nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Trade Unions

Parchment

Are you in a union at work? If so, how do you feel about unions?

I feel there is a lot of negativity around unions these days.

Just interested to hear others views.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Shenshen

Nope, not in a union.
My feeling about them recently is that they urgently need to re-invent themselves. There certainly is still a massive need to protect employees, be it around health and safety, employment security or payment. But the way unions are structured right now and the tools they employ to try and achieve their aims are worse than useless at this point.

At best they achieve little more than driving the few large employers that unions can tackle closer to either bankruptcy, at worst they drive jobs offshore. They represent a fairly small portion of the Irish workforce and distort the employment market massively.
If I'm generous I'd assume they were at least well-meaning, but I suspect that they have themselves realised how outdated their methods are at this point but instead of changing have decided to shout louder in an effort to keep seeming relevant.

biko

"I'm not in a union and the simple reason is that I don't give a rat's ass about anyone else here at work.
For all I care they could all be replaced by Indians tomorrow and that would be fine by me.
Also I don't think anyone except me should fight for salary increases, even though I am not really doing a good job about it myself.
In fact I am not doing a particularly good job at all but I hope they won't replace me with an Indian this year."

^^ Seems to be the sentiment of most AH posters when it comes to unions.

gifted

biko wrote: »

"I'm not in a union and the simple reason is that I don't give a rat's ass about anyone else here at work.
For all I care they could all be replaced by Indians tomorrow and that would be fine by me.
Also I don't think anyone except me should fight for salary increases, even though I am not really doing a good job about it myself.
In fact I am not doing a particularly good job at all but I hope they won't replace me with an Indian this year."

^^ Seems to be the sentiment of most AH posters when it comes to unions.

What have Indians got to do with the OP question?

GerryDerpy

I have never met an intelligent, articulate and confident person that is in a union.

Unions have a purpose.

Hilly Bill

gifted wrote: »

What have Indians got to do with the OP question?

He works in Apache pizza.

Arcade_Tryer

I've never met an intelligent, articulate and confident person who is against unions.

Unions have a place in society, same as shareholders and boards.

Wanderer78

Atomisation and increasing worker insecurity, 'good for the economy' they say, ta hell with those pesky unions, ruining our plan of world domination!

sbsquarepants

The place I work is unusual in that roughly half the staff have to be in a union, and the other half don't.
It speaks volumes I believe that of the roughly 50% (maybe 100 people) who don't need to be in one, I don't know of 1 single person who has joined voluntarily.

I have no time for unions, have never been in one and have zero intention of ever joining one unless I absolutely can't avoid it.
They're bad enough in the private sector, but public sector unions are nothing short of shameless.

Parchment

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

I've never met an intelligent, articulate and confident person who is against unions.

Unions have a place in society, same as shareholders and boards.

I agree - unions brought in everything that private industry has slowly absorbed such as work place rights, leave entitlements, wage levels etc.

If the unions didnt do it - it wouldnt happen.

I do agree that they need to modernise themselves though and become more relevant and transparent.

Shenshen

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Atomisation and increasing worker insecurity, 'good for the economy' they say, ta hell with those pesky unions, ruining our plan of world domination!

I would agree, but I can't see how striking is increasing worker security.
They need to find new tools, the old tools are actually working against them at this point.

Wanderer78

Shenshen wrote:

I would agree, but I can't see how striking is increasing worker security. They need to find new tools, the old tools are actually working against them at this point.

Will completely agree with a new approach, they don't seem to be very creative, I'm thinking some young blood required for new thinking. Ah striking is just another tool, sometimes it works and other times not

Parchment

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Will completely agree with a new approach, they don't seem to be very creative, I'm thinking some young blood required for new thinking. Ah striking is just another tool, sometimes it works and other times not

I think striking is a very tangible reminder of the power of the workers but i do agree that more tactics are needed in these "modren" times.

Shenshen

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Will completely agree with a new approach, they don't seem to be very creative, I'm thinking some young blood required for new thinking. Ah striking is just another tool, sometimes it works and other times not

Well, it may work short-term, as the employer will want to keep the business running, obviously.
Long-term, though, I would imagine any employer who had faced a strike would want to safeguard against the next by moving as much of their workforce as they can abroad, even if the quality might suffer a bit. If they hadn't considered it before being striked at, they will afterwards.

osarusan

Depends on the union, what they're supporting, and how they go about it.

Wanderer78

Shenshen wrote:

Well, it may work short-term, as the employer will want to keep the business running, obviously. Long-term, though, I would imagine any employer who had faced a strike would want to safeguard against the next by moving as much of their workforce as they can abroad, even if the quality might suffer a bit. If they hadn't considered it before being striked at, they will afterwards.

Yup globalisation truly isn't working for the worker, won't be easy sorting this one

Parchment

Shenshen wrote: »

Well, it may work short-term, as the employer will want to keep the business running, obviously.
Long-term, though, I would imagine any employer who had faced a strike would want to safeguard against the next by moving as much of their workforce as they can abroad, even if the quality might suffer a bit. If they hadn't considered it before being striked at, they will afterwards.

But if everyone thought like that nothing would get changed. Its fear that keeps people down.

I know thats all very idealistic and people have mortgages to pay and kids to feed but its about the larger picture. Workers have to stand up for themselves.

Think about those amazing Dunnes workers who went on strike in the 80's in opposition of apartheid. Fear didnt stop them and they made a huge change.

I dont look at unions with rose tinted glasses at all but i just try to always look at the bigger picture.

[Deleted User]

If they were fighting for the rights of the employees at the bottom then I could get onboard with the cause.

But I've never heard them shout about those.

DrPhilG

Personally I have been let down by them. I am part of a very small group of employees and as such, not worth fighting for. When other larger groups of staff have been hard done by in similar situations the Unions fought hard for them and won their claim. For us (2 people only) they didn't give a crap. Not worth the time/money for us.

That said I still pay into the Union. I think it's the fear that something terrible will crop up and I would need them.

So no, not a fan.

sbsquarepants

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Will completely agree with a new approach, they don't seem to be very creative, I'm thinking some young blood required for new thinking. Ah striking is just another tool, sometimes it works and other times not

This is their main problem as far as I can see - they are still stuck in Jim Larken mode. It's no coincidence that the most unionised industries and work places are also the most old fashioned and inefficient.
You can spot unionised workers a mile off - everything is an issue, the simplest of things become stumbling blocks and bones of contention. Not my job becomes a mantra.
It's very hard to tell apart from laziness to be perfectly honest.

I approach my job as simply as this - my job is to get the job done. It's not a set list of tasks which I refuse point blank to deviate from, if shít happens i'll use my head, adapt, improvise and get on with things I will in short do what needs to be done to achieve our pre agreed end result. I will expect to be paid - but you will also get what you pay for. If you aren't willing to pay me, i'll go work for someone who is.
I think if everyone approached working like that things would go a lot more smoothly and there would be no need for unions.

osarusan

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

If they were fighting for the rights of the employees at the bottom then I could get onboard with the cause.

But I've never heard them shout about those.

Mandate made a lot of noise about Dunnes Stores' sh!tty contracts a couple of years ago.

Shenshen

Parchment wrote: »

But if everyone thought like that nothing would get changed. Its fear that keeps people down.

I know thats all very idealistic and people have mortgages to pay and kids to feed but its about the larger picture. Workers have to stand up for themselves.

Think about those amazing Dunnes workers who went on strike in the 80's in opposition of apartheid. Fear didnt stop them and they made a huge change.

I dont look at unions with rose tinted glasses at all but i just try to always look at the bigger picture.

I've no problem with taking a risk if I can see that it might bring benefit in future.
Unions as they currently work will do more damage than good, though, and bring no benefits whatsoever.
As I said, their tools and strategies are woefully outdated.

meeeeh

If you want to find the worst employee in the place you just ask who is the union rep.

Unions are dinosaurs that refuse to change, bully people who don't conform and do more damage than good.

Wanderer78

sbsquarepants wrote:

I approach my job as simply as this - my job is to get the job done. It's not a set list of tasks which I refuse point blank to deviate from, if shÃt happens i'll use my head, adapt, improvise and get on with things I will in short do what needs to be done to achieve our pre agreed end result. I will expect to be paid - but you will also get what you pay for. If you aren't willing to pay me, i'll go work for someone who is. I think if everyone approached working like that things would go a lot more smoothly and there would be no need for unions.

It's a good approach to have but humans aren't black or white, particularly our behaviour, it's very complex. This productivity approach is madness, humans aren't production machines. Sadly some just don't have the abilities or whatever is required to be able just up and leave if things aren't working out. It's extremely critical to have some sort of security for workers but I do feel things such as neoliberalism/globalisation are seriously increasing worker insecurity, this causes complex problems for most workers. It's a very complex problem, but we're gonna have to knock our heads together or this could go to very bad places.

Thundercats Ho

A company I worked for went bust in 2007.
They were looking for wage cuts. I can't remember the specifics, but it was mostly overtime rates, shift pay etc (maybe a 5/10% cut on flat pay too).

The wages were inflated. The union called the company's bluff, but it backfired and the company closed with around 200 job cuts, which naturally enough was a huge blow to the town.

A similar (engineering) firm opened around the same time, and quite a lot of the workforce got employment there, but at wages that were maybe 30% less than they had just rejected from the old company.

I'm conflicted on unions tbh. They are there to stick up for the little guy and fight for workers rights, but they were responsible for a long standing company to go to the wall by not being realistic.

it's not a case that the old co would have failed anyway, as the main reason the new start up is thriving, is that it picked up all the contracts from the old company, without the larger overheads.

Wanderer78

Thundercats Ho wrote:

A company I worked for went bust in 2007. They were looking for wage cuts. I can't remember the specifics, but it was mostly overtime rates, shift pay etc (maybe a 5/10% cut on flat pay too).

Maybe the union push could well have been just the final nail, in an already sliding business, hard to tell though. That's rough. Employers market at the moment

Divelment

The problem with unions in this country is that they have become largely a public sector only type of organisation. You won't see tradespeople such as electricians, mechanics, carpenters in unions, and this is where the ability to earn a proper wage that is commensurate with your skill and experience, is being most undermined, as EU free borders now mean that anyone can come here and offer their trade for any price, usually substantially lower than the going market rate here.

FTA69

I work as an organiser for a major union in the U.K. and can say that they've never been needed more. In fact, there's a direct correlation between the rise in inequality in society and workplaces and the fall in union membership.

Increasing amounts of workers face mass precarity, low wages and a general powerlessness at work. Some people moan about the term "race to the
bottom" but that's exactly what we are seeing. Real wages are plummeting and workers are also facing outside pressures such as rising rents and decreased social services. Realistically, the only vehicles working people have to redress this are trade unions, flawed as they are.

As for people bemoaning strikes and the like, the reality is that strikes are at their lowest levels ever and many unions are engaged in cozy partnership deals with bosses which are more concerned with preserving the status quo and the position of senior union people than they are for advancing the interests of workers.

If anything unions need to become more combative, more localised, smaller and more adaptive to precarious industries.

Hilly Bill

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

If they were fighting for the rights of the employees at the bottom then I could get onboard with the cause.

But I've never heard them shout about those.

They do, every day in all forms employment.

Hilly Bill

Divelment wrote: »

The problem with unions in this country is that they have become largely a public sector only type of organisation. You won't see tradespeople such as electricians, mechanics, carpenters in unions, and this is where the ability to earn a proper wage that is commensurate with your skill and experience, is being most undermined, as EU free borders now mean that anyone can come here and offer their trade for any price, usually substantially lower than the going market rate here.

You'll have them tradesmen in unions as well apart maybe those that are self employed.

FTA69

Hilly Bill wrote: »

You'll have them tradesmen in unions as well apart maybe those that are self employed.

Construction is notoriously hard to organise for a variety of reasons. 1) we are seeing a mass rise in bogus self-employment where even the labourers are stand alone 'companies' not entitled to any of the benefits of an employee like sick pay or pensions etc. This is often a condition of them being hired.
2) it's transient. You can put huge efforts into organising a job and then a year later it's winding down and the tradesmen are off working in different parts of the city of country or joining different firms.

It's a tough proposition for any union although I hear New York etc have a good bash off it.