# Would you still be union if



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Would you still be union if you couldnt collect unemployment when you were layed off? Non union workers pay more in then union workers but union workers get more out. Under that dynamic the union worker relies on the non union workers UI tax to supllement there income when they are layed off. Shouldn't the union worker then pay a higher % since he is more likely to use the benefit?


----------



## jwjrw (Jan 14, 2010)

I'm all for it!:thumbsup: Make them pay a higher %. They can afford it. After all they are union!:laughing::whistling2:


----------



## Charlie K (Aug 14, 2008)

gold said:


> Would you still be union if you couldnt collect unemployment when you were layed off? Non union workers pay more in then union workers but union workers get more out. Under that dynamic the union worker relies on the non union workers UI tax to supllement there income when they are layed off. Shouldn't the union worker then pay a higher % since he is more likely to use the benefit?


I dont know how it works in your State. Where I live and work unemployment tax is paid by the employer as a percentage of payroll. Being a Union man for 30 years I have not collected Unemployment since 1983.:whistling2:

Charlie


----------



## Widestance_Politics (Jun 2, 2010)

Ya I'd have to say that after becoming fully vested in my pension it would take more than the thought of not having UI benefits (which in my state equate to around 7.50 an hour) to jump ship.....plus I'm pretty certain that even if I had to pay into my own unemployment fund it would be nowhere near the premiums I paid for health insurance each month in the non-union sector.....


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Widestance_Politics said:


> Ya I'd have to say that after becoming fully vested in my pension it would take more than the thought of not having UI benefits (which in my state equate to around 7.50 an hour) to jump ship.....plus I'm pretty certain that even if I had to pay into my own unemployment fund it would be nowhere near the premiums I paid for health insurance each month in the non-union sector.....


 
That makes me wonder... How is the health and welfare fund effected by the new healthcare bill?


----------



## Widestance_Politics (Jun 2, 2010)

gold said:


> That makes me wonder... How is the health and welfare fund effected by the new healthcare bill?


I wonder the same...I'll have to check into it...besides dental check-ups and flu type appointments my family hasn't made a trip to the hospital for major work since the last birth thankfully.....besides knowing what doctors my plan requires me to see, I have to admit that I am fairly ignorant about my policies.....I have the large book, just no desire to read it.....


----------



## Charlie K (Aug 14, 2008)

gold said:


> That makes me wonder... How is the health and welfare fund effected by the new healthcare bill?


At this time I dont know how it will be affected.
Charlie


----------



## katoomrp (Dec 5, 2009)

Ive spent more time layed off working non union than union


----------



## Mantis Toboggan (Jun 24, 2010)

gold said:


> Would you still be union if you couldnt collect unemployment when you were layed off? Non union workers pay more in then union workers but union workers get more out. Under that dynamic the union worker relies on the non union workers UI tax to supllement there income when they are layed off. Shouldn't the union worker then pay a higher % since he is more likely to use the benefit?


I'm also from NJ and am very familiar with the unemployment payment process as well as union topics.

I'm confused about a couple things you mentioned. How do non-union workers pay more than union workers? The worker pays the same thing, up to a certain small amount each year (I forget the exact amount, $112 or so?) A large part of the UI is paid by the employer after the claim is made.

Also, how is a union worker more likely to use the benefit?


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Mantis Toboggan said:


> I'm also from NJ and am very familiar with the unemployment payment process as well as union topics.
> 
> I'm confused about a couple things you mentioned. How do non-union workers pay more than union workers? The worker pays the same thing, up to a certain small amount each year (I forget the exact amount, $112 or so?) A large part of the UI is paid by the employer after the claim is made.
> 
> Also, how is a union worker more likely to use the benefit?


Proportionately, the union worker is more likely to be layed off and receive the benefits between jobs. While each worker PAYS the same there are fewer union workers but a higher per capita receiving benefits. In turn the individual nonunion worker does not pay more but the non union sector as a whole receives less benefit per capita. I should have been more specific in my first post.

What I was leading to was that by this the nonunion worker as a whole carries a share of the union workers burden on the ui fund. Wouldn't it be more beneficial to the union work force if they had there own type of fund to draw from.

Isnt one of the selling points to the union contractor the ability to only carry the workforce they need? That very selling point acknowledges a burden placed on the nonunion workforce.

Are teachers who receive there pay only during the schoolyear able to collect benefits during the summer?

I'm not condeming or condoneing, just trying to understand.


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

gold said:


> Proportionately, the union worker is more likely to be layed off and receive the benefits between jobs. While each worker PAYS the same there are fewer union workers but a higher per capita receiving benefits. In turn the individual nonunion worker does not pay more but the non union sector as a whole receives less benefit per capita. I should have been more specific in my first post.
> 
> What I was leading to was that by this the nonunion worker as a whole carries a share of the union workers burden on the ui fund. Wouldn't it be more beneficial to the union work force if they had there own type of fund to draw from.
> 
> ...


I must of miss the economic class you went to.Employers are charged a rate based upon how many people they lay off within a year so you are charged by how many employee's you get rid of. Nonunion does not have to pay because of the union employee's use(never heard of that logic)


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Brother Noah said:


> I must of miss the economic class you went to.
> Isnt there also a weekly contribution?
> Employers are charged a rate based upon how many people they lay off within a year so you are charged by how many employee's you get rid of.
> isnt this in addition to the weekly contributions?
> ...


----------



## bduerler (Oct 2, 2009)

gold said:


> I must of miss the economic class you went to.
> Isnt there also a weekly contribution?
> Employers are charged a rate based upon how many people they lay off within a year so you are charged by how many employee's you get rid of.
> isnt this in addition to the weekly contributions?
> ...


AMEN TO THAT:thumbup:


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

Isnt there also a weekly contribution?
Employers are charged a rate based upon how many people they lay off within a year so you are charged by how many employee's you get rid of.
isnt this in addition to the weekly contributions?


Look on your paystub isnt there something there that say SUI with a small deduction next to it? 

Like any insurance shouldnt someone at higher risk pay a higher premium?

For instance a 500 pound 3 pack a day smoker pays a little more for health insurance. A guy with 11 DUI's pays a little more for auto

Why shouldnt the guy who is "on the books" every year pay a little more for unemployment insurance?[/quote]
The UI insurance is charged by the rate the contractor lays off their labor force, sorts like the question you pose about a 500 pound 3 pack a day smoker having higher health cost. What it appears that you are asking for is to penalize the workers(especially union) because the contractors have less work therefore has to lay off his labor force less.I do understand if you have this animosity towards the union and want to charge them a higher rate because they are out of work more(double negative) I would take the risk and say a majority of the working class do not want to be laid off and now you want to tax those that are out of work more(the ones who need more of a break in my oppinion) If these people are on the books more and surving off UI benefits how do you suppose they are even going to be able to pay this extra tax you are requesting??? I do not know what yo are use to paying your bills on but UI is only about a 3rd or 4th of what I make weekly while working.I guess one could see the appeal to you.


----------



## bduerler (Oct 2, 2009)

Brother Noah said:


> The UI insurance is charged by the rate the contractor lays off their labor force, sorts like the question you pose about a 500 pound 3 pack a day smoker having higher health cost. What it appears that you are asking for is to penalize the workers(especially union) because the contractors have less work therefore has to lay off his labor force less.I do understand if you have this animosity towards the union and want to charge them a higher rate because they are out of work more(double negative) I would take the risk and say a majority of the working class do not want to be laid off and now you want to tax those that are out of work more(the ones who need more of a break in my oppinion) If these people are on the books more and surving off UI benefits how do you suppose they are even going to be able to pay this extra tax you are requesting??? I do not know what yo are use to paying your bills on but UI is only about a 3rd or 4th of what I make weekly while working.I guess one could see the appeal to you.


i think he is referring to union being taxed more while they are working not once they are laid off


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Brother Noah said:


> Isnt there also a weekly contribution?
> Employers are charged a rate based upon how many people they lay off within a year so you are charged by how many employee's you get rid of.
> isnt this in addition to the weekly contributions?
> 
> ...


The UI insurance is charged by the rate the contractor lays off their labor force, sorts like the question you pose about a 500 pound 3 pack a day smoker having higher health cost. What it appears that you are asking for is to penalize the workers(especially union) because the contractors have less work therefore has to lay off his labor force less.I do understand if you have this animosity towards the union and want to charge them a higher rate because they are out of work more(double negative) I would take the risk and say a majority of the working class do not want to be laid off and now you want to tax those that are out of work more(the ones who need more of a break in my oppinion) If these people are on the books more and surving off UI benefits how do you suppose they are even going to be able to pay this extra tax you are requesting??? I do not know what yo are use to paying your bills on but UI is only about a 3rd or 4th of what I make weekly while working.I guess one could see the appeal to you.[/quote]


nope

You totally missed my point.

