Compulsory Union Membership

[carlyp]

What do you all think? Good idea or bad idea?

Personally I disagree with it. I dont believe you should HAVE to be a member of anything if you dont want to be. But Im willing to listen to other peoples p.o.v.

 

[jim boy]

Depends on the industry. Management are a team working together to get the best result for their shareholders, so why shouldn't the workers unite to get the best result for them. However IMO it should only apply arguably to industries where there is a large over supply of labour.

 

[redback]

OK ban compulsory unionism but if a union gets better pay & conditions for its members the non union people shouldnt get them why should they get something for nothing.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by Jim Boy
Depends on the industry. Management are a team working together to get the best result for their shareholders, so why shouldn't the workers unite to get the best result for them. However IMO it should only apply arguably to industries where there is a large over supply of labour.

Mangement should be a team. There is nothing wrong with the workforce being a team too. In fact having regular intercompany meetings is great.
The problem is that the unions are an outside force with political objectives and rule their members.
Now if management were to join a political organisation that told them how to run the Company then that would be bad too.

 

[Captain Sensible]

No problem at all with freedom of association. People shouldnt be made to join organizations against their will.


However if they choose not to join a union they shouldnt expect to get the benefits that the union gains for their due paying members.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by localyokel
No problem at all with freedom of association. People shouldnt be made to join organizations against their will.


However if they choose not to join a union they shouldnt expect to get the benefits that the union gains for their due paying members.

Proposition.

A workforce of 100. 40 in union 60 not. The uinion negotiates a 5% wage increase for it's members. A delegate of the other 60 meets with management and negotiates 5% wage increase too.

Should all 100 get it? Or what? How should it be worked out?

 

[Captain Sensible]

Originally posted by Frodo


Proposition.

A workforce of 100. 40 in union 60 not. The uinion negotiates a 5% wage increase for it's members. A delegate of the other 60 meets with management and negotiates 5% wage increase too.

Should all 100 get it? Or what? How should it be worked out?

Depends on the circumstances. I would have to know more about who the frontrunners in negotiations were.

 

[dr nick]

Originally posted by localyokel
No problem at all with freedom of association. People shouldnt be made to join organizations against their will.

people dont have to join organisations against their will. if they dont want to be in the union, work elsewhere.

if you dont want to have bob carr as your premier, live elsewhere. by mere fact that you choose to work/live somewhere you have to accept these conditions/obligations

ban compulsory unionism but if a union gets better pay & conditions for its members the non union people shouldnt get them why should they get something for nothing.

sometimes its not as easy as that. for instance, if they made taxes volountary, a huge proportion of people would not pay them, and that makes it more expensive for people who do want to pay them, and the benefits would be much less.

for instance, if taxes that helped the rural community get water, roads, postal service etc were volountary, a very small percentage would pay for that, and costs would not only skyrocket for those who did pay, but quality of service would drop dramatically.

 

[TigerCraig]

The one that used to annoy me was compulsory student unionism when I was at uni.

 

[Dipper]

When I was in Sydney I was working in construction just doing labouring & I'll admit it was pretty well payed due to the battles won by the union over the years for it's members but on certain (usually bigger) jobs the union would make it a union site & anyone who wasn't in the union wouldn't be allowed to work there, fair enough I thought I don't mind joining the union but then you hear union organisers coming over to the job speaking to the blokes going on about how they want to get rid of 'all the pommie backpackers who are taking our jobs' & how they didn't want the construction companies employing casual labour from hire companies.
So as I fitted into both of these groups I found it a bit hard to stomach that I had to join a union & pay the same dues as evryone else but the union that I was paying to represent me made it pretty clear they wanted rid of me & obviously wouldn't be sticking up for my rights.

The whole idea of a democracy is that we are (supposedly)free to make these decisions, compulsory union membership is akin to compulsory membership of the only political party in one party states.

I actually beleive that membeship of a strong union is a very wise move especially in an industry like constructionn where safety is such a massive factor & it's not just a question of pay & hours like in many jobs but you can't force people to join especially when the union refuses to represent you fully.

BTW the union I'm talking about here is the CFMEU.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by localyokel



Depends on the circumstances. I would have to know more about who the frontrunners in negotiations were.

Simon Crean for the Unions and Joe Nobody for the workers

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by nicko18


people dont have to join organisations against their will. if they dont want to be in the union, work elsewhere.

if you dont want to have bob carr as your premier, live elsewhere. by mere fact that you choose to work/live somewhere you have to accept these conditions/obligations

Good worker, management wants this type of guy. Guy is a Liberal member and will not join a pro Labour union.


Your solution..........if you don't support labour you don't deserve a job...........

are you really an Alf alias?

 

[Captain Sensible]

Originally posted by Frodo


Simon Crean for the Unions and Joe Nobody for the workers

Sorry Frodo I didnt explain it properly. Who was first to the bargaining table unionists or non-unionists? Who did most of the work negotiating and who rode whose coatails?



BTW I wouldnt want Simon Crean negotiating for my side. I might just end up with less than I had started out with.

 

[Hollypig]

As an employer, I refuse to join a union on a construction site.
However a couple of years ago a union official approached my crew to join up & get their fair share of wages & benifits.
Lo & behold the benifits were already being honoured. OK the union said, we expect the comrades to be paid full union rates. No problems with me, sign em up.
Only problem with my boys was that the union rate was $5 p/hr less than I was paying.


Guess who`s workforce is still non union.

But to be fair the casual rate for a employee in the horticultural industry is around $9.50 p/hr. Thats adult wage. You`d be a fairly cruel bastard to pay that pitiful amount to a worker.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by localyokel




Sorry Frodo I didnt explain it properly. Who was first to the bargaining table unionists or non-unionists? Who did most of the work negotiating and who rode whose coatails?

