Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Toad on February 21, 2002, 11:28:49 AM
-
United contract with mechanics no industry breaker (http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/020220/n20328314_1.html)
"United's most senior mechanics would be paid $35.14 per hour, a few cents more than those at any of the other major U.S. carriers. The mechanics had not had a pay raise since 1994."
Highly skilled labor.. highly... working indoors and outdoors in all kinds of weather from blazing hot to freezing cold, rain or shine.
Fixing minor things for passenger comfort on 4 hour flights to major things that will kill folks if not detected and repaired prior to flight.
... and they pay them about what landscapers get to mow lawns around here.
It's not enough.
IMO.
-
I heard this on the news the other day and was totally amazed at how little the maximum salary was. $35/hr may sound like alot... just not for a skilled labor job where someone has 20 years of experience. Its quite pathetically low.
Hell... our technicians top out much higher than that.
AKDejaVu
-
I also believe Creamo is overpaid.
AKDejaVu
-
That's much more than my mom makes and much more than the people I work with make.
Mom's a nurse and I work with teachers. A LOT of important professions are underpaid, bro.
btw, $35.14/hr is about $72,000/yr gross. I think my mom makes half of that, with 25 years under her belt at the same hospital. Not saying that the senior mechanics shouldn't get a raise, just saying they aren't the only ones.
-
My wife makes less than that, caring for critical care patients, doing things that doctors did 15 years ago (RN's do ALOT of things that only doctors did 15 years ago).Personally, I think that wage could be the end of Privately owned aircraft business (Aeroflot USA?) At Boeing, overpaid union machinist has led to over 60% offload to cheaper, non-union companies, and over-seas offload. The new Sonic Cruiser will be primarily built overseas, and only assembled in the USA, due to overpaid union workers. I know, I was one at one time, I always felt that I was overpaid for the job I did.
-
Originally posted by Toad
... and they pay them about what landscapers get to mow lawns around here.
Wow! $70,000 a year for mowing the lawns? Where is that? A graduate with a Masters degree would be happy to get $50,000 starting salary and $70,000 after a few years in New York - and that is a pretty expencive place to live with higher salaries then the rest of the country.
I bet that search for salary levels will show landscapers making much less then $70,000 a year.
I would pay a guy $5-10/hour to mow the lawn if I had any.
miko
-
Yup, I make a bit over $25 and hour, and I have 17 years experience. Not saying mechanics are overpaid, but as has been stated, it's the same all over outside of entertainment and sports.
-
Dunno about that Nifty. My mother in law just got RN two years ago. She started at $26/hr. She'll easily top $40 in 10 years.
I look at my father's job. He's been a truck driver for nearly 40 years (with UPS). He's pushing about $30/hr. That is not a skilled labor job. He also gets 8 weeks of vacation a year in addition to holiday pay.
Skilled labor is skilled labor. Repairing jet engines is not child's play, nor is maintaining navigational equipment. I just can't see not rewarding people for having the necessary skillset to excell in that field.
AKDejaVu
-
Yahoo careers:
low(25%ile), median, high (75%ile)
Aircraft mechanic (jet) $44,900 $52,249 $59,948
Aircraft Mechanic (non-jet) $38,908 $43,511 $50,330
Aircraft Maintenance Mechanic $36,843 $39,600 $46,332
Aircraft Engine Mechanic $31,887 $34,736 $37,629
miko
-
guess it's where ya live, deja. tho mom might be up to $20/hr. I'm near 100% positive she's not at $26/hr after 25 years (where your mom-in-law started at).
you should increase any salary figure in my area by 10-15% to scale it. Cost of living here is cheap. I pay $535 month for a 1100sq ft 2 bed 2 bath apartment in a nice part of P'Cola. My stepbro pays $800+ for a 1 bed 1 bath in Boyton Beach FL. He'd pay even more if he lived in Boca Roton where is job actually is.
-
That's kinda the point Nifty. In most professions pay is scaled based on cost of living in the area.
The $35/hr is a hard ceiling for their entire maintenance industry. That's just plain wrong.
AKDejaVu
-
$35/hr isn't enough? Wish I didn't earn enough....
-
Look around, Rip.
There's a LOT of non-union "overpaid workers" as well as Union "overpaid workers". We call them the "American Middle Class".
Those Union jobs are getting outsourced overseas to lower paid workers.. yep.
Now ask yourself this: Did those "overpaid" US Union workers have anything to do with making the US the most desirable market in the world for all sorts of consumer goods?
Did those "overpaid" US Union workers have anything to do with the creation of the US "middle class"? Without the US "middle class", would the lifestyle here be as desirable as it has become?
Why were those jobs outsourced again? So the corporation could make more money right? More profit?
When Boeing outsourced did the price of aircraft go down? No, it did not. Boeing just raked in the profit and the bosses all took nice bonuses, didn't they? Stockholders got just enough to keep them quiet.
When Chevy started building Suburbans in Mexico, did Suburbans get cheaper? Ah.. Nope.
Where's this benefit we consumers are continually promised? Oh, THAT'S RIGHT.. if we didn't outsource the corporations would screw us to an even GREATER degree for the things they want to sell us. Anyone here think a Suburban is REMOTELY worth $45,000? It's said GM makes in excess of $8000 on each Suburban.. not the dealer, GM. The Dealer is getting his cut on top of that.
Dang those Union guys. They keep wanting a decent lifestyle in the US market.. that cr*p has to STOP! Only MANAGEMENT should have access to nice homes and good schools!
You do remember the bonuses Wolf and Gangwahl took the year US Air had horrendous losses and they told the F/A's there was no money for a raise (even though the F/A's had had no raise for something like 8 years?)
When all US high-paying jobs are outsourced to foreign workers, what will happen to the US "middle class" and the US consumer goods market? You already know the answer, don't you?
