Posted on 12/27/2009 1:37:18 PM PST by Last Dakotan
They signed a contract that included an "evergreen clause" that bound them to hire/pay union scale and benefits for all future jobs in that particular area. The judge ruled on that clause.
The contract job was in Philadelphia. Their home base was Lancaster. Would that not be a "different area"? Certainly, a different local (if there even is one in Lancaster).
I guess we need to know whether that $2.9 million was due the Philly contract workers (which I wouldn't understand) or their Lancaster non-union employees (which I wouldn't understand, either).
If the latter, I wonder how they feel about losing their jobs over the dispute...
From the story, "Later, Banta had another union-scale job with a contract containing a "traveling contractors" clause. That meant the contract's requirements would apply to future jobs in other areas."
Sounds to me like Banta signed a couple of stupid contracts, to which the union held them. The union was no help to the Banta employees, of course ... but the judge had to rule on the contracts, not the effects on Banta's employees -- not to mention the union laborers who will no longer get work from Banta.
The leadership of this union is clearly more interested in maintaining their piece of the pie, than they are in keeping their folks employed.... the union members should (but most likely won't) figure out that the union isn't actually helping them with lawsuits like this one.
Evil unions - destroying companies whenever they can. Or chasing great jobs to different states or countries. But they usually vote for Democrats, so they are mental midgets.
My question for the unions: if you do not like the way a company is run, start your own and run it the way you want. Then you can compete with those big, evil, greedy corporations that provides millions of jobs.
“...Banta signed a couple of stupid contracts, to which the union held them...”
It is important to have some legal contract expertise OR have a lawyer review all contracts before signing.
True, but clearly the union chose destroying the jobs of 25 people over setting a precedent of firms wiggling out of a contract.
“So the judge should have ignored the law and ruled to keep the jobs? How very Democratic of you. Judges should call balls and strikes regardless of the consequences.”
You may have a point, judging from other comments too. If so, sorry. But I don’t mind jumping to conclusions, as that is what the left does, and unless we start to play at their level, we’ll continue to be defeated.
Two questions:
1. Gotcha. But why is a contract with a "travelling clause" even legal? It evidently creates a union shop where none existed -- without benefit of a vote. Can an employer sign away the rights of his employees?
2. On whose behalf did Banta actually owe the $2.9 million in bennies? I can't imagine it's the contract labor from the nineties in Philly -- it has to be the company's regular staff. Doesn't it? Which brings us back to #1...
I think the "employees" were contractors hired to install Banta's tiles, and the contracts in question most likely covered the terms under which those guys were hired. If I read the article correctly, Banta later decided unilaterally to abrogate those terms, which led to the lawsuit.
And the $2.9 million would have been owed to the contractors ... and thereby also to the union.
I don't like the outcome here, but I think the judge probably ruled properly, based on contract law.
The comments following the original article are telling. I haven’t heard the term “scabs” in years.
I belonged to unions in the distant past. They are useless, and only benefited ‘the suits’, our supposed reps who looked out for our rights. Yeah, sure.
It isn’t the rank and file who are destroying businesses. They just want a paycheck, to feed their families and pay the bills. Destroying a business isn’t on THEIR agenda; it is the agenda of communists worldwide.
Businessman must be smarter and more aware than any union. Check out those contracts closely.
Makes me damn glad I don't run a business in the Northeast. That area is going to stay in recession a long while...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.