|
For once I agree with Ace here.
The only example I can use is my own real-life experience.
At my plant we already pay above average for our area and have above-average benefits for our area. Locals drop off applications every day. Many of our employees are long-term 10-year +, 20-year+, 30 year + employees. NOW that being said...
one of the main benefits of a union is that those who are tenured get better pay. That is to say, those with higher seniority. I have two employees in particular who have been in the same position for 30 years with no more than a 3% annual raise. They are content to stay in this position (we've asked numerous times). However, a unionized plant would have us moving these employees into the highest-paid position in the plant b/c they are the most senior, even though they may not be the most qualified or even desire it. Why?
Additionally, I disagree with the simple majority clause. If 51 people in the plant want a union, and sign the cards, then the plant is union. Union reps come to the plant, pressure everyone to join who initially didn't want to, and stir up other related trouble in order to "negotiate" with mgt to pay even better wages and even better benis when the fact is we pay better than everyone else around (50 mile radius - I did the wage survey myself)...my question is WHY? Unions are outdated and unnecessary. At least in my line of work (manufacturing). We as a country already manufacture much more than we need in the hopes of keeping people employed...but that is another thread I suppose.
__________________
These are the good old days.
How did I become upright?
|