Tesla Employee Calls For Unionization, Musk Says That's 'Morally Outrageous' (arstechnica.com)

"In a Medium post published today, Tesla employee Jose Moran detailed working conditions at the company's Freemont factory and called for the factory workers to unionize with United Auto Workers (UAW)," reports Ars Technica. In response, Elon Musk told Gizmodo via Twitter Direct Messages: "Our understanding is that this guy was paid by the UAW to join Tesla and agitate for a union. Frankly, I find this attack to be morally outrageous. Tesla is the last car company left in California, because costs are so high." Musk went on to blame the UAW for killing the New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc (NUMMI), which sold the Fremont factory to Musk in 2010. Ars Technica reports: Tesla currently employs more than 5,000 non-union workers at its Fremont, CA-based factory. Moran wrote that the workers are often faced with "excessive mandatory overtime" and earn between $17 and $21 hourly, compared with the national average of $25.58 hourly for most autoworkers in the U.S. The Tesla employee noted that the astronomical cost of living in the Bay Area makes $21 an hour difficult to live on. Moran also claimed that the factory's "machinery is often not ergonomically compatible with our bodies," and requires "too much twisting and turning and extra physical movement to do jobs that could be simplified if workers' input were welcomed." He added that at one point, six out of eight people on his team were out on medical leave "due to various work-related injuries."

Comments

Not what he said.

[duckintheface]

RTFA! Musk said that it as "morally outrageous" for someone to sign on as a Tesla employee, not because they wanted the job but because they wanted to be in a position to influence a unionization vote. Musk did not say or imply that unionization was morally outrageous. But that was obvious so the false title was intentional.

Re:Not what he said.

[Mass Overkiller]

Exactly he's complaint is not against Unions per se but against someone who purposely got hired by Tesla for the expressed purpose of instigating Unionization.

Re:Not what he said.

[drinkypoo]

Musk did not say or imply that unionization was morally outrageous. But that was obvious so the false title was intentional.

Well, let's look at his claim. Is it morally outrageous to take a job specifically for the purpose of encouraging unionization? I don't think that it is. I mean, it's a lot less outrageous to me than someone who takes a job specifically for the purpose of fucking off and phoning it in and doing a shit job. My perception is that most union members believe in their union, and thus, in the act of encouraging unionization. I don't see anything to be morally outraged about there. If I were a business owner, I would be peeved at them, but I'd be equally upset with my HR department.

Re:Not what he said.

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly he's complaint is not against Unions per se but against someone who purposely got hired by Tesla for the expressed purpose of instigating Unionization.

Yes. Additionally, the guy was being paid by the union for doing this.

Re:Not what he said.

[zaphod]

Did Musk offer proof Jose was working for the UAW? The guy's LinkedIn profile doesn't show that: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jo.... Just wondering if Musk is assuming the guy works for UAW or if he knows it.

Re:Not what he said.

[drinkypoo]

Unionization is no longer needed in the United States.

It's not the best solution; the best solution would be the things you think we have, that we don't. To wit:

There are laws in place to protect worker safety and inflating wages/job protection are the only real things unionization does anymore.

The laws in place which protect worker safety are inadequate, because they do not make unsafe work conditions sufficiently unprofitable for large industries. And there is absolutely zero job protection for non-union workers; in a world which insists that you have a job, there should be some form of job protection.

Wages are too high in the US in two areas.... the lowest paid unionized workers (floor sweepers, fork truck drivers etc) and the highest paid (CEO's).

CEOs don't have a union. The lowest-paid unionized workers are getting paid what we all should be getting paid. The minimum wage has not kept up with inflation in over twenty years, and the inflation is meant not to simply pay a subsistence wage, but to pay a comfortable living wage upon which one could support a family. That's the minimum standard that we want to accept as Americans, because we don't want to see a race to the bottom.

Middle tier skilled labor positions such as welders have good wage parity between union and non-union jobs indicating the wage is FAIR to both the workers and the businesses.

That doesn't actually indicate that at all. You need a lot more information to determine whether a wage is fair.

CEO's wages should be capped at a percentage of average employee wages.

Well, finally you say something that makes sense. Too bad about the rest of your comment. Also, it's too bad that outside education, the administration isn't union, and so this idea is completely off topic.

This would create incentive to raise employee wages

False. They just find other ways to deliver compensation.

Re:Not what he said.

[drinkypoo]

It's morally outrageous to pay somebody to take a job to try to force unionization in to your specific union.

That would make a lot more sense if unions didn't have specific purposes. This is the obvious union they "should" be joining (if they are to join a union.)

But UAW has a sleazy enough background that before reading the summary, I did think that maybe UAW paid the guy off.

Paying your employees so poorly, and taking such poor care of them, is also sleazy. So we see here sleaze being used to fight sleaze. I am having a hard time getting upset.

Re:Not what he said.

[Anonymous Coward]

Weasel words. Nothing more than weasel words.

If he's not opposed to unionization then why does it matter if the person applied to work at Telsa to encourage unionization or decided to do so on his own after becoming employed there.

Like all dictators, Elon Musk hates the idea of the average person having elected representatives working on their behalf.

Re:Not what he said.

[GLMDesigns]

Except unions have been going away and that has not happened. Unionization (not counting public service employees) is less than 10%. (AFAIR)

Re:Not what he said.

[Mr D from 63]

I have no problem with non-government unions. I think many have shot themselves in the foot over time. We have right to work states and union states and so we can let the market sort it out. Right to work is slowly winning the battle. Missouri just passed right to work.

I do have a problem with government employee unions. In particular government union political donations, which is basically creates a reward to politicians for enriching the union and their employees at the expense of taxpayers. These unions should be restricted from political donations and lobby limited to communications.

Re:Not what he said.

[segedunum]

Is it morally outrageous for someone to start a job and then want to start a union? I don't think it is. Musk's accusation that he was paid to do this is just that - an accusation. Musk has a habit of making these kinds of accusations when allegations against his companies are made.

Tesla is the last car company left in California, because costs are so high.

It's very clear what he's saying there. He also doesn't deny anything else, such as mandatory overtime. That's the classic way companies worldwide are now getting around minimum wages and cutting corners - by making you work more than your 'official' hours for the same money. H1B visas work on exactly that principal, so wait until Trump gets around to them ;-).

Re:Not what he said.

[inhuman_4]

It's one thing to join a company and want to form a union. But it's another thing to join a company with the purpose of getting it's employees to join an existing union. If Musk's accusations are correct, then this man is an agent provocateur sent by UWA. He is there calling for unionization to help UWA expand it's business, not improve the working conditions at Tesla. It's a fake grass roots movement, aka astroturfing. And that is morally outrageous. I don't see that kind of shady business dealing as being any different than taking a bribe.

Re:Not what he said.

[Baleet]

Unions not only lobbied for those laws, they also force non-union shops to improve pay and benefits to compete with union shops. If you depend on a paycheck, you are a worker. If you are a worker who sides with employers against unions, you are like a chicken rooting for KFC.

Re:Not what he said.

[Oswald McWeany]

We do have worker safety laws. If they're not worded strongly enough they should be improved. (Not implement more unions with all the problems they bring).

I agree that minimum wage should be raised substantially. (But not implement more unions).

All citizens should have their basic rights and needs looked after, not just unionized ones. Unions introduce a problem for each one they solve. Unions built western economies- and also almost destroyed them.

Re:Not what he said.

[johanw]

Considering the massive support for Hillary in the past elections by some corporations, I'd say that the democratic party provides a similar role.

Re:Not what he said.

[Trailer Trash]

Yes, it is morally outrageous for the UAW to try to come and unionize his employees, to the point that they send a paid agitator in.

I don't have a problem with Tesla employees unionizing. The UAW coming in and extracting money from them in exchange for "helping" them isn't the same thing - not by a long shot.

I worked at Indiana University years ago and something similar happened with the clerical workers there. AFSCME was able to get enough of a foothold to get a vote and win. The benefits provided by the university were already far and above what you would get elsewhere. During the first round of "negotiations", which lasted for nearly a year, the new union workers had their wages frozen. When it was finalized, they ended up getting the annual raises they would have received, anyway. But with union dues taken out.

You see, AFSCME didn't give a damn about the workers. They cared about AFSCME. So, AFSCME was able to capture an income stream from IU while effectively doing nothing.

Don't be fooled - this is about the UAW, not Tesla workers.

Re:Not what he said.

[drinkypoo]

It's one thing to join a company and want to form a union. But it's another thing to join a company with the purpose of getting it's employees to join an existing union.

The two are clearly different things, and yet the two are clearly related things.

If Musk's accusations are correct, then this man is an agent provocateur sent by UWA. He is there calling for unionization to help UWA expand it's business, not improve the working conditions at Tesla.

Your logic is as faulty as your use of apostrophes. The moral question to be asked (remember, it's Elon that brought this into the realm of morality, and it is the subject we are discussing in this thread — I will resist all efforts to veer off topic) is whether one is justified in seeking employment specifically for the purpose of bringing unionization. I submit that the question hinges upon the following: Does the alleged agent provocateur in question believe that unionization will in fact improve conditions for employees? If so, then seeking employment specifically for the purpose of promoting unionization has the following moral components: deceiving the owner[s] of the business (or by proxy, their agents) while attempting to aid the employees of the business. Therefore, while it remains a morally questionable act, in balance the purpose would be (in my ever-so-humble opinion) essentially moral.

Of course, if the union is a scam, and the agent is in on the scam, then it is an act both reprehensible and illegal as well, and I share Musk's apparent moral outrage. As I have posted in numerous comments in this discussion, I have significant reservations about unions and would prefer to see them replaced with government protections for all workers. However, the likelihood of anything like that happening under a Trump administration (or any Republican, but we can table that argument for the next four to eight years) is basically nil. Under these circumstances, I can hardly justify agitating for the dissolution of worker's unions. I would like to see school administrator's unions eliminated, though. Let all the employees of the school have one union. Executive compensation in American schools today has become beyond outrageous.

Re:Not what he said.

[wisnoskij]

Except he is clearly against both. He is not saying that attack is theoretically morally outrageous. He is saying that both Moran and the UAW union are evil and bad. He is 100% against the union. He believes that unions killed all auto manufacturing in California.

Re: Not what he said.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're confused. Unionization is legal. Don't like it? Tough shit, go live in some 3rd world hell hole.

Re: Not what he said.

[Anonymous Coward]

Unionization is legal. Workers lobbying for unionization is legal. Management lobbying against unionization is legal. I don't know if it's legal for unions to pay workers to lobby for unionization, but it seems like a questionable practice. Management doesn't like unions, so they do things to keep workers from wanting to join. Go to a non-union shop -- productivity and safety are likely to be high. Workers are likely to be complaining -- because complaining is what people do best.

Re:Not what he said.

[AndyMoney]

Tesla is sleazy to their employees... according to ONE employee who was hired to stir up trouble by the union. Sounds legit to me! Why aren't the other employees complaining? There are anonymous resources to lodge complaints such as OSHA, anonymous posts to forums, etc.

Re:Not what he said.

[aaarrrgggh]

But there is a question of balance. $21/hour in the Bay Area isn't much, but with a little overtime it isn't terrible for a low to no skill job. It also isn't that different than $25/hour after union dues. Ergonomics and on the job injury are dealt with by workers comp, and the company eventually has an incentive to address material issues, especially in California.

While I like living in California and many of the protections it offers workers, it is already a lot like being in a union. Why add the extra layer of crooks to the mix?

Re:Not what he said.

[avgjoe62]

They may very well be dishonest, self-serving and manipulative, but are the complaints valid? Do the complaints about pay and working conditions stand on their own? If they do then Tesla needs to address those.

Has Tesla ever produced an analysis of their pay and benefits versus those of a unionized shop? Showing that there are advantages to working without unions sounds like a better response than assigning morality to what are essentially monetary transactions.

Re:Not what he said.

[Holi]

The claim that a guy who has worked there for 4 years (and only now is speaking up) is a UAW plant is the "morally outrageous" part.

Re:Not what he said.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Additionally, the guy was being paid by the union for doing this.

Why do you believe Musk when he said this? Especially when he inserted weasel words in his statement?
FTA (updates):

In a statement this morning UAW categorically denied that Moran had ever been paid by their organization. “Mr. Moran is not and has not been paid by the UAW,” the statement claims. “We would hope that Tesla would apologize to their employee.” UAW goes on to confirm reporting done by Bloomberg yesterday that “Mr. Moran and others at Tesla, have approached the UAW.”

Re:Not what he said.

[guises]

It's funny, there was a story just the other day about H1-B visas which inspired exactly the opposite response in most of the comments. When the union is the country, and the scabs they're keeping out are foreigners, the union is great (as long as you don't call it a union, even though it's doing exactly the same thing).

Re:Not what he said.

