Management should share a lot of the blame being heaped on labor unions
Editor’s note: The following guest opinion piece was written in response to a guest column published on Sunday, March 27, by Lodi Township resident Will Warner, titled: “We can do well without the union mentality.”
Joe Vigo
I would like to straighten out a couple of other things about this article. I am an ex-union member with a withdrawal card from UAW Local 177, better known as UAW Local 1776, (Fischer Body Willow Run, 1959-1966). I am also a proud member of middle management in a large manufacturing company for the last 45 years and I can tell you right now that the unions were organized because the people needed to be represented, as the treatment they received was far less then fair and the environment they worked in was far less then safe.
As a new trainee supervisor in 1966, I was told to “Get paper on all my people” Then they would be afraid to screw up because I could fire them! Sounds like a real team approach, right? The benefits now enjoyed by the employees were negotiated with management. They were not stolen or coerced and the union didn’t have to cheat and lie to obtain them. The issues were studied by management and approved all the way up to the CEO. Then middle management was told to “make it work.” Now 50 years later, we want to take away what was given so frivolously when times were good.
The union mentality you describe is caused by poor/weak management of not only the union and the people but also of the assets of the company. Management refused to step up to the plate and manage the business; they wanted the union to do it. The union is not going to tell its members to go to work, that is a management job. Why have the old-timers been allowed to set work standards? That is a management job. The union officials are elected to represent the people. They don’t garner many votes trying to manage the production schedule by telling their constituents to work harder, that’s a management job.
The most common statement heard during union negotiations was “Give them what they want, It won’t hurt us!”
Well it did hurt and over time we have decided that it is too costly for us to manage. I could bore you with stories of management decisions that caused the loss of good manufacturing jobs currently blamed on the union. That is not my plan; I could write a book on the subject and not fix anything.
The problem we face is the perception that the union is the bad guy, members are lazy and greedy and management can’t fix the problems unless they get rid of the union! That perception may take years to change but I am betting that we do not get rid of the union, we work together to improve its effectiveness. That will take both management and unions to work together. Unions need to be more receptive to the real issues facing the management, what really needs to happen to keep our companies profitable and competitive? I think that it is management’s responsibility to tell the union negotiators the truth without hiding or embellishing the facts. The union and management must share pertinent information and common goals and work together to achieve those goals. Don’t take the representation of the people away, address the issue head on. I also would like to point out that I have never been in a factory where the union objected to your laptop. That is basically a management issue because they do not want confidential information to accidently get in your computer, and as for plugging in your computer, I can’t think of a factory I have ever seen or heard of where the union objected to plugging in you own equipment. That is exactly the type exaggerations that causes the perception problem that we currently have.
I would also like to point out that in the Big Three, at least, the Snow Day or acts of God as they were called, was not originally negotiated but rather granted by the company to compensate the employees who could not get to work through no fault of their own. It may have been added to the national agreement at a later date but is still paid at the discretion of the company. We could go on and on about the things the UAW has given back because they recognize that they hurt the competitiveness of the company and every one of the give backs would be something agreed to and approved by management. I have spent 51 years in the work force, 6 in the union and 45 in management, and I say everybody may not need to be represented but I can’t imagine what it would be like without the improvements negotiated by the unions. “Not all bood, not all bad, but necessary for sure.” Joe Vigo is a resident of Bridgewater Township.
Comments
Boo Radley
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 3:54 p.m.
I left a good job in the private sector for a career in public service because I thought it was what I wanted to do for the rest of my career. More and more, I regret that decision. I am not making more money. While I did have great benefits for many years, I also had great benefits in private industry. Recent years have seen miniscule, or no pay raises and steady increases in health care co-pays, cost shares and prescription co-pays. In the past couple of years, a new head of the organization has made life miserable for all employees. After working for years without need of the union's services, now it is only the union keeping a tenuous rein on abuse of employees. And ... at least we have a contract for a certain number of years which prevents our most benevelent employer from coming up with additional benefits to cut every year.
Macabre Sunset
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 9:43 p.m.
