Unions = not welcome

[Blastor]

Unions: the other "evil-empire"

When in Doubt, Just Blame the Unions

Here's an enlightening experiment you can try at home. Go to Google, and search on the following phrase: "union intransigence." You get 485 hits .

Now search on this: billionaire intransigence. You get exactly zero hits.

So why do unions get all the blame? The words "intransigent billionaire" just don't roll off the tongue very easily. This reflects the overwhelming anti-union bias of business commentators, repeated so often it infiltrates popular common-sense wisdom. The bias becomes part of the backdrop, allowing otherwise credible analysts to say outrageous things about unions without fear of challenge.

Ironically, targeting unions as the scapegoat for whatever economically ails us has never been less believable. Canada's economy is more business-dominated, deregulated and free-wheeling than at any time in our history. Profit-seeking private business accounts for 85 per cent of our GDP, the most ever. If something goes wrong with that free-enterprise economy, perhaps it is time to blame free enterprise.

Given the motley cast of characters populating Canada's perpetually crisis-ridden airline industry, it is especially incredible that unions get all the brickbats.

The federal government is another sorry actor, architect of the 1987 deregulation that has produced 14 money-losing years in 17 for the whole industry, not just particular companies. Its completely inconsistent policy on Air Canada (first blessing its merger with Canadian Airlines, then sabotaging it) contributed hugely to the fiasco.

Indeed, with Ottawa's politically convenient inaction, labour concessions can make no conceivable difference to the industry's never-ending crisis. Even if unions (and pension plans) were eliminated from the industry tomorrow, airlines would still be pushed to the financial brink by cut-throat competition and an inescapable tendency to concentration. The only difference is that airline workers would be a little poorer and a little more desperate as the sorry saga continued to unroll.

And how about WestJet, the "model" we should all now follow? Its executives preach free and fair competition, but expend considerable energy in Ottawa to win increasingly bizarre forms of protection against competition from Air Canada -- that is, when they're not defending themselves against allegations that they hacked into confidential data from competitors' computers.

They don't lose sleep over the choice between defined benefit and defined contribution pension plans, however: WestJet employees have no pension plan, period. CEO Clive Beddoe received total compensation last year (including option gains) of $1.9-million, and sits on WestJet shares worth upwards of $100-million. He's not worrying about his golden years. But his youthful, sweatshirt-clad employees -- the ones who sing those chirpy songs in flight -- will some day need to think about how they'll get by, once their usefulness to the employer has run its course.

Ultrarich capitalists break contracts, line their own pockets with sweetheart deals and rake in millions while denying the most basic protections to the workers who created their wealth.

All this sounds like a very good reason for unions to exist.


Globeandmailarchive.com

[DLB]

Amen!

People bitch and moan constantly about how much the poorly educated autoworker makes for doing monkey work on an assembly line but completely ignore the fact that the bosses of major companies rake in hundreds of times the average salary of the employees. Why are they compensated so well? Because they all went to Upper Canada College together and sit on each others boards. When the employees see what these fine captains of industry make its only natural that they will demand a piece of the action as they are only following the example set by their leaders.

[complexintentions]

Well, most of the employees there won't have to worry about how to get by, they won't be there. Other than the pilots, the company doesn't even pretend that the other employees are intended to be career positions. What does the F/A pay scale top out at, 5 years? At what amount? No one would make a career of it, because no one could.

It makes a lot of sense, really. Keeps the workforce young and fresh. It's the same at any lowcost, very high cabin crew and ancillary employee turnover. (With the exception of SWA, because..ummm..they're paid well.)

[Blastor]

You know what happen to Wal-Mart right?

WS has the P.A.C.T. to smooth over the employees.

[Trickkles]

PACT, PACT is powerless!!

[Ryan Coke]

Just the same as ALPA.

I've had fewer problems with PACT than I had with them. Do you, or your spouse, hold an ALPA position?

[Trickkles]

one is a member of Pact and the other is a member of ALPA

[Bede]

The reason CEO's make hundreds of times more than employees is because they provide shareholders with millions of dollars in value. Shareholders want to keep people that give them money. Employees can be easily replaced.

P.S. I'm in a union, and don't want to tick anyone off, I'm just saying the way it is.

[cyyz]

The reason CEO's make hundreds of times more than employees is because they provide shareholders with millions of dollars in value. Shareholders want to keep people that give them money. Employees can be easily replaced.

P.S. I'm in a union, and don't want to tick anyone off, I'm just saying the way it is.

You're right, Nortel, had their execs making 100s of millions and then magically those "great" people had the stock drop to 50$ yep, great value....

CEO's make the coin because they say they do.. Plain and simple.

If shareholders were anything above half assed, and at the meeting it was purposed,

get $1 return per share or pay CEO Bob 250 million this year, you're telling me they'd go, "oh, yeah, pay bob."

<HAHA> no..

Like City Council in Toronto, they throw in the salaries in some obscure vote, "give more pencils to staff...... fire staff saving 100 million...... give me 250 million raise... fire more staff saving 50 million"

The idiots vote for it.

I'm sure all the einsteins at Air Canada Part I were great and happy to give milton 50 million dollar bonus only to have their stocks sold for 1 cent.

On the flip side, you have execs making $1, didn't their stock holders say "oh that's not fair we should pay him a billion so we get the most value???" CEO's set their own rates and share holders, dumbly approve it. And yeah, yeah, most $1 execs have trillions of stock options, oh wait, stock options mean voting power, and you wonder how they vote themselves "bonuses."

[mi26]

Right on the money brother! For those with your head in the sand do some research, pick up a few books on corporations & stock market manipulation, there are plenty of good reads.

Merry Christmas

[Bede]

The CEO of Nortel got fired because he lost billons of dollars of stock holder value. The stories you hear about CEO's squandering corporate money are the excepetion, not the rule (I'll concede that this is open to debate, so no one has to do a bunch of research and read through an entire Noam Chomsky or Micheal Moore book just to debate me on this).

I agree, people that CEO's that minipulate stock prices should be punished.

[lupin]

The reason CEO's make hundreds of times more than employees is because they provide shareholders with millions of dollars in value. Shareholders want to keep people that give them money. Employees can be easily replaced.

P.S. I'm in a union, and don't want to tick anyone off, I'm just saying the way it is.

The problem, Mr Bede, is that CEOs are being pushed by shareholders to create immediate gains in share value. These rapid gains in stock value might be perceived as a good thing, but they aren't always good in the long term. Sometimes making the right decisions means looking further then immediate share value increase. If the actions of CEOs create shareholder gains in the short term but put the company in a difficult position in the future, these obviously aren't good.

CIBC come up as a good example.... their implication in the Enron scandal show a definite problem with the upper management and look at the end results.

CEO's should be paid progressively with stock bonuses that vest in the up coming years. Such a system would promote "good" decisions for the long haul instead of shortsighted decisions. In the same line of thought... Getting the employee to be financially involved in the company is not a bad thing either. Some sort of share /profit sharing program might help sensitize the employee group to the importance of a profitable company.

The current renumeration level of many CEOs is ridiculous compared to what the shareholders get.

Lupin

[Jaques Strappe]

Looking at the general economic generation these days and it is very obvious that more and more CEO's and shareholders are demonstrating less and less integrity, only being interested in a quick buck.

[Bede]

CEO's should be paid progressively with stock bonuses that vest in the up coming years. Such a system would promote "good" decisions for the long haul instead of shortsighted decisions. In the same line of thought... Getting the employee to be financially involved in the company is not a bad thing either. Some sort of share /profit sharing program might help sensitize the employee group to the importance of a profitable company.
Lupin

I think that's an excellent idea. Keep in mind, I'm not agreeing with how CEO's are paid (look at Frank Stronach. Do nothing=50 million). I'm just saying how it works.

J.S. You have a great point too.

[5x5]

And who are all those faceless, greedy "shareholders"?

We all are. Looking for the biggest return on mutual fund investments, the hot tip on that next stock that is going to make huge gains, etc. etc. Not all the badness comes from the few mega-rich at the top. If you really want to make a difference, do something personally.

Consider Ethical Funds. Investigate a company beyond the latest quarterly returns and see what their business really is. What's their long term track record, who's on their board, how do they treat their workers (pensions, profit sharing) and so on. Invest in companies that are "good" corporate citizens not just big money makers.

If you are in a company with a pension plan, contact the plan administrators (in Canada pension funds are some of the biggest investors there are) and suggest they adopt a less greedy stance. Sure they probably won't listen to you.

But at least you'd be doing something more than bitching about "the man" sticking it to all us helpless people.