[jandersen]

Exactly he's complaint is not against Unions per se but against someone who purposely got hired by Tesla for the expressed purpose of instigating Unionization.

As it stands, it still begs the question: why? If you are of the conviction that all workers should be encouraged to be in a union, is it wrong to try to convince others that they should join? IOW, does freedom of speech only hold for the right kind of opinions? Taking a job with Tesla so you can talk to your colleagues about joining a union is no different than going to any other place to argue for your particular opinions; or going to another country as a missionary. Is that morally wrong?

Re:Not what he said.

[Altus]

Yeah but anyone can join the union right? Its not like its a barrier to employment, so you can't look at someone who isn't currently in the union and say "well at least that guy can't take my job" because he can just join up.

Re:Not what he said.

[omnichad]

, since then I have not seen them do anything other than destroy companies, and do almost nothing for their employees

Agree somewhat. But the fact that there is a union is likely keeping conditions higher than if unions all suddenly disappeared and the employers had free reign to set working conditions again.

If only people could be happy with the union doing "nothing" and the union setting dues aside instead of spending them on lobbying and way too much staff.

Re:Not what he said.

[guises]

Well, continuing the parallel between country and union - not really, it depends on the industry. Much as how rich countries make it tough to immigrate, unions in industries with a surplus of workers make it tough to join the union. For basically the same reason.

Re: Not what he said.

[dywolf]

The disconnect between wages and productivity, between woker wages and ceo pay, and overall inequality, all mirror and councide with the trend of decreasing union membership.

Re:Not what he said.

[dbIII]

So unions decided not to re-tool and just keep on rolling the same sort of crap down decaying production lines while the Japanese and Germans came in to dominate the automotive market?
I think you got the spelling of MBA wrong and wrote union instead.

Re: Not what he said.

[WindBourne]

Actually, unions are still very needed in many industry. The problem is NOT unionization. The real issue is that most are the established ones that are corrupt and far more interested in flowing money to the top, just like businesses, than to the workers.

Re: Not what he said.

[WindBourne]

Uh, why compare to average union shop and instead compare to the average non-union shops such as Honda, Toyota, BMW, Mercedes, etc.

Re:Not what he said.

[atriusofbricia]

But there is a question of balance. $21/hour in the Bay Area isn't much, but with a little overtime it isn't terrible for a low to no skill job. It also isn't that different than $25/hour after union dues. Ergonomics and on the job injury are dealt with by workers comp, and the company eventually has an incentive to address material issues, especially in California.

While I like living in California and many of the protections it offers workers, it is already a lot like being in a union. Why add the extra layer of crooks to the mix?

Not only that, but absent a very very tight job market, if Tesla is really paying so poorly for the area and treating everyone so badly then why work from them? If they aren't having any trouble getting employees then either they have one hell of a PR department to cover these awful awful conditions or.. maybe those awful conditions don't exist and the UAW just wants another source of dues?

Re:Not what he said.

[Oswald McWeany]

Whilst we're on my "government changes" lobbying is another activity I'd like to see erased. Even when it's unions doing the lobbying.

My point above was, for good or bad, you can unionise certain industries and at certain factories, but if we're talking about public safety, or minimum wage increases. That's an "EVERYONE" level issue, not just a union at one plant issue.

Instead of giving union dues and hoping they grease the right palms in Washington (essentially this is the poor giving money to the rich saying "please be nicer to me"), send someone to Washington. Make it a political issue- or if you care enough- run for office, or convince someone likeminded to do so.

Unions are leaking bandaids slapped on haphazardly. If you want true uniform change- get someone elected. Make worker safety, or minimum wage a priority- send letters to your representatives, let them know you care about the issue. Try getting people to steer and make the election about something other than immigrants and abortions for once.

Re: Not what he said.

[thesupraman]

You need to do done more research..
Guess who the largest contributor to the Democratic party was?
Guess who never asked their members of they actually wanted to donate that money to the party?
That's right.. The union's. Arse deep in the game of corruption, what a damn Surprise.
Unison is just a business for Union bosses these days.. And just like Facebook.. The members are the product, not the client.

Teachers union's have all but destroyed teaching, and resulted in a massive overburdening of Management.
Auto workers union's pretty much crashed the us car manufacturing system resulting in multiple government bailouts.
Medical union's are half the reason hospitals efficiency is down to single digits these days (and the insurance system is most of the other half).

Unions are very much like communism..A very good idea for workers on paper, however in the real world corruption and power games make them a disaster.

I suspect Musk is in for a lesson as to why no one else does major manufacturing in CA.

Re:Not what he said.

[Jerry]

My first job out of HS in 1959 was at Shwayder Bros luggage plant on South Broadway in Denver. One of the brothers, Jesse, was manager. His door was always open and one could walk in at any time to offer suggestions with no fear of losing their job. Every Christmas he divided the company profits into bonuses based on years experience. I only worked there for a year but my dad worked for them from the middle 1930s until he retired in 1969, at 65.

Across the street was the Gates Rubber Co. Their employees were always striking about something. About three months before I quit and went to college, union members from Gates began picketing in front of Shwayder Bros with posters making outrageous claims. Also, some recent employees, obvious plants, started making equally outrageous claims a/o lies of abuse and mis-management. A couple years after I left a vote was held and the Union lost. After a few more years the union won. The employees lost. Instead of going directly to Jesse employees had to take their suggestions to union stewards, who would decide if and when they would be passed to management. During financially hard times, which the unionization caused to happen regularly, union stewards had job security regardless of seniority. Bonuses stop. Wages stagnated, except for union stewards and the union bosses who had front offices. Union dues, however, did not. 2% of your income for the "privilege" of being a union slave with no freedom or rights except those "granted" by Union bosses.

Re: Not what he said.

[deadweight]

I have never had a Chinese car and never will. That said, having put 250,000 miles on a BMW, 200,000 on a Porsche, 95,000 on a Mercedes, and 50,000 on another Mercedes, I can tell you they run AT LEAST 3X the cost of repairs per mile as my Toyotas and Mazdas have. At 195,000 miles, my Mazda 3 has had a battery, tires, brakes, spark plugs, and a thermostat. The BMW it replaced by that time had all 4 window regulators replaced, new water pump, new radiator, new power steering pump, new ignition coils, new tie rods, besides the usual brakes and tires. It did fun stuff like have the expansion tank blow up at 102,000 miles (100,000 suggested replacement they weren't kidding!), the radiator fan bearing got loose and the fan attacked the radiator, and the freaking parking light sockets would fall apart (WTF?). The dealer wanted around $1,000 to replace the whole front wiring harness too! I found sockets on Amazon for $5 each and saved $990. The Mercedes needed a new cylinder head at 50,000 miles and had weird electrical issues that made the heat run full blast and disabled the windows. The dealer tried to bone me on the warranty too until I proved I had been complaining about using a quart of oil every 500 miles for 2 years. Oops - forgot I had a Volvo that had an indestructible engine and an interior that rotted to pieces if you looked at it wrong.

Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[RobotRunAmok]

He should quit. Or move to where the Cost of Living/Wage for His Expertise ratio is friendlier.

Re:Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[Anonymous Coward]

Easier said than done. Single, yup, not an issue. Married, that's hard if the wife is in a career. You now have two jobs to find in a new area. Kids, yeah, good luck with matching up schools to new areas and finding two jobs. So how about you wind in your next you smug git and think there's more to life than a dweeb fly-by comment maker on a dead site.

Re:Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[rmdingler]

California wages in many fields already require two incomes to make ends meet,

and a Tesla factory job probably comes with more benefits than other employers who don't require a collegiate-level education.

Re: Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

I hear they recalled Yugos because they found traces of metal in them.

Re: Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[GLMDesigns]

What's the relevance in that statement? Can ironworkers and carpenters afford the cost of the buildings they work on? Not necessarily? Do you think the network engineers and programmers, chip makers (and others) who worked on Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory supercomputer can afford one in their mancave?

Re:Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[omnichad]

I can't understand your post or the end of the original post. Whatever you're doing, it's not helping.

Re:Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[ghoul]

Tesla sells premium priced cars. Part of why people are willing to pay such prices are they think with a factory in California Tesla's costs are higher . The other assumption is that with workers paid more than in the rest of the country the quality must be higher. If Tesla is actually paying even the same as in other car companies in other parts of the country Tesla is cheating its customers.

Re:Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[s.petry]

I was with you until you tried to claim that the problem had nothing to do with Unions and blamed workers. I call BS, and simply point you to Detroit, Flint, and every other place that collapsed with big Union controlling the workers. The larger Unions of today are not helping workers, they are making a fat living as bureaucrats at the EXPENSE of workers. The UAW in Detroit demanded "Job Banks" where people caught using drugs, drinking, sleeping, or simply not working, while on the job were placed. Automakers had to pay for rehab and then pay the people to sit and do nothing in the bank. I lived nearly 45 years in Detroit and the majority of the workers hated the Union because they blocked firing and protected the worst of the workers. So not only were the worst protected, but they didn't even have to show up at a factory to get paid by the Automaker.

The biggest complain about Government workers today is that Unions prevent removing the crappy workers. In fact if you search around for Union issues, the number one complaint (not by employers but workers) is that the employers are forced to keep the crappy people around. The Peter Principle is heavily involved in how managers end up getting rid of the worst, because the only way to get rid of people is to make them someone else' problem.

All that said, I think there are times when Unions are helpful and have been historically. Minimum wage laws, OSHA regulations, EPA regulations, and mandated healthcare have greatly reduced the need for them.

Re:Sounds Like He Doesn't Like His Job

[s.petry]

Ok, but why does that difference exist? Why are the laws so messed up in the US, and so effective in Germany?

Great question, and I'll suggest that you petition for changes in law to restrict what Unions can and can't do. Many people have been petitioning for that for quite some time, but Unions are obviously fighting those changes for self preservation of their jobs and the worst type of worker fights to keep theirs. It is a very good political lesson to learn, which is that once power is granted it is extremely difficult to remove. The founding fathers knew this pretty well.

Wow, that's some serious delusion there. The new administration is composed of a bunch of billionaire kleptocrats; if you thought we had corruption problems before, it's going to be 100x worse after they're done. It's just that the groups that'll benefit from the corruption will be different: unions won't be benefiting any more, but instead the prosperity gospel megachurches with their millionaire preachers will be making out like bandits, setting up BS "schools" and getting federal money for them, as one example.

No delusion at all, re-read what I wrote. I'm not guaranteeing they can, or will, but I hope that some of the administration keeps their word. I have made extensive study of certain people in the current Executive staff, and people like Bannon provide some hope. Read his speech history or go watch them. Don't believe what media tells you, because they lie about everything.

To preempt a common liberal response (may not apply to you, but worth noting): It's really sad that many people complain about people in politics (especially this administration, but not limited) yet have zero knowledge of them and won't even look. I was having a conversation with a bunch of Liberals on my floor during the primaries. I happened to mention one of Ann Coulter's books and they were all aghast and immediately went to "she's a *&$^" and "&^$^$ her". I asked "Which books have you read and what facts in the book was wrong?" All of them stated that they refused to read her books because "she is a *$&&". Not a single free thinker in the bunch.

Another consideration is that few of these people wanted a Government job where they are losing shit tons of wealth. Mixed bag for sure, but I'm more hopeful with this administration that I would have been with Clinton.

Re:First

[Anonymous Coward]

My dick

So.. nothing substantial?

Just leave

[Sooner Boomer]

If you don't want your plant unionized, pack up and move to a non-union or "right to work" state. I bet Texas would love to have you. Other benefits, lower taxes, less regulation, good selection of high tech workers.

Re:Just leave

[Gavagai80]

Or better yet, just skip straight to the developing world so you can even more fully exploit people.

Re:Just leave

[Richard_at_work]

Why should someone have to switch jobs to avoid the union? Why shouldnt they have the fucking *right* not to have to join the union at a workplace?! How is that not the union interfering in someones private life?!

Re:Just leave

[clong83]

It's not interfering with someone's private life unless they opt to work for a union shop... Unions are a collective of people freely associating and negotiating a contract with a private entity which stipulates that all new hires must be amenable to joining the union. Sounds pretty free-market libertarian to me. If enough union members are pissed about mandatory membership, that's probably a sign the union isn't functioning properly. In that case, the union members themselves can then vote to disband or to not require membership. But in an otherwise normal union, removing mandatory membership from the contract turns the situation into a tragedy of the commons dilemma, wherein people will avoid paying dues while still enjoying the protections that a union affords. That is, until the union shrivels and dies.

The 'interference' comes in the form of the government meddling with contracts between otherwise private and freely associated entities, and weakening the tools that one party has at its disposal.

