Foo - Management thought they could pull one over on me.

It happened once, but this time I was smart enough to ask a union steward about it.

I am the education benefit advocate at my office. I basically help people through the process of signing up for the benefit & help them with any problems they may have. This position is completely voluntary & assigned & approved by the union.

At work we have to meet certina performance metrics. If we fail to meet them disciplinary action can be taken. I am currently on a step plan as a result of not meeting the metrics for the month of Jan. This happened only once before, over a year ago. When this happened the last time my duties as the ed. benefit advocate were revoked until I was satisfactory in my metrics.

The same thing was threatened this time as well. Meaning if I don't become sat. managment is telling me they can revoke what I do as the ed. benefit advocate.

Well come to find out managment can not do that. After the meeting I had today when this was threatened I asked the union steward that was in there with me if they can revoke it & he found out they can not. And that they should not have done so the 1st time it happened. The reason is it is not company dictated, but union & per the agreement I am allowed to perform the duties as the benefit advocate on a voluntary basis, as long as it does not interefere with my job duties, it never has.

Needless to say there may be a grievence filed because of the threat. Had managment done their homework they would have found out they are not allowed to do this.

For those of you who hate unions or think they once had their place, think again. They still have their place. For one, with out it the CWA, myself & my fellow occupational employees would not be able to take advantage of the ed. benefit & go back to school. I would not be able to afford to otherwise.

Bottom line if it happens once & don't question it, shame on me. If it happens twice & I do question & find out you're not supposed to then shame on you.

I know a lot of people that receive outstanding educational benefits from their employers, and they don't pay union dues. That's on top of well above average salaries. When you are left to stand on your own, and you are capable, you stand higher.

Probably half my clients are union shops. Oh, the things I've seen happen. The choices I've seen people make. The things I've seen people get worked up over. I could go on and on.

We might as well move this over to the P&R forum . . .

I know a lot of people that receive outstanding educational benefits from their employers, and they don't pay union dues. That's on top of well above average salaries. When you are left to stand on your own, and you are capable, you stand higher.

But does their education have to be approved by the employer & does it have to be company related for the company they work for?

Our education benefit does not have to be company related & can be for anything we want to take classes for or get a degree in & does not have to be company approved. The school has to be an accredited institution of learning & the employee has to have at least 6 months of service & be a regular full or part time employee.

I work for a telecommunications company. Let's say an employee wants to get a degree in casino gaming & the classes are taught by an online university. As long as the school is accredited the benefit will pay for the classes. My company has nothing to do with casino gaming.

Do the people you know have to be full time or can they be part time? How long do they have to be on the job before they qualify for the benefit?

per the agreement I am allowed to perform the duties as the benefit advocate on a voluntary basis, as long as it does not interefere with my job duties, it never has.

So you don't feel that not meeting your performance metrics could be considered an indication that something is interfering with your job duties? Oh, but being an 'advocate' is more important than doing the job you were hired to do...that they pay you for. What was I thinking? :rolleyes:

But does their education have to be approved by the employer & does it have to be company related for the company they work for?

Our education benefit does not have to be company related & can be for anything we want to take classes for or get a degree in & does not have to be company approved. The school has to be an accredited institution of learning & the employee has to have at least 6 months of service & be a regular full or part time employee.

I work for a telecommunications company. Let's say an employee wants to get a degree in casino gaming & the classes are taught by an online university. As long as the school is accredited the benefit will pay for the classes. My company has nothing to do with casino gaming.

Do the people you know have to be full time or can they be part time? How long do they have to be on the job before they qualify for the benefit?


To me, that doesn't sound like a benefit. It sounds like really, really poor business practice. I mean, I feel sorry for your company's clients, since they're basically underwriting all those casino management classes.

If you want to go to school, work hard, make money, and do it the old fashioned way (pay for yourself.) I don't see how financial support for casino management degrees should be expected from your employer.

Are you seriously standing behind the position that a company should pay for educational benefits for an employee to get education in a field not related to the work that they provide for that company? Seriously?

