Unions Are Costing Companies Too Much....

[Diego in Seattle]

They make way too much money for sitting around & doing nothing.

Sincerely,
Bill Johnson

Gee, I wonder how the workers are going to fare in this merger.

[mvscal]

Gee, I wonder how the workers are going to fare in this merger.

Probably better than the ten year old boy stuck to your cock.

[Truman]

They make way too much money for sitting around & doing nothing.

Sincerely,
Bill Johnson

Gee, I wonder how the workers are going to fare in this merger.

Why do you care? Are you a Duke shareholder? How does Bill Johnson's severance affect you?

[Mikey]

Should have stuck to skiing.

[smackaholic]

What the fukk does the company being stupid enough to pay this guy a huge chunk of cash have to do with unions?

It has fukk all to do with it. That's what.

[Derron]

Yeah..unions are really helping out our economy these days.

Judge orders longshoremen to stop slowdown at Port of Portland
Portland Business Journal by Erik Siemers , Business Journal staff writer
Date: Tuesday, July 3, 2012, 12:17pm PDT

U.S. District Judge Michael Simon on Tuesday issued a temporary restraining order requiring the International Longshore and Warehouse Union to end its efforts to slow down production at the Port of Portland's Terminal 6 container operations.

U.S. District Judge Michael Simon on Tuesday issued a temporary restraining order requiring the International Longshore and Warehouse Union to end its efforts to slow down production at the Port of Portland's Terminal 6 container operations.


A federal judge on Tuesday issued a temporary restraining order forcing the International Longshore and Warehouse Union to end an illegal slowdown of work at the Port of Portland’s lone container terminal to a halt.

But it wasn’t a total loss for the longshoremen.

Prior to U.S. District Court Judge Michael Simon’s ruling, the Port of Portland, terminal operator ICTSI Oregon Inc., and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers reached a deal that at least temporarily gives the longshoremen union the rights to two jobs at the center of a long-simmering dispute.

The actions Tuesday were designed to return the port’s Terminal 6 to normal production levels in time for the next container ship to arrive, German carrier Hapag-Lloyd’s Cape Manila, at the port around 4 a.m. Wednesday.

Not everyone is convinced that Tuesday’s ruling will bring an immediate return of normalcy to the port. “Not necessarily,” said Bill Wyatt, the port’s executive director.

The two ocean-going carriers that call on the port weekly — Hapag-Lloyd and South Korean’s Hanjin — have already decided to bypass the port until the labor issue is resolved. Now that there’s at least a temporary resolution to the issue, “they’re all going to look at production.”

In other words, tomorrow’s call by the Cape Manila could determine how quickly carriers resume regular service in Portland.

The dispute centers on which of two labor unions — the International Longshore and Warehouse Union or the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers — has the right to two jobs plugging, unplugging and monitoring refrigerated containers at the port’s Terminal 6.

The longshore union wants terminal operator ICTSI Oregon Inc. to comply with a labor agreement between their union and the Pacific Maritime Association , a collective bargaining unit that represents terminal operators, including ICTSI.

But ICTSI officials argued that the jobs weren’t theirs to reassign. ICTSI’s 25-year lease agreement with the Port of Portland dictated that those jobs belonged to the port, which assigned the work to the electrical union.

The sides weren’t able to resolve their issues on their own after more than a week of negotiations brokered by former Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski, whom Simon appointed as a “special master” in the case.

So on Tuesday morning, ICTSI, the Port, and the electricians union broke the stalemate by reaching an agreement to amend ICTSI’s lease with the port to allow the disputed jobs to be reassigned to the longshoremen.

The agreement, though, is only temporary and contingent upon a pending ruling from the National Labor Relations Board in Washington, D.C., that most involved hope brings a final resolution to the case.

Despite the agreement, Mara-Louise Anzalone, an attorney for the NLRB’s regional office in Seattle, still urged Simon to issue the board’s request for a temporary restraining order against the longshoremen, whom they accused of staging illegal work protests that have brought production at the terminal to a halt.

Anzalone argued that the agreement between ICTSI, the port and the electricians union only came about because they were coerced by the longshore union.

“ICTSI has been forced to do what they’ve been doing,” Anzalone said. “Without a restraining order, this will happen again.”

Simon said none of the evidence presented at two prior hearings gave him the impression that the longshoremen boycott was in dispute. The issue instead was whether it was targeted at their primary employer, as allowed by law, or a secondary employer, which isn’t.

The longshore union’s attorney Robert Remar had argued previously that the union’s primary employer is ICTSI — a distinction that would make any action against the company OK under federal labor law.

Simon, however, ruled that the disputed container work belonged instead to the Port of Portland, as dictated by the port’s contract with ICTSI.

His temporary restraining order against the longshore union only lasts 10 days, expiring at 5 p.m. July 13. He scheduled a 9 a.m. hearing that day to discuss next steps, which could include issuing one additional 10-day restraining order or involve one of the parties filing a request for a permanent injunction.

Longshore union spokeswoman Jennifer Sargent said the union wouldn’t be issuing any statements.

Ronald Hooks, director of the NLRB’s regional office in Seattle, said he was grateful that the court granted their request.

“We feel that it was needed to ensure the return of a steady stream of commerce to the Portland area that was being interfered with."

The dispute, though, is far from over.

Cases before the NLRB can take anywhere from weeks to months to be resolved.

The next step is a hearing on August 14 in Portland before an administrative law judge, , who will be tasked with making a recommendation to the National Labor Relations Board in Washington, D.C.

In the meantime, Simon expressed his regret that the parties couldn’t resolve the issue on their own and urged them to continue negotiating.

“This dispute will end one day, somehow,” Simon said. “It really is in your best interests and the public's to end it soon.”

[BSmack]

Bill Johnson resigned and got a fat check. MSNBC reported that. The new guy at the helm of the company, Democratic Party bigwig James Rogers, is whacking 1,800 American jobs. MSNBC did not report that. Wonder why?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-0 ... -stay.html

If you have a problem with restructuring, then you should be in favor of banning corporate mergers. Otherwise, what's your problem?

[Derron]

Either you are in favor of it, or you are not. You cannot have it both ways. Unless you are a Democrat, I suppose. Then it doesn't matter how inconsistent and incomprehensible your position is. It is simply better than the strawman you've decided to run against.

Well said...B's statement was one of those head scratchers where you ask yourself " Where the fuck is dude coming from ?"

[Wolfman]

Just think of Bri's brain as a bong/toke/hit too far.

[BSmack]

Isn't that the nastiness that Obama and the Democrats are accusing Romney of doing at Bain Capital? Which way is it? Either you are in favor of it, or you are not. You cannot have it both ways. Unless you are a Democrat, I suppose. Then it doesn't matter how inconsistent and incomprehensible your position is. It is simply better than the strawman you've decided to run against.

I'm not in favor of it. And I would piss on a dem doing dirt same as a dittohead. I do think you drawing an equivalence between the party nominee and a mid level bagman is pretty fucking retarded.

[Derron]

Here is why the system is soooo fucked up..unions, judges, legislators, government managers, they are all part of this corrupt system.

OHSU looks to cut runaway PERS costs
Published: Friday, July 06, 2012, 10:13 PM Updated: Saturday, July 07, 2012, 11:10 PM
Ted Sickinger, The Oregonian By Ted Sickinger, The Oregonian

The OregonianOregon Health and Sciences University has proposed eliminating a 6 percent retirement contribution it makes for more than 5,000 employees.
In a controversial move that could play out with government employers around the state, Oregon Health & Science University has proposed to stop paying its employees' required 6 percent contribution to the Oregon Public Employees Retirement Fund next year.

The proposal is part of an offer OHSU made this week in collective bargaining with unions. And it highlights what many see as the most expedient and legally defensible way for public employers in Oregon to cut their ballooning costs to fund workers retirement benefits.

PERS costs are reaching crisis levels for many public employers. Systemwide, employer contribution doubled last July, taking a $1.1 billion bite out of public budgets already wracked by the recession.

Due to lackluster investment returns, the PERS system still has a $16 billion actuarial deficit, so contribution rates will go up again next July, skimming another $1 billion that otherwise would go to fund public services.

In total, retirement costs for many employers, including social security contributions and debt service costs for pension bonds, could approach 35 cents in every payroll dollar by 2013, with the prospect of further PERS rate increases in 2015.

Conventional wisdom in Oregon is that PERS' benefits are untouchable. State courts -- where judges are members of PERS -- have ruled that the benefits are a contract and therefore sacrosanct. And the Legislature, where members are PERS eligible and often beholden to powerful public unions, has declined to consider meaningful changes to the system since it undertook reforms in 2003.


With little control over the system, employers are left to cut services or trim compensation around the edges. The 6 percent employee contribution is an obvious, but politically fraught option.

OHSU is in a better position to undertake such a change than many government entities. It's a public corporation with a budget that's largely independent of the state's. It's directors and administrators aren't worried about keeping their jobs next election. And it already offers employees a competing pension plan.

Still, the university needs to offer competitive compensation, and avoid strikes like it has experienced in the past.

OHSU President Joe Robertson said the proposal is only one element of a compensation and retirement package that would remain better than average.

Nevertheless, he said it was crucial for the university to control PERS costs as healthcare reform squeezes its financial margins. In a newsletter to employees this week, he said PERS costs increased by $20 million a year when rates jumped in July 2011 and will increase another $20 million annually when new PERS rates take effect next July. Absent change from the state, they will increase by a third $20 million on July 1, 2015, he said.

"Being good stewards of our resources means figuring out a way to address the unsustainability of PERS," Robertson told employees. "The 'employee pickup,' which OHSU had previously paid for PERS employees, is one of the few aspects of the program we can control--and one we can no longer afford."

Eliminating the pickup in 2013 would save $20 million and hold OHSU's annual PERS costs constant at about $50 million.

Frank Vehafric, a representative for OHSU members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said the PERS cost problem is real, but that it's cyclical. The university's other pension plan was more costly a few years ago, he said, and PERS costs will come down eventually with higher investment returns or the retirement of older employees.

Eliminating the pickup would be "a very serious financial blow to our members," Vehafric said. "It was part of the deal a long time ago to swap pay increases for the pickup. There's no part of this offer to make employees whole for that trade."

While Vehafric suggests OHSU's PERS costs are concentrated among highly paid doctors and researchers, university figures show PERS membership is concentrated among employees represented by AFSCME and the nurses union. Moreover, elimination of the pickup would constitute an immediate cut in pay for all employees who participate in PERS, unionized and otherwise.
In the end, "employee contributions" to PERS is a misnomer, as most members don't pay it, and the money is no longer contributed to the pension fund.

About 70 percent of PERS members statewide have their required contribution paid by their employer. The so-called "pickup" was instituted in place of pay raises in the past, and has become a standard piece of collective bargaining agreements.

Also, since the 2003 pension reforms, employee contributions -- no matter who pays it -- have been redirected into supplemental individual accounts similar to a 401k plan. Those accounts belong to employees and don't cover pension benefits.

The Legislature made the change because the contributions were exacerbating runaway liability growth under the system's controversial money match program, which guarantees older members an 8 percent return on both employee and employer contributions to the pension. Redirecting the employee contributions slowed liability growth, but it left employers and taxpayers on the hook to fund all benefit costs that weren't covered by investment returns.

Elimination of the pickup is a regular subject of debate statewide. As he was leaving office, former governor Ted Kulongoski released a "Reset Cabinet Report" that considered reducing employee contributions to PERS as a means to trim overall compensation costs and forestall a projected "decade of deficits."

It was estimated that cutting the contribution in half would save state agencies and schools about $132 million in pickup costs every two years. Systemwide, eliminating the pickup could save employers about $750 million per biennium.

The change wouldn't impact the health of the pension fund, but make it easier for employers to swallow looming rate increases, while delivering a big pay cut to employees.

It's not clear if Gov. John Kitzhaber wants to expend any political capital to take on the issue in the upcoming legislative session or in collective bargaining with state agencies.

As it stands, state agency contracts guarantee employees a 6 percent pay raise if the Legislature changed the law and eliminated employee contributions.

Kitzhaber's office didn't return calls for comment on Friday.

[Cuda]

Isn't that the nastiness that Obama and the Democrats are accusing Romney of doing at Bain Capital? Which way is it? Either you are in favor of it, or you are not. You cannot have it both ways. Unless you are a Democrat, I suppose. Then it doesn't matter how inconsistent and incomprehensible your position is. It is simply better than the strawman you've decided to run against.

I'm not in favor of it. And I would piss on a dem doing dirt same as a dittohead. I do think you drawing an equivalence between the party nominee and a mid level bagman is pretty fucking retarded.

So you're defending the Koch brothers now, Monica?

[Moving Sale]

Which way is it?

Care to answer your own question?

[Felix]

The dispute centers on which of two labor unions — the International Longshore and Warehouse Union or the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers — has the right to two jobs plugging, unplugging and monitoring refrigerated containers at the port’s Terminal 6.

no doubt, plugging in refrigerators takes some serious electrical skills....and that monitoring thing, that's tough stuff....so maybe they should make it into four positions....two to plug in the cooling equipment and two to monitor the containers

there are some areas where labor unions are necessary, but shit like this is why people think labor unions are a total waste of time and money

when I was in Indiana, we drove by a massive Honda plant that employs thousands, and not one of them belongs to a union.....the japanese philosophy is you want to unionize, go do it somewhere else....surprisingly, the workers at the plant are doing very well without the "support" of the autoworkers union....go figure

[Moving Sale]

I am not aware of a single person or company who is in favor of outsourcing U.S. jobs unless they have to do so to remain competitive in this global economy.

What does "comptitive" mean?

In other words, no person or company purposefully outsources U.S. jobs unless there is a good business reason to do so.

Like $ ?

Why would anyone offshore his or her employment or any other part of his or her business if the business climate in the United States was more favorable here than elsewhere?

Their parent's were born in Mexico and they want to help Mexico's economy?

They claim that through the use of the force of the State, they can force companies to hire and retain employees in non-competitive business climates so that the companies and their employees can continue to send tax dollars to the State.

Huh? How would that work?

Conservatives/Libertarians understand that in a global economy, if you want to have business thrive in your country, you need to make the business climate in your country conducive and attractive to business.

You can't think of any other way to keep business in the US?

That means lower taxes, fewer regulations, less paperwork, etc.

Paperwork? Really? That's your answer? Less paperwork?

And you can do that without causing old people to die, babies to starve or the environment from being trashed.

Link please.

[Derron]

And you can do that without causing old people to die, babies to starve or the environment from being trashed.

Link please.

Here you go..this should back up his claim.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v256/ ... ripper.jpg

Do you just jump in and tard up every thread ?

[BSmack]

there are some areas where labor unions are necessary, but shit like this is why people think labor unions are a total waste of time and money

when I was in Indiana, we drove by a massive Honda plant that employs thousands, and not one of them belongs to a union.....the japanese philosophy is you want to unionize, go do it somewhere else....surprisingly, the workers at the plant are doing very well without the "support" of the autoworkers union....go figure

Of course those "non union" workers would be flourishing in a world without the UAW providing a price point for Honda to have to at least approximate for their services.

Ponderous.

[Felix]

Of course those "non union" workers would be flourishing in a world without the UAW providing a price point for Honda to have to at least approximate for their services.

Ponderous.

those workers are flourishing....they do very well, the ones I've talked to are very happy, and based on what I've heard, the plant is a huge success.....the UAW has outlived their usefulness.....

[smackaholic]

Of course those "non union" workers would be flourishing in a world without the UAW providing a price point for Honda to have to at least approximate for their services.

Ponderous.

those workers are flourishing....they do very well, the ones I've talked to are very happy, and based on what I've heard, the plant is a huge success.....the UAW has outlived their usefulness.....

rack.

the bottom line is that in a production line environment, you must have a reliable work force that will show up on a daily basis. Henry Ford figured this out a long time ago and paid his workers very well. Of course the Unions weren't happy with that and have done their damnedest to kill their hosts.

and lets say the unions do go the way of the dodo bird. do you really think the other automakers would go all scranton on their workforces?

fukk no, they wouldn't.

[Screw_Michigan]

the bottom line is that in a production line environment, you must have a reliable work force that will show up on a daily basis. Henry Ford figured this out a long time ago and paid his workers very well.

Of course the Unions weren't happy with that and have done their damnedest to kill their hosts.

Hey idiot. The $5 work day started in 1914. The UAW didn't organize GM until 41.