Technology Rewrites the Book

mdoneil says:

Wrong way
There is a right way and a wrong way to go about things. Demonstrating at a public meeting is not the right way. Interrupting a meeting is not the way.

Since the employees are government employees the NLRB rules don’t apply to them. They can sign all the cards they want, the Board does not have to recognize them or recognize the union.

How can unionization possibly benefit the library, a library already in dire financial straits?

Some quotes from the website amaze me:

IMCPL employees want to form a union to have the power to bargain collectively for our wages, working conditions and benefits. Currently, employees have no part in deciding policies or pay.

They should not have any part in deciding policies or pay. They are not the board, they are not management. They have no role in deciding these things. They can voice their opinion to management or the board, and I am certain that if management is able they will consider them very closely. But when it comes to closing Sunday or paying the shelvers more, the shelvers get the short end of the stick. Sorry about that but life is not always fair.

Consider the following list of things we have given up in the past few years due to having no voice in our workplace:

The shift differential.
12 days of sick time reduced to 10.
Sunday overtime.
Retiree benefits.
Red circling.
Longevity pay.
Annual cost of living raises – leaving us with only merit increases, which are subjective.
Increases in our healthcare to maintain the same coverage, with decreases in benefits.

Shift differential -> if you don’t like the pay go get another job.
10 days of sick time -> geez how sick can you be? FMLA should cover this as well.
Sunday overtime -> see shift differential.
Retirement Benefits -> Open a 403b, an IRA or something like that, or get a job with retirement benefits.
Red Circling -> you should be happy they give you a job if they don’t need you in your current position. If you don’t like the decrease in pay, you got it…look for another job.
Longevity pay -> extra pay simply for working a long time. Where I come from we use merit raises for that.
Annual raises not tied to performance -> Oh, thats a good idea pay you more simply for showing up and doing a crappy job. Merit raises or nothing.
Insurance changes -> no crap blame the trial lawyers. We all have the same problem, public or private, union or not. Trial lawyers have sued healthcare providers so much it now costs thirty four dollars for a tetanus shot that costs less than a buck to make. Blame John Edwards and his cronies who lie about Cerebral Palsy being iatrogenic.

The best one is: “According to the U.S. Department of Labor, union workers earn on average 28% higher wages than non-union workers.”
Holy geez, how can this possibly benefit a library bleeding red ink. If the union gets in the people who are making ten or twelve dollars an hour will be unemployed. I don’t see that being the greater good.

mdoneil says:

Re:Staff Demonstrate for Union in Indianapolis
No, the taxpayers are paying for the board’s decisions. I as a taxpayer would want to be as frugal as possible while still maintaining as many services as possible.

As a taxpayer I cannot see how giving people 28% more money would achieve that goal. There are other jobs. If you don’t like it at the library there are hundreds of people who will send their CV’s in today for those jobs.

mdoneil says:

Re:Outrageous!
I bet they are using union labor.

mdoneil says:

Re:Wrong way
Lower half of the food chain. On what do you base that assumption? Idiots who assume because I have a graduate degree in library science I must make a paltry income, or that I am in a position that could be unionized amuse me.

You are correct that I don’t understand what you perceive as the benefits of a union. However your perception is far from reality, and thus incomprehensible to me. There are few if any benefits, and many detriments to unions, perhaps if you could see how they have lost their effectiveness over the last few decades you would see clearly how unions now serve only to exacerbate existing problems.

If you were to visit LISNews often you would know that I don’t parrot anyone’s views. These views I express are entirely my own. I am opposed to unions because of their graft, corruption and fat-cat leaders who don’t have the best interest of the rank and file at heart. Just like Communism, unions sound good, and look good on paper, but when put into effect they are abject failures.