Union workers picket at Arrowhead

by THE_TRUTH on Apr 1, 2009 8:09 AM CDT Comment 42 comments

http://www.kctv5.com/news/19062527/detail.html

I wish it were a joke. So much for "all the confidence spewed by the press" about renegotiating the last 2 weeks.

The Unions know they have the stadiums at their mercy. The agreement was poorly arranged, they should ahve had a no-strike clause when getting bids for the work.

The union's business manager told KCTV5 News that the sticking points were money and contract length.

Other unions at the stadium who have agreed to tentative agreements are honoring the strikes. They said they won't cross the picket line to work at the stadiums

The Sports Authority said things will be set for Royals Opening Day at the K next week, regardless of a strike. But improvements are far from done on Arrowhead Stadium, and it could affect the start of the football season for the Chiefs

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.

1 recs | Comment 42 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Weird

The link I posted in the morning update said the two sides had reached an agreement late last night.

I’m not worried one bit about this.

Arrowhead Pride

by Chris Thorman on Apr 1, 2009 8:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

980 reported that everyone but the concrete workers reached an agreement.

I, for one, can’t wait to see this town turn on organized labor.

by HIV 2 Elway on Apr 1, 2009 8:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Different Unions

The Cement Masons didn’t reach an agreement therefor the other Unions won’t cross even tho they agreed to a new contract.

BTW…the cops are there:

Bill Parcell’s: "You are what your record says you are."

"My job is not to collect talent, but to build a team. Individuals make the Pro Bowl. Teams win championships. That is our goal."—Chiefs GM Scott Pioli.

by THE_TRUTH on Apr 1, 2009 8:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oops..here's the link

http://www.kmbc.com/news/19062799/detail.html

I guess it’s getting messy.

Bill Parcell’s: "You are what your record says you are."

"My job is not to collect talent, but to build a team. Individuals make the Pro Bowl. Teams win championships. That is our goal."—Chiefs GM Scott Pioli.

by THE_TRUTH on Apr 1, 2009 8:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bunch of self entitled bitches.

by HIV 2 Elway on Apr 1, 2009 8:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

According To Your Link

The concrete workers already have a tentative deal in place, so this will likely defuse quickly.

Predictions for 2009

1. Todd Haley's going to struggle with managing his staff in his rookie year as head coach.
2. The Lions will draft Matt Stafford, the Rams will draft Jason Smith, and the Chiefs will draft either Aaron Curry or Eugene Monroe.
3. Maurice Carthon will be the most hated man on the Chiefs' coaching staff within two years.

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I just rechecked the link and it was updated after my initial post

Initially it just mentioned the picketing and police having to respond at the stadium. I’m guessing they came to a consensus in a matter of a couple of hours during the picketing. I just don’t get why they couldn’t have just done this 2 weeks ago or last night at the latest?
Each side knew what the other was going to do…what a bunch of nonsense.

Bill Parcell’s: "You are what your record says you are."

"My job is not to collect talent, but to build a team. Individuals make the Pro Bowl. Teams win championships. That is our goal."—Chiefs GM Scott Pioli.

by THE_TRUTH on Apr 1, 2009 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's a

“who blinks first” scenario. Companies had to see if they would do it, union(s) had to show they would.

My crystal ball says Jay Cutler cries himself to sleep every night.

by IISaiNtII on Apr 1, 2009 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Being only one union didn't get a new contract

I’m not worried about it. The stoppage of the others will put added pressure on the SLU for the concrete guys to get a deal done with the companies. I’d guess 3 days max.

My crystal ball says Jay Cutler cries himself to sleep every night.

by IISaiNtII on Apr 1, 2009 8:34 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

The Good Thing About A Recession

Those construction workers likely need their paychecks as bad as or worse than the company needs the work to continue on that project because of the recession.

Stupid fucking unions.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 9:23 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Call me uneducated on the subject of unions

Why do you say they’re not a good thing?

by Joel Thorman on Apr 1, 2009 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

They're just outdated...

They made great strides years ago in getting fair wages and safe working conditions, but are now obscolete do to agencies like OSHA. They strong arm companies into unsustainable labor contracts that cripple the company for years.
We’re seeing the highest unemployement levels many of us (and I’m refering to us youngsters) have ever seen and they now feel they are entitled to $2 an hour raise? Great PR.

by HIV 2 Elway on Apr 1, 2009 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

case in point

Auto workers union. Due to the union required yearly wage increases the average salary of a forklift driver is $96,000.
Do you think driving a fork lift around the factory floor is such a “high skilled” job that it deserves a $96,000 a year salary? I sure as hell don’t. On top of that, even if the auto manufactors were to lay off all unionized workers they would still be on the hook for upwards of 70% of their salaries. That’s right, they have to pay them for a set period of time even if they lay them off.

The sheer cost of the unionized labor in the U.S. is one of the main driving forces that pushes “blue collar” jobs over seas. Why build anything here when the unions will blackmail your company for insane wages and then use the union dues to bribe the poloticians into supporting the union?

Unionized labor is broken. As a business owner I would follow the WAL MART model from a few years back. When ONE of their 5,000+ locations had it’s workers unionize and demand an increase to min. $12 an hour + FREE full benefits (while the min. wage was $5.25) Wal Mart decided not to fight the unions. They didn’t fire everyone and spend money battling in court. They simply closed the Wal Mart. They argued the profit potential of the location, but bottom line is they would rather just shut down the store than see the union get a foothold in the company.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Apr 1, 2009 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just curious

Where can one train as a forklift driver? And is anyone hiring?

Blame my wife!
Waiting until August!

by sir eccles on Apr 1, 2009 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Forklifts

I drove one once when I worked in a dairy…it took all of one day to learn how to operate and drive it safely. If I’d known I could get $96,000 a year for it, I’d have made them print me out a certificate.

Primetime, if you’re looking for reasons why I have problems with unions, here’s a good website that covers some of them. But I agree with HIV’s assessment as well…they once served a purpose in society, but they’ve long since outlived their usefulness and more often they’re a drain on the companies that use them and the economy at large. Not to mention that they pay off politicians to create legislation that forces companies to accede to their demands and excludes non-union labor from the workplace (basically forcing employees to join a union if they want to get a job at all, even if the employee wishes to negotiate just for himself).

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

So teachers unions are the devil too?

When they make $28k / year and are in debt (if paying for college themselves) double to triple that amount trying to help the young people of this country become intelligent?

Unions aren’t all bad, and are meant to do good. Unfortunately, it only takes one bad apple to make the whole batch look bad.

My crystal ball says Jay Cutler cries himself to sleep every night.

by IISaiNtII on Apr 1, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes...Teachers' Unions Are Bad

My brother’s a teacher and he bitches about them constantly.

When they make $28k / year and are in debt (if paying for college themselves) double to triple that amount trying to help the young people of this country become intelligent?

Nothing in that comment is an argument in favor of the unions. If someone’s making $28K a year at a job, they’re free to try and renegotiate their contract with their employer (and the employer is free to either pay them more, not pay them more, or replace them). Salary is an agreement arrived at by negotiation between employer and employee, but it’s the employer’s money that’s being paid out…the employer does not owe the employee X number of dollars for the job just because the guy’s got debts or sees himself as underpaid or thinks his work is somehow indispensable to society.

Unions aren’t all bad, and are meant to do good.

I’ll agree with the first half of that statement, but say “not always” on the second half. I think the NFLPA under Gene Upshaw is probably the best example of a “good” union…it butted heads with the NFL to resolve disputes when appropriate, but also acted as best it could as a partner to improve the NFL’s worth overall when times were good. I’d argue that the majority of unions don’t do that…particularly the Teamsters, UAW, AFL-CIO. Most of them are simply trying to gouge the system through coercive actions and aren’t trying to act in their membership’s best interests. That’s why all of those organizations have, at various times, simply been arms of the Mafia and organized crime. They’re not designed to protect workers’ rights, they’re designed to enrich the union bosses even if it means compromising workers’ rights.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Clarification

the employer does not owe the employee X number of dollars for the job just because the guy’s got debts or sees himself as underpaid or thinks his work is somehow indispensable to society, unless the employer sees the utility that worker provides as worth the increase in salary.