There is no animosity toward union workers.

I Am not suggesting any new tax.

MY statement is this
The contribution to reward ratio is unproportionately higher among union workers as a demographic. Union workers draw on a insurance fund based on contributions from both union and nonunion workers. 

My Question is this
Considering the benefit received by the union contractor shouldnt the union(local) manage there own fund with worker and contractor contributions seperate from the nonunion workforce? If not why not?


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

MY statement is this
The contribution to reward ratio is unproportionately higher among union workers as a demographic. Union workers draw on a insurance fund based on contributions from both union and nonunion workers. 

My Question is this
Considering the benefit received by the union contractor shouldnt the union(local) manage there own fund with worker and contractor contributions seperate from the nonunion workforce? If not why not?[/quote]

Once again I will state that the contractors pays a premium based upon THEIR ratio to hire and lay off(not everyone, union or not) What you are asking is a goverment control issue not union or nonunion.Now if you are making an attempt to post that unions use up more of the benefits, I say you must not know that the unions only account for a small market share compared to the nonunion sector.Lets say that you have 1000 employees laid off,unions could only account for maybe 150 because thats all there is available I do not know where your info comes from but it does not appear true. When I pay my car insurrance it is based on what I do, even though it goes into one big fund, it depends on how (I) drive to how much (I) have to pay.Thank you for your post but now I am curious about why you think the ratio is not correct.


----------



## bduerler (Oct 2, 2009)

Brother Noah said:


> Once again I will state that the contractors pays a premium based upon THEIR ratio to hire and lay off(not everyone, union or not) What you are asking is a goverment control issue not union or nonunion.Now if you are making an attempt to post that unions use up more of the benefits, I say you must not know that the unions only account for a small market share compared to the nonunion sector.Lets say that you have 1000 employees laid off,unions could only account for maybe 150 because thats all there is available I do not know where your info comes from but it does not appear true. When I pay my car insurrance it is based on what I do, even though it goes into one big fund, it depends on how (I) drive to how much (I) have to pay.Thank you for your post but now I am curious about why you think the ratio is not correct.


ok for once i agree with you im a little lost to and im none union. i to would like to see were you(gold) are getting your information from. not trying to start anything just wondering thats all


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

gold said:


> My Question is this
> Considering the benefit received by the union contractor shouldnt the union(local) manage there own fund with worker and contractor contributions seperate from the nonunion workforce? If not why not?


You don't know WTF you're talking about.

Do your homework before you post. 

You have successfully brought attention to your ignorance, THANK YOU!


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Once again I will state that the contractors pays a premium based upon THEIR ratio to hire and lay off(not everyone, union or not) 
I acknowledge this, and understand it. The fund is still paid the regaurdless of how much is paid by the union contractor.
What you are asking is a goverment control issue not union or nonunion.Now if you are making an attempt to post that unions use up more of the benefits, I say you must not know that the unions only account for a small market share compared to the nonunion sector.
It is a government controll issue. They do represent a smaller market share, so why not have a seperate fund? 
Lets say that you have 1000 employees laid off,unions could only account for maybe 150 because thats all there is available I do not know where your info comes from but it does not appear true. 
Which information are you disputing I haven't presented anything that uncommon. 
When I pay my car insurrance it is based on what I do, even though it goes into one big fund, it depends on how (I) drive to how much (I) have to pay.Thank you for your post but now I am curious about why you think the ratio is not correct.[/quote]


Once again I HAVE NO ANIMOSITY TOWARD THE UNION. There is no need to be defensive. The truth is, with the type of work I have been getting there is a possability I may become a union shop very soon. There is no need to be an ass*ole about it, I'm just asking a question that I dont think has been fully understood and some of you are assuming I am trying to somehow challenge your soladarity and your lashing out at me. 

If you dont understand the question ask, dont assume I am flaming the unions.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

miller_elex said:


> You don't know WTF you're talking about.
> You mean YOU dont know wtf I am talking about
> Do your homework before you post.
> What exactly am I saying that you dont agree with and I will confirm it.
> ...


