patrick.net

ChrisLA says

As I mentioned private sector has their own pitfalls, but perpetual laziness filters out incredibly fast.

You will get put on a PIP unless you work for the union....who will come in and tell the HR department the manager did not follow proper protocol in documenting your situation.

marcus says

It’s quite natural to set up pay structures so that it’s low when you come in, but if you can perform it goes up pretty quickly (although 22k in 10 years isn’t that great). Her complaint is that people doing exactly the same job she does were paid the same as she is 10 years ago. This makes sense. And basically you are wrong to frame it the way you are, at least in my opinion.

Exactly how much do you expect a motherlovin assistant to get paid with an high school education? 45k, 55k, 75k, 85K?

My 20 year old niece can do this job. Although, it is effortless and thankless. Being an assistant requires only entry level skills (Word, Excel, Powerpoint) with a great amount of organization and responsibility. Paying an assistant as much as a professional is silly IMO.

marcus says

Many jobs start at a relatively low pay, and if you have skills and an ability to learn and work hard your pay goes up a lot in a short time. That’s how the corporate world works, and I am speaking from experience. I got a 25K raise in two years in a software company I worked for back in 2000. That was because I took a low pay to get in the door, and my pay went up a lot when I worked hard and showed how I could progress.

But did you complain about not getting a motherlovin COLA? Or about how your pensions were no longer being funded by tax payers?

Hell, I guess this is a moot point for some. The IT Industry is being outsourced to India, Mexico, Canada right now. We complain about how the jobs are leaving and the wages are going overseas leaving us with contract positions, no benefits. We have put a lot of effort into certifications and degrees that built up high level skills. All she did was learn how to use a motherlovin computer and sit on her toosh.

It's nice to see intelligent comments mixed in every now and then.

ChrisLA says

A mentality of entitlements to other peoples money and complete disregard for public welfare.

That sounds like a description of Wall St, not a description of public employees.

marcus says

I believe in Unions in the sense that there should be rights regarding sick leave and vacations and working conditions. I also believe there should be equal pay for equal work.

Answer my question, did you complain about not getting a COLA after you increased your salary 25%?....I think that was a fair question.

Zlxr says

In some offices the clerks basically sit right next to nurses, doctors or lawyers who are supposed to be reviewing stuff and making decisions according to the Gov’t mandates for that particular program. Eventually - the clerk learns enough to make those same decisions and many times the work is passed off onto them. So here you have a nurse making $85,000 and a clerk who now understands how to do most of the work making $36,000 and of course the clerk feels shorted. The clerk may not have a college degree - but they often end up acquiring alot of medical or legal knowledge just from working around it, typing the reports and asking questions.

Good point, I failed to realize this viewpoint in my rants. I think this has a lot to do with why so many complain....in both private and public sectors. I digress on my views a bit.

Zlxr says

So without a Union at all —– just who do you think the Gov’t is going to hire with your Tax Dollars? And if they aren’t saving money now - how do you expect them to save money once they get rid of Unions????

Good point, they will probably start hiring all their relatives creating an environment free to competition for the jobs we all apply for. I have seen this many times where husband and wife teams bring in friends and family. But this goes on in all orgs.

Clarence 13X says

marcus says

It’s quite natural to set up pay structures so that it’s low when you come in, but if you can perform it goes up pretty quickly (although 22k in 10 years isn’t that great). Her complaint is that people doing exactly the same job she does were paid the same as she is 10 years ago. This makes sense. And basically you are wrong to frame it the way you are, at least in my opinion.

Exactly how much do you expect a motherlovin assistant to get paid with an high school education? 45k, 55k, 75k, 85K?
My 20 year old niece can do this job. Although, it is effortless and thankless. Being an assistant requires only entry level skills (Word, Excel, Powerpoint) with a great amount of organization and responsibility. Paying an assistant as much as a professional is silly IMO.

Answer this one to Mr. Marcus....your not the only one here with intelligence.

Clarence 13X says

your not the only one here with intelligence

I know that. I understand that you're rated genius level on some IQ test. That puts you above me, because I don't consider myself a genius.

But I recognize intelligence when I see it, and zlxr's comments above are the most intelligent addition to this thread.

I don't know Clarence. IT just sounds to me like you have major issues. Sometimes assistants and clerical people gain a lot of institutional knowledge in their field and experience in how specialized tasks are done. The reason why this sounds so weird to me is that I don't understand how you can know so much about how easy your mother inlaws job is.

So you say that after all of her promotions, it's still just an entry level job. I just don't know. Her pay seems very reasonable to me. 57K, 10 years in to a job, depending on the city isn't all that high. But in any case, I'm not that fascinated by the topic of trying to figure out how difficult or how overpaid your mother inlaw is or isn't.

