|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5862503 - 07/15/06 06:05 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
As a general question, what do you think it's like working at GM now, knowing that the death knell due to unions is right around the corner? The hell with right around the corner, it has been rung. Endless concessions and pension crapouts. Meanwhile, all the union bigs have collected their money.
--------------------
|
Vvellum
Stranger
Registered: 05/24/04
Posts: 10,920
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5862564 - 07/15/06 06:19 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mandatory promotion by seniority is common, is it not?
I would not say common. I was promoted when I was in a union and there were others that had been around longer than I was.
Quote:
I also feel that the inherent divisiveness between management and employees is unnecessary and counter-productive for all involved.
a union acts as a bridge between both parties. a division of labor exists without unions.
Quote:
In my eyes, the only need for a labor union is when labor laws are being violated.
And what should should employees do if labor laws are not being adhered to if there is no union?
Quote:
Customers aren't going to want to shop in a store that has a negative atmosphere resulting from its employees.
explain the existence of sweatshops, then.
Quote:
I've personally witnessed supervisors receive disciplinary action as result of associates utilizing the communication resources that are granted to us as an absolute right when the work environment becomes improper. It works, which is exactly why there isn't a union in Wal*Mart stores.
if the company can take care of itself, then the union would not need to step in.
Quote:
Unions certainly seem to think that Wal*Mart should be unionized, although apparently Wal*Mart associates do not.
source?
Quote:
I'd love to be the head of a union, man... tons of money for being a business that leeches off of another business.
not all unions are leeches. many provide benefit where there is no avenue for such benefits.
Quote:
Perhaps in certain situations, they can provide a service to employees that is otherwise not available to the employees, but, with Wal*Mart, that service is the absolute, undeniable right of each associate, to speak for themself, and to follow up with it if not satisifed as far as they wish, without retaliation.
and how strong of a voice does a sole individual has? I doubt your voice is as strong as you make it to be.
|
Vvellum
Stranger
Registered: 05/24/04
Posts: 10,920
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: Vvellum]
#5862575 - 07/15/06 06:22 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
the problem with unions is corruption, not the existence of unions and how they operate. dont throw the baby out with the bathwater.
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5862580 - 07/15/06 06:24 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Unions certainly seem to think that Wal*Mart should be unionized, although apparently Wal*Mart associates do not.
I have a friend who worked at Wal-Mart for years, and despite being the most right-wing friend I know, he was strongly in favor of Wal-Mart employees unionizing. I've never met a guy who hated Wal-Mart more than him.
--------------------
|
GabbaDj
BTH
Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,681
Loc: By The Lake
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5863013 - 07/15/06 09:01 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
The ONLY reason Unions are pushing sooo hard to unionize Wall-Mart is because they are the nations largest employer.
Unions say that they want to unionize all of Wall-Marts employees to give them all the benefits that a union can bring, but thats total bull shit.
Unions make EVERY dollar they have from its members. Unions dont buy or sell anything and they arent a business of any kind yet they are worth tens of billions of dollars.
Unionizing Wall-Mart would make the unions, More specifically my union the United Food and Commercial Food Workers Union the richest, largest and most powerful non profit activist group in the world.
To answer some questions..
Yes, unions do give employees more power by setting rules and regulations that the company MUST follow, if they dont laws are in place to punish these businesses. Laws that go beyond federal law that non union businesses dont have to answer too.
They DO make working conditions better and safer by defining job descriptions. People ONLY have to do whats described in their job description and can refuse any other work without fear of getting terminated. Sooo lets say that my boss came up to me and told me to clean the bathrooms. I could laugh in his face and tell him to go fuck himself and their isnt a damn thing he could do about it. This keeps the work place safe because only the right people are told to do the right job.
In general Unions would get people more money and guarantee weekly hours based on their job and most unions take over the roll of overseeing medical benefits which is good for the business but still the business will have to cough up the cash to pay the insurer.
The whole seniority thing is just bull shit, so is the idea that employees are REQUIRED to join the union and dues are taken straight out of their checks. I pay $14.95 a week or about $60 a month. I dont even have cable yet still I pay my union $720 a year. Still Id rather have cable
The one great thing about unions though is that they are the only politically active group who works to protect workers rights. If not for unions laws would be passed left and right that are unfair to employees and unions play a LARGE part in making sure these laws never get passed.
-------------------- GabbaDj FAMM.ORG
|
xDuckYouSuckerx
xBannedx
Registered: 05/25/06
Posts: 1,410
Last seen: 17 years, 7 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: Silversoul]
#5863449 - 07/15/06 10:54 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Silversoul said:
Quote:
Unions certainly seem to think that Wal*Mart should be unionized, although apparently Wal*Mart associates do not.
I have a friend who worked at Wal-Mart for years, and despite being the most right-wing friend I know, he was strongly in favor of Wal-Mart employees unionizing. I've never met a guy who hated Wal-Mart more than him.
Any guy who works for Wal-Mart as an associate for "years" and hates Wal-Mart more than anyone obviously is a winner at the game called life. Why didn't he quit? Was it the best possible solution for him?
-------------------- Unions are the bastions of the mediocre. - luvdemshrooms
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: xDuckYouSuckerx]
#5863457 - 07/15/06 10:56 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
He did quit. He now works in an auto parts store. And he refuses to shop at Wal-Mart anymore.
--------------------
|
xDuckYouSuckerx
xBannedx
Registered: 05/25/06
Posts: 1,410
Last seen: 17 years, 7 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: Silversoul]
#5863475 - 07/15/06 10:58 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
You've answered none of my comments. How long did he work as a entry-level position for a place that he "hated"? I mean, how seriously should we take this guys story and how much creedence should we give to it if he's been working at the most dead-end job in the world for "years", hating it the whole time?
So, when he was at Wal-Mart, was it the bets possible opportunity for him?
-------------------- Unions are the bastions of the mediocre. - luvdemshrooms
|
Vvellum
Stranger
Registered: 05/24/04
Posts: 10,920
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: xDuckYouSuckerx]
#5863764 - 07/16/06 12:36 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
do you really think it is so unusual for people to work at dead-end jobs and to hate their jobs? sometimes people have to work crap jobs to make ends meet - it's quite common, actually.
|
Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5864151 - 07/16/06 02:50 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Oh, I'm sorry, I was under the impression that you were actually going to engage in discussion and provide examples of exactly how labor unions empower workers. Perhaps if you were to actually do so, we could gain some ground in understanding this, but if you don't have anything to bring to the table beyond empty assertions, then I guess we'll have to leave it at that.
If you're going to say something as nonsensical as "Unions don't give employees more power" there's really no reply to that. You're obviously wrong. Walmart certainly know what power unions give to workers which is why they don't want them.
Well, if you work at Wal*Mart, you utilize the Open Door policy to address concerns with those above you
Get real. What point is there to an "open-door" policy if you want something the employers don't want you to have? What do you do then?
If you are not satisfied with the working conditions, then you don't work there. Oppurtunity is great.
Far better to simply have a union and the power to improve working conditions than having to go from slave labour conditions to slave labour conditions tho. People learned that a hundred years ago.
Let me ask you these, what the fuck do you do with a union? Do you have an answer?
I've told you once. Better working conditions, better pay.
A labor union simply cannot guarantee better working conditions, or increased wages.
Not guarantee no, but they give you a damn better chance than if you were on your own.
Corporate directors that are interested in profits aren't going to destroy the environment that supports the customers that provide those profits
Why not if that is where the greatest profits lay? You've already said "That's business". If Wal-mart can make more profits than anyone else by destroying the environment they will destroy the environment and drive the others out of business. That's business.
"Don't blame me for injecting cows with hormones, Wal*Mart made me do it!".
You need to talk to a farmer about this. You'll learn a lot.
I've been employed with Wal*Mart for two years now, with no real previous work history, and I have been an hourly supervisor for months now, managing two departments of the store.
Ah, i get it now. You're a manager at walmart. That explains everything
anything that has a detrimental effect on the company itself has a detrimental effect on the employees themselves.
Trouble is the managers deciding wage levels and working conditions for themselves will use different criteria and say "We have to pay each other fortunes otherwise it will be detrimental to the company". It's one rule for the directors and another for the workers. That's why unions are so vital.
|
Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5864192 - 07/16/06 03:08 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Hey, how do you explain this? Wal-mart support unions as long as you live in China!
Wal-Mart has finally found a union it can live with.
Up to now America's largest employer has opposed every effort of its employees to form a union. Wal-Mart doesn't recognize unions; it doesn't even recognize "employees." The proper Wal-Mart name for its workers is "associates," a term that connotes higher status and collegiality and that actually means lower pay and workplace autocracy. For the privilege of associating themselves with Wal-Mart, its employees are paid so little that many can't afford the health insurance the company generously allows them to buy. One study of health care in Las Vegas revealed that a plurality of that city's employed Medicaid recipients worked at Wal-Mart.
But that was the old Wal-Mart. Last week Wal-Mart announced that if its associates wanted a union to represent them, that would be hunky-dory -- as long as the union was affiliated with the All-China Federation of Trade Unions, a body dominated by the Chinese Communist Party. The official statement was simple and seemingly unambiguous: "Should associates request formation of a union, Wal-Mart China would respect their wishes."
Wal-Mart America has made no such declaration, of course. Why it deems its 20,000 Chinese associates who work in its 40 Chinese stores worthy of representation while its million U.S. employees can't be trusted with the right to represent themselves is a good question.
We can, I think, dismiss suspicions of anti-anyone-but-Chinese racism as such. The answer, then, must lie in Wal-Mart's preference for old-line communist-dominated unions in authoritarian communist states over any other kinds of unions anywhere else. America's unions, which Wal-Mart despises, have a long history of anticommunism, and today's AFL-CIO is the staunchest defender on the American political scene of democratic rights in communist nations such as China. For that matter, unions affiliated with reformed or post-communist parties outside of the few remaining communist states have gotten nowhere with Wal-Mart either. Only in China, with its inimitable blend of Dickensian capitalism and authoritarian communism, has Wal-Mart found a union to its liking.
And small wonder. Unions affiliated with the All-China Federation seldom push for wage increases or safer machinery. Indeed, the locals are often headed by someone from company management.
The leaders of genuine workers' movements in China don't end up running the All-China Federation. They're to be found in prison, in exile or in hiding.
Allowing a democratic union movement to form would threaten both Dickensian capitalism and authoritarian communism, and diminish some of China's competitive advantage over other low-wage but not authoritarian nations in Southeast Asia, Central America and elsewhere. Such a development would be anathema to both the Politburo and Wal-Mart's board of directors. It would introduce the concept of free choice and the prospects of higher living standards not just to Wal-Mart's 20,000 Chinese store employees but to the far larger number of Chinese workers laboring in poverty-wage servitude to stitch clothing for the contractors, subcontractors and sub-subcontractors whose products fill Wal-Mart's shelves.
Bentonville regards the prospect of employee free association and organization within its stores with the same fear and loathing that Beijing feels at the prospect of free elections in China. Anti-union American employers can't imprison pro-union workers, but exile is a real possibility. Troublemakers are free to go. According to Cornell labor relations professor Kate Bronfenbrenner, at least 5 percent of workers involved in unionization campaigns are fired, which is both quite illegal and quite routine: Companies would rather pay the nominal fines than pay their workers higher wages and lose the absolute control they hold over the work lives of their employees.
