0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I'm not sure how much of the above posts are legit or simply sarcasm
Quote from: gottaplan on December 15, 2010, 12:20:07 AMI'm not sure how much of the above posts are legit or simply sarcasmMy post was absolutely serious. But I wasn't discussing the prevailing wage law. I was only talking about how he plans (or at least will attempt) to screw our cops, firefighters and other emergency responders out of their right to meaningfully engage in collective bargaining. That is a topic totally separate from any discussion on the prevailing wage law, which I have mixed emotions about.
It is perfectly possible to get a reputation for quality work without being a union member, too.For almost a decade in the late 90s, my family had one guy that did basically all of the construction/remodeling work we ever needed or wanted done on our house. To this day, I still have no idea if the guy was a union member, or ever was a union member. He's retired now. We heard about him through a referral (far and away the #1 source of business for almost all small businesses). We hired him, and he did a good job, so we kept on hiring him--and giving him referrals in turn when other people asked us if we knew a guy who could redo a sunroom or bathroom or whatever. He charged far more than minimum wage, but you know what? He was worth it, so we paid it. I'm pretty sure that he was never short of work, though I don't know what life might have been like for him if he'd still been around in 2008.
Custodial staff? Seriously? So you're in favor of people who empty trash & clean the floors making top wages? How about offer $8/hr and if they pass a background check they are hired? How does a custodian remotely impact a child's education? It doesn't, so don't bother trying to explain. If you think keeping the wages higher will help screen out some weirdos, that logic doesn't work either.
How much do custodial staff make? You consider that "top wages"? Be serious.Amazing how you all will fight tooth and nail to ensure "Buckley Smith IV's" irrevocable trust is fully protected, but want to take a sh!te on the little guy creating an even larger wealth gap than we have (in which the richest 1% has more money than the bottom 50% COMBINED). It really is puzzling...
When I was an adjunct instructor at a community college, I made $17/hr and the janitors made over $20. That's how screwed up sh!t is.
^The best part of this whole discussion is the assumption that it is impossible for janitorial services to be valuable simply because of the nature of the job. Janitors or Facilities Directors or whatever deal with icky stuff, therefore it is impossible that they should be paid a high wage.
^For once, I actually agree with DanB.
Why don't we eliminate certification for doctors and lawyers and real estate agents and tradesmen? sh!t, why companies fire a bunch of MBAs and hire people who don't have those degrees and pay them less?Nobody yet has explained why exactly a $20 an hour janitor or a $100,000 a year Facilities Director is overpaid except to imply that the nature of their work means that they are overpaid.
^For once, I actually agree with DanB. Why should we take it on faith that janitors must be paid less than teachers? Bartenders and servers routinely make more money than someone working a job that requires a college degree. Should we trash them as well?
Custodial staff? Seriously? So you're in favor of people who empty trash & clean the floors making top wages?
Quote from: LincolnKennedy on December 15, 2010, 06:22:56 AM^For once, I actually agree with DanB. Just be proud!Seriously, all of these so-called college graduates are what is hurting the job pool. Some of these people would be better off going to a trade school and learning a trade. There is nothing wrong with that. Getting an associate degree from a community college does little to prepare them for the world.
with regards to $100k Facilities Director, I'm wondering if the unstated concern was that he was given an inflated salary that may have been based less on the market value of his services and on his specific qualifications than on his tenure and the union contract. Not that I should put words in SHS's mouth, he's capable of speaking for himself. But that would be my basic concern. If that position was tested in the open market, would someone, with the necessary qualifications, be willing to take the position for something less than that $100K?
Interesting article in WSJ yesterday by Minnesota Gov Tim Pawlenty on taking on public sector unions (not specifically emergency forces though) and how all states need to be tackling this issue sooner than later http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703766704576009350303578410.html?KEYWORDS=pawlenty
No problem, Carl. Are you interested in pursuing a career in the custodial arts?