Re: Unionizing?

Subject: Re: Unionizing?
From: Kevin McLauchlan <kmclauchlan -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:31:26 -0500


On Wednesday 04 December 2002 14:47, Bruce Byfield
wrote:
> KMcLauchlan -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com wrote:
> > Until BOTH companies can set up offshore, and
> > close out the costly factories... or, at
> > least outsource to sub-contractors who have
> > lower costs to pass along. That choice, of
> > course, depends on whether the union has
> > gotten a contract clause that forbids
> > outsourcing.
>
> Going off-shore happens whether you have a
> union or not.
>
> But it sounds to me as though you're conceding
> that unions might have a benefit in keeping
> your job for you.

Keep in mind that I have no problem with unions,
on their own. They can amass power only to
the extent of what they can negotiate each time
a contract runs out.

Where I have a problem is when they have lobbied
government successfully and gotten
laws/regulations in place that entrench their
power, such as standing rules that the terms of a
contract live on after the expiration of the
contract.

Negotiate all you want, from the strength of your
actual value to the other party. Don't negotiate
on the strength of people with guns.

Business/market conditions may have changed,
and the contract may have expired, but the
company is still bound to it in perpetuity, and
the union can use it as the starting point for
the next negotiation. In many jurisdictions, the
old contract cannot be eroded unless the union
agrees to it. If the company had been allowed
by labor law to start negotiations with a clean
slate, they might have been able to avoid
shutting down and moving offshore. Believe it
or not, many senior managers and executives
have a considerable stake in their homes and
towns and clubs and charitable works, etc., and
go to great lengths to avoid shipping
the business overseas.

Basically the same effects as rent controls.

All that to say that a union may very well give
you some job security... for a while... but only
on the backs of others *locally* who might have
been willing -- even eager -- to do the same job
for less.

/kevin

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Check out SnagIt - The Screen Capture Standard!
Download a free 30-day trial from http://www.techsmith.com/rdr/txt/twr
Find out what all the other tech writers, including Dan, already know!

Order RoboHelp X3 in December and receive $100 mail in rebate, FREE WebHelp
Merge Module and the new RoboPDF - add powerful PDF output functionality
to RoboHelp X3. Order online today at http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.



References:
RE: Unionizing?: From: KMcLauchlan
Re: Unionizing?: From: Bruce Byfield

Previous by Author: Taming Word's autonumbering?
Next by Author: RE: A sobering encounter (So now what?)
Previous by Thread: Re: Unionizing?
Next by Thread: RE: Unionizing?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads