Except the government has no money its the people's money.

 

We the people allow them to do that and our society allows them to do that. None of us should ever expect the government to do what WE feel is right with 'our' money. The question is how do we change that and prevent that from happening in the future? I don't see how we can based on how our society operates. Our society encourages those with boatloads of money to use that money to get more money as quickly and as easily as possible. Using the government to get that money is how our society operates.

There are some people who are in high roles in management that are so anti-union that they look to screw the union every chance they get as well.

So true. Union busting is a contact sport in some parts of the country.

Yeah , even if it cost the company 25 % or more than the non union company it desires to do business with. Or in Cincy's case , a 1/4 million bucks that could save the layoff of union police and fireman. I'm NOT totally anti union . My bro is a retired boilermaker . I know TONS of good ole boy union guys who live in eastern ky . Good guys . No doubt about it . But there are times where they only look out for their good and screw anyone that dares question it or get in their way .

Who else is going to ,as you say " look out for their good " or maybe their family's good ( welfare ) if "they" don't . The evil government ?

Or you are a little upset that they are making it harder for you to milk money out of government projects like the Fay Apartment renovations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tongue firmly in cheek.........

 

:lol2: If only you knew how much money was SAVED on that project because of the accelerated schedule the job progressed with...or the amount of cost savings that my company put into researching alternate means, methods, and materials. That project was years in planning just to figure out how to cut millions out of the budget.

 

Your statement shows how incredibly clueless you are to what you are stating, and KyTmcNcc's "like" on your post goes to show how readily and blindly so many union folks will follow people who clearly don't have their facts straight.

Edited May 15, 201313 yr by Colonels_Wear_Blue
spelling

Who else is going to ,as you say " look out for their good " or maybe their family's good ( welfare ) if "they" don't . The evil government ?

I personally look out for my own personal good . Noble thought I guess.

:lol2: If only you knew how much money was SAVED on that project because of the schedule the job followed...or the amount of cost savings that my company put into researching alternate means, methods, and materials. That project was years in planning just to figure out how to cut millions out of the budget. Your statement shows how incredibly clueless you are to wehat you are stating, and KyTmcNcc's "like" on your post goes to show how readily and blindly so many union folks will follow people who clearly don't have their facts straight.

 

I was joking about the project, that is why I put what I did at the bottom of my post. If you fail to see my intent that is your problem since it was pretty clear.

 

Also, you can have the Faye Apartments I have had to go there one to many times on calls in the middle of the night. Any idea on costs from thefts on that job?

I was joking about the project, that is why I put what I did at the bottom of my post. If you fail to see my intent that is your problem since it was pretty clear.

 

Also, you can have the Faye Apartments I have had to go there one to many times on calls in the middle of the night. Any idea on costs from thefts on that job?

 

You can say "tongue and cheek" all you want...but making statements about trying to milk money out of a project are pretty obviously pointed, regardless of caveats and disclaimers.

 

As for cost of thefts on that job, they were fairly minimal, all things considered. We took all security measures we could to prevent them, including security cameras and alarms, as well as locking up literally EVERYTHING that couldn't be bolted down in ConEx boxes at the end of each day. That job spent more time in planning and logistics than it did in actual construction. In the end, all things considered, it ran like a top.

We the people allow them to do that and our society allows them to do that. None of us should ever expect the government to do what WE feel is right with 'our' money. The question is how do we change that and prevent that from happening in the future? I don't see how we can based on how our society operates. Our society encourages those with boatloads of money to use that money to get more money as quickly and as easily as possible. Using the government to get that money is how our society operates.

 

No disrespect meant, but I don't know what you are saying here. Are you saying because government can be corrupt we should never get upset over corrupt actions we see? Obviously government has always been used as a tool for all different segements of the population to get money. It does not mean I won't call a group of corrupt city council men and women out on a bad policy. This bill does nothing to better the city itself all it does it stack the war chest of unions who will then in turn donate more money to the democrats.