Unions

[nehumanuscrede]

Unions certainly had their time and place in history, but these days it seems to be less about standing up for the little guy and more about how much money can we bring in via Union Dues. ( My opinion of course, I work within a Union Company )

That said, $21 an hour is a rather laughable wage in a State with a high cost of living like California. Hell, a wage of $80k is laughable in a State where housing starts at $500k and goes right off the scale.

So there is this thought:

If Musk doesn't want his employees getting seduced by the Union, he should probably consider bumping the pay of his workers to near what the national average is and address any concerns they may have ( like excessive mandatory overtime per the article ). As long as he keeps his workforce happy, they'll have no reason to Unionize and Musk will have nothing to worry about.

Of course, there is the flip side.

Musk can say " screw this " and move the entire operation out of California and into another State where the cost of doing business is much lower.

Re: Unions

[fluffernutter]

Companies certainly had their time and place in history, but these days it seems to be less about making a quality product for the consumer and more about making as much profit for the shareholders as possible.

Re:Unions

[Baloo Uriza]

Unions certainly had their time and place in history, but these days it seems to be less about standing up for the little guy and more about how much money can we bring in via Union Dues. ( My opinion of course, I work within a Union Company )

Sounds like your union sucks, therefore all unions suck? Maybe you should get more involved in your union.

That said, $21 an hour is a rather laughable wage in a State with a high cost of living like California.

That's rather the union's point, is it not?

Re:Unions

[squiggleslash]

Want to know why Wal-Mart hasn't unionized? Funny story. Those unions who are only interested in dues and are Mafia controlled and {insert other anti-union nonsense here} keep turning up at stores, organizing meetings, and so on.

And then, oddly enough, those stores start treating their employees well. There are wage increases, grievances are suddenly addressed, management starts dealing with various unpleasant aspects of working at Wal-Mart, and meetings are called where they point out all those voluntary improvements, all done because Wal Mart values their associates, and you don't want to unionize, those unions are nothing but trouble and...

And so the union reps disappear, usually with a smirk on their faces.

(In fairness, in one or two cases the situation was so bad the employees voted to unionize anyway, and Wal Mart went nuclear and killed the store, but threats to close the stores aren't usually part of the initial pitch - after all, if you're trying to say what good employers you are, saying "We'll fucking fire you if you unionize" isn't going to help.)

There are good, bad, and means-well-but-sucks unions much as there are organizations in any sphere.

My advice to Musk? If employees are considering unionizing, find out why, and fix the problems. It's a lot easier to give your more vulnerable staff raises and reduce the raises for your management layers, for example, than to deal with a strike.

Re: Unions

[radl33t]

mainly the erection of market barriers via regulation, lobbying, scale, and duplicitous behaviors including bribery, collusion, nepotism, and other forms of corruption.

Re:Unions

[whoever57]

The factory wasn't built by Tesla.

The building was formerly a joint venture between GM and Toyota (NUMMI). GM pulled out of the site as part of its bankruptcy. Toyota invested $50M in Tesla and then Tesla bought the site from Toyota for $50M.

Re: Unions

[CrimsonAvenger]

You assume there is competition and you assume when their is competition that companies are forced to make a better product. Go buy a appliance sometime asshole.

Oddly enoiugh, I did that this past December. And oddly enough, there were multiple choices, from cheap junk to quite expensive (and high quality) appliances.

Which means a range of choices for everyone who wants a dishwasher, for instance. Pick what's in your budget and fits your needs.

Now, alternately, we can go with the "one model fits all" theory. It has, after all, worked so well in the past. Oh, wait, it hasn't.l...

I'm curious, where do you live that there are no choices in appliances?

Re:Unions

[alvinrod]

The problem is that the union can argue for a $40/hour wage until their blue in the face, but they can't change economic reality. Say that the company gives into the union and their employees are now making $80k/year, which is great until they company goes under within a few years because its incapable of being competitive with other local or even foreign companies. So now the union has to argue for protectionist tariffs in order to support their workers, which is basically arguing that I'm forced to restrict my purchasing choices because they think that they somehow deserve to be the only game in town. At that point, why don't they just deserve $80/hour wages because its no like anyone has a choice.

Rather the union should argue that it makes more sense for the company to relocate. There are plenty of parts of the country were $40/year is enough to own a home. Too many unions labor under the delusion that if they believe strongly enough, or fight with the company enough that two and two can be made to come out five.

Re:Unions

[thomst]

nehumanuscrede opined:

If Musk doesn't want his employees getting seduced by the Union, he should probably consider bumping the pay of his workers to near what the national average is and address any concerns they may have ( like excessive mandatory overtime per the article ). As long as he keeps his workforce happy, they'll have no reason to Unionize and Musk will have nothing to worry about.

Of course, there is the flip side.

Musk can say " screw this " and move the entire operation out of California and into another State where the cost of doing business is much lower.

"For every complex human problem, there is one and only one simple solution - and it is always wrong." - H. L. Menchken

First of all, Musk really can't increase Tesla workers' wages significantly. Tesla is still only marginally profitable, and, despite probably the most extensive use of industrial robots in the auto industry, it has a workforce of approximately 5,000 at the former NUMMI plant. A $10/hour raise for that many people (and this is assuming a 40-hour workweek with 10 holidays per year) would amount to an additional $10 million in wage costs per annum, plus additional payments to California and the U.S. for social security and other taxes. That's not peanuts. High wages for production line workers is one of the things that nearly killed the domestic auto industry by opening the door for less-expensive foreign imports from countries with lower labor costs (or more extensive automation - i.e.: Japan).

Secondly - and more cogently - Musk really can't move Tesla's manufacturing to another state. The deal he made to take over the NUMMI plant in Fremont is incredibly favorable to Tesla. He'd be really hard-pressed to find lower per-square-foot costs elsewhere, plus he'd have the expense of moving, re-installing, and troubleshooting the industrial robot army that produces and assembles most of each car. (Those 5,000 workers mostly do stuff like hook up wiring harnesses and so forth. There's essentially zero heavy lifiting involved in their jobs.) And then there'd be the six-to-twelve month halt in production while the changeover in facilities took place, just as Tesla is getting ready to roll out its first truly mass-production car, the Model 3. It's simply not a financiallyt realistic option.

In the parent article, Musk clearly states that Tesla has always been "union neutral". He's not anti-union. Nor is he pro-union. What he's against is the underhandedness of Jose Moran, who is essentially a union mole who took a job at Tesla specifically to agitate for a union vote. Apparently his mission was unsuccessful - Tesla's workforce was unreceptive to his message - so he quit his job (again, from the actual article, there is no current Tesla employee by that name) and has taken to tha Innerwebs to propagandize against Musk.

It's worth noting exactly why Tesla got such a sweetheart deal on the NUMMI plant: it's because astronomical labor costs made producinhg cars at the factory (which is ENORMOUS - Tesla occupies only a portion of the complex) unprofitable for GM and Toyota, the joint owners of NUMMI, so they SHUT IT DOWN in 2010, eliminating 4,700 jobs altogether.

That, I suspect, is why the UAW's mole found so little support among Tesla workers. Many of them are former NUMMI employees. They remember the good times and relatively high wages - but they also remember what happened to those good times and good wages when their former employer decided to shutter the plant because of those high wages ...

Re:Unions

[kellymcdonald78]

The biggest issue is that some of the unions have become so large and represent workers across so many industries and employers such that they are insulated from the historic symbiotic relationship between employee and employer. In this case for example, lets say UAW succeeds, unionizes Tesla and as a result of higher costs, forces it out of business. That's 5000 workers on the street, less than 2% of UAW 390,000 total members. UAW leadership isn't out anything and they continue on their merry way. Historically unions had to work in a framework that left the business they worked for to be viable, now there is no need for that

Something is fishy in Denmark

[darthsilun]

Moran claims he's worked there for four years.

Tesla/Musk claim Moran was paid to join Tesla to agitate for unionizing.

So he joined four years ago, and was silent for four years.

And only after four years of silence, four years of mandatory overtime, etc., etc., he starts to speak out.

At which point he's suddenly a shill for the UAW?. Dunno, whether he is or isn't a shill, that doesn't make it magically wrong, per se, to argue for a union.

(And perhaps it need not be the UAW, but if not them, then who?)

Re:Something is fishy in Denmark

[Mashiki]

Not fishy at all. The Toyota plants in Woodstock, Ontario and Cambridge, Ontario have had multiple cases of this. People would get hired on usually by having a sterling resume, or qualifications that put them above the average worker to get hired on. Then after several years start agitating for unionization and so on. It's why the unionization vote at the Woodstock plant has failed at least 4 times that I know of.

Re:Something is fishy in Denmark

[drinkypoo]

People would get hired on usually by having a sterling resume, or qualifications that put them above the average worker to get hired on. Then after several years start agitating for unionization and so on.

So they work for years and then they want to be treated better and therefore they are a UAW plant who is evil and must be destroyed? I'm going to need more than that.

This is where government standards SHOULD come in

[jenningsthecat]

There should be no need and no place for a dispute over "not ergonomically compatible" and "excessive mandatory overtime". Legislated workplace standards, (and people of integrity to investigate complaints and enforce relevant legislation), should be in place to prevent this kind of dispute from being fought in the press. As for unions, they are an evil made necessary only by the fact that so much of government is in the pockets of corporations. Just my two cents worth.

Re:Being a member of a union

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, this! Younger generation forgets that this country was built on strong unions.
Government and business were _always_ pro child labour in the U.S. (don't believe me,
read the Supreme Court's ruling on child labour - right to enter into a contract my arse!)
Unions, (like U.S. juries are supposed to do) help keep business and government honest
and are a needed and necessary part of a free democratic society. The original purpose
of a union was the strike fund (which is sadly "illegal" now, though it exists in other forms)
which allow workers to strengthen their bargaining position when management was tough.

As far as IT, if we all weren't a bunch of snobs and embraced unions back in the 90's, we
would not have the horrible H1B situation that we have to struggle to regain control again.
I like to think Trump can help fix the H1B problem, but it might be too late to become a
world technology leader again because of the problems created by the H1B program
(lack of native born U.S. citizens entering the field, etc.)

CAP === 'births'

UAW scam job

[Anonymous Coward]

Normally I'm not a fan of Elon Musk's approach to things, but i have to agree with him on this. Of course the UAW would be after him once he gets enough momentum for Tesla, it's what the UAW does. And frankly it's the UAW's policies that have crushed the old car manufacturers in the US; their ability to redesign production processes is severely hampered by union rules.

The reason I support Musk though on this is because if the things that this guy claims is true of Tesla's plant, then frankly they don't need to unionize to improve conditions because the plant would be illegal under California labor law. I've worked in manufacturing facilities in California nearly my entire life. So either Tesla is operating illegally, or this guy is making a lot of false claims to cause agitation. I doubt the California Labor Commission (CLC) would have not inspected a 5,000 employee plant by now, so the more likely scenario is this guy is making stuff up.

From his post:

"Most of my 5,000-plus coworkers work well over 40 hours a week, including excessive mandatory overtime. "

This is extremely illegal under California state law; then penalties for companies for this are really harsh. Musk can't even get away with it by making his employees salaried exempt, the CLC takes a very hard stance on classifying employees of a particular job differently than another company. And they do inspect.

"The hard, manual labor we put in to make Tesla successful is done at great risk to our bodies."

Tesla's plant is heavily automated so I find this unlikely. I also find it unlikely that OSHA has not inspected a 5,000 employee plant for safety and health hazardous issues given how OSHA operates, so this is a questionable statement.

"There is too much twisting and turning and extra physical movement to do jobs that could be simplified if workers’ input were welcomed. Add a shortage of manpower and a constant push to work faster to meet production goals, and injuries are bound to happen."

I could see ergonomics to be a problem, and Tesla is under a crunch to deliver vehicles and meet performance measurements. And given how fast Tesla has grown, I could see their production lines being made in a haphazard and inefficient and not ergonomic way. But again, I doubt it. Tesla took a lot of influence from Toyota (including investment) on this plant, and frankly Toyota's lines are far and above the best in the business when it comes to efficiency and worker safety. So it's possible, but again unlikely.

"Most Tesla production workers earn between $17 and $21 hourly. The average auto worker in the nation earns $25.58 an hour, and lives in a much less expensive region. The living wage in Alameda county, where we work, is more than $28 an hour for an adult and one child (I have two)."

I'm sorry buddy, but labor is a market. If you don't like your rate go find another job that pays better, it's that simple. You signed up for the job at this rate, you can always leave and find another. It' unethical to go into a job with a pay rate you knew was low when you signed up, and then threaten unionization to increase the pay rate; that's you threatening trying to break an employment contract you signed.

"A few months ago, six out of eight people in my work team were out on medical leave at the same time due to various work-related injuries."