This economy doesn't work if we're all serving hamburgers to each other in the service industry. If this economy doesn't work, odds are the world economy won't work either. You're seeing it right now.
You know, there's alot of folks want to outsource airline aircraft "letter check" maintenance to overseas repair hubs. Like Taiwan.. you know the place.. the place where all those "aircraft grade bolts" that are made from melted coathangers come from. Funny thing is the FAA doesn't think that's really a good idea... wonder why?
Lastly, answer this "chicken or the egg" question:
Which came FIRST.... bad management or unions?
Asked another way:
Do reasonably happy workers join unions?
You know the answer to both don't you? ;)
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Wow! $70,000 a year for mowing the lawns? Where is that?
miko
Kansas City area.
Let it be known I mow my own lawn.. takes me about 40 minutes.
However, my neighbors are paying right at a dollar a minute for a guy to mow and blow the clippings.
Guy was a mid level techie at Sprint and got caught in a downsize. Decided he didn't want to work for ANYONE ever again. Started his own business. First year he had to quit taking customers. Works 5 days a week only, says he does about 6 hours a day mowing.
Won't take any more customers until somebody leaves his service.
I know a few others just like him.. one that only does the fertilizing/bug killing thing for lawns. That guy is a big-time fisherman too.. has lots of time to fish. Used to be a corporate wage slave like a lot of folks.
So, yeah.. it's out there.. if you're sharp enough to find it.
-
wow toad, you sound like a commie !!! :D
75k/year is a good wage ANYWHERE IN USA.
Isn't national average something like 25k/yeah ?
What happend to the good old "capitalism" let "supply/demand" do thier thing ?
I'm with miko on that one.
-
:D
One of my more famous sayings is:
The ONLY thing WORSE than having a Union is..... NOT HAVING a Union.
What can I say... I guess I'm not as easily pigeonholed as some would like me to be. I sure don't sound like the dyed-in-the-fine-wool-broadcloth Republican a lot of folks make me out to be, do I?
Bottom line is I think MOST folks in the US are pretty underpaid given the contribution they make to our society. Examples are rampant... you don't need to look very far. Cops spring to mind.. TEACHERS really jump out at ya.. the military.... it's easy to see, IMO.
It would be a tough trick though. You'd have to keep inflation in reasonable check while increasing wages, match suppy to demand.. and the REAL hard part.. get folks to accept that their STILL would be a hierarchy of jobs. (oops... lost my "commie card" there, didn't I?)
:)
-
Easy with those dangerous, commie, left-wing nazi ideas, Toad.
Grunherz is never very far away.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Why were those jobs outsourced again? So the corporation could make more money right? More profit?
When Boeing outsourced did the price of aircraft go down? No, it did not. Boeing just raked in the profit and the bosses all took nice bonuses, didn't they? Stockholders got just enough to keep them quiet.
When you shop for groceries, have you ever paid more then was asked from you? Do you ever chose to buy the same product in the store where it costs more? If you happen to pay for something less then you think it should cost, do you immediately request a pay cut from your boss?
When I buy labor (as a shareholder/co-owner) of a company, why would I pay more then necessary?
When Chevy started building Suburbans in Mexico, did Suburbans get cheaper? Ah.. Nope.
Nope, american shareholders just made more money from which they payed taxes and put the rest into the ecomony in the form of investments and purchases.
Where's this benefit we consumers are continually promised? Oh, THAT'S RIGHT.. if we didn't outsource the corporations would screw us to an even GREATER degree for the things they want to sell us. Anyone here think a Suburban is REMOTELY worth $45,000? It's said GM makes in excess of $8000 on each Suburban.. not the dealer, GM. The Dealer is getting his cut on top of that.
Have you seen how much the same cars cost in the regulated markets? Name me one country on earth where you can buy the same car cheaper then in US? Japanes models cost more in Japain then here.
Which came FIRST.... bad management or unions?
Badly managed companies go out of business. Unionised companies go out of business. Same crap.
In free economy you can't run successfull business based on either incompetence or blackmail.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
When I buy labor (as a shareholder/co-owner) of a company, why would I pay more then necessary?
To maintain the consumer economy in the market that drives the world economy maybe?
Because without a healthy US market for your goods it won't matter what you are buying labor for somewhere else?
Nope, american shareholders just made more money from which they payed taxes and put the rest into the ecomony in the form of investments and purchases.
Yeah, sometimes that happens. Sometimes you get Enron and all the rest of what's bad in corporate America. Seems like that is cyclical too.. .lately (since the '90's) the cycle seems to be more "Enron" than usual.
Have you seen how much the same cars cost in the regulated markets? Name me one country on earth where you can buy the same car cheaper then in US? Japanes models cost more in Japain then here.
Are we getting into the "dumping" discussion here? :D Take a look at Union wages for foreign workers making the better known German and Japanese marques. With benefits, I believe they are higher than US wages by a significant amount. Yet those cars cost less here than they do in their home countries, as you say. HMMM.. so what's that "dumping" thing again? Are you going to lay that at the feet of the Unions?
In free economy you can't run successfull business based on either incompetence or blackmail.
miko
Sure you can. You just can't do it forever. USAir/Wolf? Enron/Skilling-Lay? Texas Air/Lorenzo?
You are basically correct however. There must be balance. The "balance" between the overwhelming power of management (think New York sweatshops and child labor at the turn of the century) and the employee is... the Union.
However, as I previously mentioned, the only thing worse than having a Union is NOT having a Union. ;)
-
Union = MOB
$$$ for organized crime
it ain't the turn of the century and you don't have children in sweat shops
they are a thing of the past, pricing the US right out of the world market
-
Is stupid, oppressive or criminal management a thing of the past?
