed by.

Have you ever met a Teamster or UAW worker or any government retiree who "lost their pension?" You you cannot say that you have, can you.



> but a decent non-union shop will offer/provide their employees with 401K, and IRA's....both of which can be transferred...


A nonunion shop "offering" 401k isn't contributing a dime to the employee, it's the employee funding their own 401k. And how can you say an IRA is "offered" by a nonunion shop? IRA are INDIVIDUAL retirement accounts. They have nothing to do with the company you work for. It's like saying these "decent" nonunion shops also offer "all the air you can breathe..."


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> None. Annuity pensions are not tied to any one stock, they're spread amongst diversified portfolios of funds that include stocks, bonds and mutual funds. This is required by ERISA. Enron employees lost their 401k's, NOT their pensions because they did not have any pension plan. And their 401k's were required by their employer and required to be reinvested with the very company they were employed by.
> 
> Have you ever met a Teamster or UAW worker or any government retiree who "lost their pension?" You you cannot say that you have, can you.
> 
> ...


you have got to learn how to read and comprehend...do you ever get tired jumping to assumptions?


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

oldman said:


> the same would happen to any union pension fund that is tied to a stock...how many pensions were lost due to Enron stock?
> 
> but a decent non-union shop will offer/provide their employees with 401K, and IRA's....both of which can be transferred...


 
That's mighty white of them, unless they are going to match funds with you, it's just money out of your check deposited in a plan that you could have filled out the paperwork for yourself. What is the benefit to that? It's like a forced savings account. My pension and annuity have nothing to do with my hourly wage. It's a benefit in that it's paid for by my employer.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

oldman said:


> you have got to learn how to read and comprehend...do you ever get tired jumping to assumptions?


No sir, it is you who need to learn reading comprehension, and to stop peppering your assertions with mistruths, and unsubstantiated facts.

Not knowing the difference between a pension and a company mandated reinvestment scheme is a good start.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

randomkiller said:


> That's mighty white of them, unless they are going to match funds with you, it's just money out of your check deposited in a plan that you could have filled out the paperwork for yourself. What is the benefit to that? It's like a forced savings account. My pension and annuity have nothing to do with my hourly wage. It's a benefit in that it's paid for by my employer.


And what's more... you ALSO have a 401k which YOU get to decide where & how it's invested by choosing among a menu of different investment portfolios. 

You and I ALSO can "offer" ourselves an IRA. 

BTW, company 401k plans are required by law to be offered to every employee if the company wants to have a 401k plan offering at all. The idea behing the whole 401k plan was that corporations couldn't offer retirement plans to management only, which was common past practice.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Why is the Union better, here's my personal reasons: 

1) I don't have to haggle with my boss about raises, I just get them. 
2) Health benefits, also included at no cost to me. 
3) Pension and annuity, you guessed it, it's included, I don't have to worry about that or social security being belly up when I get there. 
4) Tools, I have my hand tools and a few extras that make me happy, all my stuff fits in a bag easy to carry. And when my tools were stolen several times from the company truck recently, it was their insurance that bought the new ones.
5) Steady work for me since I started, never had to do more than call a BA if I wanted to move to another shop. 
6) I have so little to think about in regard to all the above that when I go to work my mind is clear to think about work, so my stress level is much lower than a guy that has to haggle/argue with his boss about money,tools, benies,etc. 
7) I like training and classes and get offered plenty to attend, all at the companies expense. And when I travel to a class I usually take an extra day or so and turn it into a min vacation. Two down so far this year and a few more planned (Pa. in a month,Ok. in Oct and maybe Germany in Nov).
Just a few reasons that make his crabby old man enjoy going to work.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

randomkiller said:


> That's mighty white of them, unless they are going to match funds with you, it's just money out of your check deposited in a plan that you could have filled out the paperwork for yourself. What is the benefit to that? It's like a forced savings account. My pension and annuity have nothing to do with my hourly wage. It's a benefit in that it's paid for by my employer.


some offer, some match, some pay 100 percent....

the point is, there are other alternatives....there are non-union hiring halls, etc....

the biggest point is that the benefits to the employee are not being disputed....they can be matched...but what are the benefits to the contractors?


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

I can't believe this. 
A thread that was obviously started to stir up shyt on April Fools Day and it turns right into the SAME old "discussion". 
I had hoped my light hearted post would start a sarcastic and humorous trend, at least in this thread. Obviously it didn't.
Don't any of you get tired of it ???????


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> No sir, it is you who need to learn reading comprehension, and to stop peppering your assertions with mistruths, and unsubstantiated facts.
> 
> Not knowing the difference between a pension and a company mandated reinvestment scheme is a good start.


http://www.investorguide.com/igu-article-748-retirement-planning-types-of-retirement-plans.html


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

oldman said:


> some offer, some match, some pay 100 percent....
> And if you aren't employed with that contractor long enough to be vested in the retirment plan you just wasted your time and get nothing.
> the point is, there are other alternatives....there are non-union hiring halls, etc....
> Most alternatives are just good for the contractor, not the employee.
> ...


I never saw it asked in regard to contractors in this thread. 

I would say the benefit to the contractor is getting a guy that is schooled in the trade and you can get the amount of labor you need by making a phone call and let them go with no issues when your job is over.


----------



## randomkiller (Sep 28, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> I can't believe this.
> A thread that was obviously started to stir up shyt on April Fools Day and it turns right into the SAME old "discussion".
> I had hoped my light hearted post would start a sarcastic and humorous trend, at least in this thread. Obviously it didn't.
> Don't any of you get tired of it ???????


Not at all and as a matter of fact the more certain guys make broad brush statements and can't back up their claims the more I get into the arguement. Puts me in a head crackin mood almost. The bottom line here, if your an employee your best choice for picking an employer is going Union for better wages now and real retirement in the future.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

randomkiller said:


> Not at all and as a matter of fact the more certain guys make broad brush statements and can't back up their claims the more I get into the arguement. Puts me in a head crackin mood almost. The bottom line here, if your an employee your best choice for picking an employer is going Union for better wages now and real retirement in the future.


so...when your view of the situatuion - "it's good for me"- gets questioned on an internet forum, you get into a "head crackin mood"....dude, you need to see someone about anger management....


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

randomkiller said:


> The bottom line here, if your an employee your best choice for picking an employer is going Union for better wages now and real retirement in the future.


Well there's that broad brush you just mentioned.

NO, I will not get dragged into this meaningless thread. It is JUST like every other stupid pro/con thread. You can throw all the "facts" out that you want. Some people don't care about your "facts" in this case.

My point was this thread was IMO started on April Fools Day and was seemingly meant to be light hearted. 
Then all the drum beaters have to come out and prove THEIR points.

I wish the OP would post back and tell me if this was in fact started like that, or was it a serious question.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> Well there's that broad brush you just mentioned.
> 
> NO, I will not get dragged into this meaningless thread. It is JUST like every other stupid pro/con thread. You can throw all the "facts" out that you want. Some people don't care about your "facts" in this case.
> 
> ...


 
What is better for an employee being non-union? Can you give two examples?


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

NO, I want no part of this bull****.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> NO, I want no part of this bull****.


 
Ahhh, come on just ONE. Don't be like an "oldman", just one legible intelligent plus for a guy to go or stay non-union.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Mrs. Petey, can speedy come out an play?


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

All I will say is I have seen what goes on in 3 & 25 and I want NO Part of it.
Money, benefits, whatever. NONE of that is worth it....TO ME.
I will not convince someone else to think one way or another because of my PERSONAL views.
I am a fiercely independent thinker. I HATE being told how to think and what to believe. 
I am NOT someone who does well in a large company either. I am too much of a control freak.
My goal from early on was to be independent, and small. I have achieved that.

You want "pro and con" and why my or your views are "better"??? Go read one of the several other threads ALL with the same monotonous drivel.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Ahhh, come on just ONE. Don't be like an "oldman", just one legible intelligent plus for a guy to go or stay non-union.


sorry, i'll try to write at the high school level from now on...my bad...


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Mrs. Petey, can speedy come out an play?


Mrs. Speedy agree with me.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> Mrs. Speedy agree with me.


In that she can't think of a plus for being non-union labor either?


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> Well there's that broad brush you just mentioned.
> 
> NO, I will not get dragged into this meaningless thread. It is JUST like every other stupid pro/con thread. You can throw all the "facts" out that you want. Some people don't care about your "facts" in this case.
> 
> ...


Petey,

This is no different than a typical "3 20a circuits or 4 15a circuits? Which is better?" discussion. 

On another front, you are correct Petey, there are some people who do not care about the facts or the issues faced by either employees or employers in the construction industry. So this thread is of no interest to those people.


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

Yup, you're both correct. 
Have a great day! :thumbsup:


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

"make 1 thing perfectly clear, i believe that for most employees, the union benefits are fantastic. ...there are some phenomenal electricians in the union..."
The above is from an "oldman" post on another thread, see even he admits under duress that Union benefits are better.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> Yup, you're both correct.
> Have a great day! :thumbsup:


Picking up your marbles and bailing. Pete nobody's busting your balls. I know you have your own busness, so you have to pay your own benies. From that point you know what they cost and are worth to a young family. So knowing those facts can you honestly say that a guy looking to be an employee isn't better off in a union environment as far as pay and benefits are concerned?


----------



## MF Dagger (Dec 24, 2007)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Ahhh, come on just ONE. Don't be like an "oldman", just one legible intelligent plus for a guy to go or stay non-union.


Higher hourly pay for me. I understand that this does not include the unions huge benefit package but for now I need that higher hourly wage anyway. I also like having control of my own future. I like the pride in finding and creating my own path.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

MF Dagger said:


> Higher hourly pay for me. I understand that this does not include the unions huge benefit package but for now I need that higher hourly wage anyway. I also like having control of my own future. I like the pride in finding and creating my own path.


 
Your saying you make over union scale as an employee?


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

Speedy Petey said:


> All I will say is I have seen what goes on in 3 & 25 and I want NO Part of it.
> Money, benefits, whatever. NONE of that is worth it....TO ME.


What goes on in 3 & 25 that you want no part of?
Local 3 is at $46.00 hour + H&W.
Local 25 is at $45.75 hour + H&W



> I will not convince someone else to think one way or another because of my PERSONAL views.
> I am a fiercely independent thinker. I HATE being told how to think and what to believe.
> I am NOT someone who does well in a large company either. I am too much of a control freak.
> My goal from early on was to be independent, and small. I have achieved that.
> ...


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> What goes on in 3 & 25 that you want no part of?
> Local 3 is at $46.00 hour + H&W.
> Local 25 is at $45.75 hour + H&W


And to think there are guys that post on here that say that thye do better than that when you read in their post they charge less than that per hour, maybe it's new math or something.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

MechanicalDVR said:


> "make 1 thing perfectly clear, i believe that for most employees, the union benefits are fantastic. ...there are some phenomenal electricians in the union..."
> The above is from an "oldman" post on another thread, see even he admits under duress that Union benefits are better.


i've never disputed it...i've said that it's possible to get comparable benefits elsewhere...but mostly, i've asked what the benefits are to the contractors...

let me translate...union benefits good...other benefits good too...what benefits union give contractor?


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

MechanicalDVR said:


> And to think there are guys that post on here that say that thye do better than that when you read in their post they charge less than that per hour, maybe it's new math or something.


that's always been a gripe of mine...union guys who feel they are worth $70/hr working for someone, then go out on their own and only bill the customer $60/hr...they screw it up for everyone...


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

oldman said:


> i've never disputed it...i've said that it's possible to get comparable benefits elsewhere...but mostly, i've asked what the benefits are to the contractors...
> 
> let me translate...union benefits good...other benefits good too...what benefits union give contractor?


There must be something in it for the contractor, all the companies I have worked for seem happy with a union workforce, I haven't seen any of them jumping ship to go non-union. Not being a contractor, I can't give you specifics on their end.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

oldman said:


> that's always been a gripe of mine...union guys who feel they are worth $70/hr working for someone, then go out on their own and only bill the customer $60/hr...they screw it up for everyone...


 I agree with you on that one. There is a price a job is worth and it shouldn't be under cut, that's when you get guys trying to cut corners to make up for the items they didn't figure should have been in the job from not reading the specs or details before they bid.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

oldman said:


> let me translate...union benefits good...other benefits good too...what benefits union give contractor?


 
I can't agree with you on this one. I see and talk to many guys on jobs (union an non). The non-union guys such as Trane and other big HVAC guys I talk to don't get what we get in benefits or pay. I talked to a lineman from JCP&L the other day that told me they now pay towards their health insurance. HVAC programmers from Trane (non-union) make @$41,000 yr/ guys from my hall doing the same work are close to double that and we pay nothing towards health and welfare.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

MechanicalDVR said:


> There must be something in it for the contractor, all the companies I have worked for seem happy with a union workforce, I haven't seen any of them jumping ship to go non-union. Not being a contractor, I can't give you specifics on their end.


don't kid yourself...the unions are a necessary evil in many industries...i know what some of the advantages are, i'm just asking if others have more information...but many large union shops are opening (under the radar) smaller non-union offshoots...most large GC's will work both sides of the fence...

but the unions still have some pull in the NY/NJ area and do throw their weight around...

many large union contractors will sub out to non-union shops...there is a union hvac company in your companies town, who rents space in his building to a non-union sheet metal shop...guess who does their prefab ductwork?


