Unions: good for workers or bad for business?

Started by DontSayBanana, April 16, 2009, 11:12:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Pro-union or anti-union?

For
29 (50.9%)
Against
28 (49.1%)

Total Members Voted: 57

Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 26
User actions

alfred russel

#225
April 20, 2009, 04:59:33 PM
Quote from: mongers on April 20, 2009, 04:53:06 PM


By the sound of it you need to get your workplace unionised.  :P


That would be the way to get my paycheck to cease. :P
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

crazy canuck

#226
April 20, 2009, 05:08:45 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 20, 2009, 04:45:06 PM
We will see what the letter says, I don't remember exactly. My memory is that it tries to convey that the letter does not confer any rights and that my employment is at will. It may say that the letter is not a contract, but I'll have to get back to you on that.

I think I might be a day laborer, actually. Today I know what my pay is, but tomorrow it may be arbitrarily adjusted up or down, or even cease. Hopefully we have an implied contract that they at least have to fly me home.

It would be very odd to have a document which sets out what your rights are or, more accurately are not (which is exactly what a contract is) and then have it go on to say that it is not a contract.  I am thinking the at the word "contract" has some meaning in your jurisdiction that is different.

I know that in every day practice I run into people all the time that think they have no "contract" because they think that they need to sign some kind of formal document when in fact every employment relationship is essentially a contractual relationship.  It just so happens that your contract is heavily tilted in favour of the employer.

Malthus

#227
April 20, 2009, 05:09:06 PM
Unions are a good thing.

How else would my worthless soon-to-be-ex brother in law earn a goodly salary, sufficient to make child support payments when they garnishee his wage? Without a union, he's be making the sort of crappy wage his meagre talents, general drunken surliness and lack of work ethic would deserve - and my wife's sisters' kids can't live on that.

Too bad he works for Chrysler Canada ...  :unsure:
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane—Marcus Aurelius

alfred russel

#228
April 20, 2009, 05:18:55 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 20, 2009, 05:08:45 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 20, 2009, 04:45:06 PM
We will see what the letter says, I don't remember exactly. My memory is that it tries to convey that the letter does not confer any rights and that my employment is at will. It may say that the letter is not a contract, but I'll have to get back to you on that.

I think I might be a day laborer, actually. Today I know what my pay is, but tomorrow it may be arbitrarily adjusted up or down, or even cease. Hopefully we have an implied contract that they at least have to fly me home.

It would be very odd to have a document which sets out what your rights are or, more accurately are not (which is exactly what a contract is) and then have it go on to say that it is not a contract.  I am thinking the at the word "contract" has some meaning in your jurisdiction that is different.

I know that in every day practice I run into people all the time that think they have no "contract" because they think that they need to sign some kind of formal document when in fact every employment relationship is essentially a contractual relationship.  It just so happens that your contract is heavily tilted in favour of the employer.

I don't know for certain that it says it isn't a contract--I'll get back to you.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

alfred russel

#229
April 20, 2009, 05:38:27 PM
A funny/tragic anecdote: at a previous employer, the company bought a major rival. There were some redundancies created, and the employees that got laid off got a two paragraph letter notifying them that they got the axe reading something like this:

"As you may know, this is a very exciting time at our company. With the acquisition of xyz, we are now the largest company in the industry. We will be able to use the best practices from both companies to set a new quality standard that best serves our clients.

The acquisition has created several duplicative positions that will need to be eliminated. Unfortunately, your position has been identified for elimination. We thank you for your years of service to our company, and will providing you with two weeks of severence pay."

And people with years of service really did only get two weeks of severence: but in fairness the company wasn't doing especially well at the time, and didn't have a lot of money to burn.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

Razgovory

#230
April 20, 2009, 05:39:51 PM
Quote from: grumbler on April 20, 2009, 11:50:44 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 20, 2009, 10:36:26 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 20, 2009, 10:06:07 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on April 19, 2009, 06:34:32 PM
:lol: This coming from the guy who stabbed John McCain in the back.
How do you reckon you "stabbed" him "in the back?"
I didn't do it.
A coupla posts ago, you said that you did!  :lol:

Okay, whatever.

I said Berkut did.  He voted Obama after being a McCain guy for years.  It was so sad. :(  It made John cry.

"I didn't cry they tortured me in Hanoi, but I'll cry now!" he said.  Or something like that.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

dps

#231
April 20, 2009, 05:43:38 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 20, 2009, 05:18:55 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 20, 2009, 05:08:45 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on April 20, 2009, 04:45:06 PM
We will see what the letter says, I don't remember exactly. My memory is that it tries to convey that the letter does not confer any rights and that my employment is at will. It may say that the letter is not a contract, but I'll have to get back to you on that.

I think I might be a day laborer, actually. Today I know what my pay is, but tomorrow it may be arbitrarily adjusted up or down, or even cease. Hopefully we have an implied contract that they at least have to fly me home.

It would be very odd to have a document which sets out what your rights are or, more accurately are not (which is exactly what a contract is) and then have it go on to say that it is not a contract.  I am thinking the at the word "contract" has some meaning in your jurisdiction that is different.

I know that in every day practice I run into people all the time that think they have no "contract" because they think that they need to sign some kind of formal document when in fact every employment relationship is essentially a contractual relationship.  It just so happens that your contract is heavily tilted in favour of the employer.

I don't know for certain that it says it isn't a contract--I'll get back to you.



Most places that I've worked, we've had employee handbooks that lay out the job duties, benefits, working conditions, ect.;  but also have a disclaimer that the handbook does not constitue or create a contract and the the policies set forth in the handbook may be changed by management with or without notice.  A lot of what's in the handbook looks like what would be in an employment contract if the workers at those companies had written contracts, but because of the disclaimer, it's just informational and isn't legally binding.

MadImmortalMan

#232
April 20, 2009, 06:13:55 PM
My company has a document to sign for new hires that states that anyone engaging in acts that may be viewed as attempts to form a union or to bring union representation into the company are subject to immediate termination.
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

Neil

#233
April 20, 2009, 06:16:29 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 20, 2009, 06:13:55 PM
My company has a document to sign for new hires that states that anyone engaging in acts that may be viewed as attempts to form a union or to bring union representation into the company are subject to immediate termination.
I don't even think that would be legal in most countries.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Caliga

#234
April 20, 2009, 06:25:52 PM
:blink:

I thought the NLRA prevented that sort of prohibition.
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points

Caliga

#235
April 20, 2009, 06:27:56 PM
Quote from: National Labor Relations Act of 1935
RIGHTS OF EMPLOYEES



Sec. 7. [§ 157.] Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized in section 8(a)(3) [section 158(a)(3) of this title].
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points

MadImmortalMan

#236
April 20, 2009, 06:30:46 PM
Quick! Get me a AFL-CIO lawyer!  :lol:
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

Neil

#237
April 20, 2009, 06:30:58 PM
Someone alert the ACLU.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Caliga

#238
April 20, 2009, 06:34:25 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 20, 2009, 06:30:46 PM
Quick! Get me a AFL-CIO lawyer!  :lol:

When he arrives, plz kill him.  :cool:
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points

Neil

#239
April 20, 2009, 06:35:22 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on April 20, 2009, 06:30:46 PM
Quick! Get me a AFL-CIO lawyer!  :lol:
There's no need for that.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 26
User actions