Discussion: Labor, Unions, and Workers' Rights

DJ Kornphlake said:
He officially announced yesterday.
Click to expand...

Thanks. A matter of when and not if. Repubs are going to be defending some tough senate races without Trump on the ballot. GOTV for what may be a semi lazy Dem party is going to be key.
 
KRYPTON INC. said:



The more I learn about this guy the more I think his potential is enormous.

I think...

Bernie, AOC, Warren...

This is THE guy that will run because they paved the way.

Maybe I'm being naive but I think he could unify the Dems as a standard bearer and appeal to disaffected Republicans.
Click to expand...

 
UuHdFiA.jpeg
 
KRYPTON INC. said:
UuHdFiA.jpeg
Click to expand...
One important thing that could come from separating healthcare from your workplace, is the focus on these other very important issues. One thing unions seems to always fall back on is the healthcare they got you. Remove that from the table and we can get into other important issues.
 
DarthSkywalker said:
One important thing that could come from separating healthcare from your workplace, is the focus on these other very important issues. One thing unions seems to always fall back on is the healthcare they got you. Remove that from the table and we can get into other important issues.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Interestingly enough, the unions pushing for healthcare improvements has pushed some businesses to reconsider their former positions on issues like M4A. Years ago, one of our big issues in our negotiations with the University of California was healthcare protections for retirees in our bargaining units (This was a permissible subject of bargaining and not a mandatory one; meaning it was legal for UC to negotiate this issues, but they weren't legally required to do so because retirees technically aren't in the bargaining unit). We got concessions because we made a big, public display of UC being willing to raise retiree healthcare payments to unreasonable levels after they were finished with them after 20 or more years of service.

One upshot of this was that, in a sidebar, a UC negotiator told me that the whole healthcare issue was a huge albatross around their neck and a lot of people in the administration were coming to the conclusion that a single payer system was as much a benefit for the university as it was for employees. In other words, it would allow them to wash their hands of the entire issue. This was awhile back, but, at the time, I, at least, didn't see it coming. It made perfect sense to me after the discussion and I wonder how prevalent this attitude is.

EDIT: In case people don't know, there are essentially 3 different subjects of bargaining.

Mandatory subject of bargaining - An employer is legally required to negotiate wages, hours of work, health and safety, grievance procedures, etc. that affect people in the bargaining unit. If agreement cannot be reached on these subjects, impasse may be declared and procedures are implemented to hammer out the final agreement.

Permissive subject of bargaining - An employer "may" bargain issues that don't directly affect the people in the bargaining unit. Things such as recruiting standards, opening new venues, etc. would qualify as such and permissive subjects of bargaining may not be used to reach impasse.

Illegal/Prohibited subject of bargaining - An employer may not bargain issues that you are legally entitled to. For example, you can't bargain away your right to collect social security or rights extended to you by the constitution/state law/federal law. There is always a severance clause in the contract in case what is negotiated is found to be illegal. Basically, it severs that subject from the overall agreement so the overall contract can remain in force.
 
Last edited:
A big win for workers in the UK. If only my state hadn't been hit with so much money to not do a similar thing back in November.

 
DarthSkywalker said:
A big win for workers in the UK. If only my state hadn't been hit with so much money to not do a similar thing back in November.

Click to expand...


Yeah, but if we had term limits, none of this could happen.....oh, wait.....we do....
 
DarthSkywalker said:
A big win for workers in the UK. If only my state hadn't been hit with so much money to not do a similar thing back in November.

Click to expand...

I wonder what this will mean for Uber's business model. I have a feeling this will be revisited in California soon.
 
writer0327 said:
I wonder what this will mean for Uber's business model. I have a feeling this will be revisited in California soon.
Click to expand...

Drivers for supermarkets, etc lost their Fing jobs and healthcare because of that stupid proposition. All that talk about "flexibility" was a load of BS. It was about corporations protecting corporations and driving down their expenses even more. It was about flexibility all right.....corporate "flexibility" to EF people over.

This is exactly why when I hear about people talking about term limits, my first thought is that what we really need is to get rid of corporate influence in our elections. They have just too much money/power and are able, via advertising, to mislead people into voting against their own interests and for theirs.
 
