Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Being on strike sucks,butthis is worse!

Can you provide some details how a union "prevented" someone from attaining their full potential?



People love to bash the union, even union members. They fail to realize that we all are "the union". We have the right to vote for our representation and run for positions if we like. Some cry the loudest, but when you call them on it, what have you done to change things, you get the same excuses. Some like to hear themselves gripe.



Case in point: The lab employees at the hospital where my wife works were represented by a union. A majority of the employees weren't strong supporters of the union. Time came for contract negotiations, Covenants clear intentions were to break the union (as displayed in the past). With the poor support from the workers the union withdrew it's representation. Then the sh*t hit the fan. Without the union coverage Covenant went crazy with new work rules, I won't bore you with all the details. The women came screaming to my wife, who was a union steward, wanting to know what could be done to stop all the BS. Her only response was that they didn't want union backing in the first place, so they got what they asked for.

B*ll Sh*t, Do you really believe that Toyota would be paying the wages and benifits it pays if they weren't worried about the union comming in and representing their workforce??????? I've known a few companys that set up internal "unions" to prevent it from happening.

Oh are we done being civil so soon? tom

I've been alongside union employees for over 30 years, many of whom were good friends. I do not look down on them, nor do I feel that they do any less a job than I do, regardless of position. I will admit that my previous post seemed very broad in its message, so let me scale it down so it is clearer to you. I am just speaking from my own experiences along side a particular local. IN MY EXPERIENCE (OK?), I knew a union employee who would not apply for a supervisory position because it was not a union position. I believe he felt that if he was hired, he would then be fired for having been union previously. In my mind this was a direct result of being intimidated and propagandized by said local representatives. IN MY EXPERIENCE, this is not an isolated incident. Union practices I have witnessed would substantiate this feeling to most open-minded individuals. Now, before you pass judgement on me for not sharing your feelings, remember that I do not feel this way about unions in general, only the ones I am familiar with. You are obviously a staunch union supporter, and I can respect that if it gets you what you need. I choose to have a different perspective, based on MY EXPERIENCE.

I guess my peculiar brand of sarcasm doesn�t translate well to others. I�ve just reread my post and see nowhere any implications or aspersions towards unions as a whole, but rather a direct shot at the head of the union under discussion here, and simply wished to beg the question that if the individual being castigated as a �scab� is �lower than whale$hit� for crossing a meaningless for-show picket line where do the actions alleged against Mr. Bahr place him on the specie $hit chain?




No, I didn�t sidestep this issue, simply didn�t address it, but certainly will, time permitting if you�ll first clue me in as to the identity of the �individual� to whom you refer. Perhaps you mean the so-called �scab�? If so and you possess information the rest of us are not privy to such as the content of the �articles of membership� of the CWA or of this particular local to which you refer and whether this fellow agreed to them or not and the circumstances surrounding his agreement please provide them. Also provide his job classification, title or duties, the condition of his employment or in fact any damn thing at all about him, his �brethren� or this supposed incident. Absent this information as a minimum, without even getting into issues such as need or character I�m stymied as to how so many can jump on the bandwagon to condemn this individual.

Or perhaps I�m mistaken in my assumption that you refer to the so-called �scab.� Reading the quote above I see that the individual to whom you refer has �collected union wages� and �received union benefits.� I�m of the impression that our �scab� is an employee of SBC not the union and in fact has been so for many years. Looking back the only individual I see mentioned on this thread compensated by the CWA is Mr. Bahr, to the tune of over $160,000 per annum if the NLRB documents online are correct. If it is he to whom you refer then I will agree wholeheartedly that if guilty of the allegations against him he has indeed �turned like a rat and violated the trust of the membership at a time they needed his support.�




I�m sorry John, but the big picture here is much larger and quite different than those you�ve seen in the building trades. It goes beyond the current dispute, SBC, CWA and indeed the entire telecommunications industry and has little or naught to do with pay, working conditions or the like. The real issue, as silly and nonsensical as it may seem to the employee needing to pay bills or feed his family, or even to the public in general is one of accountancy � specifically the underfunding of future liabilities by large corporations under GAAP, and the stark truth is the implications to our economy are much too complex and important to be �hammered out� between the corporations who engineered the problem and union officials who don�t even understand it, or who refuse to for unknown reasons. This issue must be addressed as a matter of U.S. fiscal policy, and sooner rather than later�.

