• 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:
Why wouldn't you publish it? If I'm a union member, I'd like to know which of my co-workers was out to screw me.
Click to expand...

And what would you do about it?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Zyphlin said:
Thank you for your opinion requiring leaps in judgemeny and reading I to things and assuming what something means as opposed to what it says
Click to expand...

I"m not sure what you're trying to say here but if you're saying that my opinion is based on judgements, you are correct.

By you claimed the specific line was misleading. Again I say, explain. I highlighted each part and clearly showed how all of it was accurate. You adding intent or words to something doesn't make it misleading
Click to expand...

One can be misleading while stating nothing but facts. Certainly you know this.

Mislead | Define Mislead at Dictionary.com

What about that statement was misleading? I mean the actual words, not your assumptions and guesses as to what they "mean"by involve adding entirely different words to their statement

Back your own claims up
Click to expand...
It is obvious that they stated facts in a way that leads the reader to conclude that unions are doing this in order to encourage people to intimidate others.

And I'll take your objections to my assumptions and guesses as to what they mean seriously when you object just as strongly to those who are making assumptions and guesses concerning the union's intent in publishing those names. Otherwise, your objections are just as partisan as the accusations of the unions malevolent intent
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Kal'Stang said:
No, they're not freeloaders. Its not their fault your leaders negotiate for them also without getting paid to do so. Your leaders make that choice. Their responsibility. Not the non-union members.
Click to expand...
See my answer above:

Unrepresented said:
I agree that lawmakers should outlaw "right to work" laws that weaken worker strength and encourage freeloaders.
Click to expand...
 
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 are the type of thug the union was targeting by posting those names.

Thanks for proving the many points on this thread about why the names were posted.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

ocean515 said:
If it's theft, why haven't they be cited, or even arrested?
Click to expand...

It would mean the de facto status of any hire is criminal.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

j-mac said:
Is that the only thing the AG is supposed to be concerned with?
Click to expand...

If you asked me that 10 years ago, I would say no. Under this administration, I am not sure.
 
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...

It is not a scab job.

The employer offers jobs and people take them.

If some people are in the union, they choose to do that, but the job is still the job and the employer is the owner of that job, not the union.
 
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...

That would create a hostile work environment which is not allowed at most big companies, so who gets fired?
 
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...

That should never be allowed in any workplace under any circumstances. Management would be forced to take action.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Unrepresented said:
It sucks to be undercut. The South did it to the Midwest the same way that freeloaders are doing it to their union counterparts.

The fallout? The rich get richer and the middle class shrinks.
Click to expand...

Yeah. It turns out bomb all the other industrialized countries into smithereens so that you have zero competition wasn't a very sustainable business strategy.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Blue_State said:
That should never be allowed in any workplace under any circumstances. Management would be forced to take action.
Click to expand...

"Somebody censor the internet!"

It's not bad enough to support freeloaders but you're anti-free speech too?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Unrepresented said:
"Somebody censor the internet!"

It's not bad enough to support freeloaders but you're anti-free speech too?
Click to expand...

It creates a poor working environment and creates animosity between co-workers. It should not be tolerated. People are told to knock it off in ordinary circumstances on the job. That's a decent standard to abide by.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Fiddytree said:
It creates a poor working environment and creates animosity between co-workers. It should not be tolerated. People are told to knock it off in ordinary circumstances on the job. That's a decent standard to abide by.
Click to expand...

You know what else created a poor working environment and animosity?

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

Fiddytree said:
[...] C) Take that to lawmakers. [...]
Click to expand...
Well, that trend is reversing as far as legislation is concerned (government is becoming more hostile to unions). In the distant past (before 1947), in a closed union shop everyone had to join the union, period.

After that date, federal law prohibited the closed shop and allowed workers to refuse to join the union but they still had to pay their share of the cost of operating the union (called the agency shop).

As time went by and more state lawmakers became paid, aided, and abetted by ALEC to be hostile to unions, state-level laws (right-to-work) were implemented to where the non-member could opt of of their share of the union's operating cost altogether and simply 'free ride' (the 'open' shop). So, in those states (about half) there will be no appeal to lawmakers, unless the unions can pay them more than pro-business groups like the Kochs and the Chamber of Commerce is paying them. Since the intent and the effect of the laws is to cripple unions, there is little chance of that (and I doubt they have the deep pockets that the anti-unionists have, even on a good day).
 
‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Unrepresented said:
You know what else created a poor working environment and animosity?

Scabs.
Click to expand...

Is this sort of behavior tolerated under other circumstances in the workplace, without the possibility of a lawsuit or being laid off? You're supposed to get along with co-workers and not divide them or cause them significant amounts of discomfort. I've had co-workers laid off or threatened with being fired for causing so much drama. Other folks doing this sort of thing toward a person of a protected status or subject matter were walking a tight line in causing liability for a lawsuit.

This is not proper behavior in the workplace and this is the sort of thing we teach teenagers to not do on the job.

Just because your union sympathies make it awfully tempting to support or engage in this behavior does not make it right or proper in the slightest.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
Then I suggest you consult a dictionary. Or, you can continue to be wrong
shrug.gif
Click to expand...

Hm. If scab includes a regular worker that simply refuses to join a union, then I am wrong. I admit I had always assumed that that sort of derision was saved for those who came in to work during a strike.

Wow. Unions are even more nasty and vindictive than I thought. Sentences I never thought I'd write for $500, Alex.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Mason66 said:
[...] the employer is the owner of that job, not the union.
Click to expand...
Not really, at least before the gov't got involved. The job is controlled ('owned') by contract between the employer and the union. What the federal and state governments have done is to inject themselves into private contracts and telling private parties what they can and cannot do. Normally the conservatives would be screaming about this gov't intervention into private matters, but as with all things the conservatives scream about it really depends more on just whose ox is being gored.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Unrepresented said:
You know what else created a poor working environment and animosity?

Scabs.
Click to expand...

Unions make up less than 7% of today's workforce in America...Why is that? People don't want them around....
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Fiddytree said:
I'm getting the job from the business owner, not the union. It's not the union's job.
Click to expand...
Wrong answer. I think I provided someone else with an explanation above (yeah, see #292).

Years ago (may still be true today), in some industries -- like construction -- the employer simply calls the union and tells them how many and what type workers they need. The union supplies the bodies (so to speak ;)).
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

RedAkston said:
Pressure tactics: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers | Fox News



The last line is bolded for emphasis. These are the tactics that unions use and it's plain wrong. I dare anyone to defend what the union is doing here with a straight face.
Click to expand...

I think this violates several federal work right laws as well. one being a harassment free work place.
therefore this type of thing is illegal and these guys should be fired.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

j-mac said:
Unions make up less than 7% of today's workforce in America...Why is that? People don't want them around....
Click to expand...
Oh, I don't think people are that hateful.

Well, most people....
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

ludin said:
I think this violates several federal work right laws as well. one being a harassment free work place.
therefore this type of thing is illegal and these guys should be fired.
Click to expand...
Scab is not a protected class. Think again :)
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

cpwill said:
Hm. If scab includes a regular worker that simply refuses to join a union, then I am wrong. I admit I had always assumed that that sort of derision was saved for those who came in to work during a strike.

Wow. Unions are even more nasty and vindictive than I thought. Sentences I never thought I'd write for $500, Alex.
Click to expand...

scabs are only workers that cross picket lines to work.

i see nothing wrong with that of course. if you don't want to work then i will. it's your loss.
these guys are not scabs they work for the company and didn't want to join the union.

federal worker rights laws protect them from job harassment just as this list.

if i worked there and someone tried it my first defense is to lodge a complaint with the union manager letting him know his men are in violation of federal worker laws.
if that didn't stop then i would inform the company that if they do not do something they are in violation of federal worker laws.

if nothing then is done i sue both the union and the company for millions of dollars and retire.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
Scab is not a protected class. Think again :)
Click to expand...

your right to work in a harassement free work place is a right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom