Daily Archives: 31 July 2014

A Precious Union

Posted on by
Reply

The Metropolitan Opera singers union resumed contract talks on Monday after a two-month hiatus, but union officials said they had little hope of reaching an agreement before a threatened lockout.

And no wonder, with such an awesome sense of entitlement.

“He doesn’t want to help us maintain our instruments,” said chorus member Jean Braham, commenting on the effect [Met General Manager Peter] Gelb’s proposed high-deductible health plan could have on singers’ voices and bodies.

“We are the artists,” Ms Braham said, her voice cracking. “We are the product. The fact that he accepts no responsibility and no accountability is just incredible to me.”

They are your instruments, Ms Braham, not the Met’s. Like any worker, your tools are your own responsibility. And, no, you are not the product. Get over yourself. The entertainment that the Met produces—blending your tools with those of the major singers, those of your company’s dancers, those of the orchestra, those of your company’s stage managers, and the acoustics of the opera house stage and setting are the product.

What’s incredible to me is that your sense of entitlement has become so ingrained that you view all of this as your natural right. How precious can a union worker get?

Another Reason

Posted on by
Reply

…to disband the NLRB.

McDonald’s Corp could be treated as a joint employer with its franchisees in labor complaints, according to a National Labor Relations Board legal determination….

The relationship between a franchisee and the parent franchisor varies in the details of the franchise contract. However, the general nature of the reputation is quite limited. The franchisee gets to use the franchisor name and the franchisor’s marketing and accounting assistance, and it gets the franchisor’s market power in holding down the cost of supplies. In return, the franchisee is bound to the franchisor’s rules regarding the use to which the franchise name is put and the nature, quality, and standardization of the product being sold. The franchisee also is required to refrain from activities that would result in denigration of the franchise name.

There’s nothing in there concerning hiring or employment practices, or anything else involving labor decisions, that tie the franchisor to the franchisee. Existing labor law covers the franchisee’s hiring and employment.

The NLRB knows this, of course, which makes its ruling even more pernicious.