Labor, Schmabor

[desh]

You know, I try to get behind the concept of union politics as strongly as Ruby K and Josh do. And I really admire them for all the work they do. But then something like this happens.

The story is that a plumbers' union in Philly was protesting over the plan to install waterless urinals (still not quite sure how that works) in a new skyscraper in Philadelphia. They were upset about the loss of union work that would result from this decision. So what compromise was reached? The waterless urinals would still be installed, but water pipes would be run to them anyway.

Someone, anyone, please explain to me how the unions are in the right here, or how this solution makes sense at all? I'm just not getting it.

Comments

[jdcohen.livejournal.com]

I think the idea is that if the waterless urinals, for whatever reason, need to be replaced with, uh, watered ones, the plumbing to do so is already there. No need to rip out walls to change the types of urinals in the bathrooms. However, it is a definite example of certain municipalities in which the unions hold a disproportionate amount of power over industry. Now quit yer whinin', hippie.

--Jeff

[desh]

Yeah, I mean, I know that's the point, but I don't get the impression from the reading I've done that these urinals are brand-new, unknown, or "beta" technology. They're expected to work fine. And if that's the case, what do you need backup technology for?

[jdcohen.livejournal.com]

In case the waterless urinals are too expensive to maintain, duh. Boy am I glad you're not a building manager.

--Jeff