I understand your Angst Miller but your reaction is out of context, I wasnt condeming you or the union. Perhaps this question is best answered by someone more adept then yourself. (maybe you could let the grown ups talk)


----------



## Magnettica (Jan 23, 2007)

gold said:


> Would you still be union if you couldnt collect unemployment when you were layed off? Non union workers pay more in then union workers but union workers get more out. Under that dynamic the union worker relies on the non union workers UI tax to supllement there income when they are layed off. Shouldn't the union worker then pay a higher % since he is more likely to use the benefit?


The real question should be "would you be a union worker if the government didn't subsidize nearly all of your jobs?" I hate the ****ing unions.


----------



## bduerler (Oct 2, 2009)

Magnettica said:


> The real question should be "would you be a union worker if the government didn't subsidize nearly all of your jobs?" I hate the ****ing unions.


now that is awesome:laughing:


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

gold said:


> The UI insurance is charged by the rate the contractor lays off their labor force, sorts like the question you pose about a 500 pound 3 pack a day smoker having higher health cost. What it appears that you are asking for is to penalize the workers(especially union) because the contractors have less work therefore has to lay off his labor force less.I do understand if you have this animosity towards the union and want to charge them a higher rate because they are out of work more(double negative) I would take the risk and say a majority of the working class do not want to be laid off and now you want to tax those that are out of work more(the ones who need more of a break in my oppinion) If these people are on the books more and surving off UI benefits how do you suppose they are even going to be able to pay this extra tax you are requesting??? I do not know what yo are use to paying your bills on but UI is only about a 3rd or 4th of what I make weekly while working.I guess one could see the appeal to you.


 











Do you seriously think the UI bean counters miss a thing?

Union guys usually get layed off. That raises the Union Contractors premiums. They usually pay the max rate and do not really care if someone collects.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

jrannis said:


> Do you seriously think the UI bean counters miss a thing?
> 
> Union guys usually get layed off. That raises the Union Contractors premiums. They usually pay the max rate and do not really care if someone collects.


So I wonder if the union model would be AS efficient if they were forced to use a seperate fund. 

If this were corrected and Davis and Baccon repealed could a union contractor still compete in a free market burdened with the unusually high cost associated with being a union contractor? 

I wonder if somehow the new healthcare bill will allow the union to move its members onto a public option plan to reduce the contractors cost, to address there inability to compete in open markets.


----------



## Charlie K (Aug 14, 2008)

gold said:


> So I wonder if the union model would be AS efficient if they were forced to use a seperate fund.
> 
> If this were corrected and Davis and Baccon repealed could a union contractor still compete in a free market burdened with the unusually high cost associated with being a union contractor? Our local does a lot of work that is not Davis Bacon. We currently have hospitals under construction, banks, shopping centers, office buildings etc. This work was all bid by union and nonunion alike.
> 
> I wonder if somehow the new healthcare bill will allow the union to move its members onto a public option plan to reduce the contractors cost, to address there inability to compete in open markets.


 Unions can compete in open markets. Read the above.

So now what is your fear of unions? The contractor I am employed by has had record profits, years in a row. We enjoy new vehicles every 5 years, state of the art tools and equipment. The company pays over the mandated wage and we enjoy company and union benefits. The owners dont seem to have a problem at all competing, and no debt. We also have an extensive safety program that has resulted in no lost time injuries for 5 plus years. With the exception of a senior project manager and the general manager everyone has come up through the IBEW. Having management that cares and employees that care gives you a winning team. It is also the key to repeat customers.

Charlie:whistling2:


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

gold said:


> If this were corrected and Davis and Baccon repealed...


I knew you smelled like a tea party circle jerker.

A tea party economic utopia exists. There is this place in the Persian Gulf where there are no worker protections of any kind, nor restrictions on trade. Electricians make about $3 a day. Its called Dubai. You need to come right out and say this is where you want to take US.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

Charlie K said:


> Unions can compete in open markets. Read the above.
> 
> So now what is your fear of unions? The contractor I am employed by has had record profits, years in a row. We enjoy new vehicles every 5 years, state of the art tools and equipment. The company pays over the mandated wage and we enjoy company and union benefits. The owners dont seem to have a problem at all competing, and no debt. We also have an extensive safety program that has resulted in no lost time injuries for 5 plus years. With the exception of a senior project manager and the general manager everyone has come up through the IBEW. Having management that cares and employees that care gives you a winning team. It is also the key to repeat customers.
> 
> Charlie:whistling2:


This has been my experience too. I really do not understand where all of the "protectionist BS" is coming from.
If you think about it carefully, the DB jobs are sometimes based on the local union wages. The paperwork is an additional burden on the union contractor that is paying the wages anyway. 
The non-union guys are getting more money. I really do not see a problem for the non-union contractor.


----------



## Southeast Power (Jan 18, 2009)

gold said:


> So I wonder if the union model would be AS efficient if they were forced to use a seperate fund.
> 
> If this were corrected and Davis and Baccon repealed could a union contractor still compete in a free market burdened with the unusually high cost associated with being a union contractor?
> 
> I wonder if somehow the new healthcare bill will allow the union to move its members onto a public option plan to reduce the contractors cost, to address there inability to compete in open markets.


Dude, Where do you get your logic? Rush Limbo? Their is no "Public Option".
Our non-union guys use our "public hospitals" is that what what you are referring to?


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

Once again I HAVE NO ANIMOSITY TOWARD THE UNION. There is no need to be defensive. The truth is, with the type of work I have been getting there is a possability I may become a union shop very soon. There is no need to be an ass*ole about it, I'm just asking a question that I dont think has been fully understood and some of you are assuming I am trying to somehow challenge your soladarity and your lashing out at me. 

If you dont understand the question ask, dont assume I am flaming the unions.[/quote]
Sounds to me that your intent from the start was to give only a portion of the question in order to stir BS. Your first post makes reference that the unions pay at a different ratio just because they are union(this is false) Now you are asking if unions can compete making bids against nonunion, the answer is yes but if you are the contractor and wish to be able to compete with the nonunion you will probably make less money on certain projects in short term but after years of quality work being produced your possibities are endless with a sound respect from the business community. In 1891 with unions scarce the IBEW started and have vied as well as help create laws to benefit ALL THE WORKING CLASS.I do not sit behind the desk but from what I hear with the health issues in the IBEW there will be many changes in the near future. This thread has been for the most part polite and civil, frustration at you comes from your evasive post of exactly the question you wish to pose. I see no Azz holes posting only those that may be confused by your post and maybe one who wishes to stir the pot.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

There is no reason for the attacks I'm only asking questions. 

Charlie, sounds like a great company. As a contractor I could see myself there when you paint that picture. I'm put off by millers flaming but I understand not everyone can comunicate on the same level. JR Once again reread what I posted I'm not suggesting anything. Just curious about what would happen to me if I were a union contractor and some of these events happened. Davis and baccon being repealed is a real issue after the next set of elections, and its something that should be considered as a contractor. UI reform is next its a logical course of action. These arent my ideas they belong to the next generation of senators and congressmen. It seems to me the public option would be the best way for a contractor to combat this ( I realize they dont call it a public option but whatever they call there subsidized health care) I am Trying to make a decision with hindsight I dont have. 

I have yet to say anything negative about unions why am I being attacked so much?


----------



## yucan2 (Jun 9, 2009)

gold said:


> There is no reason for the attacks I'm only asking questions.
> 
> I have yet to say anything negative about unions why am I being attacked so much?


Starting any thread is like lighting a match. Oftentimes flames will follow. 
Just take what's useful and discard the rest.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Sounds to me that your intent from the start was to give only a portion of the question in order to stir BS. Your first post makes reference that the unions pay at a different ratio just because they are union(this is false)
I think you misread my post 
Now you are asking if unions can compete making bids against nonunion, the answer is yes but if you are the contractor and wish to be able to compete with the nonunion you will probably make less money on certain projects in short term but after years of quality work being produced your possibities are endless with a sound respect from the business community. In 1891 with unions scarce the IBEW started and have vied as well as help create laws to benefit ALL THE WORKING CLASS.I do not sit behind the desk but from what I hear with the health issues in the IBEW there will be many changes in the near future. 
I have to wonder if this isnt the puprpose of some part of this bill
This thread has been for the most part polite and civil, frustration at you comes from your evasive post of exactly the question you wish to pose.
OK if you consider general defensiveness and name calling civil
I see no Azz holes posting only those that may be confused by your post and maybe one who wishes to stir the pot.[/quote]
Stirring the pot? I think your mistaken evasiveness for my inability to articulate my thought. I am not trying to stir BS. I am recognizing inevitable changes and asking if those who are union will be as happy later in a "worst case scenario" 

