20,000 AT&T Workers Strike California, Nevada, Connecticut Impacted Several union workers have written in to tell us that they've started striking after negotiations with AT&T broke down. AT&T confirms to Reuters that 20,000 wireline employees are now striking in California, Nevada, and Connecticut -- which could result in support and service issues for users in those markets. AT&T did manage to strike a new three year tentative agreement with the CWA covering workers in the southeast, preventing potential strikes there. AT&T is moving quickly away from wireline services to focus on wireless, and wants to obviously reduce costs in those services. The CWA however insist that AT&T's demands are too major, and include significant increased health costs for employees. AT&T sent us a statement saying they've struck additional agreements in the midwest: On July 21 AT&T reached tentative agreements in the Midwest Region and AT&T Corp, covering nearly 18,000 wireline employees. The New York Times noted that the CWA “applauded the agreements, saying they did not contain the deep concessions many American companies are demanding.” And AT&T Midwest on July 13 announced that it has reached an agreement with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers on a one-year contract extension covering nearly 7,000 wireline employees in the Midwest region.
|
 Reviews:
 ·ooma
 ·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reduce costs? fire a union worker..
hire undocumented and h1-b visa employees who will work for less. after-all, it's the Romney way.. let's not be coy about the Republican agenda and corporate sponsors of it, regardless if they (AT&T) are going to spy on the DNC during the convention.
however, no love for CWA either.. they have aligned themselves too much with big corporate telecom and their anti-consumer interests for far too long, so they're getting a little of what they deserve too. unions are good in principal, but when they sell out those principals the worker & consumer are worse off then w/o a union. job protection and worker rules no longer apply when 9/10ths of the reasons to have a union are squandered at the bargaining table and state law. the 10% isn't worth fighting for, really it isn't. | |
|  |  skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
·Cox HSI
 ·Clear Wireless
| Re: reduce costs? Workers need to realize they are worth only what it costs to replace them, not a penny more. If they were more productive they would have better bargaining power.
Unfortunately the original purpose of Unions is long gone. Now Unionization is about protecting the lazy at the expense of the productive...Union welfare. | |
| | | | | Re: reduce costs? And this kind of propaganda perpetrated by so many on the right allows for the complete destruction of any respect in the workplace.
You can knock unions all you want, whether you're in one or not, the reality is the more that's taken off the union table, it trickles down to every other workplace and you're letting them have more to get away with.
Each day, we're being asked to work more for less, and have the ordeal made even worse so propagandists can finally have their wet dream of the death of unions.
When they start sending Johnny to work out of elementary school, maybe we'll start believing we have rights again. | |
| | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
| Re: reduce costs? It's no more propaganda than YOU shopping for services based on price for what you get. If you can get the same thing cheaper somewhere else, you are an idiot for not doing it.
If you want more money, get skills employers need and are willing to pay more for. Don't bitch that you aren't making 6 figures from that degree in Sanskrit. | |
| | | | |  Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | Re: reduce costs? said by skeechan:It's no more propaganda than YOU shopping for services based on price for what you get. If you can get the same thing cheaper somewhere else, you are an idiot for not doing it.
If you want more money, get skills employers need and are willing to pay more for. Don't bitch that you aren't making 6 figures from that degree in Sanskrit.
In the US we have a standard of living to keep.
If we followed your philosophy we would be like india.
I think you need to move to india since you obviously think life is better there. | |
| | | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 | Re: reduce costs? I don't need to move to India. I have skills in demand. If you want to make more, get skills that are in demand.
No one owes you anything. You have to earn it. | |
| | | | | | | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: reduce costs? said by skeechan:I don't need to move to India. I have skills in demand. If you want to make more, get skills that are in demand.
No one owes you anything. You have to earn it.
well, aren't you an arrogant shit. I have skills in demand and make good money, but I don't rub others noses in it or denigrate their abilities.
oh wait, I forgot - I work for the government, so I don't have a job (don't forget, gov't doesn't create jobs). | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: reduce costs? said by nasadude:said by skeechan:I don't need to move to India. I have skills in demand. If you want to make more, get skills that are in demand.
