Which way do you lean?

Question:
Union:

Choices:
Yes...
No....

 

To me it's not a Yes or No answer. I would hit the button that voted: "In certain circumstances".
Corey

quote:

Originally posted by noble97monarch:
To me it's not a Yes or No answer. I would hit the button that voted: "In certain circumstances".

This is why I can not, in good conscious, vote in this poll. The poster has given a Yes or No answer to all instances of Labor.

My father was a Union Member, then a Shop Steward at Con Edison before he went into management there. I was a Union Mechanic at Shop-Rite and at Yellow Freight.

My shop is Non-Union and my Mechanics enjoy Full Healthcare for themselves and their family members without any types of matching contributions by them. They have Dental. They have access to a very generous retirement plan, if they choose to participate, with matching contributions by our company. They get paid holidays, sick time and vacation time off. Their pay is above our "Industry or Union Average".

They get a Turkey Day gift card that will easily feed their entire family with extra left over to the grocery store of their choice. They get a Christmas Bonus Check that equals the "Average Of Hours Worked" in a week. No one has been laid off in this economic downturn!!!

I have a very low turnover rate. Both full time mechanics have been with me for 9 & 13 years. They just won't leave...

Here, at RDR I follow the simplest of rules. The way it works is...
1) Never ask anyone to do something that you're not prepared to do yourself. As in: This is why you see me posting at 4am.
2) If it's good enough for me... It's good enough for them. As in: I've got the same Insurance and Retirement Plan that they have.

Now if the question was asked... Do you support the Hanging of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed: Yes or No, then I can answer that one in the "Hell Yes" Category.

quote:

I have a very low turnover rate.

This isn't an accident! I have a Masters in Organizational Management, so I think I'm qualified in stating that you run a class A outfit. It's too bad that greed and ego run amok in so many otherwise good organizations. My hat's off to you Bill.

quote:

Originally posted by noble97monarch:
It's too bad that greed and ego run amok in so many otherwise good organizations.

Greed: Is another word for "Short Sighted Gains"
Ego: Is another word for "Pompous Ass"

Hey, I just made up a new word...Greego

Greego = a Greedy Pompous Ass

Union? Is this about labor? Or about the War Between the States?


Matt

quote:

Originally posted by Bill N.Y.:

quote:

Originally posted by noble97monarch:
To me it's not a Yes or No answer. I would hit the button that voted: "In certain circumstances".

This is why I can not, in good conscience, vote in this poll. The poster has given a Yes or No answer to all instances of Labor.

Yeah, there is no simple, one-size-fits-all answer.

My take is that a good employer is better off without a union.

My take is also that a good employee is better off without a union, if he has a good employer.

However, we do not live in a perfect world.

I have held union office and management positions, and my bachelor's is in organizational behavior. One son has an MBA from Stanford, and the other is in UCLA's MBA program, so you can imagine this is the subject of much discussion and E mailing. Several of my long-term weekend friends were employees (both labor and management) at a non-union airline, as well, so one could say that I have a fair amount of experience and exposure to both sides.

Bill's employees are fortunate to have a good boss, and Bill is such a good employer that a union offers no advantage.

quote:

I have a very low turnover rate.

That speaks volumes. When I make choices of which businesses to patronize, I am strongly influenced by turnover.

You also mention layoffs. I have observed a reverse Darwinism in a company that has layoffs. If you lay off 10 employees, two are aces, two are lops and the other six are average. When there is a recall, the aces don't come back, because their value was recognized by other employers. Some of the average performers come back, some don't, having found what they consider a better or more secure job. But, and here's the rub.......both of the lops come back, because no one else really wanted them badly enough to offer them a better spot.

I have observed this over and over again, at the same place with people that I was able to evaluate accurately. Others agreed with me, BTW.

The eventual result of all this is what I call Reverse Darwinism. Instead of the survival of the fittest, you see the staying power of the least fit. In an industry with constant layoffs and recalls, this can be a very negative situation. In a very technical job, with products of increasing complexity, it becomes difficult to manage and delegate your resources when the top performers are always leaving. Throw in some pay and benefit cuts, and the situation accelerates. Where I worked, for the most part, the only good performers remaining were the ones with the Golden Handcuffs, i.e, a good retirement package in the future (they hope). We lost an awful lot of good young talent that would have been a resource for years to come.

OH, BTW, good performers are MUCH easier to manage. In fact, they don't require very much management. The inmates can, indeed, run the asylum.

Geeze, I am sounding more like Ulyanov than Maslow, here.

OK, I got off on layoffs instead of unions, but Bill DID mention layoffs.

If anyone wants to think that I am a one-sided Union Man, I can go on and on about the negatives of that side, as well. Greed, corruption, lust for power, fat cats, and cronyism is as rife there as anywhere else.

If all employers were like Bill, there would be no unions. Further, if all companies were like Bill's, we would have no TARP, there wouldn't be a crisis in health care, Osama Bin Laden would be dead, there would be no national debt, lobbyists wouldn't be allowed within the city limits of DC, the air would be clean, we would all be young and good lookin', and our children brilliant.
J

quote:

OH, BTW, good performers are MUCH easier to manage. In fact, they don't require very much management. The inmates can, indeed, run the asylum. Smiler

I would agree in most cases, but there are certain professions where the talent needed to be a good performer seems to come from the opposite side of the brain from good management (of people or corporate requirements). Perhaps this "Career Profiling" is not PC, but artist, doctors, plumbers, some engineering disciplines, are all on my personal suspects list. I think the "Peter Principle" found its strongest foothold in disciples like these.

I honestly think there is a left brain/right brain structural explanation to this, but it is not yet graspable in its entirety to mere humans. From what we know of history, could Einstein, Picasso, Mozart or Hitler truly run their own affairs? I think not, they were buried in some deep recess of brilliance or depravity that left little of the mind for day-to-day events.

I think Bill is a good example of "Center Brained" Logical enough, emotional enough, artistic enough, etc. Most of us on this site seem Center Brained to me. Not too brilliant, but brilliant in the right places.

Oh, I just recalled Bill is a New Yorka. That does imply that they cut the part of his brain out at birth that controls patience.....but other than that...........................

quote:

Originally posted by noble97monarch:

quote:

OH, BTW, good performers are MUCH easier to manage. In fact, they don't require very much management. The inmates can, indeed, run the asylum. Smiler

I would agree in most cases, but there are certain professions where the talent needed to be a good performer seems to come from the opposite side of the brain from good management (of people or corporate requirements). Perhaps this "Career Profiling" is not PC, but artist, doctors, plumbers, some engineering disciplines, are all on my personal suspects list. I think the "Peter Principle" found its strongest foothold in disciples like these.

I suspect you're right on that. My management experience is limited to aircraft maintenance technical types.

I have been honored enough to have served on both sides of the fence here. I was a shop steward for awhile while employed at the phone company. Got into trouble on that end because I wouldn't file "petty" greivances.

Somehow, I got promoted and was no longer part of the union. That was both good and bad, I was accustomed to having a union to "back me up" and was surprised to learn that only union folks get 8 hour days, my management days were mostly 10-12 (sometimes more) hour days.

Management had the same insurance as well as benefits, so a gain for the union also meant a gain for management.

As with Bill NY, his respect from and for his employees is obvious, also the fact that he wouldn't ask someone to do what he won't do himself.

As posted earlier, if more employers were like Bill, there wouldn't be a need, unfortunately, not all employers are like Bill.

Can't vote on this one yet, still on the fence. I have seen too much of both sides on this issue and I'm truly 50-50.

I will say one thing thing, if Bill was in the sunny south here, I would be applying for a job

Now that's a great idea, Bill's 'Southern Branch'. Can I drive the truck? I work for food and drink.
Jim

Departing from my rational 50/50 opinion on unions, I will wear my Union Man hat for a moment.

Look at Fedex and UPS.

Which provides better service?

Which is unionized?

Which pays more?

UPS is really well-managed, and is a good place to work, with super pay and benefits.

Fedex is non of the above, at least as reported by my friends in the aircraft maintenance areas.

Anyone who has the image of union employees featherbedding should follow a UPS driver as he RUNS from truck to doorstep all over town.

I can drive too, at least a 36' diesel pusher

Aaaand, don't we all work for food and drink???

Tina