Please educate me about unions.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Even though people tell me how much I hate unions, I actually think that people have a right to unionize under the rights of freedom of association and freedom to refuse to conduct business. Part of the freedom to conduct business is the freedom to refuse to conduct business.

The only thing I really don't like about unions is all the special government favors and benefits that they seek, as a counter to the special government favors and benefits the businesses seek. Hm, perhaps it is the special government favors and benefits I have a hard time with, seeing as that is my complaint about both sides. Nah, it must be because I hate unions.

My problem with unions as they currently exist right now is that over 50% of the union membership in the US is government employee unions.

Unions allow mere peasants to challenge the authority of their betters (rich people and large corporations), which is why unions make us all less free and inevitably lead to communist dictatorships. All America-haters support unions, while patriotic Real Americans(tm) know that they are a threat to our freedom. What is the point of having an aristocracy if we leave in place a mechanism that allows peasants a say in how things are done? [/conservolibertarian]

Already refuted before you posted.

Please stop lumping libertarians in with you and your fellow conservatives.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

While high pay is a reason, it's the inflexibility with unions that companies don't like dealing with them. To make major shifts, things don't work out well and there is no good way for companies to reward good workers in an union structure.

Add featherbedding to that. Not to mention the widespread acceptance of sabotage as a labor action.

None of these problems are a necessary result of unionisation. There are plenty of unions that negotiate minimum wage levels, but allow for good workers to be paid more; most unions do not engage in feather-bedding or sabotage.

Arguing that we should abandon labour unions because some unions do things that are harmful is exactly equivalent to arguing that we should abandon corporations and governments because some of corporations and governments are corrupt. Or that we should stop eating food, because some food gives you salmonella poisoning.

If those are the best arguments you have, you have nothing.

Unions are intended to provide a counterbalance for the dramatic imbalance of power that usually exists between an individual employee, and the collective clout of his employer. When they do that job, they are well worth having. As with governments and corporations, on the rare occasions when things go wrong, those things need to be fixed, but there is no justification for throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Reality: Prepping for a trade show some time back: One of the papers from the exhibition talking about union rules: We were not allowed to do our own electrical work--which included the normal consumer activity of plugging in our computers.

In other words, we had to wait for--and pay exorbitant rates to (minimum billing time)--an electrician to do everyday tasks.

Sounds to me like your firm is not a very good consumer since it did not spend the effort to become full informed of the product/service it was purchasing. That was not an union problem at all.

What in the world are you talking about?

We knew the rules. I'm just saying how crazy they were.

I've heard of a related issue that happened to someone else: A monitor went on the blink at a show. They were stopped from swapping it out--that had to be done by an electrician. In other words, they had to incur downtime at the show waiting for an electrician to do a totally routine job.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey, if your firm didn't like it they could have just quit that trade show and gone to another one. I mean that's the advice you guys usually give employees who don't like the things their employer does to them, right?

Because employers compete. Unions ensure there is no competition.

 

[laughing dog]

While high pay is a reason, it's the inflexibility with unions that companies don't like dealing with them. To make major shifts, things don't work out well and there is no good way for companies to reward good workers in an union structure.

Add featherbedding to that. Not to mention the widespread acceptance of sabotage as a labor action.

None of these problems are a necessary result of unionisation. There are plenty of unions that negotiate minimum wage levels, but allow for good workers to be paid more; most unions do not engage in feather-bedding or sabotage.

Arguing that we should abandon labour unions because some unions do things that are harmful is exactly equivalent to arguing that we should abandon corporations and governments because some of corporations and governments are corrupt. Or that we should stop eating food, because some food gives you salmonella poisoning.

If those are the best arguments you have, you have nothing.

Unions are intended to provide a counterbalance for the dramatic imbalance of power that usually exists between an individual employee, and the collective clout of his employer. When they do that job, they are well worth having. As with governments and corporations, on the rare occasions when things go wrong, those things need to be fixed, but there is no justification for throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Reality: Prepping for a trade show some time back: One of the papers from the exhibition talking about union rules: We were not allowed to do our own electrical work--which included the normal consumer activity of plugging in our computers.

