A A A A Search :
Toledo Talk   (musing about Lake Erie West and beyond)
From TheAssHoleLawyer's workspace   

Counter productive ??? A union does Toledo another disservice.

A corporate giant buys HCR Manor care. Manor care appears to be a well run company providing quality service. (Notice before the buyout there were no cries of mistreated residents or poor health care at their facilities.) The corporate giant at this point may not have any reason to move the headquarters, fire personnel, or make any large scale changes, all of which would cost substantial amounts of money.

BUT.

A union - seeing a chance to make some headlines - decides to protest the corporate buyout, knowing full well that they will have ZERO IMPACT in the decision to sell. In standard union form they attack the income of the director, make false allegations about the quality of the service provided (health care will decline), and attempt to influence people through fear -- "The 700 jobs will be lost to elsewhere!!!"

SO.

The corporate giant, who previously did not have a reason to make changes, sees this political stunt as in indication of the headaches it may face if it maintains the headquarters of its newly acquired corporation in Toledo, Ohio. Measuring the cost of change against the cost and heartache of the status quo, do you think the union has DECREASED the likelihood of Toledo losing these 700 jobs or INCREASED that chance?

Do you think other large employers who may consider NW Ohio as a potential investment location are encouraged to do so when faced with this union protest, or more likely to choose another city for investment?

We won't even talk about the other businesses in that building being adversely effected by the locked doors. Ficocia's apparently was "closed for repairs," or the expenditure of YOUR TAX DOLLARS on the increased police presence at this sham of a political stunt.

The A-Hole.

www.theassholelawyer.blogspot.com

created by TheAssHoleLawyer on Oct 18, 2007 at 12:31:19 pm     Comments: 27

print      source      versions

Comments ... #

AHL, any of your parents, grandparents ever union members?

posted by ilovetoledo on Oct 18, 2007 at 01:17:46 pm     #



What does that have to do with what he said?

posted by billy on Oct 18, 2007 at 01:29:09 pm     #



As I mentioned recently on a previous thread, I worked at the HCR ManorCare headquarters for quite some time.

I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but several of their SNFs are union buildings.

What I do recall with great clarity from the time I worked there is that the SNFs with union employees did not perform any better than the non-union SNFs...actually, by most objective measures (state on-site survey results, etc.) the union SNFs were performing worse than the non-union ones.

posted by mom2 on Oct 18, 2007 at 01:45:56 pm     #



I just wondered if he was like many rabid anti-union people who owe their white-coller success to their parents' or grandparents' union membership...

posted by ilovetoledo on Oct 18, 2007 at 01:47:09 pm     #



I see. Well, my Mom belonged to a labor union and my Father did not. So what does that make me, ilovetoledo?

As a point of interest, Menard's wanted to open a plant in Toledo but after meeting with the Mayor for ten minutes or so, they decided to go elsewhere.

posted by madjack on Oct 18, 2007 at 02:46:02 pm     #



You can decide for yourself. What does/did your mom and your father think of her union?

posted by ilovetoledo on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:00:57 pm     #



Madjack, they are opening a menards store in Toledo, its being built as we speak, on Alexis road, theres also one going up in oregon on brown road too, or were you refering to their distribution warehouse?

posted by tm2 on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:07:08 pm     #



The union affilation of one's parents has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the SEIU's tactics sent a positive or negative message about Toledo and the company that pays their wages.

SEIU has some rather 'strong-arm-type' tactics that are not supported by all other unions.

I did not follow this issue until today, when I read and listened to the message they were espousing...that they do not provide good care for their clients - the patients in their care.

