Uh-oh! Cue 50 comments from Conservatives who hate unions for no other reason than that Fox news or Donald Trump told them to. People who have never worked a union job in their life. One thing about opinions that people don't seem to take into account is that if your opinion is only as good as what you back it up with. Just because you entitled to an opinion does not mean that your opinion has any inherent value.

Unlike anyone in the comments, I have worked in a union. It was fantastic. I've also worked non-union jobs. There is no comparison. Union wins in every way, even with some of the drawbacks. Also, people who hate unions without any experience are worthless trolls. So 99% of WW comments on this article.

Pretty well said. The out of work RWNJs on here are monolithically moronic.

Sure comrade. Do they have unions in Cuba?

Lazy workers benefit from unions.

Unions work best for passive, unimaginative people with no real skills or abilities. But if that is what you were dealt, best of luck to you.

Exactly.

"Cue 50 comments from Conservatives who hate unions for no other reason "

Other reason is that in the long run, unions only see one side of the argument. So you get great pay for a while, then kaboom - As in Detroit and the ILWU jobs at PoP.

In Europe and Korea, unions and management are much more collegial and work better.

In any case, stable long-term skilled jobs are absolutely necessary for a prosperous and truly wealthy society.

Wake me when our public school systems realize this. They're screwing our kids way more than any non-union employer.

"Starbucks calls their benefits package their “Special Blend.” Part-time employees working at least 20 hours a week can get health coverage, including medical, dental, and vision. Benefits also include life insurance, disability coverage, and tuition reimbursement."

I can see employees unionizing if their benefit package was abysmal and working conditions were difficult, but it appears even part time employees at Starbucks get decent benefits. If the tipping point to unionize was the requirement to be on time during inclement weather, that requirement will not disappear in a union.

Decent benefits shouldn't be an anomaly.

That really depends upon the contract, doesn't it? Work conditions are very important, and relying on your employer is very hit or miss.

I have family members who work in in union jobs. When those contracts are for renewal, depending on the state of the economy, benefits can change. Benefits are pretty decent. though, especially medical and dental.

Which is why all the Starbucks should unionize... there is strength in numbers.

I was a Teamster working in a cannery during school. There were some positives about the union (safety measures). And there were some negatives (the inability to be recognized or get promoted for being a hard worker and doing a good job. It was all seniority based). Of course, the only robots that were around to take my job were fake ones on TV. Those times are changing, quick like.

I was in the Teamsters/Warehouse Workers while working at a C-ration packing house in Portland during the VietNam war. It was a pretty weak union, back then. The shop stewards were useless, basically cow-towing to management.

A word of warning to those looking to push for unionizing coffee shop workers and the effect on morale; Employees who are union tend to believe that without their union, the Company will run them over and take advantage of the employees, and the cycle then builds on itself through the mistrust and never-ending votes and threats. I see it will all my customers that are union vs those that are not union, and it is very unfortunate to see how morale is essentially capped at the unionized companies.

You're misinformed, apparently, perhaps because you did not bother to read the piece before comnenting.
Like most union elections,cthis one is being requested by the employees. There's not some nefarioos outside force at work, here. The workers desire to be represented by the union. They know what they'll be getting.
Pretty simple.

The point I am trying to get across is the morale, real-feel, outcome so often in Union settings is not enjoyable or inspiring and I see it first hand. Not intending on floating any conspiracies, etc. as "those looking to push" can be included as the employees but there's not gold at the end for them. Just unfortunate with the Northwest coffee culture and all to go from the Keep Portland Weird vibe to unionizing chain coffee shops...

LOL, nothing is that simple.

cool story

Because relying on the good graces of your employer has worked so well in the past?

Sure it has. Look at the high-tech business. Few, if any, unions and prob (outside of govt jobs) highest avg pay of any industry.

I was going to say $150K ILWU jobs at the Port of Portland, but they kinda screwed the pooch on that.

Yeah... look at the sever misogyny coming from the high-tech business... and the fact that they are starting to get interested in unionizing.

Look at how well they've done without unions. If you think 20K $100K jobs from Intel in Oregon alone is something to be ashamed of, I disagree. Lot of those jobs are HS diploma jobs.

Now if you want to address a racist public school system that cheats minorities by not giving them skills to get better, I'm all ears. Sorry, forgot the teacher's unions runs things there.

I think a well-educated populace is a lot better than a labor-organized one.

And both would be... just amazingly good and the best part is, it is entirely possible and doable.

"it is entirely possible and doable."

Maybe, but the teacher's union is calling the shots and it's not real encouraging. Look at SB744 from my Senator that works for AFT.

Problem is unions don't look at the long term and what's best to keep the business going. You unionize high-tech, lot of those jobs will go to right-to-work states or off-shore now that their public education is better than ours.

BTW - Sever misogyny? WTH does that mean? You have any chops, you'll get hired no matter the race or gender. Intel fired the top guy for having an affair.

severe. Sorry. You'll get hired.. but you're a woman you stand a good chance of getting harassed from day one. Quite a bro culture going on there. There are more high tech companies than just Intel.

Severe misogyny - You must be kidding. I'm not denying it doesn't happen at all, but Intel is NOT an outlier. You get more public harassment in govt jobs I bet than Intel.

If we go your Marxist way, everyone is beholden to the boss for their existence. That's the way totalitarian govts work - Strong leaders trump all.

You keep mentioning Intel.... and ignore other companies like Activision/Blizzard... and many articles about the bro culture in silicon valley. That there horse is done dead by now.. you can stop flogging. Go your Fascist way... forcing everyone to conform to some ideal that never existed.

OK, so you don't have anything specific beyond being unable to show that the high-tech business has as much harassment to less than any union job? This is NOT excusing ANY harassment.

Got plenty of bros in the ILWU that are pretty nasty if you look at the BS they pulled during the PoP strike.
And probably, based on the number of women co-workers, don't make it easy for women in the ILWU.

Otherwise, go in peace.

Thanks... you too ;)

You want to talk misogyny? No one does misogyny as well as Muslims. BUT WE MUST NOT BE "PHOBIC" ABOUT THEM. Why are you so phobic about high-tech business?

Yeah, The greedy ILWU union tried to take too big a bite for their already overpaid members.

But the criminals running the unions are better? LOL

???? Well, yes, actually. The biggest criminals are supposedly "respectable" people. I'll bet most companies have more criminals running them than unions.

Yep... and lets not forget Enron who suckered their employees and left them with nothing to retire on. I'll take the Teamsters over the Enrons any day.

But... it doesn't condemn all unions. There are bad unions, and there are good unions. By far, most are good. I think you missed the point.

"I'll take the Teamsters over the Enrons any day."

Any comment on the % of women workers for the Teamsters vs Enron or Intel?

You know the Teamsters are very male-dominated.

Yep... but at least there is a better chance at changing the Teamsters of the world, than the Enrons.

Go right ahead, I wouldn't let my wife work there vs Intel or Enron.

Well... how modern of you. Do you make her wear long dresses too? Must she seek your approval on all things or just on some.

How about a different union.. like AFL-CIO or AFSCME. ?

You're the one that brought up the Teamsters and ILWU. How many women they have there - Like 0.01%?

Re-read the thread. I did not mention the ILWU and the Teamsters first. Nice try though.

I believe they're both unions which you mentioned.

Only in response to someone mentioning them first. I don't believe I even ever mentioned the ILWU. LOL... I sure wish facts matter to you.

Well, only goes to show that the lack of female opportunities in unions isn't limited to the Teamsters.

Kinda crude for being so prejudiced.

It's kinda cute how you don't address what I'm saying, but instead you just go on a topic that wished I had mentioned.

Even cuter is how you won't address facts. Like how few women are either Teamsters or ILWU, both of which are way lower % than high-tech.

Thought the goal was to show how much better for society unions are. After the bang-up job the teacher's unions are doing for minority students, there's plenty of room for improvement.