Nope.
Until then, you're going to have unions, like it or not.
-
Toad....
workers of all contries UNITE !!! :D
-
How would/did the Unions help Joe Sixpack working at Enron?
I think they still got the shaft. Dunno how a Union protects an employee from corrupt/stupid management. They are in it for the money. Their money - dues. And the power they hold over corp America, that is until the chase everything offshore & overseas.
-
$75k is a good salary, sure. But most of the united mechanics will not be paid $75k. That is the most they can ever hope to make.
Management can be good or bad, but being concerned about its employees is a luxury few of them have.
In the eyes of management, employees are an asset like any other that needs to be maximized. Why pay for two skilled workers to work 8 hours a day when you can pay one skilled worker for 16? Heck, if the whole industry does it, all management wins out twice: not only do they pay one worker instead of two, but with half as many jobs, you can pay less and demand more.
You don't want to work overtime? Fine, we'll just hire somebody more desperate for the job.
True it's not turn-of-the-century sweatshops,a t least in this country. Want to guess how that changed? The Pinkerton Cops lobbied congress?
Sure unions do some good things. 5 years back, my job got unionized. Before then, we didn't have health care; I knew a coworker who one day went to the clinic for a headache, and was given four hours to collect her belongings and report to surgery. She survived, but lost everything she owned to that brain tumor. Now we get taken care of, and last year when I had a genetically precipitated cancer, I got it removed with no hassle whatsoever.
On the other hand, my older brother's in a similar job, and they are unionized as well. The way the bargaining group's set up, the people in his job are the ones that the union always "bargains" out. Those guys don't represent him; they just take his dues. No health care; he's got a 50% chance of cancer and doesn't have the means to find out, let alone seek treatment.
-
"it ain't the turn of the century and you don't have children in sweat shops"
Not in this country. That's why it's cheaper to make stuff overseas, where they DO have sweatshops, and are free of those troublesome regulations that protect our workers and our environment.
-
Toad, I equally blame it on both, Unions and Management. Unions asked for too much(think greed..our secretary at the local union hall had a starting wage of $75,000 a year, when our max. salary was $60,000 a year), Management then looked to outsource.
Incidently, why WOULD the price of a car come down if they outsource? Its THEIR business...this isn't a commonwealth nation. ;)
-
Bottom line is I think MOST folks in the US are pretty underpaid given the contribution they make to our society.
So what??
If they don't like it, do something else. It's called freedom.
(http://www.tektalk.net/right2.gif)
-
Incidently, I've never been treat MORE FAIR in my life than my current job WITHOUT a union. When our company went to a closed shop union, guess what? THE UNION STOPPED WORKING FOR US!!! Ask anyone (yeager? Weave? help me out here..) about what we went on strike for in 1989, and 1995...about 5 cents more an hour! It cost me $15,000 in pay to go on 2 strikes, I'll never recover that back again. "Oh, but for the future, the big company won't try to take things away from you again"....roadkill!
I just got a Employee Incentive check for 9 days worth of pay for the last year of work. Its incentive pay for doing a job well done, based on shareholder value , blah blah blah (many things tie into the value of this check) My point is, the company has given me my biggest raises, step level progressions, and incentive checks as a salary employee than the Union EVER did as a union worker for 14 years.
Another thing that irks me about unions, you could have the laziest bastard who had the biggest drinking/drug problem who would NEVER be fired short of killing someone because HE'S UNION!
Now, OTOH, I've worked for a manager or two where I'm glad the PRESENCE of the union was there, or these managers would have had everyone fired just because they were fu$#ed up in the head. So, its like sleeping with the devil, gotta have em to balance things out.
Incidently, ALF/CIO has got its lowest membership in years, and is short cash for its Democratic fund raising that they give each year, an avg. of $38,000,000 to the Dems each year. If the Unions were not so politically motivated (they actually TOLD us who to vote for!) the I MIGHT have supported them more, but once you start that communist "VOTE FOR THIS PERSON" crap, you lost my interest. Incidently, the company does NOT tell me who to vote for.
Anyway, I could go on and on about experiences about the Union here, but I just get too worked up over it. Piss on unions I say, but dammit, gotta have em for the drunks who'd lose their jobs if not for the unions, and to keep management in check.
-
The economy is self-regulated by the laws of supply and demand - of capital, labor, goods, talent.
The only fair way to affect everyone equally is to have anti-trust laws and limit the working hours - and that has been done.
Once you start putting artificial limitations in some places but not others, there arises a lot of opportunity for corruption, crime and exploiting the resulting inefficiency.
It is commonly agreed that monopoly is a very bad thing. Union is a monopoly on labor - pure and simple. As any monopoly it uses extra-market means to benefit some people at teh expence of others.
There is a balance established between shareholders profits, operating expences (including salaries), customer's expences and risks.
The free flow of capital ensures that risk-adjusted shareholder's profits are the same in all industries/all companies. If it is different it is not for long since inflow of capital to more profitable area or closing of less profitable production will restore the balance.
It's a zero-sum game or worse - not only blackmailed money comes out of some other people's pockets (customers, retirement funds who are the biggest shareholders) but the jobs disappear too once the disbalance becomes too great.
miko
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
So, its like sleeping with the devil, gotta have em to balance things out.
Which mirrors the essence of my statement that "The ONLY thing WORSE than having a Union is..... NOT HAVING a Union. "
Rip, you and I agree in almost every respect throughout this thread.
....and now to Eagler:
How would/did the Unions help Joe Sixpack working at Enron?
.
Well, for starters, the widespread availability of the 401K is almost certainly directly attributable to union lobbying/bargaining across the USA. So, they wouldn't even have a busted 401K to cry over without unions.
