Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 89

Thread: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

  1. #31
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktoria View Post
    Pragmatism = cultural imperialism. Don't throw that shtick around.

    The courts are ****ing retarded. They're just trying to be practical in order to make things happen despite how people clearly haven't invested the time needed to think about what they want to happen.

    There is something very wrong going on with this country and freedom of speech. People are increasingly claiming it's their right to control other people just because they can make a lot of noise, and other people can't.
    I don't understand what you're talking about.
    Last edited by misterman; 12-19-11 at 10:47 PM.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  2. #32
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    I'm not spewing bull****.


    Steps to Creating a Union Workplace

    See, you don't even know what the **** you're talking about.
    What part of "One common way is to request the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which is a neutral government agency, to hold a secret ballot election," from your own link, did you not understand, genius?

    That's what this thread is about. Not elections for union officers.

    The NLRB election usually takes place over several weeks, with campaigning from both sides. The workers usually vote by mail or by dropping their ballot. They don't have to vote in person.

    And you're still full of ****, since unions don't go holding secret elections in the middle of the night either. That's not legal.

    Go spew your bull**** somewhere else. You can have legitimate complaints about unions, but not lies.
    Last edited by misterman; 12-19-11 at 10:46 PM.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  3. #33
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    01-20-12 @ 02:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19
    The only alternative is to assume they meant to vote "yes". I think the ruling is proper.

    Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

  4. #34
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    Why would workers A, B, and C have the right to negotiation a contract on behalf of workers D and E who are not interested in the union and want to negotiate their own contract?
    Well, workers D and E don't get to negotiate their own contracts in most cases. Most non-union workers don't have contracts.

    What makes workers A, B, and C think that they are somehow in control of what workers D and E do? And where is the government in all this? Why doesn't the government protect workers D and E?
    I doubt most workers D and E oppose unions winning them higher wages, etc. and most couldn't do better on their own. But sure, maybe some do. That's something for a whole new thread. It's the entire history of the labor movement you're getting into there. Too much for me to handle.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 09:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    Hehe, agree to pay A,B,C $18 and hour after they have been on strike for 6 months and then agree to pay D and E $23 an hour.
    I just don't see the problem with A, B, and C forming their union and engaging in negotiations with their employer, while worker D and worker E can each negotiate their own contracts. The fact that the decisions of workers A, B, and C have any impact at all upon two other people who want nothing to do with them or their contract is just astounding to me. How do A, B, and C get away with this. The more I learn about this subject, it seems that the government is actually supporting the ability of A, B, and C to impose their will on people other than themselves. The government ought to prevent this, not go so far as to empower this sort of behavior.

  6. #36
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktoria View Post
    A "no vote" is what's recorded when people don't vote. It's the default position, and it waits for something to be said in order to be changed.

    This is VITAL to any form of parliamentary procedure.
    Name a single parliament, organization, governing body, commission etc. that counts the absence of a vote as a "no" vote. That's utter bull****.

    Without respect for "no votes", entire organizations can be subverted by the hands of the few.
    Same goes for yes votes. Why is "no" the status quo?
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  7. #37
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    I just don't see the problem with A, B, and C forming their union and engaging in negotiations with their employer, while worker D and worker E can each negotiate their own contracts.
    You don't get it.

    Bus drivers or whatever don't negotiate their own contracts. They take whatever their employer offers. If they asked for a contract, the employer would laugh at them.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 09:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Well, workers D and E don't get to negotiate their own contracts in most cases. Most non-union workers don't have contracts.
    You're right in that there may not be a written contract, but all employees and employers agree to the terms and conditions of employment. It may be formal or informal.

    I doubt most workers D and E oppose unions winning them higher wages, etc. and most couldn't do better on their own. But sure, maybe some do. That's something for a whole new thread. It's the entire history of the labor movement you're getting into there. Too much for me to handle.
    Point taken. Maybe it deserves a thread of its own. I'll drop it here if you think I'm derailing...

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 09:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    You don't get it.

    Bus drivers or whatever don't negotiate their own contracts. They take whatever their employer offers. If they asked for a contract, the employer would laugh at them.
    Our posts passed in the ether. As I mentioned above, it might not be a formal written contract, but simply an employment agreement. Employers and employees always negotiate and agree to employment terms.

  10. #40
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    You're right in that there may not be a written contract, but all employees and employers agree to the terms and conditions of employment. It may be formal or informal.
    You've got my meaning backwards, I think. Non-union employees (D and E) have no collective bargaining. They get what their employee offers them. They can ask for more, but they make their own deals. For most, that means no deals, just taking what is offered. There is no enforcement either - the employer can change the terms at any time, or fire them just because they feel like it, etc.

    Point taken. Maybe it deserves a thread of its own. I'll drop it here if you think I'm derailing...
    Drop it only because I can't handle it right now!
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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