One other point; the term "scab" is incredibly derogatory for a guy who may have a family he is trying to feed and there are few or no other options available to him. I think you'd do the same thing if you were in his shoes. You probably understand that the company has a right to do business regardless of your participation, and that if the strike is an economic strike, as opposed to an unfair labor practices strike, you are without a contract when you are on strike. Strikes typically happen after the term of the contract has expired. In a strike situation, continuing to do business includes bringing in workers that you refer to as "scabs" because the union has told you that you can't work there while you are on strike under the threat of fines and other sanctions. These can be permanent replacements, and this should be no mystery to you. It's all about choices, my man. You made yours, the guy that crossed the line made his, and the company made theirs, and it is not easy for anyone!. It almost seems that some people feel that there would be justice if the company went tits-up as a result of a strike where they would/could not agree to the demands put forth. I fail to see any winners in that case.
I do not wish any ill on any employees, union or not. We all have to eat, have bills to pay and want to sleep at night knowing that our future is secure. I find no satisfaction in somebody being put on the street or losing their income for extended periods. Choices...

Tom, we hear a lot of stories how the unions are "bad". In all reality most of them are untrue. Lines of demarcation are there for a reason, at times far beyond what is precieved. The problem arrises when the resonse time is lacking. It's hard for someone to accept the idea that you are capable of moving your own computer, but you have to wait hours for someone to show up.





A few years back the union that represented my wife deciced to have an infromational picket at the hospital. Covenent, being affraid of the havok a few women would create hired a "security firm' out of Chicago, I believe ADT. They specialize in strike breaking. All the "security" personal were retired military. One look at them gave you an idea why they were there. Their goal was to intimidate the hospital employees! So the union isn't the only one to use force as a negotiating means. ADT cost Covenant aprox $300,000. Dang we had fun with them boys, sent them packing within a month. No, they didn't suceede in their plan to decertify the union at the time. One of the most interesting conversations I had with one of the goons, his dad was a union activist in the miners strike. Got his butt whipped more than once. Now here's his son, retired army, trying to intimidate a bunch of women into dropping their union. Talk about extremes!

T, that falls under a job assignment. Under the new way of doing things we don't assign work according to senority. We get to pick the best man or woman <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> for the job.

I am sure that the hospital management was reacting to previous union �informational� pickets if not at their location then at other locations. We know how peaceful union pickets always are don�t we. My son worked security for a strike in Kaliforna. Their job was to video tape the union type harassing customers and employees that crossed the picket lines and damaging store property and vehicles. tom

I've got no use for scabs, never had, never will. Unions were formed for a reason, and the reasons for forming them still exist. When union jobs move into an area, wages for the whole area increase. Amazing how many people ride the backs of the union, and sit here and bitch about the unions.

OK 8Ball, let's hear it... who will pay my pension??? my benefits???

it's true, they pay these things with money that i have contributed... still who do you think pays for them??? it sure don't come from the easter bunny, or the tooth fairy, and it don't come from some constipated little company accountant fairy either.....

heck yeah, the union pays my pension and my benefits!!! ..... john w

Tom, you are correct to a point. The hospital has well staffed security, excellent security camera system. There was no need to bring in outsiders. Charges were filed against ADT at the time thru the NLRB and found to have merit. The Saginaw City Police also did a great job in controlling the situation, the goons were not well recieved. Only part of the hospital staff was under union representation and Covenants goal was to decertify the union. By the way, CWA had a few of it's members join us in picketing, more than I can say for quite a few of the lab techs.

Rick, I have been in data processing since 1978 and no union has ever done anything for me and I don't want any union to do anything for me. I deal with a company that I want to work for and If I am not happy I move on. tom

journeyman, forgive me, i misspoke... the individual(scab) collected wages and benefits that were negotiated for by the union..... concerning his long term employment with SBC though, how long has SBC been in business??..... i don't live in a cocoon and i don't think that i'd heard of them 2 years ago. are they a new company? a management buyout? who are they??? and did they step up to the plate with a skilled workforce already in place??? i ask because i don't know... i do know that several long time communications workers here locally work for SBC, and some of these guys never heard of the outfit before either..... they are long time employees who went to work one day, put on a different shirt, and had a different logo on the truck door...

as far as the articles of membership go, i will admit to a leap in logic based on the premise that the CWA is organised under the AFL/CIO... if you know differently i will retract the statement. if they are under the AFL/CIO it is an article of membership that they honor a legal picket by any AFL/CIO bargaining unit...



why is this company trying so hard to back out of the agreements that it made... and why are so many insistent that the union must concede, without resistance, benefits that it worked and bargained for in good faith??? a few here believe that the unions are only fit for sheep... a few more insist that the unions need to be more like sheep.....

johnw,

Don't pay any attention to journeyman,he has proven in the past(on the strike topic),not to be above board,seemed to me it was something about the truth.Interesting how someone would want to defend a SCAB.By the way,this guy that crossed has no financial issues that our crew(5 installers & 7 repairmen)has ever heard of.The SCAB has worked with some of the senior guys for over 25 yrs, and evervone is shocked that he did it,more like betrayed.

johnw; evidently I hit a nerve. You said it yourself, it is paid with money you contributed, and whatever your employer has contributed, if they match or contribute to your pension. Last time I checked, unions don't contribute any $ to your future. They merely negotiate the contracts that allow you to make the money to contribute.
From the sound of your response, you must hate the company you work for, in which case maybe you should look for something that works for you. I don't mean that flippantly, but, man, who the hell pays your wages? Not the union.
There really is more than one side to it, whether you want to believe it or not.

I'm laughing hard here.....here's the link to the other thread, perhaps Bart, you'd care to point out where I've not been "above board"... https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...mp;amp;o=&fpart=all&vc=1

...it appears to me YOU were the one spouting untruths, misinfirmation and pure bull$hit.





Untruth







misinformation (and somewhat amusing)







bull$hit





While you're straightening me out on those points why don't you go ahead and answer johnw's questions (which for your info are a well thought, gentlemanly response to my prior post, something with which you obviously have little experience) about the company by which you're employed?...but oh yeah, I forgot...you'll have to get your union rep to do that for you since you don't seem to KNOW anything about the company.....



THEN, you can show me where on this thread I said I support a "scab"...what I said was I don't know enough of the situation to pass judgment.



Lastly, why don't you share your (deep I'm sure) thoughts on Mr. Bahr and Ullico.....



We all wait with bated breath......

Journeyman ,I apologize to you for getting you mixed up with someone else.I am completely wrong on everything and beg for your forgiveness (except you said earlier that you had no dog in this hunt,that seems somehow below board,considering your zeal)I'm just a simple phoneman,look at my profile. I don't know about you(your profile is blank). Having said all of that,with bowed head; go F#@K YOURSELF and put me on ignore list....JACKA$$

P.S. no need to reply,your above that...

Yep the civil part of this discussion is definably over. tom

Just a glimpse thru the posts seems to show anger and posturing on the Union side and confident, independant types on the other. Mt isn't a big Union State. I've only worked one Union job and that was in MN. doing the same things I do here. I have no beef with my time in a Union position. I will say the Union shop was a lot less productive, but that may be due to a poorer work ethic in the "city" as opposed to rural Mt. I do remember as a kid my Dad was a Service Manager at local Auto Dealer. Previous to that he'd been a Union Mechanic for many years. Of course management isn't union. When they went on strike he did his job and filled in as a mechanic. All but one [bleep] on the line had no problems with that. The one [bleep] being a fat slob who made a habit of trying to step into Dad's path as he drove home after work. One day the said fat slob did step in front of the truck, dad kept driving and fat slob hit the dirt suffereing leg injurys. I also remember my friend worked a summer job at a Lead Smelter that went on strike. When he showed up the guys told him to cross as he needed the money for school. I think the so called "tough" guys make the Unions look like a bunch of knuckle dragging idiots. Maybe you should concentrate on trying to sell what a Union brings to table, not just what you scarf down out of the feed bag. The conditions that existed certainly warranted the start of Unions, and a case can still be made today, however I've yet to see it here.