Special Metals contract rejected (Union Votes Down Contract, Co. Likely To File Ch 7 Within Days)

The Herald-Dispatch ^ | August 25, 2003 | Jim Ross

[Timesink]

HUNTINGTON -- Workers at the Special Metals Corp. nickel alloy plant in Huntington rejected a proposed contract offer Monday that their union leadership and company executives said was necessary to keep the plant open.

The vote, announced at 8:30 p.m. after a full day of voting, was 236 workers for the new contract and 303 against it.

[steve8714]

The larger problem is the multiplier effect. Probably another 2-300 area people will lose their jobs as a result of this, and what employer will want to come into this area to replace them?

[steve8714]

The negotiating team never lose their jobs.

[steve8714]

No flaming, many of your points are spot on...however the union guys have demonstrated that their loyalty is with the union right or wrong. They will go down with the ship.
Now, what will they do for a living?

[steve8714]

people in Southern IL are still waiting for mines to reopen that closed in the Reagan admin.
People need to realize that economic securityonly exists in your savings. I live with economic insecurity because I am new to virtue, but at least I recognize it.

[Gritty]

Now, let's see what a 'smart' person would do:

...insist on this package and lose your job...

1. $16.00/hr = $33,280/yr, + insurance, benefits, pension, etc.

...or approve new contract...

2. $14.50/hr = $30,160/yr. + insurance, benefits, pension, etc.

...or work at McDonald's (if you can even find a job)

3. $6.50/hr = $11,830/yr (35 hr wk), + no insurance or benefits

So, the dummies chose #3!!??

...many of the emloyees do not believe the company will close its doors; they think it's a bluff...

Yeah, saw that happen right here just this year, putting 650 out of work. They believed the Union, that it was a bluff, and refused to take a pay cut. The business went belly up and was eventually resold. If they're lucky, 100 will eventually get some sort of a lower paying job from the scaled-back restructured company.

Unions don't usually care if the people they represent get thrown out of work and the plant shuts down, as long as the Union doesn't "lose". It gives them more bargaining power on the next negotiation with another company and that's all they care about - their own power!

[Gritty]

...what benefit does the Union derive from convincing employees to put themselves out of work?

See my Post #65.

The Union negotiators never "lose". They still have their jobs and perks from the central Union with plenty of Union money still in their central till to pay them and their cronies salaries for years and years, as well as their retirements and bonuses. Don't worry. They won't lose their jobs!

[PackerBoy]

But the union's "logic" defies real logic.

If employees expect their employer to buy the best raw materials for the cheapest price to make a profit, why would they not also understand the same rules hold true for labor and its cost to the employer. If the employer can make more money by relocating to Mexico, or stop losing money by shutting down an unprofitable plant, why shouldn't it?

[FlyVet]

Basically, many of the emloyees do not believe the company will close its doors; they think it's a bluff.

But, do they think bankruptcy is a bluff?

[BudgieRamone]

In self defense, I was the only steward that could be found when needed: Running my machine like I was supposed to, on the shop floor in the 110 degree heat, not holed up in the air conditioned union office like my predecessors, not in the break room sipping coffee. I worked for a living, and pardon my sounding a tad bitter, but I got laid off--now you know why I hate unions--there are "non workers" still there while my rear end got tossed on the street.
Also, before you crucify me for being a whiner, walk a mile in my shoes, Get a decent paying job in aircraft, live in your means then have your livelihood taken away...along with 10,000 other people who do the same job you do in the same city. Add to this situation, that you have a college degree, many years of experience, and are a very flexible worker, most HR people here see your experience--BIG AIRCRAFT-- and chuck your resume'/application or that you have a "DEGREE" and again round file your application because according to them "You won't be happy here."
For the record I have always been happy to have a job and while I am not ENTITLED to a job, I do know what I am worth and I have standards. So don't criticize me or any other worker for demanding a fair days wage for a fair days work.
Union or no, just because the person is making 9.00 or 12.00 or 16.00 or 20.00 an hour for a job you don't deem worth that pay, doesn't mean its not worth that.

ok rant over.

[1rudeboy]

bttt

[PackerBoy]

I believe that many unions coach their members to distrust management ... whatever is said. But the unions rarely do anything in the way of an investigation to see if the company's finances are as precarious as management says. That's union malfeasance, IMHO.

[FlyVet]

I believe that many unions coach their members to distrust management ... whatever is said. But the unions rarely do anything in the way of an investigation to see if the company's finances are as precarious as management says.

I'm only going by what the article stated, that the company had been in Ch. 11 since March 2002. A law scholar I am not, but it seems like it would be pretty hard to fake financial problems for that long, and the employees should have picked up on that. I sure wouldn't have given up a good job like that for a buck-fifty less per hour, in a locally depressed economy. Crazy. Special Metals Shrugged.

[staytrue]

bump

[meadsjn]

Forgive me for asking a seemingly stupid question, but what benefit does the Union derive from convincing employees to put themselves out of work? If the unions need dues, how does this serve their purpose?

When a Republican is president and both house of congress are held by a Republican majority, it is the best time for union leaders to devastate the economy, drive jobs offshore, and thereby generate votes for Democrats and social programs, which will subsequently provide new crops of union members who will pay union dues and vote as they are told for several years.

Union leaders are predominantly Democrat and corrupt.

Union workers are predominantly conservative, but not politically astute, and are therefore easily misled.

Union membership in the private sector is at an all-time low, and it is more politically beneficial to kill the economy now, and let the jobs go offshore, than when a Democrat is in office.

Government unions make up the vast majority of union membership, such as the NEA and AFSCME, and are the driving force behind the Democrat party. If private sector jobs disappear, they will just raise your taxes and go on about their business of getting even more taxes.

While the Democrats are about this filthy business, they will even send infiltrators into conservative internet forums, to pretend to be anti-union conservatives and attempt to disrupt any and all discussions of the economic problems being faced by people in the real world.

[ninenot]

Thanks for the ping. You and I are both 'fact-deficient' on the case heading this thread--

In the last 2 weeks, the AFSCME local representing Milwaukee County workers was presented with two choices: either everybody takes a 35-hour week, or there will be significant layoffs of County employees (had to fix a deficit in the budget.)

It seems that the Union brass did not even bring the item to a vote--they just took the layoff option. Of course, the laid-off employees are no longer members of AFSCME, and the next membership meeting just so happens to be AFTER the layoffs take effect.

Hmmmmm.

On the other hand, since you are a practitioner of the IR arts, you probably understand the old maxim: "The Company gets the Labor Relations it Deserves." Case in point: American Motors/Chrysler.

For about 30 years, American Motors (AMC) had labor relations that deteriorated annually, usually with lengthy articles in the papers. Got to the point where there was 1 steward for every 10 workers at the plant. Finally, AMC gave up the ghost and sold to Chrysler.

Chrysler dumped the auto business and concentrated on engine manufacture. Invested a bazillion or so in the plant. Went to the UAW and said (in effect) "We will live up to the rules in the agreement, and so will you. We will treat you like human beings--please do the same for us."

Presto!!! In less than 12 months, the UAW/AMc/Chrysler imbroglios, fights, and PR battles disappeared entirely from the newspapers. No more wildcat strikes, no more 'actions,' nada, zip, zero.

First, treat them like people. Then, practice IR with integrity. Win-win.

[rrrod]

when are these union idiots gonna learn???? sad to see them loose their jobs but they brought it on themselves....how about the support type co's that will have to lay off employees too??..what a mess