Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 89

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

  1. #41
    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
    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.
    Well, no, they don't. The typical bus driver doesn't negotiate anything, he asks how much the employer pays and says yes or no. That's the extent of it. Professional and white collar jobs may negotiate, but not most union-level workers. Which is why they have unions, to give them bargaining power.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  2. #42
    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, no, they don't. The typical bus driver doesn't negotiate anything, he asks how much the employer pays and says yes or no. That's the extent of it. Professional and white collar jobs may negotiate, but not most union-level workers. Which is why they have unions, to give them bargaining power.
    Okay. I'll take back my initial assertion and simply say that employers and employees agree to the employment terms. As you state, there may or may not be much negotiation.

    And now I'm dropping the subject...

  3. #43
    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

    Found the NLRB election procedures summarized on Wikipedia.

    NLRB election procedures - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Let's have no more bull**** about "middle of the night" elections.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

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

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Name a single parliament, organization, governing body, commission etc. that counts the absence of a vote as a "no" vote. That's utter bull****.
    Congress. You should try watching C-SPAN sometime.

    There's:

    Yes
    No
    Abstain
    No Vote

    Same goes for yes votes. Why is "no" the status quo?
    Silence is not consent. It's not your right to expect others to do what you want because you're no more of a person than other people.
    Last edited by Daktoria; 12-20-11 at 07:56 AM.

  5. #45
    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
    Congress. You should try watching C-SPAN sometime.

    There's:

    Yes
    No
    Abstain
    No Vote
    Exactly. But not voting doesn't count as a no vote. It counts as not voting.

    Silence is not consent.
    Nor is it non-consent. It is silence.

    I understand your point. A vote is a vote to change the status quo, so the status quo is the default and a non vote is de facto a no vote. But that doesn't apply to elections in which you choose whether to be a voter, as opposed to an elected body where there are a certain number of votes to be cast. That's the difference. In an open election, where anyone qualified can vote and there are a large number of voters and no quorum required, a non-voter doesn't count either way.
    Last edited by misterman; 12-20-11 at 09:01 AM.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

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

    You're confusing abstention with "no vote". This has NOTHING to do with status quo issues, especially when it comes to multi-choice elections.

    This is VITAL when it comes to the quorum issue. You can't assume that people consent with present-only quorums unless you intend on disrespecting who other people are in not letting them exercise their own judgment.

    Honestly, I think you're just trolling at this point. This is the last chance. Your statement about silence not being non-consent actually questions whether or not you're a possible rapist. Frankly, if I was a moderator, I'd have you banned just for making that statement.
    Last edited by Daktoria; 12-20-11 at 10:50 AM.

  7. #47
    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
    You're confusing abstention with "no vote".
    False. There is no difference in this situation.

    Let me try to explain this to you again.

    A "no vote" means not voting (not the same as "no"). It doesn't count. Nor does an abstention. So a bill could pass even if it doesn't have a majority of members of the chamber voting yes.

    For instance, a vote in the Senate of 45 Yes, 44 No, and 11 not voting or voting "Present" (an abstention in the Senate) would PASS. The 11 non-votes don't count either way.

    So you are wrong. Members who don't vote don't count either way.

    And I've done alot more than watch C-SPAN.

    This is VITAL when it comes to the quorum issue. You can't assume that people consent with present-only quorums unless you intend on disrespecting who other people are in not letting them exercise their own judgment.
    False. Those who don't bother to vote don't get counted. That's their choice. Their judgement is to not vote at all. You can't count it as a vote for one side or the other. THAT would be disrespecting their judgment - counting their vote in a way they didn't cast it.

    That's how it works in every legislature and every election in America. A quorum, if required (and it is only required in legislatures or agencies or similar bodies, never in a mass election) is established in a SEPARATE vote. So you'd do a quorum call, then if a quorum is present, you could do business and vote. The votes of those who are absent or abstaining still don't count when you vote on a measure. Except for perhaps some rare, important votes like amendments to a constitution or whatever, no legislature or election requires a majority of all members or voters - only a majority of those present and voting.

    Honestly, I think you're just trolling at this point. This is the last chance. Your statement about silence not being non-consent actually questions whether or not you're a possible rapist. Frankly, if I was a moderator, I'd have you banned just for making that statement.
    Please don't be silly.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  8. #48
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

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

    QUORUM COMES FIRST. YOU CAN'T ASSUME PEOPLE ARE SATISFIED WITH VOTING CONDITIONS.

    The quorum issue has ALREADY been addressed in Congress, so we don't have to consider it any longer, but you can't assume it in new organizations.

    Otherwise, ANYONE could conspire with anyone else to force them into an organization. THIS is what makes you look like a potential rapist. You'd be willing to conspire with others into coercing third parties to have sex with you.
    Last edited by Daktoria; 12-20-11 at 11:07 AM.

  9. #49
    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
    QUORUM COMES FIRST. YOU CAN'T ASSUME PEOPLE ARE SATISFIED WITH VOTING CONDITIONS.
    Nope. There is no election in America (as opposed to a vote in a legislature or agency) that requires a quorum. In most elections, only half or fewer eligible voters actually vote, in fact.

    The quorum issue has ALREADY been addressed in Congress, so we don't have to consider it any longer, but you can't assume it in new organizations.
    Is that your way of saying you were wrong?

    Otherwise, ANYONE could conspire with anyone else to force them into an organization.
    Nope, not when everyone has the right to vote no, if they choose to.

    If you choose not to participate in an election, your vote doesn't count. Very simple principle. You are still responsible for that decision and its consequences.

    But look at what you said - if anyone could conspire to force someone into an organization, that would apply even if everyone voted! If the vote were 60% yes, there would still be 40% who voted no, and would have to go along with the rest. Is that a "conspiracy" to "force" someone to do something? No, it's just democracy.

    THIS is what makes you look like a potential rapist. You'd be willing to conspire with others into coercing third parties to have sex with you.
    You realize this could be grounds to report YOU to the mods, right? Please stop this nonsense, it makes you look really silly.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    09-18-12 @ 08:07 AM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    3,245

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

    We're done here. I'm convinced you're a rapist, and there's no reason to talk with you any longer.

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •