Ours is funded by both the employer and the employee. Definitely isn't based on EI claims - but there may be a rate variation in certain industries (mining, fisheries) where the companies count on routine "layoffs" - mine shuts down when they have enough production ahead, might be 2 weeks, might be 3 months.
Anyone else think "at will" work states are a joke? Is it just me?
- Thread starter BusynMember
- Start date
BusynMember
Well-Known Member
CB, you are lucky to be in a union. Not all teachers belong to unions. It is against the law for "public servants" in Georgia to belong to a union. So teachers, police and firefighters are not unionized in the state of Georgia.
I always find it interesting when I read a rant in the letters to the editors of the Atlanta Journal and Constitution about the evils of the teacher unions. Obviously, the letter writers believe the talking points that they hear on the radio or cable news and don't bother checking the facts.
~Kathy
I always find it interesting when I read a rant in the letters to the editors of the Atlanta Journal and Constitution about the evils of the teacher unions. Obviously, the letter writers believe the talking points that they hear on the radio or cable news and don't bother checking the facts.
~Kathy
DammitJanet
Well-Known Member
I think in most southern states unions are illegal. I believe I have heard that we may be heading into changing that but dont really know.
There are only five states that don't allow teacher unions: South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, Virginia. It is interesting that they are all in the south and all have lower average salaries than unionized states like Ohio.
2010 average teacher salaries
Ohio: $54,656
States without collective bargaining
Georgia: $52,879
North Carolina: $48,648
South Carolina: $47,421
Texas: $47,157
Virginia: $48,365
2010 average teacher salaries
Ohio: $54,656
States without collective bargaining
Georgia: $52,879
North Carolina: $48,648
South Carolina: $47,421
Texas: $47,157
Virginia: $48,365
We used to have - or at least I don't live in that province any more - at least one province that didn't allow all sorts of occupations to form unions - "public servants" being one of those. They got around THAT just fine... and formed "professional associations" to speak for them. Technically NOT a union. They couldn't strike, etc. But... they enforced standards of professional conduct, collected dues, and... when necessary, showed up in court or anywhere else to support their members. Eventually... the government decided it was just plain easier to negotiate with one umbrella organization, than to keep pretending that it wasn't a "union". But they still call them "professional associations".
Hound dog
Nana's are Beautiful
Ohio also has some really horrid teachers they just can't get out of the system either. I don't just mean those who can't teach, I mean abusive teachers as well.
I'm not necessarily anti-union. I just haven't seen recently where they've actually worked in favor of those whom they're intended to serve. I have seen far too many unions push companies to the point of closing their doors because they flat out refuse to compromise, thereby causing the workers to lose their jobs. This is all but folding up the city in which I grew up........which is a shame. I've also, unfortunately, been exposed to much of the corruption in the upper levels of some unions which would enrage the people they're working for if they ever figured it out.......my step dad was part of that along with a few other people I knew. Which is one of the reasons the man had such outrageous bank accounts. No one exposed them because they all knew each others secrets. ugh They could literally get away with murder in my hometown. (he did too )
I just don't see how unions who do this sort of thing can convince those they're working for that they're doing them any favors. What difference does it make if they got you a raise and more retirement if 3 months later the company folds because they couldn't afford to pay it? I think I'd have be happy with the lower salary / benefits and to still have my job.
I've been in a union and it was a pretty good one overall. Only thing I can say is when they planned to strike I told them flat out I wouldn't be doing it. I had bills to pay and food to put on the table (Fred was out of work at the time). I said it loud and clear during the meeting. I said it loud and clear when they tried to convince me privately. I wouldn't say anything against them.....but a .50 raise was just not worth being evicted from my apartment or my kids going hungry. They wound up deciding not to strike, seems like more folks felt like I did than they thought. Had they went on strike? I'd have been crossing picket lines. Sorry, a whopping .50 cents is just not worth it to me. geez
That's what I like about our Labour Relations Board approach. It is NOT a union. But there is "somebody" who can stand up to abusive companies, somebody who can speak for the individual. Unless you have a union - in which case, the person is directed back to the union, which can be corrupt... So I'd rather work without a union.
