GOP introduces national right-to-work legislation

[danielpalos]

Should fools and horses Have to work, under the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World?

 

[ding]

Fools and horses are British.

Only Fools and Horses - Wikipedia

 

[danielpalos]

Fools and horses are British.

Only Fools and Horses - Wikipedia

Just right wing fantasy, like usual:

That name was based on a genuine, though very obscure, saying, "only fools and horses work for a living", which had its origins in 19th-century American vaudeville.

 

[ding]

 

[danielpalos]

We have the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World; true capitalist economies, simply can't compete, even if they tried (with a work ethic from the Age of Iron).

 

[Harry Dresden]

....Conclusion: You are required by law to treat non-members the same as members when it comes to applying and enforcing the labor-management agreement. However, regarding issues that can be raised in a forum other than the negotiated grievance procedure you can restrict representation to members only . If you doubt what I say I urge you to check with a labor attorney.

Belief or non-belief is irrelevant. There is no circumstance where I would represent a non-paying member. I don't believe there are any other Stewards or Union Leaders in the Union who would either. I'd lose my job over it, thank you very much.

It's not just about you. If management fires an employee without just cause and you refuse to file a grievance on his behalf because he is not a union member, what do you think will happen? I will tell you. He will sue your union and your union will lose.

Look, I don't give a royal fuck what happens to you personally if you disobey the law. You're an adult and you are willing to face the consequences of your actions and I find that admirable. However, when your ego-driven personal agenda puts your own union at risk I have a problem.

At any rate, I did my best to inform you what the law says and I am done with you and this thread.

i was a member of the NALC in the PO and that's the way it was with them; you had to defend the non union guys or you will have a problem...........

If the letter carriers have the right to strike, there's no excuse for not doing that in order to exclude the scabs from all contracted benefits and pay raises.

cant strike....you sign a paper when you get hired stating you understand you cant....what i seen through my time there is a lot of the grievances filed were by non-union people....one jerk in particular,he would bad mouth the union,but had a grievance going against management every other month...guy was a real piece of work....

 

[Harry Dresden]

i dont know what PO you are talking about but the one i worked in you had a route to do in hopefully 8 hours and if you gave it 60% you were no longer a carrier......

So you had to give 61% whoop di doo!

Every post office I've ever been has employees moving at the same rate of slow motion. There can be no people in line behind you or twenty with two stations open. Give them a ticket for a certified letter, and their stroll is the same for both.

This is what plays next to the practice treadmill.

im talking carrier....you give 60% you are not carrying mail,you would never get a route done even on the easy days....

 

[ding]

We have the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World; true capitalist economies, simply can't compete, even if they tried (with a work ethic from the Age of Iron).

 

[baileyn45]

I wonder if said unions decided to give people a chance to support if they wanted. I'd be very happy with unions if they did that, in fact, I could even maybe support unions as a 'good' influence instead of a 'bad' one if they'd agree to voluntary participation of their members.

That's not the way a Union works. Despite the English spelling, there is no "I" in Union. There is a "We". Take that away and suddenly the whole Union no longer works.

Imagine a workplace where 8 people supposedly have the same job. 4 of them are members of a Union, and have rules about what they can/can't do. The other 4 are not bound by those rules. How efficiently do you think that dep as recent is going to work? Not very well, as I see it.

That doesn't make sense, work rules should be set by the company not the union. There in lies the problem with unions, they not only want to "organize" the workers, they want to dictate to the employer.

 

[hadit]

I wonder if said unions decided to give people a chance to support if they wanted. I'd be very happy with unions if they did that, in fact, I could even maybe support unions as a 'good' influence instead of a 'bad' one if they'd agree to voluntary participation of their members.

That's not the way a Union works. Despite the English spelling, there is no "I" in Union. There is a "We". Take that away and suddenly the whole Union no longer works.

Imagine a workplace where 8 people supposedly have the same job. 4 of them are members of a Union, and have rules about what they can/can't do. The other 4 are not bound by those rules. How efficiently do you think that dep as recent is going to work? Not very well, as I see it.

That doesn't make sense, work rules should be set by the company not the union. There in lies the problem with unions, they not only want to "organize" the workers, they want to dictate to the employer.

Unions should just go the next step and become contractors. Employ the workers themselves, pay them salaries, pay for their benefits and pensions, pay their payroll taxes, handle all their gripes, and charge the company a flat fee for their services.

 

[EverCurious]

I suspect workers will want to see what happens with ACA repeal/reform before they try that. As it stands right now contracted workers are exempt from employer coverage under ACA -- The newspaper up here immediately turned all of their carriers into "independent contractors" so they didn't get slammed by the ACA mandate when it was passed.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I dont accept that opinion as valid. And in any case the opposite of that is a race to the bottom where everything is made by Chinese and Bangladeshi toddlers.
In effect the sick society that you and your ilk whine about 24/7.
You are conflicted sir.

That's what has been happening more and more so your theory needs work.

As usual you miss the point in spectacular fashion.

Jobs go overseas because the corporations feed off inequality and not because unions fight for a fairer slice of the pie.
If the world was more equal then you would not feel the need to build this ridiculous wall.

If the world was more equal you'd be paying a lot more for everything.

Not necessarily. If the world was more equal then ,for example, Africa would become an important market and we would sell more to them. We would all benefit.

And the man would not be able to play off Mexican against American in order to depress wages.

And most importantly the world would be a better place to live.

Most certainly you would pay more for everything. That's not even controversial. Where do you think Africans would get the money to afford our goods and services? From higher prices for their goods, of course.

Are they not entitled to the lifestyle that you enjoy ?

 

[hadit]

That's what has been happening more and more so your theory needs work.

As usual you miss the point in spectacular fashion.

Jobs go overseas because the corporations feed off inequality and not because unions fight for a fairer slice of the pie.
If the world was more equal then you would not feel the need to build this ridiculous wall.

If the world was more equal you'd be paying a lot more for everything.

Not necessarily. If the world was more equal then ,for example, Africa would become an important market and we would sell more to them. We would all benefit.

And the man would not be able to play off Mexican against American in order to depress wages.

And most importantly the world would be a better place to live.

Most certainly you would pay more for everything. That's not even controversial. Where do you think Africans would get the money to afford our goods and services? From higher prices for their goods, of course.

Are they not entitled to the lifestyle that you enjoy ?

Is anyone entitled to any kind of lifestyle?

While you ponder that, consider how rapidly things would equalize if American style freedom were to be universal. Many African nations are rich in natural resources and their people could be much more well off without their despotic leadership.

 

[Anathema]

That doesn't make sense, work rules should be set by the company not the union. There in lies the problem with unions, they not only want to "organize" the workers, they want to dictate to the employer.

Work Rules are set by negotiations between the Company and the Union. It's called a Contract. There are additional Rules for conduct and activity laid out in the bylaws of the Union, that affect all Union members.

Does that clarify what I'm talking about for you?

 

[danielpalos]

We have the Best form of Socialism in the Entire World; true capitalist economies, simply can't compete, even if they tried (with a work ethic from the Age of Iron).

Just national socialist, right wing fantasy?

 

[baileyn45]

That doesn't make sense, work rules should be set by the company not the union. There in lies the problem with unions, they not only want to "organize" the workers, they want to dictate to the employer.

Work Rules are set by negotiations between the Company and the Union. It's called a Contract. There are additional Rules for conduct and activity laid out in the bylaws of the Union, that affect all Union members.

Does that clarify what I'm talking about for you?

As some one who runs a business I shudder at the thought of negotiating work rules with a union. I need bureaucrats like I need a hole in the head. It usually ends up like an old friend told me years ago. He worked for Local 410. What does the 410 stand for? 4 guys doing the work of 1 accomplishing nothing.

 

[Mr Natural]

As some one who runs a business I shudder at the thought of negotiating work rules with a union. I need bureaucrats like I need a hole in the head. It usually ends up like an old friend told me years ago. He worked for Local 410. What does the 410 stand for? 4 guys doing the work of 1 accomplishing nothing.

Treat your employees with a bit of respect and they won't be looking to organize.

 

[baileyn45]

As some one who runs a business I shudder at the thought of negotiating work rules with a union. I need bureaucrats like I need a hole in the head. It usually ends up like an old friend told me years ago. He worked for Local 410. What does the 410 stand for? 4 guys doing the work of 1 accomplishing nothing.

Treat your employees with a bit of respect and they won't be looking to organize.

Already done. My people make more than their union counterparts and they're not paying the union. It's nice, I don't have to worry about a union coming in, my employees would run them out the door. I guess watching union shop after union shop go belly up while we're still there works very well. And the difference between my shop and the union shops wasn't about pay, it was work rules. I've never had an employee say to me "not my job".

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I wonder if said unions decided to give people a chance to support if they wanted. I'd be very happy with unions if they did that, in fact, I could even maybe support unions as a 'good' influence instead of a 'bad' one if they'd agree to voluntary participation of their members.

That's not the way a Union works. Despite the English spelling, there is no "I" in Union. There is a "We". Take that away and suddenly the whole Union no longer works.

Imagine a workplace where 8 people supposedly have the same job. 4 of them are members of a Union, and have rules about what they can/can't do. The other 4 are not bound by those rules. How efficiently do you think that dep as recent is going to work? Not very well, as I see it.

That doesn't make sense, work rules should be set by the company not the union. There in lies the problem with unions, they not only want to "organize" the workers, they want to dictate to the employer.

Owners Aren't Earners

It's a team, not a one-man show. You're only defiant when going against your fellow workers, not in standing up to the boss's treatment of you like a Cash Cow. So you have to come on like a superbossy tough guy to cover up your cowardice as you slavishly bootlick your Lord and Master. You're making Capitalism into a totalitarian religion. Communism is State Capitalism, and Capitalism is Communism for the rich.

 

[baileyn45]

I wonder if said unions decided to give people a chance to support if they wanted. I'd be very happy with unions if they did that, in fact, I could even maybe support unions as a 'good' influence instead of a 'bad' one if they'd agree to voluntary participation of their members.

That's not the way a Union works. Despite the English spelling, there is no "I" in Union. There is a "We". Take that away and suddenly the whole Union no longer works.

Imagine a workplace where 8 people supposedly have the same job. 4 of them are members of a Union, and have rules about what they can/can't do. The other 4 are not bound by those rules. How efficiently do you think that dep as recent is going to work? Not very well, as I see it.

That doesn't make sense, work rules should be set by the company not the union. There in lies the problem with unions, they not only want to "organize" the workers, they want to dictate to the employer.

Owners Aren't Earners

It's a team, not a one-man show. You're only defiant when going against your fellow workers, not in standing up to the boss's treatment of you like a Cash Cow. So you have to come on like a superbossy tough guy to cover up your cowardice as you slavishly bootlick your Lord and Master. You're making Capitalism into a totalitarian religion. Communism is State Capitalism, and Capitalism is Communism for the rich.

I am the boss, Lord and Master. And I earn everything I get. I work longer hours than anyone, I take all the risks and I'm responsible for all. So save me the Obama crap that "I didn't build that". I built everything except the building, that I bought and paid for.

You sound like the typical leftwinger, anyone that owns a business is sitting around doing nothing and collecting the money. Some of us work our asses off and will apologize to no one.