Unions: Boon or bust when it comes to safety?
July 24, 2009 by Jim BurgerPosted in: In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, cost of safety, inspections
Do unions make workers more safe or less?
A recent Newsweek article, written by a small-business owner, addresses the proposed “Employee Free Choice Act” and the self-described paranoia he feels at the thought of having his company become unionized.
The author raises some interesting points about wages and benefits. And he expresses concern that OSHA is a lot more likely to come calling on companies where unions have either waged successful campaigns, or are hoping to.
But what about safety? Do unions make it easier or harder to keep employees safe? Do they fulfill the promise of promoting safer working conditions, or do they promote a counterproductive us-vs.-them attitude and make it tougher to get rid of unsafe employees?
Let us know what you think in the Comments Box below.
Tags: Employee Free Choice Act, safety, unions
Loading ...
July 27th, 2009 at 9:11 am
I think they help the employee, however a lot of times they really hurt the employer.
July 27th, 2009 at 10:46 am
As a union masonry contractor I know first hand that Construction Unions make the workplace 50% less Safe for the following reasons:
1. Union members cannot be tested for drugs or alcohol. A huge safety issue.
2. Many members will not adhere to company safety policy, and cannot be fired because they are protected by the union bosses.
July 27th, 2009 at 11:34 am
I am disappointed!
Why is this article even mentioned in a safety bulletin, it has absolutely nothing to do with safety. It starts out mentioning OSHA and then spends all its time talking about how vicious unions are in their current organizing tacticts.
Plus he never mentions why OSHA was there in the first place, was this a random inspection or had he been cited, or perhaps one of his employees called? This is the story!
July 27th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
I think some unions give safety training to their apprentices, I find that when I safety train our new construction union workers, they already know a lot about safety, but there is still the ocasional worker that breaks the rules and cuts corners even after they have been trained. boon
July 27th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
From the experience I have of being a non union manager of union employees, I’ve seen how damaging the union can be to a facility. The union here only protects the sick and the stupid, but does nothing for those employees who show up to work everyday and work safely.
This union does not address safety concerns, even if approached by its members. They purposely avoid safety concerns because it is not profitable for them - they make more money and cause more trouble by lobbying for poor workers to keep their jobs.
Most unions were needed before OSHA, but are now a drain on the employers, especially the small business owners.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Unions spend Millions of dollars on safety training and training in their respective work processes. Union instructors attend comprehensive train-the-trainer sessions and are part of well organized training efforts. Union training and safety standards are set high. You will not find union instructors selling safety certifications because credibility is paramount. Many unions have national drug testing programs and highly organized training programs.
July 27th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
OSHA does not make anyone “SAFE” and unions do not make anyone safe. “Workers” make themselves safe! They achieve this via good training, real world work experience, having a safe attitude when conducting work tasks, and following the appropriate safety standards. And as most of know, the “supervisor” is the vital link as to success of the entire safety program. If the supervisor does not reinforce/discipline safety issues, OSHA could develop 30 more standards and it would do absolutley no good!
I know in the industry I have worked in, complying with OSHA, company safety polices/procedures are “CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYEMENT” wheich are spelled out in many contracts.
Just my .02
July 27th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Steve you obvously don’t understand the theme of this article. He is not bashing unions. He is commenting on why a particular legislation is not a good one for small employers and their employees. Why OSHA was there or what was found is not the issue. At one point in the country’s past the usions were a desperately needed thing. They forced poor employers to correct bad bussiness practices. The federal government had few laws and they were poorly enforced.
In the last 40 years many laws have been enacted by the Labor department to ensure worker safety and fair compensation. The unions have become that which they fought against and bring little to the table. You can bash bussiness all you want. When push comes to shove a business HAS to make a profit for the workers to have a job.