Yeah, but, 365k in T.O. buys you a very very humble home (or at least it did). 365 k in Hamilton buys you a palace.foghorn leghorn said:
4% Property Tax Hike
- Thread starter Rockslinger
- Start date
your right to make comments, your right to work for any city and your right as a worker to join a union if majority wants it 50% +1
OJ: I know you're pro union and all but with every audit of the public sector costs in Toronto and the TTC the number one cost is labour. For eg: the last time the Sun did an expose of the TTC they noted in particular that the number of TTC employees who hit the $100K club increased by something like 300% over the last 5 yrs. Up until that point it was about 1 a year.
As for not working for a union. No, I can honestly say that I would never be able to function in a union enviroment. I was "management" where union workers were in the warehouse and even THEY were getting fed up with all the rules (like a warehouseman not being able to put a box on the fedex truck because that was the shipper's job).
I've worked (albeit semi-illegally) in many places in the US where the workers were union, and in many places where they were a "right to work" state (meaning the union couldn't stop anyone from earning a living). I worked with guys who moved from a union location because they got too frustrated with the bullshit. In addition, in the non-union locations we got far more work done in less time, better work done, and far less headaches than union halls.
Sorry, I'm the type of person that: if a lightbulb burns out, I'll replace it. If a screw needs tightening, I'll tighten it. If a piece of carpet lifted, I'll retape it and if a sign was crooked, I'll straighten it. In union locations you need 4 different union workers to do the above tasks with a minium of 4 hrs each. The total time for me to do all the above would be maybe 30 minutes.
THIS is the reason I am anti-union in addition to the fact that in cities where the halls were union, the guys worked maybe (on average) 10 hrs a week. In non union halls, the guys worked (on average) 50 to 60 hrs a week (and took home the same hourly rate as it was the UNION that charged the customers more but paid the same).
As for not working for a union. No, I can honestly say that I would never be able to function in a union enviroment. I was "management" where union workers were in the warehouse and even THEY were getting fed up with all the rules (like a warehouseman not being able to put a box on the fedex truck because that was the shipper's job).
I've worked (albeit semi-illegally) in many places in the US where the workers were union, and in many places where they were a "right to work" state (meaning the union couldn't stop anyone from earning a living). I worked with guys who moved from a union location because they got too frustrated with the bullshit. In addition, in the non-union locations we got far more work done in less time, better work done, and far less headaches than union halls.
Sorry, I'm the type of person that: if a lightbulb burns out, I'll replace it. If a screw needs tightening, I'll tighten it. If a piece of carpet lifted, I'll retape it and if a sign was crooked, I'll straighten it. In union locations you need 4 different union workers to do the above tasks with a minium of 4 hrs each. The total time for me to do all the above would be maybe 30 minutes.
THIS is the reason I am anti-union in addition to the fact that in cities where the halls were union, the guys worked maybe (on average) 10 hrs a week. In non union halls, the guys worked (on average) 50 to 60 hrs a week (and took home the same hourly rate as it was the UNION that charged the customers more but paid the same).
As usual, tboy made a number of valid comments about union shops. It is also important to distingusih between private sector unions and public sector unions. Private sector unions are subject to market discipline as the CAW and UAW are finding out to their grief. Public sector unions are monopolies with monopoly pricing power which they do not hesitate to constantly abuse.
Pros and Cons to unions I'd say.
Cons
----
Many years ago, a guy I used to know worked for Canada Post in Regina delivering mail. He used to drop by a mutual friend's place around lunch to play some D&D and smoke a few "select" smokes. One day I asked him about all these Canada Post trucks that flocked to this A&W around lunch and would be there till 4ish. He tells me those guys are killing time. Seems these guys sort their mail in the morning, deliver the mail, and then they're done for the day. However early they get done. Which was why this guy was playing D&D with us around lunch.
One year the union went on strike. This guy was genuinely angry that the government wouldn't give him the raise he wanted. Go figure, eh?
To this guy's credit though, he liked to finish early and sometimes pick up another route. Seems the pay goes through the roof for that cause that's considered overtime. Has things changed?
Pros
---
My parents weren't terribly well educated. CUPE ensured that their jobs were secure, and well paying jobs (compared to what they previously had). I personally can't really argue with that.
Cons
----
Many years ago, a guy I used to know worked for Canada Post in Regina delivering mail. He used to drop by a mutual friend's place around lunch to play some D&D and smoke a few "select" smokes. One day I asked him about all these Canada Post trucks that flocked to this A&W around lunch and would be there till 4ish. He tells me those guys are killing time. Seems these guys sort their mail in the morning, deliver the mail, and then they're done for the day. However early they get done. Which was why this guy was playing D&D with us around lunch.
One year the union went on strike. This guy was genuinely angry that the government wouldn't give him the raise he wanted. Go figure, eh?
To this guy's credit though, he liked to finish early and sometimes pick up another route. Seems the pay goes through the roof for that cause that's considered overtime. Has things changed?
Pros
---
My parents weren't terribly well educated. CUPE ensured that their jobs were secure, and well paying jobs (compared to what they previously had). I personally can't really argue with that.
Justanormalguy, isn't your Canada Post story an example of piecework? Like the seamstress paid so much per each shirt collar, the CP guys sound like they were paid per route completed. Only unlike the immigrant in the sweatshop or at home making 10¢ per piece, the CP guys got a good deal. Same as the freelance consultant paid for her report. Or the contractor who did your roof.
Like any other pay scheme, that sort of thing gets negociated between union and management, buyer and seller and each side's supposed to be going for their maximum benefit. If management has such dim knowledge of how long a typical route actually takes, or such poor negociating skills, how is that a strike against the union?
As a taxpayer, and postage stamp buyer, I might think to replace those suit and tie guys with former union execs who obviously do a better job negociating and getting the mail delivered as well. But since Canada Post makes a profit, this shareholder, like any GM shareholder, is just gonna let those management types do it their way.
Like any other pay scheme, that sort of thing gets negociated between union and management, buyer and seller and each side's supposed to be going for their maximum benefit. If management has such dim knowledge of how long a typical route actually takes, or such poor negociating skills, how is that a strike against the union?
As a taxpayer, and postage stamp buyer, I might think to replace those suit and tie guys with former union execs who obviously do a better job negociating and getting the mail delivered as well. But since Canada Post makes a profit, this shareholder, like any GM shareholder, is just gonna let those management types do it their way.
Last first: A 300% increase in the $100K club from one is only four guys total, and presumably the three didn't jump from $20K to a hundred. What matters is the bottom line impact—which would be minimal (In fact we could be talking as trivial a difference from last year as $3 overall)—and second what the numbers might tell us about how the TTC is run.tboy said:
If it's such a telling sign, then why aren't people screaming about incompetent management? Bozos who couldn't do the numbers and see that calling in George, instead of the noobie driver, was going to put him in triple time for a week? Or refused to train a replacement for Lisa who was going on maternity which meant Faez would have to do double shifts for a year? Morons with MBAs who allowed big bad ex-bus drivers in ugly ties to bully them into unaffordable contracts?
But all anyone wants to talk about here is the 'undeserved' salaries these union members have supposedly 'extorted'. If they were department heads, no one would say boo these days, but mechanics, ticket-takers and drivers? How dare they! Now let's not forget our fellow TERBitalists in a poll said a "good income" (not further defined), was over $50K, which the socialists—Bob Rae—defined as wealthy because only 20% or fewer Ontarians actually made that much. So can I presume these folks don't deserve to be wealthy or even have good incomes? Even with splitshifts, working weekends and holidays, all-night shifts, and OT? OK at 50weeks and 40hrs per that's an outrageous $25 an hour with all that other stuff averaged in. Exorbitant!
Since you're up on TTC stuff: how many TTC managers in the $100K club? These would be the guys who fought and lost two court cases to avoid calling out bus stops, and only then took years to buy an automated system to do it. What foresight, what careful stewardship of or money, what dedication to public and customer service! Did you know that they still can't tell you on their website the best way to get from A to B. MyTTC.ca—all unpaid amateurs, lefties many of them—can. So who's earning their $100K? My vote's for the guy actually driving passengers where they want to go, not for the guy who had to commission a special study to figure out if 501 cars were being short tiurned too often.
But to finally get back to the 4% tax hike topic: You are right, in a service enterprise like a city, the biggest expense is labour. But IF—and it's a big IF—all that was hiking taxes was union wages, howcum no one, and I mean no one pushing that point has mentioned the biggest single union-wage bill in the budget? For that matter, howcum none of them has done any arithmetic to actually demonstrate how much we might save if 'reasonable' wages were paid? My bet: Proving their point's a lot harder than just singing along with the chorus, which, to my ears makes it just another prejudice heard from.
Someday I'll trade my personal stupid workplace stories tboy, but most of them are dumb rules managers laid out that make it harder, if not downright impossible to do the job they assigned. When I've had union crews I've never had a problem fixing a sign, picking up the other end of the load, or getting the spare light bulb and screwing it in, as long as I was respectful of the guys whose job it actually was. Let me guess: trade shows and exhibits? Ever work the Javitz Convention Center in NYC? Or am I as far ff the mark on this guess as you think I am on unions?
Last edited:
