9 ms·

Ignorant question. But how do union dues work? Is it a percentage of your paycheck or a fixes cost? Also I assume there’s a formation/founding cost. How does t

Ignorant question. But how do union dues work? Is it a percentage of your paycheck or a fixes cost? Also I assume there’s a formation/founding cost. How does that work?

kyoob 7y ago
It's usually a percentage of workers' paychecks, between 1-2% is pretty standard. Founding, organizing, and legal stuff for newly forming unions can be handled by the larger organization (e.g. CWA) using pooled dues from existing unions within that organization.
- sevenf0ur 7y ago
  Losing that much per paycheck with nothing guaranteed in return would chaff me after awhile. I hope it works out for them.
  - einpoklum 7y ago
    If your union is actually _your union_, i.e. yourself and your co-workers, organizing together to do something - then you're not paying to get a "return". You're participating in your own collective effort. Pecuniary union achievements are an added bonus (though a frequent one). Unfortunately, with larger unions, or those with weaker consciousness and mis-perceptions of what a union is supposed to be - there's alienation between the member worker on one hand and the union and its operatives on the other, and then dues payment seems to be something transactional: "What will you get me in exchange for what I pay you?"
  - johnpowell 7y ago
    I was a union HVAC guy for a few years. And one very nice thing was that there were union shops and they went through the union to find employees. So if work dried up at one place the union would take care of getting my unemployment going and then when work came up they would call and say that I was needed elsewhere. This probably wouldn't translate well to software. But it works great if you are installing ducts. Same goes for plumbers and electricians. My sisters first husband was a union electrician. That is why I looked into getting a union gig. I hate job hunting. In the years I did it I worked for five different companies. I didn't have to run around dropping off resumes and doing practice tests. I just got a call from the union and was told where to go to work. And I made significantly more than my non-union counterparts. Easily more than the dues I had to pay.
    - fiter 7y ago
      Is this one of the angles that unions use to sell themselves to companies? They can help by providing a well of valuable resources to draw on in an as-needed basis. When both hiring and firing would be an easier proposition, I could see more activity occurring as a result. These people would have experience at different companies and could provide their knowledge like many say is the benefit of people rotating jobs a lot in the SF Bay Area.
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        > Is this one of the angles that unions use to sell themselves to companies? Unions don't sell themselves to companies in the first place.
        fiter 7y ago
        Why not? I would presume that would help with regard to union busting, scabs, outsourcing, etc.
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        > Why not? The same reason your criminal defense attorney doesn't sell themselves to the public prosecutor's office.
        fiter 7y ago
        Are you implying that public prosecutors have the option to not interact with criminal defense attorneys, because companies certainly have the option to hire employees that do not work for unions.
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        > Are you implying that public prosecutors have the option to not interact with criminal defense attorneys, No, I'm implying that working for an actor’s counterparty compromises your ability to represent that actor in adversarial interactions with the same counterparty, which is a core function of unions with respect to employers as it is with defense attorneys with respect to prosecutors. > companies certainly have the option to hire employees that do not work for unions. Not in the US; even where union shops are prohibited by state right-to-work laws, adverse employment decisions on the basis of union membership or union-related activity by an employer are prohibited by the National Labor Relations Act. That is, in some cases, employers are allowed to hire employees who aren't members of a union, but they aren't legally permitted to hire employees because (even in part) they aren't members of unions.
  - hinkley 7y ago
    How much of a paycut would you take for getting a guaranteed max 40 (or say, 45) hour work week with no retribution from management? Put it this way, when I worked at startups that owed me a raise they couldn't afford, I've offered several times to take a 0% raise in exchange for a 10% reduction in hours. Not a single company has taken that offer and several thought I was trying to be funny. I was not.
xav0989 7y ago
> But how do union dues work? It depends, some unions have it as a percentage of salary, others have a set rate per position (all juniors pay X, all mids pay Y, etc.), and yet other have a single fixed amount for all members.
einpoklum 7y ago
1. If the union is complacent and is willing to put its financial situation in the hands of the employer, to be used as leverage against any struggle - then the union and the employer arrange for a fraction of each employee's salary to be deducted by the employer and passed to the union. That, at least in the US, is the common case. It is also extremely tempting - and I say this as a past union activist - to go for this option. 2. If, however, the union values its independence from the employer, then union dues are collected either: 2.1 By hand from time to time (much harder, but you get independence from the banking system), or 2.2 Each member signs a standing transfer order, transferring a certain amount of money from their account to the union every month/quarter/year. It's still a challenge to collect anything from non-members, despite them enjoying everything the unionized workers have achieved.
- fiter 7y ago
  I appreciate your opinion in your comments on this post. All of them read to me as balanced and nuanced. Regarding 2, is there any reason the union achievements must apply to non-union workers as well?
  - Macha 7y ago
    You then give encouragement to employers to hire non-union workers or exclude union workers if they don't have to have the same rights/wages. It seems a bit of an own goal for a union to give more incentives for employers to fight them
    - einpoklum 7y ago
      "Hire non-union workers" is a phrase that's only meaningful in world states where the employer can be forced to only hire union members. It requires a great deal of organizational/political power to force workplaces to do that unless they are union-owned to begin with. It is therefore a rarity, which occurs mostly where there is some arrangement between large corrupt unions, the government and enough large corporations, which includes: * Unions putting a lid on actual rank-and-file demands and initiatives. * No or rare collective action. * No solidarity action with non-unionized workers, workers from oppressed social groups etc. * Political support by unions for the regime in general and for dominant factions within government in particular. * Employers acting in concert with union by dues checkoff and requiring new hires to join (or go through the union to be employed). * Legislation enshrining this arrangement, or preventing legal action against it. ... which explains why I didn't mention this consideration.

Ignorant question. But how do union dues work? Is it a percentage of your paycheck or a fixes cost? Also I assume there’s a formation/founding cost. How does that work?

kyoob 7y ago

It's usually a percentage of workers' paychecks, between 1-2% is pretty standard. Founding, organizing, and legal stuff for newly forming unions can be handled by the larger organization (e.g. CWA) using pooled dues from existing unions within that organization.

sevenf0ur 7y ago
Losing that much per paycheck with nothing guaranteed in return would chaff me after awhile. I hope it works out for them.
- einpoklum 7y ago
  If your union is actually _your union_, i.e. yourself and your co-workers, organizing together to do something - then you're not paying to get a "return". You're participating in your own collective effort. Pecuniary union achievements are an added bonus (though a frequent one). Unfortunately, with larger unions, or those with weaker consciousness and mis-perceptions of what a union is supposed to be - there's alienation between the member worker on one hand and the union and its operatives on the other, and then dues payment seems to be something transactional: "What will you get me in exchange for what I pay you?"
- johnpowell 7y ago
  I was a union HVAC guy for a few years. And one very nice thing was that there were union shops and they went through the union to find employees. So if work dried up at one place the union would take care of getting my unemployment going and then when work came up they would call and say that I was needed elsewhere. This probably wouldn't translate well to software. But it works great if you are installing ducts. Same goes for plumbers and electricians. My sisters first husband was a union electrician. That is why I looked into getting a union gig. I hate job hunting. In the years I did it I worked for five different companies. I didn't have to run around dropping off resumes and doing practice tests. I just got a call from the union and was told where to go to work. And I made significantly more than my non-union counterparts. Easily more than the dues I had to pay.
  - fiter 7y ago
    Is this one of the angles that unions use to sell themselves to companies? They can help by providing a well of valuable resources to draw on in an as-needed basis. When both hiring and firing would be an easier proposition, I could see more activity occurring as a result. These people would have experience at different companies and could provide their knowledge like many say is the benefit of people rotating jobs a lot in the SF Bay Area.
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      > Is this one of the angles that unions use to sell themselves to companies? Unions don't sell themselves to companies in the first place.
      - fiter 7y ago
        Why not? I would presume that would help with regard to union busting, scabs, outsourcing, etc.
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        > Why not? The same reason your criminal defense attorney doesn't sell themselves to the public prosecutor's office.
        fiter 7y ago
        Are you implying that public prosecutors have the option to not interact with criminal defense attorneys, because companies certainly have the option to hire employees that do not work for unions.
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        > Are you implying that public prosecutors have the option to not interact with criminal defense attorneys, No, I'm implying that working for an actor’s counterparty compromises your ability to represent that actor in adversarial interactions with the same counterparty, which is a core function of unions with respect to employers as it is with defense attorneys with respect to prosecutors. > companies certainly have the option to hire employees that do not work for unions. Not in the US; even where union shops are prohibited by state right-to-work laws, adverse employment decisions on the basis of union membership or union-related activity by an employer are prohibited by the National Labor Relations Act. That is, in some cases, employers are allowed to hire employees who aren't members of a union, but they aren't legally permitted to hire employees because (even in part) they aren't members of unions.
- hinkley 7y ago
  How much of a paycut would you take for getting a guaranteed max 40 (or say, 45) hour work week with no retribution from management? Put it this way, when I worked at startups that owed me a raise they couldn't afford, I've offered several times to take a 0% raise in exchange for a 10% reduction in hours. Not a single company has taken that offer and several thought I was trying to be funny. I was not.

xav0989 7y ago

> But how do union dues work? It depends, some unions have it as a percentage of salary, others have a set rate per position (all juniors pay X, all mids pay Y, etc.), and yet other have a single fixed amount for all members.

einpoklum 7y ago

1. If the union is complacent and is willing to put its financial situation in the hands of the employer, to be used as leverage against any struggle - then the union and the employer arrange for a fraction of each employee's salary to be deducted by the employer and passed to the union. That, at least in the US, is the common case. It is also extremely tempting - and I say this as a past union activist - to go for this option. 2. If, however, the union values its independence from the employer, then union dues are collected either: 2.1 By hand from time to time (much harder, but you get independence from the banking system), or 2.2 Each member signs a standing transfer order, transferring a certain amount of money from their account to the union every month/quarter/year. It's still a challenge to collect anything from non-members, despite them enjoying everything the unionized workers have achieved.

fiter 7y ago
I appreciate your opinion in your comments on this post. All of them read to me as balanced and nuanced. Regarding 2, is there any reason the union achievements must apply to non-union workers as well?
- Macha 7y ago
  You then give encouragement to employers to hire non-union workers or exclude union workers if they don't have to have the same rights/wages. It seems a bit of an own goal for a union to give more incentives for employers to fight them
  - einpoklum 7y ago
    "Hire non-union workers" is a phrase that's only meaningful in world states where the employer can be forced to only hire union members. It requires a great deal of organizational/political power to force workplaces to do that unless they are union-owned to begin with. It is therefore a rarity, which occurs mostly where there is some arrangement between large corrupt unions, the government and enough large corporations, which includes: * Unions putting a lid on actual rank-and-file demands and initiatives. * No or rare collective action. * No solidarity action with non-unionized workers, workers from oppressed social groups etc. * Political support by unions for the regime in general and for dominant factions within government in particular. * Employers acting in concert with union by dues checkoff and requiring new hires to join (or go through the union to be employed). * Legislation enshrining this arrangement, or preventing legal action against it. ... which explains why I didn't mention this consideration.