The Rand Formula

[Stoker]

My curiosity is getting the better of me here, but how many posters on this site/thread belong to or have once belonged to a Union?

Isn't this the best argument for joining a union? Given the choice between a union-negotiated $5/hr increase and a non union $0.75/hour increase, what kind of moron would choose the latter?

Who's the real "moron"? The person that works year round for 10.75 hr or the guy that works 6 months of the year for 15 hr and collects EI for the rest?

An even better example for who's the real moron, is a twenty year old labourer at Vic Ship making 20-23 hr really doing that well when compared to another twenty year old labourer working in a none union enviroment making 10-15 hr?

[Slavik44]

Willy, I would like to know what kinds of rights you believe a worker is entitled to, if any.

We have labour relations regulations, that cover safety, rights of dismissal, ect. This is a good roll for government not unions. A human resources department tends to be a good place to start looking for help or mediation when needed.

I don't think that corporations are intrinsically good. I do think many good things can also be good for business.

As for unions being workers. The union executives do not work in organizations. Buzz Hargrove and Jim Sinclair or full time pains in the butt, paid for by union dues. Thier measure of success in only growth in members.

I have to disagree with you, the government cannot afford to micromanage canada, it would cause them to focus to much attention on some areas and make other areas weak, not the kind of canada we need.

however the unions relaive stress off the government, they are focused enough to be able to micromanage workers rights, they may sometimes go overboard, but in the end they do a respectable job. The government Can assure workers of basic rights but basic rights are not allways enough, and they cannot always be assured by the government. If we saw unions abolished, as oyu seem to suggest, we would end up with waiting lists like our health care system. I think you seem to be gathering you Union information for watching the news and a bunch of strikes but I would be willing to wager a bit more goes on behind the scenes that we don't hear about. It would be simply ridiculous to base your opinions on everything forom what you hear on the news.

[willy]

think you seem to be gathering you Union information for watching the news and a bunch of strikes but I would be willing to wager a bit more goes on behind the scenes that we don't hear about. It would be simply ridiculous to base your opinions on everything forom what you hear on the news.

I deal with unions every day.

The inflexibility of union contract prevents me from making work environments better. I can not reward someone for doing things not in the contract. I can not reward people for merit when seniority take precedence. I can not give people the flexibility to deal with family issues because of contracts. I have to call a union person just to move a desk. I get to see grievances filed just so people can take time off with pay outside of contract. A few unions in BC have managed over the years to get senior staff 9 weeks holiday a year. Honestly how on earth can anyone accomplish anything with all this stuff? The horrible irony is that it ends up hurting employees or as some like to call them working people. (like I don’t work)

the government cannot afford to micromanage canada, it would cause them to focus to much attention on some areas and make other areas weak, not the kind of canada we need.

Do the police monitor your every move or do they act only when crime is being committed.

Unions are about unions. The justice system should be about justice.

[Slavik44]

think you seem to be gathering you Union information for watching the news and a bunch of strikes but I would be willing to wager a bit more goes on behind the scenes that we don't hear about. It would be simply ridiculous to base your opinions on everything forom what you hear on the news.

I deal with unions every day.

The inflexibility of union contract prevents me from making work environments better. I can not reward someone for doing things not in the contract. I can not reward people for merit when seniority take precedence. I can not give people the flexibility to deal with family issues because of contracts. I have to call a union person just to move a desk. I get to see grievances filed just so people can take time off with pay outside of contract. A few unions in BC have managed over the years to get senior staff 9 weeks holiday a year. Honestly how on earth can anyone accomplish anything with all this stuff? The horrible irony is that it ends up hurting employees or as some like to call them working people. (like I don’t work)

the government cannot afford to micromanage canada, it would cause them to focus to much attention on some areas and make other areas weak, not the kind of canada we need.

Do the police monitor your every move or do they act only when crime is being committed.

Unions are about unions. The justice system should be about justice.

interesting you use a police comparison, because hey if there were no police who cares if there our laws, no one is their to enforce them, and if their are no unions who cares if there are laws they are basic minimiums, $8 is nto a wage people can live off of, They do ensure that workers get medical and they are nto fired for ridiculous reasons and personally if it were me, i would trust a union i am a part of to protect me, rather then a government that has screwed up every public service in canada. Unions act like a workforce police ensuring workers are not violated. Sometiems they go to the extreme, likewise sometimes police go to the extreme but in the end you cannot disband them simply because there are laws you must have other bariers in place that will help the government enforce them, a union certianly is one of them.

[maplesyrup]

Unions came into being for one very good reason - management was abusing the workers. Period.

I have not seen anything coming from management that shows that anything has changed.

Actually it is time in Canada for our governments to bring in (READ: FORCE OUR STONE AGE MENTALITY EMPLOYERS TO DO IT) some progressive benefits for the Canadian workers such as:

1 - Holidays should be administered by the government the 4% or 8% should be contributed weekly by the companies to the government and employees should get their holidays based strictly on their age.

No one should be getting less that one months vacation, but the older you are the longer your vacation period should be. But it should have nothing to do with how long you have worked for a particular company, or what your position in the company is. It is time to relieve management of all these perks they give themselves.

2 - Penson plans, and other parts of the benefit packages, also should be completely administered by the government, and should be completely portable, so that employees are not impeded from changing jobs for fear of losing their pension, or any other part of their benefit package.

3 - Canada needs to support worker owned co-operatives. There have been some very successful ones such Montdragon in Spain where they have over 100 separate worker owned businesses. They have been going for I think maybe 50 years and have never had a bankruptcy.

Canada's business community is quite frankly boring, stifling, and completely lacking in imagination.

We have had a major rip off of our financial resources by corrupt management exemplified by companies like Enron, etc. These people are greedy pigs and need to be severely controlled.

It is time for Canadians to take back their country from the multinationals. And the sooner the better.

(161)

[Black Dog]

It matches to a T. The trend today is lower wages and that has to transcend into shrinking union presence. Concessions is the by-word for labour unions today and will be for years to come.

But your whole argument rests on the notion that unions are too powerful, and that high labour costs are forcing companies out of business or out of the country. They simply don't jive with current and historical trends.

If union power has waned to the point where real wages ar eplummetting (even as corporate profits and real prices climb), what's your beef with the unions?

An even better example for who's the real moron, is a twenty year old labourer at Vic Ship making 20-23 hr really doing that well when compared to another twenty year old labourer working in a none union enviroment making 10-15 hr?

How is this an argument against unions????

[Cartman]

When we are talking about unions, remember that we are not just talking about financial compensation, we are also talking about making the workplace safer. I am familiar with the coal industry in BC. Specifically, the same company has several unionized mines and one non-unionized mine. When fog settles in around the mountains and truck drivers (240-310 ton haulpacs) cannot see, guess who keeps driving in such unsafe conditions and guess who collectively stops driving? In the mining industry, people die terribly violent deaths.

Funny how you hear about every street crime in society today, but when a guy is scooped up into a bag and pail because of unsafe working conditions, well, this is kept quiet and it is called an "accident" even though it was foreseeable and preventable. I would never work in a non-unionized mine 'cuz my life is worth a lot more to me than the $25/hr.

[Hjalmar]

It is time for Canadians to take back their country from the multinationals. And the sooner the better

Labour unions in Canada are a far bigger threat to our country than any corporation. Labour unions are a self serving group with no ones interest but their own. By contrast corporations, and all employers for that matter, make a vast contribution to society. They are the engine that drives our economy, provide people with the products they need as well as creating employment for virtually every person who works other than people who are self employed.

Do corporations create massive inconveniences for people, and society as a whole, the way labour unions do? In todays world, with up-to-date labour laws in every province, how many people would be harmed if labour unions were to become history? I can tell you this --- approximately 85% of the population would benefit. That would include all non-union workers plus all the people that don't work such as retirees etc. And I doubt many of them would feel sorry for the union workers affected after witnessing the free ride they have had over the past 30 - 50 years.

Best of all -- we could start competing again and more jobs would remain in Canada. Also our prices would likely come down to earth again after being driven upward for 35 years based primarily on labour union greed and selfishness.

[Black Dog]

Hey Hjalmar, I'm still waiting for you to explain how unions can be so all-powerful and damaging when they represent a minority of North American workers.

Labour unions are a self serving group with no ones interest but their own. By contrast corporations, and all employers for that matter, make a vast contribution to society. They are the engine that drives our economy, provide people with the products they need as well as creating employment for virtually every person who works other than people who are self employed.

When was the last time you opened up a corporate annual report and saw "making a contribution to society" as a line item in the financials?

Corporations are out to make money for their owners and shareholders. Any benefits to society at large are purely incidental. In fact, one could say that corporations are are a self serving group with no ones interest but their own in mind.

By contrast, labour unions are made up of workers. Workers trying to make honest wages in decent working conditions. Workers, through consumer spending, are a far more important to the economy than corporate shareholders.

Do corporations create massive inconveniences for people, and society as a whole, the way labour unions do?

Yes. Moreso.

Best of all -- we could start competing again and more jobs would remain in Canada.

If you asked even your average, non-union worker if they'd like to make what teh average non-union worker in India makes so that his bosses can "remain competitive" in his new mercedes, you'd likely get a punch in the nose.

Also our prices would likely come down to earth again after being driven upward for 35 years based primarily on labour union greed and selfishness.

Cna you show that the increase in consumer prices is tied specifically to union-negotiated wage increases (versus inflationary pressures?) Or are you just full of hot air?

I just love this race to the bottom meentality. Rather than fighting for fair wages for all, you'd take away gains that others have fought for. Don't like what union workers make versus non-union workers? Start a union. Why drag everyone down to your level?

[Michael Hardner]

Hjalmar:

Labour unions in Canada are a far bigger threat to our country than any corporation. Labour unions are a self serving group with no ones interest but their own.

They serve the members of the union, yes.

By contrast corporations, and all employers for that matter, make a vast contribution to society. They are the engine that drives our economy, provide people with the products they need as well as creating employment for virtually every person who works other than people who are self employed.

It is what's called a symbiotic relationship, I believe. Corporations help society and society helps corporations

Do corporations create massive inconveniences for people, and society as a whole, the way labour unions do?

They can do this, yes.

Envirionmental disasters, price-fixing, are some examples.

In todays world, with up-to-date labour laws in every province, how many people would be harmed if labour unions were to become history?

Wages would go down, and the buying power of these workers would be lowered as well.

I can tell you this --- approximately 85% of the population would benefit. That would include all non-union workers plus all the people that don't work such as retirees etc. And I doubt many of them would feel sorry for the union workers affected after witnessing the free ride they have had over the past 30 - 50 years.

You don't know this. It's conjecture. Even an economic genius wouldn't be able to predict all the cofactors that would result from such a radical move.

Best of all -- we could start competing again and more jobs would remain in Canada. Also our prices would likely come down to earth again after being driven upward for 35 years based primarily on labour union greed and selfishness.

We could pay a dollar an hour. That would be competitive.

Obviously, the business world will try to get the best deal they can. It's up to the people to decide what's fair and what isn't.

[Black Dog]

Read an interesting Slate article on the battle between Wal Mart and Costco in the States. I found the bit about the two companies' markedly differnt approaches to organized labour to be quite relevant to this discussion.

Costco also has the sort of labor policy that would bring a smile to Barbara Ehrenreich's face. Pay starts at $10 an hour. About one in six employees is represented by a union, and workers receive nice health benefits. Sinegal has a non-zero-sum view of employee relations. Give people good jobs at good wages, and they'll be more likely to work harder, less likely to leave, and less likely to steal. As Helyar reported, Costco's turnover "is a third of the retail industry average of 64%," and "shrinkage"—the amount of inventory lost to theft—"is about 13% of the industry norm."

(Wal Mart's) labor policies are state-of-the-art, for the 1890s. It has been investigated for hiring contractors who allegedly hired illegal aliens to clean Wal-Mart stores and for locking them inside overnight. (One wonders if the Wal-Mart employees who in April were bused in to hear Vice President Dick Cheney sing the company's praises at Wal-Mart's headquarters were similarly confined.) In June, a federal judge certified a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of female Wal-Mart employees who claimed discrimination. The average wage at Wal-Mart, which has no unions and bitterly opposes raising the minimum wage, is lower than Costco's lowest wage. Turnover at Wal-Mart, according to the Economist, is 44 percent, meaning it "has to hire an astonishing 600,000 people every year simply to stay at its current size."

Link.

[Cartman]

Wal Mart has also been accused of systematically forcing employees to clock in after they have already put in time at work. I refuse to shop at this dump. I guess some will say that this is just part of being competitive?

Without gov't intervention, how are Canadians expected to compete with third world nations in terms of wages? This is especially important considering that most jobs can be "Taylorized" these days (India's computer industry). If the only way that we can keep jobs here is by lowering ourselves to these levels, then I cannot see any way our economy will sustain itself in the future. Who here is willing to work for third world wages? BTW...if you receive above "competitive" third world wages, it is likely due to the fact that unions have created a climate (even for non-unionized workers) of relatively high wages in the first place!

[willy]

Without gov't intervention, how are Canadians expected to compete with third world nations in terms of wages?

Good then don't compete based on wages.

Other factors:

Educated workforce

Specialized workforce

Resources

Access to large markets

Transportation routes (ships, highways, trains)

Weather

Government stability

Tax system

Justice system (clear contract law and low levels of corruption)

Wages are only one factor and the example you use primarily applies to low skilled labour. We do have minimum wages. The debate may need to center around what the appropriate level should be.

Unions make our companies less productive. This is one factor of competitiveness and it need not be attached to just wages. Think of the resources corporations have to spend dealing with unions.

When the work you provide has higher value and is more specialized you make more money. Act like a business and market yourself. Why should you be paid more?

[maplesyrup]

I don't know if it is the first, but the City of Vancouver has stood up to this scum called Wal-Mart and has blocked them from building in Kitsilano, probably the most desirable residential area in Canada. Too bad more muncipalities don't have the guts to say NO to these business creeps that would destroy communities.

Wal-Mart sex bias case has corporate attorneys jittery

[Black Dog]

Unions make our companies less productive. This is one factor of competitiveness and it need not be attached to just wages. Think of the resources corporations have to spend dealing with unions

Prove it. How do unions decrease productivity?

On the other hand, economies where workers get paid more tend to be more productive, simly because workers have more to spend, thus creating a ready supply of capital.

Furthermore, as the WalMart/CostCo case study seems to indicate, a happy union workforce is a stable workforce. Turnover is a huge drain on productivity. If your assertion wa strue, then non-union WalMart should be cleaning CostCos clock. But instead, it's falling way behind.

(Of course there are always other factors to consider, but we're painiting in fairly broad strokes here.)

[Hjalmar]

I'm still waiting for you to explain how unions can be so all-powerful and damaging when they represent a minority of North American workers.

I'll ask you to explain this to me --- Why has a small group [approx 25% of the workforce] been vested with such massive powers? I'll answer my own question: These powers were granted to labour unions little by little over a long period of time dating back 100 years. Once additional powers are granted they seldom, if ever, are rescinded. Over time, these powers accumulated to the point where labour unions have become a huge thorn in our society. Scrapping the Rand Formula is not the total answer but a good start nevertheless.

Our world has changed a lot over the past 100 years. The time has come to use more mature tools. Labour unions are not the answer in this day and age. They are passe, outdated and needless. Time to start focusing on the masses rather than a select few who benefit from unionism.

[maplesyrup]

Nonsense.

Granted labour unions have dropped the ball a bit by not unionizing low income workers, and they need to really look at that issue, however as has already been stated here, every single employee benefits from organized labour's efforts.

The only reason employees have any of these benefits is that workers got together in the form of unions.

When unionized employees are receiving $20-$25 an hour for their efforts it is difficult for employers of non-unionized workers to pay minimum wages, eh. But they would in a flash if they could

[willy]

How do unions decrease productivity?

Organizations have a limited amount of resources. They deploy these resources to deliver a service or produce a product. Every time resources are diverted from the organizations primary function of delivering the service or producing a product they loose efficiency. Loss of efficiency decreases productivity. Unions divert attention from production and use organizational resources thus they decrease productivity.

Costco is not kicking Wall marts butt. Wall mart is the largest company in the world and has been for years now. They only have one direction to go.

You mention happy union workers. Do you think wages are the only thing that make workers happy because I have met many unhappy well paid workers?

[Slavik44]

How do unions decrease productivity?

Organizations have a limited amount of resources. They deploy these resources to deliver a service or produce a product. Every time resources are diverted from the organizations primary function of delivering the service or producing a product they loose efficiency. Loss of efficiency decreases productivity. Unions divert attention from production and use organizational resources thus they decrease productivity.

Costco is not kicking Wall marts butt. Wall mart is the largest company in the world and has been for years now. They only have one direction to go.

You mention happy union workers. Do you think wages are the only thing that make workers happy because I have met many unhappy well paid workers?

Sure you can meet unhappy people everwhere, But I mean if you give a person a $5-10/hour raise they will be happier doing their job. You also seem to be promoting productivity and efficiencey as the "everything" of buisness but sometiems workers and their rights need to be put ahead of productivity. Besides that if you did eliminate union I have a fealing you would have a much higher gap in income disparity and that is not something any country needs.

[maplesyrup]

How do unions decrease productivity?

Organizations have a limited amount of resources. They deploy these resources to deliver a service or produce a product. Every time resources are diverted from the organizations primary function of delivering the service or producing a product they loose efficiency. Loss of efficiency decreases productivity. Unions divert attention from production and use organizational resources thus they decrease productivity.

Costco is not kicking Wall marts butt. Wall mart is the largest company in the world and has been for years now. They only have one direction to go.

You mention happy union workers. Do you think wages are the only thing that make workers happy because I have met many unhappy well paid workers?

Let's take away executives overblown salaries and perks and see how happy they are.

What a bunch of dribble!

[Stoker]

QUOTE 

An even better example for who's the real moron, is a twenty year old labourer at Vic Ship making 20-23 hr really doing that well when compared to another twenty year old labourer working in a none union enviroment making 10-15 hr?

How is this an argument against unions????

You asked in the post that I replyed to who was the moron, the none union worker with .75 raise or the Union worker who had received a five dollar raise.

I countered (in the post you quoted) with a real life situation.

Again, and I'll type slower so as not to confuse you, who is doing better in BC? A union labourer at Victoria Shipyards or a labourer in a none union enviroment?

[Hjalmar]

however as has already been stated here, every single employee benefits from organized labour's efforts.

Your argument is wearing a bit thin. The fact is that union workers benefit at the expense of everyone else. There are a lot of products that non-union workers can no longer afford because of inflated prices resulting directly from labour unions exorbitant demands. You need to get your head out of the sand and recognize what is really happening MS. Thankfully we have WalMart with a non-unionized staff enabling a lot of people to purchase goods they otherwise couldn't afford today. Time to start living in the real world of today MS.

Your living la la land.

[Cartman]

Time to start living in the real world of today MS.

Your living la la land.

I think that you are the one living in "la la land". What about the safety issue? I see you have avoided this issue entirely. My suspicion is that you have not actually worked in heavy industry where unions are required in order to maintain a safe working environment.

The anti-union sentiment expressed here is the result of jealousy pure and simple. If you were unionized, I highly doubt that you would refuse the rewards that others have worked so hard for. That is also why is there no negative reaction to managers who earn so much.

BTW...I am not sure where you live, but $23/hr is not very high these days. Try raising a family properly on that.

[Cartman]

Ten years ago on the bus to work in BC (when we made $25.00/hr at a corporation that is still doing quite well), one of my fellow union workers jokingly said that he wanted to contract out/outsource his own job. He went on to say that most Albertans are stupid enough to accept the "work for any low wage" rhetoric (sorry fellow Albertans...just relaying a story ), so he would just hire one of them at about $6.00/hr and earn $19.00/hr just for staying at home while the other guy was working. Of course, this is capitalist logic.

Don't you guys see the madness/stupidity/insanity at fighting for third world wages?!?!?!?! If low wages made a nation's economy stronger, then the power houses would be Mexico, Zambia, etc etc.

[Slavik44]

however as has already been stated here, every single employee benefits from organized labour's efforts.

Your argument is wearing a bit thin. The fact is that union workers benefit at the expense of everyone else. There are a lot of products that non-union workers can no longer afford because of inflated prices resulting directly from labour unions exorbitant demands. You need to get your head out of the sand and recognize what is really happening MS. Thankfully we have WalMart with a non-unionized staff enabling a lot of people to purchase goods they otherwise couldn't afford today. Time to start living in the real world of today MS.

Your living la la land.

Interestingly Enough i find the prices at Costco are much better then the prices at Walmart.

For example, Business Week reports that Costco pays its employees significantly higher wages and benefits than its major competitor, Wal-Mart, but Costco boasts lower employee turnover, lower recruitment costs, lower training costs, and higher profits per employee.