Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 89

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

  1. #71
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    97,155

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Someone is being OBTUSE! The Government, in collusion with Unions, STOLE millions from unsuspecting people, and only after it was exposed and the courts get involved, did things get set right. The point was, that Unions can get formed without anyone even knowing it happened. In this case, it was reversed BECAUSE it was so blatantly done, but it took court cases, money and time to reverse the damage. Misterman, and yourself claim Union forming HAS to be done under the ausipices of the NRLB, I have shown just one example, there are more, of Union thuggery in action.


    If you are referring to the situation in post #55 from yourself, there is nothing in there which matches the rant you just made against unions.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  2. #72
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 08:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

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

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    [...] The Court of Appeals ruled on it yesterday. The court made the following earth shattering announcement:

    If you didn't vote, then you didn't vote.
    FOX NEWS ALERT: Legislating from the bench! Sqwaak! Legislating from the bench! Sqwaak! Legislating from the bench! Sqwaak!

  3. #73
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 08:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    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. Without respect for "no votes", entire organizations can be subverted by the hands of the few.
    Sometimes ya don't know whether to laugh or to cry

  4. #74
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 08:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

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

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman, replying to another View Post
    They can't. The workers don't have to join the union. In some states, they can be forced to pay a fee to the union though.

    If you get a job that enjoys union benefits, though, you shouldn't complain. Your wages were won by the union even if you don't join. Those who don't are freeloaders.
    Trouble is, the Republicans don't want you to have any union benefits, because they don't want any unions. That's what all these anti-union arguments and legislation is about. It makes sense if one is a businessman -- the lower the labor cost, and the fewer the employee benefits, the better it is for their business model (as they understand it).

    Trouble is, it sucks for the working class. Guess how much the GOP cares about them?

    By the way, if you're expecting an honest argument from the anti-unionists on this issue, rotsa ruck
    Last edited by Karl; 12-20-11 at 08:36 PM.

  5. #75
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    154,913

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktoria View Post
    You're confusing abstention with "no vote". 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.
    Moderator's Warning:
    Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is validIf you have an issue with a post, report it. Do NOT play moderator.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  6. #76
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 02:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktoria
    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.
    Not true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wikipedia: Abstention
    Abstentions do not count in tallying the vote negatively or positively; when members abstain, they are in effect attending only to contribute to a quorum. White votes, however, may be counted in the total of votes, depending on the legislation.
    It doesn't count as anything.

  7. #77
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 07:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

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

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Misterman, and yourself claim Union forming HAS to be done under the ausipices of the NRLB, I have shown just one example, there are more, of Union thuggery in action.
    ...along with a lawsuit that overturned it.

    Is it sinking in yet?
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 08:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

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

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    If a union only represents a portion of the workers, that union has no power. I'm sure you know this which is why you ask leading questions like this.
    If A, B, and C go on strike, they would be taking away 60% of the employer's workforce. This would have not effect?

    But be that as it may, say A, B, and C decide to form a union, but D and E are not interested because they are already happy with the terms of their employment. So are you saying that A, B, and C can force D and E into their union just to make their union more effective? What about D and E's right to stick with their current employment terms? How do A, B, and C somehow become the boss of D and E?

  9. #79
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 07:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Centinel View Post
    If A, B, and C go on strike, they would be taking away 60% of the employer's workforce. This would have not effect?

    But be that as it may, say A, B, and C decide to form a union, but D and E are not interested because they are already happy with the terms of their employment. So are you saying that A, B, and C can force D and E into their union just to make their union more effective? What about D and E's right to stick with their current employment terms? How do A, B, and C somehow become the boss of D and E?
    Nobody is saying that you can force D and E into a union. Nobody can be required to join a union. In some states, you can be forced to pay a fee to a union if you get a union job, but that's it.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 08:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

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

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    Nobody is saying that you can force D and E into a union. Nobody can be required to join a union. In some states, you can be forced to pay a fee to a union if you get a union job, but that's it.
    Why would the state force D and E to pay a fee to A, B, and C just to continue working at the jobs they already have? Other than that they happen to work for the same employer, how are D and E related in any way with A, B, and C?

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 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
  •