Maybe it's the title of "assistant" that is confusing you. There are many people with that title in the corporate world making 6 figure salaries, 150K or more, and earning it. Some of them don't have college degrees.

marcus says

But I recognize intelligence when I see it, and zlxr’s comments above are the most intelligent addition to this thread.

Yes, he used a very tactful approach in his answer.

marcus says

I don’t know Clarence. IT just sounds to me like you have major issues. Sometimes assistants and clerical people gain a lot of institutional knowledge in their field and experience in how specialized tasks are done. The reason why this sounds so weird to me is that I don’t understand how you can know so much about how easy your mother inlaws job is.

I posted this piece to get different viewpoints, not to proclaim how smart I am. My frustration is with the fact that here is a person that has obviously worked their way up the ladder whom is still aggrivated with their pay scale. If she wanted to make 100k/year she is probably in the wrong field as 57K is at the mid to high end of the scale for assistants.

Please, when responding to me keep the insults to yourself...thats not my style any longer. I am not looking to come here to berade or engage in unnecessary banter. I was looking to learn from your viewpoints.

marcus says

Maybe it’s the title of “assistant” that is confusing you. There are many people with that title in the corporate world making 6 figure salaries, 150K or more, and earning it. Some of them don’t have college degrees.

These are possibilities that are slim and few for assistants. These type of assistants are actually capable of handling multiple large scale projects, hold degrees and can run a fortune 500 company while the boss is out.

My mother is law is not capable of any of that, she simply takes requests to transcribe meeting notes. She can get to that level by obtaining a higher level of education, which would open doors for her to apply for higher level assistant roles but I doubt anyone over the age of 50 is going to do that.

Clarence 13X says

I posted this piece to get different viewpoints,

No, you posted it to passively attack unions. I keep saying it, the main problem i have with you guys is you can't ever simply be honest about anything.

How smart you are is not actually of any interest to me, personally, but I am actually curious of your age.

You want union stories? Okay, here's one. My stepfather is a VP in charge of Personelle & a negotiator for a large company. He deals with unions pretty much every day and he hates the rules that allow employees who continually screw-up to remain employed. He hates that guys can literally fall asleep at the job and the union will defend them, to the end. But this doesn't signal to him - or to me - that unions are baaaaaaaad and that they should be broken and disbanded, it signals to me that there is need for reform within the unions, that like any institution there are policies that should be considered and amended, to create an institution that better serves the company and the people who don't screw-up. But then creating a better institution that better serves the people and the company isn't your objective is it?

Though I don't watch Fuckus News my guess is that you do and that its is going off on unions these days, and this has narrowed your focus to this fine little point, this week.

By the way, total aside, I think you should take that image of Malcom X off your avatar, you don't deserve it.

My union story: While attending school, I worked at a large union supermarket chain. The union had negotiated as part of their contract an increase in the hourly wage for any employee that was attending college. Over a lengthy period of time, I never received the increase in pay. After numerous failed attempts with my employer to pay the increase, I filed a grievance with the union. My employer owed me several thousand dollars (a substantial amount of money back then), however, the union from the start attempted to strong arm me into accepting a settlement that was substantially lower than the amount owed. The union clearly was "working" much harder to maintain a relationship with the supermarket chain than with its member. I never forgot that lesson. Unions often have cozy relationships with businesses, but are very adept at maintaining an opposite front for their dues paying members. That was a long time ago. I don’t get the impression that things have improved much since that time.

kentm says

Though I don’t watch Fuckus News my guess is that you do and that its is going off on unions these days, and this has narrowed your focus to this fine little point, this week.

@RAYAMERICA, BAP33, SHREKGRINCH

Did KentM on the low call me a Replublican with his comment about me watching Fox News? After you 3 have on numerous occasions outed me as a Liberal for some of my policies?

THis is why I can no longer support the Democratic or Republican Party. If you disagree with their Unions then all of a sudden you are Pro-Republican or if you disagree with the War in Iraq you are liberal.

@KentM

Just what am I if all I want is a better future for my children?....free of the 1% rule, free of silly union gripes, free of offshoring.

...somehow these debates always lead back to a argument over right vs left policy. I dont ever remember citing the unions as pro-Democrat but I guess it is always implied.

kentm says

No, you posted it to passively attack unions. I keep saying it, the main problem i have with you guys is you can’t ever simply be honest about anything.

I think I was outright attacking the Unions inability to reform and cease the gripes about how badly paid they are...not the laws passed by the unions in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

We just dont need them any longer due to the Federal laws we have in place.

