Yes, it’s the lack of innovation by these old industries that’s the real problem. This is the problem of putting retirement money into the markets and the laser focus on shareholder value. I do think it’s quick but I always suspected that was to put the pressure on the front end. I haven’t seen any change program come out of the government that doesn’t grant extensions on the back end.
This strike is different in that it’s trying to focus attention on business practices designed to skirt laws that don’t match reality (defining a work week as 32 hours, for instance) and compensation (40% increase) in the C-Suite but everyone is covering the politics of it (or their perceived political take on it) or as if it’s just another union strike that has made demands that are downright crazy. I wish journalists would get pre-conceived notions out of their mind and just do in-depth investigation.
Where hourly workers are not paid for their lunch hour, the employee is there for 9 hours, not 8. It’s a legal slight of hand. A company defines a work week as 32 hours (4 days) so they can classify those workers as part-time but they are really expected to work 40 hours (5 days). I think this is the UAWs way of calling attention to what should be an illegal practice IMO. Saying they should be paid OT for anything over the defined work week of 32 hours makes sense in that light--companies skirt a lot of labor and other law obligations by classifying them as part-time and the employees don’t get benefit of those protections or company obligations.
That’s why I’d love to see journalists inform the public better about the company’s labor practices at places that both want to form unions and where unions strike. There are so few of them, and so many salaried employees reading about strikes it would good for us all to get a refresher on how things work today, not when we were whippersnappers :-)
It’s good to remind ourselves that anything the UAW gets covers all hourly employees, even if they are not members of the union. They’re not just fighting for themselves.
Yes, it’s the lack of innovation by these old industries that’s the real problem. This is the problem of putting retirement money into the markets and the laser focus on shareholder value. I do think it’s quick but I always suspected that was to put the pressure on the front end. I haven’t seen any change program come out of the government that doesn’t grant extensions on the back end.
This strike is different in that it’s trying to focus attention on business practices designed to skirt laws that don’t match reality (defining a work week as 32 hours, for instance) and compensation (40% increase) in the C-Suite but everyone is covering the politics of it (or their perceived political take on it) or as if it’s just another union strike that has made demands that are downright crazy. I wish journalists would get pre-conceived notions out of their mind and just do in-depth investigation.
Rant over.
I figured that the forty hours pay for thirty two hours of work involved not having to punch out for an hour lunch break. Maybe I'm wrong.
Where hourly workers are not paid for their lunch hour, the employee is there for 9 hours, not 8. It’s a legal slight of hand. A company defines a work week as 32 hours (4 days) so they can classify those workers as part-time but they are really expected to work 40 hours (5 days). I think this is the UAWs way of calling attention to what should be an illegal practice IMO. Saying they should be paid OT for anything over the defined work week of 32 hours makes sense in that light--companies skirt a lot of labor and other law obligations by classifying them as part-time and the employees don’t get benefit of those protections or company obligations.
That’s why I’d love to see journalists inform the public better about the company’s labor practices at places that both want to form unions and where unions strike. There are so few of them, and so many salaried employees reading about strikes it would good for us all to get a refresher on how things work today, not when we were whippersnappers :-)
It’s good to remind ourselves that anything the UAW gets covers all hourly employees, even if they are not members of the union. They’re not just fighting for themselves.