Unions: I'm Part Of One. IBEW

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: bctbct


We're talking about 100s of million in tax breaks these days. I think it was Toyota who received a sweet heart package from Georgia I think, that would pay all salaries for approx. 3 1/2 years.

Manufacturers are looking for a rural area, no competition, employees happy with 11-12 bucks per hour. They want tax payers to foot a large portion so they can boost profits.

None of the links provided proved that incentives were the only motivating factor in Industry moving to a particular state. As I stated earlier, labor cost is the biggest factor in any decision of a company to locate somewhere. You also have to add in the cost of training, building, property, tax rates and transportation cost. Incentives offered by cities and states are designed to help off set some of those cost.

Now if you would read the previous post I made, you would find that Oklahoma excels in all of those areas, making it attractive to business. Our biggest increases in businesses to the state happened in 2005-2006 after Right to Work passed. All the other factors were already in place prior to that.

 

[Stifko]

Originally posted by: MotionMan
I tried to take pictures of the picketers, but they all kept hiding their faces.

That is weird.

If you want to put on a B'way show, you have to have a union flyman. It doesn't matter if your production has flying elements or not, you have to have a flyman on your payroll. You would also need a minium of like 50 guys for the load in, regardless of how much stuff you were loading into the theater. I don't know what has been negotiated since they settled the stagehands strike, but some of those old terms were totally out of control.

 

[mikej007]

Originally posted by: amdhunter
<-- Former IBEW Local 3 member.

Hey my uncle worked in Local 3 for years before retiring this year...

 

[dartworth]

I LOL reading this thread...

 

[MotionMan]

Originally posted by: Stifko

Originally posted by: MotionMan
I tried to take pictures of the picketers, but they all kept hiding their faces.

That is weird.

If you want to put on a B'way show, you have to have a union flyman. It doesn't matter if your production has flying elements or not, you have to have a flyman on your payroll. You would also need a minium of like 50 guys for the load in, regardless of how much stuff you were loading into the theater. I don't know what has been negotiated since they settled the stagehands strike, but some of those old terms were totally out of control.

Two words:

Ghost gang.

If you do not know what that means, consider yourself lucky.

MotionMan

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: bctbct


We're talking about 100s of million in tax breaks these days. I think it was Toyota who received a sweet heart package from Georgia I think, that would pay all salaries for approx. 3 1/2 years.

Manufacturers are looking for a rural area, no competition, employees happy with 11-12 bucks per hour. They want tax payers to foot a large portion so they can boost profits.

None of the links provided proved that incentives were the only motivating factor in Industry moving to a particular state. As I stated earlier, labor cost is the biggest factor in any decision of a company to locate somewhere. You also have to add in the cost of training, building, property, tax rates and transportation cost. Incentives offered by cities and states are designed to help off set some of those cost.

Now if you would read the previous post I made, you would find that Oklahoma excels in all of those areas, making it attractive to business. Our biggest increases in businesses to the state happened in 2005-2006 after Right to Work passed. All the other factors were already in place prior to that.

Here is a quote from the link I provided to you


"Hi-Shear considered several locations in Ohio and Indiana before choosing Fort Wayne, but Maude said the state and local incentives were most attractive in Fort Wayne.

The Alliance said in the statement that the city offered the company a $100,000 grant to help with the building improvements. Tax abatements that could save the company up to $173,000 are being considered.

The Indiana Economic Development Corp. offered the company $30,000 in worker training assistance, up to $75,000 in infrastructure assistance and up to $855,000 in state tax credits.

?We?re excited about coming to Fort Wayne, and we look forward to the opportunity,? Maude said. "

In 2002 Oklahoma did this,

OKLAHOMA CITY - The Department of Housing and Urban Development today announced an estimated $17 billion in tax incentives to stimulate job growth, promote economic development and create affordable housing opportunities in eight new Empowerment Zones across the country. These Empowerment Zones will encourage public-private collaboration to generate economic development in some of the nation's most distressed urban communities.

Text

Looks like that helped your economic growth.

I have posted numerous sources that tax incentives play a huge role in getting a business to come to a state. Now its your turn to post just 1 article showing that Right to Work has impacted new business in Oklahoma.

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Do you know anything about the "construction world"? I am a project manager at a commercial construction company so I do. Unions may have been necessary for large projects in the past but in most fields they are no longer necessary to man very large projects.

We just finished a huge project that required 8 times the manpower that our company was able to provide on our own. We simply took on the roll of a "GC working under a GC" and subbed out portions of the work. We put a full time project manager and superintendent on the job, purchased and coordinated the material/deliveries and handled quality control. The labor cost ran roughly 6% over our in house labor costs and the project as a whole cost approximately 3% more because of the additional subs.

Oh, did I mention that a union company bid on the project as well? Their bid was over 40% more expensive than ours and they would not guarantee that they could meet the fast track schedule. So we got the job done quicker and cheaper than the closest union bid. I can't say that the quality was "better" because the union companies do turn over a quality product to the owner but it was definitely equal.

The ONLY reason that union companies are still in business around here is because of government work. They simply can't compete with other companies on projects that don't require union labor.

Of course this differs from area to area and different trades (usually dependent upon how much of a stronghold the union has on the trade/area) but unions are most definitely NOT required to complete large construction projects and they are NOT required to provide workers with a safe working environment anymore (OSHA, as much of a PITA as they are, handles that quite well now).

I know quite a bit about the business. Beating your nearest competitor by 40%!! You left a lot of money the table. How many zeros?

 

[MikeyIs4Dcats]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Do you know anything about the "construction world"? I am a project manager at a commercial construction company so I do. Unions may have been necessary for large projects in the past but in most fields they are no longer necessary to man very large projects.

We just finished a huge project that required 8 times the manpower that our company was able to provide on our own. We simply took on the roll of a "GC working under a GC" and subbed out portions of the work. We put a full time project manager and superintendent on the job, purchased and coordinated the material/deliveries and handled quality control. The labor cost ran roughly 6% over our in house labor costs and the project as a whole cost approximately 3% more because of the additional subs.

Oh, did I mention that a union company bid on the project as well? Their bid was over 40% more expensive than ours and they would not guarantee that they could meet the fast track schedule. So we got the job done quicker and cheaper than the closest union bid. I can't say that the quality was "better" because the union companies do turn over a quality product to the owner but it was definitely equal.

The ONLY reason that union companies are still in business around here is because of government work. They simply can't compete with other companies on projects that don't require union labor.

Of course this differs from area to area and different trades (usually dependent upon how much of a stronghold the union has on the trade/area) but unions are most definitely NOT required to complete large construction projects and they are NOT required to provide workers with a safe working environment anymore (OSHA, as much of a PITA as they are, handles that quite well now).

I know quite a bit about the business. Beating your nearest competitor by 40%!! You left a lot of money the table. How many zeros?

As a commercial construction PM and estimator, I can assure you that there are numerous factors affecting a bid. One of the 2 contractors could have made a mistake in preparing their bid. Often times a busy contractor will bid work on a "so what" basis. They need something for estimators to bid on so they will bid a project intentionally high, and if they don't get it, "So what". If they do, then they make a mint. A contractor might also increase his bid greatly because they feel the project or the owner will be a pain in the ass, so we include a PITA fee. It's impossible to look at 2 numbers and have any idea why they are so different without more information.

We are a union contractor, and while the cost of labor can be an issue depending on our competitor, the difference is usually less than 10%. A union contractor in our area can still be competitive on most projects. As a union contractor, we have managed to survive over 90 years.

In my experience, the contractors most affected by the union factor are mechanical and electrical subs as they require pretty specialized training and also often have the largest combined force size on a larger project. It is their ability to draw from a large shared labor pool that enables them to be competitive and survivie in the market as the projects vary over time. There are not always large projects to bid, and during those times they can cut back and spread the same forces over more companies with smaller projects.

Your argument about government work keeping unions in business is ridiculous. Most government entities are obligated to take the lowest responsible bid regardless of the labor status of the company. Most government projects (including all federal projects) require the payment of Davis-Bacon wages. In some cases, this equalizes the wages between open shop and union companies, but in many instances, union companies and many open shops pay well above the minimums set, so it's not always an issue. If a union company is depending on a government entity that is required to take the lowest bidder to stay in business, they are a rarity.

By the way, what you described doing abouve is called brokering, where you perform no tangible work and sub everything out. What you said about being a "GC under a GC" does not describe what you explained.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Deeko
If I walked out on my job cuz I wasn't happy with my contract, I'd get fired.

This is how it should be. Union striking is bullshit. I've also heard of unions picketing companies that won't use union labor. That's great, they're on the same level as Peta now. Good company to be with.

So you're rejecting all collective action, ever. Brilliant.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
If I walked out on my job cuz I wasn't happy with my contract, I'd get fired.

This is how it should be. Union striking is bullshit. I've also heard of unions picketing companies that won't use union labor. That's great, they're on the same level as Peta now. Good company to be with.

So you're rejecting all collective action, ever. Brilliant.

Don't twist my words, chump.

By the way, in response to the OP, do these unions understand that they created the reason they NEED to strike? In the rest of the "free market" (ya know, capitalism), if you want to get paid more, you ask for a raise. If you don't get it, you find another job that will pay you more...its the basis of our economy. If you're really worth more, someone will pay it. But, since they created this world of unions, the very thing they claim as a bonus (#3) is what is hurting them.

Of course, when you consider most unions rape their employers for far more than they're worth anyway, I guess they can't complain too much about the pseudo-communist working world they're trying to create.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
If I walked out on my job cuz I wasn't happy with my contract, I'd get fired.

This is how it should be. Union striking is bullshit. I've also heard of unions picketing companies that won't use union labor. That's great, they're on the same level as Peta now. Good company to be with.

So you're rejecting all collective action, ever. Brilliant.

Don't twist my words, chump.

By the way, in response to the OP, do these unions understand that they created the reason they NEED to strike? In the rest of the "free market" (ya know, capitalism), if you want to get paid more, you ask for a raise. If you don't get it, you find another job that will pay you more...its the basis of our economy. If you're really worth more, someone will pay it. But, since they created this world of unions, the very thing they claim as a bonus (#3) is what is hurting them.

Of course, when you consider most unions rape their employers for far more than they're worth anyway, I guess they can't complain too much about the pseudo-communist working world they're trying to create.

Stop revising history, chump.

The only reason the average worker received more than starvation wages for 50 years or so was unions.

Globalization is fixing that as we speak though, so don't worry.

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
If I walked out on my job cuz I wasn't happy with my contract, I'd get fired.

This is how it should be. Union striking is bullshit. I've also heard of unions picketing companies that won't use union labor. That's great, they're on the same level as Peta now. Good company to be with.

So you're rejecting all collective action, ever. Brilliant.

Don't twist my words, chump.

By the way, in response to the OP, do these unions understand that they created the reason they NEED to strike? In the rest of the "free market" (ya know, capitalism), if you want to get paid more, you ask for a raise. If you don't get it, you find another job that will pay you more...its the basis of our economy. If you're really worth more, someone will pay it. But, since they created this world of unions, the very thing they claim as a bonus (#3) is what is hurting them.

Of course, when you consider most unions rape their employers for far more than they're worth anyway, I guess they can't complain too much about the pseudo-communist working world they're trying to create.

Stop revising history, chump.

The only reason the average worker received more than starvation wages for 50 years or so was unions.

Globalization is fixing that as we speak though, so don't worry.

The resident union haters here don't care about history...about WHY unions were formed, or WHY they are still needed today...all most of them know is the stories they've read about fat lazy workers who (for the most part) are exceptions to the rules.

The city I live in did away with the "Little Davis-Bacon" laws by filing as a Charter City. No longer do contractors have to pay the prevailing wages for work paid for 100% by city money. (no state or federal money) surprisingly, 90% of the work is STILL done by the union contractors who pay union scale to their workers. They are still able to outbid the non-union "RATCO" contractors, PLUS, their work is done right the first time. The biggest non-union contractor in the area ends up having to go back and re-do/fix major portions of their jobs almost every time, and have been banned from bidding on jobs by several of the local town/cities for shoddy workmanship...

 

[Deeko]

What does history have to do with anything? The Model T revolutionized the world, but that doesn't mean we should all still be driving it.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Deeko
What does history have to do with anything? The Model T revolutionized the world, but that doesn't mean we should all still be driving it.

What, exactly, has changed since unions did 'good'?

Not what has changed about the unions - I'm right on board saying there are serious issues with the way unions act today.

What has changed about the rest of the world, and employee-employer relations to make unions obsolete?

Some of the best non union employers out there will tell you straight up that they treat their employees well to keep the unions out; taking unionization off the table is a stupid idea.

 

[rpanic]

Unions had their place at one time.

I have had to deal with a lot of union employees with the county of Los Angeles and the utility companies. Before I thought unions were great but since have to deal with them the last 12 years my opinion of them has taken a complete turn with the county employees being the worse.

The number of incompetent people that I have encountered has always boggled my mind, it always seems like for every four people there is one that is actually productive the rest are just sitting on there ass while one guy does most of the work, probably the least seniority. I have talked with management and it takes so much paperwork and time that it is made almost impossible to fire a lazy employee that have lots of seniority. Another thing I have noticed about the union employees that I have had to deal with is nepotism seems a little more rampant in union sittings, I guess its easier to get in a union if you have a family member that is already in.

Seniority equals laziness the more you have the lazier you get and the harder it is to fire you. Seniority equals more pay, which has nothing to do with skill, ability, or productivity all of which seem to decrees with seniority.

Maybe its more of a problem when everyone is under the union umbrella at a business and not just a group of people that have a particular skill. Take a utility company for example everyone is covered from the receptionist at a office to the guy that is working the lines, does the receptionist really need to be part of the union? There might be some trade unions out there that are good, but all the unions that I have had to deal with sucked and were nothing but a drain.


And as far as the writers guild goes, most of the stuff coming out of Hollywood these days sucks, perhaps they should be purged and replaced with new blood.

 

[MotionMan]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
What does history have to do with anything? The Model T revolutionized the world, but that doesn't mean we should all still be driving it.

What, exactly, has changed since unions did 'good'?

Not what has changed about the unions - I'm right on board saying there are serious issues with the way unions act today.

What has changed about the rest of the world, and employee-employer relations to make unions obsolete?

Labor Laws.

MotionMan

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: MotionMan

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
What does history have to do with anything? The Model T revolutionized the world, but that doesn't mean we should all still be driving it.

What, exactly, has changed since unions did 'good'?

Not what has changed about the unions - I'm right on board saying there are serious issues with the way unions act today.

What has changed about the rest of the world, and employee-employer relations to make unions obsolete?

Labor Laws.

MotionMan

And since the Unions pour millions into getting those laws enacted, who will step in to take their place?

 

[MotionMan]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: MotionMan

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
What does history have to do with anything? The Model T revolutionized the world, but that doesn't mean we should all still be driving it.

What, exactly, has changed since unions did 'good'?

Not what has changed about the unions - I'm right on board saying there are serious issues with the way unions act today.

What has changed about the rest of the world, and employee-employer relations to make unions obsolete?

Labor Laws.

MotionMan

And since the Unions pour millions into getting those laws enacted, who will step in to take their place?

Allow me to quote myself from this thread (you did read the entire thread, didn't you?)

Originally posted by: MotionMan
There was a time for unions and because of them, we have a great deal of employee protection laws. However, the time for unions as a presence in the workplace has passed. Unions should be converted from employer-specific organizations to state and national lobbies to help maintain the current laws and to proposed and support new ones.

MotionMan

 

[MotionMan]

I have also added the idea that unions continue to act as a sort of employment agency.

MotionMan

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: MotionMan

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: MotionMan

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
What does history have to do with anything? The Model T revolutionized the world, but that doesn't mean we should all still be driving it.

What, exactly, has changed since unions did 'good'?

Not what has changed about the unions - I'm right on board saying there are serious issues with the way unions act today.

What has changed about the rest of the world, and employee-employer relations to make unions obsolete?

Labor Laws.

MotionMan

And since the Unions pour millions into getting those laws enacted, who will step in to take their place?

Allow me to quote myself from this thread (you did read the entire thread, didn't you?)

Originally posted by: MotionMan
There was a time for unions and because of them, we have a great deal of employee protection laws. However, the time for unions as a presence in the workplace has passed. Unions should be converted from employer-specific organizations to state and national lobbies to help maintain the current laws and to proposed and support new ones.

MotionMan

Yes I read the thread. Just becaue we have those laws today does not mean they wont be changed tommorrow.

 

[LtPage1]

Unions are great. Who doesn't support the writers' guild?

 

[MotionMan]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: MotionMan

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: MotionMan

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
What does history have to do with anything? The Model T revolutionized the world, but that doesn't mean we should all still be driving it.

What, exactly, has changed since unions did 'good'?

Not what has changed about the unions - I'm right on board saying there are serious issues with the way unions act today.

What has changed about the rest of the world, and employee-employer relations to make unions obsolete?

Labor Laws.

MotionMan

And since the Unions pour millions into getting those laws enacted, who will step in to take their place?

Allow me to quote myself from this thread (you did read the entire thread, didn't you?)

Originally posted by: MotionMan
There was a time for unions and because of them, we have a great deal of employee protection laws. However, the time for unions as a presence in the workplace has passed. Unions should be converted from employer-specific organizations to state and national lobbies to help maintain the current laws and to proposed and support new ones.

MotionMan

Yes I read the thread. Just becaue we have those laws today does not mean they wont be changed tommorrow.

And when they are changed, then that, again, will be the time for the unions to step back into the workplace until the laws are reinstated. However, I doubt the "union lobby" would let that happen. (Then again, if the laws did get changed back, that would mean that the unions failed.)

MotionMan

 

[MotionMan]

Originally posted by: LtPage1
Unions are great. Who doesn't support the writers' guild?

Don't forget the airline pilots' union, too!!!

MotionMan

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: MotionMan

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Deeko
What does history have to do with anything? The Model T revolutionized the world, but that doesn't mean we should all still be driving it.

What, exactly, has changed since unions did 'good'?

Not what has changed about the unions - I'm right on board saying there are serious issues with the way unions act today.

What has changed about the rest of the world, and employee-employer relations to make unions obsolete?

Labor Laws.

MotionMan

"Right to Work."

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: bctbct

Originally posted by: Darwin333

Do you know anything about the "construction world"? I am a project manager at a commercial construction company so I do. Unions may have been necessary for large projects in the past but in most fields they are no longer necessary to man very large projects.

We just finished a huge project that required 8 times the manpower that our company was able to provide on our own. We simply took on the roll of a "GC working under a GC" and subbed out portions of the work. We put a full time project manager and superintendent on the job, purchased and coordinated the material/deliveries and handled quality control. The labor cost ran roughly 6% over our in house labor costs and the project as a whole cost approximately 3% more because of the additional subs.

Oh, did I mention that a union company bid on the project as well? Their bid was over 40% more expensive than ours and they would not guarantee that they could meet the fast track schedule. So we got the job done quicker and cheaper than the closest union bid. I can't say that the quality was "better" because the union companies do turn over a quality product to the owner but it was definitely equal.

The ONLY reason that union companies are still in business around here is because of government work. They simply can't compete with other companies on projects that don't require union labor.

Of course this differs from area to area and different trades (usually dependent upon how much of a stronghold the union has on the trade/area) but unions are most definitely NOT required to complete large construction projects and they are NOT required to provide workers with a safe working environment anymore (OSHA, as much of a PITA as they are, handles that quite well now).

I know quite a bit about the business. Beating your nearest competitor by 40%!! You left a lot of money the table. How many zeros?

You misunderstand. We beat the nearest union company by 40%. We actually came in second overall on the bid by a little over 1% but the low bidder didn't agree to the fast track schedule and the liquidated damages that went with it.

If I leave 40% on the table I am going to try everything in the book to withdraw my bid.