The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

Who owns the job
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1073		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Ladas [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 8:58 am ]
Post subject:  Who owns the job
We have danced around this subject a lot over the years, but this WSJ article regarding some new, proposed regulations from the DoL really has me wondering if this administration isn't, despite their objections, hardcore socialist and deliberately prolonging the economic problems to increase pressure on fundamental changes to the underpinnings of this country.

I would love to hear from our more reasonable members that support these proposals, if any, as to why they support it, and who they think owns jobs... the employee or the employer.
Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 9:21 am ]
Post subject: 
I support this proposal. There are so many transparency requirements on the Union side that its time to balance the equation.
Author:  Ladas [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:33 am ]
Post subject: 
1) Which proposal, or all of them in general?

2) Why should an employer be required to disclose legal advice about operations of the business to employees?

3) What regulations require transparency on the part of Unions? I cannot find any outside of some financial records that merely state what they collected in dues, not how the money was spent (unlike corporate statements), their assests, etc.
Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 11:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re:
Ladas wrote:
1) Which proposal, or all of them in general?

2) Why should an employer be required to disclose legal advice about operations of the business to employees?

3) What regulations require transparency on the part of Unions? I cannot find any outside of some financial records that merely state what they collected in dues, not how the money was spent (unlike corporate statements), their assests, etc.


The entire process of Unionizing from start to finish is transparent. It's been a few years but I graduated with a degree in HR and there was always a very heavy emphasis on the organizing drive and it's components. You can find out more about it here.
Author:  Arathain Kelvar [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 12:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
Jobs are owned equally. It's a contract between parties.
Author:  Ladas [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 12:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
There is not necessarily a contract, and at no point should the employer be forced to act if there is one or disclose any of the information these proposals request.

The job does not exist without someone exercising entrepreneurial initiative, so pending a contract that gives a specific person the right to occupy that job under certain conditions, the employee never "owns" the job and has no legal claim to it.
Author:  Ladas [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 12:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:
Hopwin wrote:
The entire process of Unionizing from start to finish is transparent. It's been a few years but I graduated with a degree in HR and there was always a very heavy emphasis on the organizing drive and it's components. You can find out more about it here.

Again, I ask the same questions you declined to answer.

Additionally, that isn't transparency, that is a specific process based upon specific laws and doesn't begin to address the operation of the Union, the legal workings, finances, etc... all information being proposed as a requirement for businesses to supply.
Author:  Micheal [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
The transparency being suggested is in how the employer deals with the Union and is in regards to the advice given to the employer as to how to deal with the Union. It doesn't seem to hit on the day to day running of the business.

The entrepreneur can have the most wonderful idea in the world, but without the workers to make it happen its just an idea. A successful company is the fusion of a good idea/product and the owner and workers combining to make a product of value. Abuse of the workforce has historically been rampant without unions. Many companies that toe the line and treat their workers well do so because they do not want to become unionized and know that the Unions will move inif they do not play fairly with their employees. Occasionally, Unions move in anyway. Requiring companies that are unionized to be aboveboard with their dealings with the Unions is coming about because many have not dealt fairly with their employees.

The adversarial relationship between employers and Unions leads to both sides wanting to hide unfavorable information from their counterparts across the negotiating table. As long as the regulations require the same disclosure on the part of both sides, I'm most likely going to be in favor of it.

I'm not sure how I feel about the proposals right now, only having skimmed them for the basics, but I lean toward supporting them until I know more.
Author:  Beryllin [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Who owns the job
My initial take on this is that it's a great mechanism to send more companies and the jobs overseas.
Author:  DFK! [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Who owns the job
Beryllin wrote:
My initial take on this is that it's a great mechanism to send more companies and the jobs overseas.



This.
Author:  Uncle Fester [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
The employer owns the job, he created the position...and if he is an idiot he will be be able to fill it.
Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 5:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:
Ladas wrote:
Additionally, that isn't transparency, that is a specific process based upon specific laws and doesn't begin to address the operation of the Union, the legal workings, finances, etc... all information being proposed as a requirement for businesses to supply.

Since the law referenced in the article only pertains to advise provided by consultants on keeping the Union out that is all I addressed with the link which explains the organizing drive (attempt by employees to bring a Union in).

In order to move forward with the process you must either gather a petition which contains the signatures of 30% of the bargaining unit (which must be verifiable) to trigger an election or collect union cards (which must be verifiable) from 50% of the bargaining unit to certify a Union without elections in certain states
Quote:
The union must also submit a list of the employee positions in the proposed community of interest, even if the union has not been able to obtain signatures from all of those employees. The University must then submit a list of names of the persons holding those positions.


The only privacy is the secret ballot election.
Author:  Monte [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 8:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
Oh, innocent corporation. How oppressed you are by the horrid masses.
Author:  Micheal [ Tue Dec 08, 2009 8:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
There are times Monte, there are times I just want to cal you Sarah Bernhardt.

Not saying I disagree with you on this one, but you do go for the dramatic flare predictably.
Author:  Wwen [ Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re:
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
Jobs are owned equally. It's a contract between parties.


This essentially. When taking a job, your employer is the customer and you are selling your time and labor to meet their needs. If both parties agree that the amount paid is equitable then it's all gravy.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/