No one owes you anything. You have to earn it.
well, aren't you an arrogant shit. I have skills in demand and make good money, but I don't rub others noses in it or denigrate their abilities. oh wait, I forgot - I work for the government, so I don't have a job (don't forget, gov't doesn't create jobs). I thought he was arrogant too. Unless he has a golden parachute (C level employee), he too will soon be outsourced. What happened to logical discussions and debate? Some people's kids..... | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: reduce costs? The sense of entitlement is the issue. People no longer want to earn anything. They have an expectation that something must be given to them whether its from the government or off the backs of the person who did earn it.
All people do is complain about outsourcing when in the end those people that are getting the jobs WANT them and are willing to do what it takes to get them. People in America want everything for free and then complain about it being crap. Quality cost money and in the end you always get what you pay for. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 | No gov't didn't create your job, the taxpayers the government stole the money from did. No one came willing with check in hand to pay your salary, it was taken from them by force of law and gun. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: reduce costs? And if we go the survival of the fittest route, as you seem to be promoting, there will be more unemployed, a smaller tax base to take from and more taxes for you to pay to make up the difference for the roads you use to get to your in demand job, the cops who give you the speeding ticket and the fire department who saves your cat.
Go ahead, shoot yourself in the foot. Do you think those outsourced folks are paying taxes here, or in their country of origin? But if you want to make up the difference... | |
|
| | | | | "Each day, we're being asked to work more for less,"
Boo Hoo... CWA workers are supposed to be exempt the troubles of the current economy?
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company. | |
| | | | | | said by osravens:You can knock unions all you want, whether you're in one or not, the reality is the more that's taken off the union table, it trickles down to every other workplace and you're letting them have more to get away with. What you fail to understand is that T management is already paying for their own healthcare. You aren't going to see any sympathy from us. In this case, we want to "trickle up" so that you guys pay your fair share! | |
|
| | | | | Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| said by skeechan:Workers need to realize they are worth only what it costs to replace them, not a penny more. If they were more productive they would have better bargaining power.
Unfortunately the original purpose of Unions is long gone. Now Unionization is about protecting the lazy at the expense of the productive...Union welfare.
Maybe there are a few bad apples.. but I think you're confusing unions with government jobs (or unionized government jobs).. nowhere is that more the case than in government jobs.. how many scandals have we seen there with wasted taxpayer money on nonsense while the government goes broke.. political patronage runs deep in the federal government, long past the time many states have cut back.. there are plenty of do no work jobs there.. but as a union worker, you are EXPECTED to do something for that dollar (productivity quotas) and if you don't.. union or not, you're out on your ass, and this goes well beyond union telco jobs. | |
| | | bemis
join:2008-07-18
Reading, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon FiOS
| said by skeechan:Workers need to realize they are worth only what it costs to replace them, not a penny more. If they were more productive they would have better bargaining power.
Unfortunately the original purpose of Unions is long gone. Now Unionization is about protecting the lazy at the expense of the productive...Union welfare.
I really hope you're a troll and don't honestly believe all this.
It's like the mentality of a heartless factory owner from the 1700-1800s. You going to fire someone who loses their hand in your machines because they're less productive now?
In a "global" economy countries with higher standards of living (and increased costs) are getting crushed by cheaper labor. Beating down the paychecks of everyone is not the complete answer and it's narrow and one-sided to think that this has to do with "productivity".
I'm not a union person, and I've never been one. But I can see that unions are about protecting workers rights--which include the right to not be worked to death just because some poor shmuck is even worse off than you and willing to work for less pay. | |
| | | | | | Re: reduce costs? said by bemis:I can see that unions are about protecting workers rights Unions are about getting Democrats elected and funneling money into the political machine. Any altruistic principles died a long time ago.
--
Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty - Ronald Reagan | |
| | | |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by bemis:It's like the mentality of a heartless factory owner from the 1700-1800s. You going to fire someone who loses their hand in your machines because they're less productive now?
Let's say you were hiring someone to mow your lawn and a tragic accident happened and that person lost his or her hand and was unable to work the mower.
Would you continue to hire this person to mow your lawn even if it was not possible for that person to physically do it?
--
Romney 2012 - Put an adult in charge. | |
| | | | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 | Re: reduce costs? Meanwhile these are the first people to look and save a buck shopping at Amazon to avoid paying sales tax and buy groceries at Target or Walmart rather than support the union banana scanners checkers at the local grocery store. | |
| | | | | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| said by pnh102:....
