-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney unions vote on contract....
- Thread starter WDWmazprty
- Start date
Fable McCloud
Well-Known Member
I'm glad to see that there was an attempt to do something to help out Cast Members...I'm interested to see what the result is.
disneydata
Well-Known Member
That's because under the proposed contract, one of the unions has good things for some of it's members and not-so-good things for others. They can't support one side of it's membership while leaving the other in the cold.
RunnerEd
Well-Known Member
Kudos, Raven. I've worked 2 union jobs in my 20+ years in the civillian work force and when I leave military service, I hope I never have to work in a union shop again. Waste of time and money; especially when they send dues money to politicians that are good for unions but bad for EVERYTHING else in the country.
Phonedave
Well-Known Member
So in that case they recommend a no vote.
I am no fan of unions, but this is the role they are supposed to perform. They are suposed to unite people (hence the name) as a single block - all for one, one for all. Each member supports each other. Either the contract is fair for all or it is fair for none.
For a union to say "no comment" means, to me, that the union is not doing it's job and would make me question just what my dues are going to.
-dave
You're kidding, right? OF COURSE unions are sending money to politicians that would be good for them. When you vote you vote for the person that is in your best interest.
What caught me was this: " reminder that Disney is offering each full-time worker a $100 bonus if the contract is approved on the first vote."
I'm pretty sure that's called tampering. If I were one of the unions agaibnst this contract I would contact NLRB.
Phonedave
Well-Known Member
That did seem odd to me too.
I have seen signing bonuses before, but they were negotiated into the new contract. Somthing the union and the company negotiated into the contract, not something after the fact that the company offers up. That's very strange. But then it may also be poor reporting.
-dave
disneyjesus
Member
When Unions contribute money to politicians, it's called "corruption." When multi-billion dollar corporations contribute money to politicians, it's "freedom of speech."
Was the $100 bonus negotiated?
The dilemma with the Service Trades Commission is that it is comprised of various local unions each representing different types of employees. In some cases, those numbers can strengthen bargaining power for all employees through solidarity and a common focus. However, in many instances, the goals of one classification will be compromised for the benefit of another during negotiations. The Unions must strike a balance between obtaining the best results for their own members, while maintaining support and solidarity for the members in the entire STC. Ultimately, the members have the final say when they vote on the contract.
Collective bargaining is a wonderful example of the democratic process in the workplace that helps to create a level-playing field for the employees.
jakeman
Well-Known Member
So I misread the title and thought is said "Disney unicorns vote on contract". :lookaroun
Moderation between greedy corporate overlords and blind socialist management-haters is key. Unfortunately a swing in either direction can be disastrous.
Ask the unemployed in Detroit how that union is working out for them.
Sometimes.
Moderation between greedy corporate overlords and blind socialist management-haters is key. Unfortunately a swing in either direction can be disastrous.
Ask the unemployed in Detroit how that union is working out for them.
disneyjesus
Member
I like your Unicorns title better.
You are quite right about striking a good balance between the two sides.
Phonedave
Well-Known Member
I have been a union worker
I have been in jobs where there was no union and I was a "worker"
I have been in jobs where there was no union and i was a "boss"
I have been in jobs where I was non-union management supervising union labor.
Sometimes they are bad, sometimes they are good. In my experience though, more times than not, unions come to the table with an adveserial outlook. I really think thats because the people running the unions are most of the time people who used to work for the company, and have been promoted by election. Somtimes that works, other times you get some not-to-savvy people in union leadership positions.
-dave
disneydata
Well-Known Member
If they were to suggest a no vote, then they are going against the best intrests of the half that are getting the good parts. Now you are splitting your own union in half which is not the point.
Phonedave
Well-Known Member
Again, a union is a UNION of it's members. It works (in theory) because it's members are UNITED in support of each other.
That's why labor unions have sympathy strikes, that's why a union member will not cross a picket line, that's why unions have 'do not patronize' lists.
We have two seperate unions here at work. For a while, their contracts came up at different times. If one union went out on strike, workers from the other union would not cross the picket line (as a show of solidarity) and as such, even though they were not on strike, they would not get paid.
Really, I have no love for unions, but their strength comes from the unity of their membership. If some part of their membership is getting the dirty end of the stick, then EVERYBODY walks. That's where their power comes from. A union that says 'no comment' because it is good for half the membership, but is not good for the other half is doing the membership a disservice.
-dave
raven
Well-Known Member
I worked in another union job as well making twice as much and only paying 1/3 of the union dues I have to pay here. I think $500/year is way too much to pay a union for the low wages we are already receiving. They want to hold out for a larger raise and then raise our dues. If that happens then the only people actually making more money are the union officers, not me.
My current union protects foreign employees simply because they are a different nationality. In our department these foreign employees sleep on the job (claiming they are praying) and simply refuse to do their work because they know they can go to the union claiming rascism if anything is said to them. It doesn't matter what color or nationality you are. If you refuse to work you should be disciplined. Management has simply learned to "look the other way" at these employees because of this and focus on us (the average american that can't use those excuses).
These are the reasons why I voted the way I did.
The way our contract was made, CM's hired after 1998 would be better off voting "yes" due to the fact that our percentage of raises would be greater than the percentage of raises for the people hired before 1998. The whole "Vote No" push is being made by those long-term employees that are already making more than me anyways. I'll take the proposed raises coming every 6 months and the $550 bonus plus $100 bonus if everyone votes "yes" today.
Tom
Beta Return
Communism looked good on paper too
If the article is correct, and if I'm doing my math right, a "yes" vote today will cost Disney $2 million. $100/full-time worker, and it says the council represents about 20,000 full-time workers at Disney. 20,000 * 100 = 2,000,000.
raven
Well-Known Member
Communism looked good on paper too
If the article is correct, and if I'm doing my math right, a "yes" vote today will cost Disney $2 million. $100/full-time worker, and it says the council represents about 20,000 full-time workers at Disney. 20,000 * 100 = 2,000,000.
The article doesn't list all of the details.
Phonedave
Well-Known Member
Communism looked good on paper too
As I said, I have no love of unions. I have dealt with them for many many years. However, I do know how they are SUPPOSED to work.
Most of the time they are not so openly blatant about not caring about the membership.
-dave