I get it now, you work for another Enron!!!



I'm 40 yrs of age now and hired into Boeing in 1995, 15 more years I'll be retireing getting over $3200.00 a month in Retirement for my overpaid underutilized lazy union azz, as well as the close to 500k I have now in my 401k. ( YEah it may go down or go through the roof) But my company\union benefits are guaranteed, unlike a employee owned corp.
Along with health benefits till myself or my spouse expire who ever is last.
If your company provides benefits till death please let me know, because I believe we are one of 3 companies to do so.
In addition to whatever Share value trust accumulates 5k-10k a year per employee.

I'd say my union elected officers have done quite a job for me and my brothers and sisters. Not bad for a measly $63.20 a month in dues.

You used "we" alot in that last post, don't you mean "I" remember your the man negotiating all your benefits for yourself.

What exactly is a Visual communications specialist???
Sounds like cable installation to me.

 

Man, that's awesome! Go Union!

 

Hell with you being part of the Joint Strike Fighter aren't you on a cost plus program???
Meaning get it fixed, done, the right way no matter how much o.t. it takes?

We are ramping up for the new 737 posidon A8 sub hunter, and hopefully we will get the 767 tanker deal as well.
God knows I don't want my tax money going to another government to provide planes American Troops will be depending on.


Man, I kept telling myself not to stoop, but the egotisticle crap pisses me off.
Telling me "he alone" negotiates for his own benefits, only unless he is a private contractor of some sort.
A employee owned company has 2-3 choices on healthcare coverage all picked by the company corperate managers.

I mean come on I OFFER BLACK AND WHITE MY CONTRACT, and you give me what a line that you take on big companies and they give in to your demands?? You sure your last name ain't HoFFA?

 

I'm not Matt, but if it comes to that, then yes, I've got no problems leaving and going somewhere else. If I'm upholding my end of the bargain, being a hard working, productive employee, and my employer slips on their end, then I sit down with the powers that be and discuss the matter at hand.

If my pay or benefits change at all, which can't happen at my employer without my approval, then my long term future at that particular employer is questionable.

Goes out the door, as in gets fired, or leaves on his own will/retires?

 

Gets told to leave, period.
Now with that said, being a person that sexually harrases or is on drugs or something like that it's understandable.
But for any non-discript reason.

See you and your co-workers have power with the company cannot cut back on benefits without some sort of vote or survey or however they do it.
Believe it or not that is unionisim.

 

O.K. I understand some non-union companies take care of their employees very well, share in the profits and all that.

Say your job which requires "x" skills correct? You get a certain wage.
Now another guy in job "y" with his skills, and his wage.

One job is a higher pay scale than the other, but you are the guy in the lower pay scale and they ask you do do the job of the higher paid worker at your same wage.
My contract would make sure you got paid for the higher rate for the higher wage job.

I mean you could be the hardest working minimum wage worker in your plant but if management asked you to do the higest paid job at the plant would you do it for the same pay???
No you would want compensation right??

 

Short of a grievous violation, like stealing from a customer and/or the company, getting hauled in by the cops for murder, drug possession/intent to sell, molesting children, tearing tags off mattresses, etc., that will not happen, at least at my level. Someone with 20+ years is a great asset to the company, in regards to the training, certifications, and experience he holds. He's worth more to the company than the kiss *** with 5 years there, who quite frankly could - and should - be considered as expendable...why would they tell the guy with 20+ years to leave?

It's individualism. If wages or benefits change, we don't vote or survey for it, we're individually seen and the new wage/benefits package is presented to us one at a time. It's discussed and negotiated one-on-one.

Unionism would be more like where one wage/benefit package is presented for all, and I as a representative reviews it, reviews it with all my constituents and we agree or disagree with it...and in general, I disagree with that reason of thinking. I think it's flawed, because it allows people who are slackers to ride the coat tails of the guys who bust *** and give 110% every day. Everyone benefits regardless of who or what they are, and what they know - I just can't agree with that. It sets workers up for failure, IMO.

