Labor Lawyers Advice?

-
So you believe that companies should be forced to pay some employees more than they are worth just because of their poor life choices or the high cost of living ?

Don't know where you pulled that out of, but Nope, I do not believe that, But I do believe that if your boss does good cause of your blood and sweat, you deserve a little extra,....If he shows up in a Cadi, smokin a Cuban, and your drivin an 86 S-10, don't you think you'd ask for a raise??? Hell I would. You can bet his insurance is better than yours...and your the one bustin your balls so as not to get fired...

All I'm sayin is your time is worth somethin, especially if your family time suffers. If you have to pull 60 hours a week to keep a modest roof and food in the fridge, somethin is wrong somewhere,.... If you chose to pull 60 a week so you can buy a Cadi and smoke Cubans, more power to ya...
 
Nope, I do not believe that, But I do believe If he shows up in a Cadi, smokin a Cuban, and your drivin an 86 S-10, don't you think you'd ask for a raise???...

Most of the wealty I know don't smoke anything, and buy used cars in the six to eight year old range. That's why they are wealthy bosses. I'm the boss...I have an '87. No air, no electric seats or windows, no cruise,etc., you get it. From what you posted, if you worked for me I would expect you to offer to take less money for your pay. Using your criteria that would only make sense.
 
Lots true there, but thats not all you do as a steward,...how about the guy who is late cause his kid was sick, and the company wants to dock him. This is where FMLA and sick days come in,...even non union employees benefit from this,...eventually a bad employee will be ousted if you give him enough rope to hang himself,...nobody wants to be that guy.
The best employees usually get tapped for management, and if its a good company, you'll do well. But remember not all companies have there employees best interests at heart, as seen at the start of this thread...Believe It or not, some companies consider you a liability, not an asset, no matter how stellar your job performance is. In today's world, you are just a number, and if that company can get your job done 5 cents an hour cheaper by outsourcing, your history. Thats business.

Somewhere in the middle the company and the union will meet so as to keep your job secure and the company making money.

And not everybody lives to work, some of us work to live. I firmely believe that no man should be forced to work more than 40 hours to keep his head above water

I have been directly involved in Union negotiations, on both sides of the table, and I've managed union shops for decades. Presently I own a couple of small non-union companies. Let me tell you this, Anyone can be fired from a union shop at any time. There is no contract written that stops the company from firing people. All the contract does, is establish the parameters of doing so. It's called "Progressive Discipline". A bad employee can usually be weeded out by the supervisor simply by documenting the on going infractions, and following the rules of progressive discipline. Even verbal warning are to be noted, and dated, and always witnessed by the Shop Stewart. The normal progression usually goes something like this:
1.Verbal warning (with a written memo for the record dropped in the personnel file).

2. Second Verbal or First written warning. If it's a 2nd verbal, a memo for the record should be put into the personnel file. If it is a first written warning, copies go to: the employee, the SS, HR, and the Union Hall.

3. Second written warning. Copies go to: the employee, the SS, HR, and the Union Hall.

4. One to three day suspension without pay, accompanied by a written warning with copies to the employee, the SS, HR, and the Union Hall

5. One week suspension without pay, accompanied by a written warning, copies to the employee, the SS, HR, and the Union Hall.

6. Termination of employment. it's best to terminate the employee position with the company in the presence of both the Shop Stewart, and the Local Union Delegate, and accompany it with a letter spelling out all of the previous issues, verbal and written warnings, and suspensions. As usual copies to the employee, the SS, HR, and the Union Hall.

There are also a number of things for which can result in immediate termination of employ. Things like fighting, theft, threatening anyone, industrial espionage, drug use drinking on the job. Some companies have stipulations in their contracts that an employee can be sent home from work and lose the day's pay if he/she, has been drinking with in 4 (or 6, or in some extreme cases even 8 hours) before reporting for duty.
First offense: loss of day's work.
Second offense: Suspension.
Third Offense: Termination of employ.

Likewise, supervisors also have a lot of room in dealing with good employees. Like the guy who is late due to no fault of his own, or the day off because of a sick child. I, and most managers will always bend for good employees. people who don't take advantage of situations,and people who give you a good day's work, and people who have good employment and attendance records. That might not seem fair to you if you're a crappy employee, but, it is fair, nonetheless, to the employee who makes it a habit of protecting his job.

I tell my employees, even to this day, to call me if they are going to be late for any reason. Even if it's a last minute thing. I can always get cover for their jobs until they can get there.

It isn't always black and white. There is a lot of gray area when dealing with people, their jobs, families, even transportation issue. If you give a Crap about your job, you do what needs to be done to protect it.

When you develope the US and Them mentality regarding the relationship between labor and management, you're usually done.
 
If you are operating under the illusion that the amount of time you have worked for the company should dictate their commitment to keep you employed, you will be sadly mistaken. Your company will employ you as long as you are giving a return on the amount they are paying you and no one is able to deliver the same job cheaper.

I also have been a union represented employee and saw them turn their backs on the folks that they have represented. I have also been targeted by them. I have had grievences filed on me for taking time off to take care of my family while my wife was in the hospital. I had false allegations filed against me in an attempt to discredit me. In all cases I was exonerated.

If you fight the previous employer you can be black-balled in an industry that is fairly narrow. The best solution is to smile and move on. There is such a thing as winning the battle but losing the war.

Jesse

(PS- I do know a good labor lawyer that practices in CA if you still want to pursue that route. PM my for the name)
 
So you pretty much only represent the worthless employee's at the expense of the good employee's, this is what I suspected.

And why I don't like unions.

You cannot say you are representing the good employee's because you are forcing them to carry the dead weight of the bad ones. You should be helping the company do proper documentation and follow up on it. Other wise the mediocre employee will see what the bad employee is getting away with and become a bad employee.

You can still defend the useless, as best you can, but if he has no defense your hands are tied.

It is the companies right to deal with employees how they see fit. If they don't want to go after troublesome employees that is their business.

Clearly, you don't like unions. Very clearly, you don't have a clue about unions.

A union contract is a signed and binding contract between the Company and the Union. With this contract comes certain legal obligations.

If you are going to argue some point here at least take the time to learn about it.

If the company doesn't want to fire someone what should the union do about it?
 
If the company doesn't want to fire someone what should the union do about it?

Lots, depending on how much of a hazard the employee may be to me. You say you want to protect my rights and then you say the company can keep any one they want no matter how much of a threat they may be to someone else. Which is it?



By the way Rev, I got to thinking, and it seems as if we have hi-jacked your thread. Most of this has nothing to do with your dilemma. Sorry about that. Unless this thread gets back on course, I'm just gonna let it go. Also, I have no idea why it says jaimus was quoted, it wasn't him.
 
Lots, depending on how much of a hazard the employee may be to me. You say you want to protect my rights and then you say the company can keep any one they want no matter how much of a threat they may be to someone else. Which is it?


Here, let me put it in it's simplest form. Only the Company can fire or discipline people.

What you assume is that the Union has power which it does not have.
 
By the way Rev, I got to thinking, and it seems as if we have hi-jacked your thread. Most of this has nothing to do with your dilemma. Sorry about that. Unless this thread gets back on course, I'm just gonna let it go. Also, I have no idea why it says jaimus was quoted, it wasn't him.

LOL, not worried about the hijacking. I'm actually learning a few things. Doesn't mean I'll ever join a union. Come to think of it, this and the B body sites are pretty much the only thing I've joined since the Army.

So far the only thing that chapped my hide was someone's flip comment relating service to our country and defending freedom to working a regular job for a fair wage.

If this particular side road helps folks come to a better understanding of another's view, then by all means, drive on.
 
Here, let me put it in it's simplest form. Only the Company can fire or discipline people.

What you assume is that the Union has power which it does not have.

Neither you nor I said anything about the union firing anybody. That is a different thing altogether. You asked what should they do, I said lots. For instance the union could strike. I can think of other things. Someone who is a danger to everyone else needs to be gone.
 
Here, let me put it in it's simplest form. Only the Company can fire or discipline people.

What you assume is that the Union has power which it does not have.

Bingo.

I've heard repeatedly that unionized workers work for the union. That's completely wrong, an is a line of BS that has been propagated over the years.
The straight fact of the matter is, the employee works for, and is paid by the company. Further, it is the company that owns the employees job, not the union. The union doesn't pay the employee, it doesn't supply the job, the benefits, the place of employment, supply the job description. All of that is done by the company (employer).

On the other has, the union has no say in who works on a particular job, as long as the worker is paid the agreed scale for that position, and the employee has the proper training, or break in time for the position.

the union does not fire people, and does not recommend people to be fired. However there are other ways that a union can influence the termination of employ, of a union member.

For example: Little, or poor representation during a grievance hearing. All of us who have experience with unions have known or heard of an employee that the union didn't want around for one reason or another, and how they were fired for the smallest infraction. Well, when that happens, it's usually because the union reps weren't trying to save that person's job. The reason could be anything from having an argument with the Shop Steward to being a close friend of a supervisor, or not being one of the clique, or even no issue at all, the union boys just have someone who they prefer to have that position. I've seen it time and time again.

I've also seen deals made between the Union and the company to accomplish the same end. Yes, it does happen.

What S340 stated above is spot on... "Only the Company can fire or discipline people".

However, the union can (illegally) fail to give proper, or full representation if the employee in question is an undesirable to them. It, also happens.
 
I also agree a union can help in situations like this. Unfortunately being a right to work state really hurts. They are talking about that here in Ohio. She should contact her clients and put aps in with them. She will land on her feet. Has she applied for unemployment? The employer can say no but, they would have to give a reason. Then when they give some lame as reason you might have something to take to an attorney. Isn't amazing how the church people ended up screwing someone life up? Good luck Rev.

Rev -- I feel for you and anyone who gets let go like this.

As an owner of a company that has a union labor force the opposite holds true for us. We have (2) employees that are USELESS!!! I mean they produce 50-60% less than everyone else on the crew in an 8 hr shift and yet the union won't let us get rid of them. The union has even evaluated their performance and productivity and told us even though they see it too they are protected. So in the real world it really goes both ways and unions are actually just as bad as right to work states. Their needs to be a happy medium between performance based pay and workers rights.

As for fighting it... honestly it will end up costing you time, money, and aggravation that in the end you will have nothing or very little once the lawyers take their cut to show for your fight.

Good luck with it, when the dust settles you'll come through it just fine.
 
I gotta say Rev,...I sure didn't see all this converstion coming, but Its all good if your ok with It,....Having been a worker bee, a steward and a boss all with the same company, I think Frankie had the best handle on It,...
 
-
Back
Top