Millions of new caddies.

…was a very, very bad idea.

Whoever enabled that tiny little marxist takeover of the government should be strung up…and I don’t mean figuratively.

I didn’t see the article (reportedly in either the Chicago Tribune or Chicago Sun-Times), but I’m told that union political “volunteers” are becoming quite frustrated when out knocking on doors to hand out the Democrat’s campaign material. Seems they’ve noticed a large and growing number of family television sets tuned in to Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly. Heh.

Yeah, I read that site sometimes, and it riles me up a lot.

They had a post about some knifesmiths who made a company,a nd then made a tenuous jump to unions being good…not sure what it meant, but I wrote some stuff, that I think is sort of pertinent here:

Did Unions pick up the slack of their own accord and through their dues to improve the skilly of their workforce, when companies stopped that training? Or did they use more of those dues for political lobbying?

Are unions having internal prcedures to measure the skill sets of their workers, and improve those who are lacking,a nd promote those with more skill up in the ranks? sorry, I forgot, seniority is still th guiding principal?

If unions were truly guilds, measuring the skilly, providing transparency to potential clients (be they consumers or employers), guaranteeing, with liability the quality of their members work and skill sets, then they would not have the reputation as the great satan. It was tough to get into a guild…the sort of tough that would violate most labor practice standards in the first world today…unpaid apprenticeships and the like.

If union made, or union certified means something other than someone who gets good benefits or bargains collectively, then that is a stamp of approval,a dn would be good marketing. Like Kosher Hot dogs…. If a union makes sure no one on my shop floor is slacking off, or underqualified, then lots of employers woudl welcome them. but if a union is someone who puts all the workers into one “collective” and thinks they gain leverage tha way, don’t be surprised if I want to pick and choose who I want to hire, promote and train as individuals.

________

It wasn’t just Henry Ford. Look all around the world at the turn of last centruy up through the first world war…lots of industrial companies took pride in the gains the workforce made. I think of Siemensstadt in Berlin, I think of Lawrence MA.

But as with anything, when some gain, others see it, and think “I can do that for less”. In the Us there was plenty of wage arbitrage BEFORE the idea of outsourcing started. Workers in Tenesse, the carolina’s and the like touted their lower labour costs and cheaper goods to people in the northeast, and the northeast lost jobs in mills, tailoring, shoemaking, furniture and the like to the cheap southern labour. that the chines are doing the same to improve their lot in life…who can blame em.

As a business owner, I would also contend that most business owners like to see their workforce better themselves in life. I am happy when I get a call from the bank for reference on some 28 year old who is buying thier first house.

But the supposed decline from labours glory days might also coincide with when people abdicated their responsibilities to the government. When teh government instituted social security, people did not see the need to provide pension systems, etc. It reminds me of how the rate of chartiable giving is higher in the range of 3-6times in the US as a % of income than in europe. In Europe people assume the government has programs to take care of the social ills that charity targets. So that might alleviate their conscience.

But what I fail to see from organized labour is the service they are providing the employer. Are they training, are they recruiting, are they screenign potential hires. Or are they in an old fashioned marxist confrontational role of trying to get the most for themselves? If that is their attitude going into negotiations, then they shouldn’t be surprised that the other side has the same ambitions.

In my company 20% of profits are paid out to all non management staff. That meant in 2007, the average bonus was about 40% of their fixed yearly salary, but 2009 it was down to ZERO, because we made no money. some yelled and screamed, but most understood this was the deal going in…wages were comptetitive, and allow us to be competitive. As far as is possible, their jobs are safe, and if we make money we all make money, but when we don’t make money, we either shut down, or we all take the cut.

It looks like we’ll make some money again this year, and the bonuses should be back to about 15% of yearly salary, but they know I can’t guarnatee it for the future.

I’d like to meet the union that would come to me with such a sensible solution.