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

oldman said:


> don't kid yourself...the unions are a necessary evil in many industries...i know what some of the advantages are, i'm just asking if others have more information...but many large union shops are opening (under the radar) smaller non-union offshoots...most large GC's will work both sides of the fence...
> 
> but the unions still have some pull in the NY/NJ area and do throw their weight around...
> 
> many large union contractors will sub out to non-union shops...there is a union hvac company in your companies town, who rents space in his building to a non-union sheet metal shop...guess who does their prefab ductwork?


Oh I know many union contractors that pull all kinds of bs to make up for lack of planning and too much overhead in all the wrong ways.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

oldman said:


> i've never disputed it...i've said that it's possible to get comparable benefits elsewhere...but mostly, i've asked what the benefits are to the contractors...
> 
> let me translate...union benefits good...other benefits good too...what benefits union give contractor?


Flexibility.
Skilled workers. 


---unbroken legs. (Just kidding...)


----------



## amptech (Sep 21, 2007)

I hope no one got the idea from any of my posts that I thought union pay and bennies weren't top shelf. They are hard to beat but SOME open shops DO surpass what the union offers. IT IS RARE, but it does exist. That was my bone of contention in all of this. There were blanket statements made that open shops were all sub-standard regarding pay and benefits. This is simply not true. I, myself, make a lot more now than if I had went into the union years ago when I made my decision not to. A buddy and I both went into the electrical vocation while still in high school. When we had the opportunity to get in the IBEW program he did and I didn't. He did a lot better than me financially over the first 10 years or so then I caught up to him and passed him. The gap has widened every year since. There are pluses and minuses to both paths we took and where we are now. He makes a little less money but also has a lot less headaches. He has no regrets about his choice and neither do I. I have had good and bad experiences with the union and when I related them here I was just short of called a liar/gossip-monger. But I have been around long enough to know that the persons responsible for those viewpoints and comments are far from being an average voice for the IBEW and I would hope not to sink to the level where I judge a whole group or organization by a few experiences with a few people or what someone told me they were told.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

> Flexibility.
> Skilled workers.


Flexibility, YES skilled not necessarily.

For a small contractor like me I see little or no benefit other than knowing my men make a good wage with bennies. My buddy runs a shop similar size, his take home is substantially higher than mine though I have more billable's. We have compared operations and efficiencies are about equal. He pays 10.00 less an hour and no where near the bennies I pay.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

the premise is what lawnguy said...and if that were the case, it would be ideal....a well trained labor pool at the ready...what an awesome thing...

the downside is that there are people involved...


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

brian john said:


> Flexibility, YES skilled not necessarily.
> 
> For a small contractor like me I see little or no benefit other than knowing my men make a good wage with bennies. My buddy runs a shop similar size, his take home is substantially higher than mine though I have more billable's. We have compared operations and efficiencies are about equal. He pays 10.00 less an hour and no where near the bennies I pay.


Of course, he pays less, so he makes more.


----------



## LGLS (Nov 10, 2007)

oldman said:


> the premise is what lawnguy said...and if that were the case, it would be ideal....a well trained labor pool at the ready...what an awesome thing...
> 
> the downside is that there are people involved...


And? You're not a people person?


----------



## frank (Feb 6, 2007)

Non Union Benefits.

I make up my OWN mind.
I come and go as I please
I better appreciate the CUSTOMER and my EMPLOYER
MY work ethic is stronger.
My mistakes are MY own
My future is in MY control
I make no DEMANDS of anyone other than myself
My SOCIETAL CONTRIBUTION is substantially more and GIVEN FREELY.

Could go on for ever but Socialist thinkers would become apoplectic.

Sorry boys. Just couldn't help myself and it looks like my big foot is right in it now'

Frank


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

LawnGuyLandSparky said:


> And? You're not a people person?


when people are involved, human nature takes over...and ruins utopia...it was the downfall to communism...ruins socialism....ideas are perfect...but when people get involved, things get ruined...

edit to add - i didn't see Franks response above until after I typed this...LMAO at the apoplectic socialist comment


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

frank said:


> Non Union Benefits.
> 
> I make up my OWN mind.
> I come and go as I please
> ...


For Mechanical....

Apoplectic
Main Entry: *ap·o·plec·tic*
Pronunciation: "ap-&-'plek-tik
Function: _adjective_
*1* *:* of, relating to, or causing stroke 
*2* *:* affected with, inclined to, or showing symptoms of stroke


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

> Of course, he pays less, so he makes more.


I hate to say this BUT DUH!