It is a shame that many people do not remember or are too young to understand why unions were formed in the first place. I sat on both sides of the aisle during my time working at the phone company. I was the sole provider for our family and we lived month to month. And yet I honored the picket line when necessary and when I was in management I crossed the picket line to work as was my responsibility both times. I'm not going to judge anyone else for what they do but I do think it's very sad that we forget the good unions have done for workers in our country and while there may be changes that need to be made I will not join in bashing teachers in any state, let alone my own.
Last edited:
Nancy... I've seen at least three sides to unions...
In the really, really old days, when unions were formed, well... in my opinion companies got what they "asked" for, even though they didn't think so. They were being SO far off the deep end in how they handled staff that... people will group together and stand up for their collective selves. It was absolutely necessary.
In the "old days" (40 years ago, when I was a kid and my parents worked union jobs), there was a respect between the union and management. The adversarial nature of the relationship was partly show, and mostly hidden unless there was a real point to be made. Usually, strikes were rare - if you hit two strikes in your career, that was about -normal. At this point, unions were no longer absolutely necessary, but they worked - it was effective all the way around.
Today? There's just too much corruption on all sides... union, management, staff, and the government departments that are supposed to have oversight. With or without unions, we're in a major mess (on our side of the border too...)
In the really, really old days, when unions were formed, well... in my opinion companies got what they "asked" for, even though they didn't think so. They were being SO far off the deep end in how they handled staff that... people will group together and stand up for their collective selves. It was absolutely necessary.
In the "old days" (40 years ago, when I was a kid and my parents worked union jobs), there was a respect between the union and management. The adversarial nature of the relationship was partly show, and mostly hidden unless there was a real point to be made. Usually, strikes were rare - if you hit two strikes in your career, that was about -normal. At this point, unions were no longer absolutely necessary, but they worked - it was effective all the way around.
Today? There's just too much corruption on all sides... union, management, staff, and the government departments that are supposed to have oversight. With or without unions, we're in a major mess (on our side of the border too...)
S
Signorina
Guest
Professional associations are one thing - and IME they usually don't get involved in workplace issues.
One does not need to be in a union or even a "right to work" state in order to have enforceable workplace rights.
AFAIK, every state has a labor board and every state has it's own legislated labor code and statutes which the labor board enforces. In our state, the labor agency is the "Department of workforce development" (they also handle Unemployment) and they are very proactive and take complaints seriously.
It's usually pretty easy to file a complaint against an employer for labor statute violations - unpaid overtime, wages due, discrimination of any kind, unfair labor practices, prevailing wage violation, substandard working conditions, workplace retaliation, etc... h online or by mail in any state and it gets action. They are prompt to investigate EVERY claim and if it does not get resolved, they will follow up. Just because you are in an "at will" state does NOT mean that employers are all powerful and there are no labor standards/laws beyond federal anti - discrimination law.
So, in a sense, every state has it's own taxpayer funded agency that is basically a labor relations board.
And MWM - here's a link to the WI DWD - you have lots of rights as a WI worker... http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/er_know_your_rights.htm
You can file a complaint against Head Start without a lawyer if you feel like your rights were violated, hth
One does not need to be in a union or even a "right to work" state in order to have enforceable workplace rights.
AFAIK, every state has a labor board and every state has it's own legislated labor code and statutes which the labor board enforces. In our state, the labor agency is the "Department of workforce development" (they also handle Unemployment) and they are very proactive and take complaints seriously.
It's usually pretty easy to file a complaint against an employer for labor statute violations - unpaid overtime, wages due, discrimination of any kind, unfair labor practices, prevailing wage violation, substandard working conditions, workplace retaliation, etc... h online or by mail in any state and it gets action. They are prompt to investigate EVERY claim and if it does not get resolved, they will follow up. Just because you are in an "at will" state does NOT mean that employers are all powerful and there are no labor standards/laws beyond federal anti - discrimination law.