Secondly, unions will be the driving force behind reforming the 401K plans in order to offer more protection against this situation in the future. No, it won't prevent it entirely... crooked managers will still find ways to shaft employees in the retirement arena.. but it will help.
Thirdly, think about the "average" US lifestyle we all enjoy so much.
Know why you're kids are in school and not working like they did at the turn of the century?
Know why the "traditional" work week is 5 days and not 7 like it used to be?
Know why you have two weeks of paid vaction instead of none?
Know why you have a medical plan (in most jobs) instead of just a box of bandaids and a bottle of hydrogen peroxideon the wall at work?
Know why you have any sort of retirement plan at all?
.... well, I could go on and on, as you well know. Some of those are ancient history, but some aren't, like 401k improvements.
The bottom line is that "management" in the US fought hard against EVERY SINGLE ONE of these benefits for US workers and forecast the doom and destruction of the entire US economy should these benefits be given to the working masses.
YOU.. and all of us... have these benefits because Unions fought long.. in some cases over 100 years... to get them for their members. Once achieved, these bennies spread to the non-unionized workforce for obvious reasons. Who would work for a company that didn't offer medical benefits when he could work for one that did?
And when I say fight, I mean the kind where blood flows. In the early days it wasn't lawyers in three piece suits swapping inflammatory rhetoric; it was workers getting their heads cracked by the Pinkerton men that caused these changes.
Yeah, Unions do forked up stuff. They get fat and lazy and quit serving their electorate. Some ARE tied in with the mob.
Some Managements do forked up stuff. They get fat and lazy and quit serving their shareholders AND their employees. Some are tied in with the Mob. Some are the Mob. Some are just our and out thieves like the Enron crew.
There's no denying however that Unions have achieved and are still achieving improvements for the common working man (union and non-union alike). There's no denying that well run coporations are an assest to the economy AND the workforce.
As Rip pointed out... it's about balance. Unions are the counter balance to bad managers.
In my industry, Southwest stands out like a beacon. Mostly non-union, their employees have it every bit as good as any of the unionized carriers. Ask yourself "why is that"?
I'll give you two reasons:
1) SW values its employees and is quite willing to pay them at or very near "industry standard".
2) SW goes out of its way to listen to its employees, show respect and reward them when their work helps the corporation. (Profit sharing)
So again... why is SW mostly non-union. Because happy employees don't join unions.
....and guess what... SW is probably the leading light in the industry in terms of shareholder value right now. Coincidence? I think not.
Koala: So what??
If they don't like it, do something else. It's called freedom.
Tell me, do you think teachers are over or underpaid considering the responibility they hold and the role they play in both raising and educating the nation's children. Without doubt, the job they do is a determining factor in the future success of the nation.
Supply and demand enters into it. There seems to be an endless supply of people willing to enter the teaching profession and wages stay low as a result.
But are you getting results you are happy with? The Cleveland school system and the non-accredited Kansas City, MO school districts are evidence that we are not. Simply because while they are getting the most publicity right now, the situation is nearly the same in many large cities.
Yet you can't raise wages to retain the better teachers because it is NOT a "free market". When teachers strike, the government ORDERS them back to work. (Now the NEA has a lot to answer for as well as the School District Mangagement... see my comment about the only thing WORSE than a union).
So, what do the teachers do? Exactly what you say... they move on.
And what you get is the Cleveland school system.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
The economy is self-regulated by the laws of supply and demand - of capital, labor, goods, talent.
Not exactly. It's pretty heavily GOVERNMENT regulated in most of the "developed" or "upper tier" countries. Take the "minimum wage" concept for example. Most of the developed nations have it... most of the undeveloped nations don't. That isn't self-regulation at all... it's overt regulation by the government.
Once you start putting artificial limitations in some places but not others, there arises a lot of opportunity for corruption, crime and exploiting the resulting inefficiency.
See above. Government regulations ARE "artificial limitations" particularly with respect to the world economy. The US has OSHA to regulate workplace safety; I doubt you'll find quite that much interest in workplace safety in some of the places these jobs are moving. Is OSHA a good or bad thing? I happen to think it's a pretty good thing overall.
It is commonly agreed that monopoly is a very bad thing. Union is a monopoly on labor - pure and simple. As any monopoly it uses extra-market means to benefit some people at teh expence of others.
At the end of the bargaining road, the company and the union are (usually) free to resort to "self-help". The company can hire replacement workers from the free labor pool... at any price they choose to offer, with any benefits they may wish to include. Workers from the pool may or may not flock to the company.
The union is free to withhold the services of its workers. It is the ONLY leverage a union has.
You never can tell how it will play out. It's often not worth it to the company to try to replace an entire workforce, particularly if it is a highly skilled workforce. It happens though; remember PATCO?
Most times, it benefits both the company and the union to settle at some point. As Rip pointed out, a union worker rarely recovers wages lost due to strike in his entire career. However, sometimes there are issues more important than wages that must be resolved (health care is one).
The free flow of capital ensures that risk-adjusted shareholder's profits are the same in all industries/all companies.
Risk adjusted by whom? The markets or the governments or both? It's certainly not a "free market" worldwide and you know it.
but the jobs disappear too once the disbalance becomes too great. miko
Yes, I agree. But where do the jobs go? They go to places where the workers wages and benefits are much closer to 1802 than 2002. Is that a good thing? For Managers, yes. For shareholders, sometimes. For the average working man worldwide? Nope.
Will this affect the world economy? Look around the US right now. Lots of those jobs have left. Are the folks who lost those jobs buying more or less consumer goods now? What effect will THAT have on the economy that for now is a key driving force in the world economy?
-
When enlisted personnel in the United States military who also work on jet engines and do much more dangerous and equally or more important jobs that require specialized skills get over $35 per hour, I might shed a tear for their civillian equivalents not having a raise in 5 years.
The feds use an inflation index: if the index says inflation was 5%, government employees get a 4% raise, military gets a 3% raise, congress gets a 10% raise. I will never understand their logic, nor do I want to. I want to see this problem rectified. No one should be able to vote for their own salary and all government pay inflation adjustments should move up and down at the same rate regardless of whether you are military, civil, or congress.
This country owes its very existence to our military both currently active and veterans, yet has very rarely shown any appreciation where it counts most. I salute those who have sacrificed their own comfort and well being to stay in the military throughout the Clinton years.
-
When I was still a Police Officer I was in a hazardous duty assignment, as if simply being a street cop wasn't dangerous enough. I topped out at $18.35 an hour WITH the haz duty bonus (5%). What bearing does that have on aircraft mechanics??? I am currently enrolled in an A&P school to get my mechanic certification. I expect I'd practically start at the max I got for being a moving target.
Believe me I think aircraft mechanics deserve a decent wage but there are others who dedicate more and get paid much less.
Mav
-
$75,000!!!!
Hell, I wish I could spell $75,000!! :)
Hey, I just did!!
Gota go tell the wife!!!
:)
-
Originally posted by Toad
...Bottom line is I think MOST folks in the US are pretty underpaid given the contribution they make to our society.
Examples are rampant... you don't need to look very far.
Cops spring to mind..
TEACHERS really jump out at ya..
the military.... it's easy to see, IMO....
-
i cant say i think 35 bucks an hour is underpaid. probably just about fair.
as for the sonic cruiser ripsnort i have gotta jab you. that thing is the worst idea ever. anyone who knows anything about airplanes knows that in simple terms its just a bad idea. thats why boeing is being smart and retreating from the idea now that they have 911 as an excuse to back away. it would have ruined the company.
-
plus you cant overpay everyone. the result of that would be inflation. imo, 70 grand a year is a fair wage for a skilled laborer. hell i am (barely) living on 17 grand a year as a poor graduate student, 70 isnt that bad :)
-
I've worked both sides of the fence.. Union and Management.
Gotta go with Toad.. Unions are better for the quality of life of all of us than no unions at all.
You don't even have to work in a union shop to enjoy the benefits of a union.. when conditions on a job I had got bad enuff, I asked a union rep to stop by and start the polls for going union. Management came around in a heartbeat, cleaned up their acts and within 3 months we were workin in Rips non-union paradise.
Balance.. unions are a valid counterpoint to rabid capitalistic stuffed shirt corporations and private employers that can't fathom what it's like to work for a living in a toejamhole with no protection, no health plan and no way to achieve dignity without the threat of a union toejamtin in the company's cream of wheat.
On the negative side, I worked a managemnt position in a shop that was populated by several incompetent slackers that could not and would not perform because the shop steward kept them from performing. A typical union-mangement amazinhunk contest. Result was all the folks in that shop, quality mechanics and slackers alike suffered the stigma of all thats bad about unions. Took me almost a year to weed out the tulips that held the operation down... a situation that would have taken 15 seconds to clear up in a non-union shop.
Like the coin of the realm.. there's two sides.
-
Toad said:
Tell me, do you think teachers are over or underpaid considering the responibility they hold and the role they play in both raising and educating the nation's children. Without doubt, the job they do is a determining factor in the future success of the nation.
I think parents are a bigger determining factor than teachers when it comes to the future success of the nation. And what is the salary of a parent? Zero.
Teachers probably get paid pretty much what they're worth. If they were worth more in reality, then they'd get paid for it. They actually are paid pretty well as it is. Both of my folks are teachers, and they do very well considering they work 9 out of 12 months a year. And a lot of that is because they have the teacher's union, which I don't agree with, but I'm not gonna argue that point (yet ;) .
(http://www.tektalk.net/right2.gif)
-
Man, this thread just screams to point out the obvious to the anti-union crowd, as the initial arguments are littered with foolish assumptions, lack of understanding without some serious history study in union/management relations, or experience in this complex matter. Really.
At times outright wrong statements about unions are laughable, but I can't see explaining it worth the effort on a AH forum. Even Off Topic, and knowing the demographic of a hardcore flightsim player is aviation inclined, and intelligent, facts aside, the union/non-union issue is full of opinions. Right or wrong, fact or lie, just look at the PLO/Jew issues, or Dems vs. Repulbicans here. Futile.
However, since the thread was started by a pilot, in the industry, and about United Techs, although I see no need to play instructor/informant on managment/union labor relations, or who derserves what compensation in any given career, so I'll repond to the given post.
Toads initial post does mirror what pilots as a whole from my experience feel towards this paticular labor sector. It's appreciated, and that's the notible responce. No amount of BBS banter and goofing between the two groups, here or on the flightline, diminishes the actual professional interaction of the 2. Plus, I agree with his points.
United mechs have been given the ESOP shaft with the rest of the UAL employees(don't even ask, that's a whole hideous explanation and argument) and deserve this contract, as Toad posted, period. More imo as well, but that's the bottom line.
-
Well Koala, let's see.
Since an awful lot of families with school age kids have BOTH the father and mother out working to make ends meet and since roughly 8 hours a day is spent in "downtime" (sleeping) and since life is full of other little chores besides earning an income...
do you think Moms and Dads spend as much awake "quality time" :rolleyes: with their kids as the teachers do?
People like to b*tch about the quality of education in the US today but you sure don't see anyone wanting to spend more on the teachers to improve it. Build a new building? Sure. Buy a computer lab? Sure. Pay to get a highly motivated, well-qualified teacher in that building and lab... Nah.
There's an old adage. You get what you pay for. Lots of districts start out in the $18-20K range. Go figure.
-
Toad
Do you really think paying teachers in the public school system higher wages would give us better teachers? Or would we still have the same crappy teachers just making more?
I am not a teacher but if I were, someone would have to pay me one helluva alot more than a private school would to get my arse in the typical public school class. It would be a matter of stress and a feeling of that I was teaching to a bunch of kids who actually want to learn. I still think the biggest problem with public school students, say after age 10, is the parents and home enviroment. They come to school to screw off not to learn. Not all but too many.
I guess this is related to unions as I feel the unions are keeping the crappy teachers in the system. When's the last time you've heard of a teacher getting booted for anything other than having sex with a student (and getting caught). That is why they are against testing. They do not want to be judged on job performance like the rest of us, ie what they have actually taught the kids. And part of me can't blame them .... can't teach someone something who doesn't want to learn it. So if the parents aren't giving the kids the "quality time" after working all day, they should ... it ain't a teachers responsibility to give quality time to a kid, its the parents role to raise the child to want to go to school and learn. Just another example of role confusion IMO.
-
Miko: The economy is self-regulated by the laws of supply and demand - of capital, labor, goods, talent.
Toad: Not exactly. It's pretty heavily GOVERNMENT regulated in most of the "developed" or "upper tier" countries. Take the "minimum wage" concept for example.
Misquoting is not an honest argument on your part. The next sentence in my post contains examples of government regulations that are commonly accepted and affect everyone equally.
If you pretend to ignore it just to steal my own reasoning and throw it back at me, what's the point of an argument?
At the end of the bargaining road, the company and the union are (usually) free to resort to "self-help". The company can hire replacement workers from the free labor pool...
That is a news to me. In my building my firm cannot hire our own contractor to paint the walls - we must use the union. I think it is somewhere in the contract.
If firing workers who refuse to work, or workers who join union was so easy, the unions would be just like clubs - with political but no legal power.
Miko: The free flow of capital ensures that risk-adjusted shareholder's profits are the same in all industries/all companies.
Toad: Risk adjusted by whom? The markets or the governments or both? It's certainly not a "free market" worldwide and you know it.
Do not pretend to be so ignorant of simple terms. No one adjust thr risk itself and I am not talking about adjusting the risk. I am talking about risk-adjusted profits or more generally risk-adjusted return.
If all investments had the same risk, everyone would chose the one with highest return. Since the risk of different investments is different, those with higher risk must offer higher return to be attractive. That is why you FDIC insured bank account pays very little interest, bank CD pays more because there is risk associated with tying dow your money for a period of time, US government pays even more and corporation bonds pay more yet - depending on their financial prospects.
Risk-adjusted return allows you to calculate how much money you will expect to have in a period of time considering thet some investnments will not work out.
So you adjust a number on your personal piece of paper - there is all adjustment there is. No markets or governments are involved.
Yes, I agree. But where do the jobs go? They go to places where the workers wages and benefits are much closer to 1802 than 2002. Is that a good thing? For Managers, yes. For shareholders, sometimes. For the average working man worldwide? Nope.
That is true. It would make sence to make a legislation allowing US companies to operate and goods imported/exported from countries with the same level of development as ours.
I'd also like to point an obvious contradiction in your previous statement. You complained that when Chevy started building Suburbans in Mexico, Suburbans did not get cheaper!
I hope it is ignorance rather then hypocricy on your part.
The extra money made by owners of GM were spent mostly in US (since oure is mostly a service economy - and services cannot be imported as well as purchased goods). That helped create new jobs and offset the job loss by moing the production. In fact in developed countries certain unplesant manual jobs are so undesirable that natives do not want to take them or demand exorbitant salaries. I bet no one of the laid-off GM workers seriously considered plantation work in which there is a huge labor shortage filled by mexican migrants. That is true for every developed country - each has unemployment and imports lot of labor at the same time.
Here is the hypocricy - If GM started selling Chevy's for lot less "to benefit the customers" , they could actually make more profit by selling more cars. Other brands - Ford, Crysler, etc. would not be able to compete and would be pushed out of the market, would have to close their plants and lay off the workers. So the consumers would be hurt by losing their jobs even more.
You can't demand GM to share their winnings with consumers and hurt them at the same time. You should stop reading people's posts and economical articles one sentence at a time but try to keep in mind the whole picture.
So to answer your question, Suburban is worth $45,000 because comparable Ford sells for $45,000 and it is a very good thing that they do not try to change it.
The example of other countries selling cars for much more then tehy sell in US is not an example of dumping. It is an example of making people pay more for something through legal means rather then free-market.
You just want some people to pay more for labor as long as that benefits you - and hence for airplane travel, etc.
There are many ways that market liquidity could be facilitated by government and private organisations. You can study and predict demand for certain occupations few years in advance so that there is no glut or famine as it happens quite frequently now. That is called educating the workforce.
There are many ways that corporate incompetence could be combated - by studying the companies, economy, etc. Many financial analysts do that successfully - it's just that they do not share the results because they make money off their insight and better understanding of reality. But what four dozen of them can do for each company, a determined organisation can do as well.
Unfortunately unions are not interested in either fixing the labor disbalance or corporate incompetence.
As for the "Unions" getting us the 8-hour day and 5-day week and pension plans, that is quite different. That was mass movement of most of the workers to change laws of the country, not some group to get a bigger piece at the expence of others.
Those unions and modern unions are not the same thing.
There seems to be an endless supply of people willing to enter the teaching profession and wages stay low as a result.
You can buy crappy food cheap but you probably buy the food you like. Same with the teachers.
Plenty of people pay much more for teachers - those in private schools. Because of that there is a lot of appicants and the schools can select the best ones. That is why more money is offered - to attract better work force.
That would never work for unionised public school - however much you pay, the bureaucrats do not care to select the best for the job and union would not let them sack the worst anyway. That is why it does not make sence to waste money on the public school teachers - at least in huge and impersonal schoold districts like New York. In small suburbian school districts the quality of teachers is comparable to private schools because the methods are similar.
I live across a school. In the last two years they had and still have scaffolding around it - which they take down every few months and a few months later put up again to start working in the same places. They did it five or six times since I started observing them. So they are either crooks or hugely incompetent. If they cannot fix the damn walls (if those even need fixing), I do not believe they would use extra money to hire more capable teacher. They are not a private company.
As for many applicants for teacher positions, the unions and bureaucratic rules made it very difficult to become a teacher. My sister had MS in biology and lots of teaching experience and was willing to become a school teacher in NYC. She had to go through a licencing procedure that would have taken her more then 6 months (which she would have to live somehow), so she took another job instead.
How come MS in biology and years of experience not sufficient to grant a job after a regular job interview? I bet union rules had a lot to do with it.
The teachers in NYC are mostly losers that cannot get a job anywhere else and it will never change while the school system is huge and public.
I am not saying the unions are bad. In fact, they are great as congregations of concenting and interested people that all gather to share knowlege and develop strategy, etc.
The current unions more resemble a flock of dumb sheep headed by crooks with their own agenda.
miko
-
The current unions more resemble a flock of dumb sheep headed by crooks with their own agenda
And AMFA is certainly in that realm of "Current Union's"
Since you are a master of labor and union current events, please explain AMFA's failure to give these dumb sheep a 40% pay raise, and how they profit on the machinist's families better living, on a "union crook" agenda that's a bias'd front?
Fool. Told you this was pointless banter of AH tards.
-
Misquoting is not an honest argument on your part. The next sentence in my post contains examples of government regulations that are commonly accepted and affect everyone equally. If you pretend to ignore it just to steal my own reasoning and throw it back at me, what's the point of an argument?
Poppycock, Miko and you know it too. So what sort of "arguing" is that. You said:
"The only fair way to affect everyone equally is to have anti-trust laws and limit the working hours - and that has been done."
There's the part I left out for brevity. I figure anyone that has read this thread this far is smart enough to recall what's been said for at least 10 posts.
Anyway, that hasn’t been done internationally AT ALL. And you’ve been focusing on jobs moving overseas. Anti-trust, working hours.. the same in Viet Nam as here? The same as Mexico as here? No way. THAT’S the point…. IT’S NOT EQUAL!
That is a news to me. In my building my firm cannot hire our own contractor to paint the walls - we must use the union. I think it is somewhere in the contract.
If firing workers who refuse to work, or workers who join union was so easy, the unions would be just like clubs - with political but no legal power.
Read what I said again… "at the end of the bargaining road".. you have a contract AFTER you negotiate on with a union. And you have to abide by the contract until it is completed, expires or is re-negotiated. Are you complaining that it’s not fair that you have to abide by the contract you signed? That would be pretty typical of management. :) Bet you expect the Union to abide by the contract IT signed, don't you? Or is that different?
Since the risk of different investments is different, those with higher risk must offer higher return to be attractive.
Point is the RISK does vary BECAUSE of what Governments and people do. Capital DOESN’T necessarily "free flow". Governments, trade agreements and cheating ALL alter the "free flow" of capital.
"All things being equal"… but they aren’t. And that's the point. If you skew the risk/reward decision by cheating....
That is true. It would make sence to make a legislation allowing US companies to operate and goods imported/exported from countries with the same level of development as ours.
But you know this will NEVER happen.. and if it DID, there’d be no point in moving the jobs out, would there? Because labor costs wouldn’t be different enough to make it worth the effort.
That helped create new jobs and offset the job loss by moving the production...
The point you so casually ignore is that the stats all say that these "new jobs" you are so proud of are paying far, far less than the previous jobs. That’s going to make the economy grow?
Tell me Miko, how will the US economy be when we’re all working at the drive in window at Burger King serving fast food to each other? Think we’ll still be the world’s most desirable market?
When the vast majority are all making minimum wage, how will that be a plus?
Other brands - Ford, Crysler, etc. would not be able to compete and would be pushed out of the market, would have to close their plants and lay off the workers. So the consumers would be hurt by losing their jobs even more.
Ignoring the fact that Ford and Chrysler have done essentially the same thing as GM, aren’t you? They moved the jobs out along with the rest. More burger flippers now.. a great thing, eh?
but try to keep in mind the whole picture.
Indeed. You might want to try it as well.
The example of other countries selling cars for much more then tehy sell in US is not an example of dumping. It is an example of making people pay more for something through legal means rather then free-market.
Dumping is selling cars here for far less than they cost to produce in the home country AND for less than they sell for in the home country. Dumping is protectionism. There’s two schools on that. If they want to subsidize your car purchase, let them. The other school is they can ruin YOUR car industry this way.. and then charge what they like.
Japan used to "dump" pretty routinely until we finally got the trade agreements worked out. It wasn’t a good thing for our industry and that’s why it attracted the politicos attention.
You just want some people to pay more for labor as long as that benefits you
No, actually, I’d like to see working people make enough money to own a home, raise a few kids, have decent health insurance, be able to send their kids to college without bankrupting themselves and also have a decent retirement. ALL working people.
And if you wait for management to raise the pay that far, you’ll never, ever see it.
If you let the government do it, it’ll be done through high taxation and it’ll be done poorly for all concerned.
Maybe we should just pay people that much for giving their life to a company? Nah...... screw 'em.
Unfortunately unions are not interested in either fixing the labor disbalance or corporate incompetence.
Come on now! Fixing corporate incompetence? I have to laugh. I’d love to see the look on the faces of the Board Members when the Union guy strolled in and said, "hey, we’ve got some really sharp folks that have analyzed your business and we have some suggestions for you".
Management looks down on ANYTHING a Union proposes until the Managers get themselves in so deep they have to screw the working guy again to get out of the sh*t. Then they’ll pretend to talk with and listen to the Union guys… until they get what they want.
As for the "Unions" getting us the 8-hour day and 5-day week and pension plans, that is quite different. That was mass movement of most of the workers to change laws of the country, not some group to get a bigger piece at the expence of others.
Those unions and modern unions are not the same thing.
Some of those Unions are EXACTLY the same Unions that fought for those working conditions. And RIGHT NOW they’re working to improve other aspects of working conditions and benefits. Look for 401K revisions to be heavily supported/pushed by Unions after Enron. And without the Union support, it would never get done. Look for further efforts to secure decent reliable medical benefits for workers… and without Union support that will never get done either.
There’s plenty of work still to be done…. And it isn’t Management that’s out trying to improve the lot of the worker and his family… it’s the Unions.
That is why more money is offered - to attract better work force.
Agree.
That would never work for unionised public school - however much you pay, the bureaucrats do not care to select the best for the job and union would not let them sack the worst anyway.
Disagree. It works just about everywhere. Administrators want the best teachers they can get.. it makes their job easier and makes them look better.
The NEA, as I mentioned upthread, IS going to have to change on teacher evaluations if they ever expect to get significantly better wages. However, the reason the "hard to fire" aspect of Unions evolved is simply because of the way Management treated the workers.
They’d fire on a whim, they’d fire to dump senior workers in order to employ cheaper new hires, etc. Pendulum effect. It got way too one-sided when Management was pushing the pendulum in their favor and now there has been an equal and opposite reaction. Now the Union aspect is out of line in some industries.
How come MS in biology and years of experience not sufficient to grant a job after a regular job interview? I bet union rules had a lot to do with it.
More likely, it was state law. Standards and Standardization. Licenses for professionals are pretty common. My dad taught me how to fly a long time before I got a license. Should someone have hired me as a commercial pilot at that time?
The teachers in NYC are mostly losers that cannot get a job anywhere else and it will never change while the school system is huge and public.
I think this gross generalization and defamation pretty much speaks for itself.
The current unions more resemble a flock of dumb sheep headed by crooks with their own agenda.
So how would this make them different from say.. Management types? Use the Enron leadership for your example. Because the Enron types are probably the norm now. They guys who built companies and industries to benefit the nation as well as themselves are about all gone.
Anyway, check upthread. I’ve said over and over that the only thing worse than a Union is NO Union.
You have to have them to balance out the low-life in the management pool.. simple as that.
-
hmmm
Drop the 60hr work week (since Sept 11 and various other times), base this on a normal 40hr work week. Don't figure in the "24/7 availability" expected. Forget about the weekly schedule changes. Don't figure in deployments.
Your average E-6 in the U.S. Military is making roughly $17 an hour lol. Hell I aint gonna gripe about it, I'm happy with it actually but, ....if $35 and hour aint good enough for ya
....your a big fat whiner heheh
-
You being happy with your wage concessions is why countless families suffer due to your lapdog management lay down attitude Tumor. Think about it.
$35/hr ISN't enough for skilled workers. Course, if they didn't gripe, they'd be poverty striken $17/hr employees.
Unhappy and on strike, maybe, happy and broke like you?
Nope. See the formula?
-
Originally posted by Tumor
hmmm
Drop the 60hr work week (since Sept 11 and various other times), base this on a normal 40hr work week. Don't figure in the "24/7 availability" expected. Forget about the weekly schedule changes. Don't figure in deployments.
Your average E-6 in the U.S. Military is making roughly $17 an hour lol. Hell I aint gonna gripe about it, I'm happy with it actually but, ....if $35 and hour aint good enough for ya
....your a big fat whiner heheh
You also get comissary privelages, free medical care, free vision and dental, a great retirement plan- All in all, your benefit plan is one most Unions struggle for everyday.
The labor movement is an ongoing struggle which has been defamed by rumors (some true, unfortunately) of mob control, political graft, Communist activity- but at every Union meeting I've attended they start the meeting with the Pledge of Allegence. And not just since 9/11, either.
Every consession the Labor Movement has won for us-the 40 hour work week, health and safety regulations, aboloshment of child labor- has been opposed by big business special interests.
I'm amazed common people like me, out working every day, could ALSO be opposed to Organized Labor. How many of you would like to see all the concessions Organized Labor has won for ALL working people stripped away? Would you like us to abolish the prohibition on child labor in sweat shops? After all, you oppose us. How bout the 40 hour work week? I'm none of you would mind working 80 hour weeks with no overtime pay.
I couldn't imagine what the living conditions would be like in America today if not for Organized Labor. I'm glad they will continue to fight for workers' rights, and, as I feel this is an ongoing struggle I support Organized Labor. Whenever possible I buy Union Made in America. I shop at union grocery stores, use UPS rather than FED-EX for shipping (Fed-X is nonunion) and honor ALL picket lines, and I will continue to support Unions. I'm amazed anyone here who considers themselves middle-class could not.
-
Military.. highly paid?
Go to the nearest military base you can think of. Army, Navy, Marine, AF... doesn't matter.
Then drive around the neighborhoods and see what people are living in.
AKDejaVu
-
There not.
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu
Military.. highly paid?
Go to the nearest military base you can think of. Army, Navy, Marine, AF... doesn't matter.
Then drive around the neighborhoods and see what people are living in.
AKDejaVu
Where did I say the Military was "highly paid???" I said they had a great benefits package, is all. I made 152.00 a MONTH when I was in, BTW.
The military is the most UNDER paid workforce in the Government Sector (not to mention arguably the most vital), especially today.