Rent a tech Union debate

[RADBASTARD]

Does Bartlett or the Atlantic group base their pay on experience or merit?  There is no way radbastard should get the same amount of money as me. (thats an attempt at a joke)  Cant we least get NShift differential without having a union?  Go Gators

Well biloxi anything over waitress wages and your stealing from them.You forget I worked with you many times in the past,and I will again at st lucie.
They should though have a system to give higher wages to people who have put in their time.I know this isn't a perfect system because we have some techs who have in 25 + years and are worthless aka: biloxi blues just joking buddie and some new 3.1 that bust their ass's.
I just think we should get levels for the experience or for the job's your assigned to.I know we have5+ and 7+ levels.Some away's get the tough crappy job's and high risk and some sit control points and make the same $$$$
If anybody thinks they have a work experience paying system please share it with the class

[Shawnee Man]

The biggest things I have seen in the last 17 years are the following:

1) You hear this for House as well as contractors: do more with less!
2) It used to be Rad Safety was a top priority. If you did something not following RP directions you were disciplined appropiately.
3) Now Outage Schedule takes priority! Talk to people about the safety at recent S/G replacements. The safety records at Power Plants are always mentioned for house injuries, but contractors are doing the work.
4) We talk about 18.1, 3.1, 5 year, and 7 year seniors. How about equal opportunity for other positions such as ALARA, Planners, and Lead Techs. How fair are these opportunities?
5) Ever since the "Maintenance Rule" came about in the mid 90's, the plants are run like we would do taking our car to a shade tree mechanic for the cheapest labor.
6) If the industry is going to be top notch, that means everyone that comes into contact with the plants should have first class training.
7) The only training that is done by the plants is go no go training for techs.
A union would ensure proper training for all techs before a test.
9) The only way you and I can ask for fair wages is to have an educated work force.
10) When a plant can take anyone off the street, be it a untrained person, boyfriend, or girlfriend how can we justify more pay if a union does not prevent a hiring unless they have had the proper training and experience to do the job.
11) I still believe a union can work with freedom of choice, that is negotiated by the representatives elected and then approved by an overall vote by the workers.
12) Right now we have less organization than a bunch of coyotes!

Here is a link from the European Union on the importance of a Labor Union in Radiation Safety at Nuclear Power Plants: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:_7co1l3oqVsJ:www.srp-uk.org/irpaethics/ssiwshop.pdf+Radiation+Protection+labor+Union&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6

[alphadude]

Training is the big issue with unions. The skills of the journeyman would be standardized, you would get techs that are trained and not "resume" trained, and you would have a much safer work force.  Unions tend to make things equal. As most of us know union provided training is very good.  As a customer I would have more confidence in the purchase (tech contracts) if I saw union techs. I would tend to eliminate the NEU exam and other hinderances.

[jjordan]

Shawneeman, and alphadude, you are both correct. I got training from my union, can still get it if I want. it would cost me thousands every year to take it elswhere. All I have to do is pay my dues of $26/month. Ya'll do the math, it's easier than the NEU. The house techs at BNP don't want the NEU, we don't think it's pertinant and or fair, but who listens to us? Tina, I read some about catapillar, and i owe you an appology. But it seems the culprit was the UAW and the AFL, CIO. The Carpenters, Laborers , and Operating Engineers have withdrawn from them. Thats one of the problems with unions, or government, or any democratic society. Everybody needs to stay current and vote. If the wrong people get in, vote them out. Tina what exactly are your negative points?[ Batman, you posts aren't any longer than they need to be, mine are as long. Complicated issues take a little bit to explain. your posts are excellent.
Thanks,
JJ /color]

[Chimera]

We can "hot air" this issue until the cows come home, but until there is something concrete on the table to hash out and discuss, that's all it is - hot air.  My reluctance to join another union goes back to the days of my youth watching the steel workers go out on strike for benefits they would never recover although they fought an excellent battle for the betterment of their children (yeah, I'm talking about the '50's).
My suggestion is to put something concrete out here.  For those of us who advocate for the union, let's see the proposed contract.  For those of us who tend to be leery of unions, let's make the proposal into something potentially more useful for all of us.
Since I've been both union and non-union, I would like to see a copy of a proposal to help me make up my mind where I stand on the real issue - not just an esoteric discussion on the pros and cons of some mythical concept.

