IT Unions
-
And BTW, someone in an earlier post mentioned the SEIU to which I would say "not on your life".
I work for a large healthcare concern and these people tried (unsuccessfully) to get their feet in the door here a few years ago. I have never seen so many dirty tricks, intimidation, misinformation, and downright fabrications of the truth in my adult working life. If this organization can't be truthful when it's trying to enter a workplace and when it should be putting its best foot forward, how in the world can I expect them to be truthful when it comes to representing me and my interests? Thanks, but no thanks.
My hovercraft is full of eels.
-
"Ban Canadians".....
my my ....somebody doesn't like the 51st state (what crappy beer did the some barperson give you?....or are you jealous of the view of Niagara Falls from the northern side?)
-
"Seeing employees as stakeholders? Brilliant!!! Will it ever happen in the US?..."
It's happening with SAIC...one company I know of that is actually supposed to be a real-life working model of "employee owned and operated..."
"Ban Canadians"....NEVER! I wouldn't be able to live without my daily dose of Alex Trebek!
**ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI !!!** -
I've worked in both union and non-union shops. The union shop is the only job from which I was ever terminated. Even though I was management, and the state law governing collective bargaining prohibits managers from being in the union, this union was so powerful it bullied the state into requiring that managers in shops where the union was had to belong to the union. This was done with no change to the law!
So then they fired the CIO, and everyone who directly reported to him who didn't have tenure in the union was let go when their contract expired (everyone without tenure was on a year-to-year contract that required a positive renewal at the end of each year). I was told my contract was being terminated at "management discretion". Something the union gave them to enable them to get rid of people they decided they didn't like without having to justify it. The union refused to support my desire to fight how I was being treated, so what did I pay dues for? I suspect the union was in kahoots with management because I kept questioning why I was required to be in the union if state law specifically prohibited me from being in the union. The really funny part (not that anything about that was funny...) is that all the people in charge of the union were Director level people in the organization. So essentially management was running the union, the real union didn't want to hear about it, the state board that governs unions didn't want to hear about it. Talk about your incestuous relationships!!
Unions? No way! Professional organization that manages and monitors standards and certification? Maybe. Not that the AMA or ABA are sterling examples, but maybe we would be better off if companies couldn't hire IT staff who didn't have a certification recognized by a central organization. Keep some of the absolute morons out of this industry, and there are plenty! You have to wonder how someone can get to be Director of a Division in an IT organization and not know how to right-click a mouse to get a context menu.
Anyhoo.. That's my vote.
-
I am not sure how the state could force management or anyone else for that matter to join a union. Union membership is covered by the NLRA (National Labor Relations Act). If you do not live in a so called right-to-work state you may have to pay a portion of the standard union dues but you can not be compelled to join a union. In a right-to-work state you can not be forced to pay any part of union dues.
The union does not have choice in defending your rights under a union contract, this is true even if you are not a union member.
If your termination was less than 6 months ago (which I believe is the limit established by the NLRA) I would contact a labor lawyer.
Management is explicitly prohibited from forming or joining a Union. I do not remember which law covers this provision but seem to remember that it is covered by the NLRA as well.
Mike
-
I am not sure how the state could force management or anyone else for that matter to join a union. Union membership is covered by the NLRA (National Labor Relations Act). If you do not live in a so called right-to-work state you may have to pay a portion of the standard union dues but you can not be compelled to join a union. In a right-to-work state you can not be forced to pay any part of union dues.
I don't know either. Between Federal and State laws there was a pile of precedent on my side, but all I got for raising the issue was fired.
The union does not have choice in defending your rights under a union contract, this is true even if you are not a union member.
Theoretically, no. But unfortunately I got a new job with better pay so it wasn't like I could argue that I'd lost anything...
If your termination was less than 6 months ago (which I believe is the limit established by the NLRA) I would contact a labor lawyer.
Six years ago. I did see a lawyer. His position was "Do you really want to fight to keep the job? You certainly wouldn't want to work there now after the way you've been treated. Besides, you're making more money now so you can't claim that you've suffered a loss..."
Management is explicitly prohibited from forming or joining a Union. I do not remember which law covers this provision but seem to remember that it is covered by the NLRA as well.
My position as well, for all the good it did me.
-
Unions have their place, but I believe they fit in standardized jobs where results are more fixed than variable.
In IT, things vary constantly and your "worth" to a company can vary depending on many factors.
Many of us have difficulty marketing our skills, so we often rely on others to get us work, and for that they take a huge percentage.
If there was an employee owned IT company (like Remax in real-estate) that only took in the top of the business, it could give the IT producers a larger part of the pie.
Depending on how much talent it has in given markets, it could leverage rules for OT, vacation, and training, and work conditions up to a national "ideal."
Companies would learn that it pays to work with the best, especially if it lowered the risk of "hiring." (Most managers would rather pay $200k for 90% chance of success than $100k for a 50% chance of failure.)
As long as the company dealt with vetting new hires (keeping only the best) and only kept skills in high demand, I think it would be successful. It could even be a status thing among companies to be "run" with XYZ personnel that stock watchers looked for.
Mike
-
As I have been reading these messages I keep thinking of different scenarios that could occur to a DBA in a "unionized" IT shop.
Pager goes off at 2 am, server is down. Head into the shop (after trying everything online) and discover it is a hardware issue - can't touch it because you are a software card carrying member. Can't even contact the hardware people directly, against union rules!! Got to call a manager who tells you to sit tight while he gets hold of someone from hardware!
You get the idea!
No thanks to union - worked in enough jobs in my life where all they did was make it hard for me to do my job.
Yes they did serve a purpose at one point but I think the world has opened it's eyes and can handle (for the most part) seeing that all employees are treated fairly.
Darrell
-
"world has opened it's eyes and can handle (for the most part) seeing that all employees are treated fairly."
And one of the reasons employers treat employees fairly is that they know that if they do not the employees will form a union to force them to do the right thing.
Mike
-
Unions served their purpose. Labor laws and access to lawyers have moved the US beyond the need for unions. Today, they only cause higher prices and headaches. I've heard stories of how much union members can get for sweeping the floor. I'm not knocking the guy sweeping the floor but I don't think it's a $25/hr job.
Robert
-
I recently heard an interview with one of the line workers for (Ford or GM - can't remember now) and the worker was complaining about the upcoming layoffs. He tried to make the claim that the layoffs are due to "dumb" U.S. consumers buying Toyotas!!
I thought we were being intelligent shoppers by looking for the best value for our dollar!!
Some of the working unions are starting to sound all too much like the professional sports unions/players!!!
-
I thought we were being intelligent shoppers by looking for the best value for our dollar!!
DSP you are right on the money on this one. I just wonder how much input the guy in the interview has when it comes to designing a new car or improving its quality. American companies not just automobile companies focus too much on quick profits.
Toyota is the most profitable automobile maker in the world. Any individual working the assembly line for Toyota has the responsibility for stopping the line every time he finds a deviation from their quality standards. The line will stay stopped until the CAUSE of the problem is identified and corrected. The company is committed to continuing quality improvement and long-term profitability at the expense of short-term profits. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence American companies maintain that halting production cost to fix problems when they surface is to expensive.
If you get a chance pick up a copy of "The Toyota Way" great reading. For the managers reading this post pick up two copies. Read one and beat your boss over the head with the other until he reads it and takes action on what he reads.
Mike
-
Mike,
I am not sure how much input the line workers actually have. I have a freind who is a line manager for GM that has the job of "random" sampling of vehicles that come down the line. Now, if that is their idea of quality control then maybe they need to revisit the situation!
Darrell
-
"Six years ago. I did see a lawyer. His position was "Do you really want to fight to keep the job? You certainly wouldn't want to work there now after the way you've been treated. Besides, you're making more money now so you can't claim that you've suffered a loss..."
Fighting to keep the job does not mak a lot of sense in your case. My problem is that I would have filed suite because the Company was legeally WRONG. The only way the goverment officals can engage in corrupt activities is if people let them. If someone picks my pocket I think he should not be allowed to pick the pocket of others just because I found a gold mind on the way to the police station.
Mike
-
I work for AFSCME (American Federation State, County, Municipal Employees) in Washington State. My Union has been beneficial for ensuring wages and benefit packages are competitive. I get to provide input on how these plans are restructured -- something I couldn't do in a non-union shop. I also get to provide input on how we define telecommuting policy within our government organization that protects everyone. Overall, my experience has been positive. However, you must speak up and get active if you want your union experience to succeed.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 29 (of 29 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply