Union for F1 workers?

[czt]

We had a project with unusual composite steel and concrete columns. In Europe, the steel worker erects a steel tube, the concrete worker fills it with concrete. You'd have thought that easy wouldn't you?

We used the same detail on 2 projects in the US, both jobs stopped for a few days. The steel and concrete unions were arguing if was a steel column or a concrete column. In their eyes the two couldn't mix. It had to be one or the other.

I have encountered very similar things at US companies...

In my case we had developed a mechanical part with sensors which was to be tested at the customer in the US. My boss had helped the mechanical guys assemble everything and then reached to start connecting the sensor wiring, only to be shouted at to stop as they had to get an electrical tech in otherwise the unions would be up in arms. Unions do themselves no favours with attitudes like that!

I don't know what employment law is like in the US, but over here (UK) the employee is very well protected so I see unions as something of a relic - I certainly can't recall many instances in recent times of where they have improved the situation, beyond self interest of their members without looking at the bigger picture.

As for unions in F1? I can't see that!!

[bhall]

Those are measures that protect employees and their employers by ensuring workers are only tasked with jobs they are qualified to do. The benefit to employees is obvious. For companies, it limits liability.

Moreover, such provisions are always negotiated as part of a labor contract. It's not workers or their unions arbitrarily deciding what they will and will not do.

You know you're doing something right when people hate you. If there ever comes a time when unions are truly outdated, no one will be talking about unions at all.

[czt]

Are you a union rep by any chance bhallg2k?

[Jersey Tom]

Those are measures that protect employees and their employers by ensuring workers are only tasked with jobs they are qualified to do. The benefit to employees is obvious. For companies, it limits liability.

Moreover, such provisions are always negotiated as part of a labor contract. It's not workers or their unions arbitrarily deciding what they will and will not do.

You know you're doing something right when people hate you. If there ever comes a time when unions are truly outdated, no one will be talking about unions at all.

So much BS I don't even know where to start. It doesn't make me hateful, it makes me sad.

[strad]

Why? It's true.

[bhall]

Are you a union rep by any chance bhallg2k?

Nah. I just get really irritated when people crusade against unions, because I've found that 99% of detractors have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. I think they blame workplace bureaucracy, strikes, etc., on unions when that's not the case at all.

No one alive today has firsthand experience of what it was like before unions, and I think that makes it very easy to forget all they've done and how bad things were before they did it.

The 40-hour work week is a union product. Weekends are a union product. Vacations are a union product. Minimum wage is a union product. Company health insurance is a union product. Safety standards are union products. Child labor laws are union products. Workman's compensation is a union product. Collective bargaining is a union product. It goes on and on.

Hell, before unions, you could be sent to prison if you were unable to repay a debt. Before unions, your employer effectively owned you. It should be clear to everyone that unions have served a great purpose.

And to those who would call them relics, just look at the recent history of what happens when companies are allowed to operate by their own rules. When banks were deregulated they promptly brought the world economy down to its knees because what used to be called corporate responsibility took a back seat to profits.

That ethos will never, ever change, my friends, because corporations have one job and one job only: to increase shareholder value. No more; no less. That's it. Everything else, from what they make to how they make it and to whom do they pay to make it, are instruments to support that singular goal. Unions serve to keep workers from being trampled on in the process.

[Pierce89]

I have no idea if or how this correlates with the practices of other nations, but here in the States, if a union shop hires "scabs," management will quickly find themselves answering to the National Labor Relations Board and potentially liable for considerable compensatory and punitive damages to the union.

Every system must have checks and balances. Unions balance management.

And my little jab about weekends was mostly tongue-in-cheek. That said, I think it would be very difficult to stage a grand prix if no one could watch or attend because everyone had to work.

Your top paragraph is correct which is why unions are becoming so hated in the U.S.

P.S. I see you're a southerner. I'm from Alabama and the coal mining industry in Alabama has been nearly completely eradicated and jobs down to 25% of what they were thanks to the UMW(United Mine Workers). I used to make 22$ dollars an hour driving a skidsteer putting myself through school. Now I'm up to my eyes in student loans because the UMW sued my non-union(scab as you put it) mine because that property was once used for a union mine and they thought that location always should be unionized and the litigation costs eventually put our mine out of business.

[bhall]

Resentment of unions comes almost exclusively from the right because it's far easier to turn unions into scapegoats than it is to acknowledge the colossal failure of fiscal conservatism nearly every time it's been adopted as the basis for economic policy. It's quite beyond me how anyone can suggest that labor costs be cut and regulations relaxed while corporate liquidity is at record levels. Shouldn't it stand to reason that if "trickle down" really worked, the economy would be far stronger than it really is simply because there's more money at the top than ever before?

I don't know the specifics of your situation, but I am sorry to hear that you've been saddled with debt from student loans. Times are really tough. I know that because I lost my house earlier this year.

It just seems to me that no one but the federal government is willing to part with their money to make capital investments for the future. Companies are just too busy profiteering.

(Sorry, that turned into more of a broad rant than I intended.)

I'll finish with this: labor contracts are always negotiated, and I can assure you that neither labor nor management would agree to a deal if they felt it would effect them adversely. However, when things go awry - too often from self-inflicted wounds - management never seems to have a problem asking for concessions from labor before even considering adjusting their bottom line.

[strad]

all true

[Mr Alcatraz]

+1 Many years ago when I was a freshman in college carrying a full load. I was simultaneously being taught "trickle-down economics", and working 30 hours a week. It was a very good thing that I belonged to a union otherwise I would have been worked until I dropped. At least there was plenty of work then. Times have changed, and not for the better. It is a catch 22. There is much less work. Outsourcing domestic white and blue collar jobs along with weak, corrupt, political prostitution in at the state, and federal level is a huge contributing factor in the disintegration of the middle class in the States. "Trickle-down economics" stopped working a long time ago.

End of rant.

[Pierce89]

Resentment of unions comes almost exclusively from the right because it's far easier to turn unions into scapegoats than it is to acknowledge the colossal failure of fiscal conservatism nearly every time it's been adopted as the basis for economic policy. It's quite beyond me how anyone can suggest that labor costs be cut and regulations relaxed while corporate liquidity is at record levels. Shouldn't it stand to reason that if "trickle down" really worked, the economy would be far stronger than it really is simply because there's more money at the top than ever before?

I don't know the specifics of your situation, but I am sorry to hear that you've been saddled with debt from student loans. Times are really tough. I know that because I lost my house earlier this year.

It just seems to me that no one but the federal government is willing to part with their money to make capital investments for the future. Companies are just too busy profiteering.

(Sorry, that turned into more of a broad rant than I intended.)

I'll finish with this: labor contracts are always negotiated, and I can assure you that neither labor nor management would agree to a deal if they felt it would effect them adversely. However, when things go awry - too often from self-inflicted wounds - management never seems to have a problem asking for concessions from labor before even considering adjusting their bottom line.

Maybe resentment of unions does come ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY from the right. But I'm a 27 years old and I've been working blue collar labor for 10 years and I'm up to my eyes in student loans. I'm quite far from the right wing. I absolutely don't resent unions in theory(been a member of two) but I do resent their practical application over the past 15 years, and I hate how politically entangled they've become. I used to vote almost exclusively democrat, now I only vote in local elections because the left and right are screwing me on the federal level and unfortunately for a blue collar laborer the unions are helping them do it.

[mx_tifoso]

Would you guys prefer that this discussion be moved to the Off Topic section? Otherwise we'll have to get back on track to the F1 industry.

[mx_tifoso]

Some of the larger teams tried to increase the race staff to 55 (from 47) but the proposal was rejected within FOTA.

Top teams' bid to increase staff limit rejected in FOTA - autosport

[bhall]

On topic: As much as I am a proponent of unions in general, I don't think they'd work in F1 due to the international nature of the sport. Each team would be bound to the labor laws of the country in which it is incorporated, thereby giving teams based in nations with lax labor laws an inherent advantage. It's then not difficult to envision a scenario in which every team eventually relocates to China.

I think FOTA is just about as good as it's going to get.

[Jersey Tom]

Edit/delete - Too long.. will rewrite at some point