Look I went into business for a variety of reasons and while this may seem anti socialistic, I wanted to make more money.


----------



## amptech (Sep 21, 2007)

That's one aspect I never could understand. Joe Schmoe wants to start a company. Joe makes a business plan with a marketable product. Joe borrows money and/or solicits investors to start-up manufacturing his product. Joe then markets his product managing on a tight budget until cash starts to flow. Joe hires employees and works to make the wage and benefits on par with area companies of similar size and revenue. As Joes company grows he sees the need to increase wages and bennies to retain a trained, quality workforce. As Joe's company succeeds and grows he is able to retire his start-up debt and begin to recoup what he sacrificed personally in the start-up struggle years. Joe has added dental and eye plans as the company has grown along with a profit sharing plan and a fully funded pension. Joe's average employee's salary hits $50k per year plus health, dental, eye, life insurance,profit sharing and pension, but he is paying himself $100k plus all of the bennies. Joe also is paying a dividend with a portion of the profits to his investors yearly. Joe's employees find out and think he is making too much more than them. Joe's employees decide to organize with a union to bargain for more of the profits for the labor force. How is this fair? I think the guy/gal who takes the financial risk and does the planning, marketing and lives lean through the infant stage of the companies development deserves to see a substantial return on the investment. Isn't that what America is supposed to be about?


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

amptech said:


> That's one aspect I never could understand. Joe Schmoe wants to start a company. Joe makes a business plan with a marketable product. Joe borrows money and/or solicits investors to start-up manufacturing his product. Joe then markets his product managing on a tight budget until cash starts to flow. Joe hires employees and works to make the wage and benefits on par with area companies of similar size and revenue. As Joes company grows he sees the need to increase wages and bennies to retain a trained, quality workforce. As Joe's company succeeds and grows he is able to retire his start-up debt and begin to recoup what he sacrificed personally in the start-up struggle years. Joe has added dental and eye plans as the company has grown along with a profit sharing plan and a fully funded pension. Joe's average employee's salary hits $50k per year plus health, dental, eye, life insurance,profit sharing and pension, but he is paying himself $100k plus all of the bennies. Joe also is paying a dividend with a portion of the profits to his investors yearly. Joe's employees find out and think he is making too much more than them. Joe's employees decide to organize with a union to bargain for more of the profits for the labor force. How is this fair? I think the guy/gal who takes the financial risk and does the planning, marketing and lives lean through the infant stage of the companies development deserves to see a substantial return on the investment. Isn't that what America is supposed to be about?


there are those who believe that joe really doesn't risk anything...and that if it's not him, it'll be someone else...and that it's the employees who do all the work, and therefore deserve all the rewards...


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

*Double Post Sorry*

In my opinion this particular thread was the WORST thing to happen to this site, the whole union open shop issue is a WASTE OF time no one is ever going to change an other person opinion on this subject, might as well try to convert Muslims to Judaism.

I THINK many of the open shop members have tried to see the other side but some (NOT ALL) of the union member continue to exhibit what drives the two sides apart, a narrow minded approach to this issue along with a certain arrogance.


I now know why some forums keep this issue out and for the reasons noted above this is my last post on the forum.

If Nathan could remove me from the members list I would appreciate it.


----------



## oldman (Mar 30, 2007)

brian, it's not that serious...it's a place to have this discussion without it turning to actual violence (although, I think randomkiller is working on a way to 'crack some heads' via the internet)...the dialogue is probably wasted on those typing...but i'm pretty sure that people viewing the thread are given food for thought...


----------



## Speedy Petey (Jan 10, 2007)

brian john said:


> I now know why some forums keep this issue out and for the reasons noted above this is my last post on the forum.
> 
> If Nathan could remove me from the members list I would appreciate it.


Less than a week with this new forum and we have LONG time upstanding members threatening to leave? I don't think so!

Brian, please don't leave in haste. 
Let's let this go for now. I am closing this thread, NOT because I agree or disagree with anything said, nor because I am for censorship (to those thinking that don't waste your breath), but because it is to the point where it is exactly as Brian said. NO ONE is going to change their minds, and all this is just creating ill feelings.

I pushed for this added forum so we could keep the extremely negative "union" threads off the top boards. Now that there is a dedicated place for it I think it is getting out of hand, mainly because of several with some very strong and vocal feelings on the issues.

If I see this new area becoming any more of an area of division and animosity I will ask Nathan to pull the whole thing and ask him that we ban all such discussions. Hows that for taking my marbles and going home?!
You don't like it, take your over zealous pro/con union discussions elsewhere.


----------

