federal unions

[burrocrat]

Taxpayers foot bill for union work, lawmakers seek changes | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/26/taxpayers-foot-bill-for-union-work-lawmakers-seek-changes/)


According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 939,000 federal workers belonged to a union in 2014. Another 139,000 were covered by collective bargaining agreements, but weren't in a union. That brings the total number of employees covered by the unions to 31.6 percent of the total federal workforce. Hice -- who will introduce legislation in the House Thursday to limit "official time" -- doesn't think it's fair that the other 68 percent of federal employees are doing government work every day, while some of their union colleagues are getting paid to not do the work they were hired for.

i'm curious, how many here are dues paying union members? covered by a collective bargaining unit but don't pay dues? in a series not represented by a union?

[Maricar19]

There are some craft who need to be represented by the Union or their rights will be abused.
Some management can be ignorant of the rights of the workers and some do respect these rights.
There are some bad union members and officials who abuse this right of representation.
I can't seem to find an appropriate ending for my discourse...so I'll just leave it hanging until I can think of a better ending...

[Lakebound]

I'm a manager who was at one time who was the Chief Steward for our local.

I'm no longer a member but, I respect the union's position, know the Master Agreement very well and abide by it. The problem that I see is people who see their position in both management as well as in the union as a platform to inflict pain onto the other party.

I personally feel that becoming a manager was a mistake on my part so late in my career. The human behavior, especially the vindictiveness that I have witnessed is appalling.

Frank

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

[gegor1957]

I'm a manager who was at one time who was the Chief Steward for our local.

I'm no longer a member but, I respect the union's position, know the Master Agreement very well and abide by it. The problem that I see is people who see their position in both management as well as in the union as a platform to inflict pain onto the other party.

I personally feel that becoming a manager was a mistake on my part so late in my career. The human behavior, especially the vindictiveness that I have witnessed is appalling.

Frank

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Sounds like my career, I took the early out in 2012 because I couldn't deal with the lies from either side.

[Lakebound]

Sounds like my career, I took the early out in 2012 because I couldn't deal with the lies from either side.

I'm seriously thinking about writing a book about leadership and management based solely on what I have witnessed as a manager.

Frank

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

[nnuut]

I was a second level supervisor for 13 years a BRAC closed the facility. I was transferred to another base but not as a supervisor, I was a much happier employee for the rest of my career. The union helped sometimes and hindered the others.

[PessOptimist]

Taxpayers foot bill for union work, lawmakers seek changes | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/26/taxpayers-foot-bill-for-union-work-lawmakers-seek-changes/)

I believe that the union representatives concerning myself represent us on their own time. I may be mistaken. The unions finally mentioned in the last paragraph of the article are not mine and Maricar19 is correct that some Craft employees are regularly abused by management because management thinks everyone is a general schedule employee. Management has no clue about bargaining agreements for Craft employees and equivalent pay.

The unions mentioned in the last paragraph of the link seem more concerned with how many square feet of workspace and what kind of telephone the worker has.

Management seems more concerned with bonuses and promotion.

As stated before in other posts management has no clue about the lower level day to day things that their part of the fed machine does nor do they care about it or who keeps it going. Until part of it malfunctions.

PO

[FireWeatherMet]

Taxpayers foot bill for union work, lawmakers seek changes | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/26/taxpayers-foot-bill-for-union-work-lawmakers-seek-changes/)

I believe that the union representatives concerning myself represent us on their own time. I may be mistaken. The unions finally mentioned in the last paragraph of the article are not mine and Maricar19 is correct that some Craft employees are regularly abused by management because management thinks everyone is a general schedule employee. Management has no clue about bargaining agreements for Craft employees and equivalent pay.

The unions mentioned in the last paragraph of the link seem more concerned with how many square feet of workspace and what kind of telephone the worker has.

Management seems more concerned with bonuses and promotion.

As stated before in other posts management has no clue about the lower level day to day things that their part of the fed machine does nor do they care about it or who keeps it going. Until part of it malfunctions.

PO



Unless one has been living in a cave, its quite obvious what is going on here.

The agreement to let union officers (local stewards, regional chairs, etc) a day a week (or pay period) to work on labor issues has been a law for over 35 years. Never any problems with that for all that time

The unions at the regional/national level fight to negotiate many of our federal benefits and fair labor standards (Pension, Health Care, OT and Comp Time).

One political party (not to be named since this is not a political thread) have declared a holy war Fatwah on federal employees, wanting to drastically cut pension benefits, cut FEHB, prevent COLA's, maybe reduce leave in the future.