However You are absolutely right I did not put forth my entire point in my first post. It wasn't my intention to "bait" anyone but instead to lead the conversation in a specific direction. So I will reiterate my original thought;

After the next election cycle, when the "tea party circle jerkers" have more political influence there are some expected Reform acts such as UI reform and DB reform. Under a worst case scenario, Would a relatively young union contractor be able to survive in a more competitive market? Will the unions be able to maintain there membership levels? A question that also comes up (actually within this thread) Was this forseen by some who influenced the health care bill and would the unions be able to fall back on a subsidized health care fund to help the contractors compete in a changeing market? What about union workers if they had to fund there own UI and fall back on federally sponsored healthcare would that change there opinions of there union? While I wouldnt expect a mass exodus if this occurred surely it would have some effect on the union worker, how much effect? I know in the past some locals have decreased there wage when needed to be competitive but would they be willing to make more dramatic sacrafices like UI, healthcare, or maybe pension cuts?

There is no animosity intended here, no need for acusations or name calling.


----------



## robnj772 (Jan 15, 2008)

miller_elex said:


> I knew you smelled like a tea party circle jerker.
> 
> A tea party economic utopia exists. There is this place in the Persian Gulf where there are no worker protections of any kind, nor restrictions on trade. Electricians make about $3 a day. Its called Dubai. You need to come right out and say this is where you want to take US.


 
A tea party circle jerker?

Lay off the CNN kool aid!!

How is that hopey changey thing working out for you!

The tea party movement is just against raising taxes to support welfare,etc,etc.

Dubai is a very wealthy area and workers are paid a helluva lot more then you claim (I still have no idea what Dubai has to do with this topic but) 

Have you ever been to Dubai? I have it is rather nice there.

ANYWAY.

I would rather have us go more like Dubai then Russia or china like we are headed now thanks to the liberal scum in office along with the senator from San Fransisco


----------



## Bkessler (Feb 14, 2007)

I'd love to see the bacon davis go buy, buy. I was foreman on a lot of prevailing wage, "school modernizations" jobs. There is so much waste of millions and millions of dollars. My wife is a teacher, she's been at two schools in her district and modernization at both. There books are old, they have no money for anything, no art class, no gym class, no music, no library but they have a bunch of 4" pipes going to each building and a bunch of underground vaults for "future". That's at her school, I've done the same thing to many other schools. Tustin, congratulations you have wasted so much money it ridiculous. I installed huge trenches with between 20 and 40 4" pipes all over schools and only utilizing One for power, one for data, one for FA ect and at the same time I have perfectly good pipes that can be used going for building to building. It's ultimatly what got me to quite and start my own business. That and Chino school district paid $12000 for a one day change order that involved two guys and $500 in material.


----------



## Charlie K (Aug 14, 2008)

Bkessler said:


> I'd love to see the bacon davis go buy, buy. I was foreman on a lot of prevailing wage, "school modernizations" jobs. There is so much waste of millions and millions of dollars. My wife is a teacher, she's been at two schools in her district and modernization at both. There books are old, they have no money for anything, no art class, no gym class, no music, no library but they have a bunch of 4" pipes going to each building and a bunch of underground vaults for "future". Sounds like a design, planning and engineering issue. Hows that relate to Davis Bacon? That's at her school, I've done the same thing to many other schools. Tustin, congratulations you have wasted so much money it ridiculous. I installed huge trenches with between 20 and 40 4" pipes all over schools and only utilizing One for power, one for data, one for FA ect and at the same time I have perfectly good pipes that can be used going for building to building. Again how is this a Davis Bacon issue? It's ultimatly what got me to quite and start my own business. That and Chino school district paid $12000 for a one day change order that involved two guys and $500 in material.


I am not going to answer the last gripe due to lack of details. I think you are confusing Davis Bacon with overdesign.

Charlie


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

I think your mistaken evasiveness for my inability to articulate my thought. I am not trying to stir BS. I am recognizing inevitable changes and asking if those who are union will be as happy later in a "worst case scenario" 

However You are absolutely right I did not put forth my entire point in my first post. It wasn't my intention to "bait" anyone but instead to lead the conversation in a specific direction. Would a relatively young union contractor be able to survive in a more competitive market? Will the unions be able to maintain there membership levels? A question that also comes up (actually within this thread) Was this forseen by some who influenced the health care bill and would the unions be able to fall back on a subsidized health care fund to help the contractors compete in a changeing market? What about union workers if they had to fund there own UI and fall back on federally sponsored healthcare would that change there opinions of there union? While I wouldnt expect a mass exodus if this occurred surely it would have some effect on the union worker, how much effect? I know in the past some locals have decreased there wage when needed to be competitive but would they be willing to make more dramatic sacrafices like UI, healthcare, or maybe pension cuts?

There is no animosity intended here, no need for acusations or name calling.[/quote]

I appreciate this post as an effort to ask the question(I sense there is more though) If you have to ask the questions you do then you have not spoken to union personel who will inform you of all the new plans we have available for all the foreseeable issues you posted on. As far a locals making concessions, not once has it ever proven to gain the union ANY MORE MARKET SHARE(not once) it has only devalued what a journeyman wireman was worth(union or not) and or put more funds into the contractors purse.I believe the contractor takes risk therefore should make money(therefore we are taught to give 8 for 8 of quality work) erst we the workers should be afforded our concessions. I have been shown by example to only expect what you deserve. Yes I am aware there are unscrupplious people in the union as well the nonunion side. Gold or whoever you are just call the hall they have the info you need in black and white.
Bkessler the school systems in Riverside and San Bernardino county are in serious trouble and have been for years as on occassion I have donated my time to help.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Brother Noah said:


> I appreciate this post as an effort to ask the question(I sense there is more though)
> No Brother, thats all I got. Just curious what the future holds and were I will be.
> If you have to ask the questions you do then you have not spoken to union personel who will inform you of all the new plans we have available for all the foreseeable issues you posted on. As far a locals making concessions, not once has it ever proven to gain the union ANY MORE MARKET SHARE(not once) it has only devalued what a journeyman wireman was worth(union or not) and or put more funds into the contractors purse.I believe the contractor takes risk therefore should make money(therefore we are taught to give 8 for 8 of quality work) erst we the workers should be afforded our concessions. I have been shown by example to only expect what you deserve. Yes I am aware there are unscrupplious people in the union as well the nonunion side. Gold or whoever you are
> Lloyd is fine
> ...


I appreciate the less hostile sentiment. :thumbsup:


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

gold said:


> I appreciate the less hostile sentiment. :thumbsup:


Lloyd anything new on your wonderful options that may or may not be available?


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

Not really a decision I would make that fast, I'm changeing my target market a little, offering different services to larger companies. I may be forced to make a decision later this year. As is tho I have alot of fear, fear of the cost, fear of politcal influence, fear of brand damage, fear of getting the wrong type of person in my company and not being able to get rid of them. Not to mention fear of loosing control over how I want employees to act and interact with customers.


----------



## gold (Feb 15, 2008)

I spent several weeks trying to close a customer (very large comercial) on Installing solar. They werent even looking for it. In the end I got the comission for selling it but didnt get the install because I wasnt union, even tho I was more qualified. Had a better and bonded warranty etc etc
Perhaps that may have influenced this thread.:whistling2:


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

gold said:


> I spent several weeks trying to close a customer (very large comercial) on Installing solar. They werent even looking for it. In the end I got the comission for selling it but didnt get the install because I wasnt union, even tho I was more qualified. Had a better and bonded warranty etc etc
> Perhaps that may have influenced this thread.:whistling2:


Huh and I always thought cousin Guido had the most influence in your part of the country.(lol) I do know that across the river in THE City that very little gets done without the union label and several border cities in New Jersey may have been influenced also.Solar Voltaic classes are ready available for us out here in So-Cal as I am sure across the country locals are pushing green energy with the federal grants being splashed around in hopes of stimulating the economy in a sunny fashion.Misconceptions are all around us but from my experience it is easier working with some of the locals out here than any one local New Jersey. Go to largesolarenergyprojectsinsoutherncalifornia I wish you well in your job hunt.


----------



## Brother Noah1 (Mar 23, 2010)

gold said:


> Not really a decision I would make that fast, I'm changeing my target market a little, offering different services to larger companies. I may be forced to make a decision later this year. As is tho I have alot of fear, fear of the cost, fear of politcal influence, fear of brand damage, fear of getting the wrong type of person in my company and not being able to get rid of them. Not to mention fear of loosing control over how I want employees to act and interact with customers.


Lloyd sometimes locals have one job contracts that would only hold you to that certain job, I would say just call the hall and ask questions before you make a decision.


----------

