ADVERTISEMENT

question on unions

Interesting. Seems even more outrageous that you'd give $800 a year to an organization that does nothing for you other than provide partial insurance when you can pay a fraction of that for full coverage insurance.
You pay for their advocacy and representation if you were to be accused of something you did not do. I seem to remember you posting something about a student making a false claim about you and the district ignoring it after they did some research. If they had not done so your association dues would have provided you with legal representation.
 
Interesting. Seems even more outrageous that you'd give $800 a year to an organization that does nothing for you other than provide partial insurance when you can pay a fraction of that for full coverage insurance.
You pay for their advocacy and representation if you were to be accused of something you did not do. I seem to remember you posting something about a student making a false claim about you and the district ignoring it after they did some research. If they had not done so your association dues would have provided you with legal representation.

Not totally correct. They pay for it if you're not found guilty. Otherwise you foot the bill. Like I said, there are other organizations that provide the same services and cover you no matter what for a fraction of the cost.
 
That's about the longest most uninformed post on union membership I have ever read
union can visit homes and employers can't what the fvck is that
your second point on promises Its not a promise it's called negotiations and a contract
point 3. I have know idea what this is


Rebuttal to all points as usual TRad is clueless.
Trad is an HR person. His job is to protect the company, not the employees. His job would be a lot easier if he could f*** over the employees whenever convenient. It's quite obvious he's biased against unions.
 
Not totally correct. They pay for it if you're not found guilty. Otherwise you foot the bill. Like I said, there are other organizations that provide the same services and cover you no matter what for a fraction of the cost.
Can you provide a link for that claim? I can believe that you would be responsible to pay if you abused a student. This is what I found at the ISEA site:

Legal representation
When you belong to the association, you have peace of mind that your side will be heard and that your rights will be protected. We stand ready and willing to go the extra mile to make sure you get a fair shake . . . and you don’t have to pay a penny in legal fees!

Educators employment liability protection
With your Association membership comes a $1 million Educators Employment Liability (EEL) insurance policy which protects you against civil proceedings brought against you in job-related matters.

https://isea.org/member-benefits/
 
Not totally correct. They pay for it if you're not found guilty. Otherwise you foot the bill. Like I said, there are other organizations that provide the same services and cover you no matter what for a fraction of the cost.
Can you provide a link for that claim? I can believe that you would be responsible to pay if you abused a student. This is what I found at the ISEA site:

Legal representation
When you belong to the association, you have peace of mind that your side will be heard and that your rights will be protected. We stand ready and willing to go the extra mile to make sure you get a fair shake . . . and you don’t have to pay a penny in legal fees!

Educators employment liability protection
With your Association membership comes a $1 million Educators Employment Liability (EEL) insurance policy which protects you against civil proceedings brought against you in job-related matters.

https://isea.org/member-benefits/

I'll have to look for it. I've got it on my computer at work.
 
I'll have to look for it. I've got it on my computer at work.
Okay, also I would like to see the cheaper coverage you can get from outside the ISEA that pays no matter whether you are guilty or not? I'm just curious. Thanks
 
Prepaid plans are a type of legal insurance plan offered by a number of different companies and marketed through employers, labor unions, credit unions, department stores, credit card companies, and even door to door. The theory is that legal services, much the same as nuts and berries, are cheaper when bought in bulk. A relatively low yearly fee, sometimes under $100, purports to cover a number of lawyerly tasks.

In fact, most low-cost plans cover only a couple of phone consultations—and a few basic services such as a simple will. Beyond that, you receive a discount for other types of legal services. But unfortunately, the resulting fee is often not much lower than you could negotiate if you called around on your own. The better and more expensive plans completely cover certain legal services, such as divorce, bankruptcy, and drunk driving defense. Also, to avoid obvious conflicts of interest, the best plans do not allow the lawyers who provide telephone consultations to refer cases to themselves.

Think about how likely it is that you'll need one of the covered services—and think about how many of these tasks, such as writing a will or filing for divorce, you can do on your own with a little help from Nolo or by hiring an attorney on your own. Because most people use a lawyer only a few times in their lives, this might be insurance you can do without. Even if you decide to sign up, don't write that check until you know exactly what the plan covers and what you'll have to pay on your own. Also ask whether the plan's phone-consultation lawyers are allowed to recommend their own services. If so, you are at risk of buying into a bait-and-switch scheme.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/question-are-prepaid-legal-service-plans-28184.html
 
I'll have to look for it. I've got it on my computer at work.
Okay, also I would like to see the cheaper coverage you can get from outside the ISEA that pays no matter whether you are guilty or not? I'm just curious. Thanks

Sure. You can check out PEI or there's a Christian organization that does it as well. Can't remember their name. I think the amount PEI covers depends on the outcome. I was an ISEA member my first couple years and I've had no coverage the last 13 years. In almost every case outside maybe criminal charges, the school is going to represent you. At least that's what they tell you in admin masters classes. I would assume that's because the school is more than likely going to be part of the lawsuit.
 
Trad is an HR person. His job is to protect the company, not the employees. His job would be a lot easier if he could f*** over the employees whenever convenient. It's quite obvious he's biased against unions.
This is how I perceive Trad, which is, unfortunately, in line with my experience with HR. It's weird—it's as though human resources functionality within corporations has become a contradiction in terms. Maybe it should be called OSP for owner/shareholder protection?
 
This is how I perceive Trad, which is, unfortunately, in line with my experience with HR. It's weird—it's as though human resources functionality within corporations has become a contradiction in terms. Maybe it should be called OSP for owner/shareholder protection?

You have an amazingly low understanding of the profession. Our job is to maximize the value of the company's human resources toward the realization of the company's strategic goals. This may or may not mean doing what's popular with the employees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gimmered
You have an amazingly low understanding of the profession. Our job is to maximize the value of the company's human resources toward the realization of the company's strategic goals. This may or may not mean doing what's popular with the employees.
Yes that is the profession in theory. In practice I have experienced something much, much different. I was under the impression that you were bright enough to realize I was opining on my experience given I used the words "my experience" to qualify my opinion.
 
You have an amazingly low understanding of the profession. Our job is to maximize the value of the company's human resources toward the realization of the company's strategic goals. This may or may not mean doing what's popular with the employees.

In other words doing everything in your power to screw workers over. At least every worker who in any way stands up for themself
 
In other words doing everything in your power to screw workers over. At least every worker who in any way stands up for themself

Completely untrue. I'm for employees who contribute value to the organization. They are valued and should not have to put up with slackers and malcontents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quix0te
I was a former teamster at ups.. and currently a member of the ibew... the first thing unions do great is they actually fight for a wage you can live on, yea I know they are some non-Union companies that do aswell. But there is a lot of companies that take advantage of employees.. safety is more important in the unions being able to go home safe everyday is a priority.. now the bad of unions is they do tend to retain the crap employees. But usually fellow brothers, don’t like working with those guys and they get spun pretty fast.. the right to organize is the right of every employee in the nation, and the government should not interfere with that right..
 
I was a former teamster at ups.. and currently a member of the ibew... the first thing unions do great is they actually fight for a wage you can live on, yea I know they are some non-Union companies that do aswell. But there is a lot of companies that take advantage of employees.. safety is more important in the unions being able to go home safe everyday is a priority.. now the bad of unions is they do tend to retain the crap employees. But usually fellow brothers, don’t like working with those guys and they get spun pretty fast.. the right to organize is the right of every employee in the nation, and the government should not interfere with that right..
Except for your last nine words, I agree with everything that you said.

But you ducked political contributions. I don't want my union dues going to political contributions AND I don't want to pay dues to a union who makes political contributions to anyone, either party. Do you understand that?
 
Sure. You can check out PEI or there's a Christian organization that does it as well. Can't remember their name. I think the amount PEI covers depends on the outcome. I was an ISEA member my first couple years and I've had no coverage the last 13 years. In almost every case outside maybe criminal charges, the school is going to represent you. At least that's what they tell you in admin masters classes. I would assume that's because the school is more than likely going to be part of the lawsuit.
The school will represent you if it is in their interest. They won't be there if someone files a civil suit against you personally or if the question is unfair termination of employment. I taught for 34 years and never needed the legal services of ISEA, but if I had it to do all over again I'd still join. It only takes one misunderstood situation to ruin your career.
 
Except for your last nine words, I agree with everything that you said.

But you ducked political contributions. I don't want my union dues going to political contributions AND I don't want to pay dues to a union who makes political contributions to anyone, either party. Do you understand that?
I agree with that statement 100 percent.. a lot of trade union members are getting tired of the Democrats for the open border policies, because the non-union side is hiring these workers and it is crippling a lot of the trade unions..trust me there is a lot of trump love on job sites.. but yes my dues should go to making my union stronger... but everything now is so political, that my dues will go to a political party not by my choice..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gimmered
I agree with that statement 100 percent.. a lot of trade union members are getting tired of the Democrats for the open border policies, because the non-union side is hiring these workers and it is crippling a lot of the trade unions..trust me there is a lot of trump love on job sites.. but yes my dues should go to making my union stronger... but everything now is so political, that my dues will go to a political party not by my choice..
Yep. It's sad.
 
i have worked for enough lying crappy non union employers to know that they are absolutely still needed today.

when management at one of the lying crappy non union employers goes nuts and show anti union propaganda videos a day after somebody was handing out union literature to employees leaving their shifts I will support the unions 99% of the time despite the flaws
 
i have worked for enough lying crappy non union employers to know that they are absolutely still needed today.

