• 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

Wiggen said:
Except, of course, that the reason the employer does all of these things is because of the union.
Click to expand...

Which I've stated multiple times may very well be the case in most instances

But that's irrelevant to the point of who PROVIDES those things.

All pointing that out does is act as a diversion. If someone says "The employer is the one providing the benefits" and someone goes "No they don't, that's the union" that's just simply wrong. The union doesn't PROVIDE it. They may be the impetus for WHY the employer provided it...but it's still the employer providing it.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

d0gbreath said:
It says in the OP link that it is so that their union co-workers can explain to them how wonderful solidarity is, and try to encourage them to sign up.

Of course, everyone goes immediately off the rails and assumes persecution of the listed.
Click to expand...

Thanks. So they publish the name so the other workers can pressure them.

I've never worked in a union shop so I have no idea what it's like. I do work for a very large corporation as a middle-tier manager and I'd be pretty bull**** if senior management or anyone else published my name with the instructions to my co-workers to encourage me to do something that I, as a grown up, could decide to do on my own. JMO.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

clownboy said:
You seek to dismiss the tactic by restricting discussion to just this one use ignoring the fact that this [pressure tactics on member, I suppose] is a general tactic used by unions since their inception. [...]
Click to expand...
While the OP may present one instance of that, he -- and you -- have yet to make the general tactic argument that you claim. Demonizing your opponent is simply mud slinging, not reasoned discussion.

Now speaking in general terms, "pressure tactics" are used by pretty much everyone everywhere, so it becomes a matter of degree and comparison. Generally speaking, unions use pressure tactics against employers and employers use pressure tactics against unions. I suppose you could also say that unions use pressure tactics against scabs and employers use pressure tactics against union members/organizers. So again it becomes a matter of degree and comparison (and I am certainly not saying that two wrongs make a right).

In the case presented by the OP, I'm not sure that I condone the listing of the names, but I am sure it does not rise to the level of offense that it is being dishonestly portrayed by many in this thread. Therefore my main issue is the defective/dishonest arguments presented... if you remove all those, plus all the personal attacks, there hasn't been all that much discussion of the OP (and probably well over half the posts would disappear).

clownboy said:
Name and shame, with more than a little violence thrown in is an old, old union tactic that precedes so many of the posters here.
Click to expand...
Well, see, there ya go -- there is no violence in this case, but by heaping it on anyway you simply discredit yourself. As they say in politics, that may excite the base but it isn't going to win you any converts.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

MaggieD said:
Fair share? You mean being forced to pay union dues when you don't want to belong to one? That's your idea of fair share? Well, we disagree. IMO, the company ought to pay its nonunion workforce 50-cents an hour more and exempt them from work rules. They'd be quittin' that union in droves. Now that's union busting I could get behind.

I don't need a union. I don't want a union. And forcing me or coercing me into paying their dues is little more than extortion.
Click to expand...

Then don't take a job with a union shop. The workers at that business made sacrifices and worked hard to get that union, a contract and its benefits and if you aren't willing to pay for your share for the benefits that resulted from their efforts you are a freeloader.

Employers have tried paying non-union workers more and it has probably succeeded in destroying some unions. The problem is that without a union the employer has no incentive to maintain those wages or benefits that were artificially, and perhaps only temporarily, raised to bust the union.
 
Last edited:
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Hard Truth said:
There is information that is widely considered private, such as medical information or unlisted phone numbers. A persons name, where they work and whether they paid union dues is not considered confidential information and there are numerous ways to obtain that information that are not difficult. I don't support vandalism, threats or violence against scabs, but there is nothing wrong with criticizing, shunning and embarrassing them.
Click to expand...

Isn't posting scabs names, addresses and phone numbers implying a threat when a strike is occurring? It's to convince the scab to not cross the picket line and in order to achieve that goal doesn't there have to be some implied threat or retaliation for such an act? Telling union members what address to go to is a clear implied threat, no?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Wiggen said:
Except, of course, that the reason the employer does all of these things is because of the union. No union and all industry becomes like a giant Walmart store, where employees are screwed at every opportunity, because the employer knows that if one guy thinks he isn't being treated fairly, they can always find somebody else. I understand this philosophy has great appeal for the Far Right, who have never given a damn about working stiffs.
Click to expand...

More ridiculous hyperbole. One of these days a poster will come along who is left of center that can make a salient point. Until then we are stuck with posts like this.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Wiggen said:
Because I would know who I could trust and who I could count on. And who would have my back. Do I want to treat them differently because they are screwing me? You bet your ass.
Click to expand...

So you would only treat them differently in terms of how you trust them? Or would you actually be treating them different in how you speak to them, act towards them, etc?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Hard Truth said:
Then don't take a job with a union shop. The workers at that business made sacrifices and worked hard to get that union, a contract and its benefits and if you aren't willing to pay for your share for the benefits that resulted from their efforts you are a freeloader.
Click to expand...

Fair point but sometimes there's no other choice but to take the scab job.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Zyphlin said:
Well I think immedietely jumping to initimidation is a stretch.

But would you not agree d0gbreath that a concerted effort by multiple union members to continually pressure them about the benefits of being part of a union would concievably be "unwanted" pressure for someone whose expressed their desire NOT to be part of the union, and thus could reasonable be considered an organized effort of harassment?

I don't think it's a stretch to state that someone whose expressed a desire to NOT be part of the union has no desire to hear about the importance of "solidarity" with said union.
Click to expand...

You speak much truth.

Still, a person needs to stand up for what they believe in. Telling the union guys to knock it off (with conviction) isn't as hard as it sounds.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Zyphlin said:
Which I've stated multiple times may very well be the case in most instances But that's irrelevant to the point of who PROVIDES those things. [...]
Click to expand...

"Distinction without a difference

A distinction without a difference is a type of logical fallacy where an author or speaker attempts to describe a distinction between two things even though there is, in fact, no actual difference.[1] It is particularly used when a word or phrase has connotations associated with it that one party to an argument prefers to avoid."

Distinction without a difference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Ockham said:
Isn't posting scabs names, addresses and phone numbers implying a threat when a strike is occurring? It's to convince the scab to not cross the picket line and in order to achieve that goal doesn't there have to be some implied threat or retaliation for such an act? Telling union members what address to go to is a clear implied threat, no?
Click to expand...

It is not a threat of anything but being criticized, shunned and embarrassed. Most other activities against a scab would be illegal.

Home addresses were not listed.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

tres borrachos said:
Thanks. So they publish the name so the other workers can pressure them.

I've never worked in a union shop so I have no idea what it's like. I do work for a very large corporation as a middle-tier manager and I'd be pretty bull**** if senior management or anyone else published my name with the instructions to my co-workers to encourage me to do something that I, as a grown up, could decide to do on my own. JMO.
Click to expand...

You'd be pretty what? lolz

Then you would be grown up enough to tell them to stop pressuring you (with conviction).
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Ockham said:
Isn't posting scabs names, addresses and phone numbers implying a threat when a strike is occurring? It's to convince the scab to not cross the picket line and in order to achieve that goal doesn't there have to be some implied threat or retaliation for such an act? Telling union members what address to go to is a clear implied threat, no?
Click to expand...
None of that is the case with regards to the issue posted in the OP.

In fact you have provided no evidence showing that what you hypothesize above has ever happened anywhere, at least as far as union-sponsored activity is concerned. Creating stuff out of thin air is called a strawman, and is an invalid form of debate (and, as such, is a failure).
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Ockham said:
Fair point but sometimes there's no other choice but to take the scab job.
Click to expand...

I feel bad about people who are so desperately poor that they would take a scab job despite their own ethics. That is why I would never support doing anything more than criticizing, shunning or embarrassing them. Unfortunately, too many working people these days are not sufficiently familiar with history, the concept of worker solidarity and the importance of unions that there are far too many people willing to stab their fellow workers in the back by being a scab.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

d0gbreath said:
You'd be pretty what? lolz

Then you would be grown up enough to tell them to stop pressuring you (with conviction).
Click to expand...

Can't bypass the censor, use your imagination.

I would. But when would it stop? It doesn't seem right to have people be subjected to this. JMO.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Hard Truth said:
It is not a threat of anything but being criticized, shunned and embarrassed. Most other activities against a scab would be illegal.

Home addresses were not listed.
Click to expand...

I said "implied threat". Scabs aren't embarassed and most couldn't care less if their shunned - they don't stick around long after the strike anyway and they know that.... and it's only illegal if they catch someone flattening a scabs tires at home, or spray painting a rat on the side of their house..... etc.etc.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

This is why people suggest it makes it easier to target them for harassment and why people think harassment may happen.

Definition for Harassment from Merriam-webster

"to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct."

Hard Truth said:
I don't support vandalism, threats or violence against scabs, but there is nothing wrong with criticizing, shunning and embarrassing them.
Click to expand...

Wiggen said:
Do I want to treat them differently because they are screwing me? You bet your ass.
Click to expand...

Unrepresented said:
Scabs should be treated with the contempt they deserve.
Click to expand...

Is anyone going to tell me that showing people "contempt", attempting to criticize, shun, and embaress them, and treating them like someone who is "screwing" you isn't going to creating an unpleasent or hostile situation and isn't being done via verbal contact?

If you think they have the harassment "coming to them" then so be it, but I hope some posters stop acting like it's entirely unreasonable to think this makes it easier for people to harass them
 
Last edited:
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Hard Truth said:
I feel bad about people who are so desperately poor that they would take a scab job despite their own ethics. That is why I would never support doing anything more than criticizing, shunning or embarrassing them. Unfortunately, too many working people these days are not sufficiently familiar with history, the concept of worker solidarity and the importance of unions that there are far too many people willing to stab their fellow workers in the back by being a scab.
Click to expand...

There may be a possibility that some people are more concerned about taking care of their families. I have solidarity with my fellow managers (non-union) but when it comes to feeding and clothing my kids, or putting a roof over their heads, solidarity with other adults who aren't responsible for my kids' well being isn't so important.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Ockham said:
I said "implied threat". Scabs aren't embarassed and most couldn't care less if their shunned - they don't stick around long after the strike anyway and they know that.... and it's only illegal if they catch someone flattening a scabs tires at home, or spray painting a rat on the side of their house..... etc.etc.
Click to expand...
Your posts are very imaginative ;)
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

"Criticize, shun and embarrass".

Sounds like something that is happening in my kids' high school as I type this.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
"Distinction without a difference

A distinction without a difference is a type of logical fallacy where an author or speaker attempts to describe a distinction between two things even though there is, in fact, no actual difference.[1] It is particularly used when a word or phrase has connotations associated with it that one party to an argument prefers to avoid."

Distinction without a difference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​
Click to expand...

That's nice and all. You know how to quote wikipedia. Next time try to learn how to quote it in a way that actually is applicable.

Unfortunatley for you, there IS a substantial difference between actually PROVIDING something and causing someone to provide something.

If I tell friend x to give friend y a dollar....it's incorrect to say that I provided the dollar to friend y. Friend x provided the dollar. I just convinced him to provide it.

The union is not providing the wages. They're not providing the health care. They're not providing the safety equipment. The employer is. That's fact. Simple, unquestionable, fact no matter how much you want to insult people as a means of suggesting otherwise (how about you go google that fallacy. I'm sure you won't bother). The union may convince the employer to provide it, but it's still the employer providing it.
 
Last edited:
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
None of that is the case with regards to the issue posted in the OP.
Click to expand...
I take it as an implied threat so it's 100% the case.

Karl said:
In fact you have provided no evidence showing that what you hypothesize above has ever happened anywhere, at least as far as union-sponsored activity is concerned. Creating stuff out of thin air is called a strawman, and is an invalid form of debate (and, as such, is a failure).
Click to expand...

Lambertville vandalism, John King interviewed on FOX - Toledo News Now, Breaking News, Weather, Sports, Toledo

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

Zyphlin said:
Well I think immedietely jumping to initimidation is a stretch.

But would you not agree d0gbreath that a concerted effort by multiple union members to continually pressure them about the benefits of being part of a union would concievably be "unwanted" pressure for someone whose expressed their desire NOT to be part of the union, and thus could reasonable be considered an organized effort of harassment?

I don't think it's a stretch to state that someone whose expressed a desire to NOT be part of the union has no desire to hear about the importance of "solidarity" with said union.
Click to expand...

Politicians get my name and address from the registrar of voters and pressure me to vote for them. They call me also.

People do not have a right to be ignorant or kept away from people with opinions or information. Harassment on the job is illegal and threats, stalking etc are also illegal.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

tres borrachos said:
Can't bypass the censor, use your imagination.

I would. But when would it stop? It doesn't seem right to have people be subjected to this. JMO.
Click to expand...

This is what you typed:

I do work for a very large corporation as a middle-tier manager and I'd be pretty bull**** <snip>
Click to expand...

Well, you'd be pretty anyway.

Peopled are only allowed to be subjected to what they allow themselves to be subjected to. That is true for your whole life, no matter who you are.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Hard Truth said:
Politicians get my name and address from the registrar of voters and pressure me to vote for them. They call me also.
Click to expand...

And if that's unwanted I'd argue that it's a kind of harassment. ESPECIALLY if you've intimated to them you don't want to vote. It may not be legal harassment, just like this may not be legal harassment, but it's harassment none the less.

If you stated you don't want to vote this election and the GOP got together and put together a "unpatroitic non-voter list" with names and addresses of people with encouragement for party members to go forth and inform you about the importance of patriotism and the benefits of voting...yeah, I'd say they're advocating for a systematic act of harassment against you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom