Re: Re: Strike Votes _vs_ mgmt -vs- union-bustin


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by concerned on September 11, 2000 at 16:50:09:

In Reply to: Re: Strike Votes _vs_ mgmt -vs- union-bustin posted by Bill on September 11, 2000 at 14:54:45:

How many of these striking orchestras benefit from recording residuals in their contracts?
would it take more than one hand to count them?? You say there's no nation-wide strike mentality, so how is it you think there is a nation-wide attempt to "bust unions"?? Sound a bit paranoid to me, but then I guess I feel insecure too when I cannot maintain my position based upon merit alone.

My own local orchestra has been burdened with a lack-luster string section for years, due to "protections" afforded lack-luster players by their union, and you cannot tell me this is a good thing! How can you grow any enterprise without an ever-improving product?
(hint: YOU CANNOT) I realise there are no simple solutions, but the lock-step mentality of the average bargaining-unit-mouthpiece has got to be offensive to right-thinking ensemble members, so WHY the HELL do we strike and drive the enterprise outta business? "Principle??"
Now before you get your panties in a bunch, let's look at the "need" to audition for the Seattle tuba chair. It's a decent gig, by all accounts the guy there now is a phenominal player with a good working relationship with the back row, so what good reason is there for auditioning the chair after he's been there for a year? More "union-busting"??? Or just another "principle"? What a waste....of dollars and energy, don't try to tell me that is how management would want it in Seattle!


Follow Ups: