DomYngBlk
Posts: 3316
Joined: 3/27/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: barelynangel You do know that the workers took a $3 pay CUT for the next 3 years minimum? Not all people kept their jobs, the employee number was over 300 before April and is now under 150 with only 40 of them non-union (do you know if they took a pay cut? something tells me they didn't) and many took severance packages. If the union was smart, they would have insisted on a year long CBA especially with that significant a pay cut. But instead the company now has 3 years wherein the paycut won't need to be corrected even if their profits soar. Smart move on the company. In order to guarantee the employees the 5 day work week they cut 80 part time jobs. The company made demands on the employees in order to keep the company open. The employees and union caved to those demands. To me, that is what the company wanted and needed. Do you think individuals couldn't have done this? The difference is, without the union, it wouldn't probably have came about at all because the company could have laid off the people that didn't come back, cut the 80 part time jobs, and had the employees take a pay cut. They wouldn't have had to go into negotiations playing hard ball saying they would move the company. They would have gotten the same results only without having to deal with the union. All in all, it seems like the company got what they wanted. ISomething tells me it was simply them playing hardball because of the unions. I can't believe an informed company like Hugo Boss would not know how to deal with the union and how to get what it wanted from them. Its really not hard to manipulate a union through the employees. Fear is a great motivator. I am not saying every now and again a union helps some employees within a crap company, but more often then not, they don't. Think about it, the union needed that company to stay in Cleveland, why? Because without the company more than likely they would have lost members -- a lot. And in this recession they are probably losing a lot of members. So 130 people kept their jobs at a huge paycut as the average salary is now $10 an hour, not much to live on really, its what $200 above minimum wage? Others got severance packages, and 80 part-time jobs were cut. Based on the results to me it seemed all the union was concerned about was keeping their members which meant they needed to keep them employed. Oh and just out of curiosity, did the union agree to lower their dues for these employees beyond the new percentage because of the lowered pay scale, or even suspend their dues since it cost the employees $3 an hour? Somehow i doubt it -- yeah it cares about the employees. Domyngblk, i really am not trying to convince you unions are bad lol despite my own opinions about them, but i do hope you take from this and the link i provided, information and knowledge that will make you need to look deeper into any union you are involved in or support. IF you are fully informed and still enjoy unions then by all means give them your money. angel Think you need to read a bit more about that and about this area before you take that kind of shot. The plant was as good as gone. Media attention , local leaders pressed them to stay. Sure they may have given up some money and some folks didn't get back on but what would be the alternative here in Cleveland? Unemployment with no other job to go to at all. Nada.....zilch....Kidding yourself if you think anyone of them would have had a happy ending. Would they have gotten severance? LOL....sure...dream on. I don't think I need your link. Your anti union bias is pretty apparent. But hey, don't worry about it. Take monday off.....you deserve it. LOL
|