T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1448.1 | Perfect union = no union at all | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow | Tue Apr 30 1991 15:00 | 0 |
1448.2 | Here's my idea ! | CSC32::S_HALL | DEC: We ALSO sell VMS.... | Tue Apr 30 1991 15:00 | 25 |
| > So, rather than argue about whether unions are good or bad, why
> not assume that most existing unions are sufficiently imperfect and
> begin the discussion from there. Pretend for a momment that you have
> been called together to architect an ideal union for software/hardware
> engineers at DEC. What would such a union or guild look like?
Well, how about one that:
1) Took no money from anyone's paycheck,
2) Dictated no work terms to members,
3) Left the individual's salary, benefits, etc between
the individual and the employer,
4) Engaged in no political activity ( lobbying, pressuring of
government reps, financing of campaigns ),
5) Engaged in no violence or threatened violence ( vehicle
and road blockage, shotgunning of vehicles, etc ),
6) Encouraged no government mandates of union membership in
any job,
In short, no union is the best union.
Steve H
|
1448.3 | if you can't say somethin' nice ... | RICKS::SHERMAN | ECADSR::SHERMAN 225-5487, 223-3326 | Tue Apr 30 1991 15:55 | 4 |
| Boy, I tried to come up with something. Better to stick with the
Thumper Rule ...
Steve
|
1448.4 | Union or Professional Association? | AGOUTL::BELDIN | Pull us together, not apart | Tue Apr 30 1991 16:58 | 69 |
| Well, since I perpetuated a potential "urban myth" about unions, I feel
impelled to answer Dave's query constructively, although my first
impression is like the previous replies.
First, lets begin by contrasting "unions" with "professional
associations". There are similarities and differences, one of which is
that professional associations do not raise people's hackles so
quickly. Maybe there is something to be learned from the comparison.
Comparison Item Union Profesional Association
--------------- ----- -----------------------
can exclude someone yes, in a closed yes, if licensing or
from some kind of work shop certification is
required
sets work standards, yes, by contract yes, but as above, and
with or without the negotiations with using peer pressure
consent of the member the employer
prohibits its members yes, by work rules not as far as I know,
from work not identified negotiated with the but there is indirect
as appropriate to the employer pressure to respect
group the domains of other
professions
bargains collectively yes identifies "reasonable"
with the employer for fees and evaluates
the entire membership, salary scales
and across industries
adopts an adversary nearly always only rarely
relationship with the
employer
has been known to use violence, psychological and
means of influence physical and economic
beyond negotiation psychological intimidation
intimidation
avoids public exposure if they have clout almost always
of wrong doing by members,
covers up scandals
considers benefits to yes yes
its members as more
important than benefits
to employer
permits members to move no yes
to management jobs and
remain in the organization
maintains a code of not commonly common, but not often
"ethics" or "service" fully enforced
time span of benefits immediate or short and long
sought by leadership short term term
qualifications for family or education plus
membership other informal "connections"
ties
treats individuals..
(in theory) equally individually
(in practice) discriminates in mass
I am sure there are other comparisons that could be made. But on the
basis of these, we should be able to position ourselves on the scale
between a union and a professional organization.
|
1448.5 | | KALI::PLOUFF | Ahhh... cider! | Wed May 01 1991 02:30 | 14 |
| re: .4
This "comparison" contains several personal opinions, and one glaring
factual error.
Comparison Item Union Professional Association
--------------- ----- ------------------------
qualifications for family or education plus
membership other informal "connections"
ties
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Demonstrably untrue for industrial unions and public employee unions.
Wes
|
1448.6 | | SOLVIT::DCOX | | Wed May 01 1991 12:54 | 15 |
| If you're going to do it, do it right.
Samuel Gompers is generally credited with starting the first, formal
trade union (not a guild) in the United States. When asked at a rally
just what his union's goals were, his reply was simply, "More, now!".
And that is the environment I would want my union to foster. More
wages, benefits, better working conditions, shorter hours, etc.;
immediately and with no mention of performance issues. The closest any
union comes to that, today, is the PASS-THE-BATS-AND-HIT-THE-BRICKS
Teamsters union.
However, I will go on welfare before I will take another job in a union
shop.
Dave
|
1448.7 | | PSW::WINALSKI | Careful with that VAX, Eugene | Wed May 01 1991 18:08 | 5 |
| In my current situation as a software engineer, I have no need for collective
bargaining. Therefore, for me, unionization is solving a non-problem. For
me, the best union is no union at all.
--PSW
|
1448.8 | There's only one advantage... | HOBBLE::WILEY | Marshall Wiley - PSS | Wed May 01 1991 21:38 | 23 |
|
to a union that I can think of for software engineers - unions
often maintain their own retirement funds and the employers use
that fund instead of providing their own (I won't EVEN start
discussing other "uses" of those funds). This is intended to
provide retirement benefits for members, especially in trades
where the employee often moves between jobs. My wife was once
a member of such a union.
I saw a study a couple of years ago (IEEE ?) that said the
average software engineer, especially in the first few years
of his/her professional career, changes employers every 2-3
years. Often this by choice, but it is common for many smaller
companies to have large hiring/lay-off binges as business
needs change. I beleive that there was also some investigation
into methods of setting up a national fund for software folks.
I don't know how this ever turned out, but the concept was
quite interesting.
However, I too would rather change careers than join a union
solely to get this benefit.
|
1448.9 | Union Sites | ORIENT::FENDELANDER | | Thu May 02 1991 00:43 | 3 |
| Just a quick question, how many dec sites are union?
