• 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

RedAkston said:
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.
Click to expand...

This should be considered an invasion of privacy if not harassment, and prosecuted accordingly. Mafia style intimidation certainly doesn't lend their cause any sort of credibility.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

RedAkston said:
LOL - anything in the past century you'd like to bring up? :lamo

Keep trying sangha, it's hilarious!
Click to expand...

SO you think you get to decide how far back history goes? :lamo
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

sangha said:
SO you think you get to decide how far back history goes? :lamo
Click to expand...

No, I simply get to point out how you are really, really reaching. Everyone saw it, have a good day. :2wave:
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

ludin said:
[...] not working for a union [the real premise is working a union job and refusing to join that union] does not make you a scab you need to get a clue.
Click to expand...
You may create your own dictionary with its own meanings if you like (this does seem to be a favorite conservative pastime), but no one will think you have a clue :2razz:
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

TurtleDude said:
yeah I like freedom. and if you own a business you should be able to fire or hire whomever you want
Click to expand...
Including those uppity minorities and Muslims?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

TurtleDude said:
[...] people should have the freedom to contract.
Click to expand...
Except unions, right?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

RedAkston said:
Everyone saw it
Click to expand...

Everyone who already agrees with you

But I do like how you returned to argumentum ad populum after claiming you don't need it.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

mac said:
How would that in any way justify employees being harassed and intimidated by other employees and their union?
Click to expand...
Normally it wouldn't, but the anti-unionists are arguing that union violence in the past justifies assigning union violence to the current event in the OP.

So, past employer violence is a case of sauce for the goose ;)
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

RedAkston said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes, calling people the term scab is a pressure tactic used by unions. Business has its own tactics to deter threats to the organization. It may not be calling members a scab but no doubt it does intimidate.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

AlabamaPaul said:
Please put the quote in context without selectively singling it out, or is that how you roll? There's a reason my visits to this site have diminished... Good night. You have to live with yourself...
Click to expand...
Taking your ball and going home and/or casting aspersions upon the character of other posters will not correct your prior erroneous posts. If information from the right wing echo chamber has misled/misinformed you, then you should be upset with them and possibly discount their input in the future.

As your link shows (and as the Wikipedia link showed, altho you dismissed it on an ad hominem basis), no one is forced to join a union. In non-right-to-work states they may, as a condition of continued union employment, be 'forced' to pay a pro-rata share of the union's operating costs.

"Workers have the right, under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), to refuse to join a union. However, some collective bargaining agreements -- the contracts between the employer and the union -- require a company to employ only union workers to do certain jobs. One major reason unions want these contracts is to share the burden of the union's work. The union is required to represent everyone in the bargaining unit, regardless of their union membership. Requiring everyone who gets the benefit of the contract to be a union member solves the problem of so-called "free riders," who reap the windfall of the union's work but don't pay the price.

Generally, a company can't require a worker to become a full union member as a condition of employment, but the worker may have to pay at least some portion of union dues, depending on the basis of his or her objection to the union and the laws of the state where the employer is located. [...]"

Right to Work, Union Shops, and Union Dues | Nolo.com​

For those of you in Rio Linda, this says that in a non-right-to-work state you can refuse to join the union and still keep the job by paying a portion of the dues that a regular union member would pay... all conditions are satisfied both with the law and the employer.
 
Last edited:
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
Normally it wouldn't, but the anti-unionists are arguing that union violence in the past justifies assigning union violence to the current event in the OP.

So, past employer violence is a case of sauce for the goose ;)
Click to expand...

I see, so, the behavior of the current "more enlightened" members of society are justified in their actions by those of a hundred years ago.

Makes perfect sense. Good thing we don't have such employer violence these days...it would make the harassment to complicated.



We're here to help you, and we'll beat and harass you until you accept that.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

mac said:
I see, so, the behavior of the current "more enlightened" members of society are justified in their actions by those of a hundred years ago. [...]
Click to expand...
No. You didn't understand what I wrote, or perhaps the context in which it was written. It was a criticism of the argument presented by the anti-union posters here, a criticism that essentially hoisted them on their own petard.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
No. You didn't understand what I wrote, or perhaps the context in which it was written. It was a criticism of the argument presented by the anti-union posters here, a criticism that essentially hoisted them on their own petard.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understood it. You didn't understand the response.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
Normally it wouldn't, but the anti-unionists are arguing that union violence in the past justifies assigning union violence to the current event in the OP.

So, past employer violence is a case of sauce for the goose ;)
Click to expand...

I can only assume you can't argue with the premise of the OP, but would rather just justify it.

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

Karl said:
Including those uppity minorities and Muslims?
Click to expand...

That is exactly right if they can't get the job done.

Do you think a minority or Muslim should keep their job simply because they are a minority or a Muslim?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Meister said:
No they shouldn't. They aren't breaking the laws as you are for harassment.
Click to expand...

They're being weak and cowardly: they take all of the salary and benefits without putting in what it takes to get them anad keep them. They are riding on the backs of the union members; it's deplorable.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

TurtleDude said:
yeah I like freedom. and if you own a business you should be able to fire or hire whomever you want
Click to expand...



You can hire anyone you want. If you don't like said person, you still have 90 days, like many businesses. Another benefit that is used a lot, is "do not send letter". That can happen on day one and said person goes back to to that hall and can't be dispatched to your company again for six months. A lot of comapnies also hire off the street and then that peson jloins the union after 90 days.

So companies hire exactly who they want all the time. No one is forced onto a company.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Grim17 said:
Nice of you NOT to read the story and simply say Fox is lying... how very... ummm... progressive of you.
Click to expand...


The lie is in the OP over "personal information". The scab list is a good thin actually. Sort of like posting the pictures of hooker's Jons on billboards.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

eohrnberger said:
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.



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 - 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.
Click to expand...

Well, the union isn’t using muscle; they’re shaming people who are riding on their backs and I think it’s a fair thing to do for despicable behavior.

And right: Joe over at machinery should be shamed. I don’t think that rank and file members will follow anybody home. That kind of stuff can be trouble and unions by and large don’t want any of that. What’s going on is good enough. Card check BTW won’t solve anything, I’ve said that many times. It might guarantee representation, but it can’t guarantee a contract. And union members will never bully an organizing drive. That can get a very fast injunction. You need more practice with reality erik. I know that you don’t like unions, but your hyperbole is over the top.
 
Last edited:
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
Since you're new, I'll give you a tip: what you are doing is not debating. Now I realize you see others doing the same, but they are not debating either. Debating is a discussion about a topic or an event, not a discussion about people participating in the debate/discussion. I know that to many it is more fun to insult/demean other participants, but from a debate standpoint it is a logical fallacy (failure). FWIW.
Click to expand...

You post was so comic I had to laugh! Here let me return the favor. What did the leaper say to the prostitute? Keep the tip. I see that you have no clue that insulting/demeaning other participants and throwing around stupid generalizations constitutes a lot of what you have posted in this thread. So the fact that you enjoy acting exactly as you are lamely whining I do? Because I noticed your dear pal Sanga's weak bait? Is a logical fallacy, you might want to learn what the words you are using actually mean. Because all I see here is a schizophrenic posting style devoid of much logic but heavy on fallacy. Now here is a free tip for you, each time you proceed to act like not only a hypocrite but start lecturing others like you are staff moderator? I'll do the same favor for you I did yesterday, and let the real thing do their job with you. I've got a funny feeling you don't enjoy a lot of respect and cache with the staff here, so let's not turn this into the Karl's dog and pony show and make it all about you and your schizophrenic posting style. But if you insist I can certainly be helpful in making sure that kind of weak posing gets the audience it deserves. Free tip. No charge.

Hey, how do you circumcise a leaper? Shake him.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Meister said:
I can only assume you can't argue with the premise of the OP, but would rather just justify it. I fully understand
Click to expand...
I'm sorry that #435 and #439 was over you guys' heads, but that's not my problem, and others who did understand it shouldn't have to suffer thru an explanation. Have a nice day :2wave:
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Mason66 said:
Karl said:
TurtleDude said:
yeah I like freedom. and if you own a business you should be able to fire or hire whomever you want
Click to expand...
Including those uppity minorities and Muslims?
Click to expand...
That is exactly right if they can't get the job done. [...]
Click to expand...
Turtle didn't say anything about getting the job done, so answer the question in the context it was asked without running and hiding behind an excuse:

"if you own a business you should be able to fire or hire whomever you want", "including those uppity minorities and Muslims."​

Yes or no?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Great King Rat said:
You post was so comic I had to laugh! Here let me return the favor. What did the leaper say to the prostitute? Keep the tip. I see that you have no clue that insulting/demeaning other participants and throwing around stupid generalizations constitutes a lot of what you have posted in this thread. So the fact that you enjoy acting exactly as you are lamely whining I do? Because I noticed your dear pal Sanga's weak bait? Is a logical fallacy, you might want to learn what the words you are using actually mean. Because all I see here is a schizophrenic posting style devoid of much logic but heavy on fallacy. Now here is a free tip for you, each time you proceed to act like not only a hypocrite but start lecturing others like you are staff moderator? I'll do the same favor for you I did yesterday, and let the real thing do their job with you. I've got a funny feeling you don't enjoy a lot of respect and cache with the staff here, so let's not turn this into the Karl's dog and pony show and make it all about you and your schizophrenic posting style. But if you insist I can certainly be helpful in making sure that kind of weak posing gets the audience it deserves. Free tip. No charge.

Hey, how do you circumcise a leaper? Shake him.
Click to expand...

You keep lecturing about what constitutes proper debate yet you demonstrate very little of it. Instead, your posts have been predominantly focused on judging other posters tactics with little substance concerning the issue and moaning about "insulting/demeaning other participants" in a post that does nothing but that.

Maybe someday you'll contribute an actual argument in support of the OP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom