Union women earn more in W.Va.

In West Virginia, unionized women earn 8.4 percent more than their counterparts who are not union members. That comes out to 94 cents more in average hourly wages.

Nationally, union membership boosts women's wages by 11 percent, or an additional $2 an hour, over non-union women.

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200812130300

And we've all seen what unions do for long term job security by bankrupting companies!!!

[quote="ziggy"]

In West Virginia, unionized women earn 8.4 percent more than their counterparts who are not union members. That comes out to 94 cents more in average hourly wages.

http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200812130300

Zigster, and just how can you have "female counterparts" when this is not a "right to work state"?



.

Sam, there are thousands of women in WV who work at non-union jobs. And there are thousands who work in union jobs.

So your question is non-sensical.

ziggy wrote:Sam, there are thousands of women in WV who work at non-union jobs. And there are thousands who work in union jobs.

So your question is non-sensical.

Sure nuff, .... cooks, waitresses, retail clerks, nurses, secretaries ........

And Teachers of course, who belong to a Union, but most of them make as much as private Union male members, ..... $30K to $90+K per year.

But then, those Teachers get paid a "longivity pay" which private Union members don't. Which means, all Union Teachers don't even get paid the same for doing the same equivalent job ..... as their counterparts. But the non-Union belonging Teachers get paid the same as their Union belonging counterparts.

So Zigster, ..... tell me, ...... just what the hell is that Gazette "comment" trying to convince anyone of?

.

So Zigster, ..... tell me, ...... just what the hell is that Gazette "comment" trying to convince anyone of?

I don't know that's it's trying to "convince" anyone of anything. It is reporting that WV women who work on union jobs are paid more than WV women who work on non-union jobs.

What we allow such reporting to "convince" us of is more dependent on what's going on with the reader than with the reporting source.

ziggy wrote:

So Zigster, ..... tell me, ...... just what the hell is that Gazette "comment" trying to convince anyone of?

I don't know that's it's trying to "convince" anyone of anything. It is reporting that WV women who work on union jobs are paid more than WV women who work on non-union jobs.

Zig, cite me a FACTUAL example of what you are talking about.

Where in WV are there both Union and non-Union females working on the same job doing exactly the same thing?

,

The article does not cite such an example, Sam. It says what it says.

WVEA is not a union.

They can call themselves an organization Sod but considering they lobby on behalf of their members, I don't see how they are not a union.

We’re there when you can’t be – monitoring the laws that affect how you do your job, advocating for more education funding and working to improve salaries – so that you’re free to do what you do best: helping West Virginia’s children succeed!

source

well do you think they were considered a union in this study?

I dont know, but since they are not a union I figured they would be considered not union....

I have no idea what the Gazette considers them. I know what they are.

They also pay appreciably more in union dues.

ziggy wrote:The article does not cite such an example, Sam. It says what it says.

And it said, to wit:

In West Virginia, unionized women earn 8.4 percent more than their counterparts who are not union members. That comes out to 94 cents more in average hourly wages.

Well, there has to be an example ... or there is no such counterparts, ..... right Zigster.

So, did Sherman "ghost write" that article or what?



.