On Tuesday 11 September 2007 01:49, Alex Russell wrote:
> My personal experience with unions is limited to one not terribly
> 'militant' union. I found the union was like a big rusty ratchet: it
> never goes backwards, but is very difficult to move forward.
>
> Pros:
> Don't get fired for no reason.
> Better benefits than most non-union jobs (in my limited experience)
> Less favoritism when promoting people
> Management follows labour laws much better
>
> Cons:
> hard to fire people who abuse the rules
> inflexible job descriptions / work force
> Can take longer to get promoted for merit as opposed to for seniority
> more red tape in general
>
>
> I know people who work for well run non-union shops who don't want to
> unionize as there would be no benefit and they would have to pay dues.
> But the more common situation is that non-union people have a harder
> time negotiating better wages and benefits unless they are extremely
> skilled.
>
Companies are not democracies and so the workers need some form of
collective barganing in order to balance the total power of the owners.
If they don't have this, they're screwed. Unfortunately the owners
often have their own spies among the workers and they go in to control
the union in some cases. So the workers have the choice of getting
screwed by the company if they don't have a union and if they do they
can get screwed by the company and the union. Usually workers get
better benefits and higher pay with a union especially one that pays
attention to the rank & file members.
I am hoping to soon be a television producer here in Canada and
among
producers and broadcasters the unionized shops are not that bad. The
standing agreements mean that we can cost out a project quite
accurately, with standard rates, well in advance and line up the
necessary financing. Here, producers fees, (profits), are a percentage
of the production budget, more or less, so higher rates for actors and
crew don't bother me a bit. (;-)) My new show, if the networks accept
it, will be a totally unionized shop. The system has been in operation
for a long time and the agreements and practises have been tested over
and over again till we've found something that works for us all. I've
worked in factories when I was younger and in offices and I think more
im****tant than the speed that people work is the atmosphere in the
workplace. People that are doing a job they like and in a friendly
environment, respected for their contribution, will work harder and
faster than people in a bad environment being yelled at and
intimidated. Before I'd fire someone for being too slow, I'd want to
find out why. Do they need better or more training? Are they unhappy
about something? Do they have personal problems? As an employer I
don't believe in firing people for making mistakes either. People who
never make mistakes are people who don't do much. I'd fire someone for
having a bad attitude, or for consistently making mistakes or trying to
make decisions outside of their authority and experience, but simply
making a mistake is something we all do sooner or later.
How do you feel about worker owned cooperatives?
--
Regards,
Fred
<http://www.fredwilliams.ca/thesecretofmoney.html>
|
