Castanet

Rwede wrote:Computer system workers - union.
Purchasing department - union.
PHSA workers - union. (interestingly, private healthcare ballooned under the 1990s NDP reign)

What do you know, all the people responsible for bloated costs are union members. These people are obviously low on the competency scale, as we've seen over and over again that the public sector unions attract the lowest graduates in the class, those that can't make it in the private sector. Yet, those in the public sector unions demand more and more for their lack of competency. That needs to change, as it's a huge burden on the taxpayers and the health care system delivers mediocre service for an inflated price as a result.

You're blaming the workers, we do not make money decisions.
Healthcare spending has doubled under the Liberals and I've only lost money since they got into office, how are we to blame for the wasted dollars??
The added costs are not going to us!

Rwede wrote:

Jeckle wrote:Dare I say that it's not the bed pan cleaners that are the drain on our healthcare system?
How often are computer systems replaced and/or changed? Is it necessary?
How often to they pay bloated prices for supplies because it's a government facility? Is it necessary?
How much did it cost to create PHSA to cover up privatization? Did that save us money? Will it in the future?
And, why has that stalled? Perhaps because it was a foolish idea that was rammed through and not working out?

I agree with the person that said we need a whole system overhaul....a massive overhaul. If they start at the top and streamline and still figure that we little (piggies..lol) guys cost the system too much, then I will agree to pay cuts in one form or another.

Computer system workers - union.
Purchasing department - union.
PHSA workers - union. (interestingly, private healthcare ballooned under the 1990s NDP reign)

What do you know, all the people responsible for bloated costs are union members. These people are obviously low on the competency scale, as we've seen over and over again that the public sector unions attract the lowest graduates in the class, those that can't make it in the private sector. Yet, those in the public sector unions demand more and more for their lack of competency. That needs to change, as it's a huge burden on the taxpayers and the health care system delivers mediocre service for an inflated price as a result.

The master of BS strikes again. None of these union members, people you obviously hate with a burning passion, do what they do on their own, they are directed by management. Management makes the decisions but no, it's the union worker's fault when those decisions turn out to be bad, wasteful ones, right? Puh-leeeze.....

And you still haven't answered my earlier question. If you were a hospital patient, would you expect top-notch service from poorly-paid staff distracted by the struggle just to survive, never mind knowing how poorly you value them?

Rwede wrote:

Jeckle wrote:Dare I say that it's not the bed pan cleaners that are the drain on our healthcare system?
How often are computer systems replaced and/or changed? Is it necessary?
How often to they pay bloated prices for supplies because it's a government facility? Is it necessary?
How much did it cost to create PHSA to cover up privatization? Did that save us money? Will it in the future?
And, why has that stalled? Perhaps because it was a foolish idea that was rammed through and not working out?

I agree with the person that said we need a whole system overhaul....a massive overhaul. If they start at the top and streamline and still figure that we little (piggies..lol) guys cost the system too much, then I will agree to pay cuts in one form or another.

Computer system workers - union.
Purchasing department - union.
PHSA workers - union. (interestingly, private healthcare ballooned under the 1990s NDP reign)

What do you know, all the people responsible for bloated costs are union members. These people are obviously low on the competency scale, as we've seen over and over again that the public sector unions attract the lowest graduates in the class, those that can't make it in the private sector. Yet, those in the public sector unions demand more and more for their lack of competency. That needs to change, as it's a huge burden on the taxpayers and the health care system delivers mediocre service for an inflated price as a result.

That's an awful broad generalization.

Several of us in IT took pay cuts when we left the private sector and joined IH...whether you believe it or not, there is a lot of innovative and creative work being done in IT, much it paid at lower than market rates, that is saving the system money.

And lest you think that we left the private sector to join the union, here's a generalization that you can take to the bank...if IT workers were given a vote to be able to leave the union, the percentage who would choose to leave the union would be close to 100%.

Jeckle wrote:

Rwede wrote:
So if I pay $1,000 an hour to a bed pan cleaner, will they cure cancer? Not likely. Will the bed pan be cleaner? Not likely.

The public sector pay package far exceeds the value brought to the employer (in this case, the taxpayer) and has for many years. It's time this pay package was brought into line with the market value for such service, and the gold-plated benefit plan is the first place to start.

Dare I say that it's not the bed pan cleaners that are the drain on our healthcare system?
How often are computer systems replaced and/or changed? Is it necessary?
How often to they pay bloated prices for supplies because it's a government facility? Is it necessary?
How much did it cost to create PHSA to cover up privatization? Did that save us money? Will it in the future?
And, why has that stalled? Perhaps because it was a foolish idea that was rammed through and not working out?

I agree with the person that said we need a whole system overhaul....a massive overhaul. If they start at the top and streamline and still figure that we little (piggies..lol) guys cost the system too much, then I will agree to pay cuts in one form or another.

That was me that said that - and I got attacked even though I know I am right. Its broken and its broken at the top. Its broken at the top of the health ministry and its broken at the top of the unions, too.

Oh, but the staunch union workers determine the pace and value that the employer gets for their wages, on a daily basis. Despite direction by management, the union workers make the minute-by-minute decisions that severely restrict productivity because of the discontent planted by the union bosses. And, it's worth noting that public sector management falls by in large in the same class as sp many public sector union workers - the bottom of the class that can't make it in the real world as managers.

I'd expect value for my tax dollar if I were receiving care. I know it would make no difference to my well being if the person bringing my tea and cookies were making $17 an hour or $32 an hour with extensive benefits.

To retro - then vote to decertify. You're the ones that can change your situation. If you're a good employee, which you probably are, you'd make more money and have better career satisfaction if you were to be paid on the basis of your own merits, rather than be dragged down by the union ball and chain. When your union is feeding you BS that serves to upset you in order to justify their existence, it must not be a pleasant work atmosphere. Step up and change it!

Retrosnap wrote:
And lest you think that we left the private sector to join the union, here's a generalization that you can take to the bank...if IT workers were given a vote to be able to leave the union, the percentage who would choose to leave the union would be close to 100%.

More BS. You can leave the union any time you want, just go get a job somewhere else. If you didn't want a union job in the first place why do you have one? Maybe because you like the wages and benefits the union negotiated for you? Again, puh-leeeze....

dorito wrote:

grammafreddy wrote:I suspect your union dues are far greater than your 25% contribution to your group benefit package would be. Maybe you should look at how much that is costing you? The people at the top of your union(s) get monster salaries and benefit packages, too, which you are paying for (and indirectly, so are the private sector workers because they pay your wages which pay your union leaders).

Not even in the same ballpark. My union dues were roughly $950 total for the year in 2011. If I were to pay for 25% of my benefits, that would be roughly $2500 per year. (Although I am unclear whether the 25% of the "benefits" is just MSP, extended health and dental....or everything. LTD, AD+D, WCB, employer contributed pension plus the above.)

If it were just MSP, extended health and dental, 25% would be about $1500/year. Still not in the same ballpark as union dues. this "25%" would aslo penalize larger families, as my MSP, extended health and dental is for a family of 4. Much higher amount than a single person, or a couple.

So, you are being asked to pay 25% and yet you don't know what that is 25% of?

Do you pay any portion of your MSP or anything else now? Or does your employer pay 100% of everything except your union dues?

Verminator wrote:

Retrosnap wrote:
And lest you think that we left the private sector to join the union, here's a generalization that you can take to the bank...if IT workers were given a vote to be able to leave the union, the percentage who would choose to leave the union would be close to 100%.

More BS. You can leave the union any time you want, just go get a job somewhere else. If you didn't want a union job in the first place why do you have one? Maybe because you like the wages and benefits the union negotiated for you? Again, puh-leeeze....

uhhuh. And if Upper management are such bloated evil insect overlords why work for IHA at all?
6 years ago KGH was filthy .. I guess with the contract problems it is just more so.

Verminator wrote:

Retrosnap wrote:
And lest you think that we left the private sector to join the union, here's a generalization that you can take to the bank...if IT workers were given a vote to be able to leave the union, the percentage who would choose to leave the union would be close to 100%.

More BS. You can leave the union any time you want, just go get a job somewhere else. If you didn't want a union job in the first place why do you have one? Maybe because you like the wages and benefits the union negotiated for you? Again, puh-leeeze....

Yeah, that's it...like -15% in 2004...like giving up some benefits in 2010 so that LPNs could get a raise, and then give us the finger when they left for another union.

My interview is coming up...hopefully the next time my "brothers and sisters" want something from me, I won't be around to let them take it.

You can call BS if you'd like...I'm still right about my colleagues in IT.

What I'm getting from this discussion is that people like Rwede and a few others would like to turn this into a race to the bottom, to pay public employees as little as possible and to completely eliminate benefits, including pensions and healthcare. It's much more important that we the taxpayers have a few more bucks to spend on beer and cigarettes.

So what do we do after that goal's been accomplished I wonder...do we go after well-paid private-sector jobs next, cuz after all it's us, the customer that pays for those wages and benefits too, right? All of this applies to those people of course, don't you dare touch my wages...

Verminator wrote:What I'm getting from this discussion is that people like Rwede and a few others would like to turn this into a race to the bottom, to pay public employees as little as possible and to completely eliminate benefits, including pensions and healthcare. It's much more important that we the taxpayers have a few more bucks to spend on beer and cigarettes.

So what do we do after that goal's been accomplished I wonder...do we go after well-paid private-sector jobs next, cuz after all it's us, the customer pays for those wages and benefits too, right? All of this applies to those people of course, don't you dare touch my wages...

You completely misunderstand my position, as years of union indoctrination have stripped your cognitive abilities down to a trained union seal level.

What's needed is for employees to be paid on their own merits. What's needed is for excellent employees to be paid excellent wages and benefits. What's needed is for employees to be happy in their workplace and free from the union's insidious interference in their lives, making them bitter towards their employer and hating getting out of bed in the morning. Crappy employees should make less and be tossed if they don't perform a satisfactory job for their remuneration.

Unfortunately, unions have far too much power over people's ability to think independently, and without a grassroots move to decertify and do better for themselves, workers will be stuck in this merry-go-round of hating work and being unable to better themselves and their paycheques.

Retrosnap wrote:
Yeah, that's it...like -15% in 2004...like giving up some benefits in 2010 so that LPNs could get a raise, and then give us the finger when they left for another union.

My interview is coming up...hopefully the next time my "brothers and sisters" want something from me, I won't be around to let them take it.

You can call BS if you'd like...I'm still right about my colleagues in IT.

I call double BS, the union never agreed to or negotiated that 15% cut in 2004, It was IMPOSED by the the government and it affected me as badly as you, maybe worse. If you and your IT colleagues hate the union so much, pack up and leave. No one's forcing you to work for IH.

Rwede wrote:

Verminator wrote:What I'm getting from this discussion is that people like Rwede and a few others would like to turn this into a race to the bottom, to pay public employees as little as possible and to completely eliminate benefits, including pensions and healthcare. It's much more important that we the taxpayers have a few more bucks to spend on beer and cigarettes.

So what do we do after that goal's been accomplished I wonder...do we go after well-paid private-sector jobs next, cuz after all it's us, the customer pays for those wages and benefits too, right? All of this applies to those people of course, don't you dare touch my wages...

You completely misunderstand my position, as years of union indoctrination have stripped your cognitive abilities down to a trained union seal level.

What's needed is for employees to be paid on their own merits. What's needed is for excellent employees to be paid excellent wages and benefits. What's needed is for employees to be happy in their workplace and free from the union's insidious interference in their lives, making them bitter towards their employer and hating getting out of bed in the morning. Crappy employees should make less and be tossed if they don't perform a satisfactory job for their remuneration.

Unfortunately, unions have far too much power over people's ability to think independently, and without a grassroots move to decertify and do better for themselves, workers will be stuck in this merry-go-round of hating work and being unable to better themselves and their paycheques.

Yeah, that's the ticket. Put employees completely at the mercy of benificent employers who manage thoughtfully, who care about their employee's well-being and never,ever practice favoritism, discrimination or bullying. You've obviously never worked for huge top-heavy, impersonal entities like our health authorities are or you would never make an ignorant statement like that. They don't care whether or not an employee has merit, as often as not they don't bother to evaluate employees at all. In my own case I haven't had an evaluation in the last 15 years. Merit shmerit, all the employer wants is a warm body, but in spite of that almost everyone I've ever worked with has been conscientious and competent, values they maintained on their own because that's just the way they were. And believe it or not, there wasn't a trained seal in the bunch.

Merit means nothing in the union situation. Don't blame your manager. Did you ever stop to think about why you haven't had a performance review in 15 years? Because it's meaningless, and won't get you one red cent as long as your union forces you to be paid on the union scale. If you're good, you could make way more than you are now if you only ditched that POS union that is restricting your ability to be paid what you're worth.

Rwede wrote:Merit means nothing in the union situation. Don't blame your manager. Did you ever stop to think about why you haven't had a performance review in 15 years? Because it's meaningless, and won't get you one red cent as long as your union forces you to be paid on the union scale. If you're good, you could make way more than you are now if you only ditched that POS union that is restricting your ability to be paid what you're worth.

That's pure unadulterated horse hockey. Before the HA's took over and our hospital was community-run and not top-loaded with managerial staff, I got yearly performance reviews, as did everyone. Problems were always discussed face-to-face with managers, and there were processes in place to deal with people who didn't perform as expected, up to and including dismissal. Those processes are still in place, and if anything are more slanted to the employer than ever. Evaluations, the lack thereof or the failure to act on poor ones when they do happen them are purely management responsibilities.

As for merit not meaning anything in a union situation, that's more horse hockey. I always take pride in doing as good a job as I can, and my manager noticed. I was offered an employer-paid upgrading course but had to decline because of my family situation at the time, and I wasn't the only one.