I don't blame the unions for taking what the government gave them. I blame the government for offering more than the people could afford to pay. All Snyder is trying to do is even the playing field. But I do blame the "union mentality" for the response to this effort. Right now, public employees are paid far more than people in the private sector. Not only that, but public employees are exempt from the responsibility of having to do a good job in order to maintain their jobs.
Bear
Wed, Apr 6, 2011 : 1:37 a.m.
All Snyder is doing is doubling the budget shortfall for his corporate tax break scheme and using it as an excuse to implement unconstitutional policies in an undemocratic fashion. Even the playing field? You can't be serious! Your last paragraph is false. I'd like to see you back that up, please. Just to state it as fact doesn't make it so.
David Briegel
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:46 p.m.
Your allegations are simply silly. Even the playing field? You jest? You can't bring yourself to go after the people who caused our crisis but you can sure go after the poor, the disadvantaged, the downtrodden and you begrudge the unionized workers but never the Criminal Bankster Class that rules Wall St. and rents our govt or the Corporatist "mentality"(that seems to be the favorable word) that is dominating our political discourse.
bedrog
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 9:31 p.m.
At the end of the day Jimmy Hoffa type unions suck...and so do Enron, Walmart, Goldman sachs type management. 'All union all the time' and 'non union all the time' positions are both 'reductios ad absurdem' in real world situations. In the world of university academics from which i came most professors in fact prefer to not be unionized, while for lecturer's and stressed and potentially exploited grad student assistants and lecturers it's often a good thing .
Macabre Sunset
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 8:01 p.m.
This is a nice idea in theory. But, in practice, it doesn't work. Especially with unions serving public employees, where there's no incentive on the part of the government to control costs. This current fight is about making government accountable. Unfortunately, the public-sector unions don't seem to have any interest in keeping our country financially solvent. It's all about their golden benefits.
Bear
Wed, Apr 6, 2011 : 1:33 a.m.
No, this current fight is about class warfare and union busting! I cannot believe that you are blaming our economic woes on 11.9% of our population that is working class. This is the stuff of fiction.
David Briegel
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:39 p.m.
Yup, only the criminal Corporate Bankster Class should be allowed to "rent" "better gubbermint"! Scalia and Thomas wouldn't have it any other way!
Huron74
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 8:52 p.m.
Yep. And about time too.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 8:14 p.m.
No, the current anti union and anti public employee sentiment is nothing more than a way to cut off union political donations to the candidates they support.
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:11 p.m.
Unions were a good thing, but have taken on a mind of there own. Now they exist to collect fees, donate to political parties and to get government favors. However, most of the current outrage isn't about Unions, it's about PUBLIC UNIONS where there is no management, just a bunch of bureaucrats handing out money that isn't theirs and doesn't effect their operating budget (as the U.S. simply just goes more in debt).
Bear
Wed, Apr 6, 2011 : 1:31 a.m.
Your argument is full of holes! No management? Trying to drive a wedge in between unions by slicing the cake differently? That's disingenuous at best! just a bunch of bureaucrats handing out money that isn't theirs is a prejudiced statement with no basis in fact at all. And if you want to talk about simply putting the U.S. into more debt, why don't you look at the true culprits; corporate CEO's & Wall Street Bankers & warmongering conservative administrations. Check the facts before you talk trash!
heresmine
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 3:17 p.m.
To Snoopdog - those workers don't just show up. The companies they work for have an agreement with those facilities that requre the outside vendor to use the providers labor. There are convention halls that allow you to bring your own labor, but they are the exception. Most convention centers, particularly the ones you mention, are trying to coordinate a lot of activity in a short period of time. Having control over the situation provides a better organized and safer situation. Sure, I might not like waiting on the street or so close to the dock door I can see inside, but once my number is called I know I'll be taken care of quickly. I had to make a delivery to Cobo for the NAIAS for the first time in a number of years and yes, I waited "on the wall", but once the crew showed up I was taken care of with a smile and speed.
snoopdog
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:43 p.m.
" I can't think of a factory I have ever seen or heard of where the union objected to plugging in you own equipment. That is exactly the type exaggerations that causes the perception problem that we currently have. " Exaggerations Mr. Vigo ? No, it is the truth Mr. Vigo. Try plugging in your computer, try putting down a roll of carpeting, try to assemble your display at Cobo Hall in Detroit, at McCormick Place in Chicago and you will get escorted out of the buidling. From the moment you back your truck into the facility, everything is handled by union workers. You cannot unload your own truck, you cannot move the materials yourself, you cannot assemble your displays and you cannot plug in your own computer. And some folks "wonder why" most folks are simply sick and tired of unions ! Good Day
Bear
Wed, Apr 6, 2011 : 1:25 a.m.
Snoopdog, yes, we who work at Cobo Hall handle the jobs that come in there. Exaggeration that you cannot even plug in your own computer? YES! Total exaggeration! At Cobo Convention Center & Cobo Arena, there are large shows going on in large venues. Can you imagine the management nightmare if every yahoo who came in there were allowed to do their own thing, as they saw fit? The safety issues alone would be insane. How do you know the workers brought in by an outside vendor are even competent? Would you assume the liability for 100 different vendors putting together something like the auto show? I don't think so! Just one fine example of what happens when you allow corners to be cut by non-union workers is the tragic accident that occurred at the Pontiac Silverdome recently with the stage collapsing because it was overloaded. Union stagehand workers would have NEVER allowed it to fly! I've worked at the venue in Cobo for over 10 years and have NEVER seen any vendor who was unable to plug in his own personal equipment. And to say that 'most folks are simply sick and tired of unions' is simply a lie. Maybe most of the people that YOU hang around hate unions, but that is a far cry from 'most folks'. We have unions for a reason; you must be young enough that you don't remember any of those reasons. Any benefits you have are a direct result of the blood shed by those who chose to be union. Get rid of the unions and watch how the dominoes fall! Incredible!
Huron74
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:08 p.m.
Joe I spent four years working in a unionized factory job and I have to say other than taking my dues money they never did a thing for me. Those the are the hard facts as I experienced them not some right-wing talking points I gleaned from the WSJ or something.
Bear
Wed, Apr 6, 2011 : 1:13 a.m.
and I mean that in a good way...
John B.
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 6:33 p.m.
"With or without the discount for the union dues that I don't pay?" Bogus argument. My self-employed family pays nearly $1000 per month for health insurance, plus significant out-of-pocket expenses. That is far, far more than any union dues would be.
Huron74
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 8:50 p.m.
With or without the discount for the union dues that I don't pay?
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 8:12 p.m.
So how do you like those self employed health care costs?
Huron74
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 5:23 p.m.
No terminal I quit and became self employed.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:14 p.m.
And how long do you think you would have remained employed without a union? Do you think you could have gotten better wages and benefits without collective bargaining? As an individual, did you have the power to keep management from cutting your pay and benefits so they could increase the CEO's salary or give higher profits to shareholders?? Do you truly believe management fears the "strength" of individual workers over a union who bargains collectively and equally for all its members? If you think that you have the power and the strength to get what you deserve in the workplace go for it! But I bet dollars to donuts that you'd not have the wages or benefits that you received thru collective bargaining of your union if you took matters into your own hands. You might not just have a job the next day because your boss disagreed with you that you deserve a dollar an hour raise or dental care.
northside
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 2:07 p.m.
What most amazes me is that we're only two years removed from private sector greed and corruption almost sinking the entire economy. Yet the public sector and unions are now the focus of discussion. Sorry, but unions weren't responsible for - or even involved in - the mortgage crisis. The public sector didn't bring down Enron, AIG, or ... wow, too many to list. People who blame the public sector and unions for the nation's woes are just running on autopilot, applying outdated beliefs and failing to face up to what has really happened in recent years.
mun
Mon, Apr 4, 2011 : 1:24 a.m.
"Liberals are to blame for the mess, the loan business shouldn't be charity like liberals think." Liberals didn't tell banks to pump out mortgages and sell them as debt instruments. Furthermore, Republicans controlled the White House and Congress from 2001-2007, so they also allowed this to go on.
