Unions under attack

[truetiger]

I'm sure you retain top notch employees with that attitude. Why should I, as the employee, bust my *** or go the extra mile for you, the employer who can't wait to replace me to save money. EMS is a field in which EMT's and Paramedics are asked to go above and beyond and sometimes put their lives at risk. Is it too much to ask that the employer show some loyalty as well?

 

[ffemt8978]

We are not professional enough to talk about politics or edit our own post after five minutes. So how is it we can be discussing unions?.

Simple. Political discussions never end civilly, but we do sometimes allow them provided they have an EMS focus.

The edit time is in place because previous members have gone back and deleted their posts for some reason and it totally throws off thread continuity.

This discussion about unions has remained civil, so it has been allowed to continue. The moment it doesn't, this thread will be closed and someone will get a forum vacation.

 

[looker]

I'm sure you retain top notch employees with that attitude. Why should I, as the employee, bust my *** or go the extra mile for you, the employer who can't wait to replace me to save money. EMS is a field in which EMT's and Paramedics are asked to go above and beyond and sometimes put their lives at risk. Is it too much to ask that the employer show some loyalty as well?

As employer my job is to make sure you have as safe of working condition as possible. Available tools that you need to perform your work to the best of your ability etc. Those employees that go above and beyond are the employees management see that they can't live without and as result willing to pay more to keep them around.

If there was union employees would not bust their *** because they would still get paid the same, get scheduled pay raise, promotion etc regardless if they go above what they supposed to or not.

 

[truetiger]

That's a very stereotypical answer regarding unions. I'd say most of us give 110% on this job because its our passion and not to get a pay raise. Being union is not about getting ever cent out of the employer and more about due process.

 

[SliceOfLife]

Simple. Political discussions never end civilly, but we do sometimes allow them provided they have an EMS focus.

The edit time is in place because previous members have gone back and deleted their posts for some reason and it totally throws off thread continuity.

This discussion about unions has remained civil, so it has been allowed to continue. The moment it doesn't, this thread will be closed and someone will get a forum vacation.

Ironic that the board that host discussions about professional advancement, legitimacy and acknowledgment of EMS in the medical field believes that the whole should be punished for the inappropriateness of the few. Way to help the cause.

Of all the forums I belong to this is the only one that makes such an issue of it. No wonder we can't shake the name "ambulance driver" when we hold each other to such low standards and expectations.

 

[DrParasite]

Glad to see how you view your employees.....

Sadly, many people view their employees as replaceable... Treat them like crap, pay them poorly, who cares, they can quit or get fired and I can replace them with a newbie in about 6 minutes. After all insurance doesn't care if the provider has 10 minutes of experience or 10 years.

looker = a reminder why unions are needed.

Exactly.

I work at a non-union site with more than half the employees being union. This is shift work. Recently a shift has opened up that was being held for a service member who decided not to return to the company after coming home from deployment. For the last year it has been filled by a relatively new hire. Since we are non-union, management can fill this shift however they would like. If we unionize the site it would be strictly by seniority.

Now the only other person who wants this pseudo-new shift, besides the guy already working it, is an employee with more seniority but a bad track record (performs poorly, calls out, policy violations). So who gets the shift? The new guy who has been working it for the past year or the poor performer with seniority?

If the employee has such a bad track record, why are they still employed? just because you are union doesn't mean you can't be fired or disciplined; all it means is that you need to be disciplined according to the rules, which are applied evenly to everyone, not because your boss doesn't like you.

I would ask if the position was offered to anyone before the new guy filled it. maybe a more senior guy would want it. After all, just because it was given to the new guy and he did the job well doesn't mean no one else wanted it.

Lets change your scenario a bit: if YOU were the senior guy who had been there for years, always did the job, and the new guy was the bosses son/daughter, who had a bad track record, and was given the shift because of his relationship and because they needed the spot filled and he was the newest guy, and the new guy was given the spot over you, what would your feelings be?

If i find an employee to be really valuable and he/she is worth much more I will either have to pay much more or that employee will likely find a new place to work for better wage, benefits etc.

I throw the BS flag up on this statement. When was the last time you actually paid any employer more than your company's minimum salary when they started? After all, you don't make any more money by having a good employee vs a bad employee.

A company should not have 50 step process to fire someone. It should be pretty simple, a person is not doing his/her job. They get 1 or 2 warning and if they do not start doing what they supposed to they get fired. Why should bad employee be rewarded?

bad employees shouldn't be rewarded, but you shouldn't have a different set of rules for everyone. Union shops HAVE fired people, and will continue to do so. Cross your Ts, dot your Is, people can be disciplined and fired.

Think of it this way: if I work for your company, and 2 hours after my shift ends, and you receive a complaint about me, you can "order" me to come to the office immediately to discuss it. I am already home in bed, so I tell you "no." So you, as the employer decide to terminate me, which you can do as a non-union shop.

If you are in a union shop, the rules would state you need to be given time to defend yourself, have a shop steward present, and actually not be bullied by management. You can still be fired after the investigation is completed, but you have to have a legitimate reason for it being done.

Let me ask this another way. Suppose there 100 qualified people for position, yet because position is unionized I have to pay xx amount when in reality I can easily find same qualified person for x amount. Why should company not be free to fire this person in at will states and replace them with cheaper qualified person?

kinda makes me not want to ask the boss for a raise, or even be given a raise by the boss, because he will think that I am now expensive, and I can be fired and replaced with a new hire who has the minimum qualifications needed to do the job.

As employer my job is to make sure you have as safe of working condition as possible. Available tools that you need to perform your work to the best of your ability etc.

haha, and how many of your fellow employers are failing to do that job on a regular basis, often because it's too expensive or not cost affective? after all, if people complain, you can just fire them and replace them with cheaper staff.

Those employees that go above and beyond are the employees management see that they can't live without and as result willing to pay more to keep them around.

I believe you said everyone is replaceable, often for a cheaper hourly rate.

If there was union employees would not bust their *** because they would still get paid the same, get scheduled pay raise, promotion etc regardless if they go above what they supposed to or not.

or you can just not give raises to anyone, even to those who are busting their ***, and doing everything right because it is more expensive for you and doesn't generate any more revenue for your company. and if they complain, tell them to seek employment elsewhere or just fire them and replace them with a new hire

I'd say most of us give 110% on this job because its our passion and not to get a pay raise.

I would disagree with this statement 100%. And it has nothing to do with if you are unionized or not.

Being union is not about getting ever cent out of the employer and more about due process.

I agree 100%

 

[SliceOfLife]

If the employee has such a bad track record, why are they still employed? just because you are union doesn't mean you can't be fired or disciplined; all it means is that you need to be disciplined according to the rules, which are applied evenly to everyone, not because your boss doesn't like you.

I have seen coworkers get fired for less. It's beyond me why some people can fly with golden wings while others go under the bus. This has been true for every job I have had since I was 18, union and non-union.

I would ask if the position was offered to anyone before the new guy filled it. maybe a more senior guy would want it. After all, just because it was given to the new guy and he did the job well doesn't mean no one else wanted it.

It wasn't offered and a few people requested it too. Since it's non-union the company put the first warm body they hired into it instead of moving people around and causing slightly more work to go into scheduling. They should have filled it with a someone who wanted it before a new hire for the interim period.

here for years, always did the job, and the new guy was the bosses son/daughter, who had a bad track record, and was given the shift because of his relationship and because they needed the spot filled and he was the newest guy, and the new guy was given the spot over you, what would your feelings be?

That would be horrible and I would find another job. I find it funny that you are comparing seniority to nepotism as if these are the only options. What about performance based appointments? But lets not change the scenario because mine is actually happening and I am wondering what you (collectively) would do if you where management?

For example, if it was me I would give it to the guy who has been doing it for the past year. When I was in management before I was laid off and started this job, it was easy, performers got the perks. The fact that we have a majority of union workers at this site but still don't officially vote it in as a union site means we want management to use discretion with scheduling. If my coworkers want strict seniority based management then vote the damn site in or go work at one of the other union sites. I swear their duality kills me sometimes.

Like I said before I'm on the fence with private unions as they have great advantages and disadvantages.

 

[RocketMedic]

Looker, out of curiosity, have you ever bothered to look into what would happen to your company if you treated your employees like valued people as opposed to replaceable drones?

Let's look at Acadian Ambulance. Decent pay, employees have a stake in the company, and nationally recognized as a Place That's Doing It Right. And what has it gotten them? Profit! How? Expansion! They've gone from central Louisiana to a Southern Borg-like Entity, and they've done it by impressing their customers with the best employees possible, not Drone #2342.

Now let's look at your company. When was the last time your company was seriously considered for more than a local dialysis center contract?

 

[DrParasite]

It wasn't offered and a few people requested it too. Since it's non-union the company put the first warm body they hired into it instead of moving people around and causing slightly more work to go into scheduling. They should have filled it with a someone who wanted it before a new hire for the interim period.

that's very frustrating... seen it happen at my old job. also saw a company put on a new truck, in a new time period, and had a per diem (the same per diem employee) work it for 3 months straight (friday/saturday/sunday overnight), since it wasn't approved for a FTE spot yet..... and when the FTE was approved, should it go to the per diem who worked the shift consistently, or go by seniority (or to an existing full timer who work another shift)?

That would be horrible and I would find another job. I find it funny that you are comparing seniority to nepotism as if these are the only options. What about performance based appointments? But lets not change the scenario because mine is actually happening and I am wondering what you (collectively) would do if you where management?

nepotism, favoritism, sexism, racism, there are tons of -isms you can list. It was 0400 and it was the first thing that came to mind.

What are you basing your "performance based appointments" on? If someone does there job properly, like they are supposed to, should they be rewarded? or are they just doing their job?

EMS has a very hard time quantifying a good employee, or giving a numerical value to compare the performance of employees. Or are you considering subjective opinions based on supervisors or management?

Like I said before I'm on the fence with private unions as they have great advantages and disadvantages.

If you are management, you don't want unions. if you are staff, and your management is awesome, you might not want unions. If you are staff and your management sucks, you wish you had a union. It might not make the working conditions perfect, but it will probably make it better than they are.

 

[Chimpie]

We are not professional enough to talk about politics or edit our own post after five minutes.

You actually get 15.

Ironic that the board that host discussions about professional advancement, legitimacy and acknowledgment of EMS in the medical field believes that the whole should be punished for the inappropriateness of the few. Way to help the cause.

Of all the forums I belong to this is the only one that makes such an issue of it. No wonder we can't shake the name "ambulance driver" when we hold each other to such low standards and expectations.

And we're still the most active ems-related discussion forum on the web today.

As to not take this thread further off topic, I will send you a PM.

 

[johnrsemt]

When a new grocery store chain came into Indianapolis about 20 years ago the existing unionized chain picketed them because the new stores weren't unionized.
The new stores paid their employees about 15% more than the unionized stores, and had better benefits. The new store voted down the union coming in about 4 times in 5 years: why should they want to be unionized when the pay and benefits would go down.

I talked to an employee at the unionized store that I worked with at the Volunteer FD we were both on: he said they weren't trying to unionize the new chain to benefit them, they were trying to unionize them so that the pay would be equal across the board. He didn't feel it was fair that the new chain paid more.
I asked him why he didn't go to the new stores; he answered he didn't want to lose his union benefits.

Most of the time unions don't make much sense: here we have a person that was fired for poor job performance; the union helped him get his job back; he got a 6 week paid vacation. and 18 months later he was fired again for poor job performance.

 

[looker]

Looker, out of curiosity, have you ever bothered to look into what would happen to your company if you treated your employees like valued people as opposed to replaceable drones?

Let's look at Acadian Ambulance. Decent pay, employees have a stake in the company, and nationally recognized as a Place That's Doing It Right. And what has it gotten them? Profit! How? Expansion! They've gone from central Louisiana to a Southern Borg-like Entity, and they've done it by impressing their customers with the best employees possible, not Drone #2342.

Now let's look at your company. When was the last time your company was seriously considered for more than a local dialysis center contract?

Being i am in socal,there is plenty of room for expansion. I do not need recognition by some national or local organization. All that matter that my customer(s) are happy.

 

[truetiger]

$10/hour in SOCAL cannot be a livable wage with the cost of living. Here in MO its rare to see any EMT jobs that pay less than 11.

 

[adamjh3]

Looker, I would swear you owned the company I work for if you hadn't stated your company was non unionized.

A question for you regarding your last post: Why not do all you can to be the best rather than doing just enough to pull in a bit of money each year? Why not try to follow successful business models and management mindsets?

Here's a little article that may help you see things in a different light, unless you need to get back to running an average company and finding ways to squeeze
A bit more out of your drones for free.

http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/8-signs-extraordinary-boss-110223692.html

 

[looker]

Looker, I would swear you owned the company I work for if you hadn't stated your company was non unionized.

A question for you regarding your last post: Why not do all you can to be the best rather than doing just enough to pull in a bit of money each year? Why not try to follow successful business models and management mindsets?

Here's a little article that may help you see things in a different light, unless you need to get back to running an average company and finding ways to squeeze
A bit more out of your drones for free.

http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/8-signs-extraordinary-boss-110223692.html

I have degree in business so while I appreciate that article advice, I will go by what I been taught on how to run a business. I have successful business model or I would be already out of business.

 

[RocketMedic]

Looker, assuming that a degree becomes the minimum standard, how will you remain in business?

 

[46Young]

When a new grocery store chain came into Indianapolis about 20 years ago the existing unionized chain picketed them because the new stores weren't unionized.
The new stores paid their employees about 15% more than the unionized stores, and had better benefits. The new store voted down the union coming in about 4 times in 5 years: why should they want to be unionized when the pay and benefits would go down.

I talked to an employee at the unionized store that I worked with at the Volunteer FD we were both on: he said they weren't trying to unionize the new chain to benefit them, they were trying to unionize them so that the pay would be equal across the board. He didn't feel it was fair that the new chain paid more.
I asked him why he didn't go to the new stores; he answered he didn't want to lose his union benefits.

Most of the time unions don't make much sense: here we have a person that was fired for poor job performance; the union helped him get his job back; he got a 6 week paid vacation. and 18 months later he was fired again for poor job performance.

I saw this with my former employer, a hospital based 911/IFT provider in NYC. Whenever FDNY or the local Union hospitals got something, we got it too. Pay, benefits, schedule, etc. My hospital was non union, but stole plenty of employees from FDNY, and was competitive for applicants with other hospitals. The unions actually helped us out by raising the bar on what our pay, schedule, and working conditions were.

As far as ths overall discussion, my evidence is anecdotal, but it keeps me in favor of unions:

Where I work now, my Union President spoke in front of our Board of
Supervisors in 3/2009, when I was newly released from the fire academy, and would have been one of the 90-something selected for a RIF (reduction in force, or layoff). No one got laid off, but no one got raises other than COLA's until the present time.....

.....which leads us to today. Our same President spoke to the BOS again last week. We were only supposed to get a 2.18% COLA, and no step increases. We're now getting our step increases.

Now, imagine if we weren't Union. We would have lost 90 or more positions, and we still wouldn't have any raises going on four years now. It was smooth how he told the BOS how the President of Japan came here to personally thank our USAR team, how were known internationally, how we have a stellar customer service reputation, but have not seen raises in what will now be four years.

 

[46Young]

Looker, assuming that a degree becomes the minimum standard, how will you remain in business?

That depends on whether or not these degrees raise their salaries. If there's still a plethora of medics, the degree won't mean much. If there's only a certain profit margin in IFT, there simply won't be enough money to pay medics any more than they get now. Globally, there will be no pay increases, as every IFT would be cash flow negative.

 

[looker]

Looker, assuming that a degree becomes the minimum standard, how will you remain in business?

Degree in it self would not mean more pay. If degree was to be new standard then "old crew" would need to go back to school and get a degree just to keep what they got now(assuming experience would not count as having a degree). New people with degree would get current salary unless company started making more profit as result of employees having a degree. If insurance company, medicare etc started paying more because employees have a degree yes I can see salary going up. But we all know that is not going to happen. So degree standard would not change anything.

 

[RocketMedic]

What do you pay your employees?