Only company people get promotions at Corning. Union employees don't get promotions. It doesn't work like that.

 

Where do supervisors come from? At most companies, they are promoted from the line.

Where do supervisors come from? At most companies, they are promoted from the line.

 

Not at my plant. Supervisors is a job people have to apply for and is a company job. Folks on the lines don't want it because they make less money than us and no one wants those problems for less money.

Only company people get promotions at Corning. Union employees don't get promotions. It doesn't work like that.

 

In my job, anyone had a potential to get promoted. I started as a 16 year old stockman and was running a $75,000,000 store by the time I was 25. Over half of all salaried managers started has hourly employees.

 

Different things work better for different places, some places probably need a union and some places are probably better without one.

Because when union workers leave the plant for whatever reason they will be replaced by people who won't join the union. They'll hire people off of the street to be mechanics, laborers, etc instead of those jobs being exclusively for union workers right now. They'll be able to hire entry level people for cheaper than what they currently pay incoming union employees because the union protects that wage. They can bring someone in for 15 bucks an hour to replace union workers and why wouldn't they? Not to mention our union is already weak for a variety of reasons. I wouldn't be surprised to see 25-40% of my union leave the union if given the opportunity.

 

If the union provides a benefit to workers then people won't leave. If there is a mass exodus that tells me that te workers see no value to being in the union.

Easier said than done. Whole lot of propaganda and misinformation out there. People will need to see it and live it. No one listens to anything anymore. If the pay and benefits are equal then folks that are good workers won't care if they are in a union or not.

 

Is the flip side of the 'bolded', that those who are not good workers would rather have a union to protect them, despite their being poor workers? If so, that is part of what is wrong with unions.

Not at my plant. Supervisors is a job people have to apply for and is a company job. Folks on the lines don't want it because they make less money than us and no one wants those problems for less money.

 

That is a weird set up, more headaches and responsibilities but less money.

That is a weird set up, more headaches and responsibilities but less money.

 

Just another symptom of the union issues. Overcompensated for the level of skills that are brought to the table in many instances. One of the reasons that businesses relocate to other areas or other countries.

I don't have a problem with people not being forced into a union. I do have a problem with the union having to protect those employees who choose not to be in the union. From what I am reading unions are still required to protect those employees.

 

Now that's wrong, you opt out then you should be out. No pay, no play.

According to this link it is up to the union.

 

Disclaimer: Heritage.org is a conservative site.

 

Myth: Right-to-work laws allow non-union members to “free ride” on the benefits of union representation without paying its cost.

Fact: Unions voluntarily represent non-members. The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the National Labor Relations Act allows unions to negotiate contracts covering only dues-paying members. As Justice Brennan wrote in Retail Clerks v. Dry Lion Goods (1962), “‘Members only’ contracts have long been recognized.”[3] Unions represent non-members only when they act as “exclusive bargaining representatives,” which requires non-members to accept the union’s representation. In that case, the law requires unions to represent non-members fairly. They cannot negotiate high wages for their supporters and the minimum wage for non-members. Unions can avoid representing non-members by disclaiming exclusive representative status.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/12/right-to-work-laws-myth-vs-fact

I think there was a time and a place for unions in our country. I think that time has passed.

Worked at a company that had a union. The management loved it. Kept wages lower than we would pay temps to do the same job. Not to mention the fees members had to pay.

I'd love to know why non-union is better as well.

 

I worked for a multi-national corporation for many years. It was complete nonsense that every 3 to 5 years that we spent countless wasted dollars going to the bargaining table when the workers were satisfied they were treated well, and the company was satisfied with treating the workers well. Additionally, since we were a small member of the larger pool in the local, newly elected union representatives knew absolutely nothing about our business for the first year or so on the job. Then by the time they actually knew something about us and the business, they were out of office. We worked well together, because at the end of the day, we agreed if the business was doing well, none of us would do well. However, I think most, including bargaining unit employees felt there was a lot of wasted time and money.

I guess I'm kind of indifferent to it. I think Unions have gotten a bad rap, some deserved, some not. I would hate to see them go away completely because in my opinion companies would take advantage of that fact. I like workers having a collective voice. What I don't like is the greed and unbelievable waste I've seen some unions create. That's not to say companies are immune to creating waste and definitely not to say they aren't greedy. I've been in many union work places...from coal mines to manufacturing plants to construction sites to fab shops. I've also been in many of the same that were non union. There's no blanket statement that can be made about any environment. However, non union typically tend to be more efficient environments. The ultimate goal of workers and company should be safe working conditions and making the business more profits. In theory the more profits that are generated the more money for everyone. If more unions and companies looked at it as a partnership I think there would be less issues.

If the union provides a benefit to workers then people won't leave. If there is a mass exodus that tells me that te workers see no value to being in the union.

 

Some in my union believe that.

Is the flip side of the 'bolded', that those who are not good workers would rather have a union to protect them, despite their being poor workers? If so, that is part of what is wrong with unions.

 

Those workers that are really that bad end being fired. Every single time.

That is a weird set up, more headaches and responsibilities but less money.

 

Not really. Supervisors have a chance to end up as engineers, department heads and many other opportunities within the company. It all depends on what a person wants to do. I started at the entry level with a guy who was bound and determined to end up with a company job. He became a supervisor, then he became a department head and is now currently the #1 guy for BOD Operations and a member of the upper management staff at the plant. He chose to go that route and worked his way up and is where he wants to be at the plant and company. Others like myself choose to stay on the floor and not go company but the opportunities were there for me to go company. I prefer the protection and stability the union offers me. Especially after 16 years in what is now a rocky relationship.

I guess I'm kind of indifferent to it. I think Unions have gotten a bad rap, some deserved, some not. I would hate to see them go away completely because in my opinion companies would take advantage of that fact. I like workers having a collective voice. What I don't like is the greed and unbelievable waste I've seen some unions create. That's not to say companies are immune to creating waste and definitely not to say they aren't greedy. I've been in many union work places...from coal mines to manufacturing plants to construction sites to fab shops. I've also been in many of the same that were non union. There's no blanket statement that can be made about any environment. However, non union typically tend to be more efficient environments. The ultimate goal of workers and company should be safe working conditions and making the business more profits. In theory the more profits that are generated the more money for everyone. If more unions and companies looked at it as a partnership I think there would be less issues.

 

The safety aspect of unions is one thing that isn't talked about much. Safety is already a joke in most factories and without unions there would be a lot more workplace deaths.