AT&T Vote To Go On Strike.

[MacGyver]

Are they nutz??? Typical union mentality. People out of work all across the country and they want more, more, more.




Communications Workers of America members have authorized a strike against AT&T after their contracts terminate on Saturday.

Ongoing negotiations cover six regional contracts covering 112,500 workers in AT&T's landline division.

The company reached a tentative agreement with its wireless division employees in March, said company spokesman Walt Sharp. Results of that vote will be known today, said Candice Johnson, union spokeswoman.

Health care benefits and access to jobs created by new technologies are key issues in the negotiations, according to the company and the union.

"We have a contingency plan for work stoppages," Sharp said, calling the strike authorization "expected and routine at this stage in the negotiations."

Sharp said the wireless employees authorized a strike when their contract expired six weeks ago, but negotiations continued and there was no strike.

Johnson said a strike cannot begin until the union president sets a date. He has not done that, yet, but could call the strike for Sunday.

Local 4620, which represents Green Bay area employees, has 120 members, Johnson said. Local 4621, which represents Appleton area workers, has about 350 members.

AT&T is the nation's largest employer of union labor.

The Communications Workers of America said 88 percent of members who voted on the authorization favored a possible strike.

 

[BillR]

Plenty of unemployed folks now. This sounds easier than it is, but fire those on strike and start hiring. Might cost a bit in short run, but long term will be great for the company and it's ability to hire more!

 

[ChiefApache]

Plenty of unemployed folks now. This sounds easier than it is, but fire those on strike and start hiring. Might cost a bit in short run, but long term will be great for the company and it's ability to hire more!

Agree 100%! Jackasses.

 

[MacGyver]

Plenty of unemployed folks now. This sounds easier than it is, but fire those on strike and start hiring. Might cost a bit in short run, but long term will be great for the company and it's ability to hire more!

I hope they do exactly that.

 

[sledge]

"landline" employees....is this a labor union or more trained technicians? I wonder what's going to happen when more and more people stop using landlines. That's probably part of the crux of the problem and thanks to union strangleholds, there's no easy way to phase these people out.

 

[ROGUE]

Personally, I think the entire country should go on strike. They are laughing at the tea party protests. Maybe we should pull their money flow and see how they like that.

 

[ChiefApache]

Personally, I think the entire country should go on strike. They are laughing at the tea party protests. Maybe we should pull their money flow and see how they like that.

While I don't disagree with you Tom, this country has turned into a pu$$y no backbone society that just lays down and takes it, regardless of what they're handed.

 

[OldSchool]

Plenty of unemployed folks now. This sounds easier than it is, but fire those on strike and start hiring. Might cost a bit in short run, but long term will be great for the company and it's ability to hire more!

Right on!!! Phuck them unions!!!:boxing_smiley::sifone::26:

 

[MattBMiller]

Plenty of unemployed folks now. This sounds easier than it is, but fire those on strike and start hiring. Might cost a bit in short run, but long term will be great for the company and it's ability to hire more!

Wish they could do that every time the unions strike.

 

[Griswald]

It is typical for the union members to authorize a strike during negotiations........doens't mean there will be one. Look to the news Sunday morning to find out.

 

[MarylandMark]

CWA SUCKS

BUT why does everyone want to see everyone else work for $10/hour with no benefits?

Average Verizon guy makes low 6 figs, free medical/dental/vision, 401K match, defined pension plan, etc. Union (which suck!) or not I'm worth at least that and then some!

Wireless is growing by leaps and bounds, however there is sooooooo much more going on in the landline side than your simple dialtone line. Almost all "wireless communications" are routed through the landlines. You call me on your cell- the call doesn't bounce tower to tower to get to me...

3G maxes out around 3Mbps- try to run a business on that. Yea- 4G has been here but until we milk you to get our investment out of 3G you ani't going to see it.

 

[Buoy]

So, what happens when I get to the new Camelot, and opt not to have a landline hooked up? (which is my plan)
Will I also have any problems with businesses that always ask for "home phone"?