It’s the worker’s job to convince the employer that he’s worth more money. It’s not the employer’s obligation to pay him more just because the worker thinks he’s worth more.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

What teachers make $28k a year?

The last average that i heard for the country way $46,000 for teachers with no Dr. degree and almost double that for those that have one.
$46,000 divided by 9 months of work = $5111.12 per month; which translates to $61,333 per year.

Even if it were $28k that would still be $37,333 per year. Are you going to live like a king for $37k a year? No. Can you live on $37k a year? Yes, lots of people live on less. If you want to make more money then continue your education. Get your masters of doctorate degree and double your income.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Apr 1, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

My Brother's Complaints

Center more around the teacher’s union making it more difficult for the school to do their job effectively because they’re too busy protecting the lowest-common denominator of teachers. My brother is a math teacher and from what I can tell a pretty well-regarded one. If he wants he can work for a private school for a lot more money…unfortunately for him he’s not as Darwinian as me and chooses to work in public schools because he believes it’s a benefit to society (I suspect he’s never read Ayn Rand or Milton Friedman). :) But he wonders why his job should made tougher to protect the teachers who probably deserve to get canned.

I’m hoping that someday he figures this out and decides to take one of those private school jobs. :)

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

my first year out of college I was a teacher

my starting salary was $23k. hardest job I’ve ever had. masters degrees typically take 1-2 years full-time, and doctorates another 2-5 years (depending on your focus). I don’t know how much longer they take when you’re only in class part-time, cuz you’re teaching class full-time.
***BIG variable was that I was a religion teacher at a private high school. I have some acquaintances that teach middle-school in Shawnee Mission district here in KC, they started out around $30k I think.

also, random note, don’t let anyone EVER fool you into thinking teaching is “part-time” or easy, or a short day. if you’re doing a good job you have lesson-planning for each individual class, test/quiz make-up and grading, plus you have to come early and stay late to monitor the halls, or meet w/ students/parents, etc. Plus the day is just freaking tough. Imagine yourself leading 5-7 meetings a day, where you are the sole person in charge of the meeting (most of the time, except for group work), the meeting participants may or may not have a clue what you’re talking about depending on whether they did their reading/homework/paid attention, and its your job to make them learn the subject matter. Then repeat it all the next day, teaching new subject matter. Trust me when I say, good teachers work their ASSES off.

by thehulk on Apr 1, 2009 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I Wasn't Trying To Bag On Teachers When I Say That

I realize teaching is tough…everyone in my immediate family except my dad and me were/are teachers (and I worked as a trainer for much of the time I was in the Army). The point was more about how unions don’t actually help the teachers do their jobs and often hinder schools from functioning effectively.

But then that’s just what happens with a public education system.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Same here. Not saying a teacher has an easy job....

but the teachers union doesn’t make it better.
It allows teachers that don’t cut the mustard to continue sucking off the teet because the school board can’t fire them outright uless they meet the union regs.

23k for 9 months work is not lighting the world on fire, but for an entry level in year 1 of seniority it’s a lot better than a bunch of other jobs. And with the wage scales and “required” pay increases based on senority that the union’s achieve (raises based on not being fired, instead of on merit or job performance) most teachers are making decent money by year 3 or 4.

Everyone starts out as the low man/woman on the totem in their life. Continue your education and perform well in your job and you should reap the benefits. Watching some worthless slug of 7 years tenure that does just barely enough to get by and rides the union rules to ensure they can’t be fired make more than you because raises are based on union rules instead of performance and dedication to the job is assanine.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Apr 1, 2009 6:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

However,

A lot of times and places, teachers can’t strike. They will just be without a job. Teachers Union is weak. Atleast the way it is in Kansas. The teachers pretty much get the shaft when it come to “being in a union”

by readANDgold58 on Apr 1, 2009 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

People need Unions

5.25 is BS. Who can live on 5.25? If you are going to be a gigantic company and make millions and millions of dollars you should be able to pay your workers a decent wage and help them out when they throw their back out carrying a heavy ass box acoss a gigantic store.

Unions abuse their power but you know what? Companies do too and believe me, they do it a lot. I just think Unions are necessary for balance. Don’t feel bad for these giant companies and their rich CEO’s. They don’t care about their you or their workers.

