US Steel Strike continues

[Ruby Tuesday]

www.simcoereformer.ca/2013/05/26/protect-canadian-jobs-mayor

Hope the link works. Seems as though some of the thread comments aren't supportive of the union. I disagree with the mayor on wanting to get the governments (provincial and federal) involved. I think the offer should have been accepted and now it's costing everyone because it wasn't.

Also, why would someone that's made an "above average" wage for our area all of a sudden not be able to "afford" the gas to drive a half hour, or to keep their mortgage payments up (house should be paid for anyways!). I believe that the tenure of a lot of ppl there is fairly extensive, but I could be wrong.

Do you think that the gov't should get involved when a contract is rejected that pays ppl more than just about any other production associate (or hourly wage earner for all that goes) in Norfolk County?

[Rick Wisson]

I sure wont shed a tear if they never go back to work.

[retired2]

Piss poor attitude. The Govt should not have ever let them buy the company in the first place. Now they are trying to close it so they can take all the bussiness to the US plants

[Spidubic]

US Steel made their final offer before the strike and I think they will wait the union out no matter how long. They will simply ramp up production in their US plants and lose nothing.

[retired2]

Thats why it never should have been sold. The govt screwed up again letting the deal go through

[uncle jack]

spidubic you are obviously miss informed it is a lockout not a strike we were willing to keep working and negotiating but they do not want to

[Spidubic]

Yeah, I keep putting strike when it is lockout. Bottom line is you may have wanted to keep working but they offered their last offer and I would say right now it s a take it or leave it offer. I knew as soon as they jumped to the lockout the workers were screwed. My gut says US Steel will lockout until you accept the offer. I am sure their other plants are more than happy for the increase in work.

[Cuttin Bait]

Since I have been gone from the site for a bit ,[Lost password & too much work ] yea yea poor excuse ! But on the topic I have to ask Why did the some members know a year ago that they where to be locked out .
Big US Business is playing with dwn turn in World steel market . Instead of laying off US Jobs, close the CDN plant on labour dispute , save money & look good to the House & the Senate
The iron ore mines on the U S side of L Superior have started to slow dwn , not hard to read this one

[Spidubic]

Union messed up bad this time IMHO. And it is going to cost the workers.

[growler]

and about the sale of stelco.
they seen the steel industry is in a downturn world wide,so rather than refinance,and clean up the problems that were dragging it down,they threw in the towel and wen the bankruptcy route!
the govt finally seen the steel mill in nova scotia was a money pit and closed it,they had already give up on algoma at the sault,and quit the subsidy for it,so why would they stop someone from buying stelco ?
the biggest custom alloy producer in canada,welland based atlas alloys went broke and closed ddown,welland forge switched from iron to aluminum t stay in business.
the world has to many steel mills working to make business a profit.
its not ussteels fault costs have to be kept in line!
so why blame the gov't or the company for mmaking a reasonable decision,canada don't use only about 45% of what we make,so if they don't want the contract they can pick apples,berry's or whatever !

[retired2]

I just like blaming the Govt.

[growler]

oh i enjoy blaming them when they screw up to,if you have noticed !

[tom278]

Yep it,s always easier to blame the workers instead of greedy ceo,s.

[Spidubic]

I don't blame the workers for wanting better. Everyone wants better. I blame the Union firstly as I think they overestimated their position. US Steel wins no matter what. Either they lock out the workers till they give in thus US Steel wins. Or they lock them out long enough that they can simply move all production stateside and close all Canadian operations. Either way they win. The Union did not think things through enough and now sadly the workers are going to pay for it.

[uncle jack]

wow you guys are way smarter than the union, we are not asking for better, only to remain the same not give away

[tom278]

I don,t work there or have any connection to it..That being said I have had plenty of dealings with corporate ceo,s.When they release any info to the press they will make sure the spin is in their favour.I believe you must be a current employee to know the truth.

[Spidubic]

Everyone spins things to suit their side. CEO and Union. No one wants to look like the bad guy and would prefer the other guy does. It is like Obi Wan said, "it all depends on your point of view." The real truth is somewhere in the middle.

[kishgo]

[longtallsally]

Tom 278 said ...I believe you must be a current employee to know the truth.

On the contrary, I don't think current employees know the truth. That's the troubling thing about this situation--they only have the Union's spin. If they had the truth, they'd surely still be working.

[growler]

and to the people who think they are cheap about the benefits,think about how much insurance would cost for a drug plan alone,for not just the workers (approx.1000 workers)but for all that get coverage from it !(approx.4000! husband,wife,kids(2))
and i know some only are collecting for 1,but some are collecting for 7 or 8!
i don't think the company would be upset if they just covered the workers,but they cover the whole group!

[Ruby Tuesday]

Benefits are a huge cost to employers. Not sure what the US sites' coverage is like, but for most US companies that buy Canadian companies - the Canadian company that's acquired usually has tons more benefit coverage than their US locations. Canadian's are fortunate for that.

Where I work our social costs are approximately 50% of an hourly associate's wages. So, for an employee that makes $20 per hour the total hourly costs are actually $30 per hour. For US Steel the % for social costs would be higher, as I know their overall compensation packages are better. My estimate would be that their social costs would be running 60% at least. So, if the employee makes $30 per hour in their case the overall cost of having that employee on their payroll would be $48 per hour. You can see how that can quickly be a huge impact on the residual profits - high payroll costs. Obviously no company can operate without good people. It's a matter of finding what would be a fair wage for the work being done in the respective geographical labour area.

The company also looks at labour market factors when making compensation decisions. If they are not paying enough it would be hard to recruit and maintain appropriately skilled labour, as they would desire to work elsewhere. They also look at things, such as location and working conditions. Incentives may or may not be needed depending on those two added factors.

I just don't see where this refusal to accept came from considering all of that.

There is also an element of a sense of entitlement. The old saying, the more you make the more you want. Happens historically when people are highly compensated and become somewhat expectant that the trend will always continue on a positive trend, and more so as seniority increases for the most part.

[kishgo]

RT, I truly enjoy reading your perspective on these kinds of situations. My hubby says he would love to have you work for him!
Your sense of entitlement is bang on. (And same for teachers, although ten years ago you never would have heard me say so,)

[Ruby Tuesday]

Thanks! I am truly an anti-union person. Reason being is that I've always worked very hard and am proud of my accomplishments. I do not need to pay someone to help me or to bargain for me. My work does that by itself.

I have approached every job as though I was the owner.... Thinking of it in that perspective. My husband has his own business and we disagree also on how it's ran. Constructively, if course!!!

[growler]

Thanks! I am truly an anti-union person. Reason being is that I've always worked very hard and am proud of my accomplishments. I do not need to pay someone to help me or to bargain for me. My work does that by itself.

I have approached every job as though I was the owner.... Thinking of it in that perspective. My husband has his own business and we disagree also on how it's ran. Constructively, if course!!!

well here's something that will shock a bunch of forum members that read my post's
I'M NOT ANTI-UNION !
now i know what you all think,after reading my remarks,about union things,but i agree that in the past unions were needed,as they still are,but i am ANTI-GREED !
a union still needs to be in place to PROTECT WORKERS from some MANAGEMENT TACTICS!
one recently took place locally,that mis-used the employee in volved,as well as the people being served by this worker.
and as it was a deliberate mis-use of managements powers, i am in the start of writing the story of it.
but to save being sued by the mangers involved,i am having to changethe names and job descritions,and the name of the facility being used.
but you will all get a chance to read this editted version of a workplace fairy-tale, or night-are,depending on your point of veiw.
i'll post it in/on this and another forum,and may try to get our locaal paper to publish it even.
anyways just thought i'd tell you about it first !

[Ruby Tuesday]

Most situations such as what you've referred to can be considered under Human Rights. An employee would have grounds to claim unfair and unjust treatment (without penalty, of course) if they could demonstrate what you are indicating as truly happening. If you can demonstrate that situation (not 100%sure what actually happened), whereas the employee was put in a compromised employment situation due to management exercising their authority beyond reasonable and customary grounds.

Doesn't cost anything to file it either. The employer can not penalize the employee for filing.

Again, employees already have rights through law and Provincial legislation. They don't need to pay unions too.

[Sponsored content]