Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like this

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like this

    Michigan: Teachers Unions Shut Down School Districts to Protest Right-To-Work Law

    Right to work is passed.

    Teachers strike because you are not longer forced to be in a Union to be a Teacher?

    Seriously, too bad, if Unions are so good then they should be optional and let people decide.

  • #2
    Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

    Originally posted by Wlessard View Post
    Michigan: Teachers Unions Shut Down School Districts to Protest Right-To-Work Law

    Right to work is passed.

    Teachers strike because you are not longer forced to be in a Union to be a Teacher?

    Seriously, too bad, if Unions are so good then they should be optional and let people decide.
    That is the thing... no one is stopping anyone from joining a union... only requiring someone to join a union.

    But the unions know, if not by force... few would bother to join, or give willingly their money to the union bosses.

    This is about money and power... nothing more...

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

      Originally posted by tsquare View Post
      That is the thing... no one is stopping anyone from joining a union... only requiring someone to join a union.

      But the unions know, if not by force... few would bother to join, or give willingly their money to the union bosses.

      This is about money and power... nothing more...
      As it should be. I figure the union's will start earning their keep (member services) rather than just playing corruption games with politicians.

      The only question that came up that I couldn't answer was what about the non-union worker and their healthcare options.

      Obviously they couldn't sign up for the union plan. What sort of options would they have available to them?

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

        Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
        As it should be. I figure the union's will start earning their keep (member services) rather than just playing corruption games with politicians.

        The only question that came up that I couldn't answer was what about the non-union worker and their healthcare options.

        Obviously they couldn't sign up for the union plan. What sort of options would they have available to them?
        The same I used to have when I was an IT Contractor and or any non-union worker in any other business. Whatever they can make a deal with the boss for.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

          The thought crossed my mind that now, when every individual worker in a business having the choice of whether to join a union or not, the union will have to make joining the union a compelling value proposition for each and every worker. The value proposition is that the member gives the union their dues, and the services and advantages that the union can provide in exchange, and have to be worth at least the amount of the dues. This is quite a different model than what has historically been in place, where once the union ha 51% of the workforce in support, it was applied the entire workforce, and damm near impossible to get them out again.

          Could it be that the union is so upset that their monopoly on the workforce of a business has now been, or will shortly be, broken? That they actually will hav to compete for workers and actually offer worker benefits and advantages greater than the due that they collect from their memebers?

          Anyway you look at it, that's quite a change in model and no doubt a culture shock for the union.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

            It is only going to get worse, Unions will have to go back to higher showings of thuggery now.

            Michigan passes anti-union 'right to work' measure over protests of thousands - U.S. News

            As the vote was taking place, as many as 10,000 people descended on the Capitol, State Police estimated, prompting authorities to restrict access to the building because it was at its capacity of 2,000. The overflow filled the lawn and stretched down East Michigan Avenue to the Lansing Center across the river several blocks away...

            ...Schools in at least three districts were closed because so many teachers and other staff were at the rally.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

              Originally posted by Sluggo View Post
              It is only going to get worse, Unions will have to go back to higher showings of thuggery now.
              True... but not just unions...

              “There will be blood,” State Representative Douglas Geiss threatened from the floor of the Michigan House of Representatives today as the body debated legislation that would make Michigan the nation’s 24th right to work state.
              Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor | WashingtonExaminer.com

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

                Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                Unsure about all of this. Geiss' speech is kind of all over the place talking about the beat down of union organizers at the hands of representatives of Ford a long time ago, but then goes on to say "... and came in at the 11th hour with a gotcha bill. For that, I do not see solace, I do not see peace.” It is going to end up one of those things where he can imply advocating violence, but if asked later clarify the statements to mean something else.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

                  Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                  Sounds like a terrorist threat to me.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

                    Let me break up this mutual masturbation thread. With a differing opinion.

                    First off, like FDR I do not believe in public unions, unions for gov't workers, period!

                    But unions in the private sector? Damn right I am for them. All you have to do is to read history, of how it was on lowly workers before unions.

                    But we are suffering from a war on working people, waged by business, as evidenced by americans being fired with communists being given their jobs, so profits could be maxedd out.

                    Then you have both parties allowing millions of poor mexicans to come across the borders with the end result being....americans losing their jobs to cheap labor. And we have only waged a lip service in going after the criminal business who hired these people in order to max out their profits.

                    Now we have a war being waged on unions, by republicans and business because unions do not allow business to max out profits.

                    Granted some unions have been infected with the same thing many of our businesses have been infected with, a very old and destructive disease of immorality known as greed. With the people affected by this greed on the top, they are getting their wishes handed to them on a silver platter, while the working bloke is knocked down, and then group kicked. As cons cheer on the low lifes who kick a downed man.

                    So, one day we will be forced again by the conditions in america to address the greed of the elites and the greed of the unions. Instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. There is a place for the rich and a place for unions, but not weighted to only benefit one group over the other.

                    The refusal of the bakers union to work with Hostess left those workers jobless. If a company cannot afford what the union demands, yet the union refuses to work with the owners, you legislate to stop the greed from making the unions crazy as loons. But likewise, you legislate to stop the greed of the owners from pissing on their workers as well.

                    If we were not such greedy bastards, America would live up to a noble vision. Since we are greedy, it is the responsibility of gov't, the only entity that can address this problem, to make america a fair place, for all of her people. If you try to simply leave this up to the greedy, to appeal to their better nature, you guarantee that they will take down a nation in their greed. And it is happening today, and has been happening for decades. A nation's problems will always be dependent upon the degree of immorality that is allowed by the gov't to affect other human beings.

                    If anyone has this insane idea that business practices are not subject to morality, and a social responsibility to others, IMO, you have no real sense of morality or any sense of responsibility.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

                      Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                      Didn't we see the same sort of astro turf behavior in Wisconsin? The law is still holding up there. I see it being no different here.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

                        Sir, peons, the dirty unwashed masses of working folks don't have the right to covet money or any sort of power at all. Who do these people think they are? Do they not know their place? The nerve of these people, to act all uppity and all. I mean, you gotta be way out of line if you place any value upon the work of these people that create fortunes for others. These people are not of value, and so they must be treated as such.

                        Truth is, if you don't have much gold, you don't get to help in writing the rules that you have to live under. You basically are required to take the amount of crumbs the ones with the gold drop to the floor. Now, who wrote such rules such as this? That the majority should live under, without a squawk? Well, to write the rules, you need a vast amount of gold. No gold, shut the fuck up.

                        Yet it takes the labor of these people so that the owners who live their lives sitting on their asses in nice luxurous offices may be rich, sometimes even filthy rich. And this is what conservatives term as "fair". LOL. I am sure there is an alternitive universe in which the working people think this is fairness. That this is justice in its most basic, fundamental manner.

                        Yet this has always been a huge problem in mankind's history. We have always had a group of people who believed that for some reason they deserved to keep most of the loot, created by the labor of other, lessor human beings. And these people of course were against any sort of organizing by the real creators of wealth, the folks that actually did the labor. Because the truth is, if they have to pay their creators of wealth more for their work, well that of course means the owner cannot keep as much for himself. And the name of this game, historically, has been, to keep as much for yourself as you could get away with. Unions tend to not allow you to keep as much as your greed demands, and so unions are really bad for rich folks. And conservatives agree with the rich folks.

                        These people then spend mucho time in rationalizing WHY they should keep more, and they have over time came up with a lot of creative reasons for that. They even include taxes in it, and of course they created the argument that if you tax em at that higher rate, well, they won't be able to create any jobs. Or they might leave and go to exploit the communists, and teach us a lesson.

                        But throw some extra demand their way, and miracles happen! They expand, they hire people, even if you raised their income taxes by per centage points! Demand is such a magical thing. Demand makes em hire, even if the cons think the taxes on them are too high. And demand makes em hire, even if the unions have gotten living wages for their members.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

                          Originally posted by MeadHallPirate
                          ahoy Bluest of Doggies,

                          see, thats the thing matey. i just see unions as folks who want to protect what they have...and possibly get more, if possible - and to negotiate aggressively, fightin' fer every copper that ye can get yer mitts on.

                          thats a conservative core principal 'o business, to me. thats how every business owner skippers his vessel, really.

                          i see it as hard nosed stuff, but thats reality. i don't see why unions are villified fer wantin' both monies and power. i sorta thought covetin' them things was seen as kind 'o virtuous...i mean, this thread is basically a monument to that very sentiment; http://www.uspoliticsonline.com/econ...reed-good.html.

                          i guess the idear be that greed is only good if yer worth billions. if yer tryin' to hold on to yer tiny crumb 'o middle class existence, it makes ye a heathen, yarrrrr!

                          - MeadHallPirate
                          Right to work doesn't doesn't ban unions, it just makes it so people aren't forced to pay dues. Unions have become very abusive in some situations especially when they have guaranteed income. They are much less abusive if they have to service the membership to actually get dues money.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

                            Originally posted by MeadHallPirate
                            ahoy OldmanDan,

                            imma fine with right to work, though, matey. i said so. yer again sorta usin' me post as a springboard to say whats on yer mind, without actually commentin' on that which ye quoted.

                            aye.

                            *scratches his noggin'*

                            - MeadHallPirate
                            Isn't OldmanDan talking about the topic of this thread? There is nothing wrong with wanting money and power. People have a right to profit from their hard work and enginuity. I have a problem with people who coerce money from workers who would otherwise lose their job if they didn't pay them "dues". Why is a worker's money "due" to a union? If a person wants to join a union to negotiate better pay and conditions, great. If a person thinks they can do better without a union, they have just as much right to earn their paychecks and climb the company ladder at their own pace.

                            A company should also have the right to hire whomever they want. If they want to hire non-union workers and the workers don't want to be in a union, then more power to them.

                            I don't agree with the politics of most unions and have done great without them. I've earned pay increases based on my job performance and am doing well. On the other hand, I am careful what I say about my company to customers and fellow employees. I realize that I am working without the "safety net" a union provides. I always study my career field and try to make sure that my skill set is what my employer or other companies in my field are looking for. I walk the line between entertaining job offers from competitors and using the offers for leverage for a raise against keeping my nose to the grindstone and waiting for my employer to reward me for my efforts and loyalty to keep me on his side. There are advantages and disadvantages concerning union membership and I think workers should have the right to choose whether or not they want to tie their fate with that of their coworkers.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: MIchigan Teachers, more probably Union Leaders of Michigan Teachers Union, don't like

                              Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
                              Let me break up this mutual masturbation thread. With a differing opinion.

                              First off, like FDR I do not believe in public unions, unions for gov't workers, period!

                              But unions in the private sector? Damn right I am for them. All you have to do is to read history, of how it was on lowly workers before unions.

                              But we are suffering from a war on working people, waged by business, as evidenced by americans being fired with communists being given their jobs, so profits could be maxedd out.

                              Then you have both parties allowing millions of poor mexicans to come across the borders with the end result being....americans losing their jobs to cheap labor. And we have only waged a lip service in going after the criminal business who hired these people in order to max out their profits.

                              Now we have a war being waged on unions, by republicans and business because unions do not allow business to max out profits.

                              Granted some unions have been infected with the same thing many of our businesses have been infected with, a very old and destructive disease of immorality known as greed. With the people affected by this greed on the top, they are getting their wishes handed to them on a silver platter, while the working bloke is knocked down, and then group kicked. As cons cheer on the low lifes who kick a downed man.

                              So, one day we will be forced again by the conditions in america to address the greed of the elites and the greed of the unions. Instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. There is a place for the rich and a place for unions, but not weighted to only benefit one group over the other.

                              The refusal of the bakers union to work with Hostess left those workers jobless. If a company cannot afford what the union demands, yet the union refuses to work with the owners, you legislate to stop the greed from making the unions crazy as loons. But likewise, you legislate to stop the greed of the owners from pissing on their workers as well.

                              If we were not such greedy bastards, America would live up to a noble vision. Since we are greedy, it is the responsibility of gov't, the only entity that can address this problem, to make america a fair place, for all of her people. If you try to simply leave this up to the greedy, to appeal to their better nature, you guarantee that they will take down a nation in their greed. And it is happening today, and has been happening for decades. A nation's problems will always be dependent upon the degree of immorality that is allowed by the gov't to affect other human beings.
                              Nice diatribe.... with plenty of falseness and class envy built in.

                              There were many companies that took care of their workers. Considering the Mafia was behind and still is behind the Auto Workers Union, Truckers, AFL/CIO etc etc in Michigan and elsewhere it is quite obvious that Unions have almost nothing to do with workers rights and all about extortion.

                              The one question you never answer because there is no supportable answer is this.

                              If Unions are so good, why are they mandatory?

                              Why BD? If they are so good for the workers why do former union members when moved to Southern Right to Work States vote NO to having a union in the auto plants there?

                              Why BD? With all the laws that are in place that protect workers now and give them Rights that even the Unions don't give them are unions even needed?

                              If anyone has this insane idea that business practices are not subject to morality, and a social responsibility to others, IMO, you have no real sense of morality or any sense of responsibility.
                              I could fill up several pages with companies that take care of their workers and do things without the need of Unions.

                              Here is a recent one.

                              http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

                              It wasn't the union that decided that the employees deserved a bonus it was the management.

                              http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...2012/benefits/

                              Just a starter list and you find that most do not have much union presence either.
                              Last edited by Wlessard; 12-11-2012, 07:16 PM.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X