Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Employee Free Choice Act  
User currently offlineVictrola From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 515 posts, RR: 1
Posted (5 years 11 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 3381 times:

I was wondering about why the subject of the Employee Free Choice Act hasn't seemed to come up in the Presidential election.

Supposedly, this act which is supported by Barak Obama and the rest of the democrats would stipulate that unions no longer need to win a majority vote in a secret ballet to become certified at a company. All they would have to do is to intimidate a majority of workers to sign union cards.

This is outrageous. Let's here some of you union supporters out there try to justify this nonsense.

The secret ballot is the best way to assure that workers are not intimidated by the union or by employers when the question of unionizaion of a workplace comes up.

If I were the Republicans I would be be hitting hard on this issue.

93 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineScrubbsYWG From Canada, joined Mar 2007, 1495 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 11 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 3374 times:

i think they would have to play this one just right if they were to use it.

Lately, 'joe the plumber' has been championed by the McCain camp. A lot(and i'm not saying all) of people like him that Repubs are trying to win over likely support unions to a certain extent, so they may in fact be for this. If the McCain camp goes on the record and makes it an issue, it may lose them the vote of the coveted blue collar workers who feel unionization is a good thing and that more unions and making it easier to start a union is a good thing. How would they spin looking out for the common man when it may make it easier for unions to start up with this bill?

So if this bill were to pass, would employers have the right to see who actually signed the union cards or would all they be allowed to know was that enough people signed them?


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (5 years 11 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 3347 times:



Quoting ScrubbsYWG (Reply 1):
So if this bill were to pass, would employers have the right to see who actually signed the union cards or would all they be allowed to know was that enough people signed them?

They would know , as would union bosses and fellow employees from what I understand. I guess that your card actually becomes public knowledge under the new rules ...



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6818 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (5 years 11 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3268 times:

I can't believe this topic isn't getting more play.

User currently offlineVictrola From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (5 years 11 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3258 times:

i think that ScrubbsYWG has a point. The major states in play are Ohio and Pennsylvania where the unions are strong. So McCain can't really go out bring up union issues without sinking his campaign in these states.

I'm still baffled why this issue does not seem to be more contriversial. I personally think you can't get a more Orwellian name than "Employee Free Choice Act" for this disgusting piece of legislation.


User currently offlineADXMatt From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 951 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (5 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3151 times:

I thought congress killed this a few months ago.

therefore it would be a dead issue.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8946 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (5 years 11 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3120 times:



Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 5):
thought congress killed this a few months ago.

therefore it would be a dead issue.

It was passed in the House by a large margin. Killed in the Senate, a threatened veto by Bush, if it passed. It was never brought to a vote in the Senate. If the Democrats take a bigger number of seats Tuesday, it may come alive again. Anything that makes it easier to unionize has my support. The deck has been stacked against labor for too long. A little help maybe in the offing if the Democrats win.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineSCCutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5531 posts, RR: 28
Reply 7, posted (5 years 11 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3061 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 6):
Anything that makes it easier to unionize has my support. The deck has been stacked against labor for too long. A little help maybe in the offing if the Democrats win.

I'd suggest that you acquaint yourself with how the law works, now, and as proposed under this legislation, before making a broad declaration as you have done.

There are many valuable and productive things unions *can* do, but their decline is the direct and inevitable result of the persistent refusal of most unions' elected management to recognize that their success, and the success of the companies for which their members work, are NOT mutually exclusive.

The deck is not in any way "stacked against labor" at all; the NLRB and its charge, in fact, strongly favor organized labor. This is reality. Labor's failure to honor its commitment to the rank and file workers is fact, as well.

If you believe that there is no need for a secret ballot in union representation elections, is there any reason that we should not also eliminate the secret ballot in general elections as well? Why not?

Ask yourself why would one object to a secret ballot, unless one believed they could not win in a fair race...



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12150 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (5 years 11 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3024 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 6):
Anything that makes it easier to unionize has my support.

Why?

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 6):
The deck has been stacked against labor for too long. A little help maybe in the offing if the Democrats win.

If the deck is stacked against unions, it is the unions fault. Today, about 15% of the US labor force is unionized. Unions have been trying to unionize almost every company, city, state, or other employers in the US since the 1960s (when over 40% of the US was unionized). Over 95% of the time, employees have turned down elections to unionize.

If unions are allowed to "conduct" their balloting, without a secret ballot, then the union thugs will intimadate people into voting for being unionized.

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 7):
the NLRB and its charge, in fact, strongly favor organized labor.

Correct. Today, all attempts to unionize a company is run by the NLRB, who conducts the elections. They do not allow management or the unions to intimadate workers while they are voting. This systems works and works well. If the system isn't broken now, why do the unions want to "fix" it?

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 7):
Labor's failure to honor its commitment to the rank and file workers is fact

Correct. To prove that, look at the IAM's 2 month long strike against Boeing. What did the rank and file really win? They lost 2 months of pay and benefits they will never recover.

Quoting SCCutler (Reply 7):
If you believe that there is no need for a secret ballot in union representation elections, is there any reason that we should not also eliminate the secret ballot in general elections as well?

 bigthumbsup 


User currently offlineVictrola From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (5 years 11 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3006 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 6):
The deck has been stacked against labor for too long. A little help maybe in the offing if the Democrats win.

Typical mindless union response. You didn't even bother to respond to the question of fairness of the secret ballot.

Unions are in the position where they are today because they have a mentality of entitlement that is completely out of sync with economic reality.


User currently offlineComorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4896 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (5 years 11 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2976 times:



Quoting Victrola (Thread starter):
need to win a majority vote in a secret ballet

No need for secrecy. But Ballet dancing takes years to master, so better to do it after the voting.


User currently offlineADXMatt From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 951 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (5 years 11 months 2 days ago) and read 2956 times:

I think that you need a secret ballot, but I don't think that if you don't vote it should count as a "no" vote.

If you don't care enough to cast a ballot you don't care enough if there is a union.

I think it should be the majority of the votes cast.


User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6818 posts, RR: 34
Reply 12, posted (5 years 11 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2927 times:

A person’s right to organize is protected by the Constitution—I am a big believer of freedom of association. But the downside is that that association often becomes harmful to its members whom they are to be advocates for.

Labor in this country has run amok for decades, violated laws left and right (campaign financing, PACs) not to mention the not-so-subtle shakedown tactics that they engage in. The Boeing strike is the perfect example of how not to do thing---they think they won. They already had a solid offer on the table and now they did win the battle, but they’ll lose the war when Boeing eliminates jobs in SEA longterm and relocates final assembly work.

The “Free Choice Act” is nothing of a sort. Private secret ballots are a staple and trademark of a free society and democratic organization. They should call this act what it is—a shamefully transparent ploy to recruit more Democratic voters.


User currently offlineVictrola From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (5 years 11 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2900 times:

What amazes me is how such a vast majority of the so called "Democratic" party can advocate such a position. I don't care if you are pro or anti union, there is absolutely nothing democratic about this proposal.

Unfortunately it looks like our probable future President is all for this disgraceful law.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8946 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (5 years 11 months 10 hours ago) and read 2858 times:



Quoting Victrola (Reply 9):
Typical mindless union response. You didn't even bother to respond to the question of fairness of the secret ballot.

Unions are in the position where they are today because they have a mentality of entitlement that is completely out of sync with economic reality.

The economic reality of who, Walmart? You try to unionize them, they close the store. They are union in Communist China. They could not screw over the Chinese government like they do in the US. We will see what the new Democratic President does for the worker. If he does nothing, he will be still be even with George W.

Quoting Victrola (Reply 9):
You didn't even bother to respond to the question of fairness of the secret ballot.

Do not even mention fairness. I love the way you guys cry foul when someone wants to return the favor and stack the deck against the corporations, too bad.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineSCCutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5531 posts, RR: 28
Reply 15, posted (5 years 11 months 9 hours ago) and read 2840 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 14):
The economic reality of who, Walmart? You try to unionize them, they close the store.

But for every Wal Mart, there are thousands of smaller businesses which lack the size and clout to take a hard-ass stance like Wal Mart. These businesses, the ones which employ most workers, will be gutted by this ill-considered legislative abomination.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 14):
Do not even mention fairness. I love the way you guys cry foul when someone wants to return the favor and stack the deck against the corporations, too
bad.

OK, lotta noise there, but bottom line: what is your objection to a secret ballot election, conducted under strict rules by an impartial entity?



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6818 posts, RR: 34
Reply 16, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2796 times:



Quoting SCCutler (Reply 15):
OK, lotta noise there, but bottom line: what is your objection to a secret ballot election, conducted under strict rules by an impartial entity?

Thank you for getting to the heart of the matter...I'd love to ehar a response to this, even from the most rock-ribbed pro-union supporters. Because those die-hards, sometimes zealots, should know firsthand about intimidation tactics.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

An open ballot CANNOT be justified in a free society. Period.


User currently offlineVictrola From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2787 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 14):
The economic reality of who, Walmart? You try to unionize them, they close the store

Why shouldn't they have the right to close their store? It belongs to them, they are the ones who put up the capital to open the store. They are the ones taking the risk by investing their money in the store in the first place. If they don't like their return on investment, they are free to pull out and invest their money elsewhere. Nobody should be forced to run a business against their own will.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8946 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2763 times:



Quoting SCCutler (Reply 15):
OK, lotta noise there, but bottom line: what is your objection to a secret ballot election, conducted under strict rules by an impartial entity?

I have no objection to secret ballots and fairness, never said I did. I threw out that I support more chances for working people to unionize, that is all. The free choice act as wriiten maynot be perfect. Never said it was. The Free Choice Act is a wake up call to business, obviously some in congress think that organized labor needs some help from the intimedation tactics of big business. For Example Walmart. They do meet the standards for Big Business, do they not?



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8946 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2762 times:



Quoting Slider (Reply 16):
An open ballot CANNOT be justified in a free society. Period.

Surely, you are not that naive, to think that a free open and Democratic Society exists on company property, are you?  Yeah sure



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8946 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2750 times:



Quoting Victrola (Reply 17):

Why shouldn't they have the right to close their store? It belongs to them, they are the ones who put up the capital to open the store. They are the ones taking the risk by investing their money in the store in the first place. If they don't like their return on investment, they are free to pull out and invest their money elsewhere. Nobody should be forced to run a business against their own will.

Once again, I will ask the question, are you that naive to think that Walmart does not use imtimidation and anti-union tactics when dealing with their employees? Do you think that Walmart would not close a profitable store? They did it in Canada a year or so ago, I was up there when it was in the papers. Profit had nothing to do with it, they voted union. Now in your world, that maybe justification, not in mine.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineVictrola From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2737 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 20):
Once again, I will ask the question, are you that naive to think that Walmart does not use imtimidation and anti-union tactics when dealing with their employees? Do you think that Walmart would not close a profitable store? They did it in Canada a year or so ago, I was up there when it was in the papers. Profit had nothing to do with it, they voted union. Now in your world, that maybe justification, not in mine.

They closed the store because it no longer looked like a good investment to them. You can't force people to run businesses that they don't want to run. If workers have the right to withhold their labor because they believe the salaries they are offered are inadequate, then the business owner also has a right to shut down if he doesn't believe profits are adequate.

You pro union people still don't realize that the world does not owe you a living. If you want to make a good living it is your responsability to make yourself valuable in the marketplace.

You also don't seem to understand that the secret ballot is the best way to protect workers from intimidation from both sides.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8946 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2731 times:



Quoting Victrola (Reply 21):
They closed the store because it no longer looked like a good investment to them. You can't force people to run businesses that they don't want to run. If

I have a deal for you, it is a seaside cottage in North Dakata. It no longer looked like a good investment to them? get real. Walmart is the most expert business there is at picking locations and all of a sudden after the union vote it was no longer a good investment to them? I now have a bridge for you also.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8946 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2717 times:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_Free_Choice_Act


Here is the link for the Free choice Act. Two sides to every story.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineVictrola From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 515 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (5 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2703 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 22):
I have a deal for you, it is a seaside cottage in North Dakata. It no longer looked like a good investment to them? get real. Walmart is the most expert business there is at picking locations and all of a sudden after the union vote it was no longer a good investment to them? I now have a bridge for you also.

You are the one who needs to get real. If you understood anything about business you would understand that the dynamics of the situation changes once you bring a union into the picture. Your costs will go up. Your business model has changed. Anyway, once again it is their perogative to shut down the store for whatever reasons they want. Get over it.


25 Maverick623 : Help in the form of intimidation by union thugs? I don't think so.
26 WarRI1 : Once again, I will ask a question, Have you ever seen a union thug? I put in 42 union years, I never saw one. Maybe you watched too many movies.
27 WarRI1 : I guess in your world, there are not two sides to every story, in mine there is. Do you think I need any lessons about business from you, I do not th
28 MaverickM11 : The invisible hand is stronger, and businessmen smarter, than anyone in today's unions. This tactic is incredibly frightening but ultimately if succes
29 WarRI1 : It is possible, you notice I used Walmart as an example. Walmarts history is not of making blunders in business or location choices. Any other compan
30 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : Since unions use tactics like personal threats and intimadation, a none vote must be counted as a no vote. The company is not the threat here, the un
31 Slider : Yeah, I have. I've witnessed threats, haev been threatened myself, and am intimately all-too familiar with the tactics, both thinly veiled and overt,
32 Victrola : Is the concept too complicated for you? I will use simpler words next time. Of course it is about profitability. They are in business to make a profi
33 WarRI1 : Bingo! The truth at last. I have to give you credit for that one. I guess the truth will out as they say. Now that is a changed dynamic, even I can u
34 WarRI1 : I was just watching NBC News, Things do not look too good, maybe when the Freedom of Choice act is enacted, or some variation of it, maybe more unions
35 Victrola : We live in a global economy and outsourcing is a part of the way the world works. Perhaps we should do as you union people wish and end all imports a
36 WarRI1 : You must listen to different economists than I do. Certain special interest groups like some union members? That is laughable to the point of being p
37 MaverickM11 : Unions are special interest groups. Period. They may happen to be your special interest group but that doesn't make it any less so. What is the numbe
38 GuitrThree : If you find it amazing, you might want to go research the real reason why drugs are cheaper over the boarder before spouting off here and making your
39 WarRI1 : My My! uneducated partisan hack? Oh vicious aren't we. I am almost speechless by your poor manners. I love the way you company hacks defend the screw
40 WarRI1 : Now, now watch your blood pressure, do not put words in my mouth, I never told Walmart how to run their business, I stated that I do not like them an
41 GuitrThree : Well, it's obvious you don't follow the guidelines. Read rule H (under detailed rules): When stating facts, statistics or newsworthy bulletins, pleas
42 Victrola : Just this week the Big Three auto companies were in Washington begging for multi billion dollar handouts so all the United Auto Workers could keep th
43 WarRI1 : I plead guilty. I think most of us use personal opinion on here. That is what a discussion is all about. I would have to say, "baloney" to most of th
44 WarRI1 : That is ridiculous, what a distortion of fact. They were not there to protect union jobs, they were there to protect their own. They have made the de
45 Victrola : No this is reality. If the auto companies don't get their multi billion dollar handouts they will go out of business and hundreds of thousands of uni
46 GuitrThree : Arrggh... It's NOT "baloney," it's FACT that Canada, and Mexico, and almost every other countries Governments place MANDATORY price caps on drugs. Th
47 WarRI1 : What you say is still a distortion of the facts as far as looking at things that you non-union folks always go on about. There is no doubt that the u
48 WarRI1 : Why does the US Government not do this for their citizens? Why industry lobbying of course, why can you not understand this? Let us see now, there ha
49 KC135TopBoom : Maybe most companies in the US will fold up shop, and open up overseas, poutting millions out of a job. Get real and get a life. Your employeer owes
50 Victrola : This is no distortion whatsoever. Everyone is against multi billion handouts until it is their own special interest group who is going to be the bene
51 WarRI1 : That is an absurd premise, everything would cease to function as is happening right now, when everyone stops driving, the taxes for the state and fed
52 WarRI1 : [quote=Victrola,reply=50]Unfortunately we have a situation where we have companies (The Big Three) who are too big to fail. It is politically impossib
53 WarRI1 : I wanted to include the top guns in the auto industry as Prima Donnas, although I do not agree about the union people, one must certainly give equal
54 Victrola : As a matter of fact I do speak a bit of Chinese, along with Spanish, French,German, and Portuguese. I guess that's why I am able to make a good livin
55 Molykote : What an idiotic comment. I happily buy American products when the quality warrants it (stereo equipment, tools, firearms, etc). I drive foreign cars
56 SCCutler : It is not so hard for me to remember when Japanese cars were first being imported - they sold because they were dirt-cheap, not because they had supe
57 WarRI1 : This country is loaded with phonies, who just have to drive a foreign car. You buy American? what the hell do you buy? Where do you find it? We canno
58 WarRI1 : [quote=SCCutler,reply=56]Strong point made here, but do not forget that the unions often bargain for work rules which hamstring the efficiency of the
59 WarRI1 : [quote=SCCutler,reply=56]Point is, they gained share with price, and improved the quality as they moved forward. If you compare the relative quality o
60 WarRI1 : I have no problem at all with you making a living without a union. That should be everyones choice. To be in a union, or not. It is quite easy, you r
61 KC135TopBoom : If everyone stops driving, we won't need highways to pay those state and federal taxes for. As far as my statement being absurd, just how many US com
62 Aaron747 : Best possible reply to that nonsense. What the hell are you talking about? I've never worked for a single, solitary company where freedom of speech w
63 MD-90 : Wages only improve when productivity improves and the market supports increased wages. No legislature or union can wave a magic wand and magically ma
64 WarRI1 : Got news for you dude, I was purchasing stock, when you were only a thought, I have used that line by the way before with another know it all. I have
65 WarRI1 : At your age, you have a long way to go, when you run into the wrong person, watch out. Of course one has to have the courage of his convictions to sp
66 KC135TopBoom : Have you very looked at the Ford/Chevy ratio to Kia/Nissan/ Toyota in the union hall parking lots? It is good that you have saved and invested for yo
67 WarRI1 : I fought that battle for many years, no foreign vehicles in my family. Now look what we all have, a crashed economy, greed and selfishness runs throu
68 KC135TopBoom : Well, in spite of what the Democratic Party, and the unions say, we are all partly to blame for todays economic situation. The blame goes to Congress
69 WarRI1 : Without a doubt, truer words can not be spoken. Same here. We are all entitled to our opinions.
70 MD-90 : Far and away at least 80% of the blame goes for our national bank, our legalized cartel that Congress doesn't monitor anywhere near well enough, the
71 Post contains links WarRI1 : A view of the need for the Free Choice Act. http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds...-be-biggest-reform-since-new-deal/
72 SCCutler : Interesting piece, but utterly irrelevant in the context of small businesses, which have neither motive nor ability to "intimidate" workers. How would
73 WarRI1 : That is good suggestion, of course, whether it would be legal is another question. It will be interesting to see if it comes up again in congress. I
74 KC135TopBoom : It is also interesting to see former Seantor George McGoven (D), a big labor supporter, and a big liberal doing ads against the Act. Politics truely
75 ADXMatt : I disagree.... how is someone threatented? it's a secret ballot. No one knows how you voted. If anything the company is the threat while a union is t
76 WarRI1 : [/quote] No doubt, that is certainly the reason for the Free Choice law. the companies intimidate and try to control the whole process once there is t
77 KC135TopBoom : Everyone is threatened when you can cast your own ballot in secret. That is the whole point here, the unions want to do away with the secret ballot,
78 Post contains links WarRI1 : http://www.heritage.org/research/Labor/bg2027.cfm [quote=KC135TopBoom,reply=77] only problem with that is those companies open themselves up to lawsui
79 SCCutler : While I admire your passion, it is apparent you have not the faintest idea how a union election is conducted. The entire process is undertaken under
80 Post contains links KC135TopBoom : I agree, there are problems on both the union and management sides. But, I don't see how the EFCA will provide truely fair and free union elections,
81 WarRI1 : Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 76): No doubt, that is certainly the reason for the Free Choice law. the companies intimidate and try to control the whole proce
82 WarRI1 : There are always problems, or there would not be a need for unions. Let us look on the other side, say the union loses, and does not management now k
83 WarRI1 : We will have to wait and see about that, no question, what is the count now, 58 Democrat.? A couple of Independents out there also. Lieberman from Co
84 KC135TopBoom : The key word there is "owner". Like his employees, he also has rights to protect his stores and his profit margins (which are very low in the grocery
85 WarRI1 : I think anything like the EFCA, will have to wait, with the state of the economy now, it will be on the back burner, as it should. The first thing th
86 KC135TopBoom : If we rely on Congress as being the "experts" to save the economy, we are all screwed, union and non-union alike.
87 WarRI1 : That is the truth, no doubt about. Our only hope is there are some non-congressional experts out there.
88 Victrola : No, that is his perrogative. It is his business he has taken all the risk involved in starting the business. If the business doesn't make any money h
89 Dougloid : What I don't get is why the notion of labor organizing for their mutual advantage is anathema to "free market" proponents. One would think that on a t
90 SCCutler : I think you have made one of the most cogent posts on the topic I have seen. Where the problem comes in is the ludicrous notion that employers can so
91 KC135TopBoom : In a perfect world, that would be correct. But, the world is not, nor will ever be perfect. Well, here you are half right. The workers do invest thei
92 Dougloid : No dispute about that but labor also has the last word if you want to look at it that way, but individuals who live on a paycheck usually do not have
93 WarRI1 : You are quite right, that kind of move could be called a Pyrrhic Victory, it has been done, no doubt about it. It was done in R.I. Brown & Sharpe in
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
DL Employee Killed In Train Crash - Cell Lives On posted Thu Sep 18 2008 16:38:35 by Ikramerica
Spammer Walks Free In Virginia posted Sat Sep 13 2008 05:52:29 by Elite
BK Employee Takes Bath In Kitchen Sink posted Tue Aug 12 2008 16:17:08 by RJdxer
A Question For The Cyclists... (Bike Choice) posted Sun Aug 10 2008 15:07:33 by Lincoln
Welcome To The Free Press Censoship Olympics! posted Tue Aug 5 2008 21:33:46 by Derico
Free Credit Report.com Isn't. posted Mon Aug 4 2008 06:09:34 by Dougloid
Death Of Free Internet Is Imminent? posted Tue Jul 22 2008 11:27:56 by MadameConcorde
Uniform Gift To Minors Act Regulations? posted Sat Jul 19 2008 11:07:56 by Syncmaster
Can A Gay Fed Employee's Spouse Receive Benefits? posted Mon Jul 14 2008 15:35:02 by PanAm330
Third 'free' Show Today! :) posted Thu Mar 13 2008 15:42:14 by AndesSMF