Union for F1 workers?

[czt]

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.

I agree unions in F1 wouldn't work, but I am not convinced of how readily teams would relocate to other countries.

F1 workers are fairly exploited relative to general western employment as it is! It is also very difficult to locate outside where the knowledge base currently is, as Toyota found out. Despite Germany being a great engineering nation they found themselves paying over the odds for English and Italian staff to relocate.

There is also a lot of investment tied up in factories & wind tunnels so there would have to be huge benefits to change.

[bhall]

Yes, I should have made that part a more obvious joke. (I have sometimes have a bitterly dry sense of humor.)

If the teams were all based in the same country, I'd say unions might just make sense. But, since they're not, and because labor laws are different from country to country, a unionized F1 would find teams operating without a uniform set of rules. One need only recall the reaction to Max Mosley's idea a few years ago that the teams who capped their spending at a certain amount - I can't remember how much - would have technical freedom while the big spenders would not to be reminded that F1 teams are pretty adamant about playing by one set of rules.

[Richard]

I agree with those who point out their role in protecting safety and employment rights. However I also agree with those who warn of the strangle hold they can sometimes exert on progress.

The problem in my column example wasn't about skills, there were both steel and concrete workers on site. It was about protectionism, and a load of crap about who could instruct who, and who could take orders form who, and so on. We had two skilled workers to do the job, but neither would co-operate in case it crossed a union line. As a result the job stopped for a couple of days, both sets of workers with tools in hand just standing by doing nothing. The job was in Boston and my colleague resolved the situation by thumping one of the troublesome workers. Apparently that told them that he meant business, as opposed to a suited manager in endless meetings with stewards in the cabin. We had their respect after that.

Anyway, back to topic .....

I'd expect the mechanics could call on the relevant general engineering union for advice and help if conditions were so bad as to be illegal. However, long hours and poor pay isn't illegal. Although operating dangerous machinery after long hours could be unsafe.

As other have pointed out, it's not in the team's interests to have conditions that lead to errors. A tired mechanic can destroy someone's race, just ask Button at Monaco 10 or Silverstone 11.

A constructive dialogue about continual improvement at all levels of the organisation is the approach to use.

ps "unionised" would be an appalling mistake in F1 and "unionised" workplaces are illegal in the UK, they can't say "you are only allowed to work here if you are a member of a union"

[bhall]

And richard_leeds' post reminded me of a point I was going to add.

I really think FOTA is the perfect venue for these sorts of matters. It exists outside the law, outside the FIA, outside FOM and puts the teams on relatively equal footing. (Well, as equal as it's ever going to get.) I think the FOTA agreement that effectively banned KERS in 2010, even though it was allowed by the FIA, shows that teams have the ability to make changes if they feel it's in the best interest of the sport and its players.