What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Business, Economics, and Taxes: Capitalism. Yay? >=(

Status
Not open for further replies.
SJHovey said:
That's not necessarily true. An employer can decide that certain tasks are going to be performed by outside contractors, and that the employer will no longer have paid positions performing those duties. Lots of examples of that, with school bus drivers, professional cleaning companies instead of in-house maintenance, food service caterers instead of employee cooks, etc...

If an employer chooses to do that, they must engage in "effects" negotiations with the union, which won't necessarily stop the move, but requires the employer to at least discuss with departing employees things like severance pay, etc...
Click to expand...
Except the union has to agree to it. We went through a similar thing when the company tried to contract out our deicing work. Because we disputed it the company ended up paying a contractor to deice and employees to sit and watch. Needless to say the company didn’t try to contract out again.

I’m gonna guess the union left a stupid clause in the CBA that’s allowing this.
 
Jimjamesak said:
Except the union has to agree to it. We went through a similar thing when the company tried to contract out our deicing work. Because we disputed it the company ended up paying a contractor to deice and employees to sit and watch. Needless to say the company didn’t try to contract out again.

I’m gonna guess the union left a stupid clause in the CBA that’s allowing this.
Click to expand...

I don't think the union has to agree to it.

I think it works this way. I think that before the company makes the final decision to subcontract out the work, they must notify the union and they must bargain over it. Usually what happens is the employer shows the economic benefits of no longer having those employee costs (wages, benefits, etc...) and maybe more importantly, no longer having costs with respect to the delivery fleet (liability insurance, vehicle expense, etc...). The employer can usually show there is a substantial economic benefit to the company, but at least give the union an opportunity to negotiate on that by perhaps cutting wages or something else.

I don't think the union just has absolute veto power over it occurring. The mistake that employers make is their failure to negotiate. They get the cart ahead of the horse and start making the changes. Sometimes employers can get around it by suggesting that negotiations would have been futile. For example, the savings to the company would require a 75% wage reduction by the employees, who would never accept that.

But I don't think the union gets to just decide that once an employer has a certain department or provides certain services, they can never get rid of them or subcontract them out. I've seen the subcontracting happen way too often to believe that.
 
SJHovey said:
I don't think the union has to agree to it.

I think it works this way. I think that before the company makes the final decision to subcontract out the work, they must notify the union and they must bargain over it. Usually what happens is the employer shows the economic benefits of no longer having those employee costs (wages, benefits, etc...) and maybe more importantly, no longer having costs with respect to the delivery fleet (liability insurance, vehicle expense, etc...). The employer can usually show there is a substantial economic benefit to the company, but at least give the union an opportunity to negotiate on that by perhaps cutting wages or something else.

I don't think the union just has absolute veto power over it occurring. The mistake that employers make is their failure to negotiate. They get the cart ahead of the horse and start making the changes. Sometimes employers can get around it by suggesting that negotiations would have been futile. For example, the savings to the company would require a 75% wage reduction by the employees, who would never accept that.

But I don't think the union gets to just decide that once an employer has a certain department or provides certain services, they can never get rid of them or subcontract them out. I've seen the subcontracting happen way too often to believe that.
Click to expand...

Only if it's written that way in the CBA. The CBA "should" spell out job responsibilities and requirements on who does them. My contract has two sections committed to it.
 
Yeah it all depends on the CBA There is no hard and fast rules on this stuff. (I am in 3 different unions that all have different style contracts)
 
I still can't believe Prop 22 passed in California of all places, and by the margins that it did.

Of course, California also voted for Prop 8 in 2008, so I guess all you need is a great marketing team.
 
I remember articles coming out that Prop 8 passed because Obama brought out a high percentage of Black Voters...Black Voters tend to be rather conservative on the Gay issues.
 
MissThundercat said:
Black voters REALLY frown on the Gay and the Trans. Look at the uproar over Dwayne Wade's trans child.
Click to expand...

Yup, Blacks suck on social issues. Outside of the educated they've got fundy brainlessness bad and the only thing stopping them from voting for TEH BABEEZ!!!1!1 is the GOP's incredibly virulent level of racism.

Hey, the Nazis missed out on a lot of Jewish votes, too. It's the built-in self-abuse of reactionary political movements. Conservatism leads to religious and social purification in order to keep assuaging the butthurt of their loser base that they are Special just because of their skin color and magical myths. The Right is the ultimate identity politics.
 
Last edited:
Very early in the day, but the market seems to like the results from Georgia despite a split congress being preferred.

Potential of a third stimulus, and adults finally in charge, is likely causing the run.
 
aparch said:
Very early in the day, but the market seems to like the results from Georgia despite a split congress being preferred.

Potential of a third stimulus, and adults finally in charge, is likely causing the run.
Click to expand...

Perhaps when things have been going to hell a united government that will actually do stuff is seen as a good thing.
 
Business/tech related. A tech manager in my company sent out a Happy Birthday email to one of her coworkers. She included three different distribution lists on her message, and her own direct manager. Now we're in the process of pulling together our emergency tech response team to deal with the Reply All storm that's threatening to take down a portion of our email services. We don't need to be hacked to be brought down, we just need to keep hiring Reply-All Idiots...and well wishers.
 
St. Clown said:
Business/tech related. A tech manager in my company sent out a Happy Birthday email to one of her coworkers. She included three different distribution lists on her message, and her own direct manager. Now we're in the process of pulling together our emergency tech response team to deal with the Reply All storm that's threatening to take down a portion of our email services. We don't need to be hacked to be brought down, we just need to keep hiring Reply-All Idiots...and well wishers.
Click to expand...

rotflmao
 
St. Clown said:
Business/tech related. A tech manager in my company sent out a Happy Birthday email to one of her coworkers. She included three different distribution lists on her message, and her own direct manager. Now we're in the process of pulling together our emergency tech response team to deal with the Reply All storm that's threatening to take down a portion of our email services. We don't need to be hacked to be brought down, we just need to keep hiring Reply-All Idiots...and well wishers.
Click to expand...

I HATE the reply all button. Living in Idaho, most people I work with are already extremely computer illiterate (none of my employees understands word or basic excel), and all of them type via the hunt and peck method. We got a new phone system set up recently and had to set up some new passwords for an app portion of it. One guy decided he needed a password that was at least 20 characters long. And then he could never seem to type it the exact same when having to confirm it. It was agony trying to help him and watch him hunt and peck for a solid 20 minutes before we got the entire process complete.

I get several emails a day that were "reply all" when they did not need to be. But thankfully not to the point you describe above.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top