fuji said:
That's actually my point. It's free money to him but in terms of the union contract it was a point around which there was negotiation and therefore compromise. Management looks at it in hard dollar terms, the union looks at it in terms of what they can politically sell to their workers.
OK so maybe the reps were not idiots, but it was not the best deal for the workers. I have no doubt that whatever the union gave up to get the $50 boot allowance was worth more than $50.
It depends. People tend to take better care of things that they paid for with their own money so it is often more efficient to pay people $50 more in wages and have them spend their "own" $50 on the gear.
Exactly what I was thinking. Especially since jughead says he will spend the $50.00 per year, whether he needs them or not. That it and of itself speaks volumes about the "union" mentality.
Look at it this way:
COmpany has 100 workers who spend $50.00 each per year for boots. That's $5,000.00 (that isn't needed as JH said some boots last more than a year). So, if every worker stockpiled boots they all will have a stack of boots sitting in their garage or whatever. Now comes time to renegotiate the CBA and the company looks at the boot program and the costs.
Now if the workers spent wisely and only replaced or purchased boots when they needed them, says only 20% needed replacing, the cost to the company would be $1,000.00, they saved $4,000.00 per year now comes time to renegotiate and the company says, well, it's only costing us $1,000.00 per year so we can up the amount to $70.00 per employee and they can get better boots.
But that's my issue with union shops: they tend to look for immediate gains as opposed to long term goals. Not what is best for everyone involved, what's best for the workers right damn now....
But I digress, back to the original question:
Do the boots have to be 12" construction boot style? I say this because Marks has some amazingly comfortable hiking style boots with composite toes which weight about 1/3 of steel yet give the same, if not better protection. I know when I worked construction 2 summers ago, our H&S rep approved mine and man, compared to boots? They were heaven. (10 floors/no elevator/you do the math how many times I had to walk up 10 flights of stairs).
Also for comfort look into good socks too. They make all the difference. I found some "peds" brand work socks that have extra padding in the toe and heal and that's all I wear now.They are available at Zellers and other stores. When buying socks look for ones that don't have a seam anywhere around the toe or heel. I find the cheap socks tend to have a big lump of stiching right where the toe cap edge is and it only compounds the irritation. Better quality socks don't have this and are seamless in design and the peds brand pay attention to this area and there is no lump wherever the extra padding is sewn to the sock.
The problem with walmart/zellers work boots is they SUCK (for the most part). I have wide duck feet and they just do not carry EE width boots and every boot I tried on from them pinched somewhere.
Marks or timberland, are THE best places to look for comfortable boots. I have a pair now that feel like a pair of running shoes when I wear them (and the composite toe doesn't get cold like steel does).
I know it is hard to justify but believe me, spend a little extra and get a pair of boots that fit and feel right and you'll find your legs and feet won't be as sore at the end of the day and you won't be as tired. The old saying holds true: you ONLY get what you pay for.....
Keep your eye on Mark's website. They often have sales on at 50 and 60% off their boots. I picked up my current 12" pair (for winter) for $39.99 regularly $129.99. I think I paid $34.99 for the low rise hikers which were regularly around $69 or $79.
As stated, take care of your feet and DON'T scrimp. My dad wore work boots for 25 years and his feet are fucked. He's had vericose veins, knee problems, gout, bone spurs, hip problems all associated with having to wear work boots.
.
