Do you have a written employment contract?

[Admiral Yi]

Out of interest does work to rule industrial action exist in the US?

What does that mean?

[Barrister]

Out of interest does work to rule industrial action exist in the US?

What does that mean?

Work to rule means following rules and policy to the letter, doing exactly what is required of you and no more.

[Zanza]

I think the only time I didn't have a proper contract was when I was sworn in as public administrations clerk trainee.

Right, civil servants are special. But then their "contract" is defined by public law, so it's not like the rules aren't know. That also means it can be changed unilaterally by the legislative. But I think even civil servants get some kind of document regarding their appointment that they have to accept, no?

[Barrister]

I think the only time I didn't have a proper contract was when I was sworn in as public administrations clerk trainee.

Right, civil servants are special. But then their "contract" is defined by public law, so it's not like the rules aren't know. That also means it can be changed unilaterally by the legislative. But I think even civil servants get some kind of document regarding their appointment that they have to accept, no?

I know I did.

[Jacob]

Work to rule means following rules and policy to the letter, doing exactly what is required of you and no more.

And it slows things down something crazy.

I once had to return to Canada when the border guards were working to rule. They took something like 10-20% of people crossing, searched their luggage thoroughly and asked every single question they ought to. It was slow as all hell.

[Syt]

I think the only time I didn't have a proper contract was when I was sworn in as public administrations clerk trainee.

Right, civil servants are special. But then their "contract" is defined by public law, so it's not like the rules aren't know. That also means it can be changed unilaterally by the legislative. But I think even civil servants get some kind of document regarding their appointment that they have to accept, no?

Bit hazy, it was 17 years ago. I was sworn in, IIRC, received my document that confirmed it. I think I signed something as part of that, but I can't say for sure.

[crazy canuck]

My job is unionized, but I am not in a union. We are a fairly liberal country as far as unions go. So while unions are very well protected by the law, an individual can never be forced to be a member.

However, the employers negotiate a general deal with the unions that applies to all workers in a certain industry. So my salary is based on a set of tables that applies for several million employees in the "metal" industry (that covers everything from steel mills to machine building to automotive) in Germany. However, the union agreement only sets a certain minimum standard. The workers council of your own company and finally yourself can negotiate further provisions with the employer. The workers council often negotiates things like a Christmas or profit bonus or rules of conduct and you yourself can negotiate your personal bonus or more salary than stipulated in the union contract.

Sounds like a rather civilized way of doing things.

[Jacob]

Sounds like a rather civilized way of doing things.

Yeah. It makes sense to me that the interests of workers are represented on a level of clout beyond the individual worker, to level the playing field somewhat. If this can be done in a way doesn't take away individual freedom to negotiate a better deal, and in a way that provides stability for employers as well that's pretty solid.

[crazy canuck]

Out of interest does work to rule industrial action exist in the US?

What does that mean?

It means they do their best to do as little as possible and be as disruptive as possible while still technically complying with their contract.

[Sheilbh]

What does that mean?

It's a sort of industrial action when workers only do what is required according to their contracts, no more. They'll take their full breaks, they won't do overtime, they'll leave exactly when their shift ends etc. Also they normally follow exact procedures as laid down by management rather than the speedier workarounds that most people actually do. So they'll normally follow bureaucratic and health and safety rules rather punctiliously.

But they're fulfilling the terms of their contract. It was recently done by teachers in this country and I think it's common elsewhere in Europe.

[Syt]

It used to be popular with civil servants in Germany who by law are not permitted to go on strike. When they wanted to make a point they did so by working strictly according to the words of their obligations which could slow things down rather considerably.

[Sheilbh]

It used to be popular with civil servants in Germany who by law are not permitted to go on strike. When they wanted to make a point they did so by working strictly according to the words of their obligations which could slow things down rather considerably.

In Germany I could imagine that would bring the nation to its knees

[dps]

Out of interest does work to rule industrial action exist in the US?

What does that mean?

It means they do their best to do as little as possible and be as disruptive as possible while still technically complying with their contract.

Employers in America would like it if their unionized workers would do that--the employers would get much much more work out of them.

[Ideologue]

Sounds like a rather civilized way of doing things.

Yeah. It makes sense to me that the interests of workers are represented on a level of clout beyond the individual worker, to level the playing field somewhat. If this can be done in a way doesn't take away individual freedom to negotiate a better deal, and in a way that provides stability for employers as well that's pretty solid.

Sounds kind of like it would be easy to exploit by free riders; if one can have all the benefits of the union with none of the responsibilities, like paying dues, why join?  Am I mistaken?

[Jacob]

Sounds kind of like it would be easy to exploit by free riders; if one can have all the benefits of the union with none of the responsibilities, like paying dues, why join?  Am I mistaken?

So? If the union set up ensures that workers, unionized or not, have sufficient bargaining power when it comes to employers, who cares if there are some free riders? IMO, it only really matters if free riders undermine the overall worker bargaining position.