Clarence 13X says

I think I was outright attacking the Unions inability to reform and cease the gripes about how badly paid they are…not the laws passed by the unions in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

Unclear on the concept. If one of the unions primary functions is to negotiate pay for large groups, it's only natural that they sound like they are always complaining about their pay. You're familiar with the concept of negotiation right ? What do you think, they should say, our pay is pretty good, in fact maybe it's too good, would you like to lower our pay ?

Of course in these recent times, that's not that far from what they are saying. But in all those past years what you heard as gripes, was them doing their thing. As for reform, it will happen. How can it not. But it is a little slow.

Clarence 13X says

We just dont need them any longer due to the Federal laws we have in place

That is a very right wing view, and in my opinion...kent is right, you should stop listening to fox news or talk radio. I would feel like a wuss if I was always kissing the ass of the rich and corporate overlords. What, you think they are going to reward you for your loyalty ?

Self interest is the fascinating part of this. You do understand how different you would feel if you were in a union, like the teachers union, or any of the other major public unions. OF course you can say the reverse about me, accept I didn't have problems with unions before I was in one. Pretty much just had problems with
abuses and inefficiencies, which I still have.

marcus says

That is a very right wing view, and in my opinion…kent is right, you should stop listening to fox news or talk radio. I would feel like a wuss if I was always kissing the ass of the rich and corporate overlords. What, you think they are going to reward you for your loyalty ?

I have never watched Fox News in my lfie, I generally listent to NPR, CNN and read articles on the web to make up my own opinions. Unions have no frontier left to fight for as all the major pieces of work are now covered by federal legislation.

shrekgrinch says

like the liberal press did with Loughner (who never watched/listened to Fox/talk radio let alone Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh)

Really? Do you have proof that he NEVER listened to Fox or talk radio?

"This is just one of many examples of I have of how entitled union employees are, and how arrogant they are with their rights as a worker. She recieved a 22K increase over a 10 year period and has the gall to complain about how the 3% COLA increases have been placed on hold due to the"

How can one be arrogant with their rights ? That makes no sense. If you have rights, then you have rights. Why is that considered a bad thing these days ? And what is wrong with someone being successful and getting promoted and all ? Good for her - it seems like you are confusing the very high paid government admin people with the working folks. Here is a good one - school district is going broke - layoffs happening everywhere - no more college for you or anyone else in the community - yet the administrators give themselves raises in this environment - that is what the truth is

Clarence 13X says

We just dont need them any longer due to the Federal laws we have in place.

Clarence 13X says

Unions have no frontier left to fight for as all the major pieces of work are now covered by federal legislation.

shrekgrinch says

marcus says

That is a very right wing view

Then in this case the right wing view = the logical view. Blah, blah, blah, blah.....

You know what ? I'll stand by exactly what I said. Saying that unions are not needed any more, is a very right wing view.

Wow, I really went out on a limb on that one.

Clarence, you say you're a pretty smart guy. Are you familiar with the concept of debate ? In a debate, sometimes people debate a point of view they don't even hold. Do you even know the position that opposes the one you are expressing ? Can you tell me, if you had to debate the value of unions (beyond the value to the workers they represetnt - which is a value), could you come up with an argument ?

If so, what would it be ?

Can you tell me what the argument is that you are rejecting ?

Is it worth looking at both sides before forming an opinion ?

shrekgrinch says

The flawed thought process is: “Right wingers are all crazies” –> “therefore anyone who even remotely expresses a view point that [insert lefty name of person engaging in this flawed thought process here] thinks is ‘right wing’ must be a right wing nutter or is heavily influenced by them” –> “[insert lefty name of person engaging in this flawed thought process here] becomes thoroughly invested in not acknowledging any evidence to the contrary, let alone capable of even theoretically considering alternate explanations.

I never thought I could agree with you but you are right. For some reason, when I tout Obama as Lord and Savior I get major kudos, however, I speak down on one liberal ideal then I am all of a sudden considered an arch conservative.

This is good for all us, maybe all of us can learn to be more down the middle.

marko says

How can one be arrogant with their rights ? That makes no sense. If you have rights, then you have rights. Why is that considered a bad thing these days ?

My point is that she should be thankful as she has made huge leaps in salary in comparison to where she came from. Complaining about a 3% will do her or anyone else any good, especially when we are talking about a $1500 increase in salary. No one is entitled to the right of having a job....not even me. I am currently on the fence due to a recent acquisition so I am prospecting as much as possible for new employment. I am not complaining that the company is doing me wrong or that the leaders are screwed up because I live and work in a global economy where at any one point there are 100k jobs out there waiting for me to apply to them. I have gotten accustom to working in this new global economy where as older generations like KENTM and MARCUS have not. They see their jobs as entitlements where as I see them as 2-3 year stints whereby I can work on improving my skillsets in preparation of my next position/title.

Here is why holding onto philosphies of the 40s and 50s is a bad thing IMO:

1. She is not even willing the consider the business aspects of why the city was not able to provide those COLAS.

2. She is not focused on the true value of her current role, which is adding value to her skillsets in preparation of her next role

3. She has already made leaps and bounds in terms of salary increases and I am proud of her...but if she wants more she needs to find a way to add more value to the role so that she can apply for executive level support roles that pay top dollar.

Please, in your response, dont behave as MARCUS and KENTM have...I am really trying to learn and grow from others ideas here on Patrick.net.

It is not my intent to debate with these fools who see things from only one side.

marcus says

Clarence, you say you’re a pretty smart guy. Are you familiar with the concept of debate ? In a debate, sometimes people debate a point of view they don’t even hold. Do you even know the position that opposes the one you are expressing ? Can you tell me, if you had to debate the value of unions (beyond the value to the workers they represetnt - which is a value), could you come up with an argument ?

Your tone is a little too condensending for me to formulate a reply...I have never "said" I was a smart guy. I said while growing up in Compton I worked my way up while my peers sat by worshipping Ice Cubes Thug Nation. That implies that I have determination, resiliency and a strong work ethic...not that I am smarter than you or anyone on these threads.

Since you believe I have no understanding of Unions, here are the facts:

Positive
Everyone gets a raise and benefits at the same rate as everyone else. There is no favoritism outside of tenured members which in fact is favortism should another employee be better at the job. The union will negiotiate a contract for all the employees so that employees don't have to negiotiate individually with the company. If you are having problems with management, you have a representative to go meetings with you so that you have a witness as to what has been said and how you were treated. You have representation under all circumstances. You cannot be wrongfully terminated without repercussions from the union.
Employees work together as a unit rather than individuals. The best part is just that you cannot be treated unfairly by the company or an individual because they will be held accountable to all the workers and the union. As a group you have clout against companies that would keep wages unnaturally low and not offer benefits.

NegativesIt is hard to get rid of a worker that is not doing his job or breaking rules. There is a long process that must be gone through that protects employees but makes it difficult for the company to fire employees that need it. Often the union, as a bargaining unit, is pushed to raise wages and benefits. At some point, worker's can price themselves out of a job, and it is cheaper to break the union and fire the workers or products must be priced at an abnormally high price to cover wages. (auto workers). Unions can be unreasonable to deal with and demands can put undue pressure on companies to pay unreasonable wages and benefits because all workers will walk out and cause a major disruption of services and financial loss.

Lets not be one sided in our views of the unions.

marko says

Here is a good one - school district is going broke - layoffs happening everywhere - no more college for you or anyone else in the community - yet the administrators give themselves raises in this environment - that is what the truth is

I agree. The board members, executives, directors and people running companies, city governments are just as bad as the Unions. They all want to protect their livelihood by any means necessary.

Just as a fortune 500 CEO will send thousands of jobs overseas without remorse, a Union will hold a school district hostage forcing cities like New York to employ hundreds of "lemon" teachers at a cost of 65 million per year. These lemon teachers are ones who have been proven to not do their jobs. I dont see how it is OK for idle teachers accused of misconduct to wait months and sometimes years for hearings while drawing full salaries at an annual cost of $65 million.

Clarence 13X says

Here is why holding onto philosphies of the 40s and 50s is a bad thing IMO:

1. She is not even willing the consider the business aspects of why the city was not able to provide those COLAS.

2. She is not focused on the true value of her current role, which is adding value to her skillsets in preparation of her next role

3. She has already made leaps and bounds in terms of salary increases and I am proud of her…but if she wants more she needs to find a way to add more value to the role so that she can apply for executive level support roles that pay top dollar.

Please, in your response, dont behave as MARCUS and KENTM have…I am really trying to learn and grow from others ideas here on Patrick.net.

It is not my intent to debate with these fools who see things from only one side.

I am missing something here. I havent read every post in this thread - just responding to yours.

Clarence 13X says

a Union will hold a school district hostage forcing cities like New York to employ hundreds of “lemon” teachers at a cost of 65 million per year. These lemon teachers are ones who have been proven to not do their jobs. I dont see how it is OK for idle teachers accused of misconduct to wait months and sometimes years for hearings while drawing full salaries at an annual cost of $65 million.

Public Education is much more bound by their own state laws and regulations than any union could aspire. Union contracts are to determine salaries, and other work environment items for each particular consituency in a given school district. Overall it is a myth that unions make it impossible to fire people. In most unionized states, cities, and school districts - hiring /firing is the management perogative and they can do it quickly as in having police escort you out the door. However they are bound by documentation and procedures in the LAW much more so than a union contract. Trade unions are a little different in that they do the hiring/firing in some cases

marko says

Public Education is much more bound by their own state laws and regulations than any union could aspire. Union contracts are to determine salaries, and other work environment items for each particular consituency in a given school district. Overall it is a myth that unions make it impossible to fire people. In most unionized states, cities, and school districts - hiring /firing is the management perogative and they can do it quickly as in having police escort you out the door. However they are bound by documentation and procedures in the LAW much more so than a union contract. Trade unions are a little different in that they do the hiring/firing in some cases

1 in 2500 teachers were fired last year. Check out the facts on studentsfirst.org.

http://www.globallabourrights.org/reports?id=0630&sms_ss=facebook&at_xt=4d8c33ad5d2f78c7%2C0

On the 100th Anniversary of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire
Little Has Changed in the Global Sweatshop Economy

Clarence's ideal, I suppose. Perhaps on your next holiday you can visit India and pay homage to the Hameem Fire in Savar, Bangladesh. Lets bust them unions and then bring that kind of factory management ethic back home!

Clarence 13X says

Did KentM on the low call me a Replublican

And for the record, I don't care what your party affiliation is, it doesn't matter. And I don't believe you're here for an honest open-minded discussion, I haven't seen any evidence of it.

I used to be against Unions, now strongly for them. Show me ANY human group that doesn't have it's stories of corruption and fraud. Like most do, I focused on those.

People do change their minds. However flawed, they are the last remnant of organized opposition to the plutocracy.

"1 in 2500 teachers were fired last year. Check out the facts on studentsfirst.org."

That's Michelle Rhee's website. I would take any info from there with a pound of salt.

Unions suck period. Coercing employers for undue gains and coddling politicians for special treatment so they can collude in a manner to "price fix" their labor. If a corporation does that, they're in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Unions are worthless except to those who benefit from them, which is a small fraction of the working population. Public sector unions ought to be illegal. Their interests are in opposition of the public's general interests.

HousingWatcher says

“1 in 2500 teachers were fired last year. Check out the facts on studentsfirst.org.”
That’s Michelle Rhee’s website. I would take any info from there with a pound of salt.

You're really going to bash Michelle Rhee? FFS, she's the best thing to ever happen to DC schools.

klarek says

HousingWatcher says

“1 in 2500 teachers were fired last year. Check out the facts on studentsfirst.org.”
That’s Michelle Rhee’s website. I would take any info from there with a pound of salt.

You’re really going to bash Michelle Rhee? FFS, she’s the best thing to ever happen to DC schools.

@HOUSINGWATCHER

She got rid of all those LEMON teachers...what is wrong with firing the poor performers?

Vicente says

I used to be against Unions, now strongly for them. Show me ANY human group that doesn’t have it’s stories of corruption and fraud. Like most do, I focused on those.

People do change their minds. However flawed, they are the last remnant of organized opposition to the plutocracy.

I wonder how this applies with public unions. Opposition to plutocracy? Who are the plutocrats?

If somebody has a government job, they work for a monopoly provider of a service that has no possibility of going out of business, paid for by the public. And there is no investor class sitting at the top profiting from the fruit of their labor. Who is "management" in the labor/management relationship of public employment anyway? Am I, the taxpayer, the "plutocrat" from which to extract every concession possible?

MarkInSF says

Am I, the taxpayer, the “plutocrat” from which to extract every concession possible?

Vicente previously said

last remnant

Besides, who has more influence on the Governors that are trying to shut down public unions, taxpayers like you and Clarence, or billionaires and corporations that want to see lower taxes and also see labor (IN GENERAL) get cheaper here? And by labor I mean all labor. How can a corporation pay it's employees less, if they have the option of working for the government for better pay?

This isn't rocket science.

marcus says

How can a corporation pay it’s employees less, if they have the option of working for the government for better pay?

Unemployment and underemployment are what's keeping wages down. Very few people have a choice between a union job and a non union job.

It's not like public sector unions are somehow being paid by the plutocracy. Most public sector jobholders are being paid out of local taxes such as real estate taxes, sales taxes, fees and fines which hit working class and lower class people disproportionately.

Many public sector workers here get double the salary of the average taxpayer. The public sector unions look like junior members of the plutocracy.