Hurricane Sandy Relief volunteers from Alabama told to join Union
 

This would be terrible if it were true:

http://blog.al.com/breaking/2012/11/...denies_cl.html

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/201..._non-unio.html

an update from CBSAtlanta:

http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/1998...sandy-recovery

Although 3 of these crews are from Alabama, they are from different utilities and were not there all together. Apparently different crews had different encounters, and one of them was told they needed to temporarily affiliate in with the union in order to work.

After all, many utilities assisted in Alabama during last year's tornado aftermath and the hurricanes that ravage the coast from time to time. We certainly want to return the favor!

But with nowhere to work, and with shelter, food, and gasoline in short supply, one crew elected to return home.

I imagine we'll hear more about this in the next day or two.

Excerpt from the story posted by FSUZeta, emphasis mine:

I've been having problems getting the graphics from greekchat to work on my machine. So with the width I've got, the title of this thread got split into thirds. The last line was what I originally thought this thread was about: "Alabama told to join Union". My first thought was it took armed invasion 150 years ago to get that to happen, why should now be any different?

Utility workers from Florida today produced paperwork from the IBEW locals showing that they DID have to join to work in the area. Effective dates would have been from October 29th through November 29th.

GOOD. Glad to show how volunteer help is being treated in a time when they need help so desperately. This is the kind of crap that makes people distrust unions, and with good reason. For all the good they can do, they lose sight of what is right.

I see you can pick and choose quotes, but the article also says

"Late Friday at a press conference, Hardin said the documents actually came from Electric Cities of Alabama, a coalition of the state's municipally owned utilities.

Bottom line, it appears now that Decatur Utilities wrongly assumed they would have to agree to the union contract before traveling to New Jersey to help with recovery efforts. The IBEW said in times of crisis, help is welcomed from union and non-union utility workers."

The whole thing sounds like a lot of confusion on both sides. When I parse the whole thing, I think this is what happened: the municipal utility company told the volunteer crew that they needed union clearance, and the union said that they actually don't.

I don't think it's that hard to imagine that, in a time of unprecedented disaster like this, there is a lot of confusion, and you shouldn't attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity. It's not easy to manage huge numbers of work crews...just like Red Cross doesn't want donations of supplies.

Here's a new story about non union help being turned away.


http://www.thenewsherald.com/article...ewmode=default

Really? A "newspaper" that calls the utility Con Edison is a credible source? Quoting one random guy who hauled transformers, but can't tell you where the transformers came from?

I'm pretty disgusted that so many people are using Hurricane Sandy as an excuse to smear unions. Who do you think the first responders are?

And the corollary -- what is it about unions in general that make these stories so credible?

I guess the only connection I can think of is that you were taught by public school teachers and yet lack critical reading ability.

Lol. Chill out and wipe the foam off of your mouth, I just posted the article since its relevant to this thread but since we're here let me ask you why the paper loses credibility because of using "Con Edison"? I googled it and it looks like the company that supplies power to that region is named.....Con Edison.

Also, it's not rare for truckers not to know who owns or is buying the cargo they haul especially independent or contract drivers. Most drivers don't even load the trucks, just get the manifest or B/L then take off.

Mea Culpa. That's the term people use around here to disparage Com Ed.

Perhaps the point is that that partisan politics(and union membership) should be put aside in moments of disaster and emergency.

I think that's part of the point. I think the other part of the point is that adequate and coordinated communication is crucial. I find it all to easy to believe that work crews in the field and in the stress of trying to deal with crises think they know what they're talking about (such as the requirement of union membership) when they actually don't.

I'm pretty sure this all boils down to standard operating procedures gone wrong and some miscommunication. In normal times if these guys were to work out in IBEW "turf" even as a part-timer, seasonal, temp, etc they would have to temporarily affiliate with the local there. I bet that these work crews that believe they are being told to unionize are getting those standard forms when offering to help. The utility companies should have a separate temp work form for in case of emergencies.

^^^ Exactly.

Agreed.

Are these guys working for the same pay as the union?

Probably not since these guys are most likely getting paid their normal wages (maybe some overtime) from wherever they come from. Considering the cost of living differences between Alabama, Michigan, and NYC I'm assuming the NYC guys get paid much better.

Okay, this is the part I don't really get...wouldn't affiliating with the union get them better wages? Or does it not work that way at all?

I believe that paying the high union dues is a lot of the problem.

It doesn't work like that. This is more of a pay to play situation. A local in NY who strictly deals with employees of say, Con Ed isn't going to be able to bargain for people who don't work for Con Ed, let alone a self employed truck driver.

Okay, so they are not really affiliating with the union, then? Or they are, but just in a looser affiliation?

They would be paying union dues but not getting union representation. It's good for the union coffers but I can see how it can be annoying for the people having to pay the dues just to do a two or three day job.