Your Role in Your Union

In any society, each individual has to make a fundamental decision about how to relate to the larger group. Some choose not to take very seriously at all the degree to which their participation in group decision making and action can make a difference. These people don’t educate themselves as to what is going on. They don’t read a daily newspaper or watch the TV news, they don’t bother to vote in elections, and they don’t join the PTA or get very involved in their kids’ schooling. What such folks often do spend a lot of time doing is complaining about the decisions that elected government officials make, the quality of public education, and lots of other things that they have chosen not to become involved in. In your union, as in government, you have to participate in the process to make it work right.

Adapted from The Union Members Complete Guide, by Michael Mauer

C.A.P. COMMITTEE REPORT / NOVEMBER - DECEMBER 2006

by Chris Szabo

Dear Sisters and Brothers,

Chris Szabo's column could not be printed in the online edition because the law does not allow unions to print endorsements for candidates on the internet without giving equal time to opposing candidates views or a complete accounting for how the labor was spent to publish our website.

I would strongly suggest that everyone read the current edition of "Your Union Writes" if you have any questions about where some of the candidates stand on labor issues. We have the opportunity to voice our opinion on Election Day, November 7, 2006. We must make wise choices for our future!

In Solidarity,

Marty R., Webmaster

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris's  column in part ends by stating:

"I will have more information as the election draws nearer in the CAP display case across from the in-plant Union office."

"Good luck - and remember that this election will set us up for 2008. What we win at the bargaining table can easily be lost at the ballot box".

reprinted from the latest issue of "Your Union Writes", our Local UAW 845 publication

                                            Comp Time and Bonus Bill Legislation . . . Good or Evil?

Comp Time

For years, business groups and their Republican allies in Congress have been trying to enact comp time legislation, calling it "family friendly" legislation. Comp time would erode the FLSA by allowing employers to substitute a promise of compensatory time off in the future for premium pay at the time an employee works more than 40 hours a week. The UAW and the entire labor movement have strenuously fought comp time every time it has come up, and we will continue to do so if it comes up again during 2006.

Americans work more hours in a year than workers in all other developed countries. Nearly 68.5 million women are now in the American workforce, including 70 percent per cent of U.S. mothers of children under age 18. Federal policy should aim to decrease the number of hours workers are forced to work so that parents are better able to balance work and family obligations.

Comp time bills introduced in Congress over the last decade would allow employers to issue comp time credit to employees who worked more than 40 hours in a week rather than paying them time-and-a-half overtime pay. Comp time "banks" could accumulate up to 160 hours - one month's wages - before the employer would have to pay overtime premium pay.

Nothing in the comp time bills requires employers to actually give compensatory time to their workers. Employers are allowed to turn down employee requests to use their banked comp time if the time off would, in the judgment of the employer, interfere with the employer's business operations. Moreover, employers are allowed to hold accrued comp time in the "bank" for up to thirteen months. Thus, for many employers, comp time would result in a no-interest loan from the workers to the employer.

Contrary to what proponents of comp time say, comp time would not be voluntary, for at least two reasons.
First, most non-unionized workers are afraid to say no their employer's requests because they are "at will" employees and can be fired for almost any reason. Second, under the comp time legislation, employers are allowed to discriminate against workers who decline to take comp time by giving all the overtime to workers who "volunteer" for comp time and none to those who want time-and-a-half pay instead of comp time.

The comp time bill that has been introduced by Judd Gregg, R-N.H., in the Senate is even worse than the House version introduced by Judy Biggert, R-Ohio. The Senate bill would do away with the 40-hour workweek and establish instead an 80-hour "work period." Under this provision, employees could work up to 50 hours in a week without receiving any overtime compensation, either premium pay or compensatory time off. This dangerous
80-hour "work period" provision has been included in the amendments that Senate Republicans have offered to counter Democrat efforts to raise the minimum wage.

Despite all of the rhetoric about flexibility, comp time is really just a pay cut. Even if workers get to take their compensatory time off, they have less money at the end of the year. Comp time doesn't pay the rent or the grocery bills. Rather, comp time makes it cheaper for employers to work employees overtime. Naturally, if it's cheaper, employers will require more overtime. This will lead to more stress and less family time for workers. For these reasons, the UAW will continue to oppose attempts to push comp time proposals in the House and Senate.

Bonus

Bill When an employee works more than 40 hours a week, the FLSA requires the employer to pay an overtime cash premium, which is calculated at one and a half times the regular rate of pay. The "regular rate of pay" is defined in the FLSA to include commissions, gain-sharing and performance-contingent bonuses. The so-called "Bonus Bill," also known as "Rewarding Performance Through Compensation Act," would exclude these bonuses from the calculation of overtime and would result in a lower overtime premium for workers.

Under the Bonus Bill, nothing would prevent employers from converting a portion of an employee's current pay into some form of bonus, so long as the hourly base pay is not less than the minimum wage. Thus, the Bonus Bill would encourage employers to lower their payroll costs by converting hourly wages and wage increases into "bonuses," resulting in reduced overtime pay. By making overtime cheaper, the Bonus Bill, like comp time, would lead to an increase in mandatory overtime.

The GOP and business proponents of the Bonus Bill say that it is necessary to "modernize" the FLSA. But a large number of employers already provide performance- based pay and they do not need an additional incentive to do so. The real purpose of the Bonus Bill is to permit employers to work their employees longer hours for less pay.

Like comp time, the Bonus Bill is a pay cut. Working with our allies in the labor movement, the UAW has opposed the Bonus Bill each time it has been proposed, and we will continue to do so again during the coming year.

reprinted from http://www.uaw.org/cap/06/issues/issue06.cfm