Re:Re:RE: Labor Board Issues Three Complaints Against WW1

[tklaundry@juno.com]

> WW1 is
> Boston's ONLY source for traffic.  Employees have no
> alternative source of employment if they want to
> remain in their chosen profession, that would
> probably be a major reason they organized to begin
> with.  

Dan Wrote:
The key point is the alternatives that the employer
has, not the alternatives that the employee has.  If
WW1 can get others to competently do the job for $13
then the the wage rate is reasonable.  

Dave Responds:
Ah, but the ballgame has changed,  When the employer is the only 
game in town then obviously they are not going to pay very well, there
is not incentive, like possibly losing the employee to a competitor, 
there is no competitor.  By the same token since there is no competitor they can overcharge for their services without any real fear of losing customers.

Dan Wrote:
The Labor Board complaint has nothing to do with the
wage rate, it has to do with the conduct of the
employer that, if true, violated state and federal
labor relations laws.  WW1's employee have a right to
organize but WW1 will only pay them more if they
believe that the alternative to doing so would be
harmful to the company.


Dave Responds:
True enough, but the wages are probably a key point in the
negotiations.  I wonder if since WW1 has a state contract 
whether they are legally obligated to adhere to "prevailing wage"
laws that cover non-union workers in the trades?