With negotiations going on I’ve been asking people what they think about it. This morning I met a former office mate who told me she didn’t think much of it because she wasn’t that interested. She explained that she had worked at the U before the union and that “they always got what the state got”. Then she shrugged her shoulders and said so…. As if that was explanation enough. I thought for a moment and realized that there is no way that she could be right about that.
As I recall the union was voted in because wages weren’t keeping up. It is possible that her wages were satisfactory for her needs and that she felt she was being fairly compensated, but I’m sure the numbers would show she was being paid less for the same job as a union worker at that time.
She is certainly free to remember her past anyway she cares to, and I wouldn’t want to take that from her, but I feel that I’ve got to say that she is seeing the past through rose colored glasses.
When I mentioned the wage disparity that is the current issue she just shrugged. She seemed reluctant to say out loud that she feels that her efforts aren’t worth a fair wage. It amazes me to think that she might feel that she would be better off with out union representation. Unfortunately I didn’t have my negotiation lit handy to add a visual impact to my description of the -5% under inflation wage disparity vs somewhere around +28% over inflation for the low end of what the other groups are getting. I’m going to keep that stuff in my pocket from now on.
I completely don’t understand how can be so convinced that she was better off back then and that without the union she would be doing about as well as she is. It’s a struggle for me to give her that space without feeling that I’m giving up some ground, but that is her opinion and all I can do is shake my head.
some of our co-workers aren't much better
Yesterday I was trying to explain to a P&A co-worker why we voted to strike. She didn't understand. In her mind, the University offered us 4.25% and she couldn't see a valid reason why we should "get more" than they do. I told her that in the first place, we make a lot less. I started 10 years at the bottom of the wage scale and I'm only just about half-way up my salary schedule. I figure that at current rates, it should take me only another 7-10 years to reach the top, but if the steps go away by being rolled into our compensation package, I might never get there.
"Everyone is hurting, not just you" she remarked. "What makes AFSCME members more special?"
"Well, in the first place a 3% raise on a $33,000 salary, the median AFSCME income, is an increase of just $990 a year. That just barely covers the cost of my utility increases the last two years, not to mention everything else that has risen--food costs, school lunches, gasoline, property taxes, etc." Now, if I was making $60,000, the salary increase is nearly double that and I'd probably still be able to keep up with inflation, without adding the additional salary into the equation. "Who is hurting more?" I asked.
I was shocked at the response I got.
"Go back and get your degree if you want to make more money." I reminded her I already had a bachelor's degree.
"Well, get a master's then!"
"I plan to, in the future. I am a single mother of a special-needs child that needs me right now."
Later on it struck me as a very elistist thing for her to say. A very blame-the-victim mentality.
I don't believe a master's degree is needed to deserve a living wage.