Last edited:
InCali said:
Drivers for supermarkets, etc lost their Fing jobs and healthcare because of that stupid proposition. All that talk about "flexibility" was a load of BS. It was about corporations protecting corporations and driving down their expenses even more. It was about flexibility all right.....corporate "flexibility" to EF people over.

This is exactly why when I hear about people talking about term limits, my first thought is that what we really need is to get rid of corporate influence in our elections. They have just too much money/power and are able, via advertising, to mislead people into voting against their own interests for for theirs.
Click to expand...
I don't drive Uber myself but I know a few who do that voted against the prop for the "flexibility" reason. One guy I know has a dozen odd jobs, one of which is Uber, and he liked the luxury of flipping on the app whenever he had time and making a few bucks. He doubted Uber would keep the same business model if the gig worker prop passed.

It'll be interesting to follow Uber UK to see how this all shakes out, because I'm certain once the dust settles, Uber will be making some adjustments to how they do business in the UK.
 
Once again, thanks and hats off to @MagnarTheGreat for finding and posting stuff like this. I'm going to respond in this thread.

MagnarTheGreat said:
NPR - PRO Act, Labor's Biggest Goal, Passes House: What's In It
Click to expand...

I had hopes, but concerns, about Joe Biden when he was running and when he got elected. While I find his penchant for "compromise" sometimes annoying, I have been pleasantly surprised by his actions thus far. This bill is, IMO, is just about the most important, far reaching piece of legislation that could be put into law and potentially touches on virtually every aspect of our lives. If workers have the unfettered right to organize, minimum wage will not be the problem it is now. Corporate influence in elections could possibly be curtailed and many other aspects of our lives could improve.

I know I'm looking at this from the perspective of a long time rank and file union member, activist and officer, but I don't know if people realize how far reaching the implications are if we could get something like this passed. We are talking about income distribution in this country. Think about that. Corporate America is going to go CRAZY over this and put out all sorts of lies about it abridging the "freedom" of workers; like they've been so worried about our freedoms. Yeah, tell me another fairy tale. I have one for you right now.

This bill would "force" people to pay union dues.

When a bargaining unit votes for collective bargaining, they must represent ALL of the bargaining unit in negotiations. One of the most loved techniques employers use to undercut the union's ability to successfully negotiate changes is to, when they can, run post union election campaigns, where legal, for workers to "opt out" of paying union dues in order to put a financial strain on unions. Those people who do so, however, get the full benefits of the contract negotiated and the union can't apply the benefit only to those who are dues paying members. The solution to this is what is called "agency fee" or "fair share" payments to the union that cover the costs of contract negotiations. Basically, the union conducts a CPA lead audit that establishes a percentage of dues that went to negotiations and a non-member fee is established as the percentage of full dues. As non-members, they don't enjoy exactly the same rights as dues paying members such as voting and formal input to union decisions, but enjoy the full benefits of the contract and must be represented in workplace disputes to the full extent laid out by the contract.

So, when Trump passed a "tax reform" bill that caused my taxes to go up about 4-5K/year (and, no, I don't make a huge amount of money, but do make a decent living), I didn't get to say "I didn't vote for him and my taxes should stay the same as they were". You can't play this both ways. Elections, as they say, have consequences; sometimes good (formal collective discussions with the employer on workplace issues) and sometimes bad (Trump presidency).

I am CERTAIN, Joe Biden would sign this bill if it could get through the senate and to have the support of the president of the United States is, to make an understatement, a big deal. Maybe this shouldn't have hardened my support for Joe Biden, but it has. The reason being that this wasn't, for some reason, front and center on my radar. I am more convinced than ever that the filibuster should be abolished or, minimally, be abridged to the extent that it can no longer be used to block legislation indefinitely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Alex_Spider
Cambodian garment workers locked in dispute with Wal-Mart and H&M supplier
Replies
0
Views
510
Alex_Spider
Alex_Spider
Axl Van Sixx
U.S. Labor Party?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
7K
Kelly
Kelly
SoulManX
Federal minimum wage to rise on Tuesday
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
blind_fury
B
chaseter
Discussion: All Things Union
33 34 35
Replies
869
Views
72K
Aximili86
Aximili86
SuBe
Discussion: Rights
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
Handsome Rob
Handsome Rob

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 1,363 (members: 21, guests: 1,342)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,549
Messages
21,758,666
Members
45,593
Latest member
Jeremija

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"