The Center For Individual Freedom (CFIF.org) on May 15, 2009 produced what they call their “Lunchtime Liberty Update” where they asked this question: “Shouldn't hardworking and dedicated unionized employees be allowed to earn bonuses, raises or other merit-based rewards from thankful employers? Especially during these tight economic times, when productivity and efficiency are at an even higher premium?”
The CFIF graciously answered their own question with: “Not according to Big Labor and jealous union bosses, who prefer that workers' rewards flow only through them.”
These are the same union bosses that are always telling the employees how hard they work to get better benefits and pay for the “struggling” workers. When all the facts are in, it seems more like the workers are “struggling” to put out extra effort in order to be more productive and enhance their performance for possible future compensation and promotions.
Can’t speak for you, but every time I ever held any kind of production-type job I tried to excel in order to not only make some extra bucks, but to impress management with my skills so when an opening for an advanced job came along, I could be one of the ones considered. But then, I never worked in a union shop and in fact, I avoided all such places of employment that did have union control.
It wasn’t that I was against unions, per se, it was because so many of them did more to perpetuate their own existence than they did for the average worker; particularly the fairly new employee who was really struggling to get by on entrance employee wages. These workers at the bottom of the totem pole never got any recognition from the union bosses due to their lack of seniority, and if you tried to show management that you could do the job better, the union would slap you down and tell you to back off.
So it seemed that as long as you were a “newbie” as many were dubbed, you got the short end of the stick, deservedly or not. The “old-timers” that had been around a long time, didn’t even have to be good at their jobs to get bonus money or other perks. So as a result, no one worked any harder than they really had to as it wouldn’t be rewarded by management because of union dictates.
The CFIF Update continued: “Unions are empowered to negotiate strict pay structures for covered workers through one-size-fits-all collective bargaining agreements, regardless of worker productivity.
Consequently, employers aren’t allowed to pay unionized employees any reward or bonus above what the governing collective bargaining agreement provides.” Which means that if management wanted to compensate overly-productive workers for their extra output and effort that unions would have to approve of it according to the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and the union bosses would consider such an action as not being in the best interests of all the workers.
As if they really cared about the best interests of all the workers; they just didn’t want to see a productive worker rewarded as it would create an agreement between management and employee with the union being on the outside. This sort of situation would, in the union interpretation, be against the CBA and therefore inadmissible. In the interpretation of the union, it would amount to losing total control over the worker and a victory for management.
The employee’s gain of more compensation and favoritism with management for advancement would not even be taken into consideration by the union. The CBA gives them almost life and death authority over all the workers; a power they are not likely to give up without an all-out battle. And as CFIF says it proves, “that workers’ interests and union bosses’ interests are two very different things.”
The CFIF Update reports that “Congressman Tom McClintock (R – California) wants to change that indefensible state of affairs.” The Congressman is going to introduce legislation to eliminate the power of the unions to block compensation for deserving and meritorious workers. The legislation will be titled, “Rewarding Achievement and Incentivizing Successful Employees (RAISE) Act.” This will amend the National Labor Relations Act and allow employers who want to reward overly productive workers with additional compensation without violating the CBA allowing those workers to earn an extra $2,600 to $4,300 a year according to a comparison done by the Heritage Foundation between CBA workers and those not limited by such union hindrances.
As you have probably already guessed, and CFIF reports, “Don’t hold your breath, however, for Big Labor or its liberal servants within Congress and the White House to accept this reasonable proposal.”
This would be a chance for labor bosses to show that they really are FOR the workers by allowing this chance for those workers to get justly compensated for their extra efforts; but I’ll have a better chance at a Pulitzer prize; and that is totally impossible.
However, if nothing else, it will show the workers how tenuous their relationship is with the labor union bosses.
Gerald A. “Jerry” McConnell, 92, of Hampton, died Sunday, February 19, 2017, at the Merrimack Valley Hospice House in Haverhill, Mass., surrounded by his loved ones. He was born May 27, 1924 in Altoona, Pa., the fifth son of the late John E. and Grace (Fletcher) McConnell.
Jerry served ten years with the US Marine Corps and participated in the landing against Japanese Army on Guadalcanal and another ten years with the US Air Force. After moving to Hampton in 1957 he started his community activities serving in many capacities.
He shared 72 years of marriage with his wife Betty P. (Hamilton) McConnell. In addition to his wife, family members include nieces and nephews.
