Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/4/2013 8:18:19 PM   
LookieNoNookie


Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Hopefully it will work and they can get rid of the union for good.

And then, I'm sure, they'll repudiate all the rights, benefits, and protections secured through a century of battle by the labor movement.

Or maybe not. Anti-unionists' fervor never seems to extend quite that far. Funny that.


DC, unions, as many have stated, had their purpose, and they provided that purpose well and good but, today unions are operated by thugs. They demand and extract tithes, much of which is spent on their gain....not yours.

I won't go into the details...many would refute them (I lived them) for their own purposes....if a union would provide me with employees that could produce value in accord to their cost....I'd be all over it...but they can't, they don't and...they don't even try.

I've told this story before but, the short version is when we (my firm) was being accosted by the union to have my staff join up, they offered up all kinds of promises, none of which they had any ability to keep/provide.

That same union lost money for the previous 3 years and (painters union) they needed their offices painted.

They got 3 bids. One from a non union company (to keep things "fair").

The non union company got the job and were required to work such that they started when staff was gone, and they were gone when staff arrived.

Those are the guys that took your dues. And will continue to do so.

I have another story when I was 18 just starting out....total con.

Unions don't give a shit about you...they give a shit about unions.

You ain't the union....you are nothing more than a cog.

(Who are more often than not...in the way).

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/4/2013 8:43:29 PM   
BitYakin


Posts: 882
Joined: 10/15/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice
quote:

Your bringing in Scott Walker is not a good point to make, either. Public Unions weren't the ones that rose up to counter the shitty conditions/treatment of the 30's. That was the Private sector Unions. Scott Walker is against Public sector Unions. Big difference.

I'm sure he's a huge fan of private sector unions too.
And actually, the fact that supposedly impregnable public unions could be eviscerated so swiftly doesn't bode well for the rights of any workers in any sector.
You seem to see an almost moral difference between public-sector and private sector unions, and I'm not quite sure why. Is it somehow less legitimate for cops and teachers to fight for their rights than for mechanics and printers?


Here is the difference, DC. In a private Union, you have the Union negotiating with management. Management is the company that will use it's money to pay for the wages and benefits in the Union contract. Public sector Unions see the Union negotiating with politicians. Politicians, then take, not their own money, but the taxpayer's money, and pays for the wages and benefits in the contract. People are more free-spending with other people's money than they are with their own. A private company can't simply increase it's income to pay for whatever package negotiation reaches. Government, however, can do that to some extent. Government can also run deficits to pay for that shit while a private company can't do that all the time.

I hope I was clearly able to describe the distinction.



and other lil distinction is public sector unions negotiate with politicions that they OFTEN contributed to to help get elected!

the old conflict of interest argument

hard for a politician to say NO to someone who helped put them in office

< Message edited by BitYakin -- 9/4/2013 8:44:18 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/4/2013 9:10:21 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

.

Pontificating horseshit is still pontificating horseshit. One should not lecture those who have knowledge as if you are in the same class. There aint a fucking thing that is in the air, and NLRB has no such rule and it is all asswipe, *very* *completely* asswipe.


Oh horseshit.

Here's a direct quote from the NLRB "Otherwise, a union that receives a majority of the votes cast is certified as the employees' bargaining representative and entitled to be recognized by the employer as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees in the unit. Failure to bargain with the union at this point is an unfair labor practice."

Ie., intimidating employees into not voting is a vote for the union - just like I said.

Oh - and go read the new rules that up to 20% of the votes can be fraudulent...

Dims - so used to voting fraudulently in elections now insist on the same right to obtain union representation.

Or.......Go look up "micro-units" - where the unions are defining their work units arbitrarily small. Majority of the members don't want the union - redefine your membership class.

Unions have virtually unlimited amount of time to proselytize employees. Recent NLRB rules are decreasing the amount of time the employers have to respond.

"5.The NLRB regularly reverses previous Board decisions.
Unlike courts of law, the Board does not treat previous decisions as precedent-setting. In fact, it reverses rulings of previous Boards with some regularity. Further, Board decisions are not subject to the debate, hearings, and media attention that accompany much federal legislation. NLRB decisions fly under most employers' radar.
6. U.S. labor law changes with each new or reversed Board decision.
Because Board decisions have the effect of law, the law changes with each reversal. In addition, a decision in one case changes the law for all covered workplaces. Unless employers realize this fact and track NLRB decisions closely, they easily and unwittingly may violate federal law.
7..
Some of Board Chair Liebman's desired changes include de-emphasizing employers' rights such as free speech, establishment of work rules, and access to employees; providing enhanced rights for temporary and contingent workers; enabling supervisors to join unions; broadening the definition of "protected activity;" allowing unions electronic access to employees (e.g., via employers' e-mail systems); and requiring employers to provide more extensive financial and operational information to unions."


Yep. The country is *crying* out for *more* unions, not more jobs. We need more rules, more review from govt. Yep. Thats *just* what the country needs.

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 9/4/2013 9:14:50 PM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 3:50:53 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
quote:

.
Pontificating horseshit is still pontificating horseshit. One should not lecture those who have knowledge as if you are in the same class. There aint a fucking thing that is in the air, and NLRB has no such rule and it is all asswipe, *very* *completely* asswipe.

Here's a direct quote from the NLRB "Otherwise, a union that receives a majority of the votes cast is certified as the employees' bargaining representative and entitled to be recognized by the employer as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees in the unit. Failure to bargain with the union at this point is an unfair labor practice."


Source of Information. When you quote stuff, its often implied to also note WHERE you got the information from.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Ie., intimidating employees into not voting is a vote for the union - just like I said.


Ie., intimidating employees into voting is a vote for the employer - just like you didn't say. The idea of a 'fair election' is one in which those voting are not intimidated or coarse to voting in a particular manner. Assuming that only unions try to intimidate employees down a particular course of action simply shows your bias on this whole discussion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Oh - and go read the new rules that up to 20% of the votes can be fraudulent...

Dims - so used to voting fraudulently in elections now insist on the same right to obtain union representation.


1. Where are the new rules that state this?
2. Your hatred for your fellow Americans is showing. Holy Cow! Just the sheer distrust and anger towards a group of people you do not even know should be enough of a clue for you to get some actual therapy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Or.......Go look up "micro-units" - where the unions are defining their work units arbitrarily small. Majority of the members don't want the union - redefine your membership class.


Yeah, if one minuses out the conservative bias in the article and sticks to the facts, it does seem like a good thing for Americans. Why are you so against something that is good for middle class America? SOURCE

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Unions have virtually unlimited amount of time to proselytize employees. Recent NLRB rules are decreasing the amount of time the employers have to respond.


The employer has the same time of access as the union if not more. The employer typically has better access to lawyers than unions do. Such a silly set of arguments.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
"5.The NLRB regularly reverses previous Board decisions.
Unlike courts of law, the Board does not treat previous decisions as precedent-setting. In fact, it reverses rulings of previous Boards with some regularity. Further, Board decisions are not subject to the debate, hearings, and media attention that accompany much federal legislation. NLRB decisions fly under most employers' radar.
6. U.S. labor law changes with each new or reversed Board decision.
Because Board decisions have the effect of law, the law changes with each reversal. In addition, a decision in one case changes the law for all covered workplaces. Unless employers realize this fact and track NLRB decisions closely, they easily and unwittingly may violate federal law.
7..
Some of Board Chair Liebman's desired changes include de-emphasizing employers' rights such as free speech, establishment of work rules, and access to employees; providing enhanced rights for temporary and contingent workers; enabling supervisors to join unions; broadening the definition of "protected activity;" allowing unions electronic access to employees (e.g., via employers' e-mail systems); and requiring employers to provide more extensive financial and operational information to unions."


And where does this all come from? Cite source, please. It sounds like some pathetic whacko rant that is typical of conservative talk radio shows.


(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 7:38:06 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

My mistake. I read it wrong. It does have to do with the majority of votes cast, not majority of membership.


Apology accepted.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 7:48:29 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

I used to support labor unions, and overall, I still support the basic concepts of workers' rights, fair wage/benefit packages, safe working conditions, etc. However, I think that organized labor has shown itself to be more of a liability than an asset to the remaining 90% of the workforce that hasn't been afforded the privilege of being part of a union.

What is it about unions that you do not like?


Everything.

