On Nov 26, 6:50 am, "*" wrote:
Millwright Ron wrote in article
...

On Nov 25, 3:29 am, "Harold and Susan Vordos" wrote:
"Millwright Ron" wrote in message

*****************************************
Harold:
I agree that not all men are equal in their abilities, attitudes
or desire to produce. Union scale is the minimum I had to pay. That
does not mean that I did not pay extra for talent and hard work. Which
I did! Sometimes it might be in the form of a bonus, more per hour or
offers to work over time.

Geez....!!!

Wouldn't that be a violation of the union concept of equality among
workers?

How could you pay more talented, less senior people MORE money than people
with higher seniority, and not be in violation of the contract?

It actually sounds just like some of the complaints of unequal treatment
registered earlier in this thread by people opposed to
unions.....complaints which you brushed aside as coming from uninformed,
non-union people.



I will always be proud of being a Union Millwright.
Millwright Ron

Even after admitting that you practiced the very things that you told
others didn't happen among "equal brothers"?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$

I do not know what you are talking about ??????


The contract that is negotiated on and agreed too......Is for the
minimum pay not maximum pay. If the company wishes to pay more. Why
not? If the company wishes to give a check to an employee for 10,000
dollars. Why not? This is an option that any company can do but most
do not. Why do you have a problem with that? The wage package is the
minimum for all Union Brothers and Sisters.


Most corporate version's are pay the ceo's more money and screw the
worker.

Ever week it seems that you hear about some ceo or cfo stealing money
from the companies that they work for....


Millwright Ron