So, in a sense, every state has it's own taxpayer funded agency that is basically a labor relations board.
And MWM - here's a link to the WI DWD - you have lots of rights as a WI worker... http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/er/er_know_your_rights.htm
You can file a complaint against Head Start without a lawyer if you feel like your rights were violated, hth
Actually Insane in the old days we had a strike every time the contract was up and I participated in each and every one. Strikes were very common then in most every industry, it was a matter of course. It may have only lasted a couple days but as management I worked three weeks in Toledo and two weeks in Dayton covering the strike. Our customers never suffered, we filled in every job and did it well.
Last edited:
BusynMember
Well-Known Member
Sig, I've tried. You will never win. They have the lawyers and the money. "At will" states give no rights to the workers. The Labor Boards can't help. Heck, lawyers tell me there is nothing they can do.
Wisconsin's govenor would have liked taking us "right to work" but I think he's afraid after the last election and won't do it. I still think he's toast in two years when he comes up for re-election again. We just elected Tammy Baldwin to the Senate. I think we've had it with the Walkers and Ron Johnsons in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin's govenor would have liked taking us "right to work" but I think he's afraid after the last election and won't do it. I still think he's toast in two years when he comes up for re-election again. We just elected Tammy Baldwin to the Senate. I think we've had it with the Walkers and Ron Johnsons in Wisconsin.
TerryJ2
Well-Known Member
MWM, I feel badly for you. You were wronged. And eventually, they will figure it out. Their loss. Bigtime.
In the meantime, I have to say, I agree with at-will state laws. I live in VA, which is an at-will state (as well as right-to-work, which I recently discovered is not the same thing).
Anyway, I've been on both ends. In one case, I was laid off, because we split amicably and they were very nice about it, plus, as JJJ mentioned, it does cost the company money, but they had a rather large company with a factory and they had a nice fund for that sort of thing.
I have also worked in places "almost" full time, knowing that if I made it to 40 hrs, they'd have to pay benefits, which they did not want to do. I understood that going in, and was fine with it at the time.
As far as I know, in most states, employers let you continue your health ins for a certain length of time, (and that's always been my no. 1 priority). Some of them will only pay it for a month, but the ins company will let you take over the payments, and come will continue to pay the premium for 6 wks or more. It takes awhile to find another plan, either at a new job or self employed. I'm not sure if that comes from a state law, or the insurance industry.
My husband runs his own small biz and I can guarantee you, it is a royal pain to hire and train people. And keep them. One problem is that he'll train people from scratch, and then they'll leave for a higher paying job with their new skills. He is paying more now, and he has learned to hire more effectively. One thing you don't want to do is hire the first person who shows up and you wouldn't believe how many businesses do that. It is so wasteful in training and it eats up the other employees' time, and then it cuts down on customer svc and order fulfullment, all the things the employees would otherwise be doing.
One place that seems to have just learned not to hire the first person who shows up is my cousin's assisted living complex. They are finally hiring good people. I just hope that they stay (and they remain good, and I don't have to eat my words!). They definitely fire at will and I've seen it done both fairly and unfairly there. Even though they can be very unfair, I have to say that it protects my cousin and the other patients more, because it gets the employee out. Immediately. Health care practioners can do a lot of damage. Think Michael Crichton and Robin Cook and where they got their ideas. Same thing for banking and computers.
My husband has been taken to task twice for unemployment when he fired people and he won both times. One was a racial issue. That was ridiculous. He would be okay hiring the person to begin with, so why not be able to fire him? Not to mention we are a mixed-race family. The other one involved something criminal and I don't recall what it was.
Businesses, in order to truly thrive and profit, must be able to control who and how they hire and fire. I see your point about being accountable, and/but every place I've ever worked, (in MN and VA, which are vastly different in terms of employment and politics), has always had a section in the contract stipulating two-week notice. (Well, unless you're carrying a rocket launcher or something.)
I myself have fired people. It is very, very hard. Even in one case, when I couldn't wait to get rid of the person, I hated being in the position I was in. "It's lonely at the top" is so true.
I have no idea how your Head Start operates but as I said earlier, I do think you were wronged. I don't think a different contract or a state law would have helped you. That woman was just a *$&!#.
In the meantime, I have to say, I agree with at-will state laws. I live in VA, which is an at-will state (as well as right-to-work, which I recently discovered is not the same thing).
Anyway, I've been on both ends. In one case, I was laid off, because we split amicably and they were very nice about it, plus, as JJJ mentioned, it does cost the company money, but they had a rather large company with a factory and they had a nice fund for that sort of thing.
I have also worked in places "almost" full time, knowing that if I made it to 40 hrs, they'd have to pay benefits, which they did not want to do. I understood that going in, and was fine with it at the time.
As far as I know, in most states, employers let you continue your health ins for a certain length of time, (and that's always been my no. 1 priority). Some of them will only pay it for a month, but the ins company will let you take over the payments, and come will continue to pay the premium for 6 wks or more. It takes awhile to find another plan, either at a new job or self employed. I'm not sure if that comes from a state law, or the insurance industry.
My husband runs his own small biz and I can guarantee you, it is a royal pain to hire and train people. And keep them. One problem is that he'll train people from scratch, and then they'll leave for a higher paying job with their new skills. He is paying more now, and he has learned to hire more effectively. One thing you don't want to do is hire the first person who shows up and you wouldn't believe how many businesses do that. It is so wasteful in training and it eats up the other employees' time, and then it cuts down on customer svc and order fulfullment, all the things the employees would otherwise be doing.
One place that seems to have just learned not to hire the first person who shows up is my cousin's assisted living complex. They are finally hiring good people. I just hope that they stay (and they remain good, and I don't have to eat my words!). They definitely fire at will and I've seen it done both fairly and unfairly there. Even though they can be very unfair, I have to say that it protects my cousin and the other patients more, because it gets the employee out. Immediately. Health care practioners can do a lot of damage. Think Michael Crichton and Robin Cook and where they got their ideas. Same thing for banking and computers.
My husband has been taken to task twice for unemployment when he fired people and he won both times. One was a racial issue. That was ridiculous. He would be okay hiring the person to begin with, so why not be able to fire him? Not to mention we are a mixed-race family. The other one involved something criminal and I don't recall what it was.
Businesses, in order to truly thrive and profit, must be able to control who and how they hire and fire. I see your point about being accountable, and/but every place I've ever worked, (in MN and VA, which are vastly different in terms of employment and politics), has always had a section in the contract stipulating two-week notice. (Well, unless you're carrying a rocket launcher or something.)
I myself have fired people. It is very, very hard. Even in one case, when I couldn't wait to get rid of the person, I hated being in the position I was in. "It's lonely at the top" is so true.
I have no idea how your Head Start operates but as I said earlier, I do think you were wronged. I don't think a different contract or a state law would have helped you. That woman was just a *$&!#.
BusynMember
Well-Known Member
Terry, I understand small businesses and their problems and I think that maybe under fifty employees and you should be able to do what you like. But federally funded and state employers, who get tons from our taxes, and big companies...there should be rules protecting employees. It costs US money too when some of us need to find childcare and then plan our budgets based on our jobs and we get fired for NO reason at all. Why should all the advantage go to the employer? And COBRA is dang expensive...I look forward for the ACA kicking in. I think which side you sit on is which side you take. I personally don't believe one entity should have all the power. It isn't like this anywhere else in the world and it shouldn't be here. And I think we'll see it change one day. I am looking forward to the next Wisconsin election 
And I voted for Walker and was very anti-union until it happened to me. Shows you how your own personal experience can change ones mind fast . Kind of laughing at my own swap in thinking. It's one thing to say, "Well, it's their business...why shouldn't they be able to do whatever t hey want to do?" and it's another to know the helpless feeling of being punished without cause...lol. I've totally switched sides, although I think it should go beyond just unions.
And I voted for Walker and was very anti-union until it happened to me. Shows you how your own personal experience can change ones mind fast . Kind of laughing at my own swap in thinking. It's one thing to say, "Well, it's their business...why shouldn't they be able to do whatever t hey want to do?" and it's another to know the helpless feeling of being punished without cause...lol. I've totally switched sides, although I think it should go beyond just unions.
TerryJ2
Well-Known Member
Off on a small tangent, speaking of unions, I was always totally anti-union until I saw the movie, "Norma Rae." The author and producer did a great job pointing out the problems and why those employees needed a union.
However, like many things, over the yrs, some unions grew so large and so irrational, that their only goal was to put the biz out of biz. And that helps
who(m)?
There's got to be a happy medium.
Not sure what it is.
However, like many things, over the yrs, some unions grew so large and so irrational, that their only goal was to put the biz out of biz. And that helps
who(m)?
There's got to be a happy medium.
Not sure what it is.
witzend
Well-Known Member
Because it was courtesy of the Unions that we got the 40 hour work week, child labor laws, workplace safety, standards of practice that make products safe, and eventually health insurance coverage and pensions that can't be raided by the employer before they sell you out to China. It's also through Unions that there are apprenticeship programs for electricians to learn how to not burn down everything they build, plumbers to learn how to not flood your crawl space or inside your walls and give you dry rot so your brand new house doesn't fall down around you (don't even let me get into what's happening to my 8 month old house built by "day laborers"), meat-cutters who know how to not get e-coli all over your food, auto manufacturers who build safe cars and don't try to skimp by using "just 8 less welds" than what they know has been proven safe, have some kid off the street that started work yesterday filling your loved one's medicine that's a matter of life and death, and child welfare workers who know not to have sex with the kids or turn them out to work in a sweatshop or out on the street. Is it perfect? No. But it ensures that people in skilled trades aren't doing all of those things that people say "Why wasn't someone paying attention?" when 40 guys die in a non-union mine that had been deemed unsafe 25 times in the last year because it was a "right to work" state. Safety regulations mean Jack All when you trust ginormous employers to be the only ones training their workers.
Seriously, if you're earning $17 an hour is $17 a month REALLY that much of a burden for those kinds of protections? Let me assure you, none of you working those #&*$ jobs for Head Start and Goodwill and whatever all else you've been complaining about getting shafted at and then fired when you complained weren't making what you would in a Union shop. Period. So, is it worth $204 a year to earn twice or three times as much money or more and band your small company of 15 together with 40,000 other people to protect your rights and know that when "Miss Her Stuff Don't Stink" because she's the supervisor's sister in law decides that she doesn't like you and you get canned for NOTHING and you've been working %#*& hours for no pay for the past 10 years and you have nothing to show for it can't get you fired? You decide. If you think not paying a measly amount of Union dues to avoid going back to the work practices of 1913, I suggest you look up your town and see what it was like to work in the mill or the meatpacking business a hundred years ago. You wouldn't wish that on your neighbor's dog.
witzend
Well-Known Member
However, like many things, over the yrs, some unions grew so large and so irrational, that their only goal was to put the biz out of biz. And that helps
who(m)?
There's got to be a happy medium.
Not sure what it is.
There IS a happy medium. The Union Represents the worker, and new leaders are elected every 2 years. Informed workers vote and participate in Union activities. They know both sides of the story. For the most part I ain't crying for anyone who says they went out of business because the union drove them out of business, because 9 times out of 10 they raided the pensions and stashed their money overseas before the unions "drove them out of business". Then they leave the government to bail out the pension plans.
It's just like government. If we don't participate in it, we really have no right to complain about it when we let it get away with stealing from us right under our noses and don't say a darned thing about it. If anyone thinks that the employers wouldn't just LOVE to hear about and act upon a union taking unfair advantage of employees, they're sadly mistaken. That is a two way street.
