Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

They should just fire the freaking transit workers and hire new ones. (rant)

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

  • Bluto Blutarsky
    replied
    "The only power a worker has is the power to control their work output. If the law says it's illegal to cease working, then that power is removed. So when you say "go back and negotiate", what do they have to negotiate with? The MTA offers X. Union says no, that's not enough. So then you want nothing to happen. The MTS could simply wait the union out."

    Bullshit, have you ever negotiated anything in your life? I negotiate tons of deals where my client is on the weaker side. Where the MTA has a need for workers, because they cannot work for free and no one is expecting them to no matter how you want it to sound, they will negotiate. There is a reason for the Taylor law and these assholes broke it.


    "Bullshit. A boss doesn't work if they have no employees. A business doesn't function without the workers. Any organisation crumbles without members. They hold the power. Don't like it? Outsource to 3rd world dictatorships where the workers don't have pesky lil things like "rights" and you can force them to work 17 hours days for pennies."

    Learn some basic economics, yes labor is important but what is more important AND more skilled, management or labor. A laborer can be replaced a HELL of a lot easier than a manager. Without capital there is no business, without a laborer you just hire another laborer.



    "I can't believe you just wrote "unlevel towards management". Cry me a fucking river. The entire capitalist system is biased towards those with the money, the "capital" in "capitalistic". "

    Yes, and that is the basis for our society, unions change that. We still have labor laws that protect against that which as I've said before protect against improper conduct. Here the union actually protects them when the laborer engages in improper conduct it takes a freaking complaint file as long as your arm to fire a union employee. Again, what is more important, capital. You would have the laborer making 90% of profits while the boss takes home 10%, yet when times are bad the labor won't dig into thier own pockets to put up money.

    "And the majority of societies workers are being fucked. Go read about the working poor. Really sucks not everyone belongs to a union."

    There would be no business if everyone belonged to a union. How are they bieng fucked? because they don't make a million dollars like they want to and sit and play playstation all day at work or because they are bieng beaten or sexually harassed or improperly treated. ALL of which we have laws against. And I'm only concerned about THIS society, I don't vote or live in france, or china or paraguay.


    "Inflation does mean that anything less than a 3.5% raise equals a pay cut."

    No, it means what it means, an employer is not supposed to guarantee that the value of thier dollar is the same, what kind of idiotic statement is that?

    "And again with the "they have it better than X". So what? You have it better than most, you planning on taking a pay cut anytime soon? Your boss ever say "you make more than willy the janitor, you STFU about your pay and working conditions.""

    No but as I am my own boss, when the money is not there I HAVE TAKEN MONEY OUT OF MY BANK ACCOUNT TO PAY THE EXPENSES OF THE COMPANY, and there are times I have taken no salary at all when the money isn't there, that is what bieng a boss is. I don't see my employees choosing NOT to get paid. They are not my partners and just as they are not expected to share in the losses, they should not share in the profits.

    Get some glasses to fix that tunnel vision you have.


    "Right. Cause we've never had unfair laws in this country. Ask any black man."

    I was expecting such a stupid comparison. Are you comparing the civil rights movement to breaking the taylor law? That is insane. If blacks had the benefits then that the twu had or the advantages of union labor over non union labor they would have had more priveledges than whites. (If you need me to expand that I will)

    "Hold the city hostage? Jesus, what are they - the legion of doom? How can I have any kind of discussion with you saying BS like that?"

    BS is how many busineses have gone under or experienced 60% or higher cuts in business at a time when these small busnesses NEED the revenue, many of these businesses rely on this time of year to survive. I'd be willing to bet because of these sons of bitches more than 30,000 will be out of work when the companies go under. Not every business is an FAO shwartz or coka cola (who probably doesn't see much hurt from this, but the convenient store guy selling it, or the restaurant does).

    Do you deny that the people these workers are hurting are not the rich but the poor? So basically thier strike hurts OTHER WORKERS! And you say it isn't selfish?


    "But you know what would be great for pricks that think like you? If they did fire all of them. NYC transit would be fucked for years trying to get 30k people trained, the city and state would be fucked with the ~100k new poor people getting on unemployment and welfare and Medicaid, taxes would skyrocket with the loss of revenue from the good jobs that were wiped out and the losses from trying to find and hire new people, etc etc."

    Ok if we are going to go along this route I'll answer your speculations with an equally meritorious comment that approaches all the issues just like you did.

    Replacement? What replacement? An armless monkey can do the job better and will work for bannanas.


    "But hey, at least the people that made it hard for you do get to work would be punished."

    Once again with the idiocy, dude are you even literate? do I need to spell it out phonetically? here goes.

    I-T, Is-N-t Me, It is T-h-E P-EE-P Le Th-AT CAN-T A-ffOrD to TAke C-A-B-S


    "Good job with the thinking ahead."

    yep, I'm thiking how they need to be punished or they will cost the city and businesses and millions of other workers more money, what is the estimate now? A billion dollars. Great selfish asshole thinking guys.
    Hope they do get sanctions against the workers for the strike as well as the union (already have).

    Leave a comment:


  • PEtrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by JohnnyCache
    1. Wal mart is horrible to work for. Target is OK to work for. Their entry level pay may seem about the same but Target treats people much better, has better hiring practices (you can expect more competent co-workers, in other words) and works harder to promote from withing then wal-mart. At least from what I've heard from friends that worked at both. .
    The above article from an industry watchdog that interview employees does not come to that conclution.

    2. The idea that a degree entitles you to a living and a rank and file job somewhere like the MTA doesn't is bullshit. The idea that 'some jobs should just be shitty - I went to college, they should go to college' - that's literally ERIC CARTMAN level logic.
    No one said anything about college, it said skilled, educated. No one said jobs should be shitty, some require less skill than others.

    Work should have value. A bricklayer or trashman or bus driver works - look me in the eye and tell me that an entry level computer programmer "deserves" more money for sitting around typing all day then an entry level stonemason or construction framer or plumber. The reality is these people are told they should make very little for unskilled jobs and they accept it - THAT is the failing of their lack of education; that is where their lack of education lets them down.
    All work has value that is decided by the free market. In the past unions fought to protect workers rights. An unfortunate fact of the growt of the unions is now it must work to preserve its own ass.

    All work enables other societal benefits. You may think a rich man's maid is an unskilled laborer - but in reality, she enables his work. He employs her because it is cheaper to do those things and free his time for his pursuits. The money he generates via the time he frees by employing her is a contribution to the economy far beyond her taxation.
    This is trickle down or voodo econiomics. I love that theory/reality.

    College isn't really some acheivement. It's not really all that hard. A combination of factors - access, money, lifestyle, obligation - can have a great influence on a person's education, and I'm sorry, sitting in a classroom for four extra years learning this or that isn't some cross that entitles you to a better life - it's a reward granted to you by generations before you.
    Again, college was never pointed out to be the ned all be all, but it can provide skill, time to mature, and develop a sense of that you want to do for the rest of your life. You can graduate and be a miserable faliure, the choice is yours.

    Just because someone's job doesn't appeal to you or you wouldn't do it or whatever doesn't mean they should be treated like a disposable component.
    The world needs ditch diggers too. And thats not being snide, it's a reality.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohnnyCache
    replied
    1. Wal mart is horrible to work for. Target is OK to work for. Their entry level pay may seem about the same but Target treats people much better, has better hiring practices (you can expect more competent co-workers, in other words) and works harder to promote from withing then wal-mart. At least from what I've heard from friends that worked at both.

    2. The idea that a degree entitles you to a living and a rank and file job somewhere like the MTA doesn't is bullshit. The idea that 'some jobs should just be shitty - I went to college, they should go to college' - that's literally ERIC CARTMAN level logic.

    Work should have value. A bricklayer or trashman or bus driver works - look me in the eye and tell me that an entry level computer programmer "deserves" more money for sitting around typing all day then an entry level stonemason or construction framer or plumber. The reality is these people are told they should make very little for unskilled jobs and they accept it - THAT is the failing of their lack of education; that is where their lack of education lets them down.

    All work enables other societal benefits. You may think a rich man's maid is an unskilled laborer - but in reality, she enables his work. He employs her because it is cheaper to do those things and free his time for his pursuits. The money he generates via the time he frees by employing her is a contribution to the economy far beyond her taxation.

    College isn't really some acheivement. It's not really all that hard. A combination of factors - access, money, lifestyle, obligation - can have a great influence on a person's education, and I'm sorry, sitting in a classroom for four extra years learning this or that isn't some cross that entitles you to a better life - it's a reward granted to you by generations before you.

    Just because someone's job doesn't appeal to you or you wouldn't do it or whatever doesn't mean they should be treated like a disposable component.

    And all the white collar fucks out there need to start learning the words to "we shall overcome" - because your asses are next. You get that, right? The last decade has shown us, with the situation at say, EA games and the tread of extra-national tech support and programming, that no one is immune to the greed of our neighbors.

    I do agree with PE, however, that it is our neighbors, in the case of walmart for example, that make these things possible - we all give in and buy the cheap shit at the big store once in a while. I don't automatically think walmart should be punished for thinking of a better way to do something, people just need to understand that when they shop there, they are exporting the stores profits and creating only shitty jobs in their community - in other words, they aren't really being part of W's "culture of ownership"
    Last edited by JohnnyCache; 12/22/2005 2:01pm, .

    Leave a comment:


  • PEtrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom Kagan
    Does the stock analysis include the fact that those employees covered under such a plan are really being paid for by corporate welfare tax dollars? Does the analysis show the stock options are off-blotter artificially deflating the corporate liability? Does the analysis show the "real" pension fund underfunded artificially pumping up cash flow?

    Stock analysis showed ENRON to be such a good buy.
    So what companies out there exist for the benefits of the employee? None. These people are more than fair to (again) non- skilled workers.

    From The Slate:

    Faulting Wal-Mart for America's wage stagnation is also unfair. Retail is an industry not known for developing employee skills. No matter how much it needs workers, Wal-Mart won't offer defined benefit pension plans or health insurance coverage for retirees. And neither will virtually any retailer that relies largely on low-skilled, temporary workers.

    Leave a comment:


  • PEtrainer
    replied
    http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12289

    For years, Target has cultivated an image of itself as the "anti-Wal-Mart," a retailer that refuses to sacrifice workplace standards in the pursuit of higher sales and stock prices. But now, after a decade of meteoric growth at both Target and Wal-Mart, labor groups say the two retailers are no longer very different in the way they treat their workers.
    Target pays between $6.25 an hour to $8 an hour for entry-level, hourly positions in its Twin Cities stores, according to a recent survey of local Target workers by the UFCW. That's in line with what Wal-Mart pays in this market, though some starting-level Wal-Mart workers can earn $9 to $10 an hour, the UFCW said.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom Kagan
    replied
    Originally posted by PEtrainer
    No I don't especially when these numbers come from stock anaysis.

    Does the stock analysis include the fact that those employees covered under such a plan are really being paid for by corporate welfare tax dollars? Does the analysis show the stock options are off-blotter artificially deflating the corporate liability? Does the analysis show the "real" pension fund underfunded artificially pumping up cash flow?

    Stock analysis showed ENRON to be such a good buy.

    Leave a comment:


  • garbanzo
    replied
    Originally posted by PEtrainer
    - You are correct.

    -These people are about to bargin themselves in to being jobless.
    I doubt it. I don't think anyone at the MTA or in City government has the stones to fire them and take responsibility for the chaos that would result. The system is not great as it is, and it's taken decades to get it this good after its low point in the 80's. If they try to replace all the workers it will grind to a halt.

