Pay to play - Obama style XO encouraging use of unions

[Guest SUNTZU]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EXECUTIVEORDERUSEOFPROJECTLABORAGREEMENTSFORFEDERALCONSTRUCTIONPROJECTS/

USE OF PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENTS FOR FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, 40 U.S.C. 101 et seq., and in order to promote the efficient administration and completion of Federal construction projects, it is hereby ordered that:

Section 1. Policy. (a) Large-scale construction projects pose special challenges to efficient and timely procurement by the Federal Government. Construction employers typically do not have a permanent workforce, which makes it difficult for them to predict labor costs when bidding on contracts and to ensure a steady supply of labor on contracts being performed. Challenges also arise due to the fact that construction projects typically involve multiple employers at a single location. A labor dispute involving one employer can delay the entire project. A lack of coordination among various employers, or uncertainty about the terms and conditions of employment of various groups of workers, can create frictions and disputes in the absence of an agreed-upon resolution mechanism. These problems threaten the efficient and timely completion of construction projects undertaken by Federal contractors. On larger projects, which are generally more complex and of longer duration, these problems tend to be more pronounced.

( The use of a project labor agreement may prevent these problems from developing by providing structure and stability to large-scale construction projects, thereby promoting the efficient and expeditious completion of Federal construction contracts. Accordingly, it is the policy of the Federal Government to encourage executive agencies to consider requiring the use of project labor agreements in connection with large-scale construction projects in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement.

[Rightwinger]

Oh Snap!

So instead of bonuses for early completion, and contracts that are competitive, they can take those dollars and put them in an account to settle the grievances. Add to that the average contract will go twice as long now that the incentive to get it done is gone.

Nice job.

[Mark@Sea]

You must be a party member if you want a party job, comrade.

[Guest unreconstructed1]

Oh Snap!

So instead of bonuses for early completion, and contracts that are competitive, they can take those dollars and put them in an account to settle the grievances. Add to that the average contract will go twice as long now that the incentive to get it done is gone.

Nice job.

I love how everyone automatically equates Unions with lazy workers and greivances...

just for the record, I am a member of a construction trades union. I have never once filed a grievance, nor would I, unless it was necessary. as far as laziness goes, yes,. there are some folks in the Unions that are lazy, just as there are in non-union companies; and just like in non-union companies, the lazy ones typically get their walking papers first. I for one am a hard worker, and I am rewarded for my hard work, by repeat employment with contractors who personally request me when calling the hall. while I don't expect to change your mind regarding unions, I did want to set the record straight.

[Guest Ghostrider]

unre: I can understand your point, but as far as unions, the UAW and the Teamsters have completely ruining any respect most people have for unions.

It's in the unions interest to slow production and increase the time the product is in the plant. That's not in the interest of capitalism.

I know I've passed on jobs where I would have had to join a union.

[Rightwinger]

No need for unions anymore with a lawyer out there waiting for any case, real or not to level against your employer.

Add to that the multiplicity of goverment regulation from everything to the chemicals (white out and window washer) in the office to the method you post the name of your company on the side of a truck and I would say your pretty well protected.

Have you tried NOT being in the union?

[Guest unreconstructed1]

unre: I can understand your point, but as far as unions, the UAW and the Teamsters have completely ruining any respect most people have for unions.

It's in the unions interest to slow production and increase the time the product is in the plant. That's not in the interest of capitalism.

I know I've passed on jobs where I would have had to join a union.

with all due respect rider, I could say the same about "gun owners" like the Virginia tech killer, the columbine kids etc. many people have lost respect for gun owners due to these people, but we know better. not all gun owners are violent killers, and not all union members are lazy asses. as I have already mentioned, there are most definitely those union members who are lazy, but there are also many like me as well. While I don't know any UAW workers, and very few teamsters, I do know that many in the construction trades are hard workers. currently, I am working seven days a week, 12 hours a day. we are scheduled to get every other weekend off. I have been working for just a little over a month with my current contractor, and have had 2 successful days off. what does the union do for me? it gives me the ability support my family with a fair wage, it gives me the right to speak out against unfair treatment, and it ensures that I have the ability to refuse unsafe work.

[Guest unreconstructed1]

right wing. yes, I have tried not being in the Union. what did I have to show for it? wages nearly equal to the minimum wage, working 6 or seven days a week mandatory, being forced, with fear of unemployment to perform work that was completely unsafe, a bad wrist, a bad back, need I go on? no thanks, I'll stick with my representation, thanks.

[Rightwinger]

......or, you were paid what the market would bear for what you did. If you know your worth more, there will be a job out there, non union job mind you that pays you for that value.

