Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
112 user(s) are online (104 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 112

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users






Re: Are new labor rules believable?
#8
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/1/21 21:16
Last Login :
2008/10/28 13:48
From Columbus St.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 59
Offline
JCLAW: Sorry, I missed that part. You're right, fining one party because another party isn't in compliance is...ripe for fraud, blackmail and payoffs.

Typically Jersey City.

Posted on: 2007/7/11 22:49
 Top 


Re: Are new labor rules believable?
#7
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/6/25 15:37
Last Login :
2013/5/18 18:58
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 92
Offline
alb: The article is in today's Joisey Journal. It has a table of which projects are Union Built and which are not, and compares the % of minorities in each. In every case the Union project have about 10% local or minority workers, and the Non-Union projects have about 40% local or minority workers. The article is written, the math is done. Now do you seriously expect the Dhimmicrats to go after their #1 constituent (Organized Labor)? HAH!

Kermit: The problem is, the legislation forces the developer to use UNION contractors, and then when the UNION doesn't send local/minority/apprentice workers to the site, the City imposes a huge penalty on . . . . . . . . THE DEVELOPER!

- SHEER HYPOCRISY!

Posted on: 2007/7/11 22:13
 Top 


Re: Are new labor rules believable?
#6
Quite a regular
Quite a regular


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/1/21 21:16
Last Login :
2008/10/28 13:48
From Columbus St.
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 59
Offline
Quote:

JCLAW wrote:

For the City to tell builders they have to hire Union AND hire local minorities is irresponsible, hypocritical, and impossible.



If you're right in your description of Unions as close-knit, nepotistic patronage factories, then I think putting unions in a position where they must hire local minorities is a great thing.

Posted on: 2007/7/11 16:10
 Top 


Re: Are new labor rules believable?
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/7 7:24
Last Login :
2016/1/29 4:06
Group:
Banned
Posts: 598
Offline
Quote:

JCLAW wrote:

For the City to tell builders they have to hire Union AND hire local minorities is irresponsible, hypocritical, and impossible.


I think this is a really important comment. If you're correct about what you're writing, then the Jersey Journal ought to be writing about this, and whatever investigators have jurisdiction over the unions ought to be looking into this.

I think you're always going to have some nepotism in cases like this, but, if it's really shutting Hispanic and African American people who are willing and able to work out of work, that's terrible.

Posted on: 2007/7/11 15:21
 Top 


Re: Are new labor rules believable?
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/4/10 13:29
Last Login :
2022/6/15 16:59
From Mars
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2718
Offline
Say what you will about the downside of Labor Unions, but there are also many upsides.

Ultimately, Labor Unions create a balance between employee and employer. The nature of free market capitalism encourages large corporations to take advantage of employees; corporations control the means of production by controlling the capital for investment, providing corporations with an unfair advantage when negotiating labor costs-- wages.

In pre-industrial societies, the means of production is in the hands of the laborers because the initial cost of creating a salable good is many times lower and requires little to no capital. In a pre-industrial society, the lower cost of production means labor can change production as the market dictates-- a shoemaker can become a barrel maker can become a bricklayer.

However, free market capitalism has created a monopoly on capital-- in the hands of corporations. A laborer cannot simply start a competing business as the market dictates because the cost of production has increased. Thus the negotiating power of the laborer is diminished because the corporations control the capital. By organizing the whole of the labor force as a single, unified unit, the union creates a balance between the labor and the power of corporate capital.

Yes ultimately this means that Unions increase the cost of labor, but not necessarily the cost of the final product. Corporations are still competing with each other for the best possible price of their product. The added cost of Union labor consumes the corporation's profit rather than increasing the cost the goods because competing corporations have competing goods.

Posted on: 2007/7/11 13:28
 Top 


Re: Are new labor rules believable?
#3
Just can't stay away
Just can't stay away


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/6/25 15:37
Last Login :
2013/5/18 18:58
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 92
Offline
This ordinance is INANE!

Builders have to use Unions in Jersey City because if they don't they can expect pickets, strikes and job site 'disturbances' as well as the usual antics of Union agitators sneaking onto jobsites and damaging work and stealing supplies to punish non-union contractors. Builders get no assistance from the City in defending against this because the City is PRO-UNION.

At the same time, the City expects the workers on UNION job sites to come from Jersey City and be minorities. UNIONS are the MOST RACIST BIGOTED organizations in America and their hiring halls are devoid of brown faces and local youths who are not part of a legacy of family relationships with existing UNION members. Want to get into the UNION? You'd better be Irish or Italian with relatives who are already members. Otherwise you are better off spending your energy getting into College and getting a real job.

For the City to tell builders they have to hire Union AND hire local minorities is irresponsible, hypocritical, and impossible.

YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH, JERSEY CITY. IT'S ONE OR THE OTHER IN THIS TOWN.

Posted on: 2007/7/11 12:56
 Top 


Re: Are new labor rules believable?
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2006/11/13 18:42
Last Login :
2022/2/28 7:31
From 280 Grove Street
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4192
Offline
Quote:


Are new labor rules believable?

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy scoffed at the notion that this plan is a giveaway to the unions, pointing to the fact that it only applies to construction projects that cost at least $25 million. "There will still be opportunities for smaller contractors to get work, and that's a good thing."

When asked how many of the current tax-abated projects came in under $25 million, Healy said he was unsure.



If its not mandatory to vote, then way make it mandatory to join the union to work on tax-abated projects.

Some see unions as another layer of unnecessary or cost control. Safety and adherence to building codes on construction sites would be better served if City and State building inspectors were better trained with frequent inspections and massive fines for breaches.

Why not make it mandatory for any and all tax-abated projects to employ 70% of JC or qualifing NJ residents regardless of union membership and make it mandatory to 'pay to play' where proceeds as strictly used for training programs.

Resized Image

Posted on: 2007/7/11 11:34
My humor is for the silent blue collar majority - If my posts offend, slander or you deem inappropriate and seek deletion, contact the webmaster for jurisdiction.
 Top 


Are new labor rules believable?
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/9/15 19:03
Last Login :
2023/8/15 18:42
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 9302
Offline
Are new labor rules believable?

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Jersey City residents should be skeptical as their government embarks on a new program that city officials claim will remedy the lack of local employment at construction sites supported by tax breaks.

The city's antidote is a public-private partnership between itself and local labor unions, with developers along for the ride. Local unions promise to hire and train city residents in exchange for a city requirement that developers hire only union labor if they want a tax abatement.

Under the old program, developers who received a tax abatement were free to choose union or non-union labor, but they had to show a "good-faith" effort at hiring city residents and local minorities.

That weak legal language - the product of a lawsuit brought against the city by local unions that opposed a quota system - meant that developers were only required to submit records that showed how many of their workers are city residents, minorities and women.

If the numbers showed that there were no city residents at the site, there were no consequences as long as the developer filed the necessary paperwork, reducing the city's job creation program to nothing more than a bureaucratic task that failed to do anything except keep a few city workers employed.

I compiled a database of 14 months of employment data for 31 construction sites in hopes of providing a definitive picture of the employment landscape. Not surprisingly, the number of Jersey City residents and minorities at these job sites was low.

On average, the analysis showed that 15 percent of the workers at these construction sites hailed from Jersey City, while 11 percent were city minorities. However, what was surprising is that Jersey City residents are getting a significantly higher level of jobs at non-union work sites.

For example, an average of eight percent of the workers hailed from the city at the construction site of the LeFrak Organization's Newport Shore Club, which was built with union labor, while 43 percent of the labor force had a Jersey City address at the non-union construction site at The Foundry on Communipaw Avenue.

The data suggests that the city's renewed effort to get more residents jobs at local construction sites is nothing more than a giveaway to the powerful labor unions, who wield tremendous power come election time in terms of manpower and financial resources.

Why else would the city punish non-union contractors after they have been the only group in the construction sector who have shown a clear track record of hiring city residents, while rewarding union labor after they have failed - and even contested - getting city residents on site?

"It just doesn't make sense. The only reason we see this is because unions are being outbid on projects and losing their grasp on the market. I am just getting my foot in the door and now the city is closing it," said one local minority contractor who hires non-union workers.

The argument that union labor provides better pay and benefits is a valid one, but if city residents are not getting the union jobs then the argument becomes a meaningless talking point.
Advertisement

This is not to say that the new program is not without its benefits. At least "20 percent of labor hours" on the jobs must be set aside for apprentices recruited and trained by the city agencies and labor unions working with the program, and developers face fines if they fail to meet this mark or don't file paperwork on time.

In addition, the program includes job fairs and partners with other agencies and government bodies like the school district, a welcome change from the old program.

However, like the existing program, the developers can bypass these requirements if they show their "best-faith" efforts at hiring locals, an out that was exploited over the years and that will surely be exploited again.

Jersey City Mayor Jerramiah Healy scoffed at the notion that this plan is a giveaway to the unions, pointing to the fact that it only applies to construction projects that cost at least $25 million. "There will still be opportunities for smaller contractors to get work, and that's a good thing."

When asked how many of the current tax-abated projects came in under $25 million, Healy said he was unsure.

Well, the answer is few, if any.

Posted on: 2007/7/11 7:23
 Top 








[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017