The unions at the national level are the only ones fighting for fed employee rights, lobbying congress and the WH on our behalf.

Those in Congress who want to burn federal employee benefits to the ground want to weaken federal unions, so they can more easily achieve their task.

That's all that's going on here.

[nnuut]

Same Old, Same Old, Same Old, while the Liberals are kissing Butt the Repubs are doing the hard work, the stuff that is risky, not another Give Away!

[Viva_La_Migra]

Unless one has been living in a cave, its quite obvious what is going on here.

The agreement to let union officers (local stewards, regional chairs, etc) a day a week (or pay period) to work on labor issues has been a law for over 35 years. Never any problems with that for all that time

The unions at the regional/national level fight to negotiate many of our federal benefits and fair labor standards (Pension, Health Care, OT and Comp Time).

One political party (not to be named since this is not a political thread) have declared a holy war Fatwah on federal employees, wanting to drastically cut pension benefits, cut FEHB, prevent COLA's, maybe reduce leave in the future.

The unions at the national level are the only ones fighting for fed employee rights, lobbying congress and the WH on our behalf.

Those in Congress who want to burn federal employee benefits to the ground want to weaken federal unions, so they can more easily achieve their task.

That's all that's going on here.

I'm going to make your mind explode here. I agree with you on this one. It's politics, plain and simple. I was a national union officer for five years. It's necessary to have people on official time to negotiate on our behalf. If Congress wants to authorize a modified closed shop, where people are charged a small amount per pay period for the representation the unions provide, the unions could hire full time representatives and the volunteers could go back to their jobs. They won't do that, though.

[userque]

I'm going to make your mind explode here. I agree with you on this one. It's politics, plain and simple. I was a national union officer for five years. It's necessary to have people on official time to negotiate on our behalf. If Congress wants to authorize a modified closed shop, where people are charged a small amount per pay period for the representation the unions provide, the unions could hire full time representatives and the volunteers could go back to their jobs. They won't do that, though.

Right. Most don't know the history of the labor movement. Why it was needed in the first place. Now the plan is to pit employee against their union. Old school union busting.

With so many soon-to-become-management stewards/officers "representing" employees; combined with a general ignorance of the labor movement: I'm afraid the ongoing union busting will accelerate.

[Shamus13]

Same Old, Same Old, Same Old, while the Liberals are kissing Butt the Repubs are doing the hard work, the stuff that is risky, not another Give Away!

Nope. I agree with FWM on this one. Big difference between a 'Gives Away' and a negotiated fair work environment. I a dues paying member.

Look at any work environment and you will find employees that fall anywhere from lazy to hard workers. Look at any work environment and you will see management that are SOB's to fair. Look at unions and you will see greed to fair representation for better work environments. It's unfair to say Unions are the sole issue.

Keep on on taking from me. Keep on stripping my benefits. Keep limiting my Union representation. All while coddling those that refuse to get into the workforce... Now that's F'd up.

[nnuut]

I do believe that Unions are good but they turn into a money sucking monster if they are not controlled. They should be there to assure the workers are treated fairly but limited far below the current levels of the big Billions of dollars UNIONS we have now. These should NOT be money making organizations.

[sniper]

Interesting, I didn't think federal workers were allowed to unionize

[nnuut]

Yes they CAN, but they don't have to!

[FireWeatherMet]

Interesting, I didn't think federal workers were allowed to unionize

Huh???? Where you been brother?

Nearly 1 million federal employees are unionized. That number used to be much higher...when there were nearly double the amount of federal employees 30 years ago.

[weatherweenie]

I was in the NWSEO for a few years. Then I realized that they didn't really do much, if anything, for me. So I quit.

[nnuut]

I quit the union just after my 2nd year of federal service, it took 3 months to quit! They made it as hard as they could.

[FireWeatherMet]

I quit the union just after my 2nd year of federal service, it took 3 months to quit! They made it as hard as they could.

Yes...you just happily reap the benefits that union negotiations gave you over (postal health plan costs cheaper than rest of Gov't workforce) plus all the annual leave (4 weeks after 3 years...5 weeks after 15 years0 retirement benefits and other fair labor standards you would NEVER have had in a non union industry. You get these while having others pay union dues to help achieve and maintain those rights. Nuff said.

[nnuut]

Yes...you just happily reap the benefits that union negotiations gave you over (postal health plan costs cheaper than rest of Gov't workforce) plus all the annual leave (4 weeks after 3 years...5 weeks after 15 years0 retirement benefits and other fair labor standards you would NEVER have had in a non union industry. You get these while having others pay union dues to help achieve and maintain those rights. Nuff said. 37 years and I never had to call on the union to represent me, although I had to work with them many times when one of my employees were in trouble. I would always call their representative when I had to take actions against an employee, carried the union book in my back pocket for years. I know the Union deal very well, do you?

[sniper]

Huh???? Where you been brother?

Nearly 1 million federal employees are unionized. That number used to be much higher...when there were nearly double the amount of federal employees 30 years ago.

Haha, just never looked into it. I knew when i was the military it was illegal for us to unionize, so I assumed it was like that for all feds. I was wrong lol.

[ravensfan]

37 years and I never had to call on the union to represent me, although I had to work with them many times when one of my employees were in trouble. I would always call their representative when I had to take actions against an employee, carried the union book in my back pocket for years. I know the Union deal very well, do you?

Very early in my career, I was in the union. I had a co-worker file a grievance because he didn't like the type of music I played during work hours. Thinking things could get ugly, I contacted my union rep to represent me at the hearing and was told that I couldn't have union representation because they were representing the other guy. The irony was that he was a non-union member and got representation whereas I was a dues paying member and was denied union representation. Needless to say, I quit the union the very next pay period.

As for federal unions, it is true they negotiate benefits but in reality have very little power. Just ask the air traffic controllers who tried to strike during the Reagan administration. They all lost their jobs and the union was powerless to do anything about it...

[sniper]

Very early in my career, I was in the union. I had a co-worker file a grievance because he didn't like the type of music I played during work hours. Thinking things could get ugly, I contacted my union rep to represent me at the hearing and was told that I couldn't have union representation because they were representing the other guy. The irony was that he was a non-union member and got representation whereas I was a dues paying member and was denied union representation. Needless to say, I quit the union the very next pay period.

As for federal unions, it is true they negotiate benefits but in reality have very little power. Just ask the air traffic controllers who tried to strike during the Reagan administration. They all lost their jobs and the union was powerless to do anything about it...

That's bunk. I would have filed a grievance against you for being a ravens fan, but that's about it (Steeler fan here lol) :cool:

Crappy though, you'd think the union would defend the one actually paying dues, that's messed up.

[FireWeatherMet]

I quit the union just after my 2nd year of federal service, it took 3 months to quit! They made it as hard as they could.


Yes...you just happily reap the benefits that union negotiations gave you over (postal health plan costs cheaper than rest of Gov't workforce) plus all the annual leave (4 weeks after 3 years...5 weeks after 15 years0 retirement benefits and other fair labor standards you would NEVER have had in a non union industry. You get these while having others pay union dues to help achieve and maintain those rights. Nuff said.


37 years and I never had to call on the union to represent me, although I had to work with them many times when one of my employees were in trouble. I would always call their representative when I had to take actions against an employee, carried the union book in my back pocket for years. I know the Union deal very well, do you?

I can't speak for every local union chapter, but combined, on the national level, you do know that its because of them that your retirement plan is so generous. Its because of them that you can carry FEHB into retirement, otherwise Medicare would be the only thing you would have. Its because of them that your FEHB plan withholdings were so cheap.

So you got all those benefits, but let others pay for the fight to get AND KEEP THEM from Republican efforts to reduce them. Like I said...nuff said on your end.

[nnuut]

I can't speak for every local union chapter, but combined, on the national level, you do know that its because of them that your retirement plan is so generous. Its because of them that you can carry FEHB into retirement, otherwise Medicare would be the only thing you would have. Its because of them that your FEHB plan withholdings were so cheap.

So you got all those benefits, but let others pay for the fight to get AND KEEP THEM from Republican efforts to reduce them. Like I said...nuff said on your end.NO Sir, the government employees benefits were at the level they are now by keeping up with PRIVATE INDUSTRY! Remember GM, Ford,GE, Westinghouse etc. All of those big companies that have such generous benefits, and now have lost most of them due to our good jobs being sent out of the country by Bill Clinton and Al Gore. I hate that.

[FireWeatherMet]

NO Sir, the government employees benefits were at the level they are now by keeping up with PRIVATE INDUSTRY! Remember GM, Ford,GE, Westinghouse etc. All of those big companies that have such generous benefits, and now have lost most of them due to our good jobs being sent out of the country by Bill Clinton and Al Gore. I hate that.

Wrong...you've already been schooled on this...Jobs were sent overseas by the Republican written NAFTA agreement.

"Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1990 among the three nations, U.S. President George H. W. Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush), Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulroney) and Mexican President Carlos Salinas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Salinas), each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992"
(Clinton didn't take office till late Jan 1993),
North American Free Trade Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement)

Clinton could not veto it even if he wanted to, since that Republican outsourcing bill passed by a veto proof majority in congress, remember? Whether he signed it or not didn't matter, it had already automatically passed as a law in Congress (thanks to some democrat turncoats who sided with the GOP).

And any benefits for fed employees on any par with past private sector, the ones you enjoy so much, were all negotiated by your hated unions.
The reason they disappeared from the private sector in the past 30 years is directly related to a precipitous drop in private sector union membership past 30 years.

[dougscott]

33265

Is this a political tread??? I feel like I lost my way ...

[burrocrat]

Is this a political tread???

i was hoping it would not become one as i was more interested in the proportion of union/non-union feds, and less interested in the reasons why. maybe some of the discussion might need to be relocated, but please can we keep the neutral poll here where more can see it and vote if they want?

[Shamus13]

Yup I see an asterisk '*' in this thread's future...

[Lakebound]

Probably another good reason why I didn't subscribe to the political section. I think I'll just keep it simple: Focus on making money for my years in retirement.

Frank

[userque]

NO Sir, the government employees benefits were at the level they are now by keeping up with PRIVATE INDUSTRY! Remember GM, Ford,GE, Westinghouse etc. All of those big companies that have such generous benefits....

...via unions.

[I'm done now burrocrat]:smile:

[Viva_La_Migra]

Interesting, I didn't think federal workers were allowed to unionize

Many are, even law enforcement types like me. They tried to take some of us out after 09/11, but they were only partially successful.

[Stoplight]

...so is NARFE a "union", or a "PAC" ??? :smile: I'm part of that 35% of the poll respondents that is retired !

A simple question is much more complex than Burro wanted !


Stoplight...

[nnuut]

Wrong...you've already been schooled on this...Jobs were sent overseas by the Republican written NAFTA agreement.

"Following diplomatic negotiations dating back to 1990 among the three nations, U.S. President George H. W. Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush), Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulroney) and Mexican President Carlos Salinas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Salinas), each responsible for spearheading and promoting the agreement, ceremonially signed the agreement in their respective capitals on December 17, 1992"
(Clinton didn't take office till late Jan 1993),
North American Free Trade Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement)

Clinton could not veto it even if he wanted to, since that Republican outsourcing bill passed by a veto proof majority in congress, remember? Whether he signed it or not didn't matter, it had already automatically passed as a law in Congress (thanks to some democrat turncoats who sided with the GOP).

And any benefits for fed employees on any par with past private sector, the ones you enjoy so much, were all negotiated by your hated unions.
The reason they disappeared from the private sector in the past 30 years is directly related to a precipitous drop in private sector union membership past 30 years.

Yeah sure, remember Ross Perot and the then Vice President arguing on TV when Perot warned the Inventor of the internet and Bill Clinton that there would be a GREAT SUCKING SOUND at the Border of JOBS GOING SOUTH? It damn well was Clint and AL. That was followed by GATT and other American job killers. SWOOOSH!!!!!! Where are Levis and tens of thousands of then American Made products being made now? NOT HERE!!!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhogWKlm-c0

[Sensei]

I'm a dues paying member of my union. In my organization (DoDDS), we can choose not to pay the $700 per year, and keep the money while still enjoying all the union's negotiated benefits. I don't care much for that policy. In California, one could opt out of union dues, but had to deduct an equal amount in the form of a charitable donation. Either way, the money didn't just go into your bank account. I think that was a more equitable policy.

[nasa1974]

I quit the union when they wouldn't fight for us to get our job description changed from a WG11 to a WG12. I was classified an electrical operator over in FOMD (Facilities Operation & Maintenance Division). We started large exhausters and compressors for research cells. I was qualified to operate, troubleshoot and repair in multiple buildings. Most of the electrical operators also helped the mechanics and we did pneumatic and hydraulic systems as well (jack of all trades master of none). Our max grade was a WG11 but an electronic tech could max out at a WG13. So we asked the union if we could get reclassified and at least get a WG12. The union pretty much said that the electronic tech was more highly skilled than our positions and they couldn't help us. Oh! Yeah! We also repaired printed circuit boards when they went bad.

[Cactus]

Yeah sure, remember Ross Perot and the then Vice President arguing on TV when Perot warned the Inventor of the internet and Bill Clinton that there would be a GREAT SUCKING SOUND at the Border of JOBS GOING SOUTH? It damn well was Clint and AL. That was followed by GATT and other American job killers. SWOOOSH!!!!!! Where are Levis and tens of thousands of then American Made products being made now? NOT HERE!!!Oh but there were great jobs here. Unfortunately they went to that swelling mass of immigrant labor that invaded our country. Hey, it's a free market right? And they are willing to work for a lot less than us. It beats making Levis in Mexico.

[userque]

[Re: getting out of the union because they didn't yada yada yada...] In the same sense that no one candidate for any political office will agree 100% with our personal beliefs--yet we vote; so too is it with a union. A union is not a separate entity. Workers are the union, and the will of the workers, not a minority report, ought to prevail.

Even so, the minority still benefits from the union: wages, job security, working conditions, etc. I suspect it is only when we all are working at walmart that this will be obvious to the masses. To not realize this and not paying for YOUR union is akin to cutting off the next generation of workers noses' to spite your face. For most will have retired by the time the effects of receiving union benefits for free will result in fewer/weakened benefits. The next generation can then thank them for that. Btw, those workers received benefits/wages/working-conditions on the backs of the previous generations.

Even intelligent managers realize the benefits the unions--the organized workers bring: for higher paid workers directly results in higher paid managers. I've found that anti-union/worker managers tend to be narcissistic in thinking that they are God's gift to the workforce and have, in no way, benefited from the blood, sweat, and tears of those who've fought for the rights of the basic worker throughout history.

Smart managers also realize that there are bad apples amongst their ranks and like any police force, military, government; there needs to be rules/regulations/laws in place to protect the rank and file from potential abuse--as evidenced by history. Btw, managers have rules in place to protect them from "upper management."

The National Labor Relations Board and associated laws were created not by democrats or republicans, but by both because of the atrocities of management during the time when management could legally do whatever they wanted--pretty much. To now erase those rights shows a lack of understanding of human nature with respect to "power" over other individuals; of history with respect to labor struggles; and of what will inevitably follow.

History is forgotten/never-learned. History repeats.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Relations_Board

______________
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[alevin]

I have seen ultra-bad irrational powermad managers come down on employees they'd targeted. People everyone else respected and trusted. Thank the Lord for the union in those situations, recordkeeping of the incidents as they piled up against various targeted employees, turned over to the union rep and then to higher-level management, who weren't in position to directly observe the incidents for themselves. The information compiled by the employees and passed to management via the union, documenting mismanagement multiple episodes, gave higher-level management the documentation they needed to remove the powermad incompetant dictator from supervisory position into a non-supervisory position or else out of the agency via retirement or other venues. Yes, sometimes the track record of a bad supervisor has continued over long careers through multiple states, offices, moving up in the ranks or laterally as a supervisor before it finally finally catches up with them, with the help of a union rep. It's sad that so many people suffered under that person until enough momentum was achieved to get the documentation necessary on the behaviors for higher management to finally acknowledge and rectify longstanding errors in judgement on who they raised to supervisory position power.

[WorkFE]

All democracies are based on the proposition that power is very dangerous and that it is extremely important not to let any one person or small group have too much power for too long a time. I think that is true for Unions and Governments as well. Our Politicians are a small group (we could argue that :laugh:), have we given them to MUCH power for to long. There was a time when Unions had a lot of power, and to a smaller degree still do, but squandered that power when greed and corruption of a few gave them a bad rap. I do not dislike Unions. Peoples ideologies are not all the same. How do I justify paying dues to an organization who in turn will donate money to a candidate that I do not identify with. Or do I just trust that they have my best interest at heart, highly doubtful. Obviously this is why there is a big push on one side to unionize everything (more campaign $) and more push against it on the other side (less campaign $). Some will argue that it gives you a voice, I will argue it gives someone a bunch of numbers behind one voice and I have no say in who they are aligning themselves with.
I have no doubt my TSPTALK Brothers and Sisters on the Left and Right are very adamant about there views and beliefs. This is an interesting topic.

[userque]

Unions cannot legally donate union dues to candidates/politicians. They have a separate fund for that whereby members must voluntarily donate to. Mis-information and crack kills.:smile:


All democracies are based on the proposition that power is very dangerous and that it is extremely important not to let any one person or small group have too much power for too long a time. I think that is true for Unions and Governments as well. Our Politicians are a small group (we could argue that :laugh:), have we given them to MUCH power for to long. There was a time when Unions had a lot of power, and to a smaller degree still do, but squandered that power when greed and corruption of a few gave them a bad rap. I do not dislike Unions. Peoples ideologies are not all the same. How do I justify paying dues to an organization who in turn will donate money to a candidate that I do not identify with. Or do I just trust that they have my best interest at heart, highly doubtful. Obviously this is why there is a big push on one side to unionize everything (more campaign $) and more push against it on the other side (less campaign $). Some will argue that it gives you a voice, I will argue it gives someone a bunch of numbers behind one voice and I have no say in who they are aligning themselves with.
I have no doubt my TSPTALK Brothers and Sisters on the Left and Right are very adamant about there views and beliefs. This is an interesting topic.

[WorkFE]

Mis-information and crack kills.:smile:

I don't write the stuff. This seems to be a good source of info used in these forums regularly.
Union dues - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_dues)

Union dues may be used to support a wide variety of programs or activities, including: Paying the salaries and/or benefits of full-time or part-time union leaders and/or staff; union governance; legal representation; legislative lobbying; political campaigns; pension, health, welfare, and safety funds; and/or the union strike fund (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_action).

[userque]

I hear ya. It can get confusing.

The Use of Labor Union Dues for Political Purposes: A Legal Analysis

(http://congressionalresearch.com/97-618/document.php?study=The+Use+of+Labor+Union+Dues+for +Political+Purposes+A+Legal+Analysis)EDIT: It should be noted that I am/was referring to FEDERAL employee unions with regard to political donations.


I don't write the stuff. This seems to be a good source of info used in these forums regularly.
Union dues - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_dues)

Union dues may be used to support a wide variety of programs or activities, including: Paying the salaries and/or benefits of full-time or part-time union leaders and/or staff; union governance; legal representation; legislative lobbying; political campaigns; pension, health, welfare, and safety funds; and/or the union strike fund (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_action).

[WorkFE]

I was speaking of Unions in general.
BTW, I am also opposed to Big Corp political spending as well.

[nnuut]

Supply and Demand controls the workforce as well as prices. When qualified employees are low they are payed more to attract them to the companies that are offering jobs. The employers are willing to negotiate with unions because they can get the employees to provide the products at higher prices to assure profit. When the prices drop due to global competition it is impossible to pay more and offer more benefits and make a profit so wages and benefits flounder. The unions have been failing due to global competition having a lower cost of business. So now the workers are being replaced by machines that only cost the businesses routine maintenance. I'm sure you can figure out what needs to be done.

[WorkFE]

Take them out before they take us out

:Dhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeC-lGnajT0

[PessOptimist]

Taxpayers foot bill for union work, lawmakers seek changes | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/26/taxpayers-foot-bill-for-union-work-lawmakers-seek-changes/)



i'm curious, how many here are dues paying union members? covered by a collective bargaining unit but don't pay dues? in a series not represented by a union?
I had to go back to the first post to see what this was supposed to be about.
Lots of interesting replies including one that said the poster thought Feds could not belong to a union. No time to search back for that but someone should look in to it.
I deal with two unions primarily. There are others covering contractors but that is nothing pertinent to this thread.
One union deals with general schedule employees and seems to be mostly concerned with square footage of work spaces.
The union I am covered by with a collective bargaining agreement which is discussed every year came to be “my” union due to some ancient thing about equivalency pay for craft trades.
The deal is that the union appointed by some federal law finds out how much equivalent trades in for profit industry are being paid as well as what benefits they are getting and tracks pay increases they get.
The history as I understand it is that the feds couldn’t hire or keep trades people at the old WG-05 rates and employees were leaving to get better jobs and no one was applying for the jobs advertised. Some GS-99 figured out that the reason was because they were paying nothing for these technical jobs.
When I accepted the job I automatically became a union member and was not required to pay dues. I chose to pay the dues.
Currently, in my agency, union reps are allowed to discuss union business while in pay status but do not get travel pay or per-diem if attending union functions off job site. They may actually be entitled to them but choose not to due to ongoing conflicts and BS. My rep used annual leave to attend the last out of town union meeting.
It may not be the same where you are but here pay and benefits for my series depend on negotiations of the bargaining agreement contract each year. The article lead me to believe it applies to employees who are GS or SES. I looked around and couldn’t find any person using 100% of their time for union business.
It appears once again that waste has been identified and all are being painted with the broad brush.
PO