# Crossing picket line. Specific union differences or universal?



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Our company is union with 3 plants. The company is in a small group with our 3 plants and 2 others in a similar industry, but different company. Same contract with supplemental differences for each of the separate companies.

Contract was up for negotiation but the group voted it down. There have been some extensions, but it looks like a strike us coming.

Our local plant is/was overwhelmingly in support of the new contract, but obviously outnumbered by the overall group.

What are the consequences for local employees continue to work after the strike starts?

We have heard all kinds of different scenarios. Our local union rep hasn't gotten answers quite yet.

Is there specific wording in each union's bylaws covering this? Are there state to state differences? This is ohio which is not right to work.


I imagine that the contract under negotiations would be worded to allow the continued seniority etc. 
Thanks.


----------



## SWDweller (Dec 9, 2020)

Unless you find someone in your union I doubt you will find a decent answer.
Union rules tend to be local not national. Yes they follow national ideas but individual contracts with business are more important in the local scheme of things. What you said it might differences in where you are employed.
Wanting to know the real situation means you need to be contacting your reps and press them.

Good luck, a walk out never seemed like a good idea to me. 
I am in a right to work state and left the union when I went to work for the state of Arizona. 
Seems the local did not have an inside agreement at the time.


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

The most specific and concrete example we have is from the last strike here in the late 90s. We had one guy who was off on short term medical disability when they struck. He retained his existing seniority when they returned to work. Every other worker was a new hire.

Now, I also don't know of any other previous union member who was re-hired. Any other current employee from that time came in as scabs and remained working.


----------



## HertzHound (Jan 22, 2019)

I have no idea how it works in your situation. Our agreement (contract), like most other for inside wireman, has a no strike clause. I know of one local that was going through a merger while renewing their contract, and they went three years without a contract. Strike not allowed. There is also no such thing as seniority. Your only as good as your last day!


----------



## Lone Crapshooter (Nov 8, 2008)

If your plant is in favor of the new contract and it does not want to strike, then I would not strike. I would have no problem working during the strike. If your plant is represented by a standalone lodge or local even if it represented by the same international, you should not go on strike. On the other hand, if you are all represented by the same local, I think you would need to walk out also.
One must remember the china,or india factor when striking. The company can get it done over there for 1/100 of the price and the US government will help with incentives to move it over there.
One must also remember that the quality of your union contract is inversely proportional to the number of bass boats and diesel pickups on the parking lot. You could also throw in 300,000 and 400,000 mortgages into the mix.


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Seniority is a big one here for departmental transfers and overtime. And vacations, of course.

The most common concern is, if they continue working, loosing their job/seniority if/when the contract is signed.

It's not so much of a concern with the relatively new employees.


----------



## Lone Crapshooter (Nov 8, 2008)

As far as seniority goes it only works when the company has big enough balls to fire someone for not being worth a dam.
When I was at the plant, we voted seniority out for most things, (just used it as a tie breaker) and it saved a lot of people their jobs mine included.
We had a good plant manager at the time, and he would do everything he could to keep from laying people off. I would have liked to work for him in better times. I eventually got laid off the following day I went to work for a contactor doing the same job for $700.00 more a week. That lasted 33 months basically I was lied to, and I suspected it was coming.
LC


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Our situation is a shame. Two or 3 people with personal differences are affecting the jobs of a few hundred.


----------



## Mbit (Feb 28, 2020)

acro said:


> Contract was up for negotiation but the group voted it down. There have been some extensions, ...


Same thing happened to a plant I worked at in 2014. The company just kept coming back with new contracts until they basically just beat everyone into submission. The membership can't keep up with all the new info in such a short amount of time. Eventually the fear just gets to people. 

They even had the hall surrounded by police during the voting. Everyone was forced to wait hours in the cold to vote. And the union "leaders" facilitated the entire thing. Absolute scum IMO. Oh well.


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

For what this is worth...

The local president works an our plant. He said he's might cross the line himself. To me, that's rather telling.

He got some questions answered today and said that there's not much they can do other than calling names.


----------



## aidonius (Jul 10, 2018)

Sounds like you are in a tough spot.
The local and/or union will probably have something in the bylaws about the picket lines but just because the rules exist doesn't mean they are enforced. 



Mbit said:


> Same thing happened to a plant I worked at in 2014. The company just kept coming back with new contracts until they basically just beat everyone into submission. The membership can't keep up with all the new info in such a short amount of time. Eventually the fear just gets to people.
> 
> They even had the hall surrounded by police during the voting. Everyone was forced to wait hours in the cold to vote. And the union "leaders" facilitated the entire thing. Absolute scum IMO. Oh well.


This is often the biggest thing. It's in the company's best interests to scare you with "what ifs" and worst case scenarios because they can count on the fear to grind enough people down. It sounds like it's working. Divide and conquer is just as effective.

I wonder if you have more leverage than you think. If the company thought it was profitable to outsource they probably would have done so already. It's been going on since the 80s so maybe there's a reason. Workers in mexico/china/etc are also pushing for higher wages and given the shipping delays it's possible that it's prohibitively expensive for the company to do outsource. In any case the argument is less compelling than it was 10-20 years ago.
In many places it's a lot harder to find scabs than it used to be as well.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

aidonius said:


> I wonder if you have more leverage than you think. If the company thought it was profitable to outsource they probably would have done so already. It's been going on since the 80s so maybe there's a reason. Workers in mexico/china/etc are also pushing for higher wages and given the shipping delays it's possible that it's prohibitively expensive for the company to do outsource. In any case the argument is less compelling than it was 10-20 years ago. In many places it's a lot harder to find scabs than it used to be as well.