This is extremely unlikely. Work related injuries must be reported to OSHA on an ongoing basis. If a whole team is down due to people out due to medical injuries, even if the management is a cold-hearted I would think they'd be concerned about the efficiency of this team and try to make fixes, because this would shut down an entire functional group in the plant. Not only that, if 6 out of 8 on a team were out and those were reported to OSHA, then OSHA would be sending inspectors in almost next day. So for this to be true, Tesla would have to be breaking Federal employment law by not reporting injuries to OSHA, so he's either claiming that Tes

Re:UAW scam job

[nbauman]

"The hard, manual labor we put in to make Tesla successful is done at great risk to our bodies."

Tesla's plant is heavily automated so I find this unlikely. I also find it unlikely that OSHA has not inspected a 5,000 employee plant for safety and health hazardous issues given how OSHA operates, so this is a questionable statement.

Actually Tesla has failed inspections.

http://insideevs.com/tesla-mot...
Tesla Motors Fined $89,000 For 7 Safety Violations Linked To Fremont Factory Incident

        “Tesla employees Jesus Navarro, Kevin Carter and Jorge Terrazas were taken to Valley Medical Center in San Jose with second- and third-degree burns. Carter and Terrazas have returned to work. Navarro, who had burns on his hands, stomach, hip, lower back and ankles, was hospitalized for 20 days and continues to recuperate at home.”

        “Cal-OSHA’s investigation found that Tesla failed to ensure that the low-pressure die casting machine was maintained in a safe operating condition and allowed its employees to operate the machine while the safety interlock was broken. It also found that the employees had not been properly trained regarding the hazards of the machine, and were not wearing the required eye and face protection.”

http://www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/cit...

4/25/2014 Tesla Motors, Inc. Fremont Fremont District Office
Serious – 6
General – 1
Total
Violations - 7

  Citations were issued to Tesla Motors, Inc. for six Serious and one General violation. The employer did not conduct periodic inspections of use of a low pressure die casting machine, and allowed employees to continue using the machine after a safety interlock had been damaged, which resulted in injuries to three employees who were sprayed with molten metal. The employer failed to release the air pressure used to inject molten aluminum into molds before servicing, did not maintain the machine in safe operating condition and did not use a protective shield. The employer did not ensure that employees were trained in the hazards of using the machine, and did not ensure that employees used eye and face protection.

Re:UAW scam job

[Anonymous Coward]

Where to start?

"Most of my 5,000-plus coworkers work well over 40 hours a week, including excessive mandatory overtime." This is extremely illegal under California state law; then penalties for companies for this are really harsh. Musk can't even get away with it by making his employees salaried exempt, the CLC takes a very hard stance on classifying employees of a particular job differently than another company. And they do inspect.

From the State of California's Department of Industrial Relations: "Q. Can an employer require an employee to work overtime? A. Yes, an employer may dictate the employee's work schedule and hours. Additionally, under most circumstances the employer may discipline an employee, up to and including termination, if the employee refuses to work scheduled overtime."

(your disbelief that the work is risky)

I'm sure your opinion of whether the work is prone to injury at a place you've never been on a job you've never held, as well as your idea of how much risk that worker should willingly bear, is very much valued. Please give me details of your work situation so that I may tell you what it's really like.

I'm sorry buddy, but labor is a market.

You're clearly not sorry, and you're ignoring what is a fundamental justification of unionizing. If there were 30,000 employers involved in making a car, I'd say the 30,000 employees of Tesla should indeed go out and negotiate on their own.

Work related injuries must be reported to OSHA on an ongoing basis. If a whole team is down due to people out due to medical injuries, even if the management is a cold-hearted I would think they'd be concerned about the efficiency of this team and try to make fixes, because this would shut down an entire functional group in the plant. Not only that, if 6 out of 8 on a team were out and those were reported to OSHA, then OSHA would be sending inspectors in almost next day. So for this to be true, Tesla would have to be breaking Federal employment law by not reporting injuries to OSHA, so he's either claiming that Tesla is acting in an extremely illegal way by not reporting injuries, or he's lying.

Yes, whenever an employee is killed on the job or suffers a work-related hospitalization, amputation, or loss of an eye, that must be reported. He's neither lying, nor is Tesla operating illegally- it's that you're wrong about the law.

Nevermind, I'm tired of typing. Do I need to bother to tell you there's a difference between whistleblowing and speaking? To question whether "the last 30 years" is a relevant time period to measure unionized vs. non-unionized efficiency when the power of unions has been declining during that entire period, and wasn't particularly strong at the start of that period? You've made up your mind- there's simply no other reason you'd make claims about stuff you're clearly legally wrong about if you hadn't already decided you hate unions.

Re:UAW scam job

[galabar]

Is that it? For having run for a fair amount of time, it seems like a small list.

Re:Being a member of a union

[argStyopa]

I think people should freely be allowed to unionize, but people should also be allowed to NOT be part of the unions if they don't want to be: it's their economic choice, really.

However, I do believe that if a union interposes itself as the collective-bargaining agent for a number of workers, then the union logically should be legally held liable for the conduct of the workers it's representing: ie if productivity falls below normal, etc, the union should be liable to compensate the firm for lost income.

Re:Being a member of a union

[Richard_at_work]

The problem here, and one most non-US readers wont get so I will spell it out and repeat some of what you say, is that in the US most unionisation through majority vote means *total* workforce unionisation, whether individuals want it or not.

Even if you, as a worker, disagree with the union, in most states you are *required* to at least pay dues to the union if you want to continue to work at that employer, even if you never engage with the union in any way. Thats not something that has been foisted on the unions, thats something the unions have wanted - mandated whole workforce dues payments increase their funding.

So yes, unionisation is a right, but its a right which is forced on a lot of people who don't want it and whose only recourse is to quit and find a different job.

So I agree with you that unions should only have to represent members in good standing who pay their union dues, its the laws requiring or allowing 100% union shops against individual employees wishes that need to be gotten rid of.

I found the article misleading

[Chrisq]

Elon Musk didn't say that a call for unionisation was morally outrageous. He said that for someone to be "paid by the UAW to join Tesla and agitate for a union" was morally outrageous. There's quite a difference

Re:Being a member of a union

[Trailer Trash]

Sure, being a member of a union is a right. That's not what this story is about. The UAW wants to capture some of the wages from Tesla along with all the other money that they capture. Then they can hand it to Democrats while keeping a few million for the bosses who run the union. That's all they do.

If Tesla employees want to have a union, they should do so. They don't need the UAW to "help".

Elon shouldn't quit.

[stooo]

>> He should quit.
No, I don't think Elon Musk should quit. He has to learn a thing or two on series production.
I'll suggest him to take a tour of the Volvo plant in Torslanda.
They can give him a lot of useful advice on how to design things to be easy to assemble, and how to rotate workers around on different tasks.
Tesla has a lot of lessons to learn that the auto industry had 30 Years ago.

Re:Being a member of a union

[XxtraLarGe]

I think people should freely be allowed to unionize, but people should also be allowed to NOT be part of the unions if they don't want to be: it's their economic choice, really.

Collectivism only works when it's mandatory--and even then, it doesn't work.

Re:Right to Work for Peanuts is Anti-Free Market

[Richard_at_work]

The government already meddles to allow this - its called the National Labor Relations Act, and the Taft-Hartly act to basically overturn previous court rulings that closed union shops were illegal. They no longer call them "closed shops", but rather "union security agreements" but they are basically the same thing - the union gets dues from *all* workers, even those who do not want to join.

If a union vote doesnt pass with 100% of the workforces approval, why should it be the exclusive supplier? Because, the union will argue, its influence is diminished if it isn't - and so the rights of individual workers are trampled on because they are forced to pay dues to an entity they want nothing to do with.

It is not right, and its a setup you will find illegal in most of the rest of the world, where individual employee rights are respected. The UK made closed shops illegal in 1990.

An employee should be legally free to engage in his or her job without outside interference from a third party, even if that third party has contracts with other people in the workplace.

Question, is it deception?

[mpercy]

"then seeking employment specifically for the purpose of promoting unionization has the following moral components: deceiving the owner[s] of the business (or by proxy, their agents) "

My first question is this "Did the employee in question in all other respects do the job he was hired for?" If so, then I wonder if the ulterior motive is immaterial. He did an honest day's work for the agreed upon wages and benefits, as he would be indistinguishable from an employee who had no ulterior motive but decided the day after he was hired to become union devotee.

OTOH, if all he did was get hired so as to have a way to spend time agitating for a union and didn't do the job he was hired for, then his motives are material.

We've seen similar cases where people got themselves at slaughterhouses just so they could report on violations and film animal abuse. It's interesting to see who is defending whom in both cases.

Re:This is why we can't have nice things.

[michelcolman]

Since when does Tesla have massive profits?

Re:First

[wbr1]

His girlfriend told him he was two inches bigger than her last partner. I bet he's glad his girlfriend is no longer a lesbian.

Re:Being a member of a union

[Richard_at_work]

Thats the unions problem - if they aren't getting people to voluntarily sign up, then theres something wrong with their offering, surely...?

Unions seem to have survived here in the UK and Europe, where practices such as enforced union membership is illegal and unions only act for and on behalf of voluntary members, so that makes your argument somewhat moot really doesn't it?

Yes, actually they did

[raymorris]

> So unions decided not to re-tool and just keep on rolling the same sort of crap down decaying production lines

Yes. Modern tooling replaces some (union) jobs that (union) humans did in the 1960s with machines that do the same job, better. That scared the crap out of the unions. Understandably, they fought tooth and nail against modernization, insisting on contracts that retained outdated jobs.

Other countries used the machines to produce more, better cars, faster, thereby growing their automotive sector and increasing overall employment in the automotive industry, while reducing the *per car* head count.

It's totally understandable why the unions did this, but as it turned out, they shot themselves in the foot.

Re:Yes, actually they did

[dbIII]

The unions in the USA are incredibly weak compared with those in Germany and do not have anything like the power you suggest to stop modernization.
Those other countries that produce more, better cars, faster have unions with more of a say in workplace than in the USA, so I really don't get why you push that line unless it's to say what The Party says you should say in Amerika. Nyet?

Ps look at the union web sites still today

[raymorris]

If you're not surw whether I'm right, look at the positions taken by UAW and other large unions still today. They are still against updating tooling, which would results in higher-paying, but fewer jobs. (Aka automation)?

They still don't seem to understand that it's not a choice between automated US factories and non-automated US factories. It's a choice between automated US factories amd automated Japanese factories.

Re:They changed the title

[wardrich86]

I seriously don't understand how people are so anti-union. I assume none of them have ever been part of a union... They're the reason why we have breaks, weekends, and 7 hour shifts (instead of unlimited-hour shifts). The only way I can see somebody being anti-union is if they are a slave-driving exec who will have to suddenly start treating their staff like humans.

Re:Right to Work for Peanuts is Anti-Free Market

[Cederic]

Nope. The employee agrees to those dues as part of the contract with the employer.

Not if the employee is working there prior to unionisation.

Also, why the fuck should I pay some cunt a cut of my salary to interfere negatively in my relationship with my employer? Fuck that.

Closed shops are a fucking travesty and horrifically anti-employee.

The UAW recently laid off four of their senators

[raymorris]

> It seems like some US unions (the UAW in particular) are a lot more powerful than any of our unions or even all of them combined

Perhaps so. The joke is that the UAW isn't doing as well as it once was, they had a layoff and laid off four the senators who work for them.

The most powerful unions are probably some public-sector unions, like teachers' unions, because they literally pay the people they are nominally negotiating against. It goes a bit like this:

The teachers' union donates $250,000 to a certain candidate for governor.

Two months later, they sit down with the new governor and demand that he give them $2 million of taxpayers' money.

A couple years later, the governor is up for re-election.

The teachers' union meets with the governor again and says:
We'd like to discuss two things with you. First, you remember we gave you $250,00 for your last election - we're considering giving you $250,000 again for this election. Secondly, we'd like you to give us $3 million of taxpayer money.

The negotiation is between a union who wants taxpayer money and a politician who is being paid by the union. Nobody in that negotiation represents the people who are paying for it, the taxpayers.

Also, the teachers and firefighters hold a very powerful endorsement. "Think of the children", they can easily say, "Your childrens' education and future depend on you voting for candidate Greenbacks", and many, many voterd are influenced by that endorsement. The fact is, whoever is elected will help decide how money the members of the teachers' union get, and how much the union itself gets. Their self-interest is very much affexted. One should fully expect that that effect on their pay will influence their endorsement.

Re:They changed the title

[superdave80]

I seriously don't understand how people are so anti-union. I assume none of them have ever been part of a union...

Bad assumption. I am against unions, and I actually worked with the NUMMI union (and even briefly was forced to join their union). The workers were low skilled, but felt they deserved high pay. And don't even get me started on the 'leadership' of the union. The fliers that they wrote for their elections looked like they were written by 5th graders for a class president election.