|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
Announcement :: Labor |
|
Community Picket Friday Morning |
Current rating: 0 |
by Ricky Baldwin
Email: baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (verified)
Phone: 217-328-3037 |
28 Feb 2006
|
|
Our local community joins the Building Trades unions again this Friday March 3 during the morning "rush hour" from 8-9 AM at the Tatman Hilton hotel site, Kirby between Neil and State, Champaign. |
Protest one of the largest non-union construction projects in recent years. Protest the use of out-of-town labor to bust local unions and erode local wages and working conditions.
Join us on the picket line this Friday March 3 during the morning "rush hour" from 8-9 AM at the Tatman Hilton hotel site, Kirby between Neil and State, Champaign.
And let’s tell owner Paul Tatman: Our community expects better!
Support local union workers!
Sponsored by the local Jobs With Justice Organizing Committee
For more info call 328-3037 or email cu_jwj_forming (at) mail.com |
See also:
http://www.jwj.org
|
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
Re: Community Picket Friday Morning |
by Just A Reader
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
28 Feb 2006
|
Mr. Baldwin,
Being a non union worker, I have often wondered a few things about non-union picket lines. This is not an attempt to troll or anything like that, I only have a few questions. I often see articles on this site from you, and others, about picketing non-union work sites, but I rarely see any reason for supporting the pickets.
First, what is wrong with using non-union labor? Are these workers not capable of performing the jobs? Do they have less of a right to work because they chose not to join the union?
Also, how does using non-union labor "bust" local unions, erode wages or erode working conditions? How do you know that Tatman is not paying a competitve price for that labor? And does not the same OSHA requirements apply both to union and non-union jobsites alike?
In your post, you referred to these employees as out-of-town labor. How do you know that this company is from out of town? I work on many union jobsites, and have dealt with union personnal from other cities and towns. Does this out-of-town labor rule apply here also?
Like I said before, this is not an attempt to get anyone riled up. These are just a few questions I have.
Thanks for your time.... |
|
Re: Community Picket Friday Morning |
by Ricky Baldwin
baldwnricky (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
03 Mar 2006
|
First, I encourage you to join a union at your earliest opportunity. Labor law in this country provides that without a union contract you can be fired "at any time for any reason or no reason." On top of this, union wages are almost always higher and not just wages but benefits and other working conditions. And since you mention OSHA, the answer is no.
I used to work in occupational safety and health as a matter of fact, and the sad truth is that if you as a worker do not have an advocate, such as a union, in reality you do not have the rights that exist on paper for you. OSHA simply does not have the staff or the time, or these days the authority, to intervene in many of the most egregious cases. But having a union that is willing to fight for these rights makes all the difference.
But joining is no guarantee. Workers in this country, who polls show over and over again overwhelmingly want to join unions, often have to fight for this basic right of freedom of association. And even afterwards, they have to fight even harder to get a first contract. The courts and the labor board are often little if any help, and employers violate the laws with virtual impunity while workers continue to try for their basic legal rights.
This is why it is important for community members to support unions and for unions to support one another. Without that support, a group of workers is easily isolated and skewered on the altar of bigger profits. On the other hand, when workers stick together, they are stronger.
In the building trades this effect is particularly pronounced, because the work is mostly seasonal and contracted out to various small businesses which choose either to employ union workers under union conditions or not to. Every time a project, especially a big one like Tatman's hotel, employs non-union contractors it reduces the number of job opportunities for union workers; the union workers are shut out.
You may argue that by going union, the non-union workers are shut out. But if these workers join the union, they will not only enjoy superior wages, benefits and working conditions, they will be able to work on union jobs -- if there are any. (That's the point.) You might say the union workers have the same option: go non-union and get the non-union work, but this is not an equivalent choice -- you are asking them to accept lower wages and benefits, work under less favorable conditions, take greater risks in terms of safety and health, risk being fired because the boss doesn't like their political views or favorite sports team -- and even if they take the risk they may very well not be hired because employers often discriminate (illegally) against workers associated with unions.
By accepting less, we provide an economic incentive to an employer to use non-union labor. It's that simple. That's WHY they go non-union. By allowing non-union labor in our community, we undermine union labor by making it harder for union members to find jobs. And that means the average wage in the community drops, as well as level of benefits, safety and health protections, etc. People earn less, spend less, lose homes, cars, health, let serious illness or injury go untreated, pay less taxes, participate less fully in their families and communities, and on and on.
Likewise the problem with using out-of-town labor is when employers - as in this case - use them to undermine local labor standards. In other words, if you can't get enough qualified labor locally to work vheap enough, non-union, etc., then instead of going union, they bring in someone from the outside to do it cheaper, who's willing to cut corners, drive the workers harder, etc., and since they don't have unions it's harder for them to speak up if they're getting injured on the job, or sick, or thier families are suffering because they can't get days off, etc. So it's HOW they do it.
Well, that's long enough for now. I hope I've answered most of your questions. And just to reiterate, I've worked union and I've worked non-union myself, and I know from personal experience that any union is better than no union. I encourage you to join up ASAP. You're perfect for it. It's a whole lot easier to ask the awkward questions when you're in a union that's going to fight for your rights than out there on your own, trying to get by competing with your neighbor for a few extra cents. |
|
Re: Community Picket Friday Morning |
by Lucero
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
05 Mar 2006
|
Ricky writes:
"You may argue that by going union, the non-union workers are shut out. But if these workers join the union, they will not only enjoy superior wages, benefits and working conditions, they will be able to work on union jobs."
I know someone who runs a small business out of his home, and he is shut out of many jobs because he is not a member of a union, and his business is not profitable enough for him to afford union dues. I'm sure that there are many others in the same situation. In this regard, the union is a lot like Walmart, forcing small locally owned businesses to shut down.
I'm glad that there are non-union jobs in this town. This allows more jobs for more people, rather than just for a relatively small number of elite who shut others out of the work force by a system of privilege and patronage. |
|
Re: Community Picket Friday Morning |
by Ricky Baldwin
baldwinricky (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
07 Mar 2006
|
Hi Lucero-
I'm afraid you misunderstand what unions are. Probably why you think they are a "system of patronage and privilege" or why you think denying a lot of people's rights to join a union somehow creates jobs (and what kinds of jobs are they, by the way? minimum wage jobs? less?)
Business owners as such do not join unions, just employees. Your friend does not have to "afford union dues". All he has to do is agree to union representation for his employees, if he has any.
But honestly it doesn't sound as if your friend is in the construction business at all. Without knowing what line of work he's in, it's hard to comment. He may not even be in a line of work that really competes with union labor, for all I know. It sounds like he is self-employed -- not really the same as a "small business owner" in the usual sense either. This is also not the same as "having" a union or nonunion "job", which is when a worker has no way to make a living except by working for someone else.
These are the people that unions are concerned with, the vulnerable workers who so often get their pay cut or get told to hit the road or can't afford health insurance because of no fault of their own, who are trying to raise a family or just be a productive member of society the best way they can -- but have to check most of their rights - constitutional or otherwise - at the door when they go to work.
This includes most people, actually, and once we realize this and stand together, instead of each trying to cut our own deal on the side, we will all be better off. Then it wouldn't matter if we all worked for Wal-Mart or for big or small businesses.
And as a matter of fact, your friend might get better pay for his services (whatever they are) because historically when more people belong to unions, and unions are strong, the average wage and benefit levels increase for EVERYBODY, not just union members. (They increase more for union members, of course - so the best thing is always to join.) |
|