The noblest of the Bush administration's goals, surely, is that of spreading democracy. If it's serious about that task, though, there are places closer to home than the Middle East that could use a little democracy-spreading, and the American workplace is high on that list. Strengthening labor law would make it harder for employers such as Wal-Mart to thwart their workers' desire for an organized voice on the job. When America's largest employer feels more affinity for the political legacy of Mao Zedong than for that of Franklin D. Roosevelt, it's time to start democratizing our own back yard.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23725-2004Nov30.html
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: Vvellum]
#5864369 - 07/16/06 04:55 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
bi0 said: And what should should employees do if labor laws are not being adhered to if there is no union?
Well, if they have no means by which to address and resolve these issues within the company themselves, then, by all means, vote in a union. It might work out to the workers' advantage. Perhaps they will receive some concessions. Perhaps they will lose them later on. Perhaps the company will still be able to effectively perform in a manner that will ensure the company's continued success.
The only thing that is really guaranteed is that the union will benefit regardless. Lots and lots of money.
Quote:
explain the existence of sweatshops, then.
Talk to the suppliers about that one.
Quote:
if the company can take care of itself, then the union would not need to step in.
Exactly, a union will serve as a detriment for the company to take care of itself, because there will be an organization instilled that is not the company, influencing and obstructing the decisions it makes.
Quote:
source?
It takes, what, 30% of the employees of a particular establishment to vote in a union? A store can't squash the formation of a union - attempting to do automatically results in the formation of a union, as it is a violation of labor laws. The company can only prevent circumstances that would bring the possibillity of a formation of a union - it obviously does so, or we would have stores forming unions, eh?
So, my source is reality.
Quote:
not all unions are leeches. many provide benefit where there is no avenue for such benefits.
Possibly. There certainly is not any clear advantage to a union.
Quote:
and how strong of a voice does a sole individual has? I doubt your voice is as strong as you make it to be.
It depends on what exactly the sole individual is voicing, for one thing. If the voice clearly demonstrates that there is an issue that needs to be resolved, and that issue is reflective of reality, then it will be. Secondly, more than one individual can work together to address concerns. It happens, I've witnessed it happen, and it has worked. Wal*Mart clearly is not stupid, and is not going to allow circumstances that could result in a union to ferment, as it has its interests as a company - a union will obstruct their ability to perform. Thus, the associates are given avenues through which to address concerns.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: zappaisgod]
#5864378 - 07/16/06 05:02 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: As a general question, what do you think it's like working at GM now, knowing that the death knell due to unions is right around the corner? The hell with right around the corner, it has been rung. Endless concessions and pension crapouts. Meanwhile, all the union bigs have collected their money.
Ding ding ding.
Look at the airline industry. Southwest seems to be the only airline that meets some amount of success, from my limited understanding, and it is no coincidence that they are the less unionized airline corporation. This is an interesting read on Southwest web page.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: Alex213]
#5864419 - 07/16/06 05:31 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alex213 said: If you're going to say something as nonsensical as "Unions don't give employees more power" there's really no reply to that. You're obviously wrong.
Wow, you've told me that I'm obviously wrong twice now, labeled my response as being nonsensical, but you have still not actually demonstrated why it is wrong, or answered the question.
Now, I repeat, unions do not necessarily give employees more power. Please enlighten me as to why exactly I am so obviously wrong in making that statement. I don't think I'll hold my breath...
Quote:
Walmart certainly know what power unions give to workers which is why they don't want them.
Or, Wal*Mart certainly knows the detrimental effects having its workforce unionized will have on its ability to perform as a successful, growing company. As every company wishes to succeed, it does not want to create situations in which its workforce could potentially become unionized.
Well, holy shit, there was an ounce of sense in that. Time to accuse me of obviously being wrong without actually contributing anything to the discussion that would validate one's point.
Quote:
Get real. What point is there to an "open-door" policy if you want something the employers don't want you to have? What do you do then?
