RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


GoddessInanna -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 2:56:11 PM)

Exactly, the new contract would of allowed them to stay in business. because the Union refused the new contract they are all out of work. Either way , lots of people lots their jobs because the union wouldn't allow a pay cut that the workers were willing to take. Now if the workers were willing to take it, how is the union representing the worker's then by choosing to have them all unemployed rather than take a pay and benifite cut?




DesideriScuri -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 3:06:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna
Oh get off it. America is still a fat tinkie eating nation just most of it is eating from the food bank at the moment, that has a shortage by the way . Its not just hostess either. The teacher's union is responsible for us having one of the worst educational systems at the mometn. You can't even work if you have a masters and start because the unions wont let you take a normal starting wage and no school will hire. but according the teacher union our educational system is in shambles because they don't make enough so the teachers don't have enough incentive. Just recently the local metal workers union wouldn't take a new contract because the company couldn't afford a the current wage anymore. the workers had to strike against their union or all the metal workers would be with out a job. I think it has a lot to do with the union.


While I'm not going to argue that Unions have some responsibility in the fall of Hostess, giving exec's raises/bonuses and then turning around and asking for concessions from the Union workers is bad business.




GoddessInanna -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 3:06:41 PM)

Most of those executives are also salary were the worker gets hourly and time and a half for over time. Often those executives if they are doing their jobs are putting in just as many hours and more as the worker so whats wrong with a bonus no and again for doing a good job. Don't we expect a hard working labour to get rewarded or should everyone just be on an equal footing. Redistribute the wealth so no one can make more than another person?




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 people their jobs (11/26/2012 3:10:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna

Why did they have such high prices and have to keep raising them? Umm the unions. The Unions refused to allow pay cuts, the unions forced them to charge high prices to pay for the workers. they would of stayed open and kept the jobs if the unions hadn't destroyed it. Unions are over all destroying our education and economy.


I'm not exactly a union person and I don't always agree that they are a good thing.

However, if the cost of living is rising by a fairly measurable margin and the wages aren't going up, the workers are effectively experiencing a wage cut in real terms.
That scenario can only go on for so long then it becomes a serious matter with regard to sensible living.

If the cost of living goes up by 10% in a few months, that's 10% less you can buy with the same money. If the rent goes up and the price of fuel goes up, there comes a point where it's just not economical or rewarding enough to work those same long hours without a pay rise or some other tangible incentive.
The unions came about in order to protect the workers from unscroupulous bosses that take advantage of their workers in one way or another. Without them we'd all be working in sweatshops with virtually no income to speak of and lousy conditions that are bad enough to regularly kill people. We wouldn't have had equal rights for one, or equal pay or safety laws etc. You can blame the greed of the bosses and the gentry during the Industrial Revolution for the rise of the unions - people power by weight of united numbers.

Whether that particular union was justified in their wage claims or not is something I can't really assess with any accuracy as I don't live over there and don't know the whole situation. But from what I've read, the fat cats took what little equity was left in the company and then told the workers they'd have to have a pay cut and reduced pensions and medical cover just to keep their jobs.
To me, as an outsider, that wasn't playing a fair game and I daresay I'd have been one of them on strike if it meant that the new arrangements didn't give me a viable wage to live on.


Just my [sm=2cents.gif]




Hillwilliam -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 3:13:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna

The teacher's union is responsible for us having one of the worst educational systems at the mometn. You can't even work if you have a masters and start because the unions wont let you take a normal starting wage and no school will hire.


I used to teach. Your statement about educational requirements is untrue.

http://education-portal.com/educational_requirements_for_becoming_a_teacher.html

As for us having a poor educational system, if your level of literacy is a typical result of said system, I can only concur.




LookieNoNookie -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:16:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Its about time you got something.

After reading your posts, you remind me of a pimply faced teenager sitting in his mom's basement, writing posts he believes to be incredibly witty and snarky.... not saying you are... just the mental image your posts gave me.

quote:

The statistics are that 98% of the population has about 60 - 90 days of income in the bank.

That leaves 2% that have "more than that".


quote:

Most (who understand the rules of math and statistics) would have been able to read and discern the meaning of a phrase that used "statistically" and "98% of"....in the same sentence (by the way, leaving the word "statistically" would have validated your ridiculous argument. It was, however, a main component of same).


Try again next time.


And you…remind me of a girl I’d heard about years ago when I was 19 (you know we boys talk), in a trailer court in Maple Valley (I’m confident you know where it is…not necessarily the trailer court…although….was that you baby….I saw your 425 area code number on the Sani Kan just past the 320th exit in Federal Way?) who couldn’t figure out how to spell “IUD”. Was that you?

You were the one, weren’t you that attempted to pass herself off as a UW student solely by virtue of the fact that you'd driven down 405, past Bellevue, picking up the aroma of those who had…hoping that your past (those who hadn’t and never would), would pass you by, whispering to you “I’ll never tell….”, now heading for the Eastside Bothell Annex where all the money was, crossing 522 (you, presuming you could subsume the upper Eastside, eat it up so to speak, faking it all along, now left with dangling titties with crusted nipples, barely good enough for a sign on the 8th street avenade: “will work for anything above a 3 dollar bill….wanna go home sailor?”).

For a while it felt good didn't it? All that shunning left aside....no more...you could be something greater than your past couldn't you? Today was the day you'd rise above it. But it never came, did it?

You drove past the UW Annex every day on your way through Bothell, didn't you....go ahead....admit it....no one will hate you for it....on your way to the strip clubs in Lake City assuming that having driven “through” the Annex, you were hopeful you could lie your way through saying…”I just spent the last 4 years going through the UW” (and ironically, you had), having just barely glanced at it, never stopping…why would you?

You were barely capable of a brake pedal let alone a full academic doctrine…hoping even further still that no one knew you were on your way to “Déjà vu, Little Darlings, or Flesh Fantasy” (which you had long past left your ability to surprise, now only hopeful for a 5 dollar bill, in pity, as opposed to something more).

It was a good life wasn’t it, when you were fresh, young, capable of turning a man’s head but…time turns all of our dreams doesn’t it Tazz?

It’s okay sweety, I know you had better days...truly I do.

I’m with you babe…I have a dentist that works cheap. I’m here to help




tazzygirl -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:19:37 PM)

Oh lord... are you still whining????

Put on your big boy panties and get over it.

[8|]




LookieNoNookie -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:19:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

[image]http://sphotos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/532148_10151281051133729_1490742946_n.jpg[/image]


Tell that to Microsoft who has over 4,000 jobs that start at 90 grand a year, yet they can't find people skilled enough to do them.


When you offer $45 an hour for a position that pays $60 an hour why is it so difficult for you to see why no one wants go work for less?


When a company is willing to pay the feds an additional 15K over and above what they ask for now for an H1B Visa (and STILL pay 85 - 125K a year for the position, regardless of your citizenship)....why is it so difficult for you to see any kind of concept relating to reality?

Oh....I know why.




LookieNoNookie -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:20:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

It only takes ONE administrator to do that.

I bet those fat cats are still being paid their fat and inflated salaries until the company is officially closed.
Meanwhile, the workers are chucked out of a job, instantly, with no pay.

I see no justice in that at all.



It takes one Administrator to close 400 - 500 plants?

Man, are you some kind of super human efficiency expert? I'd love to see how one guy could do all that.

I have been in two jobs where the company has closed down.

I don't know what they do over there in the US but here, usually, once the public side of things has been closed to the public (ie, closing shops etc), all the plants, transport depots and other fabrication units are instantly closed and locked up with no staff whatsoever and unless there are perishable goods, even the remaining goods/stock are locked up where they are stacked.
Basically, everyone is locked out from day one, assets and bank accounts frozen and the whole process is administered by the receiver and that is usually just one person overseeing the sale of the assets.

Typical case of Woolworths, Oddbins, Unwins, Threshers, Moben kitchens, Dolphins bathrooms, Carpetright et al, were all closed after a few days of a massive sell-out sales then the stores and storage units were all closed up, locked up with no staff and whatever stock was in them.
They didn't have staff hanging on to clear out the stores or the warehouses or to sell off the transportation - the whole enterprise was just closed and locked overnight.

If a buyer is found, the new owners sort out the mess - not staff from the old business.
Virtually everything is done in meetings with the administrator and this is usually a single person not connected with the business in any way. So not even management are employed once you reach this stage.


Edit for more opinion....

Given that statistics can be manipulated to reflect almost anything you like, I'm willing to bet that of that 98% being quoted, 90% of them were on low wages and/or weekly paid and have maybe, at best, 1 week's worth of 'savings' and the remaining 10% were better paid and have a little bit more.

Apart from a tiny handful of fairly well-paid managers, most of the people I know in real life live from week to week and when that final pay cheque hits the bank, it's all they have to live on (so not really 'savings' as such). My friends also include a bunch of people I know in the USA - Jax and Tampa (FL) and a few more in north Carolina and some in Texas.
Every single one of them doesn't actually have any 'savings' as such - not one red cent. They have all had to cancell medical insurance and other luxuries such as expensive foods.

98%???? PFFFFFTTT!!




Well, you run with that.




LookieNoNookie -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 people their jobs (11/26/2012 4:22:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna

Why did they have such high prices and have to keep raising them? Umm the unions. The Unions refused to allow pay cuts, the unions forced them to charge high prices to pay for the workers. they would of stayed open and kept the jobs if the unions hadn't destroyed it. Unions are over all destroying our education and economy.


I love you.

I've always loved you.

(Pay attention folks...this is a Lady who lives in Michigan...ya know....Detroit and all that shit?)




subspaceseven -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:24:38 PM)

Gosh .. the new public records from the court show a ton of miss management and millions the union offered to give up..yet the corp people still blame the little guy, while increasing their own wages by 300% just this year...while they claimed they where broke

Gee no wonder willard lost people are sick of this shit




thompsonx -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:24:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna

The teacher's union is responsible for us having one of the worst educational systems at the mometn.


Would you happen to have any validation for this?

quote:

You can't even work if you have a masters and start because the unions wont let you take a normal starting wage and no school will hire.


What do you feel is a normal starting wage for a teacher with a masters and a credential?


quote:

but according the teacher union our educational system is in shambles because they don't make enough so the teachers don't have enough incentive.


Would you happen to have any validation for this opinion?


quote:

Just recently the local metal workers union wouldn't take a new contract because the company couldn't afford a the current wage anymore. the workers had to strike against their union or all the metal workers would be with out a job. I think it has a lot to do with the union.


Which metal workers union are you speaking of?




igor2003 -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:25:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna

Exactly, the new contract would of allowed them to stay in business. because the Union refused the new contract they are all out of work. Either way , lots of people lots their jobs because the union wouldn't allow a pay cut that the workers were willing to take. Now if the workers were willing to take it, how is the union representing the worker's then by choosing to have them all unemployed rather than take a pay and benifite cut?


Perhaps you should do a bit of research into exactly what a union is and how it operates before you make yourself sound any more foolish. A "union" is NOT a few crotchety old men sitting around a table making decisions for all of the lowely workers. The "union" is THE WORKERS themselves. They are called a "union" because they have "united" together for bargaining power. Those crotchety old men sitting around the table are "union representatives". They are called that because they "represent" what the union...that is THE WORKERS...decide.





LookieNoNookie -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:26:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna
Oh get off it. America is still a fat tinkie eating nation just most of it is eating from the food bank at the moment, that has a shortage by the way . Its not just hostess either. The teacher's union is responsible for us having one of the worst educational systems at the mometn. You can't even work if you have a masters and start because the unions wont let you take a normal starting wage and no school will hire. but according the teacher union our educational system is in shambles because they don't make enough so the teachers don't have enough incentive. Just recently the local metal workers union wouldn't take a new contract because the company couldn't afford a the current wage anymore. the workers had to strike against their union or all the metal workers would be with out a job. I think it has a lot to do with the union.


While I'm not going to argue that Unions have some responsibility in the fall of Hostess, giving exec's raises/bonuses and then turning around and asking for concessions from the Union workers is bad business.


Bud, I have to (respectfully) argue here....the execs were running the show, holding the reigns....they did what they felt best and gave the plebes a chance to join.

They chose not to.

Wanna sit in the big chair?

Buy a ticket.




subspaceseven -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:27:53 PM)

it does not matter, for Fox tells the what to believe,,facts be dammed




thompsonx -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:31:25 PM)

quote:

Tell that to Microsoft who has over 4,000 jobs that start at 90 grand a year, yet they can't find people skilled enough to do them.



When you offer $45 an hour for a position that pays $60 an hour why is it so difficult for you to see why no one wants go work for less?


quote:

When a company is willing to pay the feds an additional 15K over and above what they ask for now for an H1B Visa (and STILL pay 85 - 125K a year for the position, regardless of your citizenship)....why is it so difficult for you to see any kind of concept relating to reality?

Why don't you tell us just how that works?
You seem to be saying that micrsoft is paying the feds 15K per visa per year...Is that what you are saying?
You have also changed the pay that microsoft is paying from $45 per hour to $62.50 per hour. Please make up your mind which pay scale you are arguing.




Hillwilliam -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 people their jobs (11/26/2012 4:35:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna

Why did they have such high prices and have to keep raising them? Umm the unions. The Unions refused to allow pay cuts, the unions forced them to charge high prices to pay for the workers. they would of stayed open and kept the jobs if the unions hadn't destroyed it. Unions are over all destroying our education and economy.


I love you.

I've always loved you.

(Pay attention folks...this is a Lady who lives in Michigan...ya know....Detroit and all that shit?)


Is everyone up there that literate and intelligent?




subspaceseven -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:38:40 PM)

I believe the Bush TaX CUTS SHOWED US HOW It WORKS...... 650,000 job loses a month when he left office....yea GOP and voodoo economics




LookieNoNookie -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:40:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

Tell that to Microsoft who has over 4,000 jobs that start at 90 grand a year, yet they can't find people skilled enough to do them.



When you offer $45 an hour for a position that pays $60 an hour why is it so difficult for you to see why no one wants go work for less?


quote:

When a company is willing to pay the feds an additional 15K over and above what they ask for now for an H1B Visa (and STILL pay 85 - 125K a year for the position, regardless of your citizenship)....why is it so difficult for you to see any kind of concept relating to reality?

Why don't you tell us just how that works?
You seem to be saying that micrsoft is paying the feds 15K per visa per year...Is that what you are saying?
You have also changed the pay that microsoft is paying from $45 per hour to $62.50 per hour. Please make up your mind which pay scale you are arguing.



Uhmmmm....that's exactly what I'm saying....they're paying starting wages of between 85K a year ($41.00 an hour) and 125K a year ($60.00 an hour) to anyone who can do the task AND willing to pay an ADDITIONAL 15K to the feds to get people who can do the task....yeah....that's exactly what I'm saying...nothing less than that....exactly that....no less than that.

There SHOULD be no confusion as to what I'm saying (unless Nouns and Verbs are your problem) because what I've said previously and what I'm saying now, at this EXACT moment...are in fact....

The same thing.

I'm sure it may be somewhat complicated for you to discern but....reviewing (my) past posts, you'll find exact concurrency in all.

Any questions?





igor2003 -> RE: A few Labor Leader, cost 18,500 their jobs (11/26/2012 4:40:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessInanna

Most of those executives are also salary were the worker gets hourly and time and a half for over time. Often those executives if they are doing their jobs are putting in just as many hours and more as the worker so whats wrong with a bonus no and again for doing a good job. Don't we expect a hard working labour to get rewarded or should everyone just be on an equal footing. Redistribute the wealth so no one can make more than another person?


When a person accepts a salaried position it usually comes with the understanding that in order to get those higher wages it means working whatever hours are needed to get the job done. They might put in more hours than the hourly employees. They might work less. That is just part of what they accept when they take the salaried position. An occasional "bonus" might be in his/her compensation package or it may not. Again, it depends on what is agreed to when that position is accepted.

Now, there is absolutely nothing wrong with a salaried person getting an occasional bonus when they have done exceptional work! However, in the case of Hostess, what the salaried people were doing was running the company into the ground. That is NOT doing exceptional work...at least not GOOD exceptional work. And what they were getting, for the most part, were NOT ocasional bonuses, but actual salary increases...up to as much as 300%.

And yes, we...or at least I...do think hard working laborers should be rewarded for their efforts. But somehow, being asked to take an 8% cut in wages and benifits is not being rewarded for their efforts, especially after they already accepted a $1.1 million dollar per year cut in wages and benifits just three years ago.

You ask if everyone should not be on equal footing. Exactly how do you equate the workers being asked to take a second pay cut in three years with being on equal footing to management getting up to 300% increases in their salary?




Page: <<   < prev  18 19 [20] 21 22   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875