You keep missing the part where each individual is directly responsible for the wages and benefits he/she gets, based on their skills and experience, among other things.

Just as I'm responsible for setting the record straight if/when my benefits or wages are reduced - if done justifiably, say I'm not performing up to the standards set by my employer, well, that's on me. If done unjustifiably, then I'd be a fool to stay there when I can take what I know elsewhere and find someone else who'll pay my price. I'd rather not bounce around jobs, but I'm short changing myself getting anything less than what I know I deserve.

 

That's not really a fair comparison...

The guy doing the job with the higher pay scale is probably doing a job beyond the skill set of the guy doing the lower paying job; after all, I'd assume that's why he's getting paid more, right? Maybe more time on the job, combined with more experience, and a harder job to do.

Another variable: Say that the higher paid guy gets wind that a lower paid guy got the same wage he did for just showing up and doing his job on that particular day. The guy in the higher pay scale has dedicated years to his trade, learning, bettering himself, and then some know-nothing shows up and instantly makes the same money he does?

We're back to the slackers (in this case, not necessarily a slacker, we'll say a lower ranking individual) riding the coat tails of someone else. I still have a very, very hard time accepting that.

 

Sounds like you have a great employer then.
As I've said from the beginning some non-union employers treat their employees great.
I would like to be able to say it is because of unions that your company respects it's workers the way it does, it may be, it may be not.
Either way it sounds like employees are respected and are given a fair shake which is what we all want.

But if you are all seen idividually, there is a possibility of one person getting a better benefit package than the other.
What would happen if your best friend at work suddenly found out you make 5k a month more than him\her? Or that your childs medical emergency was covered, but your friends kis wasn't treated because his medical benefits didn't measure up.

We all have people who ride coat tails of others at everyones job, from the guy that copied tests when we where in school to the guy we all know that steals from the cookie jar and gets away each and every time. When you know damn well if you even think about it your busted.

I'm in a production facility, we kick out 28 737 airplanes a month, and the company wants us to get to 31 planes a month.
And with the 30k employees laidoff after 9/11 we are doing it with half of the man power. We used to have 70k members now we are down to 22-23k.
Mabey it is the pressure to close the deal or to produce more widgets than last week, we all have demands put on us.

Of course we stil have 3 managers per employee here, think of a upside down pyramid, the point being the actual workers and the base now inverted is management.
And managements benefits package is BASED on ours but is the given a little extra suger so they believe they are getting the better deal.
Layoff come around management has now contract language, we have language that allows senior workers to bump out those with less seniority.

I really hear you Quintin, we aren't that different you and I.
See you guys tommorow p.m PST.
Great conversation, but let us union guys try to explain things don't just tell me I'm a lazy overwieght longhaired union gnome!!!
We all have slackers and we all have great people we work with, corperate boardroom or production worker.

I mean hell, Ford payed my ex-CEO Mullaly a hell of alot of money to go there but he hasn't impressed me with what he has done at Ford and he recieved what???, 28 MILLION before his first day on the job??? Come on.. We are all working stiffs

Please read the contract language and wage scale cards I posted earlier and ?'s I'll be glad to try to answer.

 

Yes, we call it blank check OT.

I'm pulling lots of 7 day weeks. Bringing home $1500 a week is nice.

I take pride in the good work I do, Union pride.

 

Right on Stealth

Hey PSS-MAG, I take back all the negative BS I posted last night.
I let my emmotions get the better of me.
Explaining things, especially Bargaining agreements are hard enough in person and trying to see and listen to both sides without understanding each others work background is ,well almost immpossible.
I apologize if I offended you in any way.

This all started out about the UAW vs. GM, FORD, CHRY
I know nothing of their bargaining agreement.

I know for a fact none of the big 3 have struck since 1998.
So since 98' both the companies mentioned and the UAW have worked together to better the product.
They have accepted that robotic machines are a part of building a world class vehicle.

