Not my friend's company. Just a company that I have worked with in the past.

 

It would be a big deal for them to set up the program. As a general contractor, I've never had to price up an apprenticeship program. However, I've talked to a non-union plumbing contractor in the past who was researching apprenticeship programs for his employees. He told me he would have to send each of his apprentice employees to class for a full day in each work week, and he would have to pay for it - at a cost essentially the same to paying his worker for the full day of work, only he would losing the day's labor while he paid essentially the same cost. That would force the employer to charge proportionally more for his services to cover the cost of paying for employees to sit in a classroom instead of having them doing work on his jobs. And again, those costs fall back on the buyer (MSD, City of Cincinnati).

 

I have no idea what his current training is for new hires. My guess would be that the new hires are responsible for arranging their training.

 

The customers will always ultimately pay for training.

So, the non union shops want the unions to train them to be journeyman and them hopefully come to work for them? The way you describe, how else would one become a journeyman?

 

 

I know that there are several non- union electrical contractors in NKY/OH that have apprenticeship programs, they are members of the IEC, Independent Electrical Contractors. I went through that program myself many moons ago.

 

Believe it or not, there are tradesman who pay to put themselves through trade schools and apprenticeship programs. I have a couple friends who are welders who paid there own way through their welding classes - not their employers. I have a friend who is a master mechanic who has never worked a day with the UAW. I made my way into company management by paying my own way through college...working at a law firm 40 hours a week, and then taking college night classes. I didn't have to rise up through the union ranks to get into a management position - I paid my dues in college instead, just like my friends paid their dues in their vocational programs.

 

If you want to join a union and take advantage of the apprenticeship programs that they have...well great, go right ahead. But why the hell do unions think they deserve preferred status in order to get jobs because their services cost more than the open shops?

 

The customers will always ultimately pay for training.

 

Incorrect. The cost of my "training" was paid by me. I wasn't even employed in the construction industry when I went to college. The cost of my college education has never been put back on the purchasers of my construction services.

Not my friend's company. Just a company that I have worked with in the past.

 

It would be a big deal for them to set up the program. As a general contractor, I've never had to price up an apprenticeship program. However, I've talked to a non-union plumbing contractor in the past who was researching apprenticeship programs for his employees. He told me he would have to send each of his apprentice employees to class for a full day in each work week, and he would have to pay for it - at a cost essentially the same to paying his worker for the full day of work, only he would losing the day's labor while he paid essentially the same cost. That would force the employer to charge proportionally more for his services to cover the cost of paying for employees to sit in a classroom instead of having them doing work on his jobs. And again, those costs fall back on the buyer (MSD, City of Cincinnati).

 

I have no idea what his current training is for new hires. My guess would be that the new hires are responsible for arranging their training.

Bottom line for me is quality and safety ... knowing that the job will be done right. That's why it always makes sense to hire union.

Bottom line for me is quality and safety ... knowing that the job will be done right. That's why it always makes sense to hire union.

 

:lol2:

:lol2:

By the way, once you open the door to the company mentioned in post No. 1, what stops someone, say from Texas, from underbidding your guy? No, I'd much rather keep the dollars at home and ensure quality. That's a win-win. The bottom line ain't always the bottom line.

By the way, once you open the door to the company mentioned in post No. 1, what stops someone, say from Texas, from underbidding your guy? No, I'd much rather keep the dollars at home and ensure quality. That's a win-win. The bottom line ain't always the bottom line.

 

Open the door? Howell has been doing MSD work for 22 years. The door was open for a LONG time. And even with all the potential for this "Texas underbidding" you mentioned, the city's budget woes have gotten bad enough that they are planning on having to lay off police for and fire department. Now there's a bottom line for you. But sure...go ahead and require that the city pays more for union companies. It's in everyone's best interest, right?

A little more bottom line, following the Cincinnati Park Boards advisory meeting on Monday...

 

2014-2015 General Fund Budget Impact

 

2014-2015 Permanent Reductions: - $1,022,186 for 2014 and $981,861 for

2015 in General Fund Reductions

 

Park Closures due to General Fund reductions – These closures are due to the loss

of the entire General Fund seasonal staff of the Park Board of over $303,838.

 

• Mt. Airy Forest (West) – Close McFarlan Woods, and the Dog Park in Mt. Airy west, and close Stone Steps, picnic Areas 22, 23, and the Disc Golf course in Mt. Airy east.

• Buttercup/Parker’s Woods (West) – Close entire park

• Jergens Park (West) – Close entire park

• Glenway Woods (West) – Close entire park

• Seymour/Millcrek (West) - Close entire park

• Upper part Eden Park (Central) – Close Presidents Grove, Spencer Overlook, and Twin Lakes

• Bellevue Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Fairview Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Fecheimer Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Inwood Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Jackson Hill Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Laurel/Linear/Cutter Parks (Central) - Close entire park

• Central Parkway – No plantings or chemical treatments

• Alms Park (East) – Close entire park except when there is a rental.

• Drake Park (East) – Close entire park.

• Close all restrooms in park system.

• Only mow and pick up trash every 14 to 21 days. Currently, mowing is done every 7 to 10 days and trash is picked up every day.

• Eliminate all floral beds throughout park system. All Florists redeployed to care for park system cutting and litter.

• Trash picked up only when grass is cut. This is due to seasonal elimination.

• Washington Park (Over the Rhine) – All funding eliminated $85,000 seasonal staff and $409,166 of all other funding.

• Closure of all water elements in Smale Riverfront Park including Walnut and Main Street Fountains – Elimination of all seasonal staff of $65,535.00 and contractual security and utility reductions of $93,442 ($79,000 – security and $14,442 in utilities).

• Closure of Otto Armleder Spray ground in Yeatman’s Cove. This is due to the elimination of all 2014 General Fund seasonal support from the park system.

• Eliminate the proposed River Flora and River Grill events at the Waterfront parks in 2014. These events were estimated to bring in millions in revenue to our city. In addition, the Park Board will have to return the $300,000 in private sponsorship dollars already received.

• Close Kilgour Fountain in Hyde Park. Turn off the Annwood Grotto in East Walnut Hills Diggs Plaza in Burnet Woods, Bettman Fountain in Eden Park, and Piatt Fountains. Drain Rapid Run Park lake, Inwood Park lake (in Mt. Auburn), and Twin Lakes in Eden Park.

• These reductions will create safety issues within the park system that don’t exist today. When greenspaces are not adequately funded and maintained it invites inappropriate activities.

• The ripple effect of these reductions impairs the Park Board and the Parks Foundation’s ability to generate revenues, sponsorships, capital support, stimulate economic development, and the support of the city’s volunteer base, which in 2012, returned .83 cents on every taxpayer dollar invested in the park system.

• The Park Board will lose over $50,000 in rental fees each year due to the park closures.

A little more bottom line, following the Cincinnati Park Boards advisory meeting on Monday...

 

2014-2015 General Fund Budget Impact

 

2014-2015 Permanent Reductions: - $1,022,186 for 2014 and $981,861 for

2015 in General Fund Reductions

 

Park Closures due to General Fund reductions – These closures are due to the loss

of the entire General Fund seasonal staff of the Park Board of over $303,838.

 

• Mt. Airy Forest (West) – Close McFarlan Woods, and the Dog Park in Mt. Airy west, and close Stone Steps, picnic Areas 22, 23, and the Disc Golf course in Mt. Airy east.

• Buttercup/Parker’s Woods (West) – Close entire park

• Jergens Park (West) – Close entire park

• Glenway Woods (West) – Close entire park

• Seymour/Millcrek (West) - Close entire park

• Upper part Eden Park (Central) – Close Presidents Grove, Spencer Overlook, and Twin Lakes

• Bellevue Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Fairview Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Fecheimer Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Inwood Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Jackson Hill Park (Central) - Close entire park

• Laurel/Linear/Cutter Parks (Central) - Close entire park

• Central Parkway – No plantings or chemical treatments

• Alms Park (East) – Close entire park except when there is a rental.

• Drake Park (East) – Close entire park.

• Close all restrooms in park system.

• Only mow and pick up trash every 14 to 21 days. Currently, mowing is done every 7 to 10 days and trash is picked up every day.

• Eliminate all floral beds throughout park system. All Florists redeployed to care for park system cutting and litter.

• Trash picked up only when grass is cut. This is due to seasonal elimination.

• Washington Park (Over the Rhine) – All funding eliminated $85,000 seasonal staff and $409,166 of all other funding.

• Closure of all water elements in Smale Riverfront Park including Walnut and Main Street Fountains – Elimination of all seasonal staff of $65,535.00 and contractual security and utility reductions of $93,442 ($79,000 – security and $14,442 in utilities).

• Closure of Otto Armleder Spray ground in Yeatman’s Cove. This is due to the elimination of all 2014 General Fund seasonal support from the park system.

• Eliminate the proposed River Flora and River Grill events at the Waterfront parks in 2014. These events were estimated to bring in millions in revenue to our city. In addition, the Park Board will have to return the $300,000 in private sponsorship dollars already received.

• Close Kilgour Fountain in Hyde Park. Turn off the Annwood Grotto in East Walnut Hills Diggs Plaza in Burnet Woods, Bettman Fountain in Eden Park, and Piatt Fountains. Drain Rapid Run Park lake, Inwood Park lake (in Mt. Auburn), and Twin Lakes in Eden Park.

• These reductions will create safety issues within the park system that don’t exist today. When greenspaces are not adequately funded and maintained it invites inappropriate activities.

• The ripple effect of these reductions impairs the Park Board and the Parks Foundation’s ability to generate revenues, sponsorships, capital support, stimulate economic development, and the support of the city’s volunteer base, which in 2012, returned .83 cents on every taxpayer dollar invested in the park system.

• The Park Board will lose over $50,000 in rental fees each year due to the park closures.

 

 

 

Don't mourn, organize!

Open the door? Howell has been doing MSD work for 22 years. The door was open for a LONG time. And even with all the potential for this "Texas underbidding" you mentioned, the city's budget woes have gotten bad enough that they are planning on having to lay off police for and fire department. Now there's a bottom line for you. But sure...go ahead and require that the city pays more for union companies. It's in everyone's best interest, right?

So if the company in post No. 1 starts an apprenticeship program, they would be allowed to bid on these big municipal contracts? Is that all that stands in the way?

So if the company in post No. 1 starts an apprenticeship program, they would be allowed to bid on these big municipal contracts? Is that all that stands in the way?

 

Yes. But saying "is that all" is a bit of an understatement. Participating in that program will be very costly to the company from an overhead standpoint. It will force them to raise their prices, thereby causing them to be MUCH less competitive on any work that does not have union requirements or wage requirements.

So if the company in post No. 1 starts an apprenticeship program, they would be allowed to bid on these big municipal contracts? Is that all that stands in the way?

 

Serious question why should the government be creating an advantage for Union companies? I have no problem if a Union company wins the contract with the best offer. But why should the government create an obvious disadvantage for non-union companies? How is that good for anyone but the Union itself?

The city is bankrupt , they are going to have to fire people. So instead of thinking of ways to save money they now have eliminated bidders to bring down the cost of city contracts to save the city money. Honestly how can you not see the inept leadership?

Serious question why should the government be creating an advantage for Union companies? I have no problem if a Union company wins the contract with the best offer. But why should the government create an obvious disadvantage for non-union companies? How is that good for anyone but the Union itself?

If unions are supporting an apprentice system and non-unions aren't, then the vote looks like it's simply a leveling of the playing field.

 

I would also point out that city governments in NKY routinely throw out the lowest bid and instead go with a slightly higher bid based on that company's performance in years past, reputation for quality, etc.

Edited May 14, 201313 yr by Twotoplace

If unions are supporting an apprentice system, and non-unions aren't, then the vote looks like it's simply a leveling of the playing field.

 

Leveling the playing field...by forcing the public to spend more money so unions don't have to struggle to compete against open shops. Great plan for a city that's broke as a joke.

Yes. But saying "is that all" is a bit of an understatement. Participating in that program will be very costly to the company from an overhead standpoint. It will force them to raise their prices, thereby causing them to be MUCH less competitive on any work that does not have union requirements or wage requirements.

I'm not sure the apprenticeship program is all that expensive. I did a little googling and discovered that in the state of Washington, 144 hours of study is required for apprentices in one of the building trades (forgot which one), much of it online. 144 hours didn't strike me as all that much.