You live with it or go find another job?
No, wait, better yet, you go form a union. Then you can do less and make demands for more. If there are serious problems, such as hostile working conditions or a severe lack of appropriate wages, then by all means, but this clearly isn't the situation.
Quote:
Far better to simply have a union and the power to improve working conditions than having to go from slave labour conditions to slave labour conditions tho. People learned that a hundred years ago.
Firstly, having a union does not equate into having the power to improve working conditions. It simply means that one has established a means by which one can negotiate to improve working conditions. The company can still say "fuck you". Then you can strike without pay. Whoo hoo!
Quote:
I've told you once. Better working conditions, better pay.
Okay, so your whole point is that a union equals better working conditions and better pay. You get a union, you get better working conditions and you get more pay. That is what you do with a union. Great. Wow. That is truly reflective of the actuality of the situation.
Quote:
Why not if that is where the greatest profits lay? You've already said "That's business". If Wal-mart can make more profits than anyone else by destroying the environment they will destroy the environment and drive the others out of business. That's business.
Well, quite apparently, that isn't Wal*Mart's business, then. Oh, wait, I forgot about the toxic waste that we dump in the corn field behind the store...
Quote:
You need to talk to a farmer about this. You'll learn a lot.
You know this from talking to a farmer about this, then? When did you talk to a farmer, and what did he tell you? Any way you can send me his phone number, so I can talk to the same farmer you surely talked to, so I can learn what you have learned?
Quote:
Ah, i get it now. You're a manager at walmart. That explains everything
Of course it explains everything. It means that I experience the working conditions at Wal*Mart, and it means that I have been trained on our stance as it pertains to unions and how we prevent situations that could result in a vote on a union. We cannot engage in any action that would violate labor laws. We can't bust unions. We can simply respect the individual, and it works.
Quote:
Trouble is the managers deciding wage levels and working conditions for themselves will use different criteria and say "We have to pay each other fortunes otherwise it will be detrimental to the company". It's one rule for the directors and another for the workers. That's why unions are so vital.
Yes, it is vital for employees to pay fortunes to more management. One management team is enough.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 4 months, 30 days
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5864512 - 07/16/06 07:03 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Far better to simply have a union and the power to improve working conditions than having to go from slave labour conditions to slave labour conditions tho. People learned that a hundred years ago.
There are labor laws and minimum wage laws that make sure no one does slave labor. Also, employment in the United States is at-will and one can quit whenever they like if the pay or labor environment is not to their likings.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: Redstorm]
#5864628 - 07/16/06 08:26 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Exactly. Being employed is a mutual agreement in which one agrees to perform services and fufill expectations in exchange for payment.
Websites like wakeupwalmart.com proclaim that Wal*Mart's wages are not high enough. Well, if you have a family of three and are working a part-time cashier position as a sole means of income, then that's your fucking problem, eh? If you are unskilled and working an entry level position job in retail, and your income from that job is the only means of support for the entire family, then perhaps you shouldn't have three fucking children?
I'd suggest not spreading your legs and later doing so again to birth a few children when you are not in a position to amply support those children. Develop some skills that one can apply in better paying jobs first, maintain a relationship with another human being that can produce more income, or just don't have children... in other words, develop some common fucking sense.
There are those who will not take responsibility for themself, and will want others to give them everything for nothing. Consider yourself lucky that someone has given you an oppurtunity in the first place.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Catalysis
EtherealEngineer
Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 15 years, 8 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5864703 - 07/16/06 09:01 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Well, if you have a family of three and are working a part-time cashier position as a sole means of income, then that's your fucking problem, eh?
Thats a good point. I make plenty of money to live comfortably by myself but if I had kids right now I would be poor. I don't think a "living wage" should necessarily take into account yourself plus three other people who don't work at all.
Do you guys really think walmart should be paying stock boys enough money to support an entire family? Do you think that work is worth that much money?