 

[rainmn]

Mark -

I don't want to see any skilled telecom tech working for 10 bucks an hour with no benefits. What I take issue with are the benefits and wages that the unions think they are "entitled to", regardless of what financial impact that has on the corporation. Also the mentality that it's ok for all of the non-union employees to make concessions because of the economy....but not the union.

Some of these dipchits would rather see a company go bankrupt before they agree to a co-pay increase of 5 bucks.

I also work for a large Telecom (in management, not the union) that has union contracts, so I've seen their mentality first hand for a long time...just like you have. In this last year we've seen plenty of layoffs, salary freezes, discontinuation of company 401k match $, and any other cost cutting measure you can think of. I don't like any of it, but understand the necessity. If it keeps the company in business and keeps me employed, then it's a necessary evil I can deal with.

The majority of the union guys don't see it that way - they want to have the cake and eat it too. They are unwilling to make any concessions at all, but they don't want to accept the consequences.

 

[txriverrat2001]

Mark -

I don't want to see any skilled telecom tech working for 10 bucks an hour with no benefits. What I take issue with are the benefits and wages that the unions think they are "entitled to", regardless of what financial impact that has on the corporation. Also the mentality that it's ok for all of the non-union employees to make concessions because of the economy....but not the union.

Some of these dipchits would rather see a company go bankrupt before they agree to a co-pay increase of 5 bucks.

I also work for a large Telecom (in management, not the union) that has union contracts, so I've seen their mentality first hand for a long time...just like you have. In this last year we've seen plenty of layoffs, salary freezes, discontinuation of company 401k match $, and any other cost cutting measure you can think of. I don't like any of it, but understand the necessity. If it keeps the company in business and keeps me employed, then it's a necessary evil I can deal with.

The majority of the union guys don't see it that way - they want to have the cake and eat it too. They are unwilling to make any concessions at all, but they don't want to accept the consequences.

Well put ......

 

[MarylandMark]

Well put ......

Yes it is and I agree 100%. Someone that earns their money doesn't need a union to get it for them.

 

[MarylandMark]

So, what happens when I get to the new Camelot, and opt not to have a landline hooked up? (which is my plan)
Will I also have any problems with businesses that always ask for "home phone"?

I haven't had a landline in over 10 years- no problems (except with DTV)

1/2 my post was that some people are worth what they get paid yet seems like most of the country wants everyone to make $10/hr because we are a global economy and if China can do it so can we. Do you want to live like the Chinese?

The other 1/2 was "landline" is a lot more than a dialtone line most people associate with the term.

 

[MarylandMark]

ps- I am CWA only because Maryland is a not a right to work state. I resigned from my union many moons ago- not to cross any picket lines but because I don't agree with them and their mentality.

 

[rainmn]

Yes it is and I agree 100%. Someone that earns their money doesn't need a union to get it for them.

You and I are on the same page. :cheers2:

 

[ChiefApache]

seems like most of the country wants everyone to make $10/hr because we are a global economy and if China can do it so can we. Do you want to live like the Chinese?

I disagree with this. I think that MOST of the country is sick and tired of is unions (and those who aren't in unions) making what they do, getting what they get and still continue to hold their hand out asking for more. And they're making excellent money!

Low six figures for an employee is excellent money. Middle Class America is not making low six figures.

 

[Sea-Dated]

Mark -

I don't want to see any skilled telecom tech working for 10 bucks an hour with no benefits. What I take issue with are the benefits and wages that the unions think they are "entitled to", regardless of what financial impact that has on the corporation. Also the mentality that it's ok for all of the non-union employees to make concessions because of the economy....but not the union.

Some of these dipchits would rather see a company go bankrupt before they agree to a co-pay increase of 5 bucks.

I also work for a large Telecom (in management, not the union) that has union contracts, so I've seen their mentality first hand for a long time...just like you have. In this last year we've seen plenty of layoffs, salary freezes, discontinuation of company 401k match $, and any other cost cutting measure you can think of. I don't like any of it, but understand the necessity. If it keeps the company in business and keeps me employed, then it's a necessary evil I can deal with.

The majority of the union guys don't see it that way - they want to have the cake and eat it too. They are unwilling to make any concessions at all, but they don't want to accept the consequences.

Very well said