| reply to themagicone
Re: Union Building? I don't usually bid on jobs, most of my work is a sub-part of a larger contractor or sub. I.E. I got offered to install the computer system for a hair salon. Well that involved running 4 data drops from the demarc to cashwrap. I was working under company that was providing data/telcom services. Now, I should of had a low voltage license for that. But the thing was the electric was done, the final inspection was done, so there was no need to re-pull the permit, have all the low volt inspected, etc just for 4 drops. I am working on getting the license now.
But really that is a mute point and OT. Even if I had my PLT I couldn't do work in the mall unless I joined the union, got my contractor license and so on. That is way beyond me in money and need. |
|
| reply to themagicone
said by themagicone:This is the first time I have ever run in to this. I run my own business installing networking equipment and cabling. Most of the time its a side thing as in MN they require stupid low voltage licenses now. Problem is to get that you have to be an electrician for 4 years... I don't want to be an electrician I just want to keep doing the low volt stuff I've been doing for 10 years.
F that shit. They try that BS up here and I'm not going to be licenced either. Sounds like the stuff they are doing up here with the ESA to protect electricians turf. |
|
 whizkid3Premium,MVM
join:2002-02-21
Queens, NY
kudos:9 | reply to themagicone
Some building owners - the one's paying for the construction - want only Union labor. There is no 'right to work' stuff that is going to take precedence over who the owner wants to hire. These are usually larger jobs (such as airports, skyscrapers, large data centers). Often the owner is willing to pay more to ensure A-1 work or a lack of labor strife. (Not to say this would not be the case with non-union labor; that's just the way the owner sees it. They are the one with the money.) This is probably the case here. Rarely are you going to find a GC mixing union & non-union labor on a project like this; with the exception of local trades that are completely non-union.
In other places, certain projects are mandated by law to be performed using union labor. Right or wrong that's just the way it is. The only places I have seen laws like these involves large government and/or public work projects. |
|
 Lurch77Premium
join:2001-11-22
Oconto, WI
kudos:4 | said by whizkid3:In other places, certain projects are mandated by law to be performed using union labor. Right or wrong that's just the way it is. The only places I have seen laws like these involves large government and/or public work projects.
I've never seen government jobs require union labor, but many places do require the labor force on the job be paid prevailing wage. This helps prevent outside contractors from low balling the bid and bringing in low wage labor from outside the area. It helps protect the local workforce, union or not. |
|
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·CenturyLink
 ·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
| reply to themagicone
When I worked in New York City in 1964, a Union Building was defined as a building where all of the employees were members of one union or another. I learned what a union building meant when I was directed to go to a customers location in a 30 story office building, to repair their intercom system. The customer may have been renting about 600 square feet in this large building. I was doing some troubleshooting when a building employee came into the office and told me to leave. When I asked him why, I was advised that when it was learned that a non union technician, me, was working on a system in the building, all union employees in the building threatened to walk off the job. That included elevator operators and critical maintenance personnel. I left immediately. The only way the situation was resolved was because the owner employed a technician, that had formerly been a member of the CWA and retained his membership in the union. He was the only employee that my employer could send to work in that building. I was never able to get an explanation why the customers employees did not have to be members of a union. The bottom line in NYC anyway was that a union building was a building where all of the trades where a member of a union but not necessarily the same union. |
|
| said by Mr Matt: The bottom line in NYC anyway was that a union building was a building where all of the trades where a member of a union but not necessarily the same union.
This is the same definition I see here on the west coast.
Whizkid, I've worked on large projects including airport terminals, mixed use shopping centers etc. I have yet to see an owner require Union labor, however the companies that are typically large enough to do those kinds of job tend to employ a union workforce and/or contract with union contractors. Since most work of this kind is prevailing wage, there is no cost difference and all of the headaches of dealing with employees (like pension plans, medical etc) are handled by the union so it actually works out better for them.
Generally mixing union and non-union on a job is not done and bad news because in my observation the union guys tend to be abusive to the non-union guys to the points of fights breaking out. The non-union crews aren't innocent but generally the instigations come from the union side. |
|
whizkid3Premium,MVM
join:2002-02-21
Queens, NY
kudos:9 | reply to Lurch77
said by Lurch77:I've never seen government jobs require union labor, but many places do require the labor force on the job be paid prevailing wage. This is more likely than the scenario I was discussing.
said by cmaengdewd :Whizkid, I've worked on large projects including airport terminals, mixed use shopping centers etc. I have yet to see an owner require Union labor.
I plan projects and write contract documents. This is one of the first questions we ask the owner. Its an important topic of conversation when the project is being planned. Yes; many owners do for the various reasons I discussed earlier. Some have no preference. Others want it as cheap as possible. It's then discussed with the CM or GC, who follows through with the owner's requirements. |
|
|
|
 Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to themagicone
Simple rebuttal for not having unions which have outlived their usefulness:
TOYOTA NON UNION, Toyota quality excellent and company very profitable.
Ford, GM and Chrysler UNION, says it all. Unions more or less destroyed them requiring the bailout by taxpayers and severe modification of their union contracts, benefits and work rules. No more staying at home and getting paid.
Indiana recently passed a "Right to Work" law and other closed union states are looking at doing it. We have to minimize the adverse drag on American Economy by Unions. |
|
Reviews:
·Insight Communic..
| First off Ford did not take a bailout so how about you back off my Faux News talking points about the big 3. Also Ford's quality has been on par with is foreign counterparts for a few years. And for that Toyota quality....yea so good the car won't stop quality. |
|
 AVDRespice, Adspice, ProspicePremium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ
kudos:1 | reply to guppy_fish
said by guppy_fish:said by Msradell:Many places do not require a license for low voltage applications such as communications and networking even for commercial applications.
OP is the source that said is State requires a license said by themagicone:Most of the time its a side thing as in MN they require stupid low voltage licenses now.
Hence why I ask how he could be bidding for work legally, especially a large commercial job He works under the GC's license.
--
--Standard disclaimers apply.--
google this "(sqrt(cos(x))*cos(200*x)+sqrt(abs(x))-0.7)*(4-x*x)^0.01, sqrt(9-x^2), -sqrt(9-x^2)" |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | reply to OSUGoose
said by OSUGoose:First off Ford did not take a bailout so how about you back off my Faux News talking points about the big 3. Also Ford's quality has been on par with is foreign counterparts for a few years. And for that Toyota quality....yea so good the car won't stop quality.
No need to throw your zingers I don't watch Fox News (see I don't see a need to use Faux so how about backing off on your cute wording). I try to describe things properly in discussions and avoid the childish labeling.
Also the latest quality reports indicate Ford's quality is slipping on their most popular vehicles. |
|
AVDRespice, Adspice, ProspicePremium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ
kudos:1 | reply to themagicone
said by themagicone:I'm not crossing union lines... I'm not 100% for unions but I'm not against them ether. I already called the contracting company and told them I'm off the project due to union requirement. It was a HUGE project and would of been good income but I'm not union.
why don't you go to the hall and hire one or two persons to assist you (or just give the shop steward an valentine's day card)
--
--Standard disclaimers apply.--
google this "(sqrt(cos(x))*cos(200*x)+sqrt(abs(x))-0.7)*(4-x*x)^0.01, sqrt(9-x^2), -sqrt(9-x^2)" |
|
 MsradellP.E.Premium
join:2008-12-25
Louisville, KY
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to Lurch77
said by Lurch77: I've never seen government jobs require union labor, but many places do require the labor force on the job be paid prevailing wage. This helps prevent outside contractors from low balling the bid and bringing in low wage labor from outside the area. It helps protect the local workforce, union or not. The problem is that laws that require prevailing wage basically just make projects more expensive and rip the taxpayers off in many cases for no benefit. |
|
 The PigI know you want to be mePremium
join:2009-09-11 | reply to themagicone
Let's see if you was a brick mason and you had the choose of two companies to work for, would you work in a union shop for $30 an hour with benefits or work non-union for $15 with no benefits?
Aside from the fact that if you get laid-off at a union shop you can go to the union hall and they send you to another company or the non-union shop where when you get laid-off your out of work! |
|
 SteveI know your IP addressConsultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
kudos:5 | reply to The Pig
Re: Union Building? said by The Pig:Let's see if you was a brick mason and you had the choose of two companies to work for, would you work in a union shop for $30 an hour with benefits or work non-union for $15 with no benefits? This is a silly question (akin to "Would you rather make more money, or less money?") because it assumes that both options are equally available.
For many they are not, and the better question "Would you rather be employed at $15/hr or unemployed at $30/hr?" admits the tradeoffs involved that the first one elides. |
|
Reviews:
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to themagicone
Didn't read through all this but, fwiw, I own some fast food restaurants, one of which is in a mall. The mall required us to use union labor, too, which significantly added to the cost of construction over the others we built in non-mall locations.
Since my brother is in construction, he helped me build one. We did all the labor ourselves. One day, the carpenter's union boss stopped by giving me a shitty grin and asked who was doing the work. He said he didn't have a problem with people doing work for themselves but he didn't want to see any non-union contractors in there.
With that comment, I wanted to throw him out of the place as it was none of his business but didn't want to end up in the union newspaper for PR reasons. To tell the truth, I had all union people helping me build the place and paying them on the side but he wouldn't have been happy about that either. A little ironic. |
|
sk1939Premium
join:2010-10-23
Washington, DC
kudos:9 Reviews:
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to Steve
said by Steve:said by The Pig:Let's see if you was a brick mason and you had the choose of two companies to work for, would you work in a union shop for $30 an hour with benefits or work non-union for $15 with no benefits? This is a silly question (akin to "Would you rather make more money, or less money?") because it assumes that both options are equally available. For many they are not, and the better question "Would you rather be employed at $15/hr or unemployed at $30/hr?" admits the tradeoffs involved that the first one elides. +1
Many of the IBEW union halls are full of workers that are unemployed because of the demands of the union. I believe in right to work, you should not force someone out of a job and force them to pay monthly dues, just for the "privilege" of being able to work.
»marylandreporter.com/2011/03/04/···rk-bill/ |
|
Jack_in_VAPremium
join:2007-11-26
Mathews, VA
kudos:1 | Ford officials approached the UAW to make concessions as the Norfolk location had special considerations such as transportation of parts and finished trucks and other issues. I watched the local tv interviews with the local UAW President and his arrogant position. Well he lost and several thousand lost a very good paying job with benefits. Courtesy of the UAW.
Now would not a few concessions be better than not having these good jobs?
quote:
Norfolk Assembly
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Norfolk Assembly was a manufacturing plant operated by Ford beginning April 20, 1925 and most recently producing the Ford F150 truck. The plant was located on the Elizabeth River, near downtown Norfolk, Virginia, and produced its final truck just after 7AM, the morning of Thursday, June 28, 2007.
Norfolk Assembly produced the Model T, sedans and station wagons[1] before building F-150s. Before it closed, the plant employed more than 2,600 people at the 2,800,000-square-foot (260,000 m2) facility. Ford had invested $375 million at the plant in 2002[3] to upgrade it for production of the redesigned eleventh generation 2004 F-150.
As of 2004, the plant’s productivity ranked 17th-best among 45 truck assembly plants, producing a truck in 22 hours, 54 minutes – 83 minutes faster than the national average, operating at 109 percent capacity compared with 94 percent in 2003. As late as December 2005, it had appeared that Norfolk Assembly would be spared closing.
A drawing was held the last week of June 2007, for the last F150 produced, a red 2007 F-150 Lariat, won by Corey Bauswell of Portsmouth, Virginia.
The plant was represented by United Auto Workers Local 919.
|
|
Lurch77Premium
join:2001-11-22
Oconto, WI
kudos:4 | reply to Jack_in_VA
This thread stayed in topic a lot longer than I expected. But the union bashing was sure to start at some time. |
|