What kind of 'good' union goes around telling everyone that the product they deliver - i.e. care for the patients/clients - is substandard???

posted by MaggieThurber on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:09:15 pm     #



I just feel like you are extremely anti-union so you are very gleeful when you do not find them at their best and want to make sure everyone knows about that.

posted by ilovetoledo on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:12:26 pm     #



By the way, how different is it when a company goes around telling everyone how substandard, lazy, and incompetant their union employees are?

posted by ilovetoledo on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:20:01 pm     #



I know someone who used to work for that company in the facilities. I was told that the nurses basically sit at the nursing station while the understaffed nursing assistants ran from room to room becasue they had 30 patients to care for. Now i know its not the nurses job to do a lot of that work but maybe hiring more assistants and less nurses would have been helpful. Also this person said if they were offered union membership all of the assistants would have jumped at it. another complaint was the nursing adminstrators getting major bonuses for passing a state review (oh did i mentioned that the week of the state review they would hire a bunch of temp assistants for a week, then lay them off when it was over)

posted by tm2 on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:25:53 pm     #



tm2 - you can't just hire more assistants and fewer RNs. There are minimum ratios in each state which need to be followed regarding how many RNs, nursing assistants, etc. there need to be per patient. You could suggest hiring more assistants in general, but RN positions couldn't be cut to do so.

Also, if your friend felt that "all" of the assistants would have jumped at the chance for union membership, then they should have pursued it. As I mentioned above, there are union SNFs owned by HCR ManorCare - there would have been nothing stopping the workers in your friend's facility of employment from voting in a union.

P.S. I have worked as a nursing assistant and can tell you that it is definitely a thankless job. (An important job, but a thankless job nonetheless.) However, I can also tell you that your friend's perception that the nurses were just sitting around was probably a little distorted...the RNs in a nursing facility have a variety of responsibilities and are overworked as well. Just because your friend thought it "looked" like all they did was sit in the nurses station doesn't mean that they weren't doing their own very important tasks as well. Having worked as an assistant myself, I can understand from the assistant perspective why it looks like no one else is doing anything. However, having worked on the other side as well, I also know that looks can be deceiving. :)

posted by mom2 on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:45:17 pm     #



BTW, A-hole lawyer...I'd hope that this union demonstration would not affect whether or not the new group decided to keep the headquarters in Toledo.

The union argument isn't whether or not the employees at the headquarters should be unionized. (I don't see that happening, and I can't imagine anyone making that argument.)

The unions are trying to argue whether or not more of the actual SNFs should be unionized. Those are individual locations scattered all across the country (in at least 26 states, if I recall correctly). Some are located in regions that are very pro-union, some are not. Regardless of where the corporate headquarters was located, the union/non-union issue is something that's decided at the local level for each facility.

It would be foolish for the new owners to let the union protest affect whether or not they keep the HQ in Toledo, as the union decision will still remain at the SNF level across the country.

posted by mom2 on Oct 18, 2007 at 03:52:41 pm     #



Without getting into much detail, the entire family supported Mom's union activities. When she was on the picket line we'd drive by and honk. Go Mom!

Dad was in management and had to deal with the teamsters union. For the most part he ignored them, but I know he carried a gun sometimes and probably made it very clear that he'd shoot. He never had any problems, although the teamsters would go out of their way to irritate him - they just never went too far out of their way.

Menards wanted to open a truss plant, which is now in Findley (I think). I can't be certain which mayor they met with, but the time frame suggests Jack Ford.

It would be foolish for the new owners to let the union protest affect whether or not they keep the HQ in Toledo

Foolishness has never slowed anyone down before. I don't see why it should now.

posted by madjack on Oct 18, 2007 at 06:55:19 pm     #



they are opening a menards store in Toledo, its being built as we speak, on Alexis road,

Pardon me for going off subject, but TM, where on Alexis is this going in??

posted by billy on Oct 18, 2007 at 07:19:54 pm     #



ilovetoledo...again, rather than address the content of the comments, you attack the poster. I'm not sure if your 'anti-union' comment was for me or someone else, but I'm not anti-union - and multiple union endorsements throughout my public career should surely demonstrate that fact.

However, I recognize and appreciate the difference between the SEIU tactics and those of other unions when it comes to making their point. I didn't see the UAW going around telling everyone that the products they produce are substandard, even when they were on strike. SEIU uses some very controversial tactics which are not always supported or endorsed by other unions.