[RAD-GHOST]

OK, I finally have to add my two cents on the topic.  I've heard the union opinions for about 16 years.  The last attempt to bring a union standardization to our discipline failed miserably!  Sorry to tell you this, but it scared the hell out of many who require our services!  Another little known fact to the situations, only one company agreed to sit and talk with the union, which was a tremendous business decision, take a guess who that was?  The other companies didn't want to let their cash cow profit margin out of the bag and refused to agree to any negotiations.

The Technician work force, in general, fails to truly recognize the necessity and value of their function.  The customers aren't offering opportunities out of the generosity of their hearts, you are a requirement!  Believe it or not, if we don't show, their outage doesn't go!  Sure any utility can run an outage with their house staff, but most utilities have trimmed their staff to the bare bones minimum and running an outage under an emergency contingency staff plan would prove to be a regulatory disaster!  If the Technicians didn't show up, the regulators would! 

Some say, they don't want their opportunities limited by a union agreement!  They want to go where and when they want to.  I can't agree with you more!  I follow the same rule, but under a different methodology.  If company A limits the available opportunities, or offers me a poor compensation package, I go to company B, C or D!  I may not go where I wanted to, but at least I will go when I want and for as much as I want!  Are you sure you were fully informed of all the opportunities available?  The longest duration and the most money?  Did your resume make it to where you wanted, or only sent to where the company wanted it to go?  I hate to be the one to bring this to the attention of the members of this site, but the current plan, which is also currently in motion, for one Contract Company, is to totally eliminate the selectiveness of the Technicians!  In other words, “You’ll go where we want you to, or nothing at all"!  You have to admit the value of that selling point to their customer!  It would eliminate bonuses, control wages and benefits! 

If we organize, we could make those Bastards pay through the nose!  If you believe that to be the foundation of a union, you need to be banned from the union!  Actually a union would provide an equal playing field for its members.  It would eliminate all the secrets held over your head and not privileged to see!  You know the ones I'm talking about, the contract constraints, on contract you can't read!  It would also provide a venue of factual communication.  Not to say incorrect information is actually the way of doing business, but I've heard the response of some recruiters, “You didn't ask the right questions or enough questions"!  I didn't know an employment venue was a question and answer game!   

Probably the most important, from my opinion, is training and an apprenticeship program.  The nuclear industry, in our country, has been dead for quite some time!  All of the nuclear high schools have closed and the military services are offering major retaining bonuses.  I'll take the heat on this one, but my recent experiences in the industry, leads me to believe that the majority of the Technician populations, is lacking in the necessary skills of the trade.  The reason for this is self evident, limited employment opportunities and ZERO training programs!

How could I draw such a conclusion? 

Recently I attended an outage and spent an entire day reviewing OE's!  The sad part, they were all current!  All of the situations were repeats of events that took place many years ago!  Simple mistakes that compounded into reportable events due to a lack of training and experience.  What kind of events?  Workers picking up debris, failure to believe instrumentation readings, improper training with specialized instrumentation and the list goes on!  I was in the room with several other individuals and this appeared to be the first time any of them had ever heard of such events, including the instructor!

Who can train the future work force?  Actually their is still a population of experienced individuals available for that venue.  You read their comments on this site all the time!  They represent various facets of the industry, not just the commercial sector!  DOE, DOD, DOT, R&D, D&D and about a dozen other sectors of the radiological industry.  I know many of them, some I agree with, some I don't, but when it comes down to the bottom line, they know their stuff!  I don't know of any, who would outright refuse to offer assistance and training to a new work force.   

Another portion of the union debate, that seems to be overlooked, is with whom?  Everybody seems to want to pit a union against a specific company.  Sorry boys and girls that is a venture I wouldn't want to take part in!  Now if the Technician population wishes to discus the current situation of our industry and improve it, I'd be interested in that!  The talk of a formalized organization and due's can be put on the back burner for now.  Unionizing, or organizing, is simply the concept of deciding what is necessary to improve our industry today and in the future.  Even an individual, who dislikes the discussion of unionizing, shouldn't have a problem with offering advice to potentially improve his own future!  Contract on the table?  A contract has to grow from the needs of all parties involved. 

The first order of business would have to be what the Technicians need vs. what they want, a starting point.

I suggest, for dsicusion:

Wages
Travel Expenses
Per Diem
Bonus
Pension
Vacation/PTO
Medical
Vison
Dental
Perscription
Progressive Opportunities, POSTED
Training
Evaluations, REAL ONES!
Disciplinary Standards
Company Communications

Again, these are topic that need to be discussed.

My $0.02, sorry for being so long winded, RG

EB, congrad's on the new job!

[alphadude]

well put rad ghost- sad to say a lot of those not wanting the union are those with the least amount of formal jouneyman training.  When we implemented the NEU exam it was basically a reaction to untrained technicians and a  lack of confidence in the contractor work force.  That still exists today-when you hear "techs are a dime a dozen" its a reaction to that lack of confidence- tell that to a union guy and you got your self some big problems! If you notice there aren't any NEU type tests for skilled Union craftsmen. They come in qualified- and go to work. 

Don't equate steel unions, etc with what you can make of your union. That like saying "I'm not gonna drive a car cause I've seen what they do when they hit a tree!"

If anybody has the stats for DART for HP techs, I would be interested in seeing those.

[Tina]

  OK I must admit when I was in the union at a nuclear facility the only thing that was important was the training if you didnt meet quals you didnt work just that simple... but I felt at the time it was a double edge sword... ex: my quals were suppose to be "yearly" which was what I signed on to do "yearly" however, do to scheduling issues with training and our dept the once a year quails started to shift first to every nine months then the next year it was held six months later humm... let me see...what I felt personally was not only was I defending my job every year but it got ridiculous. I was requaling as often as every six months I got tired of after working for a company for 8.5 years having to save my job every stinking year or at nine to six months intervels which ever the site saw fit... I like it better now where I know I have to provide certifications at each place of employment and if its every 7 to 8 months well so be it... I know that up front its expected for me now. Im not miss lead by the thinking of my yearly quals moving up on me.... as for the type of training when I started at the NRC site I was given an instuctor and a guide to study and go over with the instuctor should I have any questions. By the time I left I no longer saw an instuctor, I was given a guide to study on my own before I was given a computer test... hummm just what kind of traiing is that... to me the quality of the training has went down and its not the best of incentives for me just to join a uion for training... now when I get training I go to places like Shawnee Environmental Services and I get online training... I pay for it myself and I dedicate myself to it hole Heartedly.... I know without the certs I will be unemployed and since I pay for it myself I pay more attention to it.... I do admit that working DOE after working NRC sites I could tell the difference in training NRC was much better but even now it is slipping by taking out the instuctor and classroom environment... I just dont get why I should want to pay out union dues for things I already have ... and I have more freedom to pick and choose my work projects .... the way it stands now I educate myself, keep my certs current and pick the best offers being made at the time to me... how would a union help me .... They arent going to keep me employed longer or get me a better quaility of work... my pay rate could end up being less and definitely wont be as lucrative to me as it is currently... As for health insurance and benefits they wont change much because companies already offer some good packages.... Where's the benefit 

[Brett LaVigne]

On training... I am an ex-shipyard guy (early 90's).  I did the NAV-SEA 108 training.  Many tests, weeks on end in class 8 hours a day, a 3 hour oral examination at the end along with a 5 - 6 hour written exam (all essay) and OJT for several months.  That was quality training.  Then I started in the commercial end of this buisiness in 92 and there wasn't a "real" exam even required.  Soon after that the North East exam came into existance for most sites and it was a test that you really did have to srudy a bit for.  It still in my mind wasn't enough to prove that you were qualified to perform as a SR. Tech but it was better.  I recently went to DC Cook and had to go through a practical exam that lasted 2 - 3 hours.  It incorporated many of the things that you need to know and perform in everyday Sr. HP life.  I thought it was the best real life exam that I have had to take since being in the commercial business.  It should in my mind be part of our NEU Exam.  This was a test, not training, I understand that.  I do think it is a step in the right direction to ensure qualified techs in the field.

When I was in the ship yard we had spill drills at least quarterly and once/year we would shut down the yard for a huge site wide mock up emergency.  It seemed like we were continuously training to respond to something big if it ever happened.  I don't know what commercial house techs go through but I think a program like this would be a great excercise for all of us to participate in on some kind of routine basis.

As contractors where schedule is the driving force I don't know who would be interested in footing the bill for training like this.  It seems like we have to get in and get out to save as much $$ as possible, but at what cost?  I often see Sr. Techs that are very proficient at letting jobs get away from them and crapping everyone up.  What are the financials on dose and personel contaminations during a refuel outage?  What are the health consequences?  Would it be worth the cost of training a few dozen Techs for an additional week prior to an outage to reduce these issues?  I think maybe it would.

With all of my hot air on this issue, the question is, what would the union really do to help in training?  Real training that is, not just lecture and/or computer based training but OJT.  Emergency training, practical training and exams.  These things take time and money and I don't think that the union would be able to drive any of the utilities to provide this kind of training for temporary HP's.

Just thinking out loud again...

[alphadude]

It is beneficial to take the extra week and get the techs in alignment. The NEU when used properly should tell the provider where there are weaknesses in the training program; however, its used as a screening tool and not as a test instrument. Usually there isnt any remediation with the test and that is flawed thinking. If a person fails the test, and is remediated-its a win-win situation for all. The tech gets training for improvement, and the utility gets a better product. And guess what- if over a period of a few years the NEU grade levels rose dramatically and were always in the high 90's- the test would go away. 

ELTs are well trained and should be given credit for their skills. They usally exhibit weakness in the "working aspects" of a new enviroment- power plant vs sub. Giving the NEU to an ELT who lives and eats theory is a waste of effort. Practice with situations they would encounter in power plants would be a perfect fit for them.

I remember some of the early tests I took in the late 70's- stupid stuff like "What is the scale on an E-500?"  or "What kind of detector does an RO2 have?" Equipment specific guestions are soo dumb. duh-what color is my underwear type questions- Anyone remember Frank McFaddens test question box?

[Tina]

  All I'm going to say is you put a lot of value in a test that like the DOE Core test could be corrupted .... Whats it gonna take some fool to bring in five copies of five different versions of the NEU and lay them out on a desk like they did with the DOE CORE before people relies that the current testing system that is in place is worthless ... I paid good money for my training to get my DOE Core Certification only to be told its not acceptable becuse of the few idiots our there dont expect me to bet my bank on the NEU test either... Sorry but the truth hurts sometimes 

[alphadude]

Tests must be developed using the SAT process. Each question must be linked to a learning objective and that objective must be covered in the lesson plan and presentation. Any test bank may be compromised by hackers, less than ethical instructors or staff or students telling each other the questions etc. Tests may be practical, oral, written-however they must be fair, cover the lesson plan objectives and present a challenge. 

There is no Core Certification anymore- you must be able to pass the CORE test- which is not a certification. There isnt any more CORE CARDS- only a certificate or declaration that you have taken the training and passed the tests, which are similar to DOE CORE, presented by the provider- you must then pass the DOE CORE test for the specific DOE facility,and then that facility thru the reciprocity process shares that information. (We email each other on who has taken the training-however that is still an informal process) On current job descriptions there is usually a statement-"must be able to pass core test." not CORE certified.

 I am a CORE training provider and the only thing I can promise is that you will be able to take the test- (notice I didnt say pass it!) I provide the modules and then test on each module. Costs are low and the info is given to you and you test with a proxy on your time. The CORE given to you by the DOE facility will be similar but totally different from my test bank. However, you will be familiar with the test method and type of questions on the facility DOE CORE test. That is the purpose of CORE Training Providers.

The NEU has already been compromised several times.... but I will not go down that road.  Besides how many ways can you state a shielding formula with buildup factor before its all the same? (5 maybe) Learn to solve for each component and move on! NEXT....

[Brett LaVigne]

This is all good back and fourth conversation and I am, as well as others I'm sure interested but I think we are straying from the topic.

[Tina]

  Ok Alphadude
The idea of me joining a union will change all these facts HOW  Obviously techs who have made it on site have passed these tests in the past... their now on sites in an outage paying "union dues"  for what benefit  Tech who work DOE know what is exspected should they chose to switch and go to an NRC site for an outage and vise versa having a union in place will even this out HOW    What will the added cost to my employment be verses the benfits  I know some house mice that where some what suprised when I told them I had passed the DOE Core ... Here they had worked as hp's for years in house and still held a fear of taking the DOE Core Test ... They felt I was truly quailfied to submitt my resume for an in house hp position since I had passed the DOE Core test... Now if a union were in place do you really think I would have been given that opportunity ... I doubt it  there would have been a greivence filed because of the time on the job issue verse tests being passed...   I'm just pointing out that we as techs do not need added hurdles to jump so we can get employment opportunities there are already plenty out there...  Oh and just for the record I was passed over for the inhouse hp position ...  a traveling road tech that had more experance then me but who was dating one of the hp managers at the time took the job... needless to say whats really funning is the road tech ended up quiting the house job when the relationship ended....    its funny how Karma works     

[SloGlo]

I suggest, for dsicusion:

Wages
Travel Expenses
Per Diem
Bonus
Pension
Vacation/PTO
Medical
Vison
Dental
Perscription
Progressive Opportunities, POSTED
Training
Evaluations, REAL ONES!
Disciplinary Standards
Company Communications

Again, these are topic that need to be discussed.

My $0.02, sorry for being so long winded, RG

rad-ghost,  ya sure ya did't put a nickels werth in there?  dang, yinz git a lot outa cupla pennies.
 
here's a take on suma yer items....
1) after reading alla posts since ya put these up, it looks like knowbuddy wants ta due ennything re: training.  eye propose dat everywon wit >20 years gits grandfathered on training, 'n alla rest git it.  betcha after a cupla years, alla dem grandfathers sit down fer some training once in a while.  especially after they learn they kin make money at it. 
2) fer medical, eye wood say to go with bc-bs.  they're nationwide.
3) per diem shood be according to i.r.s. guidelines.  nutting less 'n nutting more.
4) disciplinary standards shood be in accord with current union standards.  'n union reps shood be in attendance during all "tech a", y.f.g, disciplinary meetings, 'n udder situations eye may have mist.

dats da short of it four now.

[rapidray]

u go sloglo.

doze eyetumz thet yawl listd spechlee tha grandfudder klaus. zoundz reel goot.

reckon sense eyem a grategrandfudder, eye ownlee knead 2 shoup?

rapidray

PEACE

[RAD-GHOST]

Tina, you have a couple of situations that representation could have possibly worked in your favor.  First, the cost of your training.  The company you mentioned is one of the few recognized to administer the training.  Possibly, through collective bargaining the cost could have been cheaper, maybe even free if a structured budget is established within a union to absorb the costs.  Second, a representative would validate all testing, before and after!  Third, once you take the test, your done that test forever!  Sounds to good to be true.........READ ON!

Like Alphadude said, there are just so many ways to write a valid question.  The industry is starting to realize that an established continuous training program is a far better choice, then cold testing.  Entergy has established their core fundamentals criteria and lists it on PADS.  If your qualified to take an air sample at IP-3, then your qualified to take an air sample at all of their other plants.  NRRPT, although it is not readily accepted across the industry, many sites accept it as equivalent to the NEU test, good as long as you keep your membership active.  It seems that the precedent has been set, now someone just has to draft the mechanics of total industrial acceptance.  By the way, there is a catch, there is always a catch.....The training will be continuous and encompass the full spectrum of the industry.  Probably things you don't want to know, but could possibly benefit you in your future career.  The protocol will not be cold testing!  Like Alphadude indicated, a defined lesson plan, with a test applicable to the lesson. Pass the test and move on!  Commercial and DOE accept the Qual Card program, all we have to do is put it all together.  Testing is not accomplished to see how dumb you are, but how smart you can be!

SloGlo....Blue Cross & Blue Shield would get my vote!  On the subject of medical, the union would obtain and administer the policy, not the companies.  Grandfathered....Hum, I agree, but there has to an established set of criteria, directly related to the industry.  There are actually situations where individuals can meet the twenty+ year criteria, by today’s standard, but have ZERO experience in the industry.  Per Diem, I have a very different opinion on that subject, which I will refrain from sharing at this point.  I will say that it is a tool used by the companies and not the actual benefit we believe it to be.  Representation....Yes..Yes... Yes!  I also believe each evaluation should be reviewed by a representative, during the actual employees review.  How about a Site manager review, by the technicians?  They keep performance records, should we! 

I'm bouncing around on this thread, so bear with me. 

I guess the question of concern, "Who Goes Where"?

In my opinion, returnee status first!  After all, the customer wants, who they want!  If a site has a list of returnee's and they're paying the bill, then they should have the privilege of getting who they want, not who is drop at the door.  In other words, opportunities primarily based on your own merits and performance.  If you did a good job, then you deserve to be a priority for the customers next project.  After that, assignments based on technical qualification needs!  Many sites currently use this standard, 18.1, 3.1, 5+ year senior, 7+ year senior and whatever.  If that method works now, then why not keep it, just establish a pay grade for it.  What about technicians with limited time in the industry and the associated opportunities?  We have all experience this situation, a technician with five years experience, is a lead tech, or foreman.  Those types of opportunities will still need to be available, (upgrade).  Again, if a customer wants a certain technician as a foreman, why shouldn’t they get what their paying for?   

My $0.05, RG

[SloGlo]

u go sloglo.

doze eyetumz thet yawl listd spechlee tha grandfudder klaus. zoundz reel goot.

reckon sense eyem a grategrandfudder, eye ownlee knead 2 shoup?

rapidray

PEACE

butt uv coors.  rapidray, yew shoup wan kneadit 'n yer grand!

[SloGlo]

rad-ghost.... i'm with you!  excellent criteria for those points: my agreements are 100% on medical; grandfathering can be criteriated (?sp...yea, i no, i know... me kewstshun spelling?) to an agreed standard and we have to start somewhere; per diem i don't consider to be a benefit or a form of compensation, but rather a tool to alleviate bookeeping for expenses occurred for business travel and should be at the government's determined rate for an area and have stated this many times on many threads on this site; 100% on representation.

[RAD-GHOST]

WOW...Ain't seen a thread die this quick before!

[SloGlo]

i'm guessing nobuddy wants to talk nuts 'n bolts. 

[Mike McFarlin]

WOW...Ain't seen a thread die this quick before!

Like driving a stake thru a vampires heart.

[jjordan]

Dead? I don't think so! I was just on a little vacation, without my computer.RG many very valid points. Progress is going, or actually has gone to the national qual program. I don't know how many other utilities have done this. It's a program similar to PADS to track certain HP quals, that can transfer form site to site. It makes it cheaper and easier to inprocess for outages. We started last year. We were one of the first, and it was a lot of work getting the initial group done, but as we continue, it should get easier. I've had excellent experience with Blue Cross, with Bartlett, Progress, and my union in PA. SloGlo is correct in that it's nationwide. Health care should be contracted by the union, but be managed by Blue Cross, or another health care provider. If there are many members, this helps lower individual costs. we have several choices, and maybe the IBEW could arange some other options too, like some regional HMO's, The real trick is to stay working so that you get an employer match. It'd be infinatley easier if you stay with one company, and don't have to flip flop. I talked to some IBEW organizers tonight, they agreed with me! It's whatever YOU want. If you think returnees should be given preference, then propose that in the contract, vote on it, then get it ratified! Then you'll all have something valid to whine about. Right now nothing exists, and all of the whining and crying about how unfair all of the union rules are, is a huge waste of time. There ain't any yet! Senority doesn't exist, and just how would it be implemented fairly, if we all join the union on the same day? My first nuclear job was in 74, but lots of people have more experience, that started after me, because I didn't pursue it activley until the high dollar costruction work dissapeared in the early 80's. I agree with SloGlo on per diem. It's a living expense to be paid to help you defray the cost of maintaining 2 residences. Thats why they have the 50 mile rule (you're still living at home, and they know this) It should be the IRS rate determined for the area you're working in. Remember the IRS is here to help. They have arrived at thees figure after years of fleecing, er I mean research.It's not meant to be used as availability pay like it is right now. If your congressman gets sick when he's on an assignment, do you think his perdiem stops? Not hardly. When you are genuinly sick your expenses go up, and wages go down, so you really need your per diem.The union will have to set up rules to minimize abuse. That's why Bartlett and the other companies had to go to the present system. Too many people lay out when the get the brown bottle fever, or the Super Bowl Flu. I hear that's going around again this year too. RadGohst, why no comment on this? It's fair game. Everything will be negotiated, so we all want to hear everyone's opinions, pro and con! I'm bouncing around here also. Holidays?Bartlett has 6 I think. I have 13. It used to be, if the house people had a holiday, you got one too! Nothing wrong with that!
JJ

[Tina]

  Well it sounds to me like the only consideration here is going out to the hp's of nuke sites... This is one of the major problem I see with regard to a union....  no merging of the differant postions of RCT's Marssims, D & D, DOE, Deconers ect... There is no equality amoung the techs when it comes to unions... just another line of segration  until I'm sure that when I work at decomisioning a site with the same training, pay, benefits, and representaion as our outage brothers and sisters my vote remains no for unions 

[alphadude]

I think this debate would mostly apply to power plant workers. (standardized responsibilities)