Casino Lays Off 175 Employees Months After Union Negotiated Wage

[DRK Star]

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/socie...egotiated-wage


By Jonathan Wolfe, Sun, January 12, 2014
Around 175 employees at Resorts World Casino in New York City have been laid off. The firings come just three months after a union representing the employees negotiated a big pay raise.

The casino is owned by a Malaysian conglomerate called the Genting Group. A spokesperson from the group says the firings are not due to the pay increase given to the employees, but rather because the buffet had simply stopped being a profitable part of the business.

“If we allowed it to remain open, it would have ultimately had a negative impact,” the spokesperson said. “If that’s consistently losing money then it becomes a drain on other parts of the business, and then it becomes harder to sustain a business that you certainly want and the community wants to survive.”

The buffet was one of several restaurants at the casino. While Genting says they needed to close the buffet because it was draining money from the rest of the business, union representatives and a number of politicians are criticizing the group’s decision. They note that the casino made $696.5 million in revenues last year and is the nation’s highest grossing slot parlor. They believe the business easily could have afforded to keep the buffet open, thereby keeping the 175 laid off workers employed.

“I’m very upset about this,” said John Turchiano, spokesman for the New York Hotel Trades Council union. “We are doing everything possible to assist these workers right now.”

Turchiano said the now-jobless workers will be given priority when applying for any open positions at the casino. Still, the employees can’t help but feel they were fleeced by their employer.

“Everything is done,” said Mariano Cano, 45, a former server at the buffet. “They just threw us out like dogs. They just gave us a couple of dollars to shut up, and that’s it."

Sources: New York Times, New York Daily News

[4Dragons]

Having an incredibly hard time seeing this as the casino's fault. Only thing greedier than the casino was the union bosses that wanted that big paycheck off the backs of their members.

[Sanlmar]

Smells like Foxwoods post UAW.

[bukowski72]

Having an incredibly hard time seeing this as the casino's fault. Only thing greedier than the casino was the union bosses that wanted that big paycheck off the backs of their members.

Yeah, the casino agreed to a higher wage and then closed the buffet and fired the workers because the wage the owners chose to agree to was to much. That is scummy and the casino's fault. I will give the casino some points for third level thinking -- agree to the worker's terms and avoid all the picketing and bad press and then fire them all a few months later. Very Machiavellian -- but totally the casino's choice and fault.

[DirtyB]

Having an incredibly hard time seeing this as the casino's fault. Only thing greedier than the casino was the union bosses that wanted that big paycheck off the backs of their members.

So you've never negotiated with an employer? You just accept their first offer because that will result in the maximum profits for them?

[Dan Druff]

How is the union sure that the firings are related to the wage increase?

Would the casino really close the buffet and kill a profit-maker if it was really profitable? I doubt it.

Most businesses are greedy, but rarely are big businesses spiteful at the expense of their own greed.

To me it looks like the union pressed too hard for pay increases, and it ended up that the pay increases for 175 workers pushed the buffet from profitable to a money-loser.

That's not the casino's fault. No business should be forced to keep a segment open that loses money.

The statement below is very indicative of a sense of entitlement that most unions have nowadays:

They note that the casino made $696.5 million in revenues last year and is the nation’s highest grossing slot parlor. They believe the business easily could have afforded to keep the buffet open, thereby keeping the 175 laid off workers employed.

Why does it matter what the casino made last year?

Why does it matter if they could have "afforded" to keep it open?

Does the union think they really have a right to force the casino to lose money on the buffet, just so certain workers can stay employed?

Unions need to realize that pay raises often come with a cost, and frequently that cost involves jobs.

[Sanlmar]

Foxwoods offers an example of the battle between management and labor. Union representation seemed to be one of labor's few options.

Foxwoods was notorious for recruiting temporary foreign workers. I heard miserable stories regarding the Foxwoods recruiting trips to Eastern Europe and Asia and some of the promises made vs the reality of the immigrant's plight in a fairly expensive area of our country.

This says nothing of the plight of existing workers trying to exist in this environment.

It was downright depressing around 2008 to spend extended periods of time there and get to know the workers - both US and temporary foreign workers. The atmosphere was miserable if you became aware of your surroundings.

I think Druff is automatically giving credit to casino management for being sound businessmen.. That is naive and unfair. There are poor workers and poor businessmen. The story of Foxwoods is a case study in bad business practices. The $100k a year each Mashantucket Pequot tribal member used to receive is history - a tribute to poor management.

The labor management argument is never black and white. I am generally a Republican laisse faire type but I also have a heart for those who work hard and are getting fucked over by bullies.

[4Dragons]

Having an incredibly hard time seeing this as the casino's fault. Only thing greedier than the casino was the union bosses that wanted that big paycheck off the backs of their members.

So you've never negotiated with an employer? You just accept their first offer because that will result in the maximum profits for them?

I stopped being an employee many moons ago.

[DirtyB]

So you've never negotiated with an employer? You just accept their first offer because that will result in the maximum profits for them?

I stopped being an employee many moons ago.

And when you were, you took a lower salary that you could have gotten out of concern for your employer's profit margins?

[Ryback_feed_me_more]

I stopped being an employee many moons ago.

And when you were, you took a lower salary that you could have gotten out of concern for your employer's profit margins?

Must you always make the "big bad evil corporation" vs "socialist/communist" kum-by-ya comments Dirtyb. Jesus for once try and not make about the poor working stiff you feel is so fucking put upon.
Your dear leader Obama has caused the greatest shrinkage of participation in the economy by workers in decades.. The unemployment numbers are horse shit, if the 99+ weekers were counted that fucking idiot would be dealing with unemployment of mid teens with some states approaching 20% in some areas (some California areas already have 20%+) and thanks to MORONCARE, more businesses are cutting hours to avoid having to pay for insurance, which rates are skyrocketing thanks to that toiletpaper shitstain of a law..

My insurance through work went from under $400 to $600+ a month alone. They've cut some people back to limit FT benefits requirements because well unlike big evil own all corporation they are a small business with 4 locations and cant afford to eat growing expenses not to mention the new regulations that are handtying the mom and pop and smaller businesses due to red tape.. You want to vilify the big corps fine but they aren't affected by your Dear Leaders horse shit domestic policy they have money to burn and can hire Top 5 accounting firms to work the numbers.. Small businesses are the ones who employ a large pct of Americans and they are being crushed by Herr Leader. Meanwhile GE and the rest wine and dine the fuckers in DC to no end.

[4Dragons]

I stopped being an employee many moons ago.

And when you were, you took a lower salary that you could have gotten out of concern for your employer's profit margins?

It was never a point of contention, nor was that point of view ever discussed. But by all means, when you go into a job interview, bring that up and put it into just those words. I'm sure you'll get a call back.