|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Oct 19, 2011 19:52:45 GMT -5
I don't think the current ones should be replaced...but any new added positions should be bid. As for Kess saying there needs to be something in place to get rid of a bad team leader when bid on...it's much easier than the process you have in place to get rid a voted one as long as he has 50% + 1. Here lies the problem...when you add $1.50 to the hourly rate...you may find quite a few people on each team wanting the position (and maybe they have never wanted it before). If you don't bid these positions and you allow each team to be divided by a voting process...that creates a worse team atmosphere and work environment. If seniority decides the situation, it's cut and dry. I've seen way too many teams that the TL only has to please the 50% + 1 idea...there is already a process in place to disqualify workers on bid jobs; I had the process explained to me how to get rid of a TL now and it's ridiculous and nearly impossible. I even had a supervisor tell me as long as the TL has the superintendent on his/her side, they are going nowhere. People are gonna be split on this issue...but it's the attitude of "seniority should not matter" that also leads us to not think twice about screwing over the retirees every contract. People have no respect for their seniors...even if it's only in seniority towards retirement and not necessarily age.
|
|
|
Post by Oliver Klosoff on Oct 19, 2011 21:42:05 GMT -5
Hell, why not bid out committeemen positions too.... I bet that would work out great for us too. There are just some situations where seniority isn't that best policy, and unless there are some strict requirments, this would be one of those circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by mrlandry on Oct 19, 2011 21:59:52 GMT -5
Granted, since I've been at KTP I've only been on 1 team. But my team leader is great. Seniority-wise he's probably in the middle of the team. I honestly don't know that you could do a better job than he does.
At LAP, I had a couple of Upgraders who felt, as the senior man, that they had done their share of work, and weren't going to do any more than absolutely necessary.
I'm not advocating one way or the other, just telling my experiences.
|
|
|
Post by bigbluemike on Oct 19, 2011 23:13:48 GMT -5
Maybe we should model it just like the contract we just voted in. Lets take the TL pay from all the senior employees, not let the full payscale employees bid on these jobs and give all the good jobs to the new (lower pay scale workers). That would be the right thing to do right? At least that is what the majority of you think.
|
|
|
Post by ktpregular on Oct 20, 2011 0:29:08 GMT -5
We at KTP have been doing this for so long. I would rather vote in a person on my team than get a lazy ass person we don't even know! If the person sucks, you can vote them out next time. Personally, this has worked well! We get lots of pee/cigarette breaks. Hell, even the loan outs get the same. Our team leader is always present. He will be voted in again, I'm sure!
|
|
|
Post by bo862 on Oct 20, 2011 0:39:04 GMT -5
Kess, When this was brought to the membership last time most of us were not aware that this was on the table. I believe at least some of those votes were a knee jerk reaction. After seeing the difference between bidding and electing, bidding is as good, or better, as far as atmosphere on the team. Add over $3000 extra a year and it will be even more cutthroat than it is now. Scottrs' post earlier is dead on. A couple things have changed since the last vote. 1. The pay difference 2. The makeup of the plant 3. And people aware of the proposal before the contract ratification It may be worth it to at least do an unofficial survey. Pick two departments per shift and let the committeeman do an informal tally with some feedback. Besides, what's the worst thing that could happen? It's not like you would catch any grief for running a survey.
|
|
|
Post by lap65 on Oct 20, 2011 1:13:44 GMT -5
Not sure but I don't think Kessinger ever responded back to the answers he got about his questions regarding LAP not being team concept (cough, cough)
|
|
|
Post by bo862 on Oct 20, 2011 1:47:29 GMT -5
We at KTP have been doing this for so long. I would rather vote in a person on my team than get a lazy ass person we don't even know! If the person sucks, you can vote them out next time. Personally, this has worked well! We get lots of pee/cigarette breaks. Hell, even the loan outs get the same. Our team leader is always present. He will be voted in again, I'm sure! Congratulations on the good tl. The problem is that this has been the exception in my experiences at ktp. It is not unusual for the tl to see to it that the 50%+1 get extra breaks while the rest get screwed. The worst tl I have seen stayed in for about 5 years, and the only reason he lost then was because mngt stacked the deck.
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Oct 20, 2011 5:02:45 GMT -5
I've seen a TL hold his position for 12 years, and 49% of the team hate him...and I mean hate. I love how people assume that if you bid the position, you get a lazy piece of crap. Why do you associate seniority and bid jobs with pieces of crap? I think this is a way for our brothers/sisters trying to screw over someone with seniority. If an entire team knows they have no shot at getting a bid, why would they ever vote to have it changed to a bid process? There is no way this plant every bids to accept that...seniority only sucks when someone else has more.
|
|
|
Post by almost30 on Oct 20, 2011 7:25:19 GMT -5
Damn, I hate to agree with Scott...but...unless ypu want a popularity contest, seniority is the only fair way to go. I had a TL take 6 out of the 10 team members on a "golf outing" (his treat) the weekend before the team leader election. Guess who won? We had a team leader elected because he had LOW seniority and was about to get rolled to nightshift. Back then a TL couldn't be rolled. He had several low seniority buddies on the team. And one final war story...when I joined a team who all had lower seniority than me, they quickly voted that jobs within the team would be bid on by TEAM Seniority, not company seniority. Their reason? "We don't want higher seniority people transferring to our team and taking the good jobs." (The union put a quick stop to that nonsense) Scott's right, seniority sucks if you don't have any...but one day you will. When you do, will it mean anything if you try to circumvent it now? One last point...Bid jobs, as far as I see it, carry added responsibility and expertise. Material handling, weld checkers, cycle checkers, and yes Team leaders. You can't be all that lazy to want to take on more responsibility and closer scrutiny by management. As for me. give me seniority over "good ole boy" voting anytime.
|
|
|
Post by Ex-metalman on Oct 20, 2011 8:45:37 GMT -5
Im sure the TL will have a set of things he or she will HAVE to do and Im sure if said person doesnt do it and a majority of the team is not satisfied that our co. and POWEFUL UNION will impeach said person.That being said I hear hes a good TL whats that mean ??How hard is it to let people go to the bathroom , open their stock,get day off forms.I dont think they will be able to let you run to walmart or anything like that anymore but its not really that hard.Oh yeah and go to thursday night meeting with co. to bitch only to come back next week and bitch about the same thing!!!!Senority for sure raise NO!
|
|
|
Post by Ktp1989 on Oct 20, 2011 9:42:20 GMT -5
Any job that has an increase in pay should be set up as a bid job. If you get a "upgrader" that is not doing his job then it's the supervisors job to take the appropriate actions to take care of that. I worked at LAP for 6 years and had upgraders with over 30 years of seniority and never had a issue with any of them. It more about the looking out for each other instead of looking out for management. All jobs above VAT should be bid jobs...period.
|
|
|
Post by theycandothat93 on Oct 20, 2011 11:42:26 GMT -5
SENIORITY should rule... period... This should not even be a discussion!!
|
|
|
Post by sjohn191 on Oct 20, 2011 12:05:19 GMT -5
There is few of us on here thats' been on both sides of the fence, tradional side and the team concept "voting on every thing". I have only 12yrs in but I still think these jobs should alway be bid jobs. I was told when I hired in at ford by the person who train me on my first job "Scott" senority suck until u have some. Its true. If any of u all that are against this hasn't read some of our building chairman highlights, by making these bid jobs there might be utility bid jobs coming up also. Which is more pay for what ktp calls extra or awol coverage. If u really think about it, this is one small step away from the team concept. Which will make the union do there job instead of saying what is your team rules on this matter. Senority should rule, without senority what do u really have in 20yrs?
|
|
|
Post by reedycreekbuc on Oct 20, 2011 12:54:05 GMT -5
If any of u all that are against this hasn't read some of our building chairman highlights, by making these bid jobs there might be utility bid jobs coming up also. Which is more pay for what ktp calls extra or awol coverage. When we started the team concept at KTP, there was supposed to be 2 extras and 1 trainer for each team. Of course, that never happened, just like you will never see utility jobs.
|
|
|
Post by thintwowin on Oct 20, 2011 12:59:29 GMT -5
You not in Happy Land anymore.
Welcome to KTP
I hope you LAP boys can get it changed, but I highly doult it.
Ohio boys failed. Took them a couple years to break them down but they finally gave up.
I do wish you luck , I would like to see what happy land is like in my career here at ford.
|
|
|
Post by Calvin@KTP on Oct 20, 2011 15:12:56 GMT -5
I have worked both traditional and team concept. Seniority is by far the best way to decide team leaders and everything else for that matter.
It would immediately cut about 50% of the infighting amongst hourly workers right away.
|
|
|
Post by whiner862 on Oct 20, 2011 16:32:05 GMT -5
Lets be real about the pay, the TL gets 64 cents right now so they will accually be getting another 86 cents or so for the crap they already have to tolerate. The TL as elected has to cater to the Piss,Shit,and smokers 75% of the time, where the Contract states that they should be taking care of quality coming off their team.
As Bid the TL can tell the people that abuse piss,shit and smoking to screw off I have other things to do, and not have to worry about being voted in again later down the line. The Company will love the bid TL, because they hate when the TL is tied up on those type of breaks. Just food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by kessinger on Oct 20, 2011 16:50:35 GMT -5
We put it up by bid and it crashed and burned. When we where at the dearborne plant last year they had Elected TL then swapped to Bid TL's. I went over their contract proposal book, it just sits out int heir union office, it only had two things in it. Get fans back(no fans in the plant) and elect team leaders again. They had 50+ of those proposals. Also those that came from ATL had bid TL's and many wanted it to stay elected here, when we were walking and talking about last local tentative agreement. I like many of you wanted them elected. But this membership spoke LOUD AND CLEAR.
Clearly LAP transfers see it at a seniority issue. If you asked U trim your survey would be to bid them. But outside of that and maybe stock, most don't want it.
|
|
|
Post by Ktp1989 on Oct 20, 2011 17:18:13 GMT -5
You are dealing with a very young plant...seniority wise....so how do you think they would want a offline job that pays more then a VAT? Seniority is all we have left...all jobs above VAT should be bid.....PERIOD!
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Oct 21, 2011 8:25:13 GMT -5
Exactly...if you have no shot at getting one as a bid, why would you vote for anything other than electing them? If only the top 1,000 in the plant have a shot at even getting one of the bids, that leaves around 2,600 voting against it. There should be NO vote, the union should have the balls to speak for the senior employees and state this is the way it's gonna be. But with the possibility of losing future popularity contests, that would NEVER happen. Senioirity is ALL we have, and when your own local union is attempting to remove that from the equation, no one is on your side. Seniority matters, and should be all the union needs to reiterate to the membership.
|
|
86gn
New Member
Posts: 43
|
Post by 86gn on Oct 21, 2011 10:52:54 GMT -5
Exactly...if you have no shot at getting one as a bid, why would you vote for anything other than electing them? If only the top 1,000 in the plant have a shot at even getting one of the bids, that leaves around 2,600 voting against it. There should be NO vote, the union should have the balls to speak for the senior employees and state this is the way it's gonna be. But with the possibility of losing future popularity contests, that would NEVER happen. Senioirity is ALL we have, and when your own local union is attempting to remove that from the equation, no one is on your side. Seniority matters, and should be all the union needs to reiterate to the membership. all that needs to be said
|
|
|
Post by marcus on Oct 21, 2011 11:47:32 GMT -5
Great post scott.
|
|
|
Post by trinitus on Oct 21, 2011 11:51:20 GMT -5
Kudos to you Scott.
|
|
|
Post by nvsked1 on Oct 21, 2011 12:38:58 GMT -5
Just had day shift body shop committeeman "Cowboy" tell me that the union wants to push team leaders into bid jobs. I want the ability to vote for or vote out my teeam leader based on how he takes care of the team. All I need is another suck as feeding me managements "BS", that is what we would get bidding out the team leaders. As far as I can remember, we have not gotten rid of the team concept yet.....or did we give that up too. The team should decide who represents and takes care of them!!!!!!! You had your chance to vote at contract ratification...from this point forward SENIORITY RULES....sorry
|
|
jc
New Member
Posts: 30
|
Post by jc on Oct 21, 2011 12:46:47 GMT -5
Why dont we rotate to see who best team leader is, and then vote, that way everyone will see what job is about
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Oct 21, 2011 13:28:32 GMT -5
Because a vote does not determine whom is better...definition of best team leader may be completely different from one worker to the next. Everyone that gets a bid job may not be the best candidate, but if they have seniority, they have earned the right to obtain the job.
|
|
|
Post by Ktp1989 on Oct 21, 2011 15:01:14 GMT -5
Because a vote does not determine whom is better...definition of best team leader may be completely different from one worker to the next. Everyone that gets a bid job may not be the best candidate, but if they have seniority, they have earned the right to obtain the job. Its a popularity contest...plain and simple.
|
|
|
Post by darklady28 on Oct 21, 2011 18:25:57 GMT -5
Scott brings up some great points and Kess is right it was shot down.I'm moving more toward a bid job for it although my current team leader does a pretty good job I think.Shes fair and tries to look out for the team.Maybe it should be brought back up?
|
|
|
Post by laidoff on Oct 22, 2011 2:16:55 GMT -5
this isnt lap. they tried this shit last time. team leader at ktp is an elected position. The contract will never pass if it is a bid job. U lapers are not in the good old boy club. It is an elected position so fuck off...And if u doubted that fuck you
|
|