    They are, however, on the verge of driving their own union bankrupt.
    Last edited by garbanzo; 12/22/2005 1:30pm, .

    Leave a comment:


  • PirateJon
    replied
    Originally posted by PEtrainer
    -Walmart consistenly shows that it is better than most retailers inculding Target in the emplyee benefits and pay scales.

    I'd love to see you prove that, since I read all the time about how costco and target beat walmart hands down.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter H.
    replied
    Originally posted by PEtrainer
    - You are correct.

    -These people are about to bargin themselves in to being jobless.

    Everyone should remember the aircraft mechanics union in San Antonio and why there are so many aircraft mechanics working in other fields now. They played Zero-Sum with both the US Government and Boeing, and lost.

    Same goes with the pilots union and a couple of small airlines.

    Just remember, no matter how strong a union you have, if there are no businesses to hire you, it doesn't matter what your collective bargaining agreement says.

    Plus, some union memebrs are returning to work, according to what I am reading this morning.

    Leave a comment:


  • PEtrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom Kagan
    And you don't think accounting gimmicks such as what was mentioned has anything to do with such a showing?
    No I don't especially when these numbers come from stock anaysis.

    Leave a comment:


  • PEtrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by garbanzo
    That's two ad homini in one post.

    As charming as the Horatio Alger story might be, the labor theory of value is an outdated Marxist idea. People often do not get what they earn. They often get that for which they bargain.
    - You are correct.

    -These people are about to bargin themselves in to being jobless.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom Kagan
    replied
    Originally posted by PEtrainer
    Walmart consistenly shows that it is better than most retailers inculding Target in the emplyee benefits and pay scales.

    And you don't think accounting gimmicks such as what was mentioned has anything to do with such a showing?

    Leave a comment:


  • garbanzo
    replied
    Originally posted by PEtrainer
    Hating? Look brother, I'm educated, make a lot more money than these people and had to work for what I got. I'm not hating anyone. People should get what they earn. These jobs were never created for people to live very well off of.

    I know what a pension plan is. I sell them.

    You other points suck. This isn't the UK we do things efficently here.

    Look, you and all these other whiny, cry babies out there, quit sticking up for people who opted not to do anything productive with their lives and took jobs opening and closing doors and collecting tolls.
    That's two ad homini in one post.

    As charming as the Horatio Alger story might be, the labor theory of value is an outdated Marxist idea. People often do not get what they earn. They often get that for which they bargain.

    Leave a comment:


  • PEtrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom Kagan
    Because Wal-Mart provides help to many of its workers so they can apply for medicaid/medicare and SSI, the corporation classifies those workers as covered under the employee health care and retirement programs.

    Wal-Mart is non-union.
    I don't get this argument. So what?

    I think people need a review in basic economics.

    -Walmart is a publicly traded company, if you have a 401k, guess what... odds are you own stock in walmart. IE you own walmart. You also own some part in gas companies, super markets etc....

    -There is a finite amount of money. It's a zero sum game. Someone has to pay for this, you pay for it in higher taxes or higher prices in the store.

    -Walmart consistenly shows that it is better than most retailers inculding Target in the emplyee benefits and pay scales.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom Kagan
    replied
    Originally posted by PEtrainer
    Thats not the point, not even close.

    Unskilled workers are striking so they can continue to have new hires retire at 55 not 62. This is unreasonable. The pension plan system is also typically unavilable to the mass majority of workers who work in the private sector. MOst people have to save for their own retirement. The workers striking in this instance calls for an over hall of the current employment situation, and possibly a privitaization of that workforce.

    You are making an argumentum ad hominem by stating since the MTA lied once, they do not have a valid point. That in itself make the argument false.

    Because Wal-Mart provides help to many of its workers so they can apply for medicaid/medicare and SSI, the corporation classifies those workers as covered under the employee health care and retirement programs.

    Wal-Mart is non-union.

    Leave a comment:

Collapse

Edit this module to specify a template to display.

Working...
X