• 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

No--yer a GOP like so many on this website running from their brand and past votes .

learn your place, geezer... I tell you what I am, you don't tell me about myself.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Hmmm. Well what do you think public employee unions have been doing? How has the SEIU gone about organizing public employee representation?

Most of the SEIU leadership should be in USP-Florence
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Yet in post #622 you were so sensible.

How can you be so selfish and so wrong on fixing the pension?

You and I will get 44 cents on the dollar in ten years or less--the going federal rate for cities like Detroit.

Because of four decades of mismanagement and judges who have a conflict of interest in the same system we're in .

GIVE IT BACK.

Until then, we got nothing to say.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Another postcard from the Twilight Zone :lamo

I realize the concept of public property as well as the first Amendment's right of NON-association is loathsome to the far left but the fact is, private businesses shouldn't have to tolerate unions on their property. And Guess what--if the union can get all available labor to side with the union-then the union will prevail. If not, the union is SOL but its no proper role of the government to help unions exist
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Closed shop states no longer exist. Your fail is approaching record-breaking status . . . . .

Nice try, but despite state and federal law, unions have done end runs around it. Your fail is in not recognizing that, or playing at ignorance hoping no one else will call you on it.

Construction unions and unions in other industries with similar employment patterns have coped with that prohibition by using exclusive hiring halls as a means of controlling the supply of labor. While such exclusive hiring halls do not, in a strictly formal sense, require union membership as a condition of employment, they do so in practical terms, in that an employee seeking to be dispatched to work through the union's hiring hall must either pay union dues or pay a roughly equivalent hiring hall fee. So long as the hiring hall is run on a non-discriminatory basis and adheres to clearly stated eligibility and dispatch standards it is lawful. The Taft-Hartley Act also bars unions from requiring unreasonably high initiation fees as a condition of membership in order to prevent unions from using initiation fees as a device to keep non-union employees out of a particular industry. Also, the National Labor Relations Act permits construction employers to enter into pre-hire agreements, in which they agree to draw their workforces from a pool of employees dispatched by the union. The NLRA prohibits pre-hire agreements outside the construction industry.[4]

For the entertainment industry, unions representing performers have as their first rule one banning any represented performer from working on any non-union production. Penalties are imposed on the union member, not on the employer, and can lead to loss of union membership. Most major productions are union productions, and non-members join the Screen Actors Guild through performing as extras and earning three union vouchers, or by being given a speaking line and entering that way. The other performance unions do not have minimum membership standards, but joining the union bars one from working on non-union productions.

Also, all four major sports leagues are union shops, even though a franchise may be located in a state that has a right-to-work law or constitutional provision.

Closed shop - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Especially the ones who take care of aging Veterans with Alzheimers in Veterans Homes.

The ones who wipe their ass and bathe them and get cussed out throughout.

And the ones who have to spoon feed them and watch them slowly die--one organ at a time.

Your disgusting anti-Union spew is here just to light up the board .

Most of the SEIU leadership should be in USP-Florence
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Including those uppity minorities and Muslims?

absolutely. I have major issues with the FDR expansion of the commerce clause to unjustly allow such federal intrusion
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Did you miss the quarantine at McCarran?
As far as yer GOP is concerned, it's only a matter of time before President Ebola hits Sin City .

I'm in Texas right now... so yes, i missed it.

of course he goes to Vegas... he has fundraising to do and there's lots of union and celebrity money to be had
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Except unions, right?

if the employer wants to contract with a union-so be it. IN some areas that might be a good move. But if the employer doesn't want a union on his property, that should be his right
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

if no union representation is present, there can be no scabs. at adelsons properties, there is no union, there are no strikes, there are no picket lines... hence, there are no scabs.
it's a very easy concept.
Off topic, with respect to the post you quoted (it was about stealing). Good grief, another reading failure! :roll:
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I realize the concept of public property as well as the first Amendment's right of NON-association is loathsome to the far left but the fact is, private businesses shouldn't have to tolerate unions on their property.

And they weren't allowed to until McKinley was gunned down and the doctors screwed up a simple operation.
And Guess what--if the union can get all available labor to side with the union-then the union will prevail.
If not, the union is SOL but its no proper role of the government to help unions exist

Good thing for Ohio that Obama won both elections and this thought process isn't playing a part in the Real Life of our Nation don't you think .
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

if the employer wants to contract with a union-so be it. IN some areas that might be a good move. But if the employer doesn't want a union on his property, that should be his right

What this is is saying without saying it is that if an employer doesn't want his employees to collectively bargain than that is his right.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

In the midst of overwhelming unionization -- which you described in your previous post -- it does. If every shop on the strip is unionized except Adelson's (which is essentially what you described), then he's running a scab shop by definition. Now I know you guys don't believe the mainstream dictionaries, but your retreat into an alternate reality is not my problem.

All your other rationalizations are irrelevant when it comes to proper use of the English language... and if some want to invent their own language, then conversation with them is impossible (at least until they document it for translation, but it appears to be fluid).


there is no union representing any of his workers....the union has no presence at his properties.
union presence at other properties does not change this one bit.


speaking of alternate reality... by your definition, every non-union worker in the entire Las Vegas valley is a "scab"....hell, every non-union worker in the country can be a "scab" to you.


it's ok, you are not the first unionista I've come across that has disdain for the workers....
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Nice try, but despite state and federal law, unions have done end runs around it. Your fail is in not recognizing that, or playing at ignorance hoping no one else will call you on it.

[...] While such exclusive hiring halls do not, in a strictly formal sense, require union membership as a condition of employment, they do so in practical terms, in that an employee seeking to be dispatched to work through the union's hiring hall must either pay union dues or pay a roughly equivalent hiring hall fee. [...]

Closed shop - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What is described is an agency shop, not a closed shop (clearly union membership is not required). There is no law against an agency shop, which pretty much exists in all states that have not passed Right To Work. You fail again. Astounding . . . .
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Off topic, with respect to the post you quoted (it was about stealing). Good grief, another reading failure! :roll:

if you are going to talk ****, at least be clear about it... i don't know what you are referring to.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

there is no union representing any of his workers....the union has no presence at his properties. [...]
Take that up with the strawman that told you differently.

union presence at other properties does not change this one bit. [...]
Why would it?
confuse.gif

You've gone Twilight Zone on me... I don't know what you're reading, but it clearly isn't what I've been writing, so have a nice day :2wave:
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

[/FONT][/INDENT]

What is described is an agency shop, not a closed shop (clearly union membership is not required). There is no law against an agency shop, which pretty much exists in all states that have not passed Right To Work. You fail again. Astounding . . . .

You cannot duck that it is the closed shop model you are arguing for. You fail to grasp your own argument. Nor can you argue without failing reality, that closed shops don't exist in practice. For example, just about every port in the US. Just try to get a job, any job at any port without joining the union.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

I was speaking to Thrilla--drive-by boy--
you wouldn't know a real conservative from yer land of secession and right-to-work-for-far-less would you j-mac ?

Oh, I have no problems spotting conservatives..These days they are in short supply. But with that said, you got some nerve calling someone else "drive-by" anything...
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Take that up with the strawman that told you differently.

sorry, i'll leave the fallacies to you.. i'll keep sticking to facts.


Why would it?
confuse.gif

You've gone Twilight Zone on me... I don't know what you're reading, but it clearly isn't what I've been writing, so have a nice day :2wave:

you calling his workers "scabs" is entirely predicated on the union presence of neighboring properties.... and now you are trying to tell me union presence on other properties doesn't change things??

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

And in all of this mornic nonsense and personal attack from j-mac who just showed up on the screen with drive-bys--
as is his MO in showing up late to the party and lying about what people say--
not once did he discuss the OP--a con job on this thread .

What I "lie" about whiner?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

You've got a long way to go before you live UP to your slightly liberal lean with the spew I just wasted my time reading from you .

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

there is no union representing any of his workers....the union has no presence at his properties.
union presence at other properties does not change this one bit.


speaking of alternate reality... by your definition, every non-union worker in the entire Las Vegas valley is a "scab"....hell, every non-union worker in the country can be a "scab" to you.


it's ok, you are not the first unionista I've come across that has disdain for the workers....

I must agree with you on the use of the word scab for a nonunion shop. If that is their choice, then so be it. It would interesrting to find out about any organizing drives though.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Just like the 2nd Amendment, eh? :mrgreen:

left wing extremists are why we need a 2nd Amendment. Global labor environments are what makes unions obsolete
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

if you are going to talk ****, at least be clear about it... i don't know what you are referring to.
As I noted above, you're quoting my posts but talking about different stuff. You made a post about stealing, I responded to that post talking about stealing (with the pertinent sections in bold no less), and you replied to that post by talking about scabs and Adelson. You've lost me, bro. Maybe you just can't understand what I'm writing... that's cool, but it makes it useless to continue.

[...] and no, those scabs are not "stealing" ... you walked away from that job voluntarily, they stepped in to do the job when you refused to. [...]
Using clownboy's imaginary dictionary, eh? :lamo ... Since you guys are so desperate for a win, let's rephrase: people who take a union job in the absence of a strike, and refuse to pay a pro-rata share of union dues, are stealing both from the union as well as their fellow workers (Thrilla, you already agree with this in principle).

Several mainstream dictionaries define such people as scabs, a term which can also be used to describe strike-breakers and picket-line crossers. There -- you guys no long have a dictionary to hide behind :mrgreen:
if no union representation is present, there can be no scabs. at adelsons properties, there is no union, there are no strikes, there are no picket lines... hence, there are no scabs. it's a very easy concept.
See? In your last post you abandoned the stealing issue completely and went off on scabs and Adelson. So, I give up -- it's too much work to keep multi-quoting the entire conversation so that the person I'm addressing doesn't get lost.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

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:

yep i know what ia scab is and the only person making up definitions here is you.
people that work for a company and do not belong to the union are not scabs.

scabs which is only a term unions use to degrade people wanting to work have to cross a picket line.
since these people don't cross a picket line they are not scabs not that they are scabs anyway.

can't believe you hate working people so much i thought liberals were suppose to be for working people.
the hypocrasy can't be contained.

come back when you can actually backup that worker harassment is legal. ol yea it isn't and in fact is a fireable offense.
 
Back
Top Bottom