I’m hoping someone with knowledge of collective agreements and unions can help me understand why union members would agree to 2 weeks vacation. Doesn’t a union hold more power for negotiation?
More than 1 year of continuous employment -> 2 weeks
From what I can tell this is less than most regular employers (maybe food industry is like that though).
I’m looking at forming a collective agreement at my workplace but seeing this result is discouraging.
No one outside your union can tell you specifically how or why they bargained a certain way. You should get involved more with your union and ask them these questions instead of posting here. Every union is different and they’re obligated to explain these things to any member who asks. If any of it discourages you, then it is up to you to educate other members on why you think that’s wrong and help get them organized for the next round of bargaining. A union is only as good as its active members.
If your Canadian union isn’t working for you and the above doesn’t help, then you file a DFR report with the labour board. Even mentioning DFR (duty of fair representation) should get you service if the union is being adversarial.
I don’t work at a union, I’ve been trying to learn more about unions in general. I was surprised to find agreements with terms that were just… alright. I was 100% riding under the assumption that union jobs are better in every way, not just some ways.
Well if you’re just reading random CBAs without the context of being a worker within that CBA, there is a lot you’re going to miss. Unions are not something you can fully understand from the outside looking in. Generally it’s only the executives and officers within a union who have a good idea of how the whole thing works.
Lets use vacation time as an example. If you read my CBA you will find I earn 10 hours of vacation time a month, or three weeks a year. That may seem low, but my employer gives us two weeks paid off when the business shuts down for Christmas. So 40% of my vacation time is not mentioned in the CBA. My employer is also generous with sick days and none of that is part of the CBA, so you can add another week and a half of time off a year. So my CBA says I’m entitled to three weeks off a year but really I end up getting six and a half.
‘Ask for more’ is different from ‘Get more’. The labor contract is a negotiation. Ultimately, the only card unions have to play at an impasse is a strike. If they use that tactict the workers of the union won’t get paid while the contract is unresolved.
Let’s say you’re supporting your kid, don’t have savings, and are offered a raise and some meager time off. Do you feel like you have the freedom to push harder, ie go on unpaid strike longer, or do you vote to accept the deal and get that paycheck again?
This isn’t true. The workers of the union can get paid during their strikes by the union through the worker’s contributions.
The more members and money the union has, while remaining decentralised and its leaders directly accountable — the more power the union has.
This is absolutely true for a lot of people. A salary isn’t guaranteed just because you’re in a union, and it is often a lesser salary on strike to preserve funds. I think this person was asking about starting a union too, so there would be no fund set up unless they joined into a larger union.
I mean, you gotta start somewhere. If you have 10 people in a union, and work for about one year, you should be able to spare enough together for a few weeks of striking, provided that you lot put the contributions high enough. If the median salary of those 10 is about €40k, and took about 1/3 of salary for unions, you’d have €10k, enough to pay everyone
If those 10 work three years, they can get enough for one month of striking. Now, it might seem like a lot to contribute to, but one month of no work being done might put a business out of commission quickly unless if they pay up.
Demand higher and many more things than you actually want. Demand eg. a salary increase of 50%. Demand that the boss earn only 10% more than the highest earning workers. And so on. The boss will refuse all of the things, but be probably amenable to some of the aspects. Negotiate until he no longer caves in.
Do it during an especially busy week, and make sure the boss can’t hire temporary workers.
they hold more power for agreements, but it depends on the culture they’re a part of.
tldr: The US is on the low end of employee rights internationally, so they get less compensation than other countries even though unions are fighting for employees constantly.
i assume you’re talking about US unions since you’re talking about 2 weeks of vacation, which is basically employee abuse in most countries.
Unions do have power.
If you didn’t have unions, you wouldn’t even have 2 weeks vacation.
you would have children working right next to you.
there would be no such thing as a sick day.
Unions are the reason you have the little employee rights and compensation you have in the states, and they’re trying to get better conditions all the time, but it’s very difficult in a country that’s been and is being deliberately poisoned against a better work culture.
American work culture is crazy, so Americans think you’re supposed to work all the time and your employers expect you to work all the time.
America is also obscenely expensive to live in for absolutely no good reason, so if you did take more than 2 weeks of vacation per year, most people wouldn’t be able to afford to live inside, let alone provide themselves with food.
To get sick days or paid vacation, you and your coworkers have to pay into a fund for that to happen, and even though in the long run, better healthcare and more vacation would be a lot cheaper and more profitable for everybody, including the company, lobbyists have persuaded Americans that you’re all fighting against each other and you shouldn’t help anybody else because The only reason they’re not receiving just compensation is because they aren’t working hard enough, especially not as hard as you.
The math clearly shows that social benefit programs are better for people and more profitable for companies, but the culture you’re a part of has been infected by self-interested corporate policies, so they’re only interested in the profit part and not in the "better for people’ part.
people in America are so poor amidst their surroundings and a lavishly projected culture that they feel pressured to work almost constantly, and so corporations siphon the value out of you and then cast you aside when you have no value left.
Thanks for the detailed reply. I’m in Canada, it’s 2 weeks.
got it.
yikes, yalls housing is the only place worse than the US at this point, huh?
UK and AU prolly shittier than US too tbh