Cheryl
|
1448.10 | | CVG::THOMPSON | Semper Gumby | Thu May 02 1991 10:24 | 8 |
| > Just a quick question, how many dec sites are union?
In the US or in the world? I don't think we have any union shops at
DEC in the US. Europe is a different story and I think there are union
shops in a number of countries. They do helpful things like make sure
no one works late.
Alfred
|
1448.11 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Thu May 02 1991 11:52 | 5 |
| re .10:
From what I've read in this conference, it's laws rather than union rules
that prevent people from working late in some European countries (which,
FWIW, have more robust economies than the U.S.).
|
1448.12 | The Betriebsrat also forbids terminals at home | COVERT::COVERT | John R. Covert | Thu May 02 1991 13:40 | 20 |
| >European countries ... have more robust economies than the U.S.
Define more robust. The U.S. has a higher per-capita GNP than any country
in Europe. This gap is closing, but hasn't closed yet.
>Laws rather than unions prevent late work
It's a combination. In Germany, the law requires that the Betriebsrat
authorize late work. They usually won't. Even with 47 days (nine+ weeks)
of vacation a year, the Betriebsrat wants to make sure that management
doesn't overwork our employees.
In Germany, the Betriebsrat refused to give permission for any Sunday
set-up work for the recent DECUS Symposium. So everyone had to spend an
extra day out of town and away from their families at DEC's expense.
Had the Betriebsrat given permission, permission could have been obtained
from the government agency responsible for such things.
/john
|
1448.13 | Mass. Unions | EXPRES::FENDELANDER | | Thu May 02 1991 20:39 | 3 |
| I heard thet there were Union DECS in Massachusetts. Any truth to
this????
|
1448.14 | | PSW::WINALSKI | Careful with that VAX, Eugene | Fri May 03 1991 18:50 | 5 |
| Last time I looked, the data center operators at the DEC Marlboro, MA were
unionized. However, MRO is not a union shop, in that you don't have to
join a union to work there.
--PSW
|
1448.15 | well maybe just a little union:-) | CSC32::PITT | | Fri May 03 1991 23:49 | 4 |
|
I agree with no unions..but it would sure be nice to have someone with
some clout fighting to get *US* 5 weeks of vacation a year!!
|
1448.16 | | BRULE::MICKOL | | Sat May 04 1991 00:51 | 20 |
| <<< Note 1448.14 by PSW::WINALSKI "Careful with that VAX, Eugene" >>>
=> Last time I looked, the data center operators at the DEC Marlboro, MA were
=> unionized. However, MRO is not a union shop, in that you don't have to
=> join a union to work there.
=>
=> --PSW
As the former Site I.S. Manager of the Marlboro site, I can tell you that
none of the Operators in my organization were unionized. And having more than
a cursory knowledge of other Marlboro data centers, I would say there were no
unionized Digital employees anywhere in Marlboro. Might be a different story
for some of the contract workers working there.
I also would like to note that the 'u' word was never mentioned by anyone
while I was there.
Jim
|
1448.17 | | COVERT::COVERT | John R. Covert | Sat May 04 1991 06:13 | 5 |
| It's my understanding that one significant reason we decided not to
build a manufacturing facility on property we owned in Rhode Island
was that unions in the area made it extremely clear that they would
attempt to organize DEC workers at any plant in R.I., and that this
would be a foot-in-the-door for the rest of the company.
|
1448.18 | | PSW::WINALSKI | Careful with that VAX, Eugene | Sat May 04 1991 19:12 | 8 |
| RE: .16
The last time I looked was back in 1982. I remember the subject of there being
no unions at DEC came up and one of the computer operators at MRO said that
they were unionized. I think that may have been a hold-over from when DEC
took over the MRO facility from RCA.
--PSW
|
1448.19 | "Workers of the world, unite ...", etc. | TLE::AMARTIN | Alan H. Martin | Sun May 05 1991 15:21 | 8 |
| Re .16:
>I also would like to note that the 'u' word was never mentioned by anyone
>while I was there.
Perhaps, but there was Marxist graffitti in one of the men's room stalls for the
manufacturing floor (MR1-3).
/AHM
|
1448.20 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Mon May 06 1991 13:45 | 2 |
| I predict that as the use of C becomes more widespead, we'll be seeing
more unions at DEC.
|
1448.21 | no such thing as a "little" union. | BTOVT::CACCIA_S | the REAL steve | Mon May 06 1991 16:16 | 16 |
| re.14 JUST A LITTLE UNION????
There is no such thing.
Besides a union rewards the inept and penalizes the exceptional in any
case that I have ever heard of. Think about it! all pay scales for the
same job are the same no matter how long you've been doing the job or
how well. A 5 performer gets the same money as a one performer, BUT if
an upgraded job comes open and the 5 performer has seniority over the 1,
guess who gets the job?
At one time unions may have been worth while. They did manage to help
bust the child labor and sweat sweat shop magnates but they may very
well have outlived their usefulness.
|
1448.22 | Unions? no....but who will help the little people? | CSC32::PITT | | Mon May 06 1991 18:59 | 26 |
| ref .21
as opposed to the way things work now where someone might be with DEC
for 10 years, and a '2' performer the whole time, but we hire someone
in off the street for much higher wages?
-or-
how you CAN'T get promoted to a new job because you're NOT in the pay
scale so they'll GIVE you a lateral transfer with your current salary
but expect you to do the job posted for the higher position?
