Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Annoyed]

"I'm in a bad mood you're fired"

now gimme just one example in the US where a union successfully forced the employer to change his mind in such a context
public sector doesn't count of course

Of course the public sector doesn't count. That is the strongest remaining bastion of union power in this country.

agree 200% on this one (especially big businesses)

They don't come much bigger than General Motors.

[mad_gater]

Of course the public sector doesn't count. That is the strongest remaining bastion of union power in this country.


They don't come much bigger than General Motors.

get the name right for cryin' out loud.....it's Government Motors, not General Motors

[aretood2]

That's not quite accurate. A Union can have a CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) which does specify the circumstances under which an employee can be fired, and the agreement is binding.
As I've said, I'm not opposed to unions in the private sector.* My opposition to unions is for those in the public sector, for the simple reason that if the union in a private company negotiates a deal which causes that company's product to cost more or be of lower quality, I can simply go buy that product from another company. I have no such choice with the government and it's unions.

*In most cases. The U.A.W. would be the exception here. Their collective greed drove GM and Chrysler to bankruptcy, and those businesses should have failed as a result, but they got Bush II to go along with the "too big to fail" argument, so they were bailed out by the taxpayers. The taxpayers have no business bailing out a failed private business under any circumstances.

It should also be noted that Chrysler was bailed out not once, but twice. 1979 under President Peanut Farmer and again in 2007/8 by Bush II.

I don't think you understand how public sector unions work. Public sector unions don't strike if the problem is the actual part of the government that governs. They strike if the problem is that actual individual agency and its own policies independent of the central government's actions. If that agency fights alongside the union for XYZ and the union still doesn't get what it wants, there's no strike.

Most places don't have option to strike, just to form legally binding CBA's. Otherwise there are partial strikes that can be had. Police won't pull extra shifts, teachers will only work the contract hours, that sort of thing.

You do have a recourse if a union is leading things in the bad direction. It's called a "vote". A simple executive order of a governor, for example, can squash union action.

[Annoyed]

I would suggest that you look to the north. This state is run by and for the benefit if its employee unions.
[EDIT]
I should point out that striking isn't the primary weapon of NY's state employee unions. Their chief weapon is money, provided to the campaigns of Democrats who in turn rubber stamp their demands.
[/EDIT]

[garhkal]

so unions should be regulated but the infinitely more powerful megacorps should not?
that's so-called "laissez faire" capitalism showing its true colours with its double standards

How did i say megacorps didn't need to be regulated??

[Womble]

I'll reply later but:

I was actually thinking of Alice in wonderland.

If you watch The Matrix backwards, it's very educational. It shows how Neo quit the pills and found a stable office job.

[Gatefan1976]

I'll reply later but:


If you watch The Matrix backwards, it's very educational. It shows how Neo quit the pills and found a stable office job.

It would also show him giving up individuality to become a drone.

[Annoyed]

get the name right for cryin' out loud.....it's Government Motors, not General Motors

Good point.

[Falcon Horus]

Well, we know the media hates Trump, don't we? That's just like I refused to dignify Obama with the term "President".

The feeling is mutual, as in Trump calling everything fake news that doesn't compliment him or revere him in any other way. I wonder how he's going to talk himself out his latest lie, about other Presidents not attending returns of fallen soldiers.

Sorry, wrong answer.
In the US, the NFL and all of it's teams are private businesses. Their product is entertainment; what they put on the field.

And you clearly didn't read my entire post because I did add that it is considered a business -- which I learned from the article.

And on that note -- here's something funny I saw yesterday...

N.F.L. Players May Have an Ally in Their Protests: Labor Law

So let me get this straight.. He had spent a while bad mouthing the industry online, and now wanted to get work with them?? What changed?

He had been calling the employees of 343 Industries idiots and talking trash about their competence.
He had always been creating maps for Halo, which happened to be his favorite game to play and emerge himself in. He was a skilled mapcreator so 343 offered him an official position within the mapmaking department. Then found out about his previous comments and they immediately terminated his hiring.

Because future employers do google you and therefore it's imperitive you do not write anything under your own name.

The core problem of this is -discrimination-
Did you notice in the recent case of employers not being forced to cover birth control that it is not just ok to do it because of "deeply held religious beliefs", but -also- deeply held moral beliefs? On the surface, you could say that is a "win" for non religious morals -BUT- discrimination is often a deeply held moral belief as well.

It is indeed.

But men have nothing to worry about, viagra is still covered.

Not quite.
Remember, the NFL flag thing has -nothing- to do with what people are equating it to now, it is about the inordinate violence towards blacks by police. The flag and the Anthem do -not- represent "patriotism" which is the position of the "general" right, they represent the COUNTRY, ALL of the country, and by taking a knee, the idea is that some part of the -country- is damaged or broken and to bring attention to it.
My more specific point was NFL players are allowed to wear pink cleats for Breast cancer awareness because that's an acceptable social issue for the NFL to represent, the killing of black people by cops however, now is not -because- of this distortion of the message.

I think I read they weren't actually allowed to wear those either because the NFL has uniform rules.

Excuse me, but the NFL players are the ones distorting their own message. Their stunts are not against symbols of police brutality, they are against symbols of the country, as you helpfully observed. Aren't there other ways to make the same point that would be more precisely targeted and would not be so widely misinterpreted as a broadside against American state's existence?

The fact that people are talking about it, should tell you plenty... They get it backwards as to what #Taketheknee is for, perhaps but it has certainly created a buzz.

When was the last time you remember a T-shirt or message on a sweater had that kind of an impact?
Perhaps Banksy should do some wall art in the US.

If I stand on a street corner with a swastika flag and claim to narrowly focus my protest on the greed of the local shop owner, will you buy that too?

That local shop owner must have really pissed you off.

How about wearing something that symbolizes protest against police brutality? Obvious choice would be bullet hole-ridden hoodies a-la Luke Cage. Simple, on point, can't be misinterpreted.

First thing that comes to mind:

















Now tell me how engaged you feel to talk about it...

[Falcon Horus]

That was totally out of order to accuse me of that, I was simply comparing the situations, I do not care who you vote for or who you believe in, or who you choose to love, its none of my business.

I apologize for assuming so.

I interpreted it wrong, I'm sorry.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/man-sho...nstead-police/
Was reading this, I know he meant well, but maybe a little more training is necessary

Cold water, or a good knock on the nose (-- the latter could be for a shark, not entirely sure) -- for the dog, not the idiot who used his gun. He should pay the woman's recovery for inflicting accidental injury.

Are they not free to protest on their own?

You'd probably complain about that too.

If you watch The Matrix backwards, it's very educational. It shows how Neo quit the pills and found a stable office job.

Well, I'll be damned...

It would also show him giving up individuality to become a drone.

-- well done... well done.

[SoulReaver]

k so can anyone actually explain once & for all how the f kneeling is a form of protest?

cause from my point of view it makes absolutely zero sense
c'mon I can't be the only one who thinks that

kneeling is a sign of deference (you know, the opposite of defiance). I reckon all will agree unless social customs recently underwent a pole flip without my knowing

so if I intended to show anger or disapproval toward the president & his government then bending the knee is the very last thing I'd consider*
on the contrary I'd stand but with arms crossed (a decent enough symbol of protest) or maybe I'd even give the finger but certainly not bend the knee










*now if the president were a cute silver-haired woman with a big intimidating dragon at her side I might make an exception**
** some of you will get the reference

[Annoyed]

Quote Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
Are they not free to protest on their own?

You'd probably complain about that too.

When have you seen me suggest that a legal, peaceful protest or expression of opinion be suppressed?
My only point in this discussion is that they don't have the right to protest while on the clock, using their employer's stage and wearing the uniform of their employer unless the employer allows it. If the NFL owners decide to allow it, I have no objection. Just as I have no objection if they choose to protest on their own time and dime.
I may think one viewpoint or another is stupid, worthy of ridicule, or worth no attention at all, but you will never see me oppose peaceful, legal expression of ideas.

[Annoyed]

k so can anyone actually explain once & for all how the f kneeling is a form of protest?

cause from my point of view it makes absolutely zero sense
c'mon I can't be the only one who thinks that

kneeling is a sign of deference (you know, the opposite of defiance). I reckon all will agree unless social customs recently underwent a pole flip without my knowing

so if I intended to show anger or disapproval toward the president & his government then bending the knee is the very last thing I'd consider*
on the contrary I'd stand but with arms crossed (a decent enough symbol of protest) or maybe I'd even give the finger but certainly not bend the knee










*now if the president were a cute silver-haired woman with a big intimidating dragon at her side I might make an exception**
** some of you will get the reference

Standing during the National Anthem or Pledge of Allegiance is a longstanding tradition in this country. I can see refusing to do so as a legitimate expression of disapproval.

[SoulReaver]

Standing during the National Anthem or Pledge of Allegiance is a longstanding tradition in this country. I can see refusing to do so as a legitimate expression of disapproval.

we stand while doing a lot of things. the goalkeeper stands while waiting for the ball. I stand while washing my hands. etc.

if you can't stand standing there's better ways to show it. like sit cross-legged (yoga pose)
I maintain my stance on kneeling as a form of protest it just doesn't sit well with me :|


do you think this is also an act of defiance :
http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/lo...21/A121953.jpg
?

[Annoyed]

we stand while doing a lot of things. the goalkeeper stands while waiting for the ball. I stand while washing my hands. etc.

if you can't stand standing there's better ways to show it. like sit cross-legged (yoga pose)
I maintain my stance on kneeling as a form of protest it just doesn't sit well with me :|


do you think this is also an act of defiance :
http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/lo...21/A121953.jpg
?

You're not getting it. It is the refusal to stand that is making the statement. It doesn't matter if they are kneeling, sitting or playing twister.

However, kneeling has some significance in the game of football; I *think* upon kickoff, the receiving team's catcher can signal that he will just catch the ball, not attempt to go upfield with it by kneeling. Or something like that; I'm not that big a football fan.