Okay...the workers cooperative leader meets weekly with management. The ACTU outsider comes in once every three months. They both had discussed wage increases. Management proposed 4% to both parties. The union asked for 5% management agreed and offered 5% to both.

Basically the cooperative meets weekly and thrashes out all sorts of issues as a team situation. The union comes in every quarter and bangs it's fist of demands upon the table.

so in effect the union got the extra 1% and the co-operative had it handed on a plate. Perhaps they would have negotiated 5% or even more, who's to know.

So would you say that only the unionists should have the 5%?

If so then what if the non unionists then negotiated 7%, the unions would strike for equal pay would they not?

 

[Pieman7]

Originally posted by DIPPER
When I was in Sydney I was working in construction just doing labouring & I'll admit it was pretty well payed due to the battles won by the union over the years for it's members but on certain (usually bigger) jobs the union would make it a union site & anyone who wasn't in the union wouldn't be allowed to work there, fair enough I thought I don't mind joining the union but then you hear union organisers coming over to the job speaking to the blokes going on about how they want to get rid of 'all the pommie backpackers who are taking our jobs' & how they didn't want the construction companies employing casual labour from hire companies.
So as I fitted into both of these groups I found it a bit hard to stomach that I had to join a union & pay the same dues as evryone else but the union that I was paying to represent me made it pretty clear they wanted rid of me & obviously wouldn't be sticking up for my rights.

The whole idea of a democracy is that we are (supposedly)free to make these decisions, compulsory union membership is akin to compulsory membership of the only political party in one party states.

I actually beleive that membeship of a strong union is a very wise move especially in an industry like constructionn where safety is such a massive factor & it's not just a question of pay & hours like in many jobs but you can't force people to join especially when the union refuses to represent you fully.

BTW the union I'm talking about here is the CFMEU.

Ah Dip a fellow Construction worker, explains why I always thought you weren't such a bad sort of bloke, anyway mate I operate a Concrete Pump for My Dad and Brothers company.

Yeah the Union is a great idea to get rid of sweat shops and sub-standard conditions but 9/10 they go overboard and their demands become unrealistic and screw the employer at any costs.

 

[Hollypig]

Originally posted by Pieman7


Ah Dip a fellow Construction worker, explains why I always thought you weren't such a bad sort of bloke, anyway mate I operate a Concrete Pump for My Dad and Brothers company.

Yeah the Union is a great idea to get rid of sweat shops and sub-standard conditions but 9/10 they go overboard and their demands become unrealistic and screw the employer at any costs.

I used to do that in Darwin some 15 years ago. I loved it, hard yakka though. Had a good reason to be grumpy all the time, always get on well with pumpys on worksites these days.

 

[Dipper]

Originally posted by Pieman7


Ah Dip a fellow Construction worker, explains why I always thought you weren't such a bad sort of bloke, anyway mate I operate a Concrete Pump for My Dad and Brothers company.

Yeah I bet it comes in handy to get rid of a few of those dead bodies that you must find yourself lumbered with from time to time.

 

[Slax]

Compulsory unionism is banned.

But remember this, it is good to have a friend in a union if you get unfairly treated or they try and make you redundant. We need unions to be stronger than ever before or else we will lose more privelages.

 

[dr nick]

Originally posted by Frodo


Good worker, management wants this type of guy. Guy is a Liberal member and will not join a pro Labour union.


Your solution..........if you don't support labour you don't deserve a job...........

are you really an Alf alias?

pro labour? what the hell does this mean? you shouldnt be working if you dont believe in labour (by its very nature)

 

[Goldenblue]

Originally posted by Frodo

Now if management were to join a political organisation that told them how to run the Company then that would be bad too.

Most companies do.

It's called the CCI.

The CCI are whingers as bad as unions.

 

[Pieman7]

Originally posted by Hollypig


I used to do that in Darwin some 15 years ago. I loved it, hard yakka though. Had a good reason to be grumpy all the time, always get on well with pumpys on worksites these days.

I always find it more stressful than hard work unless you gte a line job that can be a real pain in the arse.

 

[Pieman7]

Originally posted by DIPPER



Yeah I bet it comes in handy to get rid of a few of those dead bodies that you must find yourself lumbered with from time to time.

Dip you saying I'm some kind of natural born killer?

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by Goldenblue


Most companies do.

It's called the CCI.

The CCI are whingers as bad as unions.

Absolute bolux. I have never had any dealings with the CCI in my many years of business running. What's more, the directors are solely responsible to the shareholders.


What most people don't recognise is that unions are very good in most countries worldwide. The concept is excellent.
It ia Australian unions that differ. They are political at heart and rather than supportive of their members. England was almost bankrupted by years of union abuse but now it is quite reasonable in england, even with a labour government. But the lackeys of Scargill etc ran from Thatcher to Australia and here we have an apalling union movement.
As I say, its not unions that are bad, it's who is running them and what their motive is.
This is probably the only country in the western world where a management v workers mentality still exists and it is promoted by the unions. Most other countries and also a lot of Australian non union companies adopted team based policies many years ago where the workforce is involved in decisions, knows what's going on and has chance to propsper alongside the company. This team spirit is a key factor in most well run businesses.

Can there be a better way than a happy environment with everyone rowing in the same direction?

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by nicko18



pro labour? what the hell does this mean? you shouldnt be working if you dont believe in labour (by its very nature)

So what should the 60% of non Labour believers do to earn a living if they shouldn't work?

Labour does not = worker. In fact most workers have been far better off under Liberal. It's pensioners and unemployed that may have suffered.


pps Directors that earn millions and work 90 hour weeks are still workers