Unions have long abandoned the "muscle" or "Tough guy" approach and have now gone the path of trying to protect jobs, proving to companies that there is no better quality than that of the American worker.
We proved it since the Industrial revolution.
Now it is absolute corperate greed that drives businesses overseas.
CEO's making more money, more than 1000 workers working 24 hrs a day 7 days a week 365 days a year. ( You better know the cure for cancer if your bringing home that kind of cake in my book)

American Farmers have HAD to come together to form protective bargaining for the sale of their products.
Show me a Farmer who is running the show in this day and age.
With "legal" employees.

I mean really do you guys really think we want lazy fat azzez working with us? We know that protecting that kind of worker sucks.
But in a union you protect all..... the weak, the strong, the all knowing, and the idiot. The smallest femine person to the head Queen B*tch of the freaking universe, all in all we all gain from it.

We not only work under contract be we also work under company rules, respect them more.
I can't make a racist remark, femine reference, disrespect any one in any way.
Our company has it in their code of conduct,but also as a unionist, we don't descriminate, Black, white, red, yellow I don't give a rip if your friggin purple.
Fat, skinny, lesbian or gay.
EVERYONE IS TREATED FAIRLY IN A UNION, can you say that about the places you work in?

O.k. I can sleep in peace now, have a great weekend everyone.

 

Very well put swank07. I dont think it could be said any better.
Since most if not all the bashers have not worked for or experienced the union they just dont understand.

And I am a proud member of the United Steel Workers of America and a departmental steward.


Sled...

 

Just would like to chime in on a few things…

The comment:
” I mean really do you guys really think we want lazy fat azzez working with us? We know that protecting that kind of worker sucks.
But in a union you protect all..... the weak, the strong, the all knowing, and the idiot. The smallest femine person to the head Queen B*tch of the freaking universe, all in all we all gain from it.”

Is just plain false, you, or a union as a whole does not gain from protecting some of those individuals such as the lazy ones. I can tell you from personal experience it hurts the union and makes the union weaker. If you don’t believe that then you are fooling yourself. If a union truly wanted to be as strong as it could be AND as fair as it could be it would self police itself and help a company get rid of the lazy and mouthy ones, that is a fact…

Also another misconception is that jobs are going overseas mostly, or only because of greed from business. That is just about completely false. Yes there is greed in business but so what, there is greed in unions, there is greed in each one of us who work regardless if we are in a union or not.

Union type business do seem to move overseas quicker because they payrolls are much higher then non-union business generally speaking that is. Sure there is more non-union jobs moving overseas but that is because there is very few businesses anymore that have unions.

In any regards the number one reason for jobs going overseas is the average American consumer, you, me, your family, everyone here online. We want the highest paying job possible and we want to pay the least amount from anything we buy.

It don’t work that way and WE as the vast majority of Americans have dictated to all American companies to move as many jobs as possibly overseas so some 12 year old can work 18 hours a day for $1.00…

It is NOT big business that is doing that but rather you and I and every other person here. It always makes me laugh when someone in a union complains about business or their own employer making big money and its not fair or they need to share when you average union “factory” worker, like found in the little 3 are all extremely overpaid since anybody can be a line worker, it is NOT a skilled labor job, like welder, pipefitter, etc…

When I talk factory worker I am talking about the assemblers. There is NO assembler worth more then $10 to $15 an hour because just about ANY body can do it, very easy to teach…

The little 3 will not have unions much longer because they will go bankrupt and therefore you will either see them fade away, which most likely won’t happen or they will move away which is a good thing because then we will get good quality product at an affordable price…

 

That's a fundamentally flawed plan...protect the weak, the idiot, you're just weakening yourself from within and compromising the end result.

Protecting the weak/stupid/lazy shows them that they have nothing to fear with their performance on the job. They have little to no risk of repercussions if/when they do something wrong or they don't work to their employers standards or better, so they won't have any motivation or reason to do the best job they can.

You're treating the headache by decapitating the patient.

edited for grammar...or lackthereof.

 

Quintin
You do realize this is the thread that never ends right? As long as they are cashing that check they will never see it the downsides. Typical case of cant see the forest from the trees.