UTMC

Posted: **Sun Dec 25, 2011 9:27 pm**

Yep. I've been a union sheet metal worker for the last 23 years or so, and have always worked steady until last year. I was off 4 1/2 months last year, and have been off this year since Feb. Due to the large number of guys on the 'out of work' list, we are allowed to seek work at non-union shops in exchange for being a volunteer organizer, in order to facilitate signing up more union contractors. After a half day of info/training, we were free to seek work anywhere. So that's where I am. I just hooked up a job as a press brake operator at a small fraction of my former wages, and have started to gather info on the company, its' employees, etc....
I think I need to rent Norma Ray..

Any thoughts?

Posted: **Sun Dec 25, 2011 11:24 pm**

Salting is legit work too........ are your brothers good enough to cover your medical benefits while you salt?

Posted: **Sun Dec 25, 2011 11:27 pm**

mtne wrote:Salting is legit work too........ are your brothers good enough to cover your medical benefits while you salt?

Nope, all we get is credit for hours worked toward national pension. My insurance ran out months ago. Luckily my wife works for the devil.....Universal/ GE.

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 10:08 am**

Go union!!

Give 'em heck!

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 10:18 am**

I think America has wised up to the fact that unions ultimately price their members right out of their jobs.

Do you still have to pay union dues?

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 12:15 pm**

happycommuter wrote:I think America has wised up to the fact that unions ultimately price their members right out of their jobs.

Do you still have to pay union dues?

I don't understand. Could you explain this further? If you're insinuating that unions add cost to the final product and that in itself is somehow wrong, you should see what the Chinese, the Cambodians, the Vietnamese, the Indians, Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans, etc. have done without unions. If that's the kind of place you want to live, without all the brown people, get rid of the unions here.

I bought about $17,000 worth of stainless wire for a customer last fall that was made in the US. I could have paid only 2/3 that if I had it made in Korea, or a little more than half that if I bought it from a Chinese mill. The thing that made it so expensive was that here in the US, the added cost goes to pay workers a living wage. Yet more of it goes to pay for the disposal of heavy metals used in the manufacture, like nickel, chromium, etc. I decided it was worth all the extra "expense" to have the stuff manufactured responsibly, right in CT. Otherwise I would have paid for a similar product with inferior or unknown quality produced with almost slave labor at a heavy environmental cost. In China, they just dump that shit in the river. Here, it's contained, cleaned up, and recycled. I don't see what the problem is with unions or environmental laws. Maybe you do, I don't know.

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 3:34 pm**

happycommuter wrote:I think America has wised up to the fact that unions ultimately price their members right out of their jobs.

Do you still have to pay union dues?

Well, yes. At a discounted rate.

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:10 pm**

Sisyphus wrote:I don't understand. ...Maybe you do, I don't know.

I'm with you on most of that. In fact, one key difference between the unions for private workers and public employees is the the former maintain standards.
At some point the union bosses get greedy. They want more than what is fair, reasonable or competitive and this is not in their best long-term self-interest. The predatory nature of this covert surveillance program is diabolical to me. This is not well-intentioned missionary work. It's scavengers looking for fresh meat after devouring the previous carcass.
My beef is with union management. I support organized labor, but not some mandatory feudal system run by people totally uninvolved in the trade they represent.

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:21 pm**

So you're saying that union bosses are responsible for the cost of goods that are union-produced in the US?

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 6:33 pm**

Sisyphus wrote:So you're saying that union bosses are responsible for the cost of goods that are union-produced in the US?

Oooo sneaky!

Man that totally changes my response, nicely played sir.
To that point, I think it is the consumer that has made the union into a tyrant to their own detriment. I work in construction (I know i know, its the same sad, old tune) and unions are slowly becoming obsolete only because general contractor's (the one's who run the overall project) are cutting EVERY FUCKING COST they absolutely can. If that means they hire some schlub who works out of his pickup truck to hang 1.5 million dollars worth of drywall in a building rather than pay more to a union shop to do it, then by doG it is Julio's problem to figure out how to do it right (and my problem as the super to make sure Julio gets it right). Otherwise we may not get the job, and we all lose our jobs for lack of work, see? The circle of life is a vicious circle indeed. Why are we so desperate to hang onto a low bid? The owner wants it that way because he doesn't want to pay one red cent more to have it done right. From his perspective, fuck the GC it is his problem. From our perspective, fuck the subcontractor we have to protect our 3% margin any way we can. From the subcontractor's perspective, fuck sending people to get trained to do it right, just get in there and start hanging some goddammed sheetrock.
Look, I've seen unions fuck up a wet dream, from the top all the way down to the apprentices. But one thing I know, when you get a 2nd year apprentice, or anyone journeyman or higher, they know how to do their fucking job and that counts for more than can be accounted for.

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 7:01 pm**

Everyone who's been in the trades knows what it's like to have to work with someone who doesn't know what the fuck they're doing. It sucks, and more importantly it costs more in the long term.
Half the time it's unsafe.

BUt goddamn if it costs "too much."

Posted: **Mon Dec 26, 2011 7:12 pm**

Sisyphus wrote:So you're saying that union bosses are responsible for the cost of goods that are union-produced in the US?

I've never found union goods to be overpriced. I find few domestically produced goods at all, and while the cheap consumer and the stingy owners/management are largely to blame, outrageous union demands are often a factor. The UAW is the classic case of workers nearly killing the goose that laid the golden egg.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:15 am**

That's no golden egg. US car companies can't compete because they turn out a shitty product. End of story. Outrageous demands do not include a decent wage and health benefits with a pension. Anywhere else in the world, that's normal.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 7:18 am**

Sisyphus wrote:That's no golden egg. US car companies can't compete because they turn out a shitty product. End of story. Outrageous demands do not include a decent wage and health benefits with a pension. Anywhere else in the world, that's normal.

Rip Van Winkle, wake up and look at modern American vehicles. Also, how great is it that the SUV tariff has all the foreign companies assembling in the US?

The UAW workers earned well beyond a decent wage. Literally twice as much plus all those perks you mention.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 7:45 am**

Am I missing something on this thread?

Your union is "allowing" you to work in a non-union shop provide you recruit for the union. Meanwhile the union is providing you with no benefits except for credit to the pension.

Does the pension require a monetary contribution too?

And you still have to pay (discounted) dues while making far less money and getting no bennies.

Could you see any retribution from owners / bosses in a non-union shop?

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:52 pm**

happycommuter wrote:This is not well-intentioned missionary work.

Missionaries, the polite first wave of genocide.

If your pro union, it's the chance to educate a company or person in the benefits of a union education, training, and work ethic. As often as not in the trades the salts and organizers are just as, if not more interested in bringing the contractor into the organization.

If your anti-union it's ?

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 3:02 pm**

happycommuter wrote:The UAW workers earned well beyond a decent wage. Literally twice as much plus all those perks you mention.

Okay, now I want you to justify that statement coupled with the philosophy that too much government is bad. You want government price/wage controls, do you?

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:21 pm**

Sisyphus wrote:Okay, now I want you to justify that statement coupled with the philosophy that too much government is bad. You want government price/wage controls, do you?

Was there a mention of government in this thread (besides my pro-tariff aside)? I mentioned the American people's stance on unions.

The UAW employee averages, including "wages, overtime and vacation pay, and comes to about $40 an hour. " The mean hourly wage in America is ~$21.35. Okay, nearly twice. You got me.

My exposure to unions is admittedly minimal, but the one time I met people in my profession that were unionized, they said the only benefit was that they were no longer being harangued into joining a union.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 4:25 pm**

Bigshankhank wrote: But one thing I know, when you get a 2nd year apprentice, or anyone journeyman or higher, they know how to do their fucking job and that counts for more than can be accounted for.

Ditto

I don't mind paying a bit more for something made here. I want to support OUR economy, not someone else's...

That said, I'll buy a foreign product if it's superior (Honda > HD)

I try to buy as much American as I can

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:07 pm**

motorpsycho67 wrote:
Bigshankhank wrote: But one thing I know, when you get a 2nd year apprentice, or anyone journeyman or higher, they know how to do their fucking job and that counts for more than can be accounted for.
Ditto

I don't mind paying a bit more for something made here. I want to support OUR economy, not someone else's...

That said, I'll buy a foreign product if it's superior (Honda > HD)

I try to buy as much American as I can

Same here and the ironic thing is often the American-made good is comparable or slightly more expensive than the foreign made good.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:54 pm**

happycommuter wrote:
Sisyphus wrote:Okay, now I want you to justify that statement coupled with the philosophy that too much government is bad. You want government price/wage controls, do you?
Was there a mention of government in this thread (besides my pro-tariff aside)? I mentioned the American people's stance on unions.

The UAW employee averages, including "wages, overtime and vacation pay, and comes to about $40 an hour. " The mean hourly wage in America is ~$21.35. Okay, nearly twice. You got me.

My exposure to unions is admittedly minimal, but the one time I met people in my profession that were unionized, they said the only benefit was that they were no longer being harangued into joining a union.