Not commenting on the OP's specific situation, but I agree with all those points, unions haven't been in a better position to negotiate in probably over 50 years.


----------



## Yankee77 (Oct 5, 2020)

United We Stand, if a strike occurs at a plant, why would you not support the striking union? Wouldn’t you want them to walk if you went on strike? As for 2 or 3 people effecting 100’s, voting on issues takes care of that ?


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Not entirely. It's too complicated to get in to here in its entirety. But the other company in our group has a sister plant within walking distance if their 1st plant, and they are in a different union, on a completely different pay scale. The # of employees at that plant nearly equal our 3 plants combined. Again, the negotiating group covers 4 plants. 

Committee members can either stir discontent, or promote unity. In this case, the discontent is leading in that plant and one of ours. It's the best contract the company has ever offered and was most likely approved at 2 of our plants. Unfortunately, voter turnout isn't great. 

This time there are 4 committee members who can vote. The even # is obviously a problem for voting at the table. Previous contracts had 3.


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

Once the contract expires and the union goes on strike there is essentially no contract - unless you have language that says otherwise or if Ohio has a law saying otherwise. If there is no contract in place during the strike and you cross the picket line you are basically accepting whatever terms and conditions the employer is offering. It's probably in the employer's interest to keep you happy and reporting to work ... but maybe not. I think they could impose the agreement that was just voted down. Or they could impose something different. They could also use this as an opportunity to weaken or destroy the union. For example, your employer could offer you sweetheart terms to cross the picket line - say an extra $10 hr. That would enrage the members at the other facilities and make your facility a lot of enemies. Once that happens they can take that $10hr back and maybe cut pay by $5hr. What would the members at your facility do then? Go back and ask the union for help? Join the other guys on strike? Crossing the picket line and dividing the union weakens the union and empowers the employers. How the employers use that power is the thing you would need to be worried about.


----------



## MHElectric (Oct 14, 2011)

I don’t know anything about unions or their politics, but isn’t this the type of situation that encourages American businesses to move their factories and plants overseas?


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

MHElectric said:


> I don’t know anything about unions or their politics, but isn’t this the type of situation that encourages American businesses to move their factories and plants overseas?


I think businesses move over seas for a lot of reasons: higher cost of labor here, loose environmental regulations over there and just as often they move production overseas because their CUSTOMERS are overseas. 

But if the solution to businesses moving overseas is for American workers to be ok accepting less compensation ... we need to find a different solution to that problem.


----------



## gpop (May 14, 2018)

MHElectric said:


> I don’t know anything about unions or their politics, but isn’t this the type of situation that encourages American businesses to move their factories and plants overseas?


Dollar for dollar sometime's it cheaper on a company to have a union. Contracts work both ways and the union guys onsite are not the smartest cookies in the jar compared to high priced lawyers the company is using.

E.g the company my brother-in-law use to work for. (notice the use to part)

Union "we want a pay raise".
Company "ok but if we are paying more we will need to to prove that you can do the job"
Union "That's stupid as we already do the job. Put it in the contract and we will vote on it"
Company "Thank you for signing the contract now everyone needs to take a skills test, anyone who fails will be terminated as stated in the contract"
Union "That's not fair no one mentioned a real test of our skills"


----------



## MHElectric (Oct 14, 2011)

Munson said:


> I think businesses move over seas for a lot of reasons: higher cost of labor here, loose environmental regulations over there and just as often they move production overseas because their CUSTOMERS are overseas.
> 
> But if the solution to businesses moving overseas is for American workers to be ok accepting less compensation ... we need to find a different solution to that problem.


Do American workers need to continue pushing for better pay and benefits when they are already compensated at the top levels?


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

MHElectric said:


> Do American workers need to continue pushing for better pay and benefits when they are already compensated at the top levels?


I think that's human nature. If humans settled for whatever they have at the moment, we'd all be carrying spears and living in caves.


----------



## gpop (May 14, 2018)

acro said:


> Not entirely. It's too complicated to get in to here in its entirety. But the other company in our group has a sister plant within walking distance if their 1st plant, and they are in a different union, on a completely different pay scale. The # of employees at that plant nearly equal our 3 plants combined. Again, the negotiating group covers 4 plants.
> 
> Committee members can either stir discontent, or promote unity. In this case, the discontent is leading in that plant and one of ours. It's the best contract the company has ever offered and was most likely approved at 2 of our plants. Unfortunately, voter turnout isn't great.
> 
> This time there are 4 committee members who can vote. The even # is obviously a problem for voting at the table. Previous contracts had 3.


Im not sure how it works there but the last union i was in required a strike vote and a bunch of other things before you was allowed to strike. (this was to give both party's time to negotiate and to reduce the walk out strikes of the 50's). Rejecting a contract is no big deal and it happens all the time it doesn't mean anything. Yes they will talk about strikes but most of that is basically blowing smoke unless you have a real un-happy work force. 
I have voted down contracts before, when it came to the strike vote 98% of us voted not to strike and to carry on negotiations.


----------



## MHElectric (Oct 14, 2011)

Munson said:


> I think that's human nature. If humans settled for whatever they have at the moment, we'd all be carrying spears and living in caves.


There’s a lot to be said about being content in life. It may not be what our culture promotes, but I would rather be happy with a little, then unhappy with a lot.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

MHElectric said:


> I don’t know anything about unions or their politics, but isn’t this the type of situation that encourages American businesses to move their factories and plants overseas?


In my opinion, that along with 
the availability of impoverished desperate workers to exploit, 
manipulations of currency value, 
lack of laws governing working conditions, 
lack of environmental protection regulations, 
availability of energy at reduced cost due to aforementioned lack of environmental protection regulations, 
tarrif structure that's rigged in that direction, 
demands that brands manufacture in country to gain access to multi billion population markets, 
a willing totalitarian government to partner with, 
and oh yes don't forget, corruption, they will play ball. 

All that is hard to resist if you are greedy, amoral, and shortsighted.


----------



## oldsparky52 (Feb 25, 2020)

> Essential Meaning of _union_
> 1*: *an organization of workers formed to protect the rights and interests of its members


Seems to me that Arco's union is not being a union. If you guys don't stand together, you don't have a union. 

I always thought a union mentality was similar to a socialist mentality. I never really cared for unions as I've always liked competition. But w/out unions, we'd still be working 6 days a week with little to no benefits, even the non union guys. Unions are needed to keep businesses from totally abusing workers. The more robotics advances, the less power unions will have. 

Good luck with all this Arco.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

MHElectric said:


> There’s a lot to be said about being content in life. It may not be what our culture promotes, but I would rather be happy with a little, then unhappy with a lot.


That would apply more to something like a pro sports strike where hundredmillionaires are arguing with billionaires. 

You can keep settling for less until you have so little that you can't be anything but miserable with it. 

This kind of thinking is essentially philosophical and has no place in a business negotiation. Supply is short, demand is high, raise the price, negotiate for more now, make hay while the sun shines. If someone talks you out of that, you got beat. :smh:


----------



## Quickservice (Apr 23, 2020)

I would hope that this does not apply in this situation.... But, I grew up in coal mine country, and crossing a picket line was not a healthy thing to do.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

The insulators union picketed a plant I worked at in Philadelphia. They met at the union, got the picket van, showed up around 8 or 9. At around 11 they went back to collect their $10 and get lunch. So as long as you showed up to work on time and left on time, you probably never knew they were even there.


----------



## matt1124 (Aug 23, 2011)

Quickservice said:


> I would hope that this does not apply in this situation.... But, I grew up in coal mine country, and crossing a picket was not a healthy thing to do.


If our union was the break your legs, suitcase full of cash type union, I’d join so fast…

Nice house you got there…


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Quickservice said:


> I would hope that this does not apply in this situation.... But, I grew up in coal mine country, and crossing a picket was not a healthy thing to do.


Coal mining family here and stories of umw strike in 70s resulting in several gunshots into truck radiators etc. Bad thing was our operation was non union. Just union thugs there causing trouble on our property.

Doesn't sound like that's likely here.


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

Chances are that Acro's employer is a company that's publicly traded or owned by a hedge fund which means that they will squeeze every ounce of profit out of that operation regardless of what it means to the employees. If it's a family owned operation where the family lives in the community, that might be different. But that's not likely. If the employees don't fight for themselves a little they will get taken advantage of. I think that's just the reality of how the world works.

The guy to feel bad for is the president of Acro''s union who works in his facility and presumably negotiated and supported the agreement that got voted down. A union leader who can't get a contract ratified by his members is kind of a lame duck. The members obviously don't have faith in him and management just learned that he can't deliver on his side of an agreement. Bad spot for him to be in.


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

oldsparky52 said:


> Seems to me that Arco's union is not being a union. If you guys don't stand together, you don't have a union.
> 
> I always thought a union mentality was similar to a socialist mentality. I never really cared for unions as I've always liked competition. But w/out unions, we'd still be working 6 days a week with little to no benefits, even the non union guys. Unions are needed to keep businesses from totally abusing workers. The more robotics advances, the less power unions will have.
> 
> Good luck with all this Arco.


If our union was so great, make membership optional and the membership levels would reflect that. But making membership mandatory and not showing the members very much benefit doesn't make for a very strong union base.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

Quickservice said:


> I would hope that this does not apply in this situation.... But, I grew up in coal mine country, and crossing a picket was not a healthy thing to do.


Western Michigan is a lot different from West Virginia. Picketing was not a healthy thing to do. Where I went to school when the teachers had a strike for a closed shop the police had to show up in riot gear to protect the teachers from having the crap beat out of them by the parents. They blocked the buses (school found enough substitutes) and then the parents dropping their kids off got out and beat the crap out of the teachers. The sheriff was told to either do his job keeping the picketers from interfering with the school or join the teachers in the hospital.

That being said there is a documentary from the 1970s about a coal mining strike in West Virginia. It is very sobering. I think they had George Massey in it if you know anything about coal mining history. To say the least the way the miners were treated was horrible but it went both ways in some ways. Some of the union officers were downright gangster thugs and the mine owners were just as bad if not worse. The union did get some reasonable concessions which were then erased about a year later when the unions nationalized. It is well worth watching but pretty unbelievable that what was going on can exist even in the 1970s.

My personal opinion is that I’ve seen unions screw their members over worse than anything a company ever did. I’ve seen company firemen and superintendents treat employees like crap for no reason at all other than to show they have power I have good friends who were union presidents. My opinion is that unions exist because at some point in the past the company management got so bad they felt that this is better than the alternative, whether it is true today or not. The union regulations are designed to purposely put management against the workers and vice versa, creating a self fulfilling system. It’s horrible for both sides.

That’s different from trade unions that are just the old guild system. It has its use. Trade unions are kept in check because if they don’t help anyone their jobs and membership shrinks.


----------



## MHElectric (Oct 14, 2011)

splatz said:


> That would apply more to something like a pro sports strike where hundredmillionaires are arguing with billionaires.
> 
> You can keep settling for less until you have so little that you can't be anything but miserable with it.
> 
> This kind of thinking is essentially philosophical and has no place in a business negotiation. Supply is short, demand is high, raise the price, negotiate for more now, make hay while the sun shines. If someone talks you out of that, you got beat. :smh:


I’ve never lived in a place where unions has any kind of a presence, at least not as long as I’ve been an adult. So the only things i know about them are what gets posted on this site.

From what people have said about them, they’ve worked to raise the overall benifits & wages for hard working guys like us. I can’t see why that alone would be a bad thing.

But i can totally see how not being happy when you have it good and always wanting more is a recipe for all kinds of problems. The history books are filled with these stories, don’t take my word for it.


----------



## oldsparky52 (Feb 25, 2020)

My son works at Corning here in Wilmington. They are union (voluntary). He said Corning has a plant in Monroe (outside of Charlotte NC, about a 4 hour drive) that is not union.

Quality out of Wilmington is better than Monroe and production is higher here than there.

I encouraged my son to join the union. I'll have to ask him if he ever did join.

ETA: wages here are in the low to mid $20/hour and there it's in the mid teens. Or at least it was before Covid. Don't know what's going on now though.


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

You could come up with examples of where unions have done great things and examples of where they have done terrible things. But the question in this situation is whether the employees who are members of Acro's union would have higher wages, benefits and working conditions if the company could set those on their own. I don't think I've ever come across a situation where the answer to that question is "yes."


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Been by that corning plant many times. Mom lives in wilmington.👍


----------



## Yankee77 (Oct 5, 2020)

MHElectric said:


> I don’t know anything about unions or their politics, but isn’t this the type of situation that encourages American businesses to move their factories and plants overseas?


Look at the CEO pay increases in the last 25 years for your answer, the problem isn’t blue collar pay checks


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

No doubt. But I don't see how striking unions fix that.

All that does is make hungry union families.

The ceo's have their golden parachutes.


----------



## aidonius (Jul 10, 2018)

gpop said:


> Im not sure how it works there but the last union i was in required a strike vote and a bunch of other things before you was allowed to strike. (this was to give both party's time to negotiate and to reduce the walk out strikes of the 50's). Rejecting a contract is no big deal and it happens all the time it doesn't mean anything. Yes they will talk about strikes but most of that is basically blowing smoke unless you have a real un-happy work force.
> I have voted down contracts before, when it came to the strike vote 98% of us voted not to strike and to carry on negotiations.


This is a good point. You only go on strike if the members vote to do so. Voting to say no to a contract doesn't mean that you will go on strike. Here we see it a lot where the companies will stall on negotiations so they don't have to pay the salary increases they expect to see in the new contract so we can expect to vote on a few contracts before any talk of a strike comes up.



acro said:


> No doubt. But I don't see how striking unions fix that.
> 
> All that does is make hungry union families.
> 
> The ceo's have their golden parachutes.


I think a big thing is that people forget that striking is the nuclear option of workplace action. Nobody _wants_ to go on strike. There are plenty of other things like work slowdowns that are less painful for everybody involved and still get the point across to the company. The downside is that they take a lot more work to organize and people have to feel like their colleagues and the union have their back.
It's a chicken/egg problem. People aren't invested in the union because it doesn't do much for them but a union can't do much for its members if they aren't invested in it. A union can't just be a service that you pay money into that magically creates better working conditions. The members are the union despite what the union bureaucracy might have to say about it.


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Right. And you can only get so much juice out of a lemon. When you are in an industry that is rather easily sourced multiple places, I can see how the company has to hold the line.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

MHElectric said:


> But i can totally see how not being happy when you have it good and always wanting more is a recipe for all kinds of problems. The history books are filled with these stories, don’t take my word for it.


You scout around a bit in those books and you'll see there's a few examples where people given an inch take a yard  

But sure I agree. Remind me again, who's the one here who has it good but wants more, the corporation or the workers? 

But whatever the answer, remember, don't go down a rabbit hole into philosophy and bullshit when there's business at hand, labor negotiations are business.


----------



## oldsparky52 (Feb 25, 2020)

Yankee77 said:


> Look at the CEO pay increases in the last 25 years for your answer, the problem isn’t blue collar pay checks





> “It used to be that in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, CEOs made 3.3 times what a top 0.1% earner made. Now, it’s more than six times,” says Mishel. “CEOs now are making 351 times that of a typical worker, but back in 1978, it was only 31 times. In 1989, it was 61 times.”











In 2020, top CEOs earned 351 times more than the typical worker


Since 1978, CEO compensation has grown 1,322%, but typical worker compensation has risen 18%.




www.cnbc.com


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

It's up to the board members to fix it. But competition for tallent drives it up.

Put a cap on it, and it's un-American.


----------



## oldsparky52 (Feb 25, 2020)

acro said:


> Put a cap on it, and it's un-American.


So is putting a bottom on a wage?


----------



## Yankee77 (Oct 5, 2020)

acro said:


> No doubt. But I don't see how striking unions fix that.
> 
> All that does is make hungry union families.
> 
> The ceo's have their golden parachutes.


 It doesn’t fix it, but it certainly points out the bs they try and feed the blue collar workforce (ie: we have to tighten our belts, we gonna need a little more effort on the part of the workforce to maintain our profit quota, etc......)
Most CEO’s pay is in the fine print, hidden in future payouts or stock options, etc


----------



## Yankee77 (Oct 5, 2020)

acro said:


> If our union was so great, make membership optional and the membership levels would reflect that. But making membership mandatory and not showing the members very much benefit doesn't make for a very strong union base.


That’s really not a fair statement. Most non union shops don’t offer the education, benefits, hourly rate, etc., that union shops offer. I am not bashing non Union, as everyone has a family to feed, but more often than not that is the case


----------



## oldsparky52 (Feb 25, 2020)

Here is the kicker though. According to that CNBC article,


> The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) estimates that CEO compensation has grown 1,322% since 1978, while typical worker compensation has risen just 18%.


So, for every dollar in 1978 compensation in 2020 the "typical worker" compensation was $1.18.

Now, it takes $3.16 in 2020 dollars to replace 1978 dollars.


----------



## aidonius (Jul 10, 2018)

MHElectric said:


> There’s a lot to be said about being content in life. It may not be what our culture promotes, but I would rather be happy with a little, then unhappy with a lot.


I agree that we shouldn't expect everything all the time. However "a little" in this case is often not enough. In canada 1 in 8 households don't have enough to eat and some number more are just making enough to get by. This is insufficient to be content, let alone to lead a happy and healthy life. 

I spent enough years working retail for minimum wage(8.90$/hr in 2009 to 11.25$ in 2018) to know that they will say whatever they need to and then turn around and pat each other on the back about their increase in yearly profits. I will never forget the nights running around stressed because they "couldn't afford" another employee to then one day see that the company just spent a *billion* dollars buying another. Where did all that money come from?  
We spoke longingly of fabled "union jobs" where people made enough to feed a family and were treated with respect. I would never say that we "had it good". Companies that would do that without being forced to are few and far between.


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Everyone working would take home more $$ without costing the companies a dime, if they kicked a hell if a lot of people off of welfare and fixed that problem. But that's a whole nother conversation.


----------



## gpop (May 14, 2018)

Im not in a union and at this moment in time i see no reason to join one. Staff turn over is at 15-20% due to the great resignation so pay and additional benefits are being handed out like candy. 

Covid gave people a chance to balance there bank accounts and build the nest egg required to comfortably jump ship. Company's tried to play hardball but when they lost a employee they had to increase wage's to hire replacements. Most places have finally woke up to the fact they were going to have to increase wages across the board to keep the people they have or spend even more on training the new hires.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

acro said:


> It's up to the board members to fix it. But competition for tallent drives it up.
> 
> Put a cap on it, and it's un-American.


It’s the shareholders. The boards just approve.

Seen in multiple times where the shareholders revolt. And it’s not the guy that owns 100 stocks. It’s the banks, hedge fund managers that look at CEO pay and point out that the industry average is lower or push the issue when the CEO is a screw up. Look at Zuck has taken a big hit recently. It’s just a matter of time before Chapek over at Disney is sent packing. And the ones raising the issue is NOT the board.

CEOs are just highly paid sales people. They sell company stock. When corporate officer pay affects the bottom line the shareholders pitch a fit. If you want to know how it works it’s called SG&A. That stands for sales and general administration. It’s what the sales and executive pay is. When that number as a percentage of revenues or profits gets too high, it raises red flags that cause stock prices to drop,

CEOs are easy to point a finger at but they have the least amount of influence on employee pay. That’s basically dictated by HR and middle management and to some degree accounting. In a non-union environment pay is mostly set by looking at what everyone else in the local economy is paying and how desperate a company is for workers plus often adjustments for experience for new hires. After that you might get a percentage raise but as your pay goes up the raises get smaller because they know you are less likely to leave. The way up is to change jobs about every 3-5 years. You can in theory negotiate a raise, get e promotion, etc., but that amounts to just a small percentage. Jumping ship is much easier and bigger. Some companies are better than others though about pay increases or bonuses. I’ve had bonuses that were almost a couple months pay and I’ve had bonuses that were a joke. Generally union shops never pay bonuses or they are pathetic, even if you’re not union.

In a union shop everything is set by the contract. Every few years the union negotiates increases. Generally pay is based on pay grade and that’s it. So everyone gets the same thing. Very few have incentive programs but they are becoming more popular. If they exist of course they are part of the contract or negotiated as an amendment. I have never however seen any incentive program that is tied to personal performance for a union. It always rewards slackers and high fliers equally in some way.

Better check your numbers on the Monroe plant and make sure you are comparing apples to apples. Monroe workers don’t get union dues taken out. Plus there is a huge difference in cost of living. Wilmington is expensive.


----------



## cutlerhammer (Aug 16, 2011)

acro said:


> Our company is union with 3 plants. The company is in a small group with our 3 plants and 2 others in a similar industry, but different company. Same contract with supplemental differences for each of the separate companies.
> 
> Contract was up for negotiation but the group voted it down. There have been some extensions, but it looks like a strike us coming.
> 
> ...


My father-in-law would have told you, "A Scab is a Scab!!"


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

True. But our current membership includes many good, long term employees that were hired as "scabs" during the last strike here. A wildcat strike in the late 80s. 

Would they still be scabs? Or can the be redeemed? 😁


----------



## Djea3 (Mar 8, 2019)

paulengr said:


> CEOs are just highly paid sales people.
> 
> CEOs are easy to point a finger at but they have the least amount of influence on employee pay. That’s basically dictated by HR and middle management and to some degree accounting. In a non-union environment pay is mostly set by looking at what everyone else in the local economy is paying and how desperate a company is for workers plus often adjustments for experience for new hires.
> 
> ...


I call BS about CEO being sales people. A really good CEO must be able to handle people and to CHOOSE the BEST and keep them moving the right direction as a group. A LOT harder than being a salesman. Most excellent salesmen could never come close.

CEO's actually have a Huge influence on pay, HR uses its formulas and fake information sources to attempt to minimize ALL Wages except their own.

I agree, you MUST stay more than 3 years UNLESS there is significant and easily demonstrable benefit to you. Other than that 5 years is possibly outside...7 for sure.

Union shops contracts are negotiated by ..your union reps and stewards. The Union Reps are Company men...not union blue collar men. Any steward worth his weight will be approached by the plant to move to management. EVERY TIME. If they are not worth their weight they should not be negotiating contracts or representing grievances!

With regard to negotiations remember that the company has been working on a new contract for YEARS and even using their attorneys and other resources to destroy the INDIVIDUAL WORKER AND HIS RETIREMENT to benefit the company.

When I left LMSC there was a contract negotiation. The company gave the union what the union thought was a win financially, however, it gave new job descriptions and designation numbers (i.e 611-5 Structural and mechanical inspector became 615-3 Inspector with a new moniker). Every employee in a specific designation was approved for one of the new designations at the new improved wage. All the guys within 5 years of retirement were let go, they had NEVER held any current position so they could not bump down as positions changed and the new position that they were in was deleted from need (literally within a week or two). Guys with 6 months or less to retirement lost thousands a month.

You can't tell me there was no one in the union that did not see this coming? The REP KNEW, you bet he did. He gats paid and keeps his job so what does he care? he is a COMPANY MAN really. Today Unions are just another way to pacify the masses. Can you earn better in a Union? If you plan on a single company or a single career then yes.


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

That's a terrible story. But I have one that's just the opposite. My BIL worked for Albany International in Albany NY for 30 years. Six months before his retirement they announced that they were closing the facility and moving the jobs somewhere south. He wasn't in a situation where moving to a new region was an option so he went to the union - not IBEW, I forget which one - and told them that he needed 6 more months at the Albany plant and then he could retire. You know what they did? The union got the company to give him a BS job at that otherwise closed plant for 6 mos so that he could get his 30 years. It was a huge place and he was pretty much the only one there and he didnt really have anything to do. But they paid him to "work" there 40 hrs a week so he could retire with his 30 years. So for every bad union story there's another good union story that doesn't usually make it onto the internet.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

Munson said:


> ...So for every bad union story there's another good union story that doesn't usually make it onto the internet.


Not to mention the fact that if he was working the same job in a non-union plant, he probably would have been 20 years from retirement instead of six months from retirement at that point. 

Do you know if the new facility down south had a union agreement?


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

splatz said:


> Not to mention the fact that if he was working the same job in a non-union plant, he probably would have been 20 years from retirement instead of six months from retirement at that point.
> 
> Do you know if the new facility down south had a union agreement?


Based on a google search it doesn't appear so. I think the Albany NY jobs went to St Stephen SC.Article


----------



## Quickservice (Apr 23, 2020)

acro said:


> True. But our current membership includes many good, long term employees that were hired as "scabs" during the last strike here. A wildcat strike in the late 80s.
> 
> Would they still be scabs? Or can* they* be redeemed? 😁


FIFY


----------



## Quickservice (Apr 23, 2020)

Quickservice said:


> FIFY


I can tell you this... in the coal mine country, once a scab always a scab.


----------



## acro (May 3, 2011)

Yea, but at what point do you trade in an empty belly and eviction notice for a paycheck?

Seems like more often than not, strikes results in loss of business and plant closures.


What good is it to ride a sinking ship to the ocean floor? You have to be able to read the wind.


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

acro said:


> Seems like more often than not, strikes results in loss of business and plant closures.


Sometimes. But if a plant is closing because their wages went up an extra 1-2% then they were closing anyway. Labor costs are only one of many factors that determine whether a business can be profitable or not. 

But THREATS of strikes often result in gains for union workers.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

Djea3 said:


> I call BS about CEO being sales people. A really good CEO must be able to handle people and to CHOOSE the BEST and keep them moving the right direction as a group. A LOT harder than being a salesman. Most excellent salesmen could never come close.


Large companies have a CEO, COO, and CFO. The COO runs operations. CEOs come from sales and marketing. Some just have a “president” but that’s rare in publicly traded companies. Private is different.



> Union shops contracts are negotiated by ..your union reps and stewards. The Union Reps are Company men...not union blue collar men. Any steward worth his weight will be approached by the plant to move to management. EVERY TIME. If they are not worth their weight they should not be negotiating contracts or representing grievances!


Ok let’s flip this around. Say I’m looking to hire a foreman. So I’d like to find someone that is skilled at leading people and keeping a cool head when things get rough. Union stewards are usually in their position within the union for the exact same reasons. Plus they are people you already know compared to hiring from outside. So it’s a natural that they would get offered those jobs.

As far as being “company men”, simply not true or they would not maintain their position. But look at it from a union stewards point of view. They have to put up with a lot of crap from union members and the company where the issue is pretty black and white. So they do their jobs as far as representing the union worker but that’s hard to do when you are in a losing position compared to when you believe in what you are fighting for. So most stewards and other union officers get a little callous to the bull after a while and come off as supporting the company when in fact they support you a lot more when you have a legitimate grievance. You don’t have to sit through grievance meetings like the stewards do. So they see a lot more of the “big picture” and they’re just not going to waste time on nonsense where they won’t win anyways. That doesn’t mean they are siding with the company, only that they are siding with doing the right thing. Not saying some aren’t sucking up but that’s a small minority 



> With regard to negotiations remember that the company has been working on a new contract for YEARS and even using their attorneys and other resources to destroy the INDIVIDUAL WORKER AND HIS RETIREMENT to benefit the company.


To what benefit? That’s so crazy short sighted. Sure they negotiate hard…that’s their jobs too to keep costs down. But just like the nonunion shops if they screw their workers then the competitors in the local labor department will get all the good ones. That’s a poor way to run a company. Don’t get me wrong here. The entire labor law is written specifically to pit management and union workers against each other. It is very easy to fall into that trap. Many union plants have gone out of business either because management let things get out of control by giving in too easily or by screwing their labor force to the point where it killed morale and eventually the company.



> When I left LMSC there was a contract negotiation. The company gave the union what the union thought was a win financially, however, it gave new job descriptions and designation numbers (i.e 611-5 Structural and mechanical inspector became 615-3 Inspector with a new moniker). Every employee in a specific designation was approved for one of the new designations at the new improved wage. All the guys within 5 years of retirement were let go, they had NEVER held any current position so they could not bump down as positions changed and the new position that they were in was deleted from need (literally within a week or two). Guys with 6 months or less to retirement lost thousands a month.


That’s a clear NLRB filing. You can’t just “cancel” seniority. The AFL-CIO National would happily take this up. In a management meeting I’d object to this tactic since it’s such an incredibly bad policy in so many ways and one that a first year law student could win. Plus the rest is age discrimination which is very illegal. Once you hit 55 you are almost untouchable. The union should have fought that one. They wouldn’t have lost it. Every over 55 guy would have been an automatic wrongful termination case and the company would be guilty until proven innocent. They should have claimed fraud and nullified the contract or failing that, walked out. This sounds



> You can't tell me there was no one in the union so what does he care? to pacify the masses. Can you earn better in a Union? If you plan on a single company or a single career then yes.


I don’t disagree that the time for unions has long passed. But I have seen management staff screw employees royally in exactly the way you are describing, both union and nonunion. When it gets so bad that the workers are willing to fork over 15-20% of their pay checks for relief, that’s how a union gets started. Ignoring trade unions, nobody ever started a union because it was better than nonunion, EVER. They all started because at some point management was so bad it got voted in. Management in that same company today might not be the tyrants you are describing but if there’s a union there they did that stuff in the past.

However what you may not have seen is the training classes and things companies put out to avoid having a union. Guess what the training is all about? Treating employees with respect, not screwing then over, paying competitive wages. If you don’t piss them off, they have no reason to want a union. Do you see a pattern here? Nationally union membership is down from something like 50% years ago to somewhere around 5-10% and continues to decline. Labor laws like anti-age discrimination which came WAY after collective bargaining have made them less necessary but even today there are some truly evil people out there.

I would say that most engineers are pretty biased against unions. I’d say I’m completely neutral. Any company with a union deserved it. Whether there is value today is debatable but again I’ll just say that I’ve seen things with my own eyes that confirm my belief that at least the threat of unions is still a necessity. I can work with the system and still get my job done and still treat people right whether they are union or not.

Even if wages are identical union shops are flat out less productive and more costly to run than nonunion shops. You can argue how great union workers are but nobody ever tolerated the utter nonsense games played by BOTH sides and all the lawyers and consultants paid by both sides creating a constant distraction in the work place. That’s the bias engineers have against them but I’ll say it again: unions exist because of bad management.


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

Munson said:


> Sometimes. But if a plant is closing because their wages went up an extra 1-2% then they were closing anyway. Labor costs are only one of many factors that determine whether a business can be profitable or not.
> 
> But THREATS of strikes often result in gains for union workers.


A Carmeuse lime plant in Alabama strikes at every contract. They vote to strike on say Thursday, take a 3 day vacation, and vote the contract in Monday with ZERO changes.

The threat is the key. Nonunion plants avoid treating their workers badly if they want to stay nonunion. Union plants use the threat of strikes or other actions,


----------



## Almost Retired (Sep 14, 2021)

paulengr said:


> but I’ll say it again: unions exist because of bad management.


I agree COMPLETELY

I too am neutral about unions, sometimes they are needed, sometimes they are not
union ppl being slackers or non productive is purely the fault of the negotiations, ie. both sides
not the ppl, they have been trained to be that way, and sometimes are required to behave that way to avoid getting in trouble


----------



## paulengr (Oct 8, 2017)

acro said:


> Yea, but at what point do you trade in an empty belly and eviction notice for a paycheck?
> 
> Seems like more often than not, strikes results in loss of business and plant closures.
> 
> ...


Unions have to build up a stockpile for this reason. One of the key provisions in most contracts today is “no strike, no lockout” because both sides realize a strike/lockout is usually mutually assured destruction. That doesn’t mean the union can’t organize other means of work stoppage.


----------



## Djea3 (Mar 8, 2019)

paulengr said:


> As far as being “company men”, simply not true or they would not maintain their position. But look at it from a union stewards point of view. They have to put up with a lot of crap from union members and the company where the issue is pretty black and white. So they do their jobs as far as representing the union worker but that’s hard to do when you are in a losing position compared to when you believe in what you are fighting for. So most stewards and other union officers get a little callous to the bull after a while and come off as supporting the company when in fact they support you a lot more when you have a legitimate grievance. You don’t have to sit through grievance meetings like the stewards do. So they see a lot more of the “big picture” and they’re just not going to waste time on nonsense where they won’t win anyways. That doesn’t mean they are siding with the company, only that they are siding with doing the right thing. Not saying some aren’t sucking up but that’s a small minority
> 
> To what benefit? That’s so crazy short sighted. Sure they negotiate hard…that’s their jobs too to keep costs down. But just like the nonunion shops if they screw their workers then the competitors in the local labor department will get all the good ones. That’s a poor way to run a company. Don’t get me wrong here. The entire labor law is written specifically to pit management and union workers against each other. It is very easy to fall into that trap. Many union plants have gone out of business either because management let things get out of control by giving in too easily or by screwing their labor force to the point where it killed morale and eventually the company.
> 
> That’s a clear NLRB filing. You can’t just “cancel” seniority. The AFL-CIO National would happily take this up. In


I never said stewards were company men, union reps ARE company men. They are NOT blue collar workers, they work for the union paid by your wages. They work to keep status quo. Period.

Most large union plants have teams of attorneys and definitely have HR specialists. They spend a good percentage of time figuring our how to minimize wages and increase profits. If the equipment and processes are already efficient then the ONLY place to pull that from is UNION WAGES, period (of move the plant). 

AFL-CIO, laughing my ass off. Actually, if the union employees negotiate and allow a complete new job description and job designation, and allow that each employee will be qualified at least the same pay scale then there is NOTHING the NLRB can do when the company eliminates the need for those designated jobs (the highest paid ones). The older employees have never held the lower classification and can NOT bump down. In the case of LMSC Sunnyvale the union KNEW it was screwing the older workers. It allowed it and recommended the contract. It was the employees that made the agreement willingly. A meeting fo the minds took place in exchange for a bump in wages. Done deal.

I had already left because the union had already screwed me twice by not following up money grievances (unpaid call in at OT on weekends, should have been 4 hours call in pay at 1.5X Sat and 2X Sun. total of 4 days for 16 hours total loss.) I found another job for higher than scale (a LOT higher) at a non union shop. I had kids and a family to support. No choice.
A really good life long friend of mine was in charge of training for my old department at LMSC. He told me what was happening long before it happened, we would laugh about it actually because we KNEW no older employee was going to retire and they would buy into it. He had been a steward and every year the company tried to hire him to salary, because he was damn good as a steward and caused a lot of grief for the company. They finally made an offer he could not refuse including guaranty of employment till retirement at a high salary. Sweet deal, but he died of cancer a year before retirement. Miss **** every day.


----------



## Munson (11 mo ago)

"... union reps ARE company men. They are NOT blue collar workers, they work for the union paid by your wages. They work to keep status quo. Period."

Can you expand on this? When you talk about a "union rep" are you talking about the attorneys (or similar) that the union might hire to help it represent members? It doesn't sound like you are talking about the shop stewards or the elected union officers who come from the ranks of the employees. Who are you talking about when you say that "union reps are company men ... and work to keep the status quo?"


----------



## Mbit (Feb 28, 2020)

I believe he's talking about the guys who are above the stewards. Typically guys who will have a seat at the negotiating table when contracts are being negotiated. Business reps, secretaries, and local presidents. Usually they're very highly paid with totally packages pushing 150-200. Usually the presidents and international staff are into all kinds of things besides their "day jobs" working for the local. Just what I've seen, take it with a grain of salt.


----------

