Optician's Unionize?

[kjw1231]

This made me think from another thread...

Seeing how there is little support from the National Licensing boards..aka "Alaska"...and how the squeeze is on to remove higher priced Opticans...aka "Company Policy"...is it time to unionize?

Thoughts:

- There needs to be unified voice that just does not seem to be one presently. The NAO, ABO and others have "tried" to get some national issues addressed, but has not delivered. Yet, they are stupified on why there is there is declining dues coming in.
- There are several National Unions that would sponsor an Optician's Union
- You cannot be fired if you unionize nor can your employer have prejudice against you
- There would be a voice in Washington and at State levels to draw awareness to the issues and to address concerns.
- Would provide job stability

In town, there area few union shops remaining. In fact, one of the larger offices has a majority of the third party union contracts, because he has union workers, but it is a double edged sword. They tried to fire an Optician, but had to keep him on. They tried to pull the old "we cannot afford the pay raise", yet; they purchased a YACHT (yes a YACHT), bought a home for the owners daughter but could not find another 15 cents an hour to pay a loyal employee of 5 years. The Union threatened a STRIKE, which the owner did not want to see happen.

In a non-union shop, a friend of mine lost his job because the owners realized that they have given "too many generous wage increases" over the past 15 years. They have 3 locations and have done very well for themselves. They decided to hire recent graduates for $10.00 an hour instead of paying $20.00 an hour. The other Opticians at the other locations were asked to take a pay cut, or leave. I guess loyalty means squat.

I also noticed that Lenscrafters (at least locally) is hiring former GAP and retail mangers to run their stores. They have scaled back to 2 FT opticians and a floater between stores. The General Manager makes a whopping $8.50 per hour and is compensated for the performance of the store. Oh yeah, if you are a licensed Optician, you must work alternating Saturdays/Sundays and work at least two evenings a week. I can't really say that I blame them for their position on salaries, hey they are a business, but the Optician's suffer.

Just imagine for a minute, a STRIKE at a chain store that makes it on the evening news.

What do you think?

[Alan W]

I think you need to get one started right now.
If we can't form an association that will stem the tides . . . maybe we need a club! (As in whack on the side of the head!).
Sorry, I'm not available . . .

I've got Mah Jong at 1, tea at 3, and my shrink at 4!

[hcjilson]

Back in the 60's the AFL/CIO had an optical union, I have no idea if they (the union) still exist but it probably would be easy enough to check.Physicians have done it, Nurses have done it...why not Opticians.It sure would go a long way to stifle the assaults on our profession.

hj

[Alan W]

The Retail Clerks Union, AFL/CIO has several optical members, WalMart is being deluged with it in Las Vegas, the hospital workers union has optical members. Kaiser Permanente is almost exclusively union opticians and it doesn't seem to have hurt them at all. And, Kaiser Permanente is a big employer of opticians. We need to realize that we don't need an emploiyers permission to be in a union nor its blessings. It ain't gonna happen!

This would be a slam dunk if a couple phone calls were made. It would also spell havoc to a bunch of so-called benevolent employers who can't seem to see opticians worth a whole lot more than the clerk recently transferred from the garden center, (there I go again!).

There should be an Optical Workers Union. There needs to be something. But, something doesn't happen here and I'm not too sure it should . . . but, it needs to happen, anyway. And, if you guys are real serious . . . well . . . bring em on. I get emails all the time from the WalMart Union people in Vegas. It seems that wherever they are .. . people do better and wherever they are not . . . people are led think the ABO Certificate is a passport to wealth that never happens. Meanwhile, the employers who push ABO and are anti-union use the ABO INSTEAD of wealth. It's like....you may be underpaid, but, your ABO Certificate is worth a lot . .. just not here, even if we tell you to get one.

[kjw1231]

Hello,

I have several large local Unions here that would be willing to offer the opportunity.

I can call and get the ball rolling...do you think people would join? How would you best approach the market? At trade shows?

[Judy Canty]

Ok, guys, I read this thread first thing this morning and had to let is rest for a while.

These are my thoughts.

1. Most states are "right to work" states. What does that mean? It means that unions have little or no influence.

2. We have a national organization that has, in the past, done a pretty good job of representing the interests of Opticians. It's pretty near death at this point because Opticians chose not to support it to the tune of $65.00 per year. Do you really think that these same folks are going to lay out a much larger sum in the form of union dues?

3. I can't see the sense in trying to create a new organization that we won't support. Why not continue not supporting the one we have and save the time and effort?

I'll stroke my $500 check, $399 for firm dues and $100 for the Guild, and support the organization that is already in place. I'll register for the convention in Atlanta, get some useful education and support OAA at the same time.

If you want to unionize, knock yourself out. But remember to be careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

[Darris Chambless]

Hello to all,

I must be the "nay sayer" in this one. Unions will not solve any problems for Opticianry and if done on a large scale WILL hurt businesses even those that seem to be doing well with them in place presently. On a very small scale the Union may be effective in some places (although I've not seen it) but on a large scale it would be a Jugernaught not unlike the insurance industry.

Unions once served a purpose and did in fact help workers earn a living wage, but nowdays they are no more than a business in and of themselves. Unions work for the Union not the workers. If you don't believe that simply look at a Union strike when the workers are picketting. The Union spokesmen aren't taking home $12.50 a week to live on during the strike like the workers. Nope they are making their money that day and every other day so why are they any different than the employer?

There are very few Union shops left because the Unions are sending businesses into bankruptcy. Need proof? I see that you're in New York state. Look around at the trucking industry in your state and you'll have some proof. Unions never take into consideration the feasible percentage for employee salaries that a business MUST consider in order to stay solvent. A union thinks only in terms of the workers, which is a really nice thing to have if you're a worker but a very detrimental thing to business overall which in turn will affect the workers who will be the ones left out in the cold, not the Union guys and gals.

The loyalty issue is a good one. Unionize and you will simply see a total reversal on the loyalty issue. If the businesses can't do without the employees or can't afford a strike then the employees run the show. When no repercusions are left for the employer he/she becomes a door mat and they start taking less to provide for the demands of the Union workers.

Here's somthing to think about: Let's say I'm a doctor and I have a business that I built all by my little lonesome. I've been able to run it by myself for the last few years but now it's getting busy enough that I need a little help. I hire an employee and pay them what I can afford to because it's all I have. As time goes on the business gets better and better and more employees must be hired to handle the extra work that I cannot. Times are good and I give raises accordingly and begin to finally enjoy a little leisure time after having worked long hours for several years. I buy a yacht to go sailing and enjoy life for a little while and the employees can handle the day to day operations without me there for a few days.

Now the employees resent this since they have to be at the office while I'm out living la vida loca. They Unionize and I get a call on my cell phone while on the yacht telling me I need to get back ASAP. When I get back I have this friendly gentleman waiting for me in my office. This gentleman tells me that I'm over working my employees and that I'm gonna have to raise wages and increase time off both through the year and throughout the day or my employees will strike and I'll have to go back to running my office by myself AND it will be difficult to hire anyone because the picketters will stop them from entering by telling them of my unfair business practices or by force.

I agree to hear the terms from the Union guy. I must raise every employees salary to $20.00 and hour, give them three weeks paid vacation after the first year, four weeks after the third year and five weeks after the fifth year. I must pay into the Unions pension plan to secure every employees future at the price and rate they set and I must pay for their health insurance.

So I sit down and figure it all up:

5 employees @ $20.00 hr. = $208,000.00 yr
Pension plan @ 3% total wages per month = $6240.00yr
Temporary employee when others are out = approx. $17,500.00 yr. in addition to my regular employees salaries.
Insurance= $5880.00 yr.
Workers comp= estimate $6864.00 yr.

Then there's my fixed overhead:
Lease = 1500.00 mo. = $18,000.00 yr
Electric = $350.00 mo. = $4200.00 yr
Gas = $300.00 mo. = $3600.00 yr
Water = $50.00 mo. = $600.00 yr.
Products and materials = $4000.00 mo. = $48,000.00 yr.

So let's see my total pay out at the end of the year would be $318,884.00, 65% of which is salaries only. In business terms that means death to the business unless it is strictly or at least majority service oriented.

Then lets say the business was making $450,000.00 yr. that would leave $131,116.00 for me at the end of the year. Sounds great doesn't it? But out of that I still have to pay income tax on the employees, income tax on the business, up keep on my equipment, and any other additional expenses that might crop up being the business owner. So when all is said and done I may take home about $60,000.00 (and I'm being generous with that figure because there are other expenses that I've left out) So for $60,000.00 (give or take) a year I can be in business for myself or for $250,000.00 plus I could go work for some chain and employ only me and not have the headaches. Hmmm. I think I'd take working for the chains, but that would require that I close my business and put the five employees out of work. And guess what? Unions can't do anything if you decide to shut a business down, but don't worry they won't go hungry :) Sorry but if I'm gonna work that hard I'm not gonna do it for peanuts kind of like the employees ;) It's a vicious cycle.

