• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

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

Is there a strong African-American base in the Union?
Is that the only thing the AG is supposed to be concerned with?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

For the purposes of debate, your personal anecdotes are irrelevant.

Yes, I agree. Your personal anecdotes are irrelevant. :lamo
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Would you be willing to explain your claim that the term "scab" has a violent undertone?

I will concede that it is not complimentary, and is indeed derogatory, but I'd be interested to see you try to explain the violence component. Based on experience, I will not be holding my breath ;)

Ask your union buddies the origin of the word. It's from the 30s, the developing unions, and they are called scabs because you pick them off.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

His point still stands. While the union may've been the impetus for the benefits by convincing/forcing the employer into providing them....ultimately it is still the employer providing those benefits.
No, it doesn't... in fact it falls far outside conventional wisdom. You should read that link too.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

No, it doesn't... in fact it falls far outside conventional wisdom. You should read that link too.

Based on your posting history here, it's quite apparent that you don't know what conventional wisdom is. But keep on trying, I'm rooting for you to make a valid point by the time you get to 10,000 posts.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

She doesn't pay any sales tax? Come on, Maggie... some posts in this thread are part of a fast-and-furious mission to deceive, don't get caught up in the whirlwind . . . . .

There are two states without sales taxes you know.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Not shocked, unions are full of libs and libs are disgusting vile people
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Ask your union buddies the origin of the word. It's from the 30s, the developing unions, and they are called scabs because you pick them off.
I can hardly keep up with the misinformation in this thread:

Word Origin and History for scab
n.
[...] Meaning "strikebreaker" first recorded 1806, from earlier sense of "person who refuses to join a trade union" (1777), probably from meaning "despicable person" (1580s), possibly borrowed in this sense from Middle Dutch.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
scab. Dictionary.com. Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper, Historian. Scab | Define Scab at Dictionary.com (accessed: October 10, 2014).
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

That said, I would address the OP as supposition. As there have been no known evils perpetrated upon anyone on the scab list, this is much ado about nothing.

Agree here. I think it's poor form and unethical for the Union to label individuals as a negative entity and then provide PII on those individuals, but I don't think it's inherently a big news worthy story. It helps to make an issue more probable, but it doens't cause the issue. If there are actual instances of harassment or intimidation, then it becomes more of a story.

Though the seeming "ends justify the means" attitude by some on here and the outright disdain and actual seeming tacit support of harassment/intimidation if it were to happen was rather shocking. As were those who needed to have such a knee jerk reaction as to claim that clear and blatant things were somehow anything but.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I was forced to scab by management to cover for a grocer's strike

I blatantly busted the local carpenter unions when I was a construction boomer.

I once had a welding job that ushered me into the union. That only lasted for six months.

I sometimes fantasize about unionizing the WalMart employees.

I don't have a dog in the hunt.

That said, I would address the OP as supposition. As there have been no known evils perpetrated upon anyone on the scab list, this is much ado about nothing.
That's usually how weak modern unions fall apart. It's the last dying vestige of the doomed. When high-rise builders dropped wages for carpenters in DFW, the union didn't even show up much less picket.

I don't care much for open ended OPs that feign danger! danger! Especially when I know that nothing is going to happen to those people. The unions can't even get rid of illegal workers from the south, much less non-union workers in their own town.

You can trap twice as many flies with honey.

Interesting. So what was the union's motivation for posting those names on their website?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

No, it doesn't... in fact it falls far outside conventional wisdom. You should read that link too.

You should stop assuming that because people disagree with your opinions their uninformed. I read your link.

Nothing in the link suggests the Union pays the workers wage instead of the employer

Nothing in the link suggest the Union pays for an provides additional training instead of the employer

Nothing in the link suggests that the Union pays for the health care plans instead of the employer

Nothing in the link suggests the Union pays for safety improvements made to the work place instead of the employer

Nothing in the link suggests the Union pays for various types of paid leave instead of the employer

Please quote me specifically WHERE in your link you're claiming that it shows that the UNION, rather than the employer, PROVIDES the various services and benefits such as pay, health care, training, safety equipment, etc. If you can actually show me that and indicate that I've apparently misread I'll be happy to admit my error.

As I said, it's accurate to say that the Union at times may negotiate for the various things to happen, but it's accurate to say that ultimately it is the employer that is providing the benefit in question.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Interesting. So what was the union's motivation for posting those names on their website?

I don't think he's questioning what is or isn't the unions motivation. I think he's questioning whether or not anyone will actually DO anything with said names.

Some dumbass may make a blog urging people that they need to "take back their freedom" from the government. That doesn't inherently mean there WILL be people actually taking up arms to "take back their freedom".

Intent does not inherently = action.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I don't think he's questioning what is or isn't the unions motivation. I think he's questioning whether or not anyone will actually DO anything with said names.

Some dumbass may make a blog urging people that they need to "take back their freedom" from the government. That doesn't inherently mean there WILL be people actually taking up arms to "take back their freedom".

Intent does not inherently = action.

I understand all that. Given his experience in unions I was curious what his take on "why the post the names" is.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I can hardly keep up with the misinformation in this thread:

You've apparently never been part of a union. Interesting since you seem to defend their despicable tactics vigorously enough. There are many different definitions and proported origins and etymology of the word "scab" but colloquially clownboy is correct as I've heard reference to picking off scabs on strike duty myself. You'll find there are many different variants of terms and how they are used in real life versus in books. For example:

Wikipedia said:
Irwin, Jones, McGovern (2008) believe that the term 'scab' is part of a larger metaphor involving strikes. They argue that the picket line is symbolic of a wound and those who break its borders to return to work are the scabs who bond that wound. Others have argued that the word is not a part of a larger metaphor but, rather, originates from the old-fashioned English insult, "scab."

Strike action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not surprisingly different from what you posted.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Just what would be a justifiable reason to publish the names and area of employment of those who aren't in the unions?

Why wouldn't you publish it? If I'm a union member, I'd like to know which of my co-workers was out to screw me.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I understand all that. Given his experience in unions I was curious what his take on "why the post the names" is.

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

I can hardly keep up with the misinformation in this thread:

Wow, a union man who never listened to Woody Guthrie. Now that's a rarity.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Why wouldn't you publish it? If I'm a union member, I'd like to know which of my co-workers was out to screw me.

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

Interesting. So what was the union's motivation for posting those names on their website?

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

You should stop assuming that because people disagree with your opinions their uninformed. I read your link.

Nothing in the link suggests the Union pays the workers wage instead of the employer

Nothing in the link suggest the Union pays for an provides additional training instead of the employer

Nothing in the link suggests that the Union pays for the health care plans instead of the employer

Nothing in the link suggests the Union pays for safety improvements made to the work place instead of the employer

Nothing in the link suggests the Union pays for various types of paid leave instead of the employer

Please quote me specifically WHERE in your link you're claiming that it shows that the UNION, rather than the employer, PROVIDES the various services and benefits such as pay, health care, training, safety equipment, etc. If you can actually show me that and indicate that I've apparently misread I'll be happy to admit my error.

As I said, it's accurate to say that the Union at times may negotiate for the various things to happen, but it's accurate to say that ultimately it is the employer that is providing the benefit in question.

Except, of course, that the reason the employer does all of these things is because of the union. No union and all industry becomes like a giant Walmart store, where employees are screwed at every opportunity, because the employer knows that if one guy thinks he isn't being treated fairly, they can always find somebody else. I understand this philosophy has great appeal for the Far Right, who have never given a damn about working stiffs.
 
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.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

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

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

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

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.

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.
 
Back
Top Bottom