Paddy

by Patrick Allen on Apr 1, 2009 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And if your company demands a talented work force...

you will pay your employees. We’re talking about carpenters making near $35 an hour. Thats not sustainable. Ignorant American’s piss and moan when manufacturing jobs flee this country but at the same time demand that they be paid upwards of 7 times the minimum wage.

by HIV 2 Elway on Apr 1, 2009 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also...

Does raising the minimum wage really help anyone? Is that the goal, to appease the lowest common denominator? Would you rather have 2 people earning $5.25 flipping burgers or 1 person earning $7.50? You assume that every business can just absorb the increased payroll and still remain profitable.

by HIV 2 Elway on Apr 1, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Absolutely

This is a big issue where I grew up, in a small town in Kansas. A federal minimum wage hits companies a lot harder in small town Kansas than in a larger city with a higher cost-of-living. And the result of that is that the companies in small-town Kansas hire less workers.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Best Thing To Happen To My Town, In Fact

Was when Wal-Mart moved in…a non-unionized store that hired unskilled workers in large numbers. Incidentally, they also usually pay above minimum wage and they offer advancement to employees with that company (unlike most of the businesses in town they were competing with). So unskilled workers don’t actually need unions in order to get above minimum-wage salaries…the market makes that happen anyway, assuming the worker is motivated to improve.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ummm...

no one was meant to live off of the minimum wage. It is for pimply faced 13 year olds. If you have a family to support or are working for a living (not in school) and you are making minimum wage, it is time to reconsider your life. Plus if I am not mistaken, thanks to the libs $5.25 is not the minimum wage anymore…it is $7 something.

Proud resident of Kansas City MO

by TigerChief on Apr 1, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most People Who Make Minimum Wage

Are high school students and unskilled labor working entry-level positions…and $5.25 is about what those jobs are worth in utility to the employer. That’s part of the incentive for workers to improve at their job.

If you are going to be a gigantic company and make millions and millions of dollars you should be able to pay your workers a decent wage

That’s not the company’s problem…the company wasn’t formed to financially support you while you raise your family. It’s not your parent, it’s your employer…you’re providing a service to them and they’re paying you what they think that service is worth. If they don’t consider the service you provide to be worth what you think it is, that’s not their responsibility to pay you more and you basically have two options…a) attempt to renegotiate that salary with your employer, or b) find a new employer. But the employer is not obligated to give you more money just because you think you’re entitled…no matter how profitable they are.

Unions abuse their power but you know what? Companies do too and believe me, they do it a lot.

I’ll actually agree with you there…companies also pay politicians to make unfair and unjust coercive laws, which I also oppose (along with acts of violence against workers, violations of existing contracts, etc). But I’m going to side with the company more than the labor for two reasons:

1) The less a company pays its workers, the less I get charged for the services those companies provide to me. And that’s just a fact of life…my self-interests are more important to me than your self-interests, and if it comes down to a choice, I’m probably going to side with the group that fits my self-interests (and that’s the company that produces goods and services) as long as they’re not acting coercively or unethically.

2) Labor unions aren’t about protecting workers’ rights anymore (not usually anyway), they’re about protecting worker privileges while violating the rights of company and property owners. Laborers don’t own the company…the shareholders/CEO/sole proprietors do. The owners are the ones who started the business and take the lion’s share of risk. They’re entitled to the reward. Do I feel bad for someone when they lose their job? Sure…losing a job sucks. But the owners of a company lose a lot more than the laborers do when that company goes under…a worker can always find a new job, but the shareholder usually doesn’t get his money back.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

People have the right

to either be a part of a union or not. If you don’t want to be in a union, take another job. In the side of companies, they can easily squash any talks of unionizing by firing workers and scaring others into compliance (this happens at the place where my brother works, which is an international company that has unions in other places). Having been in a skilled labor union, and my father having been a union rep for his company, I have to say I’m in the middle on them.

My union did nothing for me except take my dues out of every paycheck, and in that 6 month timespan I was laid off 3 times and was unable to find work elsewhere. However in my fathers case (and this is purely locally, mind you), they helped get them better healthcare.

In the case of these workers, they are paid a contracted amount. Having someone skilled in negotiations to benefit not only you, but your coworkers to something the company AGREES to isn’t something that’s bad in my eyes. It’s not like someone off the street goes in and starts making $35/hour (or whatever the wage is). It’s not a flat wage across the board.

Basically it comes down to who is in power and leading the union(s).

My crystal ball says Jay Cutler cries himself to sleep every night.

by IISaiNtII on Apr 1, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Unless They Don't Live In A "Right-To-Work" State

There are several states where entry into certain occupations or hiring by certain employers requires union membership under state law. Meaning if you don’t wish to be hired by a union, the government denies you the opportunity to work in your profession altogether and makes you a criminal.

How is that not a violation of individual rights?

If you don’t want to be in a union, take another job

Actually the flip side of that would be, if you want more than $28K a year in a free society you can either renegotiate with your employer or find a new employer who will pay you more (and if you can’t find that, consider finding another line of work that will support you in the lifestyle to which you wish to become accustomed). In a free society, if you’re being paid less than what you think you deserve, you have the element of choice. Unions are all too often about taking choices away from people…from employers, from their members, from consumers, from taxpayers, from people who have nothing to do with that union at all.

My union did nothing for me except take my dues out of every paycheck, and in that 6 month timespan I was laid off 3 times and was unable to find work elsewhere. However in my fathers case (and this is purely locally, mind you), they helped get them better healthcare.

I think this is reflecting what the anti-union folks here have been saying. Yes, there was a time when unions were necessary. But now it’s more likely that they’ll just take a cut of your paycheck and give you nothing in return when you need them. And to be clear, I don’t have anything against collective bargaining (which is what unions are supposed to be about). Workers should have a right to collectively bargain. I have a problem with them using the power of government to compromise the property and individual rights of owners, as well as forcing negative economic consequences on the public at large that rarely benefits anyone but the union heads.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Go back to school. Get an education. Learn a skill.

The Min wage has increased twice in the last year, and is set to increase again this year. It will be $7.25 by mid year, not $5.25.
From a business owners perspective:
14 months ago my employees at a food business averaged making 6.00 and hour. By mid year this will be an average of $8.00 an hour (not including management). That’s an increase of 25% labor cost. The cost of product (due to the corn and animal feed markets) has increased by 11% across the board. Now add in the increased payroll taxes and S.S. payments (your employeer must match what you pay into S.S.) and you can tack on another 5%.

With no unionized workers I’ve seen close to a 40% increase in costs in the last 14 months. I’m not a huge corp. I am a small independent guy that happens to own 2 quick service restuarants. I’ve had no choise but to raise prices to recoup about 1/2 of what I’ve lost in increases. My rent and taxes will go up again next year, as well as commaniary maintance costs.

Taking meat and cheese out of one container and putting it on buns and bread is not “skilled position”. You were never ment to raise a family with one person working at an unskilled labor job. If you want more money then go back to school. If you drop out of highschool, or never pursue any fruther education beyond highschool then you make whatever someone is willing to pay you. It’s not my responcibility to provide for your family. It’s my responcibility to provide for MY family. If you’d like to take on the 20 year morgages/leases, upfont all the money for product cost, spend your life 100% responcibile for the business, and make yourself liable for any potential lawsuits etc that I must be willing to do as an owner of a business then feel free to tell me what is or is not B.S. to pay my staff.
Until such time as you are willing to take the risks, and take on the responcibility of owning a business that lives and dies on “cheap” labor I could really care less what you consider to be a B.S. wage.
We aren’t all big companies. If workers want to make better wages then it is their responcibility to make themselves WORTH the better wages in the market. It’s not my responcibility to pay them more so that they can feed their children.

The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw

by Texas Chief on Apr 1, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's The Other Thing People Miss

It’s the small business owner who takes a beating with these laws, all for marginal improvements for the least-valuable sector of the labor population. Large companies may be able to eat those costs…small businesses (who employ most of the people in our economy) often can’t.

You’ve got my sympathies, Texas Chief.

Predictions for 2009

by UCrawford on Apr 1, 2009 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs