[Hydrogen]

Having been a member of two public sector unions and one "private" sector union, I also find myself a little ambivalent about these organizations at times. Nevertheless, I have seen a number of incidents where even the supposed "power" of the union could do little or nothing for individuals in certain instances, instances where clearly the individuals in question were being treated wrongly. These situations revealed just how much worse things could be if there wasn't a union to stave off the will of management.

 

[tkip]

You make a good point.

I think that some of the demands that unions make through it's leaders goes too far and feeds the negative image that really reflect unfairly on the average worker belonging to that union who's just trying to make a living.

In the end though, as long as policticians and business types keep padding their own pockets while everyone else lower down the ladder takes the hits and has something taken away then people should get off the union bashing express and refocus their energies onto the bigger fish.

When GM was announcing those planned massive factory closings and laying off thousands of workers, were the the upper management going to lose their jobs without cushy/hefty packages and refusing to keep their bonuses for having managed the company so badly?

No.

These clowns just get awarded a new opportunity in another company, having walked away from running a company into the grown with their own stupdity for not understanding the changing market and THEN trying to get the little guy to take all the hits while they sneak off into the sunet.

The hypcrisy just reeks to high heaven on this.

 

[Dichotomy]

And what are YOU driving?

The rich have always gotten richer. That's an unerring fact since Mesopotamia. Anyone can turn a wrench, but should they be paid $80k a year to do that? That is the question.
There is plenty of pain at GM and Ford these days. Nobody's job is safe. This argument goes well beyond the union argument. It goes more to the deep malaise in our society: the feeling of entitlement. The entitlement of saving $1 a Wal-Mart and not giving a damn if your neighbor lost his/her job because the product you just bought was made in China.

We need look no further tha the wast at City Hall to see what a great job unions are doing. The next time I see a parks truck hiding in a park while two workers read the newspaper for a hour, I swear I am going to hurl a bag of dog pooh at the truck. LOL

 

[CGM]

The next time I see a parks truck hiding in a park while two workers read the newspaper for a hour, I swear I am going to hurl a bag of dog pooh at the truck. LOL

That action would be counter productive as it will lead to a strike for more pay and safer working conditions.

 

[tkip]

Back and forth....

Like I said.

When I finally hear and see how the higher ups don't get *their* interests rewarded or skip out of town with their nice packages for running things so poorly while the rest of us take the fall then I'll reverse my stance on unions still serving a role in today's economic world.

Of course, with the great financial crisis of our lifetime unfolding, who knows what's going to happen next for anyone.

 

[Whoaccio]

Like I said.

When I finally hear and see how the higher ups don't get *their* interests rewarded or skip out of town with their nice packages for running things so poorly while the rest of us take the fall then I'll reverse my stance on unions still serving a role in today's economic world.

Of course, with the great financial crisis of our lifetime unfolding, who knows what's going to happen next for anyone.

Technically, they are just running away with their money. CEO (and related) salaries are approved by shareholders. If a CEO does a horrible job of managing things, the investors are the ones left holding the bag. Out of this whole financial crisis, the people who are really being hurt are the pensions and funds which invested in Lehman, Bear Stearns ect... Why none of the major investors raised a stink at some of the, ahem, questionable decisions of management is beyond me.

Once again though, this is about public sector unions, not private ones. The economics of private sector unions are debatable, but it's not what I want to get at. I think everyone here would agree that the government has a mandate to improve the lives of it's citizens by passing legislation, maintaining programs and such. Buried somewhere in here is the idea that governments have an obligation to look out for society's disadvantaged.

So, we look at a service like the TTC, intended to provide Torontonians with reliable mass transit first and foremost. That a large number of these riders are riders of neccesity, not choice, is worth keeping in mind. How is this goal aided by unions securing highest pay clauses and guaranteed pay rises? The TTC employs roughly twice the amount of staff as during the 1980s with similar ridership levels. Increased maintenance requirements can justify part of this, but certainly not all of it. Personnel routinely commit thousands of hours of overtime individually on unskilled tasks without management taking advantage of part time labor. Union leadership even campaigned against the Scarborough RT being built as an automatic system (despite it being explicitly designed as such) for the sole purpose of providing jobs.

How does that satisfy the TTC's mandate, to provide mass transit service to Torontonians? How are we, the owners and users of the system, benefited by this arrangement? I am not proposing paying TTC staff slave wages, placing them in unsafe work environments or anything contrary to existing labor regulations. Simply pointing out that the owners of the system, that is the taxpayers, are not being given appropriate oversight over the system. Who looses? The users. I myself had to live through endless cutbacks and fare hikes while union employees received guaranteed pay hikes. I was lucky in that I am relatively well off. The true looser in this arrangement is the rider of necessity who is locked into endless service cuts and fare hikes just so middle class residents can enjoy absurd benefits.

I am always surprised by the willingness of Toronto's "socially conscious" crowd to throw these people onto the tracks of union bureaucracy. Apparently socialism has become forcing the poor to pay exorbitant fees for the middle class. That the only defence for this behavior is to point out companies like Lehman Bros is proof of this casual disregard for TTC users. The owners and users of the TTC aren't rich aristocrats living in Rosedale and they don't make profits off of cutting employee wages. They are ordinary people, being screwed so a small crowd of middle class people can feel smug about their social awareness.


If the ATU 133 or CUPE existed in Soviet Russia, they would immediately be labeled Kulaks.

 

[kEiThZ]

I am always surprised by the willingness of Toronto's "socially conscious" crowd to throw these people onto the tracks of union bureaucracy. Apparently socialism has become forcing the poor to pay exorbitant fees for the middle class. That the only defence for this behavior is to point out companies like Lehman Bros is proof of this casual disregard for TTC users. The owners and users of the TTC aren't rich aristocrats living in Rosedale and they don't make profits off of cutting employee wages. They are ordinary people, being screwed so a small crowd of middle class people can feel smug about their social awareness.

This has happened because the majority of Torontonians don't pay the full cost of operating government. Owing to the nature of our progressive tax system, the top 10% of filers pay more than 50% the government's revenues (despite getting only 35% of the country's wages) and residential ratepayers in Toronto pay peanuts compared to commercial ratepayers who don't demand anywhere near the level of service. What this has led to is a complete societal lack of understanding about how taxes work, and the correlation between government levels of service, and taxes.....and the impact of unionized labour on the ability of government to deliver those services. If you are in the bottom quartile of the population and you don't earn enough to pay high taxes, there is little marginal cost to demanding new social programs or higher wages for unionized workers because hey, it's not like you are paying for it.....

Way to stick it to the man! .....who happens to be your middle class professional next door. Sadly, push him far enough and he'll take his business, medical practice, accounting services, etc. elsewhere...with the tax revenue and all the jobs he created.....

 

[Dichotomy]

The TTC represents a double monopoly: only the TTC has a mandate to provide public transit within Toronto and only unionized personnel can work for the TTC. Perfect recipe for hijacking the taxpayer.
I know there are exceptions out there, but anyone I've ever met in a TTC uniform has been whiny, needy and selfish. They need a good dose of reality of what it is to work in the real world.

 

[Whoaccio]

The TTC represents a double monopoly: only the TTC has a mandate to provide public transit within Toronto and only unionized personnel can work for the TTC. Perfect recipe for hijacking the taxpayer.
I know there are exceptions out there, but anyone I've ever met in a TTC uniform has been whiny, needy and selfish. They need a good dose of reality of what it is to work in the real world.

I've met a good number of friendly and outgoing TTC employees that I felt probably deserved the benefits and pay rises. For instance a few weeks ago, our bus driver went out of his way to help two young kids who had gotten lost find their parents. What irks me though is that decent employees like him and, I am sure, many others get held back because of the incompetent ones who are held on for questionable reasons. I would rather the decent employees (for the sake of argument, lets say 50% of the TTC) get a 6% pay rise than everyone getting a 3% pay rise.

 

[Mustapha]

I've met a good number of friendly and outgoing TTC employees that I felt probably deserved the benefits and pay rises. For instance a few weeks ago, our bus driver went out of his way to help two young kids who had gotten lost find their parents. What irks me though is that decent employees like him and, I am sure, many others get held back because of the incompetent ones who are held on for questionable reasons. I would rather the decent employees (for the sake of argument, lets say 50% of the TTC) get a 6% pay rise than everyone getting a 3% pay rise.

The level of basic courtesy of TTC employees is inconsistent for sure. Purely from appearance/comportment a select few of them seem to be social outcasts.

 

[Northern Light]

There are

Plenty of examples of excellent, unionized public service, even agreeing to more efficient operations.

For instance, the current size of City garbage truck resulted from an experiment a few years ago where East York contracted out 1/2 its garbage service for 3 years.

When the contract came up they offered the union to in-source, if they could match private sector efficiency.

They did; by pointing out that virtually all of the difference in the private operator's costs came from using larger trucks that had to make fewer trips to the transfer stations.

East York changed trucks and saved a great deal of money.

***

Post-amalgamation, the collective agreement was modified so that Garbage workers now work a 4-day, 10-hour per day workweek. What this did was eliminate several conflicts with Stat. Holidays on Mondays.

Thus reducing the number of times pick-ups are cancelled or delayed.

***

Is service there perfect? No. Every last employee hard-working? No. But that isn't so different from the private sector.

Unions can be gotten along with and agree to many progressive changes; but management does need to have a good working relationship with them, and offer a fair deal to displaced workers if things become more efficient.

Although, not always appropriate or applicable, there are room for incentives in the public sector system too, (managers get merit pay).

There is no reason you can't provide incentives to workers for success. Unions get cranky about specific merit pay with good reason, because while it should exist in an ideal world, without exacting bureaucratic standards, it can be a tool to play favourites or punish active union members etc.

However, you can offer what amounts to profit-sharing in many cases.

For example, you could give TTC Staff a cut of ridership revenue, say 2% (in lieu of a roughly equivalent amount of their current pay)

This would directly incent them to provide better service. Even if every worker got the same cut, there would be peer-pressure to perform, to get everyone's cheque up higher.

*****

There are a host of jobs the TTC shouldn't pay less for; but should do away with. However, in the case of collectors, whose jobs will be obsolete when automatic fare purchase (re-loadable fare cards) come to Toronto.....

Its TTC management that has dragged its feet.

The TTC could also ditch the guards on trains, even now, though certainly with ATC and platform edge doors, they would be beyond redundant.

I expect the union did put up a fight over having 2 staff per train (1 on the SRT). However, unionized staff in Vancouver did not result in drivers for their version of the SRT. Deals can be made.

Buyouts offered.

Its not about militance, but about sound corporate/institutional culture.

That this has been poisoned at some agencies is the responsibility of both management and the specific Union, not all unions everywhere.

 

[kEiThZ]

... Deals can be made.

Buyouts offered.

Its not about militance, but about sound corporate/institutional culture.

That this has been poisoned at some agencies is the responsibility of both management and the specific Union, not all unions everywhere.

The ATU has a different viewpoint on making deals. Look at the current stance of the union on drug testing for employees. No compromise. Their way or the increasingly overcrowded highway (for all commuters...).

 

[Tank]

Seriously? 24 weeks vacation a year? Anything that preferential should get you hated.

And yet, politicians love to promise more police officers. Highly paid civil servants getting half the year off. Can't be.

They dont get 24 weeks of vacation a year. They work a compressed work week, which is 70 hours a week. They work the same amount of hours as everyone else does. Except when others have days off officers are also attending court.

You wanna complain, complain about firemen.

 

[Tank]

I couldn't agree more. I've never understood the apparent contradiction that many hard line socialists seem to live with in Canada. That is, they want the state to control most things directly, as it's the "voice of the people". However, even when you work for the "voice of the people", you need a hugely strong union to protect you from even that entity which is entrusted to run almost everything.

That and the government is not going out of business anytime soon, no matter what they demand.



"Mr. Wilson said the last contract, which expired on Jan. 1, now leaves Toronto police between $2,500 and $3,000 a year behind Peel Region officers and the Ontario Provincial Police."

- Go work in Peel, then.

That is not the point. Toronto is a more stressful area to work. Therefore Toronto should be compensated more then Peel.

 

[AKS]

Wasn't there an article earlier saying there are more homicides in Peel than Toronto? It seems Peel has more crimes. Unless all those cases aren't considered stressful. And Toronto can't be more stressful than NYC and the NYPD gets paid less.