Would you continue to hire this person to mow your lawn even if it was not possible for that person to physically do it?
of course not; you either shoot them or put them in a corner somewhere to die. | |
|
| | Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | said by skeechan:Workers need to realize they are worth only what it costs to replace them, not a penny more. If they were more productive they would have better bargaining power.
Unfortunately the original purpose of Unions is long gone. Now Unionization is about protecting the lazy at the expense of the productive...Union welfare.
If we went by that then we would all make pennies day or even work just for food scraps like workers in India.
I will agree that unions protect bad workers. At my work you can only be fired for not clocking in on time too many times. If you suck at your job, sleep at work, or just talking instead of doing anything the union will protect you from being fired. It is very, very sad. They give themselves a very bad name when they do this which is all the damn time. | |
| | | | slckusrPremium
join:2003-03-17
Maumee, OH
kudos:1 Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: reduce costs? I wonder what would happen, Ok so we get rid of the unions and we abolish the minimum wage. Who benefits in that scenario? Business? People? Government?.
Big business are the only ones I see gaining anything, Will they decrease the prices of their products if the minimum wage is abolished? (people will make less money), will inflation go down because we are flooded with workers making under 7.50 (w/e) per hour. What will the government do with taxes once they start receiving less tax revenue from their citizens?!, What will the people do, could you afford 1-3.00 loaves of bread, 3.00+ gallons of milk, clothes, etc..... on 5 bucks per hour?.
Somethings gotta give because the scenario doesnt work, Republicans want it gone but to what end? | |
| | | | | Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL | Re: reduce costs? If unions stopped the protecting of bad workers then no one will have anything to complain about.
Unions make it easy for the other side to complain. | |
| | | | | | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: reduce costs? Give it a rest. Youre talking about a minority of union workers. The overwhelming majority of us are all hard working people, and care about the prosperity of our companies more than our damn CEO's and board directors. WE are the ones that care about YOU. | |
| | | | | | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: reduce costs? said by ITALIAN926:Give it a rest. Youre talking about a minority of union workers. The overwhelming majority of us are all hard working people, and care about the prosperity of our companies more than our damn CEO's and board directors. WE are the ones that care about YOU.
Then elect like minded people to run your union instead of the jackwagons you have running it now. | |
| | | | | | | Oh_NoTrogglus normalus
join:2011-05-21
Chicago, IL
2 edits | said by ITALIAN926:Give it a rest. Youre talking about a minority of union workers. The overwhelming majority of us are all hard working people, and care about the prosperity of our companies more than our damn CEO's and board directors. WE are the ones that care about YOU.
I work with a union. I would say its around 25% should not be allowed to keep their jobs.
The company cannot fire these people for poor performance as the union wont let them.
The only thing they can do is hope one of them fails a drug test or does not clock in on time too many times so they can be fired.
It is amazing that the union sticks up for these slackers.
One guy got caught sleeping twice on his shift and on video, was fired and the union fought it to get his job back. Other union employees caught him sleeping, but of course the union says they cannot be witness to it.
They said it was the workers word versus the supervisors and the video shows the worker with his eyes closed, but that does not mean he was sleeping. Essentially they called the supervisor a liar even when video backed him up. What a joke.
Why do unions force companies to pay for bad workers??? Why would they not want to fire the bad ones so that a good worker can be hired in place?? | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: reduce costs? Problem is a good worker is more productive.. which means less union jobs which means less political clout. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Blame the unions for bad workers all you want. The only bad or lazy workers exist in unions only.
Seriously, there are lazy people everywhere, just look around for crying out loud. And for those of you who think that its ok to buy something cheaper elsewhere, unless it is the exact same product, you do get what you pay for. Try building a car on "cheap" parts and tell me how much money you saved over 2 years! | |
|
| | | | | | |
| pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by tmc8080:fire a union worker..
hire undocumented and h1-b visa employees who will work for less. after-all, it's the Romney way.. Wow, Romney won already and was sworn in?
--
Romney 2012 - Put an adult in charge. | |
| | dynodbPremium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | Your tinfoil hat- it's on too tight.
Besides, it's not AT&T that will be spying on the DNC, it'll be the chemtrail-spraying black helicopters piloted by Elvis and navigator Dennis Kucinich. So keep your HAARP-resistant headwear handy. | |
| | Reviews:
·Comcast
| said by tmc8080:fire a union worker..
hire undocumented and h1-b visa employees who will work for less. after-all, it's the Romney way.. let's not be coy about the Republican agenda and corporate sponsors of it, regardless if they (AT&T) are going to spy on the DNC during the convention.
Hey jackwagon... you know AT&T gives money to Democrats too right? Keep up the partisan hackery, your ilk is doing wonders for America. | |
| | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: reduce costs? Not to mention the CWA was ALL IN on the AT&T/T-Mobile merger even though it would have meant a net loss of jobs.
--
Romney 2012 - Put an adult in charge. | |
| | | | | | Re: reduce costs? But perhaps a net gain of BETTER jobs.  | |
| | | | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: reduce costs? said by ITALIAN926:But perhaps a net gain of BETTER jobs. So you'd be all for firing tons of people who need those "not so better" jobs then.
That is crazy, and the last thing we need when jobs are so hard to come by.
--
Romney 2012 - Put an adult in charge. | |
|
| | Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| said by NOCTech75:said by tmc8080:fire a union worker..
hire undocumented and h1-b visa employees who will work for less. after-all, it's the Romney way.. let's not be coy about the Republican agenda and corporate sponsors of it, regardless if they (AT&T) are going to spy on the DNC during the convention.
Hey jackwagon... you know AT&T gives money to Democrats too right? Keep up the partisan hackery, your ilk is doing wonders for America. You know why they do that? Both parties have to share the committees that telecom has to deal with... many of which are democrats.. Republicans like to sit on the good ones, like energy.. Sorry if I reduce partisan politics to glossy stereotypes... but it is what it is.. everyone paints reality in their own color shades. Even the shooter at a Colorado movie theater..
I call it like I see it.. the union (CWA) made several errors backing the company (AT&T) when they shouln't have.. and they have a reckoning for those choices. AT&T will be served their lumps sooner or later.. a nice one came by blocking the Tmobile merger, but the FCC & DOJ aren't done with them yet. That was a warning shot across the bow. Ya know what.. mabye SOME workers do care about consumers.. but the leadership they hired to represent them in the union made tactical mistakes supporting the Tmobile Merger, the Bell South merger, faulty upgrade plans for wireline networks, etc, etc, etc.. lock-step with the company. Those are indisputable facts from 2006 to 2012.
From AT&T's perspective, they are in a fight to the death with Verizon to build wireless (killing Sprint, Metro PCS, clearwire, tmobile and every other regional carrier) and don't really care where the cost savings come from-- consumers, low level employees, 3rd party contractors, undocumented workers, government. As it relates to this thread, AT&T is trying to play differnt factions of wokers in different parts of the company against one another to pay some less than others so that eventually they can wratchet down expenses (wages/benefits)and meet earnings & marketshare goals. While rewarding top managment for doing so.. (how many millions are enough?)
For the most part, consumers are sheep, lemmings and easily brainwashed, so these evil corporations will get most of what they want, but that success will come at a costly price down the line when they "cross the line" Ma Bell did so many years ago.. this agenda has basically one outcome.. the breakup of AT&T and a beat down of Verizon (in the form of rolled back State laws prohibiting 3rd party carriers entry into wireline). No amount of political contributions can put the manure back into the horse when the public wants these companies' heads on a platter..
Care to gamble on the year this happens? | |
|
| | | |
skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 | Wonder what the demanded concessions were A lot of times we see claims of "significant increase in" contributions and when all is told it is still only a fraction of what other people are already paying. | |
| |
See 41 replies to this post | |
| | Good and BAd I worked for a union and it served its purpose, but what does it really protect. The union cant prevent layoffs and still has out sourced employees.
I work for a telecomm non-union now and I can say lay off happened never happened unitl recently in the last yr than in my previous 12-13.
ultimately every deserves the right to fight for what is right. ATT posted billings in earnings, but want to continue to take away from their people. I'd fight to for my lively hood. I just think Unions slow the process to resolve. | |
| | | Whats the difference? I didn't know at&t had 'build out's or 'customer service'. | |
| | | Wow.. I almost skipped reading the comments to this story - because I'm sick and tired of hearing how unions are bad, union workers are all lazy, unions are no longer needed.. etc.
