Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 89

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

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,756

    Court: Rule change for transportation union elections is valid

    House Republicans pushed this year to revert to the old rules, under which workers who did not cast ballots in union elections would be counted as no votes. The effort, which came in the form of an amendment to the FAAs funding bill, led to a protracted fight with Democrats and union groups and to a brief shutdown of the FAA this summer.
    You heard it correctly. Republicans have always supported a rule that says if you didn't vote, then you voted, and of course, you voted "our" ideological way too. That rule was changed to say that if you didn't vote, you didn't vote. Of course, this had to go to court. 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.

    Gee, what a surprise. In another move, the court is going to take up the issue on whether the sky is blue, or as Republicans claim, it is purple with yellow polka dots.

    Article is here.
    Last edited by danarhea; 12-17-11 at 02:10 PM.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

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

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    You heard it correctly. Republicans have always supported a rule that says if you didn't vote, then you voted, and of course, you voted "our" ideological way too. That rule was changed to say that if you didn't vote, you didn't vote. Of course, this had to go to court. 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.

    Gee, what a surprise. In another move, the court is going to take up the issue on whether the sky is blue, or as Republicans claim, it is purple with yellow polka dots.

    Article is here.
    This is why prosecutors take pleas for drug charges and why judges inherently rule in favor of the banks for foreclosure proceedings - to pay for court cases like this one.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  3. #3
    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 danarhea View Post
    You heard it correctly. Republicans have always supported a rule that says if you didn't vote, then you voted, and of course, you voted "our" ideological way too. That rule was changed to say that if you didn't vote, you didn't vote. Of course, this had to go to court. 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.

    Gee, what a surprise. In another move, the court is going to take up the issue on whether the sky is blue, or as Republicans claim, it is purple with yellow polka dots.

    Article is here.
    I don't know why it's needs to be so complicated. If a group of people want to form a union, then go for it. And others don't, then they don't join. Why do they need a vote?

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

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

    This is the first I've heard of this and I can only comment on what is presented. Just based upon what is presented I'd say it was a proper ruling.

  5. #5
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

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

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    This is the first I've heard of this and I can only comment on what is presented. Just based upon what is presented I'd say it was a proper ruling.
    How exactly did you come to that conclusion? Why should abstention = no? I mean, normal elections don't work like that.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

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

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    How exactly did you come to that conclusion? Why should abstention = no? I mean, normal elections don't work like that.
    What did I miss? The OP stated that the courts ruled........

    If you didn't vote, then you didn't vote.
    I agree with that.

  7. #7
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,791

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

    Quorum issue. They needed a majority of the total workforce to vote for it. A majority of those voting wasn't enough before. I wonder though, is every worker bound to agreements by the Union and required to pay dues whether they voted for it, against it, or abstained? Im willing to bet they are.

  8. #8
    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 OpportunityCost View Post
    Quorum issue. They needed a majority of the total workforce to vote for it. A majority of those voting wasn't enough before. I wonder though, is every worker bound to agreements by the Union and required to pay dues whether they voted for it, against it, or abstained? Im willing to bet they are.
    But the lack of a quorum - which, obviously, isn't required in any other elections - would only make the vote null. Non-voters shouldn't count as "no" votes, just as non-votes.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

  9. #9
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

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

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    But the lack of a quorum - which, obviously, isn't required in any other elections - would only make the vote null. Non-voters shouldn't count as "no" votes, just as non-votes.
    What's in the by-laws?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  10. #10
    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 American View Post
    What's in the by-laws?
    This isn't about internal union elections, it's about elections to determine whether a union will represent the employees. The rules for those elections are set by the government.
    "Yes I read the 9th [amendment]. It doesn't say **** about abortion." -Jamesrage

Page 1 of 9 123 ... 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
  •