Alright, I take that back. I was considering asking this be moved to the "other" forum but perhaps that isn't necessary.
You have to consider the mean hourly wage is what it is because there are a shit-ton of people making minimum wage or worse. The actual mean of $21.35 is pretty good, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone actually pulling that in. $40 after all the benefits etc are added in probably is close to the mean you mention, I don't know what their benefits are worth. They in turn take that money, send their kids to school, better their families, they spend the money and it stays in our economy. They aren't taking all this cash and investing it overseas. The money goes back into the economy.
But you make it sound like somehow the poor car companies can't compete against a superior product and consumer demand because they pay their employees too much. That's a bullshit argument. The car companies failed because oil prices skyrocketed and what was the number one selling domestic car? The F150. Fuck, they were still cranking out Hummers in 2003! No wonder they would have failed. When Henry Ford made the Model A in 1932 it got 20 mpg. The 1993 Explorer, one of which I owned, got almost the same mileage. That is hardly a shining star of American industrial enginuity. They shut off diesel imports because they were "too competitive" against the US companies. Every time Congress tries to get the car companies to increase their fuel efficiency we see a bunch of hand wringing, doom and gloom, "aw shucks we don't think we can do that without cutting jobs" and that happens every two or four years. It's bullshit.
US car companies suck because they can't get off the tit of big oil and they don't respond to consumer demand. The employees are paid well only because they have union protection. Otherwise they'd be paid shit wages to produce shitty cars.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 5:59 pm**

MoraleHazard wrote:Am I missing something on this thread?

Your union is "allowing" you to work in a non-union shop provide you recruit for the union. Meanwhile the union is providing you with no benefits except for credit to the pension.

Does the pension require a monetary contribution too?

And you still have to pay (discounted) dues while making far less money and getting no bennies.

Could you see any retribution from owners / bosses in a non-union shop?

Let me respond:
Question #1 Yes.
Question #2 My local and national pension are part of the wage package while employed at a union shop. While working non-union, my national pension is considered 'covered'. As of New Years, that's about 2.85 an hour I get credited towards my pension.
Question #3 Yes.
Question# 4 Hmm. As of now, I'm strictly covert. And that's the way it's going to be for a while. As for retribution, lol......I've been in the middle of so many Circle Jerks slam pits and high speed motorcycle runs, that retributions from a few old geezers are like getting brushed up against in the hallway by an ugly nun...And legally, I'm well versed in my rights to organize under the current law.....

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 6:42 pm**

I have some experience with "Union"

last summer had a client that had "Union Made" shirts and they were SHIT, everyone complained, I offered American NON Union Made shirts to him, better quality and lower price, they liked it but once the other shop found out they raised hell!

So, the job went elsewhere, I lost, the first shop lost, and they customer ended up paying even more for the shirt, which in the end hurt their bottom line: the charity donation they were working towards in the firs place.

I have another friend who deals with union labor, sometimes it's just as bad as the movies: clear extortion and other "strong" moves. It still happens places, might not last long but it still out there.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:28 pm**

Sisyphus wrote: $40 after all the benefits etc are added in...

No, that's before.

Oh yeah, Detroit management made some really bad decisions as well, but the staggering legacy costs of union benefits are the reason there is a "new" Chrysler and "new" GM. Because they needed to pretend to be new entities to shed those obligations.

I believe the "new" domestics, the non-union auto factories in the South producing foreign- badged light trucks earn a fair, not exorbitant, wage.

Posted: **Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:55 pm**

tucko wrote:
MoraleHazard wrote:Am I missing something on this thread?

Your union is "allowing" you to work in a non-union shop provide you recruit for the union. Meanwhile the union is providing you with no benefits except for credit to the pension.

Does the pension require a monetary contribution too?

And you still have to pay (discounted) dues while making far less money and getting no bennies.

Could you see any retribution from owners / bosses in a non-union shop?
Let me respond:
Question #1 Yes.
Question #2 My local and national pension are part of the wage package while employed at a union shop. While working non-union, my national pension is considered 'covered'. As of New Years, that's about 2.85 an hour I get credited towards my pension.
Question #3 Yes.
Question# 4 Hmm. As of now, I'm strictly covert. And that's the way it's going to be for a while. As for retribution, lol......I've been in the middle of so many Circle Jerks slam pits and high speed motorcycle runs, that retributions from a few old geezers are like getting brushed up against in the hallway by an ugly nun...And legally, I'm well versed in my rights to organize under the current law.....

