PatriotsReign

Here's my big question on unions....

"Why do unions mandate that all workers with equal seniority make the same pay?"

So a worker who is dedicated, reliable and motivated makes the same as worker with equal seniority who is lazy, forgetful and unreliable.

Shouldn't unions WANT better workers to get better pay?

I've never understood this philosophy because it seems bad for everyone but the crappy worker. If I worked for a union and was an exceptional worker, I'd hate the fact that the lazy dude working with me makes as much as I do.

Would love to hear/see what a union worker/member thinks about this policy.

PatriotsReign

wow....21 reads and no one wants to comment?

I thought I'd at least get one "Yeah PR, I work for a union and this frustrates the hell out of me!"

But not one peep?

Are union people actually ok with this?

Patters

Good workers get promoted in union shops faster than poor workers. In the construction trades, they get more jobs and better jobs. The good workers are employed even through bad times, while the poorer workers aren't given opportunities. Also, there is peer pressure in unions to do your fair share. I'm sure there are exceptions, as there are exceptions in non-union shops, but I don't think you can make a generalization. Most union workers don't like slackers since it only makes things more difficult for others. Are you talking about specific unions or unions in specific industries?

PatriotsReign

Yes, but my point is that a good worker and a below average worker don't deserve the same pay rate. Even an average worker shouldn't be paid as much as a good or exceptional worker.

All the other points regarding promotions and getter better work are common sense as all industries do that.

I'm just wondering why union workers tolerate equal pay for everyone.

scout

I don't know union policy, but in terms of promotion seniority should only be a consideration when all other variables are equal. Getting to stand for # years of service at an annual conference is one of it's benefits.

DocHoliday

It's simply easier on the union to have a 'this position pays this amount' system rather than variable increasing pay regardless of rank.

Frankly it's impossible to have labor negotiations if there aren't set positions with their own pay.

__________________

Harry Boy

I've been a Teamster for over 60 years, we never had this problem, we were all "stupid truck drivers" we spent most of our time figuring out new ways to drive bosses nuts.

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

PatriotsReign

Keep in mind unions don't pay the union members, their empoyers do. I'm sure the employers would rather see a pay structure based upon performance rather than number of years.

Honestly, years shouldn't mean much if you're not a solid employee. Each pay grade should solely be based upon annual performance. Time shouldn't be rewarded without a performance assessment.

cupofjoe1962

Their is no logic or fairness in the trade unions.
I have a lot of friends that are in the trade unions, and I hear the stories
all the time.

We have to lay you off, but we are keeping Jamal and Pedro who are
not very good workers and are not very good at their craft, but they do qualify as a minority.

Sorry dude..... We need to make the numbers.

The same guys have been out of work for so long, their unemployment
has run out. One got caught working a non-union commercial job and
they gave him a warning, that if he did not quit they would pull his book.

They cannot give him work to feed his family, but they do not want him
working a non-union job.

On the other hand.... They have no problem with their guys doing residential
work under the table, while they collect unemployment.

* You can do residential work on the side, while you milk unemployment.

* You cannot work a non-union legal commercial job that pays taxes and unemployment insurance to the state even after your unemployment runs out.

I know this for a fact.... I was with my buddy when we ran into his B.A.
at Duncan Donuts. Their conversation, was no secret.

Patters

PR, there are so many different factors and models, and I don't think you can generalize.

- In the construction trades, protection for older workers is important because they may suffer more physical constraints than younger workers. I think younger works in those trades understand and accept that, and hope to become long-time union workers as well.
- In some professions, we can generalize and say with age comes some advantages. For examples, teachers are often better as they get older for a variety of reasons, including the general respect that kids have for older people. Thus, older teachers in many ways earn more because of the fact they are older, though in some ways they may not have to work as hard as younger teachers.

In other words, there are many different ways to measure the value of an employee. But, if someone is just lazy, ultimately their colleagues, the employer, and union are not there for them. That said, in some unions they have a legal obligation to back their employees, such as in police unions, where unions are often obliged to provide legal services even to a cop who appears to be corrupt. (The old innocent to proven guilty thing.)

In many cases, the benefits that union workers get outweighs the drawbacks. To know you have some job security, that your wages and benefits are pretty good for the industry you're in, that your employer can't treat you like crap, and so on have some real value to people.

So, I don't think union workers really tolerate the lazy, and I do think that the best workers generally get some rewards. But, union workers will tolerate someone who works hard but may not be the best because they know what goes around comes around.