Just some stuff to think about from the other side of the desk.

Darris C.

[Alan W]

You have a very convincing and compelling argument. And, I for one, find nothing wrong with it.
However . . . .
Unionization is NOT a federal law. No employer is required by law to deal with one.
Presently, few optical employers have unions to deal with.
Some do.
If you don't want to hire union people, don't.
If union people work for someone who does not have an agreement, they are the ones looking funny!
If an employer doesn't want to hire union people, it's no different than it is now.
But, if the people he now has discover their counterparts are doing better with other employers who have an agreement, then choices have to be made.
The motion picture industry and the construction industry have millions of people retired comfortably, paid well, and the product comes out fine. Everybody goes to the movies and lives in a building.
Major health providers that have agreements seem to be better run because they have learned how to control their operations better. Then there are those that are better run without them. There can be no advancement unless there is economic power. This applies to the technical levels more than the professional levels. We are technicians. Presently, anyone who sells glasses is an optician. That's baloney. If we can't create certification levels and be appropriately recognized, maybe we need to get real nasty and do it another way. Apprentice plumbers and electricians make more than opticians. Let's get real here. Whatever association opticianry ever had that brought home the bacon (meaning the Guild, etc.) is dead. So, you can explain away somebodies P & L statement, but, personally, I'm a little tired of the rhetorical attempts to raise the lot of opticianry. In that world . . . "ya wanna make more bucks...get the training...get the certification and we'll see that you get the job or your boss recognizes it. Ya wanna get the plaque on the wall and no bucks . . . g'by Charlie, rots o' ruck, have a nice day!
That's what I have been seeing for 38 years, now.
It's got to stop . . . or start pushin pozzies!

[Diane]

kjw1231 said:
This made me think from another thread...


- There needs to be unified voice that just does not seem to be one presently. The NAO, ABO and others have "tried" to get some national issues addressed, but has not delivered. Yet, they are stupified on why there is there is declining dues coming in.


What do you think?

:finger:

What I think is that NO union will represent me, unless I want to even understand who they are. They will be looking after the union. DO WE FOREVER WANT TO BE TRADESPEOPLE?

There was a time when I believe that UNIONS were necessary, and for some occupations, I believe that they still are. However, I don't believe Opticianry is one of them. We are a profession and need to represent ourselves.

I am agreeing with Judy on this. I'm going to give some information that I should have given a long time ago. I hear OAA, NAO, ABO, and NCLE referred to on this forum all the time incorrectly. First of all, too many OPTICIANS don't realize that NAO is the National Academy of Opticianry. Their business is education. Not licensure, not voicing opinions in congress, legislature, etc. You MAY be a member or fellow of the NAO. ABO in addition to NCLE are certifying agencies. They are the American Board of Opticianry and the National Contact Lens Examiners. They have no voice in congress, legislature, etc. You may be certified by either ABO or NCLE or certified by both, but you cannot be a member of either. The OAA is the Opticians Association of America. THEY ARE the organization who will represent you in congress, legislature, etc. They do need us to understand them right now and become members because rather than becoming a member and being aware of who they are and what they represent, we choose to look to some other group, who will NOT have the interest of our profession or ourselves for that matter at hand when supposedly representing us.

A couple of years ago, I had a woman call me from south Georgia. She had transferred (or rather her husband was transferred and she came too) from New York, and was licensed there. She got her license here in Georgia and went to work for an Ophthalmologist, who was willing to only pay her $6.50 per hour. She accepted the position at that rate of pay. She asked me what the starting rate of pay was for a licensed optician in Georgia, because she thought this was incredibly low and felt that somebody should do something about it. First of all I asked here if she was a member of our state association or any national association, and she said that "No, because I wasn't a member in New York, and don't see any reason to THROW my money away on association dues."

My answer to her on what the starting rate of pay for a licensed optician in Georgia had just become $6.50 per hour, because she had chosen to accept that rate of pay and MAKE it the starting rate. In response to "somebody should do something about it", my comment was that unless people like her decided that things can only get done by becoming a member of their professional organizations there is nobody to DO something. I invited her to join, first of all our state association, and then our national organizations. She again chose not to be a member of anything.

Membership in fact does cost dues, but they are dues well spent. How can an organization do something without proper membership. It becomes a catch 22. Organizations need membership to generate revenue, and support in order to DO something for the membership, and people want to know what the organization can DO for them. If not enough support the organization, NOTHING can be done for anybody, and the organziation struggles, and ultimately ceases to exist.

I hear things like the national organizations are fighting each other. That's NOT true. They can and should co-exist. There are reasons for each. The purposes and missions of each is different. One is education and the other is legislation. Let's support them and let each do their jobs for us.

Judy, I will see you in Atlanta, doing my part to support Opticianry and hope that a lot more will be there as well.


OK, that's my soap box for today.

Diane

[Texas Ranger]

Diane, what a fine response!! thank you so much for clarifying the issue. In '88, I was a Guild Council member, and had served on our state's board of Directors since '73. In a very persuavise argument, Don Klauer (the OOA pres.) talked at our state convention; he used the example of the area's Chamber of commerces, relative to supporting business growth that was healthy for the entire community. those that don't participate still gain some benefit from the Chamber's efforts...I argured this point at the Dallas OOA convention to the group of state society leaders. first of all, I am in a market area that is in the middle of 3 Chambers, so I pretty much need to support all three groups. the membership in each group is $150 annually, plus a small ad in their directory which runs from $250-500 each...so, it seems like it's a very samll price to pay to belong to and support hte OAA, and Guild, and our state's opticianry group. after I got off the state board, they decided it was "too expensive to support" being a state member society. In Texas, we don't have licensing, continuing education, etc. There are, however many very qualified opticians here, but 2/3 of the "opticians" are not ABO certified. the major chains certainly like that, now don't they? As an employer of a qualified optician, i'd feel really ashamed to think I was so grossly underpaying someone helping me make my shop successful!

[Darris Chambless]

I don't want anyone here to take offense (snicker :)

But lets look at something that some see but others do not. I hear many, as Diane has stated, say that they want to know who's gonna do something about anything regarding opticianry? Will the national organizations? Will a Union? Well if you're unable or unwilling to negotiate for yourself then one or the other will have to do. I have no problem negotiating for myself when it comes to pay and as to respect I command it and I demand it (but then that's my personality like it or not ;)

I will handle whatever comes down the pipeline myself. I don't trust anyone to handle things for me when it comes to pay rate or respect. If offices, chains or any place else won't pay me what I'm looking for then I'll go elsewhere. As to Opticianry, if a chain or doctors office won't pay me what I'm asking then I have no objection to going someplace else outside of my expertise and and learning a new trade. I won't undersell my abilities to a doctor or an optical chain but if I have to take a paycut in order to learn something new then so be it but the docs and the chains won't get my abilities at "their" price, only at mine or I'll go do something else if it comes down to it.

I will tell any and everyone to support their national organization everyday of the week, and twice on Sunday, over supporting a Union. But like I said I'll handle my business and my needs myself. Handling these things on an individual level is the best place to start. If you want better pay then ask for it! If you want respect as an Optician then demand it by proving you are who you say you are in the profession! It's just that simple and I see too many trying to make mountains out of mole hills.

Anyway take care,

Darris "If at first you don't succeed, get out of the way and let me do it." C.

[Alan W]

States license truck drivers . . . . unions don't.
There are too many misconceptions being projected here.
All across the country professionals and trades people have unions. Nurses, physical therapists, so on and so forth. National acadeic societies and organizations continue doing what they do. Often times unions get called in to reinforce the establishment of an allied health care profession as well as health care technicians in legislatures. Unions have the ability to build up financial war chests organizations beg for. Someone said earlier opticianry would be reduced to a trade. Where do you get the idea that a trade is dirt? Air conditioning (HVAC)people are a trade, and are responsible for the calculation of, installation and maintenance of air flow systems that make it possible to breathe clean air....even coat lenses. They work hand in hand with HVAC engineers. Somebody has an over estimation of what an optician is . . . optician . . . optical technician. Not a doctor. We make the optical world go around, but an AA degree is the top of degreed opticianry academia. Do we have the education of a pulmonary therapist....no. They have unions. If you don't like what the Pepper Stuffers Local 999, International Pepper Stuffers Union does, create your own that has some punch in the workplace. Somebody thinks their knuckles are going to get crushed by a baseball bat on a chain link fence by a union gorilla. You're watching too many Elliot Ness movies and you're attributing too many of your own fears and inability to make the societies we now have powerful. So far, all I seem to hear is how our little "fifedoms" will be destroyed by a .....union. Frankly, if I had to chose between what a society has accomplished in terms of raising the standard of living of an optician against what the existing unions have done for opticians in other parts of the country . . . for the purposes of raising the standard of living of an optician...I'll take a union. As for raising the credibility of opticianry academically and within the professional community, I'll take an association. As for standing up to the employers who refuse to pay a 5 year experienced optician with a degree and an ABO $20.00 bucks an hour like the physical therapists and pulmonary therapists make . . . . I'll take the union. Anyone who can give credit to an association for doing that is in denial. Let me finish with this . . . as an Area Manager for Lenscrafters, Benson, and some others including owning my own two store chain . . . unions scare me to death. As an employed optician . . . I support them. That's not beeing a hypocrit. I have choices.

[Homer]

for the great post.

My question to discussion group is when has it ever happened that a union has helped an "almost-profession" become licensed?

My thought is that it would never happen. Unions negotiate for higher wages & "better" working conditions for a price - this is a FOR PROFIT organization, no matter its tax status.

Would a union, even if it represents other professionals, work to make your job a profession. I'm guessing not.

It is interesting that the Kaiser Permante opticians in Colorad have voted to join a union, the same one that represents the OD's. I don't see any of the driving newer cars yet or bragging about how much they love their work now.

[chip anderson]

Be Careful What You Wish For!

Unions are demons, state legistatures are demons, both have their own interest an preservation first, last and always.

Chip

[Colorado]

How do you unionize a doctor's office? Take a look at the location of most opticians today. They are in the doctor's office. I feel that opticians will look after their own security before they will look at the security of a profession and the doctor will look after their security before they will look after the opticians. So the optician will look at having a job first rather than risking the job on joining a union. And you can bet that the doctor will not go along with the creation of a union to improve the opticians position.

Where does that leave the argument? Opticians have to make themselves more valuable to the doctor's office. We can't sit back and wait for an impotent national association to voice our concerns to legislators in Washington DC who are so far remove from their states that we are a very low priority.

In the case of opticians working for the independent the same idea applies. Make yourself more valuable than not. Our strength is our value to the business. Nobody is going to make you valuable you have to do it yourself. You are your resume'. How you sell yourself depends on you.

OK, I've vented enough.

Ed

[Alan W]

Your implied numbers are dead wrong. Why don't you take a look at the stats from the AOA:

30,000 independent providers.
16,000 ophthalmologists
Leaving:
14,000 optometrists
There aren't that many opticians and guess how many retail outlets there are where opticians work.....
25,000
Based on your assumptions....
There are no opticians at WalMart, Sears, B.J's Warehouses, Sam's, Target, let alone hundreds of smaller shops and small chains..

You are right that doctors will look after themselves before the opticians . . . . that's why they need some representation.
If doctors won't acknowledge an optical union .. that's fine...the trend with doctors anyway is to hire ophthalmic techs and optometric assistant at best . . . . no real optical technicians . . . and certinly none being paid much more that 8 - 9 /hour if that much.

Personally, I've been watching OD's for the last 10 years recruiting young, under or no trained, females for cheap labor and dispose of them when they reach the magic number in pay....whatever that might be. The woman need representation. They are exploited.

As for doctors joining unions . . . no need to. They've got laws that allow them to charge what they want, create needless corporations at will, so on and so forth. The best thing that ever happened to doctors gone wild is managed care. They are accountable to insurance companies....fathom that!
In a right to work state where an employer can terminate for any reason or no reason at all, you better believe they will.

Want to go for another round . . . . I've a couple more minutes before I work out.

So, what's your point? You're talking like a doctor scared stiff of employees having just a teensy weensy bit of leverage.

[chip anderson]

Oh I can see it now. Only certian opticians can solder, a whole conlave will have to be called to determine fair labor practices if one of us burns his finger or stabbs himself with a screwdriver. Some opticians will be able to take P.D.'s. Another classifcation will have to take seg.ht.'s . Frame selection will be restricted to stylists only. Frame measurements will be the optical engineer. Oh yes we need that UNION. A large part of our dues will be spent for Yachts (yes union officials can waste money just like doctors and executives.) Another large part will be spent on supporting the Democratic Party (all Unions are Democrat in nature) no matter what the majority of the members feel.

Non-union shops can be dynamited (did you know that one cannot be proscecuted for any crime if it is commiteed in the course of recruting Union membership?) Lots of good benefits. Oh you probably won't be allowed to work after retirement age, or you will lose your Union Pension plan. Oh yea, You goes down to the Union Hall and they will tell you where to go out on the job today.

You really want to crawl in bed with folks like this?

Right now if you feel oppressed you can say to Hell with this, I'm quitting and and opening my own shop across the street. Not if you are in the Union though.

Chip

Hey! We might even be able to get the Union's Mafia connections to get the doctors out of the dispensing business altogether again.

[Alan W]

Very funny!
Not one of yooz guyz has said a word about who will make the rules.
It's like gripe gripe gripe . . . this is the way it will happen. I can see it all now.
I certainly don't see you sitting on the steering committee.
No.... I take that back.
You should be.
That way . . . none of the stuff you say will happen . . . will!
In fact, all yooz guyz who spell doom . . . need to be on the doomsday committee.
That way doomsday will never come.
Hey, everybody . . . .
Here's our first Board of D's.

[Judy Canty]

While I admit that my numbers are a couple of years old, according to the US Government, 65,000 people identified themselves as Opticians on their tax forms. There are in excess of 30,000 ABO certificants.

There are enough of us to make our national organization a significant force, if we cared enough to do so. The vast majority of us don't.

[Darris Chambless]

Well Alan,

I like the idea of the "First board of Darris'." If we had that as a governing body we could get things done. But there are just too few of me. :) I will have to say that Chip is right on target with his analogy. I've dealt directly with Unionized Electricians. I would have to say I'll never do it again. The only guy in the group that actually worked was a non-Union employee; everyone else stood around a ladder talking for four to six hours, depending on how long a lunch or break they took, and then bugged out at 2:00 PM when they weren't suppose to leave before 4:00PM. If it hadn't been for the non-Union Electrician we wouldn't have been able to open up the office on time. In fact the last week the non-Union Electrician was the only one that ever showed up and he worked late to make sure he got us ready to open.

My father worked at a company that was Union. Before the Union got it's numbers of Union workers the business was the highest producing in the US, after the Union got their numbers they fell to mediocre and even started running behind in certain years. My father was a supervisor and ended up leaving the company because ultimately he and the other supervisors were responsible for production numbers. It took the supervisors too much time waiting on Union Stewards to okay certain employee tasks, the inefficientcy of having more than the number of people required for a job was a detriment and thus production went in the toilet and my father got along fine with the employees AND the Union stewards.

The best part is now the company is laying people off in droves and those that aren't being laid off are having to work 7 days a week, 8 hours minimum Saturday and Sunday. If the employees don't meet the hours required they can and will be laid off themselves. You know what the Union is doing to rectify this situation? You guessed it. Nothing, and the Union did in fact okay the hours and the hour requirements. Isn't that cool? The Union shafted the very people it was sworn to protect from these practices after creating the problems to begin with. What a great bunch of people.

And finally Alan, just to reiterate...The Union IS A BUSINESS. Their objective? To make money. The guise they operate under with which to make this money? To help the common working man by uniting them. Their motto should be "Give us your tired, your hard working (not to mention your dues) and we'll....Um...We'll...Hmmm. What will we do after that again? Ah yes. We'll darn sure do something just as soon as we figure out what that something is. And just as soon as I get back from vacation we're gonna call a meeting to find out what that something might be." :)

Sorry dude, but it's true. I have a cousin in New York that is a Union truck driver. He's selling real estate now. But the Union did pay for his braces so he's got that going for him ;)

Anyway, If you want to go Union have at it big guy. I'll watch this one from the curb though :)

Take care,

Darris C.

[10 Pence Short]

Shouldn't employees, their co-workers and the employers all be working together to acheive a common goal?

In my opinion all unions do is drive a wedge and create sides. If you have sides, then there is always an enemy. Who needs to create enemies?

Unions are created by power hungry individuals who see a group of disgruntled people and whip them up into seeing anybody who doesn't agree with the union as plain wrong, never mind the facts. That is how they work over in here, in my eyes.

By all means lobby for voting powers, offer common sense and prevail the will of the masses but unions are just too confrontational for my liking. Like Darris says, there's always somebody looking to profit from conflict. All they have to do is light the blue touch paper and stand back.