Ok, well good luck. I'm mostly pro-union, though I know from some folks that some unions (or some chapters) are shit. Sometimes, IMO, an example like the shit t-shirts aren't a product of the union, but of the manufacturer. Though I know that some unions (cough AMO) are quite mobbed up and are bad in and of themselves.

Posted: **Fri Dec 30, 2011 4:58 am**

Union corruption, protection of the worst workers as long as they pay dues, etc. are all problems I've seen firsthand working IATSE and AFSCME. You don't have to tell me.

But more important is that union workers today are the only workers (not managers) still making a living comparable to American workers of a generation ago. They can hope to retire decently. They can buy a home and actually pay off their mortgage.

I don't understand why this country's attitudes have shifted so that the majority seem to cheer the few who pocket billions, and rail aganist the many who want to earn a first-world wage. Why is it OK with so many Americans for the Walton family to pay themselves hundreds of millions while paying the people who actually run their Wal-Marts so little that they qualify for food stamps (that we pay for)? Wal-Mart is just one easy target. It's going on all over. Why is it OK for the mean hourly wage to be only $21 when employers have shifted the cost of retirement savings and healthcare onto the employees? That $21 is probably comparable to $10 per hour if you subtract the cost of benefits workers got twenty years ago.

Unions are not the problem. America's eagerness to become a third-world nation with a huge lower class, tiny upper class and nothing in between is the problem.

Posted: **Fri Dec 30, 2011 3:55 pm**

AZRider wrote: Unions are not the problem. American government's eagerness to become a third-world nation with a huge lower class, tiny upper class and nothing in between is the problem.

Posted: **Fri Dec 30, 2011 4:56 pm**

Hey Happycommuter, I look at that graph, and I see a normal to lowish wage (shit, I made $15 an hour when I was 18), plus the cost of benefits, vacation and retirement. The end is $71 bucks. The japanese plants do it for $50, but who knows what their retirement packages look like. Lets say they're a bit shittier, but sufficient, and perhaps a compromise could be a $60 per hour wage/benefits cost to the company. So, then what? Are any of those benefits somehow not what any employee is entitled to in order to perform a demanding task, day in and day out, for years at a time? I mean shit, someone making $21 an hour is barely making $40k a year, a liveable but certainly lower middle class salary.....Is that too much to ask? What is a fair wage/benefits package nowadays, in your opinion?

Posted: **Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:18 pm**

If he wants to make that kind of money he can go there and get himself a union job standing on an assembly line doing mind-numbingly boring work.
I wish I made $200/hr like my lawyer, or $285 like my dentist, but I don't bitch about their wages. It is what it is. If you ask me, standing on your feet for twenty years 8 hrs/day doing the same fucking thing every three minutes, you'd have to pay me more than 70/hr!

Posted: **Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:29 pm**

MoraleHazard wrote:
tucko wrote:
MoraleHazard wrote:Am I missing something on this thread?

Your union is "allowing" you to work in a non-union shop provide you recruit for the union. Meanwhile the union is providing you with no benefits except for credit to the pension.

Does the pension require a monetary contribution too?

And you still have to pay (discounted) dues while making far less money and getting no bennies.

Could you see any retribution from owners / bosses in a non-union shop?
Let me respond:
Question #1 Yes.
Question #2 My local and national pension are part of the wage package while employed at a union shop. While working non-union, my national pension is considered 'covered'. As of New Years, that's about 2.85 an hour I get credited towards my pension.
Question #3 Yes.
Question# 4 Hmm. As of now, I'm strictly covert. And that's the way it's going to be for a while. As for retribution, lol......I've been in the middle of so many Circle Jerks slam pits and high speed motorcycle runs, that retributions from a few old geezers are like getting brushed up against in the hallway by an ugly nun...And legally, I'm well versed in my rights to organize under the current law.....
Ok, well good luck. I'm mostly pro-union, though I know from some folks that some unions (or some chapters) are shit. Sometimes, IMO, an example like the shit t-shirts aren't a product of the union, but of the manufacturer. Though I know that some unions (cough AMO) are quite mobbed up and are bad in and of themselves.

Oh c'mon. Let's stop all this shit. Quit talking about 'unions' like they're all one huge entity. It's like saying, "my governor is corrupt, therefore all government is corrupt." Classic fallacy. My union leadership is democratically elected by the membership. And believe me, if they don't produce, they're thrown out on their asses. Sure, some unions suck. Some don't. But I'd rather be in a shitty union than no union at all. Mostly pro-union. Isn't that like being half pregnant?

UTMC

So I'm a union spy.....a mole.

So I'm a union spy.....a mole.

tough sell

Re: tough sell

Re: tough sell

Re: tough sell

Re: tough sell