Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And once again we learn two things:
Those in favor of unions invoke a lost world that will never return to scare people into accepting their views.
Jillian and Juniorbert have nothing of substance to contribute and cannot sustain a debate without turning it into a name-call-fest.
Thanks. Mods, please close the thread.
The workers who are employed in those industries understand the conditions of their workplace. They are the ones who get to choose whether they want union representation or not.
I am not surprised you are giving up and self declaring victory so soon. I have yet to see you defend those mine owners in Kentuky and West Virginia who blocked unions from their sites.
I would give up if I were you also
WTF are you babbling about, again?
Someone with your track record doesn't need to go around giving advice.
Unions have consistently lost elections, thus the push for "card check" legislation now.
But my question is why do we need these illegal relics at all? They would not pass muster under any anti trust law. They seem to do nothing but concentrate power in the hands of leadership and ergo politicians, who then pretend to be out for "the little guy."
That is not the case with unions, where a better-educated workforce combined with better information dissemination makes unions obsolete.
See the difference?
yea i see it......"hey boss i need a raise"......well go find a better job....."hey boss this structure over here is unsafe"......well be careful then.....yea i see the difference....
Managment has used the "If you don't like it, find work elsewhere" for generations it was used to justify low wages, unsafe working conditions, discrimination.
Collective bargaining allows the workers to say "We will all look elsewhere"
First Amendment Freedom of Association! (unless or until you associate to promote higher wages and safer working conditions for the middle class - then you're a commie)
WTF are babbling about incoherently again?
It has nothing to do with 1A. Nada.
Guess again, Einstein.
I really liked the "just because you got your ass kicked..." line. It seems somehow appropriate here as well.
Of course, I'm not "babbling incoherently". You're just too stupid to digest what I wrote. let's try it in simpler terms:
The first amendment to the Constitution was part of the first attempt to change the Constitution. In the case of the first amendment, the change was to prevent government from passing laws banning certain activities. One of those activities was the freedom to associate - for instance, to organize or to gather. If you weren't so stupid, you would realize that the freedom of association includes the freedom of individual employees to organize to protect and promote their interests - also known as unionizing.
if any of those words are too big, let me know.
That is not the case with unions, where a better-educated workforce combined with better information dissemination makes unions obsolete.
See the difference?
yea i see it......"hey boss i need a raise"......well go find a better job....."hey boss this structure over here is unsafe"......well be careful then.....yea i see the difference....
Managment has used the "If you don't like it, find work elsewhere" for generations it was used to justify low wages, unsafe working conditions, discrimination.
Collective bargaining allows the workers to say "We will all look elsewhere"
WTF are babbling about incoherently again?
It has nothing to do with 1A. Nada.
Guess again, Einstein.
I really liked the "just because you got your ass kicked..." line. It seems somehow appropriate here as well.
Of course, I'm not "babbling incoherently". You're just too stupid to digest what I wrote. let's try it in simpler terms:
The first amendment to the Constitution was part of the first attempt to change the Constitution. In the case of the first amendment, the change was to prevent government from passing laws banning certain activities. One of those activities was the freedom to associate - for instance, to organize or to gather. If you weren't so stupid, you would realize that the freedom of association includes the freedom of individual employees to organize to protect and promote their interests - also known as unionizing.
if any of those words are too big, let me know.
Combinations in restraint of trade are illegal. Unions are such combinations. There is no protection for such a thing. Nor are unions merely for the purpose of "association". Rather they exist to represent every worker in a workplace and negotiate on his behalf. That is not a 1A right.
If any of that is too confusing to you, consult Jillian, who is a lawyer about like you are a debater.
yea i see it......"hey boss i need a raise"......well go find a better job....."hey boss this structure over here is unsafe"......well be careful then.....yea i see the difference....
Managment has used the "If you don't like it, find work elsewhere" for generations it was used to justify low wages, unsafe working conditions, discrimination.
Collective bargaining allows the workers to say "We will all look elsewhere"
As is their right. It would be great if people could recognize not just the good that unions do but the harm that they do as well. Likewise for employers. There are millions of good, decent, honest employers across this country. As I said, neither side has right on its side.
Managment has used the "If you don't like it, find work elsewhere" for generations it was used to justify low wages, unsafe working conditions, discrimination.
Collective bargaining allows the workers to say "We will all look elsewhere"
As is their right. It would be great if people could recognize not just the good that unions do but the harm that they do as well. Likewise for employers. There are millions of good, decent, honest employers across this country. As I said, neither side has right on its side.
Absolutely
There has to be a balance between the strength of management and the strength of labor. Our history has horror stories on both sides
I really liked the "just because you got your ass kicked..." line. It seems somehow appropriate here as well.
Of course, I'm not "babbling incoherently". You're just too stupid to digest what I wrote. let's try it in simpler terms:
The first amendment to the Constitution was part of the first attempt to change the Constitution. In the case of the first amendment, the change was to prevent government from passing laws banning certain activities. One of those activities was the freedom to associate - for instance, to organize or to gather. If you weren't so stupid, you would realize that the freedom of association includes the freedom of individual employees to organize to protect and promote their interests - also known as unionizing.
if any of those words are too big, let me know.
Combinations in restraint of trade are illegal. Unions are such combinations. There is no protection for such a thing. Nor are unions merely for the purpose of "association". Rather they exist to represent every worker in a workplace and negotiate on his behalf. That is not a 1A right.
If any of that is too confusing to you, consult Jillian, who is a lawyer about like you are a debater.
You know the drill, you're making the claim unions violate existing antitrust law. Please provide US Code reference for your statement.
Thank you in advance.
As is their right. It would be great if people could recognize not just the good that unions do but the harm that they do as well. Likewise for employers. There are millions of good, decent, honest employers across this country. As I said, neither side has right on its side.
Absolutely
There has to be a balance between the strength of management and the strength of labor. Our history has horror stories on both sides
Which goes back to the fact that the entire reason for labor unions is to provide equality in negotiations between labor and management. And negotiations where both sides have approximately equal power are always going to yield the best results.
It's all about balance.
Combinations in restraint of trade are illegal. Unions are such combinations. There is no protection for such a thing. Nor are unions merely for the purpose of "association". Rather they exist to represent every worker in a workplace and negotiate on his behalf. That is not a 1A right.
If any of that is too confusing to you, consult Jillian, who is a lawyer about like you are a debater.
You know the drill, you're making the claim unions violate existing antitrust law. Please provide US Code reference for your statement.
Thank you in advance.
Clayton Act of 1914.
Thanks, "counselor".
Absolutely
There has to be a balance between the strength of management and the strength of labor. Our history has horror stories on both sides
Which goes back to the fact that the entire reason for labor unions is to provide equality in negotiations between labor and management. And negotiations where both sides have approximately equal power are always going to yield the best results.
It's all about balance.
I don't understand that point.
An employer is offering a job for a given wage.
An employee is offering his labor for a given wage.
They negotiate and come to an agreement based on many factors, including and especially "is this the best deal I can get?" Pretty much like anything else.
Do you ask for representation when you buy a car from a dealer? This is so even though the dealer is in a much stronger position than you are.
And once again we learn two things:
Those in favor of unions invoke a lost world that will never return to scare people into accepting their views.
Jillian and Juniorbert have nothing of substance to contribute and cannot sustain a debate without turning it into a name-call-fest.
Thanks. Mods, please close the thread.
WTF are babbling about incoherently again?
It has nothing to do with 1A. Nada.
Guess again, Einstein.
I really liked the "just because you got your ass kicked..." line. It seems somehow appropriate here as well.
Of course, I'm not "babbling incoherently". You're just too stupid to digest what I wrote. let's try it in simpler terms:
The first amendment to the Constitution was part of the first attempt to change the Constitution. In the case of the first amendment, the change was to prevent government from passing laws banning certain activities. One of those activities was the freedom to associate - for instance, to organize or to gather. If you weren't so stupid, you would realize that the freedom of association includes the freedom of individual employees to organize to protect and promote their interests - also known as unionizing.
if any of those words are too big, let me know.
Combinations in restraint of trade are illegal. Unions are such combinations.
There is no protection for such a thing. Nor are unions merely for the purpose of "association". Rather they exist to represent every worker in a workplace and negotiate on his behalf. That is not a 1A right.
I really liked the "just because you got your ass kicked..." line. It seems somehow appropriate here as well.
Of course, I'm not "babbling incoherently". You're just too stupid to digest what I wrote. let's try it in simpler terms:
The first amendment to the Constitution was part of the first attempt to change the Constitution. In the case of the first amendment, the change was to prevent government from passing laws banning certain activities. One of those activities was the freedom to associate - for instance, to organize or to gather. If you weren't so stupid, you would realize that the freedom of association includes the freedom of individual employees to organize to protect and promote their interests - also known as unionizing.
if any of those words are too big, let me know.
Combinations in restraint of trade are illegal. Unions are such combinations.
First of all, combinations in restraint of trade are certainly not illegal- They happen every day.
Second, this isn't a "combination in restraint of trade".
There is no protection for such a thing. Nor are unions merely for the purpose of "association". Rather they exist to represent every worker in a workplace and negotiate on his behalf. That is not a 1A right.
It's the right to associate.
You should go back to calling women hookers and whores...
As is their right. It would be great if people could recognize not just the good that unions do but the harm that they do as well. Likewise for employers. There are millions of good, decent, honest employers across this country. As I said, neither side has right on its side.
Why is that argument wrong? Why is it any more wrong than "I don't like this product or service so I will buy it elsewhere"?
Unsafe working conditions are illegal. Discrimination is illegal. One does not need unions for this. Nor were unions helpful here, promoting discrimination more than fighting it.
And why should one worker who is satisfied with his wages and benefits be compelled to quit his job just because some other worker is not satisfied?
In the IT world workers move all the time to companies offering better pay/benefits. And they don't need a union to do it, nor do they work under 19th century conditions.
Why is that argument wrong? Why is it any more wrong than "I don't like this product or service so I will buy it elsewhere"?
Unsafe working conditions are illegal. Discrimination is illegal. One does not need unions for this. Nor were unions helpful here, promoting discrimination more than fighting it.
And why should one worker who is satisfied with his wages and benefits be compelled to quit his job just because some other worker is not satisfied?
In the IT world workers move all the time to companies offering better pay/benefits. And they don't need a union to do it, nor do they work under 19th century conditions.
work for the PO Rabbi.....you will be glad you have a Union.....they are not the greatest Union....but they do get on the PO when they violate the Contract they signed,they do get on them when they try and ignore safety concerns,they do get on the managers who seem to think they can treat people like shit.....in the PO the list is fairly extensive....but basically in the PO Middle and Upper Managers will attempt to violate anything they can to get their numbers they need so they can get their fucking bonuses....the Unions are the only thing standing in their way....
You know what's so funny about the last two posts?
Workers need to be protected by unions from the government...not industry.
