My Only Knock On Unions

A good marriage is better than being single, IMHO, but being single is better than a bad marriage.

I feel the same about unions: A good one is better than being non-union, but being non-union is better than a bad union.

Unfortunately, most of my experience has been with a bad union, i.e., ineffectual, timid, bureaucratic, Stockholm syndrome-ish. Management mocked it by giving benefits to non-union workers that it refused the organized folks, telling them to "win it at the table." And then it never allowed them to win it at the table. In that case, it seemed that the union benefited the non-union workers more than it benefited its members.

I also wonder about a union that, once you're laid off, no matter how much in dues you have paid through the years, treats you like you're dead. It only "represents" the folks still working, still having dues pulled out of their paychecks. Seems a little out of touch with today's journalism world, doesn't it?

 

What Joe said pretty much equals my experience.

Signed,
Martyr-Complex Douchebag

 

In today's newspaper world, there are very few "underperforming" workers left. Most of the staffs are so cut to the bone that everyone is working their ass off and I agree with you Zag that this is the biggest false meme that people put forth when they're too cheap to pay their union dues and join. Also, for those who thought the unions were "weak," because the management was giving great stuff to the nonunion people and telling them to win it at the table and didn't let them, in what universe do you think they would have been giving that stuff to nonunion people if there wasn't a union. That's the whole point. They want to get rid of the union and they'd be able to pay all their workers less across the board. This actually worked in Cincinnati when one person wanted the adoption credit and managed to get the whole paper to vote out the union so he could get that adoption credit. Presto, chango, no union. And there will never be one there again, you can bet on that. Do you think the people at that paper wish they had one now with the furloughs and wage freezes Gannett is forcing on them? I'd say so. Meanwhile, those in Detroit don't have to deal with that because they have a strong union in there fighting for them.

 

I just don't consider it a "W" to pay dues and, in the end, see non-union folks under the same get benefits that union folks do not, even if the reason is that management "fears" the non-union people organizing on them and therefore sweetens their deals. Doesn't do much good for the folks paying those dues week in, week out.

You can pay your dues, abide by the majority-rules thing and still have a view of unions, or your particular local, that doesn't jibe with the herd's. Yet that frequently seems very threatening to pro-union folks, which to me is as contrary to how a newsroom should think/work as when management treats differences of opinion from the journalists in its midst as a threat to its authority.

 

That can even be taken a step further. I've seen decertified factions of the newspaper plant receive EXTRA benefits from management, with the understanding that whether you pay dues or not, you can't have those benefits as long as there's a union in the newsroom.

 

Word. I never get sick of those martyr types.

 

A union is only as good as its members. If the officers work their asses off, make stands, make demands and bargain faithfully and realistically, as ours has, the members are going to benefit. No, we weren't able to secure a raise in our last negotiations, but we kept our company from f__ing us on health care, sick leave, layoffs, buyouts, etc. We are also a Guild shop and have received invaluable support from them. Personally, since I'm at the top of the food chain, I'd probably be f__ed without my union and the leadership of our officers. And, believe me, I've never been a big proponent of unions.
And as for the earlier thread that ripped teachers unions, that just pisses me off. My wife has been a teacher almost as long as I've been a writer. I get so tired of the generalization that teachers unions just protect the bad teachers. That's crap. My wife works all day, most of the night, weekends and vacations and into the summer. The townspeople treat her and her fellow teachers like janitors. They're mostly dedicated professionals, just like us, who deserve to be compensated thusly.

 

I've worked in union and non-union shops. No doubt in my mind my experience as a employee and the way I was treated was much better in the union shop.

 

Yes, I'm the one who made the statement about teacher's unions, and like you, my wife is a teacher, too. For almost 30 years. And I still despise teacher's unions. The way they flaunt their money around election time is beyond disgusting.

 

what kind of living do you think your wife would have made without her union?

 

Thank you. Anyone complaining about "the union" needs to understand that it's their union and it's their obligation to be involved in the decision-making process of their union. And after more than 30 years of union involvement I still have not seen a unionized workplace that isn't better because of the union's presence.

Silvercharm, your wife is lucky to be a unionized teacher because few occupations have been more favorably affected by strong unions in recent years. I bet she gets better benefits than you and I bet your wife benefits from the unions "flaunting their money" at election time, too.

 

An example of how unions work, from my company:

To pinch pennies, new platemaking equipment is purchased. It required all kinds of production and scheduling changes in both the pressroom (whose workers are in a union) and the newsroom (non-union).

The pressroom workers had all the printing work, previously done over most of the day, consolidated between mid-afternoon and about 3 a.m. Their schedule now includes four 10-hour days, with two breaks and a half-hour lunch (lunch is off the clock). They received on-the-clock training on the new equipment before it went online.

The newsroom workers showed up to work one night and were told, "Hey, effective immediately, we've got new, earlier deadlines for everything from early pages to the sports agate page. Oh, and here's a memo showing how to (incorrectly) sent plates to the plateroom." And it's been three months, and we're still scheduled according to the old production schedule -- and of course, expected to follow it exactly SO THERE'S NO OVERTIME, despite how difficult that schedule makes producing the paper each night.

Did the pressroom's union have a positive or negative impact on this process? I think I know the answer.

Tough economic times only turn up the heat in the day-to-day battle between workers and management. I've worked in union and non-union jobs, and it's absolutely better to have everyone standing together -- even the alleged "under-performing workers."

Solidarity forever.