From: bobp@hal.com (Bob Pendleton)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,alt.amateur-comp,talk.politics.misc,misc.misc
Subject: Re: GM Plant Closures Again? Won't Solve the Economic Problems
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:27:17 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.

From article <1glcjkINNlgk@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, by au329@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ronda Hauben):

> My understanding of the labor laws is that they give someone the 
> basis to defend their rights, if they choose to.

That's my understanding also.

> For example, I feel unions are an important right and that
> the law against the employer paying a worker's union dues
> so the worker can't be in a union is a violation of
> that right.

I don't understand what you are saying here. Are you saying that there
is a law that keeps employers from paying union dues? And that that
law some how prevents people from being in a union? This doesn't make
sense to me.

> similarly I know someone who was told that he wouldn't be paid
> for the hours he had spent at work. He called up the Federal
> Dept of Labor and inquired as to whether there was any law 
> requiring the employer to pay him for the hours he had been at work. He
> was told lthere was and that he could file a charge if he wasn't paid.
> HHe told the employer that he knew he had the right under the law
> to be paid. The employer agreed to pay him but then toldl him
> there was no further work for him.

This story brought back memories from a long time ago. In my very
first job I once turned in a time card with 64 hours on it. I got pay
for 32 (or something like those numbers, it was more than 20 years
ago). I asked for the difference and was told, by the owner, that I
would be paid if I could prove I'd worked the hours. Well, I figured
no problem, the manager had signed the time card, he'd tell the owner
he'd made a mistake.

The manager wouldn't stand up to the owner because he was afraid of
losing his job. The owner had the time card, and refused to show it to
me...

BTW, I did contact the state labor relation board (Utah) about the
problem, and was told I didn't have a leg to stand on.

This experience affected my life in several different ways. I learned
to be very cynical, it made me study much harder, and I learned the
"joy" of revenge.

> It was good there was a law that required that he be paid
> for the hours he was at work. It was bad that the law
> has no teeth in it so the employer knows he will face a stiff
> fine if he violates the law or penalizes the worker who wants
> to defend his rights under the law.

Unfortunately, you left out one detail. Did he go into the job
believing he was going to be paid a salary or an hourly rate? Did he
say he'd do a job for a fixed price and when it turned out to take
longer than he expected did then ask for the extra?

What was the agreement between the person doing the job and the
person paying for the job?

In my case I agreed to do a job for a certain hourly rate and was
ripped off. On the other hand, I have serveral times made commitments
that forced my to work long hours to get a job done for an agreed on
price. (Both contract and salary situations.) In a few (rather
embarrasing) cases I've wound up make only a few cents/hour. But I
made the commitment, and I had to keep it. If I tried to change the
rules by invoking federal law, I would expect to not work there any
more.

>>BTW, I'm exempt from the labor laws. I'm classed as an engineer.
>>
> Why is that? Are you considered a professional (I thought teachers
> are considered professionals but still have rights under
> labor laws).

Since writing that I've learned that the status of programmers and
software engineers is quite ambiguous under current labor laws. 

In some states I'd be considered a professional. In others I'm not
consdered to be a professional. At one time the federal government
classed programmers and computers scientists as clerical workers.

But, yes, professionals have some right under labor laws.

>>I've had access to usenet news or arpanet mailing lists for about 9
>>years out of the last 12.
> 
> That goes back to 1980? Were you on the arpanet mailing lists before
> they were gated to usenet?

I believe so. I was on arpanet for sometime before I ever heard of
usenet. 


> Were you on human.nets?
> I have heard that that was a high quality mailing list.

Yes, I used to read human.nets. I can't say if I ever posted to it or
not. 

> No membership isn't voluntary. 

This is obscene.

> I don't know why the law in this area is so weak. But I know that it 
> has led to the decline both of democratic rights for workers in unions
> and to the decline of union membership in the U.S.

I don't think it's a problem of the law being week. When the unions
start being the exploiter, what is the purpose of being in a union?

-- 
Bob Pendleton             | As an engineer I hate to hear:
bobp@hal.com              |   1) You've earned an "I told you so."
Speaking only for myself. |   2) Our customers don't do that.
                   <<< Odin, after the well of Mimir. >>>
Newsgroups: sci.econ,misc.legal