-or-
salary freezes?
-or-
all of the other 'little' things that most of us have dealt with and
ended up shrugging off as "unfair-but-nobody-ever-said-life-was-fair"
I'm NOT for Unions, but I do think that we're without a voice or a real
employee advocate here (maybe just in the US, who knows).
Who WILL step up and change the rules and tell "them" what's fair and
what's not?
We can all P&M here all day in notes. We can write long winded letters
to VPS and spread 'em around the Easynet. Does this REALLY accomplish
anything? no. That's why we all sit around worried about 'the tap'.
Unions? No. But what DO we have in the way of representation?
nothing. It's lonely at the bottom! :-)
|
1448.23 | HOW TRUE!!!! | EXPRES::FENDELANDER | | Tue May 07 1991 00:20 | 1 |
|
|
1448.24 | | CIS1::FULTI | | Tue May 07 1991 10:17 | 25 |
| Re: .22 <<< Note 1448.22 by CSC32::PITT >>>
> -< Unions? no....but who will help the little people? >-
Who will help the "little people"? why, themselves thats who!
You need to do what you need to do. But, please don't involve me.
I don't care what they are hiring people at, all I care about is what
I'm being paid. If I want a job that I believe involves a promotion
and the hiring manager wont give it to me, then I dont take that job.
I look for another one. If I cant live with a salary freeze, then I
do something about it. I cant tell DEC how to run its business, nor
should I.
> I'm NOT for Unions, but I do think that we're without a voice or a real
> employee advocate here (maybe just in the US, who knows).
Well, neither am I.
> Who WILL step up and change the rules and tell "them" what's fair and
> what's not?
Not me, I dont presume to know what is "fair", fair for who? you, me, them?
I'll tell you want is fair for me. I work for a week, they give me money for it
and this continues for as long as it is mutually agreed upon.
- George
|
1448.25 | well we should ALL be happy then... | CSC32::PITT | | Tue May 07 1991 12:21 | 23 |
|
and so *I'M* happy so everything MUST be ok.
aw well.
But as for Unions.
The question is "what would be a GOOD Union?".
Seems to me, that a UNION is simply a BUNCH of people standing together
for their rights. The perfect Union would NOT be something that is
"brought in", it would be a 'coming together' of the people who are
here already, selecting one VOICE, but not one leader.
There would be no dues, or rules, or violence involved.
It wouldn't be US against THEM.
It would simply be a voice of the employees that could take ideas and
complaints and grievences to someone who would really listen and had
the power to change something.
I think that UNION has become a dirty word because of what it became.
It became a profit oriented organization that USED the workers for it's
own gain. Probably the ultimate in "power corrupting".
|
1448.26 | | RICKS::SHERMAN | ECADSR::SHERMAN 225-5487, 223-3326 | Tue May 07 1991 13:25 | 12 |
| re: -.1
Along this line of thought, maybe the ideal "union" is when all the
workers feel like they are part of the company. When a "union" is
brought in from outside, what you often end up with is a company within
a company. This way, workers that don't feel like they are part of the
company anymore can at least be part of SOME company. I would suspect
that any support for unions at Digital would be the result of workers
no longer having the impression that what they have to say makes any
difference in how the company is run or how they are treated.
Steve
|
1448.27 | Agreement in principle | BTOVT::CACCIA_S | the REAL steve | Tue May 07 1991 14:12 | 17 |
|
RE.22, &.25
Mr. Pitt, I agree with you. But as an independent I also have the
option to negotiate with a person that may have the power to fix
something. or get the job, or bigger raise, etc. & etc. I don't have to
just sit and take it or wait for someone else to do something at a
predetermined contract ending. Besides, if I don't like whats happening
I can always leave for some other place that may have greener pastures.
Over and above the inequities inherent in unions I am and independent
and would rather do things for/by myself than be part of a group. No
flames please I am not casting aspersions, but a union makes me
think of a herd of sheep.
|
1448.28 | open door policy COULD be good enough | CSC32::PITT | | Wed May 08 1991 11:53 | 17 |
|
.27
<
>Mr. Pitt, I agree with you.
How did you arrive at Mr. ??!
I like the comparison to a herd of sheep and Union as we know it.
As I said, Union need not be 'brought in', or dues, or violence.
The ideal union would be someone representing YOU to someone who
really CARES. Strangely, the open door policy would almost even work
if people didn't feel like they were spitting in the wind!
|
1448.29 | o.k. it was more than a couple of questions | CIS1::FULTI | | Wed May 08 1991 13:11 | 28 |
| re .28
> The ideal union would be someone representing YOU to someone who
> really CARES. Strangely, the open door policy would almost even work
> if people didn't feel like they were spitting in the wind!
I have a couple of questions:
1. If the advocate is representing me to someone who cares, why do I need an
advocate?
2. If using the O.D.P. is "spitting in the wind" then what makes you think
an advocate will be representing me to some who cares?
3. If #2 is really the case, then what happens when the advocate fails to
reach a satisfactory result?
4. Who is this advocate and how does the advocate get paid for their time?
remember if the company pays them, then ....... I dont really have to
paint that picture do I?
and If the employees pay, how would it work with no dues?
If the advocate is also an employee, how do they arrange time away from
their normal job to handle other employee's problems?
- George
|
1448.30 | mea culpa for the greeting | BTOVT::CACCIA_S | the REAL steve | Wed May 08 1991 14:00 | 13 |
|
RE.28 How did I arrive at MR.???
Just a shot in the dark. With no first name and no other obvious (To me
anyhow) means of gender identification I figured I had a 50/50 chance
at being right. Maybe from now on I should put a generic label of Dear
Sir or Madame?? 8*) maybe more generic of HEY YOU for the militant
types. 8*) 8*)
^^^^^^^ please note the smiley faces!!
STEVE
|
1448.31 | A few union experiences... | TOOK::DMCLURE | Work to build the net | Wed May 08 1991 18:38 | 63 |
| According to reply .20, the ideal union might look something like this:
union DEC_employee_def {
DEC_Emloyee_Struct employee;
DEC_Manager_Struct manager;
DEC_Agent_Struct agent;
} DEC_employee;
;^)
My experience with unions is somewhat limited. I worked at a
milk bottling plant once one spring after graduating somewhat early
from high school (thinking I was going to do that forever since $5
an hour seemed like alot of money at the time). There was a union
at the milk bottling plant which I was pressured to join but never
did. This was what I would consider to be a more traditional labor
union in that it adopted a strictly adversarial relationship with
management, and furthermore, it never struck me as being worth
joining (of course the job wasn't really worth doing either, so
maybe the fact that I knew I wouldn't be working there forever had
something to do with it as well).
Later in my career, I did actually join a union (actually a
Guild - the Screen Actors Guild to be exact). The film industry is
a totally different game when it comes to unions since everybody from
the directors to the extras are all in some sort of union, so there
isn't the same sort of manager/employee friction that you find in a
more stereotypical "management versus labor union" environment.
The main thing I liked about the Screen Actor's Guild was
the focus on the employee. Nevermind the unfortunate fact that
probably 80% to 90% of SAG actors are unemployed at any given time,
but let it be said that when you are employed, you are treated like
a king! One reason is that as an actor, you run your own business.
As an actor, having a manager is entirely optional - if you want one,
you hire one, and if things don't work out, then it is up to you to
fire them (not the other way around). Agents are typically the people
who find you the work and arrange the casting interviews, and the same
holds for them as well regarding hiring and firing (some actors have
several agents to keep a constant queue of jobs lined up, but agents
typically prefer to have exclusive rights to you if possible). Both
managers and agents take a set percentage of your salary (which you
negotiate beforehand), so you only have to pay them when you earn
something. Acting agents are similar to agents in professional sports
(if I'm not mistaken). Obviously, it is cheaper to manage yourself
and act as a "free agent". Many do, but this is hard to do unless
you know what you're doing business-wise, and already have connections
in the business for job leads, etc..
In summary, I did like the sort of free-lance approach to work
while a member of SAG, but I sure didn't appreciate waiting for the
phone calls and working the odd jobs in between the acting jobs. Of
course, this was Hollywood during the early 80's when all the unions
went on strike and the recession of the early 80's was just beginning,
so business was pretty slow in Hollywood. I guess if I were to create
a wishlist of items for an ideal union, then I would have to add
that I would like to see the employee given the same sort of free-
lance command over their own destiny as exists in the various film
industry unions.
-davo
p.s. Who knows, maybe what is needed is a "NES" (New Employee System)
to go with the NMS (New Management System)?
|
1448.32 | humm..is there an honest politician in the house? | CSC32::PITT | | Wed May 08 1991 18:50 | 40 |
| re .30..
sorry Steve..Your shot in the dark was off! Don't buy any lottery
tickets this week! No matter....I'm not the militant type...call me
anything you like!!
re .29.
So good points. I'm afraid I haven't worked out the details yet on my
'ideal non-union' theory.
We know that this advocate (preferably group of advocates) would NOT be
paid by Dec. (Yes we Know what THAT will get us!).
No dues. Lets see. Something along the lines of a consumers group.
A Ralph Nadar for employee rights.
How bout this. What we NEED is someone within Dec, high up, with Ken's
ear, who really had a sense of decency and fair play (hummm...could be
tough to find someone who makes that much money and would still really
care about the little people....). THEN: we need to set up district
representatives who would have an opportunity to talk to this person
say once every 6 months and lay out the legitamate concerns of that
district (or site or whatever).
->Ever been to one of those meetings where you're ASKED to ask questions
and voice your concerns but you KNOW that there's notes being taken and
that if your opinion isn't "I LOVE YOU AND MY JOB AND AMERICA", then
you'll be one of those 24 month-1% pay raise folks??<-
maybe if Ralph Nadar gets tired of helping consumers, maybe he'd be
interested in helping disgruntled deccies!
cathy
(that's MR. Cathy to you, Steve!!) :-)
|
1448.34 | Unions outside of U.S. | SLSTRN::RADWIN | Emily's dad | Thu May 09 1991 13:22 | 6 |
| Curious as to how non-US Digits react to this discussion of unions.
It's my understanding that the worker groups, whether dubbed unions or
not, are much more active and powerful in some of the DEC's European
sites.
Gene
|
1448.35 | Are Unions GOOD in Europe? | CSC32::PITT | | Fri May 10 1991 12:13 | 10 |
|
>Unions outside of U.S
Out of curiousity, is it the Unions that got you 5 weeks a year (give
or take) vacation in Europe, or is it a government regulation?
We seem so far behind here in that respect, acutally in most respects
to employee benefits (rights??)
|
1448.36 | The unions also pressure the governments | COVERT::COVERT | John R. Covert | Fri May 10 1991 13:15 | 10 |
| re .35
The answer will depend on the country.
In most cases, DEC gives the vacation mandated by law.
In Germany, this is also the case, but it took pressure from the
Betriebsrat to get the vacation increased to the current 9.4 weeks.
/john
|
1448.37 | | LESLIE::LESLIE | Acouplapints now | Fri May 10 1991 14:01 | 4 |
| DEC UK gives more vacation than the legal minimum. They give the 'going
rate' in salary and other benefits.
- andy
|
1448.38 | Re .36 | ULTRA::SEKURSKI | | Fri May 10 1991 14:24 | 15 |
|
9.4 weeks !!?!?!? ( as my jaw bounces off the floor...)
I knew that Europe allows longer vacations but didn't know
it was that long....
If I'm here after 20 years I'll only be up to 5 weeks...
Some of the people in my group don't know what to do with
4 weeks vacation, myself *not* included...
Mike
----
|
1448.39 | | COVERT::COVERT | John R. Covert | Fri May 10 1991 22:55 | 12 |
| re .38 Yes, 9.4 weeks of vacation.
Plus three weeks of holidays: (some are regional but Munich takes them all.
and some fall on Sat/Sundays in some years)
New Year's Eve, New Year's Day, Epiphany (Feast of the Three Kings), Good
Friday, Easter Monday, May Day, Ascension Day, Whitmonday (Monday after
Pentecost), Corpus Christi, Day of German Unity (17 June -- is this
changing?), Assumption of the B.V.M., All Saint's Day, Day of Atonement,
Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, Second Day of Christmas.
/john
|
1448.40 | ok so the ideal union IS: | CSC32::PITT | | Mon May 13 1991 00:16 | 13 |
|
9.4 weeks of vacation compared to the 2,3 or 4 weeks, depending on how long
you've been with the company that we get here.......hum......
Now, I don't want to sound UNGRATEFUL....but does this really seem
*********************FAIR******************?
THAT is EXACTLY why this country NEEDS to have a stronger
represesntation for the employees...no matter WHAT you want to call it.
The ideal union? The one who got the 9.4 weeks for the folks in
Germany....
|
1448.41 | | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | member: Corporate Trauma Team | Mon May 13 1991 08:38 | 11 |
| OK, it's conceded, it's not fair.
(a) send a suggestion to Delta
(b) compute what the impact is on profitability if the company
implements this policy.
(c) consider that some might prefer the status quo rather than give up
the hope of getting raises or the hope that company insurance premiums
won't go up each year.
(d) go work for another US-based company with the policies you prefer
(e) seek employment in Digital Germany.
(f) form a union for Digital US.
|
1448.42 | your mileage may vary | YIELD::HARRIS | | Mon May 13 1991 09:37 | 25 |
| > 9.4 weeks of vacation compared to the 2,3 or 4 weeks, depending on how long
> you've been with the company that we get here.......hum......
>
> Now, I don't want to sound UNGRATEFUL....but does this really seem
>
> *********************FAIR******************?
>
> THAT is EXACTLY why this country NEEDS to have a stronger
> represesntation for the employees...no matter WHAT you want to call it.
>
> The ideal union? The one who got the 9.4 weeks for the folks in
> Germany....
You must assume that all other benefits and compensation for people
working for DEC in Germany are the same if you are trying to figure
if this is fair. Can someone elaborate on how salary and benefits
compare between Germany and the US.
I do know that people working for DEC in the UK get paid less than
DEC employees in the US. They do get a week or two more vacation,
but I'd rather have the cash.
-Bruce
|
1448.43 | | MUDHWK::LAWLER | I'm not 38. | Mon May 13 1991 09:56 | 11 |
|
It's a shame that U.S. employees can't opt for additional
vacation time in lieu of Pay-raises...
I bet a lot of people would opt for the extra time off, which
could improve morale, and potentially save the company money
if the vacation were "sold" at a premium...)
-al
|
1448.44 | I know, personal problem | TILTS::WALDO | | Mon May 13 1991 12:59 | 6 |
| 9 weeks of vacation time! NO WAY!
I couldn't afford it. My family would want to go on cruises or trips
to foreign lands. If I take a day off my wife heads for the shopping
center.
|
1448.45 | | YIELD::HARRIS | | Mon May 13 1991 14:07 | 12 |
| > It's a shame that U.S. employees can't opt for additional
> vacation time in lieu of Pay-raises...
If you made 52K(1K/week), a 6% raise would get you three weeks pay.
Take three weeks leave of absence and you have basically gotten what
you asked for.
The problem with this is many people are in groups that won't give you
a leave of absense.
-Bruce
|
1448.46 | Public policy in Germany: Less hours worked = less unemployment | COVERT::COVERT | John R. Covert | Mon May 13 1991 19:22 | 7 |
| At the current exchange rate, salaries in Germany are much higher than in
the U.S.
Cost of living in major cities is similar.
Why do you think you see so many German tourists everywhere in the world?
They've gotta use up that huge vacation time somehow.
|
1448.47 | Unions - What, Why, and Where? | GUIDUK::B_WOOD | I manage my cat? | Thu May 16 1991 22:31 | 73 |
| When I first graduated from College and went to work for a major oil
company in California, I was supprised to find I was represented by
a union which membership was voluntary. The union was weak and company
funded, a sweatheart union.
The bad part was the Company used the work rules negotiated to it's
wishes as weapons against us. Nor was it an effective advocate in
greivence or contractual issues. We had the worst of both worlds.
I quit in disgust after 15 months.
The sad aspect of union/management is the tension between the parties.
It must be noted that this tension is a two way street. Recent
developments in american labour/managment thought have taken place in
the last 10 years (Ford Motor). Unfortunately, the tension is a result
of the history of unions.
Before we condemn unions out of hand, we should recognize what unions
have done for everyone.
1) 40 hour work week with Sat/Sun off was acomplished by labour.
2) Health benefits in major corporations. The union people got
them before managment.
3) Paid Vacations.
4) Civil Liberties -- In the early 20th century, the U.S. Gov't
intervened with force on behalf of employers routinely against
labour.
5) Child labour laws.
6) Workplace safety.
7) Minimum Wage
8) Social Security
Far be it from me to tell you what working in this country would be
like without organized labour. Even though we aren't unionized, don't
think management knows that it could become very appealing if they
pissed off the employees.
Usually employees turn to unions as a last resort because most hate the
rules. My brother has been an engineer in two plants that we're
unionized during his tenure. The experienced employees all rejected
the union the first time. When management didn't get the message,
they voted for the union the next time.
re: Cathy pitt
Colorado brings up a special case. Most employees in Colorado Springs
are at the companies mercy. Most have families and own homes. In that
town, DEC is about the only good paying job and most employees were
recruited and moved at company expense. There is almost no secondary
economy unless you are willing to commute 60+ miles to Denver. It
is very difficult to leave without losing everything and to have the
company unstable, it is scaring the h*ll out of a lot of folks.
DEC is not the company I started working for in 1984. It isn't taking
steps to reward long term employees. Management is making decisions
based not upon the best interests of the company or employees, but
how to measure up to absurd antiquated financial metrics. We are in
a serious condition with most of the talented employees seriously
considering leaving because of bad management.
We are ripe for unionazation. I hope I don't see it. Nor am I happy
with the current conditions.
|
1448.48 | I don't have the articles in front of me, but ... | YUPPIE::COLE | Proposal:Getting an edge in word-wise! | Fri Jun 21 1991 11:23 | 6 |
| ... the local Atlanta papers have had some articles this week
about Apple's employess picketing and talking about a professional asso-
ciation in light of Apple's cost cutting plans. The articles make it
sound like Apple management is "shocked" that their employees would even
dream of such a thing! :>)
|
1448.49 | Extracted from NEWVAX NEWS system; summary from MISG | NEWVAX::PAVLICEK | Zot, the Ethical Hacker | Fri Jun 21 1991 16:31 | 34 |
| ************** NEWS System Article -- DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY **************
Subj: Computer Industry News from MISG Wednesday 06/19/91
From: VAXmail Distribution
Sect: MISG News
Posted: JUN 19, 1991
--------
From: ICS::CISMAIL "19-Jun-1991 1405" 19-JUN-1991 15:10:32.85
To: @MISG
CC:
Subj: Computer Industry News from MISG
********************************************************************************
....
APPLE WORKERS CONSIDER COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
"Apple Workers Mull Collective Bargaining Push"
(The Wall Street Journal, 06/19/91, PP:B1)
A group of professional employees upset over Apple's recent decision to fire
10% of its 15,000 workers, is considering launching a collective bargaining
campaign, or taking other steps to gain a greater say over management
practices at the world's second largest maker of PCs. Elsewhere in the U.S.,
computer companies such as IBM and Compaq, chief rivals of Apple, also seem
immune to the type of worker organizing seen at many of the nation's older,
"smokestack" industries. Leaders of "Employees for One Apple," the dissident
group, say they are considering various avenues to obtain a greater role in
management of the company. "We're talking about everything from collective
bargaining" to unionization, said one engineer.
...
|
1448.50 | | COOKIE::WITHERS | Bob Withers | Fri Jun 21 1991 17:00 | 44 |
| I didn't know whether to put this in the Union note or the pay cut note or
the King Lennard :-) note, but this is the first one I came to...
<<< SICVAX::SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DOWVISION_TEST.NOTE;2 >>>
-< DowVision Test >-
================================================================================
Note 20.4 Computers 4 of 21
SDSVAX::SWEENEY 33 lines 21-JUN-1991 10:23
-< Apple To Cut Pay Of Chief Executive, Other Top Officials >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright � Dow Jones & Co. 1991
Source: Wall Street Journal
Headline: Apple To Cut Pay Of Chief Executive, Other Top Officials
Time: JUN 21 1991 1026
Story:
Apple Computer Inc., bowing to pressure from employees at the personal
computer maker, said it will cut the salaries of its top executives including
its chief executive officer, John Sculley.
The decision was conveyed from Sculley to Apple employees yesterday. One of
the highest-paid executives in the computer industry, Sculley has been
intensely criticized by some Apple workers since he ordered the firing of 10%
of the company's roughly 15,000 workers last month. The first big bunch of
pink slips -- about 900 in all -- went out yesterday, one day after an angry
group of Apple workers protested the firings outside Sculley's office.
According to an Apple spokesman, Sculley promises to cut his $2 million
annual salary by 15% and promises that other senior managers -- from vice
presidents to the chief operating officer, Michael Spindler -- will take
reductions ranging from 5% to 10%. While it isn't clear how much money Apple
will save as a result of the cuts, Sculley seems to be aiming at restoring
some of the morale that has been lost since he ordered Apple's biggest layoffs
since 1985.
"It is clear that Sculley is feeling the effects of having to lay off all
these people," said Tim Bajarin, an analyst at Creative Strategies
International Inc., a market research firm. "At least he's demonstrating that
categoryIndustry I/CPR
categoryMarketSector M/TEC
categoryGeographic R/CA R/NME R/PRM R/US
categoryCompany AAPL
|
1448.51 | Be careful what you wish for...you might get it.... | ORABX::REESE_K | just an old sweet song.... | Tue Jul 02 1991 15:40 | 58 |
| A little late here.....had to chuckle when I read Dick Beldin's
entry in the other note, i.e. GM officials walking their cars
through the line and refusing to accept one built on a Monday or a
Friday......my ex worked for FS with another company.....Chrysler
Motors was his account....when we were looking for a new car, one
of the managers he dealt with spelled out Dick's scenario exactly....
said all Chrysler execs kept a very close eye to make sure they
didn't get a "lemon" built on Mon/Fri........so we bought a Chevy
Impala :-) :-)
Many moons ago (covered wagon days, it seems now) I worked for Ma
Bell as a service rep in a business office. I *had* to join the
union (closed shop); but get this......our union had a "no strike"
clause in the contract. In Pennsylvania, Ma Bell employees were
represented by several unions....the operator and installers were in
one union, accounting personnel another....and the business offices a
third.
Operators, installers and accounting types could (and did) strike;
the lucky ducks in the business offices *couldn't* honor the strike
or our union could get fined.....so we had to endure being verbally
abused....and in some cases physically threatened by our friendly
co-workers..... Someone else pointed out a valid point....everything
was based on seniority.......seniority won out every time over
creativity and/or competence!!
When we left PA for NJ a national strike was pending, so I opted to
seek employment elsewhere. My ex worked for RCA's FS at the time....
he was not unionized and was expected to honor a call-out to a Bell
accounting site. Folks walking the picket line hit our new Chevy
Impala with baseball bats and when my ex rolled down the window to
tell them to move out of the way or he was going to drive through
them.....one saintly "lady" threw a cup of scalding coffee in his
face!!!
I don't think anyone would argue that unions served a purpose at the
turn of the century when women and children were exploited so badly
by greedy and corrupt factory owners....but for the most part those
sweat shops don't exist today. A few employers here in Georgia have
been fined of late for inhuman working conditions (poultry industry);
however, since most of the employees were illegals, a union wouldn't
have been able to help in any case.
I hope I never see a union at Digital....I'm willing to fight for what
I need.....have done so in the past and won.....tried to do so
recently and lost. After 12 years with DEC I wouldn't make any rash
decisions about leaving DEC (from the moans of my co-workers, I guess
I'm among a shrinking few who enjoy the content of my work); but I
too find it hard on the stomach to witness some of the shenanigans
going on with this point in DEC's history.....so who knows.
A friend who is a manager with Southern Bell has suggested I look
there if push comes to shove.....but I must admit the thought of
being coerced to join a union that would have marginal impact on
improving my lot (based on competence) doesn't really appeal....
Karen
|
1448.52 | | BOOVX1::MANDILE | Her Royal Highness | Tue Jul 02 1991 17:41 | 8 |
| One of my neighbors works at the Electrical Workers shop in Boston.
Any car in the parking lot *not* of american origin has been
vandalized, including hers. They loved my new Mitsubishi
(especially the price!) and wanted to get one, but knew it would
be destroyed. So, they were kind of (IMO) forced to get the
Ford Escort (Ford, EHEWWWW!!!).
HRH
|
1448.53 | Turn it upside down? | FUNYET::ANDERSON | VMS: First and Last and Always | Tue Jul 02 1991 19:46 | 5 |
| How can you tell if a car is made in the US or not? Certainly not by the make,
as, for instance, many Hondas are made in Ohio and many Chevrolets are made in
Japan. For all these union workers know, they vandalized American cars!
Paul
|
1448.54 | re: Honda bashing still in favor by union types | SMOOT::ROTH | From little acorns mighty oaks grow. | Mon Jul 08 1991 03:08 | 12 |
| ahhh... but if the vandalized an american-built Honda then they were
vandalizing a (gasp!) NON-UNION produced car.
True story: Union auto worker was selected as player in an Ohio Lottery
TV game show. During the course of the show the auto worker 'won' the
choice of a brand-new Ohio-built Honda automobile or a cash prize of
$1000. They chose the cash and indicated that they would not be caught
dead driving a Honda since it was produced by a NON-UNION workforce.
union mentality!
Lee
|
1448.55 | | LESLIE::leslie | There is darkness | Mon Jul 08 1991 06:21 | 6 |
| That isn't a case of "union mentality", that's a case of an
"intellectually challenged" contestant!
:-)
/a
|
1448.56 | | SAHQ::LUBER | I'm schizophrenic and I am too | Mon Jul 08 1991 11:26 | 13 |
| At GE, the hourly employees are unionized; the salaried employees are
not. Come contract time, the salaried employees root for the union,
because the only way the salaried employees get improved benefits is if
the union negotiates improved benefits. That is why GE's medical and
vacation benefits are vastly superior to Digital, and why Digital's
benefits get worse with each passing year.
Before I joined Digital, I worked for a small 2,000 person software
company that had, among other things, a matching 401K program.
Digital's benefits suck. I don't know if a union is the answer to the
steady erosion we have all been experiencing, but it seems to work
elsewhere.
|
1448.57 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Mon Jul 08 1991 12:50 | 10 |
| re .54, .55:
I think this shows that the union member had the courage of her convictions.
