Page 13 of 124 FirstFirst ... 311121314152363113 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 1237

Thread: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers[W:702:1041]

  1. #121
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    There is information that is widely considered private, such as medical information or unlisted phone numbers. A persons name, where they work and whether they paid union dues is not considered confidential information and there are numerous ways to obtain that information that are not difficult. I don't support vandalism, threats or violence against scabs, but there is nothing wrong with criticizing, shunning and embarrassing them.

  2. #122
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,156

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Ah. My apologies. I thought it was more a rhetorical question (with an assumption already present as to the "why") as opposed to honest. My bad.
    Love the new avatar.
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  3. #123
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,974

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by d0gbreath View Post
    It says in the OP link that it is so that their union co-workers can explain to them how wonderful solidarity is, and try to encourage them to sign up.

    Of course, everyone goes immediately off the rails and assumes persecution of the listed.
    Well I think immedietely jumping to initimidation is a stretch.

    But would you not agree d0gbreath that a concerted effort by multiple union members to continually pressure them about the benefits of being part of a union would concievably be "unwanted" pressure for someone whose expressed their desire NOT to be part of the union, and thus could reasonable be considered an organized effort of harassment?

    I don't think it's a stretch to state that someone whose expressed a desire to NOT be part of the union has no desire to hear about the importance of "solidarity" with said union.

  4. #124
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-17 @ 06:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    15,248

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Why? How does this knowledge help you in any way?

    Do you want it simply to know? Or do you want it to treat them in a different manner because they're "screwing you" as you put it?
    Because I would know who I could trust and who I could count on. And who would have my back. Do I want to treat them differently because they are screwing me? You bet your ass.
    "Groups with guitars are on the way out, Mr. Epstein"

    Dick Rowe, A & R man
    Decca Records
    London, 1962

  5. #125
    Sage


    eohrnberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,864
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by RedAkston View Post
    Pressure tactics: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers | Fox News



    The last line is bolded for emphasis. These are the tactics that unions use and it's plain wrong. I dare anyone to defend what the union is doing here with a straight face.
    Just the union using unions muscle to get what they want. This sort of thing has been happening in unions shops since the first days of the unions. Why is ANYONE surprised by this? That's the real question.

    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    Well, there's no personal infomration, just their neams and department numbers; SCAB LIST So it looks like Fox News is lying again.

    Frankly, I think those people should be shamed.
    Personal information on the list itself is irrelevant. Everyone knows 'Joe over in machining' (or whatever department), and these unions members that'll probably follow them home and write down that address to be shared next day at work. There's no need for the union to publish any of it. It'll be easily obtained.

    The scabs list is little more than a wink and a nod from the union to it's members to apply pressure and have these scabs either fall in line with the union or leave.

    The same can be said for the Card Check legislation the unions want to get passed.

    Card check (also called majority sign-up) is a method for American employees to organize into a labor union in which a majority of employees in a bargaining unit sign authorization forms, or "cards," stating they wish to be represented by the union. Since the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) became law in 1935, majority sign-up has been an alternative to the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) election process. Majority sign-up and election are both overseen by the National Labor Relations Board. The difference is that with card sign-up, employees sign authorization cards stating they want a union, the cards are submitted to the NLRB and if more than 50% of the employees submitted cards, the NLRB requires the employer to recognize the union. The NLRA election process is an additional step with the NLRB conducting a secret ballot election after authorization cards are submitted. In both cases the employer never sees the authorization cards or any information that would disclose how individual employees voted.
    Card check - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    You can easily imagine the thuggery that goes on to get those cards signed in back alleys. Secret ballot would be far more fair and honest method, IMHO.

    It puzzles me that the left is so supportive, tolerant and even encouraging of union thugs bullying people who just trying to make an honest days wages, when they are totally up in arms and nearly to tears about similar bullying in the schools for example.
    the Fix-is-in Bureau of Investigation

  6. #126
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,974

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggen View Post
    Except, of course, that the reason the employer does all of these things is because of the union.
    Which I've stated multiple times may very well be the case in most instances

    But that's irrelevant to the point of who PROVIDES those things.

    All pointing that out does is act as a diversion. If someone says "The employer is the one providing the benefits" and someone goes "No they don't, that's the union" that's just simply wrong. The union doesn't PROVIDE it. They may be the impetus for WHY the employer provided it...but it's still the employer providing it.

  7. #127
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,156

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by d0gbreath View Post
    It says in the OP link that it is so that their union co-workers can explain to them how wonderful solidarity is, and try to encourage them to sign up.

    Of course, everyone goes immediately off the rails and assumes persecution of the listed.
    Thanks. So they publish the name so the other workers can pressure them.

    I've never worked in a union shop so I have no idea what it's like. I do work for a very large corporation as a middle-tier manager and I'd be pretty bull**** if senior management or anyone else published my name with the instructions to my co-workers to encourage me to do something that I, as a grown up, could decide to do on my own. JMO.
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  8. #128
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    You seek to dismiss the tactic by restricting discussion to just this one use ignoring the fact that this [pressure tactics on member, I suppose] is a general tactic used by unions since their inception. [...]
    While the OP may present one instance of that, he -- and you -- have yet to make the general tactic argument that you claim. Demonizing your opponent is simply mud slinging, not reasoned discussion.

    Now speaking in general terms, "pressure tactics" are used by pretty much everyone everywhere, so it becomes a matter of degree and comparison. Generally speaking, unions use pressure tactics against employers and employers use pressure tactics against unions. I suppose you could also say that unions use pressure tactics against scabs and employers use pressure tactics against union members/organizers. So again it becomes a matter of degree and comparison (and I am certainly not saying that two wrongs make a right).

    In the case presented by the OP, I'm not sure that I condone the listing of the names, but I am sure it does not rise to the level of offense that it is being dishonestly portrayed by many in this thread. Therefore my main issue is the defective/dishonest arguments presented... if you remove all those, plus all the personal attacks, there hasn't been all that much discussion of the OP (and probably well over half the posts would disappear).

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Name and shame, with more than a little violence thrown in is an old, old union tactic that precedes so many of the posters here.
    Well, see, there ya go -- there is no violence in this case, but by heaping it on anyway you simply discredit yourself. As they say in politics, that may excite the base but it isn't going to win you any converts.

  9. #129
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Fair share? You mean being forced to pay union dues when you don't want to belong to one? That's your idea of fair share? Well, we disagree. IMO, the company ought to pay its nonunion workforce 50-cents an hour more and exempt them from work rules. They'd be quittin' that union in droves. Now that's union busting I could get behind.

    I don't need a union. I don't want a union. And forcing me or coercing me into paying their dues is little more than extortion.
    Then don't take a job with a union shop. The workers at that business made sacrifices and worked hard to get that union, a contract and its benefits and if you aren't willing to pay for your share for the benefits that resulted from their efforts you are a freeloader.

    Employers have tried paying non-union workers more and it has probably succeeded in destroying some unions. The problem is that without a union the employer has no incentive to maintain those wages or benefits that were artificially, and perhaps only temporarily, raised to bust the union.
    Last edited by Hard Truth; 10-10-14 at 02:40 PM.

  10. #130
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    There is information that is widely considered private, such as medical information or unlisted phone numbers. A persons name, where they work and whether they paid union dues is not considered confidential information and there are numerous ways to obtain that information that are not difficult. I don't support vandalism, threats or violence against scabs, but there is nothing wrong with criticizing, shunning and embarrassing them.
    Isn't posting scabs names, addresses and phone numbers implying a threat when a strike is occurring? It's to convince the scab to not cross the picket line and in order to achieve that goal doesn't there have to be some implied threat or retaliation for such an act? Telling union members what address to go to is a clear implied threat, no?
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •