• 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

clownboy said:
Sounds like a good reason for the thinking person to not join a union.
Click to expand...

Are the unions still run by the Mob?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

clownboy said:
I quoted the post I was responding to. Together they contain what you're asking for.
Click to expand...


Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog
No, the point is the costs is divided amount it's members and members will have to pay more if their counterparts refuse to pay but those counterparts receive the same exact benefits.

Above is what you quoted and those nice bennies and wages the freeloaders got was because of the dues the union members paid.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

NIMBY said:
As they should with these scabs .
Click to expand...

Let me bait you. Why should they?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

clownboy said:
The company pays for safety training and arbitration.
Click to expand...
The company never did this before Unions came along and you know it.
Neither did they give weekends off--or paid vacations and sick leave--and all the other goodies you folks expect your Union bros and sisters to pay.
Like clean air--clean water--clean land--though yer GOP team is doing its damndest to ruin the Earth for yer kids .
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Ever heard of the first amendment ?

Meister said:
Let me bait you. Why should they?
Click to expand...
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
Didn't you get the memo? If not, try to keep up -- repeating the obvious wastes everyones' time.
Click to expand...

Other definitions aren't quite so broad and some are changed in colloquial usage. But you've already been informed of and shown that. You have demonstrated you have no problem wasting everyone's time repeating the same old tired support of unions.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

j-mac said:
So, things have to be blatantly overt for you to acknowledge them right? But only so if you don't agree with the argument against the perceived thinking in your case...Look, The union members didn't need, or don't need a set of instructions...Posting the list is enough to ensure that something bad could, or probably would happen.
Click to expand...

Fortunately, thanks to the first amendment, we don't (usually) censor or punish people for providing information because "something bad could happen."
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

You mean the Unions that built Vegas where I am right now?
Which has now turned into a scab town with some folks like Adelson ?

joG said:
Are the unions still run by the Mob?
Click to expand...
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

sangha said:
You expect me to support your OP?

Now *that* is hilarious!!
Click to expand...
Actually watching you and Karl tag team is hilarious. As well as a lot like watching a bad Keystone Cops caper. There is so much so wrong with your tortured bridgecasting. You are in such a rush to bash out a quick (you think) witty reply that you just shoot yourself in the foot over and over. The last posts from both of you has to rank up there in some sort of 'bumble and stumble your way through already tortured thread' hall of fame.

First this post is singularly impressive in that it manages to be hypocritically obtuse and hilarious at the same time.
Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
Since you're new, I'll give you a tip: what you are doing is not debating. Now I realize you see others doing the same, but they are not debating either. Debating is a discussion about a topic or an event, not a discussion about people participating in the debate/discussion. I know that to many it is more fun to insult/demean other participants, but from a debate standpoint it is a logical fallacy (failure). FWIW.
Click to expand...

The level of hilariously obtuse hypocrisy Karl's post managed to achieve was then raised by yours. Presumably because you could not catch a clue which poster's "lecturing what constitutes proper debate" contributions you were actually mangling. Hint: Was not me, it was your PM buddy.

sangha said:
You keep lecturing about what constitutes proper debate yet you demonstrate very little of it. Instead, your posts have been predominantly focused on judging other posters tactics with little substance concerning the issue and moaning about "insulting/demeaning other participants" in a post that does nothing but that.

Maybe someday you'll contribute an actual argument in support of the OP.
Click to expand...
Irony is a bitch, particularly when you are the last one to figure it out. But you go on with your bad self. The problems that come about because you are operating from a WiFi hotspot under a bridge are many. And obvious too. Danged if you are not determined to illustrate as many as you can as possible in one thread!:popcorn2:
 
Last edited:
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Thrilla said:
FWIW, I think the non-union workers should reimburse the union for any monies that were spent in his/her representation ... [...]
Click to expand...
The Koch Bros and many/most Republican politicians and many/most conservatives disagree with you. Via right-to-work laws, they want that union representation for free.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

NIMBY said:
Ever heard of the first amendment ?
Click to expand...

Ever hear of harassment?

Have a good day, NIMBY, a good football game is coming up.
I need to get back to the real world.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
I would assume, based on the other poster's assertions, the same thing that replace the unions: the government :shock:

I can understand the argument: since the government protects us so well in the workplace, then surely they can protect us everywhere else.
Click to expand...


well, nearly everything the pro-unionists use as evidence that Unions are the bees-knees ( weekends, 40 hr workweek, safe work environment etc) has been codified into law or regulation.... so much of what unions were once good at has already been co-opted by government.

workers can go to govt for help now... where once upon a time, they only had unions to turn to.

unions don't do much to "protect" anyone in the workplace....much like the govt , they offer an "after the fact" outlet to arbitrate grievances.


and really, don't **** on govt too much.... those govt workers you are ****ting on are union members.( public sector membership is pretty large, private sector, not so much)
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

The grade-school insult of calling sir Nimby an emotional adolescent by Meister--

Meister said:
my apologies, you sounded more like an emotional adolescent than a chemistry, physics, math teacher for 34 years.
Like I said earlier, we have government regulations in place to protect the workroom floor.
Click to expand...


Thanks to Unions--
and the great Republican Progress--ive President Theodore Roosevelt.

without him, the Elite GOP wing would still have 9-YO working mines with missing fingers and toes -
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

rabbitcaebannog said:
Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog
No, the point is the costs is divided amount it's members and members will have to pay more if their counterparts refuse to pay but those counterparts receive the same exact benefits.

Above is what you quoted and those nice bennies and wages the freeloaders got was because of the dues the union members paid.
Click to expand...

No, they are not. In fact in many cases they are less than what the company was willing to do in the first place. That's the idiocy of collective bargaining law. Labor must ask for more than they want and management must offer less than they are willing to provide. All this so they will bargain and hopefully strike a middle ground. Unfortunately real life doesn't operate like that.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
The Koch Bros and many/most Republican politicians and many/most conservatives disagree with you. Via right-to-work laws, they want that union representation for free.
Click to expand...

why should I care if those folks disagree with me?

if they wanted representation for free, why do they put in mechanisms for unions to get paid for representation in their right-to-work legislation?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

clownboy said:
No, they are not. In fact in many cases they are less than what the company was willing to do in the first place. That's the idiocy of collective bargaining law. Labor must ask for more than they want and management must offer less than they are willing to provide. All this so they will bargain and hopefully strike a middle ground. Unfortunately real life doesn't operate like that.
Click to expand...

Is your contention that union members make less? Proof please.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Meister said:
Dude, I was a union member, and saw with my own eyes. A lot of the members did things
worthy of firing and were protected by the union and kept their job. I've seen just how lazy
some could be and still get paid the same as those who excelled. So please don't pull the
"I don't know" crap.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the anecdote. I have one also. I have been a union worker for over 18 years and never seen any of that.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

NIMBY said:
The grade-school insult of calling sir Nimby an emotional adolescent by Meister--




Thanks to Unions--
and the great Republican Progress--ive President Theodore Roosevelt.

without him, the Elite GOP wing would still have 9-YO working mines with missing fingers and toes -
Click to expand...

oh dear god... :roll:
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

NIMBY said:
The company never did this before Unions came along and you know it.
Neither did they give weekends off--or paid vacations and sick leave--and all the other goodies you folks expect your Union bros and sisters to pay.
Like clean air--clean water--clean land--though yer GOP team is doing its damndest to ruin the Earth for yer kids .
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not true at all. Look up the history of Kellogg. And it was a GOP POTUS and congress that passed the first clean air act.

Air Pollution Control Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

rabbitcaebannog said:
Is your contention that union members make less? Proof please.
Click to expand...

Read for comprehension. That's not what I said. YOU quoted the post, now read it.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Thrilla said:
well, nearly everything the pro-unionists use as evidence that Unions are the bees-knees ( weekends, 40 hr workweek, safe work environment etc) has been codified into law or regulation.... so much of what unions were once good at has already been co-opted by government.)
Click to expand...

And what government has given, government can take away. Many a state's Blue laws are going by the way side. As business has more sway with pushing through legislation or taking it away, you will see more worker's rights taken away.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

clownboy said:
Other definitions [of "scab"] aren't quite so broad and some are changed in colloquial usage. But you've already been informed of and shown that. [...]
Click to expand...
If I had, then you would have quoted it. So, fail #1.

And this is the third odd thing that keeps popping up in conservatives' arguments -- their insistence on creating their own dictionary on the fly (which never seems to be published, by the way). Or, as sangha described it, daffynitions :lol: Fail #2.

But just to make the pwning complete (you guys really make this too easy), let's look at another random (Googled) definition from a mainstream dictionary (or are mainstream dictionaries, like mainstream media, all part of the vast left wing conspiracy?):

scab

3b (1) : a worker who refuses to join a labor union (2) : a union member who refuses to strike or returns to work before a strike has ended (3) : a worker who accepts employment or replaces a union worker during a strike (4) : one who works for less than union wages or on nonunion terms

Scab - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary​

Fail #3. How do you guys stand all the fail?
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

clownboy said:
Read for comprehension. That's not what I said. YOU quoted the post, now read it.
Click to expand...

I see. You don't want to defend your position. I don't blame you.
 
Re: ‘Pressure tactics’: Unions publishing names of nonunion workers

Karl said:
If I had, then you would have quoted it. So, fail #1.

And this is the third odd thing that keeps popping up in conservatives' arguments -- their insistence on creating their own dictionary on the fly (which never seems to be published, by the way). Or, as sangha described it, daffynitions :lol: Fail #2.

But just to make the pwning complete (you guys really make this too easy), let's look at another random (Googled) definition from a mainstream dictionary (or are mainstream dictionaries all part of the vast left wing conspiracy?):

scab

3b (1) : a worker who refuses to join a labor union (2) : a union member who refuses to strike or returns to work before a strike has ended (3) : a worker who accepts employment or replaces a union worker during a strike (4) : one who works for less than union wages or on nonunion terms

Scab - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary​

Fail #3. How do you guys stand all the fail?
Click to expand...

So failing your arguments on topic (unions) you now want to argue semantics (the definition of scab), understood.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom