Union Maide

I cannot believe I have not yet mentioned the union as it is a topic of discussion weekly in and out of work. The pendulum of opinions swings drastically depending on who you speak to, but the truth is that all of the nuanced perspectives are correct. The union is both a gainful tool and a hindrance to its own goals. As I have discussed before, the members of our IBEW cannot seem to accept this dichotomy and either die for the union credo or call it a plague on the working man. Fortunately one bias is better than the other in terms of group survival; unfortunately more members follow the latter bias and condemn the entire organization that trained them. I do not understand this.

A sizable portion of the IBEW is made up of electricians who endured the union schooling process. We are trained for five years under union recruited and trained instructors nearly for free. In those five years we work for unionized contractors with OTHER journeymen who are often trained through the same program. The IBEW negotiates with the contractors for regular raises to its members to the tune of $1-$4 every year. The union gives us a minimum of 2 or 3 pensions, guaranteed after 5 years of "vested" service to be received at retirement. We have a reasonably good, if not great healthcare plan which uses surplus money contributed to build an HSA which can be used to purchase healthcare services and goods. If the money in the HSA reaches a certain amount it rolls over into our annuity - another financial benefit in the union package. Our union defends us in workplace altercations from injury to harassment. Somehow, despite all of this support throughout our career, our journeymen vocalize rabid disdain for the organization that employs them. I have not even accumulated my required five vested years yet, and I have already benefited immeasurably from the perks allotted to a union member. Because of this, for a brief time I was on the side of the die-hard union advocates.

At some point while reveling in my appreciation of career benefits, I heard someone complaining about the union and I endeavored to ask why they disliked the organization that pays their bills. The biggest thing anti-unioners complain about is having to pay dues. Every month we owe a small sum of about $45 to the union in order to pay for the services they provide (i.e. negotiating contracts, the office workers who manage membership and events &etc.) $45 is precisely one hour of work pay before taxes as of 2023.  So every month we pay one hours worth of wages. Small potatoes, as my father would say. Most of the men who complain about this $45/month fee don't think about the larger implications, however, which is the real problem in paying dues. The larger scope is that the money we pay in dues goes to paying employees who do not necessarily do their jobs. Gossip on the grapevine says that there have been multiple examples of union hall officials spending the day playing golf in offices and ordering food on the "company tab". Additionally, if one goes to union meetings one will find that the administration often approves thousands of dollars of organization money to be donated to ragtag causes that are unrelated to our work, our mission, or our members, while denying funding to union based projects. So, ultimately, the conversation here is similar to that of federal taxation; where is our money going and is it being used well? The issue is a matter of group interest and welfare, though, not the commonly touted, individualistic, self-serving complaint against allotting one hours' pay to ensure the continuing protection of one's career. YOUR personal "suffering" in losing $540 a year that you would have spent on beer instead is not a problem. 

On the same note, the men who gripe about union dues also express incomprehensible distaste for additional funding toward our pensions. They feel that allocating any of the money we have earned to accounts that do not instantaneously put money in their wallets is effectively theft. Our pensions are different from the 401k as all union members are required to contribute the same percentage from their paycheck to the fund. This requirement ensures that the union pension pool is fully funded for years to come; both current and future retirees are guaranteed a stable source of income. Those who work more than others get more pension credits which either enables them to retire earlier (after hitting the required credit quota) or to make more money after retirement. For the union worker, this pension package is effectively non-negotiable; the union and contractors manage the investing and payout to the individuals advantage. Pensions are generally understood to be a reliable and increasingly rare retirement plan. Complaining about contributing to one is equivalent to complaining about the simple choice to be in a union. Which... I suppose is the crux of this entire conversation. If these men don't like the way unions are designed, they should not be a part of the union. The union cannot function if these established laws are not enforced upon every VOLUNTARY member. 

The second point was made by a different journeyman around the same time. This man mentioned that the union protects certifiably criminal people (or in their language, "scumbags"). I was ready to accept this immediately as I had already worked with two men who had multiple DWIs/DUIs on their record. There is a joke going that you aren't a true union member until you have a DWI. However the list of crimes are occasionally more severe (than endangering the lives of innocents by driving a vehicle while drunk...yes), including pedophilia, domestic abuse, sexual assault, robbery, and miscellaneous other felonies. The union does not discriminate against men who have criminal records, even repeat or recent offenses. I have mixed feelings about this; I believe in giving people the opportunity to repent and rehabilitate. However I also think it disturbing and frightening that I could be forced to work with a man convicted of rape or of possessing child pornography. On a less dramatic scale, as is the case in any workplace, construction sites are loaded with laborers who waste time talking, walking, smoking, gossiping, napping, and hiding themselves away in dark corners to stare at their phones. These men are continuously caught in their sloth and laid off jobs, but continuously get sent back out into the world to screw over another contractor. When a single journeyman is cashing in $1200 checks every week, hours of misused time add up to the detriment of the company, the union, the project, the economy, and even the environment. I recognize that this declaration comes across as dramatic and overblown but if you really break down the process you will find it to be a true assessment. The continued poor work ethic of dozens of construction workers breaks down the entire system, therefore when a union continues to send out unproductive members to work sites they are exacerbating the problem. Furthermore, this choice gives the union in question a bad reputation. It lowers expectations of union workers and devalues their labor and the expertise they bring to the project. 

I now accept most of the above information as canon. I accept it all, the bad and the good. I am happy to be a union member and continue to revel in my personal profits and the community of passionate people the union creates, however small it may be considering the total membership to active participant ratio. I have obvious ideas about what should be done but no reasonable suggestions about how to fund or enact such ideas, so ignore the rest if you will. I think union hall employees should be held accountable for hours wasted frivolously in the workplace, which I suppose might require monitoring and regulation. I think members who repeatedly exhibit poor work practices (3x) need to be given a warning after the second offense and be removed from the work lists after the third. Perhaps some program could be developed to reassess electrician skills and indoctrinate the deviants (haha) in union values. Those "values" would include an understanding of what a pension is and how it operates, AKA its dependence on group participation. Programs like this actually already exist... the COMET program offers resources to educate both union and nonunion members on union benefits. But it is not touted in so frequent or public a way as to make the information readily visible, nor is it a program union members are required to interact with. 

I think a firmer hand needs to be played with union members if they wish to continue sucking at the teat. We cannot continue to encourage a culture where people feel entitled to berate a system that works to ensure their comfort and success. We would also have to cultivate a union support base that proudly and diligently works behind the scenes to ensure the members financial contributions are being returned to the organization in the form of quality service. Summarily put, union members and office support need to believe in the mission and dedicate themselves to the goal of mutual benefit set into motion over one hundred years ago. Unions were formed to promise both workers and employers profit, respect, safety, and both professional/personal wellbeing. These are values to be reinforced annually as our culture and community changes with the tumultuous political/economical climate. One thing need not change with it; we are stronger standing together. Ensuring the success of another does not diminish our own gains, in fact, it bolsters us.