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 8:23 p.m.
Last I checked David, multiple banks went under and others took federal bailout (which I wasn't for). Northside, the real problem was the loophole that let these banks sell the bad loans as a package, once sold the broker had no idea how big of a lemon they were. Yes, congress made banks take out sub-prime loans, but they also gave them the loop hole. I don't care who was in office, it was wrong. Also, I think this happened during Clinton's first two years, thus liberal controlled, but if it makes you feel better I can bash a few Republicans (i.e. Iraq). Which news organization do you listen to? MSNBC? CNN? Both are owned by GE and have a really far left base. At least Fox's reporting is in the middle. .... and their commentators have higher ratings than your left leaners by a long shot.
northside
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 6:22 p.m.
Mr. Blow I'm well aware of that argument, as it's a deceptive version of the mortgage crisis that Fox News trots out to obscure the real causes. Think about it: even if legislation was passed during the Clinton era, Republicans were in full control (Pres, Senate, & House) from 2001-2006. Couldn't they have easily overturned or changed any such laws? Mortgage companies didn't care whether they made bad loans. They still profited (massive sales, closing costs, etc.) and then often sold the loans (bundled) to others.
David Briegel
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 5:21 p.m.
Those poor, downtrodden, persecuted Banksters. They sure do have a tought time don't they joe..
joe.blow
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 4:17 p.m.
Maybe you should look at history. Greedy banks aren't to blame for the mortgage meltdown. Most banks wouldn't have given out loans to unqualified people if they didn't have to. Clinton created a sub-prime housing industry where banks HAD to give loans to those not qualified so that poor people could have homes. To offset the financial hit to banks, he let them sell the sub-prime mortgages to 2nd/3rd/x# parties without disclosure of the risk. Liberals are to blame for the mess, the loan business shouldn't be charity like liberals think. People aren't entitled to mortgages, they should earn them.
DonBee
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:59 p.m.
One fact free column rebutting another fact free column. Only this time it takes 2 columns to rebut one column.
Bear
Wed, Apr 6, 2011 : 1:10 a.m.
i don't know if you've been listening at all or not; but the facts are there. The two columns responding to Warner's trash-talking are factual, if you wish, you seem to have access to the internet, look up the statistics yourself. Bureau of Labor Statistics might be a good place to start; then you can find out just who is being talked about and their place in the labor force. I cannot believe that this is all you have to say on the subject. Meaningless & negative with no real point to add to the argument, except that it didn't meet your arbitrary standards.
Terminal
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:21 p.m.
Mr Vigo is a working class hero.
Mr. Ed
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:14 p.m.
Mr. William Warner failed to think with an open mind. I'm disappointed the Ann Arbor.com printed his trash and will cancel my subscription.
Are you serious?
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 1:14 p.m.
I wonder how many of the rabid anti unionists would be willing to give up the benefits they (the non union employees) have that were negotiated by the unions?
David Briegel
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 12:10 p.m.
Good article Joe. I also managed under a union contract for 8 yrs. I found that the only obstacle to achieving my goals were the abilities of my management team to communicate to our employees and to document their non-compliance when it was observed. The other employees always knew that they were treated fairly and that when discipline was administered it was done in an even handed manner. This union bashing is just plain silly. Most problems represent the failures of management to communicate and manage in an effective manner.
Topher
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:54 a.m.
In regard to education and unions your statement about management holding some responsibility applies. Teacher unions specify that observations must happen and yet administration puts on a show. Most of my observations, as a public school teacher, were not constructive and administration usually left before the lesson was even over. My impression was that they just wanted to make sure no students were in jeopardy - there was little focus on my teaching quality. Good teachers want to be genuinely evaluated, want administrators to come into their classrooms unannounced, and want rigorous feedback. Even though my contract stated that I would have several unannounced observations, I never had one in my years of teaching. There must be higher standards and accountability for administrators.
Salinemary
Sun, Apr 3, 2011 : 11:53 a.m.
Well written, Mr. Vigo. I hope Mr. Warner reads your piece.