Stewart Stremler wrote:
Yup. And part of the reason you have that experience is that the threat
of unionization. I was a little unclear -- without the _concept_ of
unions and the threat of unionization, then even those who do good work
would likely have to yell for a living wage. (Better?)
Please don't get the impression that I'm recommending that ALL jobs be
unionized. I think it's better for employers to avoid becoming so
obnoxious/abusive/whatnot that the employees would be willing to unionize.
Perhaps it's a good thing that unions are so obnoxious. The cost to the
employee is high -- so unionization would be taken only as a last resort
when conditions and treatment are worse than the alternative.
-Stewart "All things in moderation, and some less so." Stremler
Union's, per se, are not the problem. union leadership and union
administration are the problems. For both employers and employees (union
membership).
An example. My father at one time was a painting contractor. I worked
for him during some summers when I was a teenager. On one particular
job, a Huffman apartment being built in North Park [1], I saw the actual
affects unions had on both employees and employers. All of the
contractors on the job were union contractors: plumbing, electrical,
etc. While my father was a union member (as was my uncle, also a
painter), he did not like the union and did not require his employees to
become union members.
We were in the process of finishing enameling kitchens and baths, and
were just starting to paint the doors. By today's description, the
process seems normal: cut in (by brush) and roll the walls, spray the
doors. However, by union rules, in those days, rolling enamel walls and
spraying doors was illegal. If a sub-contractor got caught, he was fined
by the union. If the fine wasn't paid, the sub's union card was pulled
till it was. Then, because the contractor was no longer union, the other
union trades would walk till the one sub complied (called a Sympathy
Strike, now illegal in California). Of course, this didn't make the
General any too happy.
Same thing happened when a non-union employee was found: Union goons
walk on the job asking to see union cards [2]. Because union membership
was not a requirement of employment, many employees were not union.
However, if one was found, and did not comply, the other trades would
threaten (by way of being extorted by /their/ union's goons) to walk off
the job because of the presence of a non-union contractor (which was not
illegal).
The explanation for not allowing a painter to roll enamel or spray
doors, is that it took less time and labor, thus depriving painters of
work (and of course, unions of dues). Basically, another form of
featherbedding. The real effect was sub-contractors being squeezed
between the developer and the unions such that their bids were so close
to the break-even point that most could not stay in business long -
which meant, of course, unemployment for their workers. But the unions
got their dues. Part of union leadership's goals was to keep the labor
process as inefficient, and labor-intensive as possible so as to
maintain the largest membership (and union income) possible.
By the way, the current union of which I am not a member, takes more
money out of my paycheck each month for dues than is about equal to the
combined deductions for Medicare and SDI [3]. Union dues right now are
set at 2% of gross income.
---
[1] Ray L. Huffman-built apartments account for some of ugliest, most
obnoxious, and worst-built housing in North Park. He was probably the
most prolific apartment builder in San Diego during the 1960's. Huffman
was notoriously well-known for his practice of avoiding paying final
draws to sub-contractors by way of his very long, very tedious, and very
outrageous "Laugh lists" (also known as pick-up lists, punch-lists,
etc.) He would continually update the list with new problem items every
time the previous problems were fixed. The cost of satisfying the lists
often cost the contractor more in labor than if they forfeited the final
draw and moved on to the next job.
What is ironic, is that more and more of these worst-of-the-lot
buildings are now being converted to $200K-$300K+ condo conversions.
These same apartments account for some of the most affordable rental
housing in metro San Diego. IOW, the people who can least afford to buy
"affordable" housing in San Diego are exactly the same people who are
being evicted to make way for their condo owner counterparts. Just one
more measure of how San Diego's middle class is slowly being pushed into
lower class status.
[2] We used to always be on the lookout for the union reps. When they
came around, everyone who was not a paid member hid. One time my uncle,
whose card had expired, jumped through a window on his way to a closet
so fast that the scaffolding he had been on was pushed over as he thrust
through the open window. I hid with him in a bedroom closet till the
goons left. We both later got caught and my dad had to fire me because
it made no economic sense for me to join the union - I would have to pay
a membership fee, training fees (apprenticeship), as well as dues. Oh,
and I'd have to pay a fine (for not being a union member before I could
become a union member) My dad had to pay his fine anyway.
[3] Oh, and I have to pay an annual fee toward union promotion - and
then there's the fee to (not) join the union...
Best Regards,
~DJA.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
