Re: Technical Writers Union

[Bruce Byfield <bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com>]

Pete Sanborn wrote:

> Why do I have to be burdened with union membership just to accept a 
given job?

Because the union performs services for you such as negotiating your 
contract and working conditions, and does so with more clout than you as 
an individual are likely to have. Of course, it may do so poorly or 
well, but union dues are cheap compared to the cost of these services if 
you hired someone else to do so.

If you take a job, part of the reason is generally the wages, 
conditions, and benefits. It seems unfair that you should get the 
benefits of a union shop without supporting it.

>I also prefer being able to discuss my grievances directly with my
supervisor rather than having everything relayed via a shop steward.  Such a
role only places me in a permanent subservient position that requires me to
voice everything through a surrogant parent.

By the same argument, I suppose, you wouldn't use a lawyer in a court 
case. If you remember what Ben Franklin said about people who represent 
themselves in court, you'll understand why this isn't a good idea. A 
shop steward or a lawyer has expertise that you and I are unlikely to 
have. They may also have the connections in management to help settle a 
case. That expertise, by the way, is one of the things that you get for 
your union dues. Considering that lawyers start at about $120/ hour, 
that's not a bad value.


> Unions also frequently impose rules that are silly and arbitrary.  
While the
history of unions is rich with valid grievances of abusive employers,
unions, IMO, have ceased to be of any consequence since around the 70s.  The
silliest union organized strike I ever saw was one by railroad engineers
striking for the right to strike!

This isn't silly. The legal right to strike is central to a union. If a 
union doesn't have the right to strike, then it loses most of its 
bargaining power with management. No matter what you think of unions, 
you can't really expect any group to throw away or voluntarily throw 
away power.

>The concept of walking off of a job to show management "a thing or two" is
one that completely escapes me.  

It's generally a last resort. Contrary to popular image, few unions 
strike until a certain level of desperation in negotiations is reached. 
For one thing, any union that strikes without very strong support from 
its members risks losing member support.

Nor do unions strike nowadays over wages very often. Nowadays, job 
security is more likely to be the issue.

>They can't prevent layoffs, they can't prevent a badly run
company from having to close its doors and they can't prevent a company from
relocating from a closed shop state to a right-to-work state or even
offshore, if that is an option.

They can work to make layoffs fairer, and minimize their effects. And, 
in some jurisdictions, there are successor clauses that keep a company 
from relocating or reforming to escape the union.



--
Bruce Byfield 604.421.7177 bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com

"What will I say when my children ask me,
'Where were you flying on that day?'
With trembling voice, I gave the order
To the bombardier of Enola Gay."
-Utah Phillips, "Enola Gay"





^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Be a published author!  iUniverse gives you: a high-quality paperback, a
custom cover design, and distribution to 25,00 retailers.  Join our almost
10,000 published authors today. http://www.iuniverse.com/publish/default.asp

 Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
 5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
 Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.