MNRF cuts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkB

I've never worked under a union. My dad, brother and few uncles do. My dad had to deal with them until he sold his business. My other uncle had to deal with them until he sold his business to a large corp. I still have one uncle that is growing grey hairs dealing with unions. I have two cousins with a tiling company that is unionized. I know enough about it. They for sure have treated employees well, but still the unions make demands and make it difficult for them to stay competitive. The big housing developers don't care about what the union wants when you're in the middle of a big contract, you have to eat the cost.

Anyhow, that is exactly my point ... there should be a balance of power, and given how in bed the unions are with the Liberals, it caused the power to tip to the unions, so costs go up! And then business shuts down! And then everyone loses.

---

Well Mark it sounds like you've heard some pretty strong anti-union stories but I'm not so sure you know exactly how it works. There's also always two sides to a story.

Without knowing the details about exactly what type of business and what union it was, a couple of things stand out to me in your post. Both your family and the union would have been working together under an agreed upon collective agreement. So maybe the "hassle" you speak of was because someone wasn't holding up their end of the deal, your family included. Maybe disagreements on language interpretation, maybe just flat out breaking the terms of the agreement. In any case, there's a process. Your family could have issued discipline to the slackers and the union could respond through the grievance and arbitration procedure. Anything that can't be settled before arbitration would be legally settled by an arbitrator.

The "demands" you speak of can generally only be made during bargaining, which the business owners had the right to refuse or renegotiate. Maybe the union would have gone on strike, maybe not.

A good question would be why did the folks who worked for your family unionize in the first place? If they were treated so well, they wouldn't have needed to right? Or so they say....

In any case, I'm more than happy to discuss this through PM if you would rather. Lots of missing details but I understand why you wouldn't want to post them.


Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkB

That sounds just about like 99% of the jobs out there. Who gets benefits after they retire? Not me ... not my dad, uncles, friends ... I'm not sure who does get benefits after retirement.

---

So shouldn't we all fight to get them (benefits) when you most need them? or are we okay with how things are? I know I am not okay with how things are. If you don't fight for improvements, most times they won't come on their own.
Anyway, my brother the electrician and my retired dad's company (unionized, sewer and water-main) has benefits when retired, so there are some that do but my point is I want them when I retire too....don't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

Well Mark it sounds like you've heard some pretty strong anti-union stories but I'm not so sure you know exactly how it works. There's also always two sides to a story.

Without knowing the details about exactly what type of business and what union it was, a couple of things stand out to me in your post. Both your family and the union would have been working together under an agreed upon collective agreement. So maybe the "hassle" you speak of was because someone wasn't holding up their end of the deal, your family included. Maybe disagreements on language interpretation, maybe just flat out breaking the terms of the agreement. In any case, there's a process. Your family could have issued discipline to the slackers and the union could respond through the grievance and arbitration procedure. Anything that can't be settled before arbitration would be legally settled by an arbitrator.

The "demands" you speak of can generally only be made during bargaining, which the business owners had the right to refuse or renegotiate. Maybe the union would have gone on strike, maybe not.

A good question would be why did the folks who worked for your family unionize in the first place? If they were treated so well, they wouldn't have needed to right? Or so they say....

In any case, I'm more than happy to discuss this through PM if you would rather. Lots of missing details but I understand why you wouldn't want to post them.


Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

---

It sounds like his family is in the construction trades. That's an absolute mine field for contractors. From what I've seen of some of the antics,I don't understand how most contracting companies can function. I have two friends who started businesses in framing,drywall and electrical. They built their businesses up from nothing to hiring 10 trades people. To get contracts,they needed to join unions. Within 5 years,their labor and benefit costs caused the businesses to teeter on the edge of failure all the time. It became so nerve wracking,they both decided to close and work as independents outside of general contracting. Life has been a lot better for them both ever since.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

It sounds like his family is in the construction trades. That's an absolute mine field for contractors. From what I've seen of some of the antics,I don't understand how most contracting companies can function. I have two friends who started businesses in framing,drywall and electrical. They built their businesses up from nothing to hiring 10 trades people. To get contracts,they needed to join unions. Within 5 years,their labor and benefit costs caused the businesses to teeter on the edge of failure all the time. It became so nerve wracking,they both decided to close and work as independents outside of general contracting. Life has been a lot better for them both ever since.

---

It's definitely a different beast than a traditional unionized manufacturing plant, which is where most of my experience is.

In rereading MarkB's post a few times after my response (and with your added insight Trimmer), I can see why he has the opinion that he does. That being said, his opinion on unions in general is a relatively broad statement based on a somewhat narrow experience.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkB

I've never worked under a union. My dad, brother and few uncles do. My dad had to deal with them until he sold his business. My other uncle had to deal with them until he sold his business to a large corp. I still have one uncle that is growing grey hairs dealing with unions. I have two cousins with a tiling company that is unionized. I know enough about it. They for sure have treated employees well, but still the unions make demands and make it difficult for them to stay competitive. The big housing developers don't care about what the union wants when you're in the middle of a big contract, you have to eat the cost.

Anyhow, that is exactly my point ... there should be a balance of power, and given how in bed the unions are with the Liberals, it caused the power to tip to the unions, so costs go up! And then business shuts down! And then everyone loses.

---

So would you rather work under poor conditions for minimum wage, no benefits or pension. Unions have their place in the workforce. But yes I to won't deny they sometimes do more harm then good in some places. What the main purpose of a union is to create a fair and equal working environment for all employees. Some places need unions while some do not.
To think the power has shifted to unions is crap. Arbitrators are far more in favor of companies nowaday then 15+ years ago.

Personally, I think it’s important to make the clear distinction between private unions and public.

Both can and do hold guns to their respective employers heads. Difference being if a Union runs amok in private, causes overhead to escalate, consumers stop buying. A widget, or um car, is only worth what the buyer can afford......

Public. Good luck refusing to pay your taxes...

Personally, it’s my belief Unions still have their place. Public Unions need to be kicked to the curb and out of

Politics....

Arbitration
Another reason why salaries and benefits for PS have soared over the past 40 years or so.

They don’t into account what the tax base can afford. There is little grey in their decisions, black or white, yes or no. Just look at numerous police and fire contracts over the past 15-20 years

“That” force gets 90k, so we should get 87k. That force got X so we should to...who gives a rats deoppings, millions thanks to stagnant salaries.....and...increasing taxation on top of that, is kneecapping people worse off than me. It’s about me after all....

Rather than griping about green grass themselves. Perhaps all Unions, should peg their remuneration to the median...

If the lowly and hammered peons gross X. A bean counter should gross X + or - Y %

Funny, things were never this bad 40 years ago when it was understood that a life in public service meant

Better job security
Better benefits ( how much is that biting now)
Slightly less salary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LoR

Personally, I think it’s important to make the clear distinction between private unions and public.

Both can and do hold guns to their respective employers heads. Difference being if a Union runs amok in private, causes overhead to escalate, consumers stop buying. A widget, or um car, is only worth what the buyer can afford......

Public. Good luck refusing to pay your taxes...

Personally, it’s my belief Unions still have their place. Public Unions need to be kicked to the curb and out of

Politics....

Arbitration
Another reason why salaries and benefits for PS have soared over the past 40 years or so.

They don’t into account what the tax base can afford. There is little grey in their decisions, black or white, yes or no. Just look at numerous police and fire contracts over the past 15-20 years

“That” force gets 90k, so we should get 87k. That force got X so we should to...who gives a rats deoppings, millions thanks to stagnant salaries.....and...increasing taxation on top of that, is kneecapping people worse off than me. It’s about me after all....

Rather than griping about green grass themselves. Perhaps all Unions, should peg their remuneration to the median...

If the lowly and hammered peons gross X. A bean counter should gross X + or - Y %

Funny, things were never this bad 40 years ago when it was understood that a life in public service meant

Better job security
Better benefits ( how much is that biting now)
Slightly less salary.

---

Like the quote above .
Another sign that the public sector is too good. The private sector has trouble finding people presently
I doubt that is true for the public sector. Supply and demand would suggest the public sector is over paid


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Absolutely Ontfarmer. Something those in PS rarely want raised/talked about.

Turn over in PS is almost non existent relatively speaking.

Last fall college “professors” went on strike. Many students lost a year. Why?

OPSEU ( same Union I belonged to briefly) went to war to reduce the ratio of contract positions to full time.

Why does any company hire contract. No benefits, it’s cheaper, helps control overhead.

Why is the ratio of contract college professors to full timers so high ( 70%).....

Because OPSEU agreed to it years and contracts ago. What did they get in return for that?

Higher salaries, better benefits, easier lives for the full timers....and more due paying members.

Maybe if they weren’t so greedy in the first place....they wouldn’t have sold their own low hanging fruit down the river. Maybe they wouldn’t have created the mess to begin with.

Back to “teachers”.
They put 10% of their salary into their pension. The people whose backs they are breaking match that.

Is a teacher that grosses say 50k a problem? $5,000 and $5,000 from the slaves? Don’t know...

10 years or 15 years later thanks to showing up for every day and salary grids that “teacher” makes 100k

$10,000 of “their own” and $10,000 from people that can’t even find the $ for a wee contribution to a TFSA....

Nic gig. Robbing the poor to pay the well off

There are so very many ways to look at the topic. So very many “dots” if you will, that almost always paint the same picture.

Public service is over paid.
The feudal system is alive and well. Sure things are better for the peons/surfs. That’s not saying much.

I have 7 friends. From very good to “friend” that have spent their lives with OPG. That’s that better job security/low turnover thing.

One is quite literally a nuclear physicist. Sheldon.
I don’t know what he grosses, I know it’s a ton.
Why the bleep are peons who are struggling to save for their own, padding his pension......he never has an answer despite how brilliant he is....

Of those 7. 5 are now retired. Four of them are back with OPG on contract.

“Figure it out”
*******

Why is the ratio of contract to full time so bad in many areas....why did unions ever agree to that to begin with...despite their war drums and teeth gnashing today.....

Yes yes Smokey it’s so unfair to your low hanging fruit is struggling, spend years on contract, precarious......
Shame you sold them down the river years ago making your full timers happy.....

EAs
Can’t get the time of day...

Corrections officers.
Fighting for years for the time of day........

We all know the sorry state of the MNR...

Meanwhile despite it being well known that the peons are getting crushed between the two. Wages stagnating for decades, taxation increasing, for decades.

The wealth gap between the haves and have nots increasing. Specifically between the upper 20% and well to bad, so sad, thanks for playing everyone else...

Answers?
Lol have fun......

Though I do believe wages need to be pegged to the mean as stated...plus or minus. Period.

We didn’t have these problems back in the sixties, seventies. While I’m sure there was grumbling about services. Most ministries had “enough” heads.

We didn’t have to wait 6 hours for a stitch or two. 8 months for an appointment with a surgeon....4 hours in gold trying to get a live person.

And much more.

If ford wants a second term, he dare not anger the unions too much. Currently I’m betting it’s even money.
And I don’t like where a number of the cuts are.

If ford wants a second term, he dare not anger the unions too much. Currently I’m betting it’s even money.
And I don’t like where a number of the cuts are.[/QUOTE]

This is another problem. Unions influencing elections so they can elect those who will fill their pockets at my expense


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro