|
|
|
|
|
by walshemj
4465 days ago
|
|
That's not how M&P unions like the AMA and BMA work in practice your just repeating the union busters propaganda. You negotiate the "rate for the job" if some one is good and need s more pay well promote them to a higher grade thats why you need to have a proper career track for all you staff. |
|
That forces concepts which are nearly orthogonal in these types of companies (duties performed vs. value-added) to be artificially commingled.
While you could theoretically say that you can fix this by inventing enough job positions to be able to give the most-qualified the best wages, what really would end up happening is that you'd have a unique job position for every person (or in other words, exactly what you'd have without the union).
As a practical example, consider placing your union idea in the context of the NBA. "NBA Point Guard: Paid $11MM". But Michael Jordan was worth far more than $11MM to the Bulls, while even in 2014 Jose Calderon is not quite worth that much to the Mavericks.
So what do you do, split point guard up into "MJ-tier Point Guard: $33MM" and "not-quite-average Point Guard: $6.7MM"? Of course not; you negotiate with each player individually.