Suppose you won something that had been produced under conditions that
conflicted with *your* beliefs (slave labor, for example). Would you
accept the prize?
BTW, Chrysler gave the woman a car because she turned down the Honda.
A Chrysler dealer gave her a lease on another car. She ended up with
two cars instead of one.
|
1448.58 | Has the original intent of unions been lost? | NODEX::GEARIN | | Mon Jul 08 1991 13:47 | 13 |
| Re .57:
What does being a union member have to do with "beliefs"? Unions
are supposed to be a mechanism for improving worker's conditions.
It was not intended to be an ideaology. If I need to improve MY
working conditions via a union, does this mean I need to be resentful
and show animosity towards products, employees, and industries that
are not unionized? Based on the case where the person refused to
accept the Honda as a prize because it was not produced by a unionized
work force, does this also mean that very same person forgoes medical
care because her doctor is not a member of this form of union?
David
|
1448.59 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Mon Jul 08 1991 16:28 | 10 |
| re .58 (continuing the rathole):
Your analogy is faulty. The woman who won the Honda was a member of the
UAW and a Chrysler employee. Her refusal of the Honda doesn't mean that
she boycotts the products and services of all non-unionized companies and
industries. Honda has actively fought the UAW's efforts to unionize their
U.S. plant. If the woman's doctor fought unionization of his practice,
I'd suspect that she'd switch doctors.
Why do people consider loyalty tantamount to stupidity?
|
1448.60 | | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow | Mon Jul 08 1991 17:04 | 7 |
| re: .59 - loyalty = stupidity
Unless the information about the prizes was incorrect, this certainly was a
case of stupidity. If she didn't want the Honda, she should have taken it
and then sold it. After all, even a used Honda Civic is worth more than $1000.
Bob
|
1448.61 | Competition encourages innovation and quality | NODEX::GEARIN | | Mon Jul 08 1991 17:19 | 22 |
| Re .59:
Why is my analogy faulty? The woman stated she did not choose the
car because it was produced by a non-union workforce. Chances are
her doctor does not belong to a "UAW-type" union. Based solely on
her reasons she should be boycotting all non-union products and
services.
>>> Why is loyalty tantamount to stupidity?
Should we all buy products based on loyalty? Do you own a non-DEC
personal computer at home? If so, why? If the product is superior,
and the price comparable you should buy the superior product. Doing
otherwise provides a disincentive to innovation and quality. Why
should I build a better a better product if people will purchase it
based on the fact that it was "union" or "American" made? The attitude
that people would buy an inferior made American cars over a superior
made imported car because of loyalty is probably a major reason
the American Auto industry is in trouble these days.....
David
|
1448.62 | | ASICS::LESLIE | There is darkness | Tue Jul 09 1991 04:41 | 9 |
| Unions are not necessarily "bad". People who hold to their beliefs can
do so without reference to other poeples opinions.
I'm saddened to read such a binary set of opinions.
Oh, by the way, this topic would get a really get workout in
PEAR::SOAPBOX.
- andy
|
1448.63 | | MU::PORTER | MOP lynch squad | Wed Jul 10 1991 00:12 | 23 |
| re .60
You apparently have no understanding of the concept of a "moral
decision".
Let me try and explain it: the car offered to the woman was produced
by a company which whose labour practices she disagreed. She
apparently felt that doing business with that company would
not mesh with her beliefs. She therefore chose not to accept
the products of that company.
It is irrelevant to the moral dimension whether she'd be paying
for the car with her own money, or whether someone else (possibly
the car company itself, if the prize was donated) was paying
for it.
Therefore, accepting the car and selling it would be
acceptable only to someone who wasn't concerned with
hypocrisy.
One may agree or disagree with the pro-Union stance of
this woman, but at least she showed her convictions
weren't fair-weather ones.
|
1448.64 | I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one... | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow | Wed Jul 10 1991 10:19 | 9 |
| re: .63
> You apparently have no understanding of the concept of a "moral
> decision".
I fail to see where morality enters into the union vs. non-union decision
at all.
Bob
|
1448.65 | rathole, rathole | FUNYET::ANDERSON | VMS: First and Last and Always | Wed Jul 10 1991 12:08 | 7 |
| Was the woman who won and refused the Honda concerned about the conditions under
which Honda workers labor and the benefits they receive? Or was she simply
concerned about them belonging to a union? Maybe the non-union Honda workers
are better off than the union Chrysler workers. I don't think it should be
assumed that union workers are always better off than non-union workers.
Paul
|
1448.66 | | USWS::HOLT | Karakorum Pass or Bust! | Wed Jul 10 1991 21:11 | 4 |
|
I suspect that the woman had an eye on how her neighbors would
react.. What would it profit her to keep the Honda and become
an outcast among her union friends ?
|
1448.67 | | SMOOT::ROTH | From little acorns mighty oaks grow. | Thu Jul 11 1991 15:48 | 13 |
| Not sure of the particulars of overall union -vs- non-union benefits
differences... but here is a singular example:
Per the local paper here workers at Honda that were called to serve
during the 'Desert Shield/Desert Storm' crisis received the difference in
pay (between military pay and regular Honda pay) during the duration of
their service, thus their families were not put in a lurch.
The article in the paper indicated that the unionized auto workers at
other plants had no similar benefit, or it was for a short duration (like
a few weeks).
Lee
|