when management at one of the lying crappy non union employers goes nuts and show anti union propaganda videos a day after somebody was handing out union literature to employees leaving their shifts I will support the unions 99% of the time despite the flaws

That's actually a union avoidance best practice. The unions are always campaigning, employers need to do that, too.... especially with today's ambush election rules.
 
i have worked for enough lying crappy non union employers to know that they are absolutely still needed today.

when management at one of the lying crappy non union employers goes nuts and show anti union propaganda videos a day after somebody was handing out union literature to employees leaving their shifts I will support the unions 99% of the time despite the flaws
It's certainly within an Employer's rights to express their views on how they feel about Unions. Not sure why you would be bothered by that.
 
So, if you're an average or below-average worker, the union is likely to be good for you, but if you're a high-achiever, you'd probably be better off in a non-union workplace where your individual contributions can be recognized and rewarded.

i have never worked with an employer that had a union. The majority of places I have worked at gave the same raises across the board, regardless of effort or production.

The place I am at now we are losing good workers who have knowledge and bust their ass because the company won't pay them and they had enough with lazier employees) getting paid the same or more. We will probably lose another one even though as a part timer, he produces more in the 4-5 hours than a few do in a couple days and they won't pay him more to keep him. i know I am getting tired of busting my ass when there are some that get away with multiple breaks and doing nothing and being on their phones all day...and yes management is aware and does nothing,

my last employer had production bonuses. I used to get about $125 every paycheck, but the metrics kept changing (assuming they were paying out too much $$). they cut metics so bad that when i left, I was getting $25-$50 for the same effort that i used to get $125 for. not really worth the incentive to keep busting my ass

continue living in your corporate fantasy land
 
Last edited:
It's certainly within an Employer's rights to express their views on how they feel about Unions. Not sure why you would be bothered by that.

it is definitely their right, but when the employer continually had us come in on our day off with no notice...as in we come in and they are telling us we are working the next day on our day off (i just quit making plans because i grew tired of cancelling them) and overall treated their employees with little regard, seeing them lose their sh*t because someone was handing out union flyers and to know how much those types of employers are that threatened by that....it made it real clear going forward that unions were a good thing and still needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gohawks50
it is definitely their right, but when the employer continually had us come in on our day off with no notice...as in we come in and they are telling us we are working the next day on our day off (i just quit making plans because i grew tired of cancelling them) and overall treated their employees with little regard, seeing them lose their sh*t because someone was handing out union flyers and to know how much those types of employers are that threatened by that....it made it real clear going forward that unions were a good thing and still needed.
It will be a cycle... where people think unions arnt needed and the companies get power then unions will come back when employees get crapped on.. but remember all union members know the first thing is make the company money, if you can’t make them money you are not helping the union or the company
 
Completely untrue. I'm for employees who contribute value to the organization. They are valued and should not have to put up with slackers and malcontents.
Trad I think you forgot why unions were created. It wasn't the because employers were giving free trips and bonuses through out yr. Maybe it was because they worked you like a slave 7 days a wk work conditions that would kill you. Fire you without cause. Employers have know further took look than themselves for the rise of unions. So when your value is used up such as getting older or a illness you can be replaced.
 
Trad I think you forgot why unions were created. It wasn't the because employers were giving free trips and bonuses through out yr. Maybe it was because they worked you like a slave 7 days a wk work conditions that would kill you. Fire you without cause. Employers have know further took look than themselves for the rise of unions. So when your value is used up such as getting older or a illness you can be replaced.

Yeah, well... it's not 1935 anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sadiehawkins
it is definitely their right, but when the employer continually had us come in on our day off with no notice...as in we come in and they are telling us we are working the next day on our day off (i just quit making plans because i grew tired of cancelling them) and overall treated their employees with little regard, seeing them lose their sh*t because someone was handing out union flyers and to know how much those types of employers are that threatened by that....it made it real clear going forward that unions were a good thing and still needed.
Unionizing isn't a guarantee at all that there won't be unwanted overtime. Possibly on how the overtime should be distributed. Unions often go into these campaigns making all kinds of promises, they will tell the workers anything they want to hear to get them to sign a card. Delivering on those promises can be a totally different matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Tradition
It will be a cycle... where people think unions arnt needed and the companies get power then unions will come back when employees get crapped on.. but remember all union members know the first thing is make the company money, if you can’t make them money you are not helping the union or the company
I can see that the rolls have switched a lot since I started in 1979. The Companies push safety to the point of stupid because of the outrageous cost of medical care for injured employees. The Unions are more inline with change and high performance work teams because of the threats of cheap foreign labor.
 
Unionizing isn't a guarantee at all that there won't be unwanted overtime. Possibly on how the overtime should be distributed. Unions often go into these campaigns making all kinds of promises, they will tell the workers anything they want to hear to get them to sign a card. Delivering on those promises can be a totally different matter.

I have had an employer lie to me during the course of the interview process. they lied to me on some specific questions I had over two interviews with three different people. If they answered truthfully, I would not have accepted the job. the lie affected child care arrangements.

I emailed the HR lady (who was one to interview me) what the disconnect was between what i was told in the interviews and what is actually happening on the floor and was fed more lies. It was day 2 that i knew i was lied to and screwed. I walked out three months later after being told a handful of other things that never materialized.

I would take my chances on the union instead of scumbag middle management any day
 
  • Like
Reactions: sadiehawkins
I have had an employer lie to me during the course of the interview process. they lied to me on some specific questions I had over two interviews with three different people. If they answered truthfully, I would not have accepted the job. the lie affected child care arrangements.

I emailed the HR lady (who was one to interview me) what the disconnect was between what i was told in the interviews and what is actually happening on the floor and was fed more lies. It was day 2 that i knew i was lied to and screwed. I walked out three months later after being told a handful of other things that never materialized.

I would take my chances on the union instead of scumbag middle management any day

That's fraudulent misrepresentation! You don't need a union to win that lawsuit.
 
I have had an employer lie to me during the course of the interview process. they lied to me on some specific questions I had over two interviews with three different people. If they answered truthfully, I would not have accepted the job. the lie affected child care arrangements.

I emailed the HR lady (who was one to interview me) what the disconnect was between what i was told in the interviews and what is actually happening on the floor and was fed more lies. It was day 2 that i knew i was lied to and screwed. I walked out three months later after being told a handful of other things that never materialized.

I would take my chances on the union instead of scumbag middle management any day
And you think you won't be lied to in a union workplace?

What I've seen within union campaigns, is that people treat it a bit like Christianity, in that they make it into what ever they think it should be. If we unionize we will do this, or that or the other thing and they will never do that again. Reality never seems to match up with the fantasy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roy-munson
Completely untrue. I'm for employees who contribute value to the organization. They are valued and should not have to put up with slackers and malcontents.

So I’m right. You’re specifically looking out for the interests of the employer, and only the employer. As long as the needs of the employer are met, you’ve done your job. You also advocate for the employer only having a quiet voice, not backed by the volume of the many. You’re a corporate minion. That’s ok, corporate minions are needed, but don’t begrudge others their voice.

My thinking is that you’ve been schooled a few times by union members, and you hold a grudge.
 
That's fraudulent misrepresentation! You don't need a union to win that lawsuit.

I was interviewing for a second shift job, but the hours were monday thru friday (at least advertised). I asked if they did any overtime (as the work environment was a place that would be likely to have OT), as I had many other things going on at the time outside or work that required me watching my son. They told me they rarely ran OT. Told that by three different people in two interviews. The fewest amount of hours I worked was my first week there at 43 hours. one day off every two weeks.....for a place that supposedly rarely runs OT.

you can say misrepresentation, but i am sure their defense would be what the HR lady told me.
" we have had lots of injuries lately"
"we are hiring more people on your shift" (only advertised the position for a couple days and all new hires were on first.

I then asked to go to first shift if we were going to run all those hours because I couldn't work weekend nights due to my circumstances. I was told for two weeks I would be going to first. they never did move me. a couple weeks later I had another job and I walked out mid shift one night. they didn't deserve a notice.

The whole nightmare would've been avoided if they simply said, we have mandatory overtime frequently. I wouldn't have accepted the position....although I should blame myself for not listening to that gut feeling i had to not take the job.
 
What's wrong with unions? Would you want some third party muscling into your business and forcing you to engage in collective bargaining over all terms and conditions of employment? It would be one thing if it was simply the employees you're dealing with. But a union organization has their own employees whose salaries are paid from employee union dues to "represent" YOUR employees and make your life miserable as the business owner.

Other problems:

Unions can visit the homes of employees; the employer cannot.

Unions can make all sorts of outrageous promises regarding the benefits of union membership, employers can't promise employees anything as an inducement to reject the union.

Union laws allow employees to describe the workplace and its managers using very nasty and abusive language, and the employer has no recourse.

Unionization creates enormous costs that obviously cannot become company profits or increased wages and benefits for employees.

In the end, the employment agreement is supposed to be between the employer and the employee. You should be recognized and rewarded for your individual skills, knowledge, abilities and efforts. Unions don't allow that. Everyone gets paid the same; seniority is the only factor that can be individually rewarded.

Simply put, unions are parasitic organizations that take advantage of employers AND the employees to feather their own beds.

You know what else “causes enormous costs that cannot become company profits or increased wages and benefits for employees” and are “parasitic organizations”? Every HR department ever.
 
ADVERTISEMENT