It was refreshing to see - up to the time of my posting anyway - that this feeling isn't being voiced as much as it has in the past. There are a few that still maintain the negative feelings about unions - and that's ok. Is the sentiment turning away from union bashing? I hope so. The fact is middle class prosperity is tied to union membership. Non-union employers must compete with union employers for the best candidates. This "rising tide" of union wages & benefits raises the non-union wages & benefits "boat", as a result. Who would want to work 40 hours a week in the same industry doing the same or similar job for less??
It's pure BS that union dues are expensive! My dues cost me 30 minutes pay per week, yet my check and benefit package may be worth 5, 10 or more hours more than a non-union worker's check for performing the same job! Who wouldn't give a half hour's pay to get an extra 5, 10 or more hours in exchange??
The answer to organized greed is organized labor! | |
| | Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
·voip.ms
| Re: Wow.. You wrote the exact reason why unions are a problem. Labor is a supply and demand generation, nothing more for a very large corporation. In a small business employees can make a huge difference. If a union pay package (inc benefits) is 25% above the market rate, then one of two things is going to happen: 1. They hire less, 2. They outsource/contract. Both instances bring less value to the company and the customer. (hire less is less coverage, less customer sat), subcontact - Less quality training, skills, or retention.
Union contracts are multi year, and cannot adjust for labor as fast as the market changes, so companies need to hedge for this, and this also means hiring less.
By creating a distortion in the labor pricing, it reduces efficiency and in turn causes market disruptions that may have not existed in a unbound labor pool.
In my company I see a lot of outsourcing all together (no unions to begin with), but the CWA has an advantage for now (need people out on the street) until technology displaces that market inefficiency, and it will.
My wife/brother is union, so I know the drill. They are some of the most unhappy people I have ever seen because people are payed according to their labor category, and not according to their skills. I think that is the major travesty of unions above all else. Rid excellence, brew mediocrity. | |
|
| | Very little left Since 1980, most unions have been killed off and many pension plans replaced with 401k that used to have matching contributions to none now in many cases. Many full time positions replaced with PRN or outsourced all together. Wages being driven down along the way. Yet some think the best thing is to give up the remaining unions that are left. Why not just increase taxes by 2K for the middle class so folks like Romney can create more jobs by extending their own tax credits. Yes that should fix things and lets dump the remaining unions along the way. After all, corporations are people too! | |
| |  KommiePremium
join:2003-05-13
united state
kudos:2 | Re: Very little left You can blame the Taft-Hartley Act for killing the Unions. | |
|
| | greed Greedy corps like ATT and VZ begat greedy unions and vise versa. It takes two sides to tango. The goal of each is to see how they can grab as much as they can from the other. Customer be dammed. Are CEO's worth what they are paid? No. »money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/···-ratios/
this is the same problem with "public" unions. Only problem there is the taxpayers who pay the salaries dont get a seat at the "closed door bargaining trough"
--
Lakewood Accountability Action Group | »www.LAAG.us | Demanding action and accountability from local government
| |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
 DavidNow accepting new patientsPremium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:78
 ·DIRECTV
 ·AT&T Midwest
·magicjack.com
·Google Voice
·AT&T Southwest
| For what it's worth.... and may not be worth much depending, I am union and far from lazy. I get up, go to work, work hard at answering email, posts, and keeping up.
Sure I am paid, I am not running around all rich, high and mighty. I just want to work, have a fair wage, fair benefits, and not be robbed blind. I have been on both sides of the fence and one isn't any better than the other. | |
| keasonPremium
join:2002-05-02
Ann Arbor, MI Reviews:
·Comcast Business..
·QuantumVoice
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·AT&T Midwest
·AT&T DSL Service
| Unions have lost their way As I see it, public sector unions, and unions whose employers mostly deal with with the public sector should be banned. Unions have bribed legislatures and local governments to keep either high wages or a closed shop, and fund democratic party candidates, who vote in higher wages and closed shops. Unions have cheated taxpayers with similar legislation affecting government contracts (Davis Bacon) + teachers unions (look at the wretched performance of urban school districts at very high costs), and with very unreasonable rules in the private sector (NLRB) and their members with poor pension management arrangements.
In the post war era, unions have done nothing but artificially increase costs - resulting in less healthy companies and fewer jobs. They have also introduced large inefficiencies - think of all of the inflexible work rules which are incompatible with modern production techniques plus the overhead of union management and stewards who add no value at all.
Unionized industries and companies have fallen to more nimble competitors, or moved jobs to right to work states or overseas.
For a more reasonable example of union behavior, look to Germany. Germans have kept wages down, and employment high in exchange for equity and board seats. At least under the German system shareholder and labor interests are more closely aligned. It could be worse - Italy and Spain are good examples.
Unions could play a greater role in improving quality of their members. | |
| | | Unions and Purposes Most of the original purposes of labor unions has now been adopted by the government and is part of the "law of the land". The most repugnant practices of employers is now punished harshly by the government, and this will continue even if some kind of "union Rapture" comes along and wipes out every union in existence.
Unions need to find a new purpose other than simply defending every worker (right or wrong) as if they were some kind of defense lawyer. They need to become more like a modern personnel company and police their own members so the bad apples are turned away.
Companies would gladly pay extra for some assurances that ALL union members are (as far as the union can determine) good workers. Union leaders need to very much act like they're on the same team with business managers and leaders (and vice versa). The current adversarial system, no matter who is really responsible for it, benefits neither of these groups. | |
| | CXM_SplicerLooking at the bigger picturePremium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Unions and Purposes said by Squire James :Most of the original purposes of labor unions has now been adopted by the government and is part of the "law of the land". The most repugnant practices of employers is now punished harshly by the government, and this will continue even if some kind of "union Rapture" comes along and wipes out every union in existence.
The original purpose of labor unions was to prevent unfair treatment by the employer... is that what the government does today?
The most repugnant practices of employers are now punished harshly by the government? Hmm, care to provide some examples? All the employers did was to move their repugnant practices to other countries. Of course, you realize that those 'repugnant practices' were perfectly legal and common occurrences here before people stood together to stop that type of treatment, right? Just because something is legal and a common occurrence (whether 100 years ago or today) doesn't make it right. It's too bad that most of America just doesn't have the guts to stand up for themselves anymore. | |
|
| | Just off shore it then When everyone wants things cheaper, watch all the middle class jobs go overseas. Unless you are on the board of directors, you will be poor like everyone else. And you think out sourcing really works? I don't know how many on shore/off shore consulting teams I have seen that have totally and utterly botched big IT jobs and corporate doesn't care because they don't have to pay their taxes, health care, social security, or overhead associated with on boarding an employee.
Unions aren't perfect by any means, but they are the last voice for the employee. Sure, you can suck it up, accept lower wages, work longer, or even become an indentured servant if you want, but the question you have to ask yourself is if it is fair when it happens to you. Chances are everyone here would be ticked off, that is unless you are the CEO that hired the off shore team. Just saying.. | |
|  Woody79_00I run Linux am I still a PC?Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state | Its a Shame.... oh great another "Unions suck fire them all, they pay their workers too much" thread...
Oh wait, no its another "That Evil greedy corporation just don't want to pay a man a fair wage"
Both sides of that argument are garbage...just like every other issue though, there will be no compromise....we haven't known what compromise means since 2002.... | |
| | | ATT American Workers Suck! I would LOVE it with ATT outsourced to india cos that is the only way I would ever use ATT again.
Rather deal with outsourced indians than the americans currently employed by AT&T now
First those idiots didn't give me my promotion on sign-up, and I had to spend countless hours on the phone a month later resolving their mistake.
Then a few months later, those idiots billed my account for web hosting and domain that I didn't even order. I didn't even have a online att.net account that could of been compromised either.
So when my next billing statement came due, it automatically disconnected me for non-payment. If the fraudulent charges wouldn't of been added to my bill, it would not of happened, but since ATT's dumb american employees made yet another f**k up, the automatic system disconnected my service.
So I called ATT to get the web service and domain that was a mistake removed, and the guy tells me "The account for that domain does not match my account". How the hell they billed my account by mistake I will never understand.
So he tells me the only thing he can do is send me an e-mail to fill out, to get it removed. Which is fine, but the only problem is their mistake lead to my service being disconnected. So I get in touch with ATT Billing, and explain to them what all has happened.
Told them I would give the $20 I owe if they would reactivate my service so I could the other $50 in fraudulent charges removed. They agreed, so I paid my bill, and they told me it would be at least 4 hours until my service is back on.
So I wait the 4 hours, call technical support who tells me its 24 hours not 4 hours. so I wait 24 hours, and still no service... I call again, and get told "We received request to disconnect your service" so that was the 3rd mistake in 9 months.
They tell me for $100 prepay they can reactivate my service. This is 1 day after I gave them $20 ($20 a month under promotion for internet) So I just said the hell with ATT, they stole my money, and made too many mistakes for me to ever use their service again. Went to cable isp.
But out of all the times I delt with outsourced CSR from india with other companies in the last 10 years, they rarely made mistakes on my account.
I would LOVE it with ATT outsourced to india cos that is the only way I would ever use ATT again. | |
| MadtownPremium
join:2008-04-26
Madera, CA | My advice My advice for those who still get service from att, is to cancel att, subscribe to CC for internet access, and for phone service get a smartphone and subscribe to Cricket (or any other mobile service beside att) and just be done with att all together. Avoid att like the plague. I personally rather drink a bowl of diarrhea than to deal with att and their lack of service, that's how much att sucks. Since I switch over to CC, I can D/L a 1GB file in around 10 mins. Watching videos in HD is no problem with CC, but try watching a video in HD with att, oh boy, you be lucky if you can even watch a decent SD video much less HD. 1080p. | |
| | | Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Very bad timing A very good description of the way life works at AT&T. Since I retired 5 years ago, I understand that "good jobs in 8" has been supplanted by something even more unrealistic.
For clarity, I was a foreman for a special services crew that did regular special services and also installation and maintenance of customer premise fiber optic systems, from OC-3 to OC-48 and everything in between.
Another poster made some derogatory comments about managers, which from my point of view were very wrong. I also took training on the equipment my technicians worked on and was qualified on all of them. I don't ever recall a time when I could sit around and do nothing. Let me see, there were safety checks, quality check, work observations, the list is endless for 16 technicians spread across an area about 90 miles by 20 miles.
And yes, the managers are under the gun to produce the results the sometimes clueless upper management demand, or hit the bricks. | |
|
Reviews:
·MetConnect
| AT&T should can the entire lot in Nevada and start over! Why do I say this, I scrapped by for 2.5 years after moving to nevada, unemployment sucks, nobody and i mean NOBODY is entitled to their job or all the benifits it has paid in years past. I applied for over a hundred jobs, went to College for a few semesters and took out the max $$ I could while only taking a few credits in the evening when I wasn't watchng the little one, all to pay the mortgage, bills, gas. I am gratfull to have a job finnaly. So anyone who rallys with a team against their employer cause they want the same great perks as years gone by needs a reality check and that reality check is unemployment! | |
| | Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·magicjack.com
| Re: AT&T should can the entire lot in Nevada and start over! said by civicturbo:So anyone who rallys with a team against their employer cause they want the same great perks as years gone by needs a reality check and that reality check is unemployment! I beat my head against the wall trying to figure out the union-shitheads. If you had no choice to join a union in order to get a job, that's one thing (doubtful excuse), but voluntarily joining for collectively threatening employers, is quite another thing. Turbo has it right - Obama will give you what -- 100months of unemployment -- I'll take your AT&T job and AT&T money.
--
That's "MISTER" Kafir to you. | |
| | | | | Re: AT&T should can the entire lot in Nevada and start over! they have openings everywhere now for "Prem techs".. go ahead become one.. come back to us and tell us how you feel after a month or two on your own. The used by date for those techs are 6-9 months, tops... 6 days a week and at least 12 hr days. When are you gonna rest? You baggers just don't know...... | |
|
| | | Oh right... So lets give it to gold old Randall... Why not you idiot?! Poor guy, he made a gargantuan $4 billion mistake and only made $20...Poor guy....Maybe he will sympathize with you and give a $10/hr job?! | |
| | | | | Re: AT&T should can the entire lot in Nevada and start over! ?? Who's Randall? What is your reply even about? | |
|
| |
|
|
·