In other words, we had to wait for--and pay exorbitant rates to (minimum billing time)--an electrician to do everyday tasks.

Sounds to me like your firm is not a very good consumer since it did not spend the effort to become full informed of the product/service it was purchasing. That was not an union problem at all.

What in the world are you talking about?

We knew the rules. I'm just saying how crazy they were.

And yet you bought the service. So, there really is no basis for complaint. Besides, you don't know what prompted those rules. It might not have been due to a union contract.

I've heard of a related issue that happened to someone else: A monitor went on the blink at a show. They were stopped from swapping it out--that had to be done by an electrician. In other words, they had to incur downtime at the show waiting for an electrician to do a totally routine job.

BTW, unions cannot possibly insure there is no competition.

 

[Togo]

I've heard of a related issue that happened to someone else: A monitor went on the blink at a show. They were stopped from swapping it out--that had to be done by an electrician. In other words, they had to incur downtime at the show waiting for an electrician to do a totally routine job.

Well yeah, monitors used at shows are expensive, because they're larger than usual, and trade show venue may have an unfamiliar electrical set up. The problem is not that you need an electrician to do the job, but that you're not covered, either from the point of view of legal liability, or from the point of view of insurance of expensive equipment, if you do it yourself.

As someone who does trade shows and public demonstrations, I much prefer someone qualified to do even very simple work. Because there is something about having expensive equipment that makes some people convinced that they're a fracking expert in electrical equipment, and there's something about trying to fix a problem in front of 150 delegates that means they won't back down even if the problem wasn't as easy as they thought. 5 mins of dead air while we find an electrician to replace a monitor is standard fare. Having some unqualified idiot thinking he can fix things and frying my rental board because he won't quit while he's on stage? That's a disaster.

One show I went to the Global Department head insisted on replacing a defective microphone himself, 'to save time'. And it was a simple job. But his replacement left a cord running across the top of the steps to the stage at ankle height. In the feedback, we got more comments on that than on the content.

The problem is not that the job can't be done by anyone. The problem is that employees are not qualified to tell when it needs a professional and when it doesn't.

 

[untermensche]

I've heard of a related issue that happened to someone else: A monitor went on the blink at a show. They were stopped from swapping it out--that had to be done by an electrician. In other words, they had to incur downtime at the show waiting for an electrician to do a totally routine job.

Well yeah, monitors used at shows are expensive, because they're larger than usual, and trade show venue may have an unfamiliar electrical set up. The problem is not that you need an electrician to do the job, but that you're not covered, either from the point of view of legal liability, or from the point of view of insurance of expensive equipment, if you do it yourself.

As someone who does trade shows and public demonstrations, I much prefer someone qualified to do even very simple work. Because there is something about having expensive equipment that makes some people convinced that they're a fracking expert in electrical equipment, and there's something about trying to fix a problem in front of 150 delegates that means they won't back down even if the problem wasn't as easy as they thought. 5 mins of dead air while we find an electrician to replace a monitor is standard fare. Having some unqualified idiot thinking he can fix things and frying my rental board because he won't quit while he's on stage? That's a disaster.

One show I went to the Global Department head insisted on replacing a defective microphone himself, 'to save time'. And it was a simple job. But his replacement left a cord running across the top of the steps to the stage at ankle height. In the feedback, we got more comments on that than on the content.

The problem is not that the job can't be done by anyone. The problem is that employees are not qualified to tell when it needs a professional and when it doesn't.

You honestly believe this nonsense?

Possibly equipment needed to be checked before it was used, but the idea that equipment had to be plugged in by a union member is laughable.

It's these kinds of stories that prove the desperation of anti-union, anti-freedom, anti-level playing field sycophants to unjustified power.

 

[Togo]

You honestly believe this nonsense?

I have enough personal experience to know I don't want Loren anywhere near my cables.

 

[untermensche]

You honestly believe this nonsense?

I have enough personal experience to know I don't want Loren anywhere near my cables.

I've worked in hospitals. Every single piece of equipment has to be checked before it can be used.

You want to use a microwave in the office, a technician has to look at it first and make sure it doesn't pose a danger, even though that is very unlikely.

And guess what, no union.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I've heard of a related issue that happened to someone else: A monitor went on the blink at a show. They were stopped from swapping it out--that had to be done by an electrician. In other words, they had to incur downtime at the show waiting for an electrician to do a totally routine job.

Well yeah, monitors used at shows are expensive, because they're larger than usual, and trade show venue may have an unfamiliar electrical set up. The problem is not that you need an electrician to do the job, but that you're not covered, either from the point of view of legal liability, or from the point of view of insurance of expensive equipment, if you do it yourself.

Sure they have some big ones up on the wall. I'm talking about the ordinary ones on PCs.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You honestly believe this nonsense?

I have enough personal experience to know I don't want Loren anywhere near my cables.

I've worked in hospitals. Every single piece of equipment has to be checked before it can be used.

You want to use a microwave in the office, a technician has to look at it first and make sure it doesn't pose a danger, even though that is very unlikely.

And guess what, no union.

A hospital is a very different situation, interference is a critical issue for them.

 

[untermensche]

You honestly believe this nonsense?

I have enough personal experience to know I don't want Loren anywhere near my cables.

I've worked in hospitals. Every single piece of equipment has to be checked before it can be used.

You want to use a microwave in the office, a technician has to look at it first and make sure it doesn't pose a danger, even though that is very unlikely.

And guess what, no union.

A hospital is a very different situation, interference is a critical issue for them.

You're simply a hypocrite.

When a non-union workplace does the exact same thing as a union workplace you condemn the union.

 

[EricK]

I've heard of a related issue that happened to someone else: A monitor went on the blink at a show. They were stopped from swapping it out--that had to be done by an electrician. In other words, they had to incur downtime at the show waiting for an electrician to do a totally routine job.

Well yeah, monitors used at shows are expensive, because they're larger than usual, and trade show venue may have an unfamiliar electrical set up. The problem is not that you need an electrician to do the job, but that you're not covered, either from the point of view of legal liability, or from the point of view of insurance of expensive equipment, if you do it yourself.

As someone who does trade shows and public demonstrations, I much prefer someone qualified to do even very simple work. Because there is something about having expensive equipment that makes some people convinced that they're a fracking expert in electrical equipment, and there's something about trying to fix a problem in front of 150 delegates that means they won't back down even if the problem wasn't as easy as they thought. 5 mins of dead air while we find an electrician to replace a monitor is standard fare. Having some unqualified idiot thinking he can fix things and frying my rental board because he won't quit while he's on stage? That's a disaster.

One show I went to the Global Department head insisted on replacing a defective microphone himself, 'to save time'. And it was a simple job. But his replacement left a cord running across the top of the steps to the stage at ankle height. In the feedback, we got more comments on that than on the content.

The problem is not that the job can't be done by anyone. The problem is that employees are not qualified to tell when it needs a professional and when it doesn't.

You honestly believe this nonsense?

Possibly equipment needed to be checked before it was used, but the idea that equipment had to be plugged in by a union member is laughable.

It's these kinds of stories that prove the desperation of anti-union, anti-freedom, anti-level playing field sycophants to unjustified power.

I have heard (from people in the medical community) that it used to be the case that if a light bulb needed changing in an NHS hospital in the UK then it had to be done by a member of the electricians union. I can't, at the moment, find anything online to confirm or deny that.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Urban legend.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A hospital is a very different situation, interference is a critical issue for them.

You're simply a hypocrite.

When a non-union workplace does the exact same thing as a union workplace you condemn the union.

It's a very different situation. If that microwave interferes it could kill someone. That's normally not an issue.

 

[untermensche]

A hospital is a very different situation, interference is a critical issue for them.

You're simply a hypocrite.

When a non-union workplace does the exact same thing as a union workplace you condemn the union.

It's a very different situation. If that microwave interferes it could kill someone. That's normally not an issue.

There can be many issues. Safety is only one consideration.

But having things checked out that outside people bring in is not simply some useless union extravagance.

It is a company policy that could exist with or without a union.