Wait wait, you PAY your unions in the US??? I thought I already heard all
Yes. Union staff needs to make a living too. It's also how we pay members when we strike.
My union is also in Canada. How do you do it in your country?
In Spain, union staff is company staff. They get paid by the company. There are some rules about how much staff time a union gets depending on company size. If I remember properly it was about 1 full time employee per every 80 workers.
For striking, in Spain people just take the cut of that day or, depending on the sector, there are arrangements where workers strike and company still pays the same. Usually transport workers.
Interesting.
It sounds like you have a completely different system from that which exists in the Anglophone countries.
Here in the US and Canada we would never dream of having our union reps on the payroll of ownership.
That makes zero sense since it would mean that they would be relying on our signatory contractors for their paycheck when what we want is precisely the opposite; an independent union that can bargain on behalf of the membership
Having our unions funded and paid for by the membership is precisely the point since it means that it's our union, not the company's.
But us unions are some of the weakest in the civilized world. Maybe that system doesn't work that well?
Wait wait, you PAY your unions in the US??? I thought I already heard all
Yes. Union staff needs to make a living too. It's also how we pay members when we strike.
My union is also in Canada. How do you do it in your country?
In Spain, union staff is company staff. They get paid by the company. There are some rules about how much staff time a union gets depending on company size. If I remember properly it was about 1 full time employee per every 80 workers.
For striking, in Spain people just take the cut of that day or, depending on the sector, there are arrangements where workers strike and company still pays the same. Usually transport workers.
Interesting.
It sounds like you have a completely different system from that which exists in the Anglophone countries.
Here in the US and Canada we would never dream of having our union reps on the payroll of ownership.
That makes zero sense since it would mean that they would be relying on our signatory contractors for their paycheck when what we want is precisely the opposite; an independent union that can bargain on behalf of the membership
Having our unions funded and paid for by the membership is precisely the point since it means that it's our union, not the company's.
But us unions are some of the weakest in the civilized world. Maybe that system doesn't work that well?