You have stated very successfully why unions don't work. The wages are generally more than the market would normally pay. The contractors or employers are strong armed into using those union workers (strikes and threats to scabs) so you get what GM, Ford and Chrysler are dealing with. Paying folks to do a minimum skill job way more than the market can bear and then suffering the crash when folks can't or won't pay what it costs for them to sell it at a profit. Foreign companies with plants here in the US will not tolerate unions, and for good reason. They have seen what the unions have done to them in Europe and its cheaper to move it here or Mexico.

So you perpetuate the union ideal because its good for you. Well when Obama promotes legislation to make everyone protected by unions where will you be? The folks who are now not union are then your brothers and making the same amount of money as you are, which will then force inflation across the markets. The fast food workers union, the restaurant waiters union, the convenience store cashiers union....protected against poor wages and threat of injury will then make equivalent money to you.

If it costs a dollar to buy the materials to make a, oh lets say a handgrip for a 1911 to keep it relevant, but the folks on the line force the employer to pay them 18 bucks an hour to insert the metal backing and run a screw in the side so they have to sell them for 25 to make a profit after marketing and shipping, and no one buys them because they are 9.99 from the other non union supplier, who is to blame? Well it was obviously mis managed right? It must have been unsafe, there were three carpal tunnel law suits filed!

If your in the demand you say you are at your shop, retain a lawyer and go into business for yourself! You can charge less than the union guys and still make a better profit for yourself. That's if you can manage the regulations, handle the taxes, protect your self from false litigation after hriing a lazy ass that wants to go on disability, etc etc.

Its simple logic and finances. I'll throw the statement that "I won't change your mind either" but time will tell which was the truer statement.

[Guest unreconstructed1]

wow, rightwinger, you sure do have a way of putting things... even if they are misguided. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree here.

[Rightwinger]

My post was bigger so I win:)

No, seriously, how was any of the "market force" or "if you have a problem you can seek regress with an attorney or current govt agency" postulates misguided? Did I err in stating that cheaper yet better made foreign car makers are kicking our butts? That government agencies, who have their own unions have no incentive to help you faster because they get paid just the same no matter what? I'll go a couple further. When the economy was setting the stage for layoffs at a TN truck maker, workers compensation claims quadrupled! Fact. Why, because their union did not take care of them in those conditions. So they faked injuries to get more money during the layoff periods. Same company dealt with a strike. Management and Scabs were followed home and harrassed. Nails and tacks were thrown in their driveways to hinder them coming to work. There were even some assaults.

Lay down some facts, and "because I'm making more money as a union guy than I did on the market" won't work. We already know that, what we want to know is why is this a good thing for us?

[Guest Rick O'Shay]

I love how everyone automatically equates Unions with lazy workers and greivances...

just for the record, I am a member of a construction trades union. I have never once filed a grievance, nor would I, unless it was necessary. as far as laziness goes, yes,. there are some folks in the Unions that are lazy, just as there are in non-union companies; and just like in non-union companies, the lazy ones typically get their walking papers first. I for one am a hard worker, and I am rewarded for my hard work, by repeat employment with contractors who personally request me when calling the hall. while I don't expect to change your mind regarding unions, I did want to set the record straight.

I have to second his point. I am an engineer in the construction trades often involved in projects up in the Northern Midwest, and I have to say that my experiences with the construction trade unions has been mostly positive. We tell the various locals how many guys we need and what skills, and presto! There they are. Except for the occasional bad apple, I have found them to be very professional and hard working. As a matter of fact, on a recent job in WI we ran into a problem that had all of us scratching our heads. A crusty old Iron Worker walked up to me and said "Why don't you try this...". That little suggestion saved our company beaucoup bucks because we were looking at express shipping special equipment up there.

I have to also mention that my company has considerable sway with many union business agents because of the frequency of our contracts so we tend to get the cream of the crop.

[Guest Rick O'Shay]

......or, you were paid what the market would bear for what you did. If you know your worth more, there will be a job out there, non union job mind you that pays you for that value.

You have stated very successfully why unions don't work. The wages are generally more than the market would normally pay. The contractors or employers are strong armed into using those union workers (strikes and threats to scabs) so you get what GM, Ford and Chrysler are dealing with. Paying folks to do a minimum skill job way more than the market can bear and then suffering the crash when folks can't or won't pay what it costs for them to sell it at a profit. Foreign companies with plants here in the US will not tolerate unions, and for good reason. They have seen what the unions have done to them in Europe and its cheaper to move it here or Mexico.

So you perpetuate the union ideal because its good for you. Well when Obama promotes legislation to make everyone protected by unions where will you be? The folks who are now not union are then your brothers and making the same amount of money as you are, which will then force inflation across the markets. The fast food workers union, the restaurant waiters union, the convenience store cashiers union....protected against poor wages and threat of injury will then make equivalent money to you.

If it costs a dollar to buy the materials to make a, oh lets say a handgrip for a 1911 to keep it relevant, but the folks on the line force the employer to pay them 18 bucks an hour to insert the metal backing and run a screw in the side so they have to sell them for 25 to make a profit after marketing and shipping, and no one buys them because they are 9.99 from the other non union supplier, who is to blame? Well it was obviously mis managed right? It must have been unsafe, there were three carpal tunnel law suits filed!

If your in the demand you say you are at your shop, retain a lawyer and go into business for yourself! You can charge less than the union guys and still make a better profit for yourself. That's if you can manage the regulations, handle the taxes, protect your self from false litigation after hriing a lazy ass that wants to go on disability, etc etc.

Its simple logic and finances. I'll throw the statement that "I won't change your mind either" but time will tell which was the truer statement.

Rightwinger,

The points you are making are invalid in the construction trades for the most part. The construction trades usually represent skilled labor, and those unions generally have success insuring their members rise to a requisite skill level through apprenticeships and training. From an employers stand point I love those unions. With a phone call I can insure that I will have X number of qualified and experienced guys on an out of town job site. That sure beats the heck out of having to put ads in the paper and having to winnow out the chaff in an applicant pool. Also, this reduces our standing company labor force by contracting what we need when we need it.

As to the UAW and unskilled labor unions I tend to agree with you a little more.

[Rightwinger]

Okay, and the final plug from the RW and I'll leave it to the rest of you. My brother is a lead man, foreman, chief installer, what have you, he doesn't care for a title but make no mistake, on his job site there are no other bosses but him. No college, worked his way up off the floor as a welder. Has worked for Japanese owned companies and American (as he is currently). He has worked with all these "skilled" construction unions in Ohio, Kentucky and California and has NO use for them at all. He makes more money than they do because he can and will do more than they do. The union guys hate him because he pushes them to the absolute limits, which means if your on the clock your doing something constructive for the pay. He too is asked for by large companies, Nissan and Toyota being two of them. Because he makes things happen. Sorry fellas, I have seen it from both sides, working as a supervisor in a union shop and seeing the fruits of my brothers work or liason with the union shops. They just are not worth what you guys are making them out to be.

So as to the original OP and the news that big contracts will go to unions and not a big construction company that is not union, not good for America.

[Guest unreconstructed1]

Rightwinger:

Once again let me reiterate... I have no experience or firsthand knowledge of factory unions, only of the construction trade unions. as for not working hard, bull. while I respect your opinion, it is simply that, an opinion.

[Rightwinger]

Yeah, we shouldn't let facts interfere in these postings at all!

[Guest jackdog]

unions were started primarily because business had control of the politicians and the working man was being abused. History has a way of repeating itself as it is today. Do unions do some good. I say yes. A lot of non-union employers pay higher wages to get more skilled workers. Is there corruption with in the unions, Once again the answer is yes. It appears that do to the lack of immigration enforcement as well as a number of congressional mandates that both union and non union workers are under attack by the various programs like hv1 visa. Once again big business is controlling politicians. and American workers are being screwed. I wonder how many HV1 visa folks are part of Micro softs up coming lay offs. My guess would be 0%

[Guest jackdog]

Since we are talking tax payer dollars a union only stipulation is wrong. Is the stimula only going to from union workers. I think not.

[canadienmike]

and American workers are being screwed. I wonder how many HV1 visa folks are part of Micro softs up coming lay offs. My guess would be 0%

What's an HV1 visa? Never heard of that one.

[Guest jackdog]

What's an HV1 visa? Never heard of that one.

Sorry brain dead post.

I was attempting to post about H1b programs and others like them.

[canadienmike]

Sorry brain dead post.

I was attempting to post about H1b programs and others like them.

Yeah, I knew that was what you were talking about. I think you are generalizing about that program as much as people generalize about union vs non-union. Is that visa program being used incorrectly in some cases, sure, but in many cases it is a legitimate method to get skilled workers. It is not an attack on American workers. I would worry a LOT more about the throngs of illegals. At least the visa holders are doing it the correct way, going through the pains of the immigration system and paying their share of taxes, etc.

[towerclimber37]

why is it that the presidential order gives me a mental picture of a bunch of russians...on one side the politicians to enact the laws, and on the other side, the unions to enforce them.

I have big problems with unions. first. what does a union need with a golf course and lake house resort? (ask GM..their union has one!)

my problem isn't with union workers..its with the Union Leadership. they take the union dues and act as if they're Jimmy Hoffa. It happens in just about every Union I know. the only difference is the scale of the corruption.

I was in a union. A bricklayer's union...I watched men get railroaded, cheated and it went on for years. I left when I couldn't stand it anymore.

Unions are a great place for labor, but so is the general workforce! Unions allow corruption and advocate the "old boy" network that allows corruption to spread.