Submitted by ycleptKyara t3_10vf5cs in Maine
Comments
intensifiedclicking t1_j7ip1p8 wrote
Have some good boi points
rectumlike t1_j7kbns9 wrote
Deli, Meat dept, bottle returns, bakery, they're horrible at all of it lol.
Alphatron1 t1_j7num3e wrote
Lol. My deli in Clinton Massachusetts had reduced hours for ages. closed at 4 most days. However as an employee of Shaws for 5 years I will not shop there unless I have to. Also the first video you have to watch is about how bad unionizing is
PGids t1_j7iap4g wrote
> Unions have become huge bureaucracies, often totally out of touch with the needs and desires of their membership.
If youāre in a local with more than a hundred people, I canāt sit here with a straight face and say itās incorrect. Iāve been in two IAM locals and currently in a USW local, there is more fuckery in this local Iām currently in than both of the IAM locals combined. Being unionized is almost always a good thing, but I can definitely tell in here who has and has not worked in a Union environment; itās absolutely not all sunshine and rainbows like some people paint it as.
One day last spring one maintenance department got an unplanned, non negotiated, outside of contract $6 raise. This pushed their pay gap from the industry standard of $3-5 to almost $10. This was for all pay grades in that department. Roughly 290 days later the rest of maintenance got $2.65. Iām absolutely topped out as far as pay goes in my current position and someone can take a bottom rung trainee bid with the other department and be making within few cents of me. A level 1 trainee making virtually the same as a journeyman; while both are paying the same dues to the same local. Thatās fucked up.
Iām rambling but point being: being organized does not make a workplace immune from stupid shit and nepotism
flat_broke t1_j7iprqr wrote
This ^ for all of you out there who default to unions are the best because the political party I like says so. Some pros and cons from my own experience as a due paying member for 8 years at a shipping company.
Some Pros: Guaranteed raises albeit very small each year with a larger cost of living adjustment every 5 years or so. Better medical and dental benefits than what you would otherwise have. Your seniority means something, everything actually.
Some cons: That lazy sob gets paid just as much or maybe more than you if they are more senior. Many people will take the āIām paid by the hourā approach and the culture where you work will suffer. They will even get mad at you for working too fast. This will impact your mood regularly and youāll have confrontations about this with some regularity. These people are very difficult to fire.
FightTomorrow t1_j7j2ma9 wrote
Where do I sign up
flat_broke t1_j7kgm9w wrote
It can absolutely be worth it for you depending on your situation. Everyone should always do what is best for them and their family. Note those guaranteed raises are like .04 cents an hour usually graduating on a scale over 8 years or whatever the length of the collective bargaining agreement is up to something like $1 an hour. Maybe like .04, .06, .09, .13, .24, .37, .65, .97. So over 8 years your pay increases by $2.55 dollars an hour in total plus some cost of living bump at some point in there. The cola adjustment is not typically matched to inflation but it is typically your most significant raise.
Keep in mind you donāt get this for free you lose some percentage of your pay to the union in dues for this service, it was 7% in my case. I cant recall if it was a percentage fee or just a flat fee but i made like $180 a paycheck and $14 went to the teamsters.
FightTomorrow t1_j7khq1u wrote
Ill be honest. I was being a bit facetious. Iām actually already union and we see way larger performance-driven raises than what you lay out. This year it was 9%. In my experience the union is a matter of protection against stagnant wages, with the types of raises youāve shown to be for the lowest performing members.
It could also be that your union blows goats. They are not all equal. Maybe run for the next election?
flat_broke t1_j7kj879 wrote
There was no consideration of performance at all. The raises you get are laid out in the collective bargaining agreement contract for every non-management person in the company and completely transparent. I suspect a grocery store union would be extremely similar. Mine was Teamsters so not small also mine was from 2004-2012. There were other jobs in the company with higher rises and higher pay like driving and delivering packages or driving a semi truck. These kinds of higher paying positions are going to be limited in number at a grocery store.
FightTomorrow t1_j7kjr4g wrote
Iām sorry to hear that brother.
Comprehensive-Act-74 t1_j7m4uge wrote
This is a false equivalence. A union might be out of touch with the needs and desires of the membership, but all but the smallest companies do not care about the needs or desires of the employees.
tobascodagama t1_j7m8oij wrote
And by "the smallest companies", what that means is "companies where there are no employees other than the owners".
enoutnos t1_j7nf6df wrote
Why did they get that raise? Did the company you work for have a hard time filling the position or retaining retiring workers?
I donāt believe any company would just hand out a $6/hr across the board raise to one department just for shits and giggles.
I think Iād be happy for them and maybe start trying to organize within my own department to get the company to realize we deserve more.
HAMMERMAIN73 t1_j7hl1mz wrote
That is a sector in dire need of organization. It's just the people who provide us our food no big deal.
radbuoi t1_j7incqf wrote
If they say you donāt need a union, you need a union.
Metal_Worldly t1_j7hbz7t wrote
I worked at a large hotel and they had an all staff meeting one day about not unionizing.
bigbluedoor t1_j7hp6ru wrote
Last year the NLRB said this is illegal. Unfortunately thereās not an effective enforcement mechanism for this, so it continues.
Comrade_Spood t1_j7i1kf2 wrote
I love their lying. They will not respect employees decision to unionize, it's not a preference it's a requirement. I wish I still had my new employee papers cause I remember a part that was about how it was against policy to unionize.
NotAMainer t1_j7j8frk wrote
Unions are good if they have a legitimate need. My paternal grandfather was union (he actually helped organize) down in Philly where he worked for the Budd plant making trolleys and train cars back in the 40's-60's. When he died 1 1/2 hours before he was due to retire at 62 (cancer) his union stepped in and made Budd honor his full pension so my grandmother would have support. The company was gonna be like "Hey, he died before retirement so you're SOOL, lady."
When they're out of touch with the locals though...
My *other* grandfather was a trucker, working for a small company near Philly (North Penn Transfer). The company hit hard times, so ownership stepped in and said "Hey, the only way we can survive is if you guys take a pay cut until we can hopefully turn things around. Can you vote on it and get back to us? The only alternative is we'd have to shut down operations."
So the employees voted and agreed to the paycut... until word was sent up the chain of command to the union HQ who said it would set a bad precedent and blocked it.
Company basically said WELP and shut down and everyone lost their jobs as a result.
Its most definitely NOT a black and white issue.
eljefino t1_j7ikvea wrote
My local hannaford posts on my town facebook group trying to hire people for pharmacy techs and other positions.
I troll them HARD about how allowing unions would bring them the needed staff, as well as trying to get them to commit to a starting salary for any of their several generic entry level positions. They won't mention any sort of hourly rate-- I assume because they have existing people working for less, who would get "uppity" if they found out new hires were getting more.
Sometimes they lock the comments, LOL.
TarantinoFan23 t1_j7lnj0v wrote
A hero
ycleptKyara OP t1_j861c3q wrote
gonna do the same. that's awesome
trunksshinohara t1_j7ldose wrote
If an organization you work for tells you. You don't need a union. Then you 100% need a union.
ApprehensiveFlan3657 t1_j7kkhp4 wrote
rectumlike t1_j7kbhow wrote
if ANY other grocery chain wanted to expand into Maine that would be the end of Hanifords.
kdubee t1_j7pge3s wrote
Onboarding at hannafords they go over why unions are bad and to not speak about unions at work
MaryBitchards t1_j7knuiv wrote
Ugggggghhhhhhh.
flippinhot t1_j8cztw2 wrote
Love that pyramid, where the union dues are the biggest issue. Because managment cares deeply about their employees being ripped off. Deeply, i say. And what's the best part, is that the people who would benefit the most from a union, listen to the execs. "I think for myself, which is why i only get my info from Fox News and Facebook memes."
New_Sun6390 t1_j7ikza3 wrote
The biggest issue I have with unions is the standardization of wages. The slackers get paid the same as the hardest workers. One person calls out frequently, does sloppy work, and has a bad attitude, while another worker is more reliable, has better quality work and a good attitude. It is not right that they both get paid the same.
Additionally, I have seen union members file frivolous grievances. A guy blatantly and repeatedly violates safety rules, gets written up on said violations, and files a grievance over getting written up. And good luck firing a union member, regardless of their work record.
I can see where unions played an important role in workers getting fair compensation and safe working conditions, but I question the benefits today
TheRealRolepgeek t1_j7l5v0y wrote
Have you actually worked for companies like Hannaford where they actually pay their hardest workers more, instead of just piling more responsibilities on them for no increase in pay?
[deleted] t1_j7hpjte wrote
[deleted]
Guygan t1_j7kcn4u wrote
> Then they got woke, brought politics to grocery
Lol wut?
Is this some kind of weird parody?
[deleted] t1_j7hidhn wrote
[deleted]
FightTomorrow t1_j7j3d4h wrote
From my own union experiences, this is probably the biggest over-simplification that anti-union propagandists put out there. At both UFCW and USW, termination for performance was not uncommon. Is it harder than non-unionized? Probably so, in most cases. But Iāve never seen why thatās a bad thing.
enoutnos t1_j7nddwo wrote
Right, god forbid supervisors must prove a track record of poor performance before termination. Itās typical that the terms arenāt even unreasonable.
It just requires proper documentation, proof of training and understanding, and some sort of intervention.
[deleted] t1_j7hcacb wrote
[deleted]