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: Catalysis]
#5864713 - 07/16/06 09:08 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I think I am going to go get a job as a dishwasher at a local inn, give birth to three children, and raise hell about needing a union because they don't pay me enough.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
GabbaDj
BTH
Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,681
Loc: By The Lake
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: fireworks_god]
#5864872 - 07/16/06 10:02 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Wow, you've told me that I'm obviously wrong twice now, labeled my response as being nonsensical, but you have still not actually demonstrated why it is wrong, or answered the question.
Now, I repeat, unions do not necessarily give employees more power. Please enlighten me as to why exactly I am so obviously wrong in making that statement. I don't think I'll hold my breath...
I answered your questions. Read my reply above..
Unions DO get better conditions for employees in all sorts of areas. You should see my union contract, it requires everything from a well stocked break room to clean uniforms and proper supplies for doing the jobs of the store.
Once a month an outside knife sharpening service is required to come in and sharpen all the stores knives, if we ever run out of aprons I can refuse to work without fear of punishment until they provide me with one, same goes for protective clothing and even cotton gloves for those of us who work in cold conditions. ALL REQUIRED.
All union contracts clearly defines the companies duties and responsibilities to the employee as well as the employees responsibilities to the company. The union invests allot of time in letting employees know these rights and lots of effort is made to force the stores to comply.
When my store changed its laundry service and went from weekly to biweekly, a call was made and a union rep was out the next day to tell the store manager that he cant do that, its against the contract and the following week we had the old service back. Its our right to have these things and its the stores responsibility to provide them and its the union that enforces these things for us.
One of the best things built into the average union contract is seniority percentage requirements, and guaranteed working hours. For every new employee earning a starting wage their must be one full time experienced employee making maximum wage and in my case I am guaranteed 8 hours a day AND 40 hours a week. If I get called in on my day off they MUST offer my 8 hours that day at time and a half AND any 6th day of work will also be Time and a half and the seventh day will be triple time guaranteed. Just an incentive to keep employers from overworking employees or scheduling people for random and shitty work shifts.
Plus a union will teach ALL the employees about all these rights and all the benefits they have coming to them as well as having a grievance process that takes care of any problems that do come up quickly and efficiently.
Do any non union jobs have that sort of checks and balances system?
Time is money and Wall-Mart dont want unions in their stores because Unions will cost the company money.. LOTS and LOTS of money. They will have to spend tens of thousands of hours dealing with the unions and hire new representatives, lawyers, negotiators and experts just to deal with a union. Plus they will be held accountable for everything, all sorts of costs will go up through the roof in every area of operation. Thts just how it is and thats why they dont want the nighmare of having to deal with it..
But as Ive said before, my union is the one making the big push to unionize wall-mart and if they ever succeed they will then be the biggest, baddest, richest mother fuckers on the planet and nothing could stop them then.
-------------------- GabbaDj FAMM.ORG
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
|
Re: Target threatens to leave if wage rule OK'd [Re: GabbaDj]
#5864923 - 07/16/06 10:19 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
GabbaDj said: I answered your questions. Read my reply above..
I was replying to Alex. You must be paranoid.
Quote:
Time is money and Wall-Mart dont want unions in their stores because Unions will cost the company money.. LOTS and LOTS of money. They will have to spend tens of thousands of hours dealing with the unions and hire new representatives, lawyers, negotiators and experts just to deal with a union. Plus they will be held accountable for everything, all sorts of costs will go up through the roof in every area of operation. Thts just how it is and thats why they dont want the nighmare of having to deal with it..
Exactly, it would seriously hurt the company's performance.
The examples you have given of how a union benefits the workers are great - it is refreshing to have someone provide an understanding of what a union actually is and does, instead of making assertions with no substantiation. In my experience, Wal*Mart has no problems with ensuring a proper work environment, which is probably why stores aren't unionized.
Peace.
-------------------- If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
|