'cause if that's your position, I'm bowing out of this discussion.

Are you seriously standing behind the position that a company should pay for educational benefits for an employee to get education in a field not related to the work that they provide for that company? Seriously?

'cause if that's your position, I'm bowing out of this discussion.

To answer your question & as an occupational employee, member of the union & ed. benefit advocate, yes. It is in the agreement contract between the company & the union.

This company wants it's employees to succeed in what ever they do, even if that means they leave the company after obtaining an education in something else to do so.

To me, that doesn't sound like a benefit. It sounds like really, really poor business practice. I mean, I feel sorry for your company's clients, since they're basically underwriting all those casino management classes.

If you want to go to school, work hard, make money, and do it the old fashioned way (pay for yourself.) I don't see how financial support for casino management degrees should be expected from your employer.

For one I used that as an example. I do not know if casino gaming is even taught at any accredited school. I could have easily used nursing, police sciences or EMT training, which I know is taught at accredited schools, neither of which are positions in my company an employee can bid or apply for.

This company wants it's employees to succeed in what ever they do, even if that means they leave the company after obtaining an education in something else to do so.

Again, I feel sorry for your clients. :(

Again, I feel sorry for your clients. :(

It's the phone company - are you surprised? They just pass the costs on to us.

So you don't feel that not meeting your performance metrics could be considered an indication that something is interfering with your job duties? Oh, but being an 'advocate' is more important than doing the job you were hired to do...that they pay you for. What was I thinking? :rolleyes:

Nothing is interfereing with my job duties. Jan. is a hard month to hit sales goals in after Crhistmas, no one wants to spend money, getting the Christmas shopping credit card bills, etc. It is this metric I did not meet. But with tax refunds coming the next few months will be really easy to hit the metrics.

And it probably wasn't the company who wanted this benefit - but was rammed down their throats by the Union during negotiation. I RATHER doubt that the company wants to pay for trained employees to learn another skill so they can take all the invested dollars they represent elsewhere.

Or, if so, it explains why the telecom industries have been in such bad shape.

Nothing is interfereing with my job duties. Jan. is a hard month to hit sales goals in after Crhistmas, no one wants to spend money, getting the Christmas shopping credit card bills, etc. It is this metric I did not meet. But with tax refunds coming the next few months will be really easy to hit the metrics.

Ya know what they say about excuses. You had a performance goal and you didn't meet it. I could see if you were out sick, had personal problems at home or whatever....but 'no one wants to spend money'? Sorry pal, that don't cut it. Indeed, it looks like you are trying to blame the customers for your own lack of performance.

Ya know what they say about excuses. You had a performance goal and you didn't meet it. I could see if you were out sick, had personal problems at home or whatever....but 'no one wants to spend money'? Sorry pal, that don't cut it. Indeed, it looks like you are trying to blame the customers for your own lack of performance.

I am not the only one this happened to. Jan. is not a good sales month company wide. I do the job I am trained for, but we can't make customers buy anything & unlike others I will not slam or cram.

To answer your question & as an occupational employee, member of the union & ed. benefit advocate, yes. It is in the agreement contract between the company & the union.

This company wants it's employees to succeed in what ever they do, even if that means they leave the company after obtaining an education in something else to do so.

I lied, I can't bow out.

Just because it's in a contact doesn't mean it's smart or right. As a human being that can tie his own shoes, I agree with SaabFan that it's bad business practice.

If the comapny wants it's employees to succeed and grow with the company, expand their potential with the company, and be a greater asset to the company and to their families, they pay for related educational benefits.

If a company is paying for educational benefits that will lead an employee out the door, they are doing it because a union has twisted their arms to do it, which means that they are in turn charging their customers for the benefit of companies in another field.

That's beyond silly, and enforces my opinion that unions benefit:
1. poor employees
2. union employees

I've never seen a solid, honest worker benefit from the union. The people that produce are underpaid, since they work harder than those that don't and only make more by seniority. As a result, the hard workers burn out and become mediocre workers, which levels the playing field.

All while the union officials sit in an air conditioned office between expense account lunch dates.

And it probably wasn't the company who wanted this benefit - but was rammed down their throats by the Union during negotiation. I RATHER doubt that the company wants to pay for trained employees to learn another skill so they can take all the invested dollars they represent elsewhere.

Or, if so, it explains why the telecom industries have been in such bad shape.

I don't know, nor do I care. I just know it is a great benefit, I am using it myself. My company showed a profit for 2006 & it was gained by not selling off divisions to show that profit as is what happened in the past, but was generated by sales & service. The out look for 2007 is even stronger then it was for 2006, so far.

I don't know, nor do I care. I just know it is a great benefit, I am using it myself. My company showed a profit for 2006 & it was gained by not selling off divisions to show that profit as is what happened in the past, but was generated by sales & service. The out look for 2007 is even stronger then it was for 2006, so far.
All I know is I am even happier I use an IP base VOIP phone!

My personal choice with using the benefit is I am sticking with the telecom. industry & taking classes to become a network technician. After my education is completed I will have a 2 yr. associates degree in telecommunication technology & I will consider furthering that to a 4 yr. after I become a tech. My hope is to do so with my company. I am doing this at a great time. In a couple years time there will be a lot of techs. retireing or being offered retirement & "bought out". But if there are no tech. positions available I will look at other telecom companies. I am also picky about the area I work in. For example I do not want to work in Montana or Wyoming, but I would love to work in New Mexico or Arizona, all of which are states my company offers service in.

Again I have the option to stick my company or not. I want to because I like working for them.

All I know is I am even happier I use an IP base VOIP phone!

Did you know that 911 service either does not work at all or they have a harder time finding your address because of the way it does work & forget about E911. Don't know about you but I want the response time to be as little as possible when it comes to my life & safety if I have to dial 911. Also if your electricity goes down or your internet service goes down so does your VOIP. With wireline service you still have phone service with a basic phone. Every home should have at least one phone that draws the power to operate from the phone line. I have 2.

Given that companies fold and reorganize, lay off or terminate employees just short of retirement and normally cut to the bone where it comes to worker benefits, I find this refreshing.
The company does something for the worker!
No doubt it was because the union held their feet to the fire.

Companies generally get what they pay for. It sounds like the phone company gets a better-educated workforce.
Workers get what they pay for too. Your union dues provide a great set of benefits.
For all those who scoff while paying their own way, please consider;their system is working better than yours.

That explains the extremely poor customer service I receive from my local telecom providers -- The workers with ambition get educations and move to different industries, leaving the less able workers and new employees who aren't as good at what they do.

A couple of points come to mind. (1) If the company agreed to the educational benefit in the collective bargaining contract, it is simpy wrong to try to weasel out of it through practices known to be disallowed under that contract. It is irrelevent whether we non-parties to the contract think the provision is good, bad or indifferent: if it is such an onerous or stupid provision, the time to shut it off was when the contract was negotiated or the next time the collective bargaining agreement is up for negotiation. Period. Color me strange, but I can't help but think that management had the negotiators of their own choice at the bargaining table to represent their interests. If they made a stupid deal, it's their own damn fault, not that of the union guys who want the benefit of their bargain.

(2) Unions are a royal pain in the butt all the way around. There is only one thing wrong with permitting unions to exist: not permitting unions to exist. History teaches us that significant numbers of the Captains of Industry will, if given the chance, crucify workers. History also teaches us that unions are one of the leading means of leveling the playing field against such folks. But union leadership is not any more or less likely to be noble, enlightened, fair or humanitarian than is corporate leadership. Which means there will be good union leaders and bad ones, reasonable ones and unreasonable ones, etc. But let's be real here - if the Andrew Carnegies and John D. Rockefellers of the world hadn't been such inhuman greedheads, unions would not have been necessary. Witness the Hershey chocolate empire and how it grew and prospered, not despite the fair treatment of its (non-union) work force, but because of it.

Besides, without unions, and the Teamsters in particular, then we would not have such gems of the language as: "But the pension fund was just sitting there." ;)

It happened once, but this time I was smart enough to ask a union steward about it.

I am the education benefit advocate at my office. I basically help people through the process of signing up for the benefit & help them with any problems they may have. This position is completely voluntary & assigned & approved by the union.

At work we have to meet certina performance metrics. If we fail to meet them disciplinary action can be taken. I am currently on a step plan as a result of not meeting the metrics for the month of Jan. This happened only once before, over a year ago. When this happened the last time my duties as the ed. benefit advocate were revoked until I was satisfactory in my metrics.

The same thing was threatened this time as well. Meaning if I don't become sat. managment is telling me they can revoke what I do as the ed. benefit advocate.

Well come to find out managment can not do that. After the meeting I had today when this was threatened I asked the union steward that was in there with me if they can revoke it & he found out they can not. And that they should not have done so the 1st time it happened. The reason is it is not company dictated, but union & per the agreement I am allowed to perform the duties as the benefit advocate on a voluntary basis, as long as it does not interefere with my job duties, it never has.

Needless to say there may be a grievence filed because of the threat. Had managment done their homework they would have found out they are not allowed to do this.

For those of you who hate unions or think they once had their place, think again. They still have their place. For one, with out it the CWA, myself & my fellow occupational employees would not be able to take advantage of the ed. benefit & go back to school. I would not be able to afford to otherwise.

Bottom line if it happens once & don't question it, shame on me. If it happens twice & I do question & find out you're not supposed to then shame on you.

That's bogus man, go get em.

Besides being a system of measurement used just about everywhere but the US, what's a metric?

I know most union workers are very devoted to the principle, but issues like living wage (which apparently means something completely different today than it did in the 1850's) and workplace safety are now basically irrelevant, either due to federal regulation or the fact that skilled labor pools don't significantly outweigh labor demand.

It's in your contract, true, but your case is justified on that, not some principle of equity or anything like that.

When I look at the actions of unions at places like Boeing, where it seems like every project is over-budget, business heads out of the country at every opportunity, and machinists making $60k/year average in salary alone go on strike because their annual raise was too small for their liking, I have to wonder what unions really have left to offer.

Besides being a system of measurement used just about everywhere but the US, what's a metric?
"Metric" is a buzzword. Most normal people use the term "standard."

By "Metric" they mean a performance rating.

Basically some pre-defined goal was not met.

We get these at work all the time....I got yelled at a while back for not meeting yields....well let's see, we were following 0% of the documented process due to lack of parts....the folks doing the assembly were too green to handle deviated assemblies properly, and then to make it worse, they were forcing us to bypass our integration testing...so of course our yields would blow dead bears....because those morons bypassed every last step then c--kblocked me when I told them that this was going to happen.

....I'm really starting to think that America's businesses no longer want quality workers, they just want people that don't give a s--t, that can work insane hours. I say if they want that, buy some robotics and get it over with.


Basically Mertics are a useful thing, but too many people set them too high, and at that point it's just a bulls--t number.

Drat, I was gonna get all riled up about unions. I soon found I didn't have to, so I made some popcorn and kept reading.

So you don't feel that not meeting your performance metrics could be considered an indication that something is interfering with your job duties? Oh, but being an 'advocate' is more important than doing the job you were hired to do...that they pay you for. What was I thinking? :rolleyes:

Yeah, I'm with chip here. How much time did you devote to your advocate duties in January when you were struggling to meet your goals? Do you get additional pay for your role as the education advocate and if so, who pays the extra? The union or the company? If it's the company then I'd say they have every right to suspend you from that role; at least from paying you any bonus or supplement for the role.

You say you can't make people spend their money, but as a sales person (at least that's what I'm getting from your posts), isn't that EXACTLY what your job is???

Finally, what good will filing a grievance do in this case? If you've pointed out that they can't revoke your advocacy job (again, do you get additional pay for that?) and they're backing off, what does a grievance do other than cause a lot of paperwork and headache to a lot of people and distract them from meeting THEIR goals?? (Note: if it takes a grievance to get the company to live up to their contract requirements - good or bad, then I withdraw this last paragraph.)

Also, if you file a grievance over this, it seems like you're just shining the spotlight on yourself for not meeting your required perfomance standards. For the second time. I'm sure there's something in the contract about that, too.... :rolleyes:

I don't know, nor do I care.

It has been my experience that Unions that have this attitude regarding whether a benefit makes sense for the company as well soon end up without jobs because the company folded.

I am not the only one this happened to. Jan. is not a good sales month company wide. I do the job I am trained for, but we can't make customers buy anything & unlike others I will not slam or cram.

Are your performance goals the same for each month?

I don't know, nor do I care.
That's got "entitlement" written all over it. I'm wary of the idea of entitlement; in my experience it tends to stir up distrust and enable selfishness. "What's in it for me" replaces "What can I do for the customer?" And "I'm stickin' it to The Man" replaces "I'm figuring out how we can all work together." I believe in benefits, but I also believe that people need to work hard to get them. Somewhere, in all the CWA banter between worker, delegate, and management, the customer gets lost. A miserable customer experience, and an expensive one too since the customer drives the business, and is the reason benefits even exist at a company that serves THEM. It's simple: make them happy and the company's bottom line will be happy. Internal strife will show up in the financials eventually...guaranteed.

Metrics are measurabale, which means if someone falls outside the performance metric then something needs to change. If the change is successful, the performer keeps collecting a paycheck and the company keeps running efficiently.

I also disagree with the benefit that would provide education outside of the company's field. As other posters have said, it's a really bad business decision.

Did you know that 911 service either does not work at all or they have a harder time finding your address because of the way it does work & forget about E911. Don't know about you but I want the response time to be as little as possible when it comes to my life & safety if I have to dial 911. Also if your electricity goes down or your internet service goes down so does your VOIP. With wireline service you still have phone service with a basic phone. Every home should have at least one phone that draws the power to operate from the phone line. I have 2.
Couldn't you just use your Zounds to alert half the county that help is needed?

;) :p

That's got "entitlement" written all over it. I'm wary of the idea of entitlement; in my experience it tends to stir up distrust and enable selfishness. "What's in it for me" replaces "What can I do for the customer?" And "I'm stickin' it to The Man" replaces "I'm figuring out how we can all work together." I believe in benefits, but I also believe that people need to work hard to get them. Somewhere, in all the CWA banter between worker, delegate, and management, the customer gets lost. A miserable customer experience, and an expensive one too since the customer drives the business, and is the reason benefits even exist at a company that serves THEM. It's simple: make them happy and the company's bottom line will be happy. Internal strife will show up in the financials eventually...guaranteed.

Metrics are measurabale, which means if someone falls outside the performance metric then something needs to change. If the change is successful, the performer keeps collecting a paycheck and the company keeps running efficiently.

I also disagree with the benefit that would provide education outside of the company's field. As other posters have said, it's a really bad business decision.

You must be a manager for the same company I work for. Which office do you work in? Are you a coach, team leader, site director or other?

Were you ever an occupational employee for this company? If you were you seem to have forgotten where you came from & started out as. As do a lot of managers who were once occupational. I do not know of the company reprograms the mgr's & indoctrinate them that makes them forget or what happens. I just know it happens. I have seen it in my office. There are some occupational employees who are now managment & they really love throwing their power around & have forgotten who they once were. Because of that I won't go to them with questions. I ask a mgr. who did not start out in my office as occupational. I wish we had a policy requiring occupational employees who become managment to be transfered out of the office they started in.

If you are a mgr for my company I am surprised you feel the way you do about the ed. benefit. Every mgr I have talked with here loves that we have it & encourages the employees on their team to use the benefit. The mgr's come to me & tell me that an employee of theirs needs help with the benefit, whether it is an existing student I have helped or a new student who has not used the program.

If this was bad business why would mgr's encourage occupational employees to use the benefit?

Our recruiting person uses the benefit plus all of the others to encourage people to come work here. She is my co-advocate.

There are 2 Co-Directors that run the program. One is employed by the union, one is managment for the company.

Don't know about you but this tells me the company encourages & supports the ed. benefit. Though I do not know when it was started or if it has ever been the subject of negotiation at the end of the contracts, I do know it has been around for a very long while.

I am not sure if the ed. benefit is something worth striking over if it came down to it.

I do know what is worth striking over is Mandatory Over Time, or MOT. We almost went on strike over this at the last contract negotiation. We have MOT & we hate it. But the company can only work us a max. of 8 hrs MOT a week. At the last negotiation the company wanted to double that to 16 hrs a week.

Because of that & other issues there was an overwhelming 93% approval vote to strike. We did not strike. I can not image what would have happened if we had went on strike.

The office in my area is competing against other companies to get potential employees in the door. There are 3 others that do similar work, some are telecom related, some are not. My center offers the best hours, higher pay & way better benefits then the other 3 companies combined. Partly because of the CWA. Our recruiter is using this as a tool to entice people to apply here.

It is almost like new car dealers competing. I have never seen companies compete like this to get people in the door.

To work for my company you have to have at least a base knowledge in working with a computer system & software, have at least a high school diploma or GED, pass a drug test & not have a felony record.

I don't know if the other companies have as high of standards & requirments as we do I would hope they do.

To work for my company you have to have at least a base knowledge in working with a computer system & software, have at least a high school diploma or GED, pass a drug test & not have a felony record.

I don't know if the other companies have as high of standards & requirments as we do I would hope they do.

That's high standards? No wonder you think the union is wonderful!

For example I do not want to work in Montana or Wyoming, but I would love to work in New Mexico or Arizona, all of which are states my company offers service in.

Again I have the option to stick my company or not. I want to because I like working for them.
Sounds like you work for Qwest. I'll stay out of the pro/con union argument and tell you to use the educational benefit as much as possible. Also take every training class on fiber splicing, fiber muxes and dcs operating systems you can. If you can take the provisioning classes, take them too. And if they offer wireless or video equipment/transmission training, take that too. Unless by network specialist, you mean IP backbone and router stuff.

That's high standards? No wonder you think the union is wonderful!
For a utility, that's about right. They sometimes require a driver's license and the ability to read maps. BTW, you didn't always need to be out of high school to work for the phone company. Years ago, people used to start p/t as mail runners after school. Once they graduated, they could go f/t and their years p/t were added to their years of service.

Oh I understand that it's about right for the industry, but I don't understand why that would be touted as a high standard.

Oh I understand that it's about right for the industry, but I don't understand why that would be touted as a high standard.
I'm gonna poke fun at the OP and just say that Qwest used to be known as US Worst (US West). So who knows, maybe for them, those are high standards.

Like anything else....some Unions are good and some are bad.
They are not all bad.
I managed a Union print shop at the largest state run university in
one of the states I lived in. That union was the union cliche'
Protected workers who werent going to work and knew they were protected.
I left that job because the union people were impossble to deal with.
My Wifes Union on the otherhand are great. It is an educational union and
has already helped her and her peers a few times against contract violations
in her district.
I am going to personally invite a union into the place I work now.

You're lucky....the employer I work for has no limits on MOT.

That's the thing with Unions...they can definately make a workplace better for the worker, but it's when they reach too far and screw the business that it's messed up. For example, I know my employer would not be concerned about cash burn right now if they implemented a third shift. That would also be the end of the bulk of hteir OT....at least a 15% reduction in labor costs once you factor in health benefits and such...and that's HUGE.

However, it's "faster" to just tell everyone you either do the OT or get fired. That's the difference.....oh and the place I work has a bad habit of underpaying the floor workers to the point that they rely on OT just to make ends meet. This place needs a Union badly....but I know they will just shut down all Florida operations before that happens.

As for why I work there? Because honestly I don't think any other electronics fabs are any better....so until I can land a spot in development or the likes....here I stay.

How much time did you devote to your advocate duties in January when you were struggling to meet your goals?

I don't know. But it is never done during the hours I am open & to be available to perform my job duties. Availability is also another metric I have to be sat. on. I only take care of my advocate responsibilities during lunch, breaks, before/after work, never during. The only thing I may do if I need to is reply to emails sent to me by the students who ask a question between helping customers. That is few & far between though. Only got one during the month of Jan.


Do you get additional pay for your role as the education advocate and if so, who pays the extra? The union or the company? If it's the company then I'd say they have every right to suspend you from that role; at least from paying you any bonus or supplement for the role.

I am not paid for being the ed. benefit advocate. It is 100% voluntary. In fact when I go to Lakewood Co. in April for the Advocate Conferance I get the time off as excused, but I am paid by the union for the 4 days I am gone from the office. My travel, lodging & meals are also covered by the union. There is a fund that this is all paid for from.


You say you can't make people spend their money, but as a sales person (at least that's what I'm getting from your posts), isn't that EXACTLY what your job is????

When I say I can not make them spend money I mean I offer & explain what we provide for service, answer their questions, ask them questions, listen to what they need, then ask for the sale. If they say no then I ask if there was something they did not understand, sometimes I need to explain something a little further, sometimes not. Most of my "no's" in Jan. were because they claimed they could not afford it. How ever I set up a lot of call backs which I am doing now & getting sales from. Another reason I may not get a sale is the service they may want is not available in their area. Like wireless of HSI. For some reason there were a lot of these in Jan.


Finally, what good will filing a grievance do in this case? If you've pointed out that they can't revoke your advocacy job (again, do you get additional pay for that?) and they're backing off, what does a grievance do other than cause a lot of paperwork and headache to a lot of people and distract them from meeting THEIR goals??

There will not be a grievence filed at this time. After talking with the union steward it is not enough of an issue to go to that extent, yet. If it does then we'll see what happens.

I remember when someone mentioned they were going to try to unionize the armed forces in the 70's. That did not go well. :)
This has been a fun read.
Steven

Let me get this straight, N_C. You work at a job where there are measured performance goals to meet. You also have this essentially volunteer position that you do extra work for. You did not meet your performance goals. Your employer would rather you not be doing the extra work so long as you're not meeting your expected goals. Your union is saying they can't do this.

I must be missing something here.

But it's his RIGHT! We need to empower the EMPLOYEES!

So they . . . can. . . . . . um. . . .

. . . . . .go to school for basket weaving!

As an amateur student of management (and one in management), that there is a lot of truth to the idea that a happy workforce makes for productivity and profits (look at Southwest Airlines--they're happy employees but they are paid less than the big guys). It makes for profits even if you know some will leave--they're happy and productive while they are there. I worked at a family owned discount upholstery outlet chain (Cutting Corners, based in Dallas where I worked) to put myself through two degrees (BA and MA). We were not unionized, and anyone who made such talk was let go. However--we were really happy. The owner paid us very well, and he gave significant scholarships to those of us in schools--the only requirements were that you worked 20 hours/week and that you were enrolled at least 9 hours/semester). He also sided with employees in customer service issues over 90% of the time. Yet the company has had record profits since opening. When I left after finishing school and going on to what I do now, I was quite pleasantly surprised with a rollover check for $12,324. They had been taking a figure equal to 15% of my pay out of profits and putting it into an IRA for me! It wasn't made known to you until you had 5 years of experience (when you get 100% upon leaving). I got 80%. We also got annual Christmas bonuses equal to $10*the number of months we worked there. The name of the game in management is not dictatorial leadership, but servant leadership! Such leadership almost always leads to a happy and productive workforce.

All that to say, whether it was union enforced or not, the educational benefit is benefitting the company overall.

I remember when someone mentioned they were going to try to unionize the armed forces in the 70's. That did not go well. :)
This has been a fun read.
Steven

Funny thing though, the military is one of those employers who will fund ANY type of education, not just job related stuff. Which was a good thing for me, I don't think blowing things up was on the official degree tracks for any of the universities I looked at...though I heard some un-official clubs and frats could teach a thing or two about it. :eek: