jim rozen wrote:
In article .com, tillius
says...

This is the number commonly quoted. It's very much
in line with my experiences.

That must be related to overhead involved in dealing with unions,


Ah, no.

Let's just say that my experience is derived from a lifetime
working in R&D, and the rule that employee's cost is about twice
what they get paid is based on decidedly NON-union companies.

One of them being one of the most famous non-union companies.
They have a 'one breath' rule. If you are a manager, you are
allowed to take ONE breath before picking up the phone and
calling your manager, if you ever hear anyone you manage talking
about unionizing.

I'd also wonder where with that lifetime we're
talking about. Employee overhead in the 70's
and 80's might have been considerably lower than
present, given the increases in health care
and OSHA compliance. Assuming, of course, that
the employer pays most of the increases and is
diligent about following OSHA regulations.