 

What you define is Crony capitalism and that is a huge problem in this country with big business and Unions and we should not accept it.

No disrespect meant, but I don't know what you are saying here. Are you saying because government can be corrupt we should never get upset over corrupt actions we see? Obviously government has always been used as a tool for all different segements of the population to get money. It does not mean I won't call a group of corrupt city council men and women out on a bad policy. This bill does nothing to better the city itself all it does it stack the war chest of unions who will then in turn donate more money to the democrats.

 

What you define is Crony capitalism and that is a huge problem in this country with big business and Unions and we should not accept it.

 

 

You're absolutely right. We shouldn't accept it all. Nothing burns me more than corrupt unions who put their union above the corporation. Even being associated with that burns me to the core as that is not what I strive to represent in my current role as a president of my local. I work everyday to erase the stigma with management and my fellow union members that we are only out for ourselves and put our union before the company. That is not a successful mindset. The health of the corporation is dependent upon all parts working equally on the same goal as one team. Changing the mindset from hardcore union to how we need to be to succeed is extremely challenging as it isn't 1969 anymore. We have to operate in the middle and be smart or we could end up like Hostess and the union will be to blame. That's not going to happen on my watch. My challenge is changing the mindset that the company owes us something to what can we do to stay here another 60 years so our kids can retire from here. And if that means that my international union leaders hate our guts then so be it. I will not allow anyone who isn't actively working beside me define how we function here. I don't care if it's the international president. That's what I am doing to fight crony capitalism. Anyone care to lend a hand?

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 can't believe that anyone could be so obtuse as to argue against a well run apprenticeship program. The one that I attended has been around since at least 1927. These programs benefit both the worker and the Contractors that ultimately hire that properly trained worker . The Idea of an apprenticeship has been around for over 300 years or at least since colonial times .

Edited May 15, 201313 yr by KyTmcNcc

I personally look out for my own personal good . Noble thought I guess.

So you Are one of the They I was referring to .

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.

When I went through my 5 year apprenticeship to become a JBT Pipefitter my class went to school at least 2 nights a week and some on Saturday morning. First at Courter Tech High School and then at our own school after we built it , and as far as I know it is still run this way . This was after working an 8 hr. day and we lost any opportunity to get any overtime that we could have earned by working because we had to be at school those nights . Also woe be unto you if you missed school without a legitimate excuse . It was as if we were back in high school . None of us were paid for one minute that we spent in class . Our teachers were Journeymen that took a college course on the curriculum that they were to be teaching . This they took over the summer at Purdue University .

I can't believe that anyone could be so obtuse as to argue against a well run apprenticeship program. The one that I attended has been around since at least 1927. These programs benefit both the worker and the Contractors that ultimately hire that properly trained worker . The Idea of an apprenticeship has been around for over 300 years or at least since colonial times .

 

No one is against them. We are against the government deciding that having such a program should be a factor in winning a bid. All that should matter is the quality of the work and cost.

No one is against them. We are against the government deciding that having such a program should be a factor in winning a bid. All that should matter is the quality of the work and cost.

Apprenticeship Program = better training = quality work = lower costs .

I can't believe that anyone could be so obtuse as to argue against a well run apprenticeship program. The one that I attended has been around since at least 1927. These programs benefit both the worker and the Contractors that ultimately hire that properly trained worker . The Idea of an apprenticeship has been around for over 300 years or at least since colonial times .

 

You seem to be mistaken about my argument. I'm not arguing at all against apprenticeship programs. You're correct - to deny the benefit of apprenticeship training would be obtuse. However, that isn't my argument at all. My argument is against government entities requiring bidding companies to provide their employees with apprenticeship training in order to bid on public work, thus clearly giving preference to union companies over open-shop companies, as well as essentially guaranteeing higher costs to complete ALL work that that government entity is putting out to bid.