Unlike you, I see good and bad in both management and unions. I was raised to believe that the "need" for a union (versus a desire for one) was a sign of poor management. Unions and management today have embraced new ways of working cooperatively to achieve company profitability which results in continued employment.

I found this review of SEIUs tactics (written by a CWA union organizer) interesting:

As one of its key strategists, Stephen Lerner, argues in "United We Win," an SEIU "discussion paper," that the union's increased "market share" has helped raise the living standards of many thousands of new members among the working poor. (3) For many activists and academics, this record of success ends any debate about the best way for other unions to grow.

Some observers do question whether the SEIU "organizing model" is readily transferable, however. They note that SEIU has, until now, had the singular advantage of operating mainly in the public sector, among smaller private firms, or within health care and home care entities that rely on public funding--a ready-made environment for union political leverage, lobbying and deal-making.

IBM, Toyota, Microsoft, Wal-Mart, Verizon Wireless, Overnite, or even partially unionized General Electric operate in an entirely different league--as unions trying to organize them are reminded every day.

Against such adversaries, no amount of clever corporate campaigning, Justice for Janitors pageantry, or even craven political maneuvering--such as SEIU's embrace of industry-backed "tort reform" that would restrict lawsuits against elder-abuse in California nursing homes--is likely to secure organizing rights or recognition anytime soon.

In contrast, at the "for-profit" nursing homes that SEIU is now partnering with--to the dismay of California patient advocates--the union's new "alliance" with management may indeed boost its "market share." (4)

When workers win--by whatever method--a greater "voice at work," this doesn't guarantee that they'll have sufficient control over their union, its internal decision-making or leadership. At the bargaining table in any industry, it's obviously better to have "union density" than not have it; but "density without democracy" is a deficiency which can, over time, seriously undermine union contract enforcement and rank-and-file militancy on-the-job.

The lack of financial accountability and transparency, which goes hand-in-hand with undemocratic practices, leads to business unionism at its worst.

posted by MaggieThurber on Oct 18, 2007 at 07:20:41 pm     #



Billy - at Benore, catty-corner to Meijers

posted by MaggieThurber on Oct 18, 2007 at 07:22:14 pm     #



By the way, how different is it when a company goes around telling everyone how substandard, lazy, and incompetant their union employees are?

Could you please provide details and factual eveidence where HCR Manor Care has expressed disparaging comments towards it union employees?

In the interest of full disclosure I am a current HCR ManorCare employee.

posted by KraZyKat on Oct 19, 2007 at 12:00:43 am     #



evidence I really must start proof reading before posting. My fat fingers and the KB cause conflict.

posted by KraZyKat on Oct 19, 2007 at 12:08:26 am     #



Could you please provide details and factual evidence where I SAID that HCR Manor Care has done this? You are right, you better start proof reading what you are responding too, also.

posted by ilovetoledo on Oct 19, 2007 at 05:57:35 am     #



mom2, when my friend worked there was a VERY LONG time ago, no one even thought about unionizing at the time, but i see your point about the nurses, i guess it was just her personal perception at the time.

posted by tm2 on Oct 19, 2007 at 07:16:31 am     #



<I>Dad was in management and had to deal with the teamsters union. For the most part he ignored them, but I know he carried a gun sometimes and probably made it very clear that he'd shoot. He never had any problems, although the teamsters would go out of their way to irritate him - they just never went too far out of their way.</I>ha

Same here Madjack. My father was in management, and had to negotiate with teamsters in the 60's and 70's. He carried a gun in those days as well. From what I understand many of the teamsters reps were decent guys, but things did not need to escalate very far before he would be confronted with goons.

posted by nick44 on Oct 19, 2007 at 11:22:52 am     #



Dad - as a state employee was unionized.

Mom - as a nurse, not sure.

I have worked in union and non-union jobs throughout my carreer(s).

I was not raised to be indoctrinated by the pro-union only stance without analyzing the facts and economic realites of any given labor issue. My parents and I rarely if ever had political economic discussions.

The unions I have worked for did little for me; not nothing, but little. I think unions were necessary to bring the country into the modern era, balance the scales during the industrial revolution, and served a good purpose.

However, in the modern world, they are antiquated, political interest groups who do more to stifle production and economic growth for both workers and management. And until I moved to the midwest I was not fully aware of the lies, manipulation, and strong arm tactics they use, which generally negatively impacts their workers, and communities as a whole. That was the main point of my post.

Just my humble opinion.

Be it ever so humble..........

The A-Hole

posted by TheAssHoleLawyer on Oct 19, 2007 at 11:51:26 pm     #



ILT...
Could you please provide details and factual evidence where I SAID that HCR Manor Care has done this?

Well...since this article was started to discuss SEIU's picketing of HCR and your comment
By the way, how different is it when a company goes around telling everyone how substandard, lazy, and incompetant their union employees are?

appears to be in response to Maggie's comment
What kind of 'good' union goes around telling everyone that the product they deliver - i.e. care for the patients/clients - is substandard???

one can make the conclusion that you were indeed speaking of HCR Manor Care. If this was not your intentions I stand corrected. However, when commenting on an article (in which the subjects are as clearly defined as they were in this article) which diverges away from the original subjects, you should clearly delineate that you are speaking of someone else to avoid the confusion.

posted by KraZyKat on Oct 20, 2007 at 12:39:14 am     #



In addition, if you were not speaking about HCR, then your comment is irrelevant. Just because one employer stupidly runs down its own employees does not mean that another does.

If HCR does not do this, then why does your comment bear on this discussion?

posted by MoreThanRhetoric on Oct 20, 2007 at 08:51:45 am     #



I just wondered if he was like many rabid anti-union people who owe their white-coller success to their parents' or grandparents' union membership...

I always try to keep a level head but for some reason I have a hard time deciding which shade of grey when it comes to unions. So I'll give you my view.

I'm for the most part anti-union, well let me say I think of unions not as a bunch of guys banding together to protect themselves from the abuses of a hard and often cold workplace (as it was when my grandfather in the coal mines) Unions now adays are more like a business.

I'm just started to break out of the poor class into maybe a middle class status because I worked my butt off, studied instead of partying and self taught my trade.

Anyway, Unions were good back in the day. When coal minders (car manufacturers whatever) were making $0.40 cents a day, the "company" had it's own store that you could only buy from, maybe lived in "company housing" all which they controlled and you paid in credits instead of cash. The "company" owned the town and it's people. Unions helped that.

Unions are good if the company and the people can get the most out of it, while still able to keep the doors open.

Those days seem to be long gone though. Unions are companies in themselves who seem to often use the same business practices that they tried to fight in years past. They seem to want to screw the company and get the best benefits, most money, no matter what the cost to the company. But what's the point if you drain the company out of business or they are forced to relocate to keep from going bankrupt.

Let me give you an example. A guy in the building I work, worked at the Ford plant in (Monroe?) he said he was making $29 an hour. ($29!!) just to stand in line and make a couple hand motions. They often worked 12 hours a day, but since the goal wasn't hours it was numbers, they often could reach their daily quota in 6 hours and they would go home, go to sleep in some corner of the factory, whatever. Still getting paid $29 for those 12 hours. Eventually it caught up with them and the quota's increased but still.

His kid sister worked there only 1.5 years and was given a $110,000 buyout. That's more than I'll make in 3-4 years JUST to quit. He was given the same package having worked there 10 years.

He said he missed the money, and the easy work but the place was closing doors next year.

Moral of the story? He business closed.

If this was the 30's 40's yeah I'd be pro Union. Now adays in a global economy they're just not as effective.

Again just my view, if you're for or against unions more power to you. There just needs to be a better balance.

posted by jshriver on Oct 20, 2007 at 12:05:20 pm     #



BTW - that union protest didn't just occur here in Toledo.

The same union picketed the Carlyle group's headquarters in Washington DC. They can't really hold the union activity against Toledo - as I mentioned in more detail earlier in the thread, it will follow them wherever they go, and I'm sure they realize that.

posted by mom2 on Oct 21, 2007 at 09:18:43 pm     #