Every encounter I've ever had with unions has been pure thuggery. Like trying to charge me $150 to screw in two incandescant lights in the Jarvis center.


How much would it cost to have an electrician come to your home and screw in two light bulb?


quote:

Like shutting down my school in order to pay janitors $25.63 an hour
"justice for janitors".

What is wrong with a janitor getting 25 dollars an hour?If you do not have a problem with how much money bill gates makes why do you whine about how much a janitor makes?

quote:

Like the Davis-Bacon act. Where anyone working on govt contracts must pay union rates, regardless of whether their workers are union or not.


Why is this a bad thing?

quote:


Unionization of govt workers is just a special interest sucking off the govt tit.

That would be a peurile ignorant opinion as opposed to the fact that unions help labor and that seems to offend those who would seek to return to slavery.




(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 7:56:14 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
That would be a peurile ignorant opinion as opposed to the fact that unions help labor and that seems to offend those who would seek to return to slavery.


Slavery? Is that the only argument you have in support of Unions?

Have a good day, Mr. Irrelevant.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 7:57:12 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie


DC, unions, as many have stated, had their purpose, and they provided that purpose well and good but, today unions are operated by thugs. They demand and extract tithes, much of which is spent on their gain....not yours.


That logic would require us to disband congress,are you in favor of that?

quote:

I won't go into the details...many would refute them (I lived them) for their own purposes....if a union would provide me with employees that could produce value in accord to their cost....I'd be all over it...but they can't, they don't and...they don't even try.


It is quite difficult to secure journeyman level labor for minimum wage. Are you in favor of a minimum wage? If not then that would be prima facia evidence that you wish to hire labor for less than minimum wage...unions were created to deal with scum like that.

quote:

I've told this story before but,



It was a bullshit story the first time and it has not got any better with the repeated telling.



quote:

Unions don't give a shit about you...they give a shit about unions.

You ain't the union....you are nothing more than a cog.

(Who are more often than not...in the way).


So labor would be better off without a union to negotiate for them?
That worked out not so well in the past why do you think it will do better now?


< Message edited by thompsonx -- 9/5/2013 7:58:11 AM >

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 7:59:51 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
That logic would require us to disband congress,are you in favor of that?


Smartass Answer: Yes. Yes. A thousand times, yes!

Real answer: Unions and Government are not the same, and should never be consider the same.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:01:49 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
That would be a peurile ignorant opinion as opposed to the fact that unions help labor and that seems to offend those who would seek to return to slavery.


Slavery? Is that the only argument you have in support of Unions?

Have a good day, Mr. Irrelevant.


When management dictates wages and work conditions that is the definition of slavery.
Mr irrelevant?????I realize that name calling,for some,is the highest level of intelectual discourse.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:08:45 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
That logic would require us to disband congress,are you in favor of that?


Smartass Answer: Yes. Yes. A thousand times, yes!


The smart ass answer would signify a lack of confidence in the u.s.....an extremely ignorant position but believable given the lack of preperation exhibited.

quote:

Real answer: Unions and Government are not the same, and should never be consider the same.


My remark, had it been read and understood,addressed the relationship of corruption in the union to the corruption in the congress. If corruption is the criteria for disbanding a union then the same criteria applies to all bodies both private and public.
Only a dullard could have missed that.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:17:01 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
That would be a peurile ignorant opinion as opposed to the fact that unions help labor and that seems to offend those who would seek to return to slavery.

Slavery? Is that the only argument you have in support of Unions?
Have a good day, Mr. Irrelevant.

When management dictates wages and work conditions that is the definition of slavery.
Mr irrelevant?????I realize that name calling,for some,is the highest level of intelectual discourse.


Actually, since management owns the factory and business, they do have some say over the wages and work conditions. Slavery isn't really just management dictating those. Slavery (in a non-BDSM context) isn't exactly something you can simply walk away from if you don't like the wages or conditions.

If you want a business to pay $X/hr. and grant Y level of benefits, feel free to start a business and offer both. If you're offer is better than what other businesses are offering, you'll have all the applicants and talent you want. And, if your product can compete in the Market, then you'll be quite the success. And, oddly enough, your competition will increase their wages and/or benefits package to regain the talent you've lured away from them.

That is how the Market works. If a person is willing to work for $Z/hour and can't get hired at $X/hr., why are you willing to remove that choice?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:20:09 AM   
sloguy02246


Posts: 534
Joined: 11/5/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
That would be a peurile ignorant opinion as opposed to the fact that unions help labor and that seems to offend those who would seek to return to slavery.


Slavery? Is that the only argument you have in support of Unions?

Have a good day, Mr. Irrelevant.


When management dictates wages and work conditions that is the definition of slavery.
Mr irrelevant?????I realize that name calling,for some,is the highest level of intelectual discourse.



Sorry, but that is not really slavery, because after management dictates their terms for wages and working conditions, an employee can refuse those terms and quit. A slave does not get to quit.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:33:04 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
That logic would require us to disband congress,are you in favor of that?

Smartass Answer: Yes. Yes. A thousand times, yes!

The smart ass answer would signify a lack of confidence in the u.s.....an extremely ignorant position but believable given the lack of preperation exhibited.


Sorry you missed the sarcasm (figured labeling it a "Smartass answer" while also labeling the other one "Real answer" would have been the big tip off; guess I'll have to make it more obvious for some).

quote:

quote:

Real answer: Unions and Government are not the same, and should never be consider the same.

My remark, had it been read and understood,addressed the relationship of corruption in the union to the corruption in the congress. If corruption is the criteria for disbanding a union then the same criteria applies to all bodies both private and public.
Only a dullard could have missed that.


Oh, I understood what you were saying. But, many people see government as a "necessary evil." The lack of government would lead to significant strides towards anarchy. Government is necessary. Unions were necessary. Much of what Unions originally fought for have been coded into labor regulations. Ending Unions won't repeal those regulations.



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:36:03 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Much of what unions fight for is not coded into law as well. So, that is a false premise.


A living wage, and of course we dont see much of that in corporate controlled America.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:37:16 AM   
JeffBC


Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Slavery? Is that the only argument you have in support of Unions?

Sign me up for irrelevance then because I think that connection is pretty obvious. In this day & age of corporatism it seems to me that labor had better get it's act together because capital surely has. You are aware, right, that corporations lie, cheat, and steal from their employees with impunity. They both break the law and bend it in ways which are astonishing. Even worse, they write the freakin laws.

So you tell me... if not organized labor then where is the fight going to come from? Or is it that you believe in corporatism and the unfettered power of... well... power.


_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:47:39 AM   
hlen5


Posts: 5890
Joined: 3/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri


.....................I read an op ed within the last 1½ years that pointed out that much of the reason Unions of today have less clout and membership today, is because much of what they originally were fighting for has been written into US Code. How do you fight for safe work conditions when you, for the most part, have safe work conditions (compared to the 30's)? There is "less" to work for nowadays. For the most part, the only things left are wages and benefits. That's why negotiations are primarily centered on those two things.



I agree with this. Unions have been declining for some time. So have average worker wages relative to the growth of the economy overall.

ETA: And to stick with the OP, If the working conditions are so prime, why can't the growers get a majority of signatures? It sounds as if they are fair with the workers, but why not a majority of de-certifying signatures?


< Message edited by hlen5 -- 9/5/2013 8:49:53 AM >


_____________________________



My fave Thread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_2626198/mpage_1/tm.htm

One time "Phallus Expert Extraordinaire"

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:51:36 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
Much of what unions fight for is not coded into law as well. So, that is a false premise.
A living wage, and of course we dont see much of that in corporate controlled America.


True, but that's not what I wrote, either. I wrote, "Much of what Unions originally fought for..."

What Unions are fighting for now and what they originally fought for are quite different.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:54:06 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

Oh, I understood what you were saying. But, many people see government as a "necessary evil." The lack of government would lead to significant strides towards anarchy. Government is necessary. Unions were necessary. Much of what Unions originally fought for have been coded into labor regulations. Ending Unions won't repeal those regulations.
[/quote]

What have you seen in the behavior of management that would indicate to you that unions are no longer necessary?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? - 9/5/2013 8:56:01 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Unions were necessary.
Much of what Unions originally fought for have been coded into labor regulations.

Unions are necessary. That was the point.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Yeah, Do you think this is a good idea? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.109