09-07-2004 23:51									#181
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

On an aside, I've seen here a number of claims that say Unions improve working conditions and safety.

Are there any figures to support these claims? I seem to recall comparisons in my management days that showed non union shops in general outperformed unions shops in all respects including: environmental records, OSHA records, pay rate, pay raises, etc.

I could be mistaken but that was my recall. The gist of the reasoning was that obstructionist tactics taken by the unions prevented the shops from making meaningful advances. Again its been a while.

	10-07-2004 00:39									#182
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Agathon On the whole, they don't. Pwned.

I don't think there's any other poster on Apolyton who spends more time declaring himself the victor than actually arguing his case.

	10-07-2004 00:41									#183
	Got spare money?

Ogie, who did the study? I can guarantee in the coal industry that is NOT the case. Coal mine operators routinely cut corners, look up the scandal on dust sampling in Kentucky over the last decade. I have a specific case that contradicts it, from right now. Google it and you'll get all the unpleasant details. We are talking a nasty, unpleasant death from black lung (which actually may be a version of silicosis).

Imran, I grant your point about the thread start. However, it's like your point to me about the semi-deregulated versus genuine free market energy market and Enron, you cannot discuss one in a vacuum without the context of the building of power plants. Why the perception of you being anti-union? I just reread all your posts. Except for a few vague global statements, most of your statements are anti-union, and every detailed statement nitpicks at unions. Every position you support, i.e. against closed shops, etc. serves to weaken unions. As I noted, I presented both good and bad corporations, with the context of why unions are necessary, and why they do not have to be. Imran, if you are perceived as anti-union due to the posts, than just maybe it might be your rhetoric. When some people tried to explain the diffrerent types of shop, you disparaged them and blew off the points on decertifying and/or changing unions. Change your delivery, and you'll change the perception.

	10-07-2004 00:53									#184
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I believe it was DoL but its been about 10 years now.

	10-07-2004 01:08									#185
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Except for a few vague global statements, most of your statements are anti-union, and every detailed statement nitpicks at unions.

When you have people who are basically declaring that unions are always good and attack those who say unions have done X badly, of course I'm going to nitpick at unions. If the discussion was reversed and most people were saying abolish unions, I'd nitpick for unions. Seeing as how hardly anyone said unions are all evil and so many are saying that they are great, guess which side I'm going to nitpick?

It's kind of the beauty of being a moderate, you agree with both sides to some degree .

quote: When some people tried to explain the diffrerent types of shop, you disparaged them and blew off the points on decertifying and/or changing unions.

Because in the end there really is very little difference. For all intents and purposes allowing union shops but not closed shops is NOT an anti-union stance, which what those 'people' tried to make it out to be.

	10-07-2004 02:27									#186
	Increase Your PM Length

Imran, I work in an open shop. Until you have some way to limit the non-union workers from benefiting from the Union's prescence, it weakens the union. In fact, my union is REQUIRED by law to help represent the non-union members. Closed shop with 50% thresholds for decertification is much fairer, without some of the hoops that the new or anti-union people have to jump through. Now if you had posted on making it easier for the rank-and-file to replace a union, with stronger protections against management meddling, you would have gotten my support, and I suspect quite a few of the other posters here.

Nit-picking does NOT change people's minds. I've been puzzled by your posts in the past, and now I get it. You're having FUN, and you are playing the traditional devil's advocate type (coincedentally, Imran, I would call you slightly right of center, you don't belong to the Nediverse, where ever he disappeared to, but you definitely are not a little bit over on the left). But when you nit-pick somebody, don't get upset when they brand you anti- whatever you are nitpicking. It does follow, in most cases.

	10-07-2004 03:28									#187
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Imran, I work in an open shop. Until you have some way to limit the non-union workers from benefiting from the Union's prescence, it weakens the union. In fact, my union is REQUIRED by law to help represent the non-union members. Closed shop with 50% thresholds for decertification is much fairer, without some of the hoops that the new or anti-union people have to jump through. Now if you had posted on making it easier for the rank-and-file to replace a union, with stronger protections against management meddling, you would have gotten my support, and I suspect quite a few of the other posters here.

Open shop is not a UNION shop. A union shop says you can be non-union for a month and then after that you have to join the union or leave. Closed shop says you join first. Between a UNION ship and CLOSED ship, there is little difference. That one month isn't that big a deal.

quote: Nit-picking does NOT change people's minds.

Neither will anything else on this site. What's your point? Nit-picking is very effective a lot of times at breaking down 'total' arguments.

quote: you definitely are not a little bit over on the left

I'm pro-choice and pro-drug legalization as well as pro-national health insurance (to a certain extent). I think that qualifies as at least a 'little' bit over on the left.

quote: But when you nit-pick somebody, don't get upset when they brand you anti- whatever you are nitpicking.

It displays ignorance to do so.

	10-07-2004 06:33									#188
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

However, if from what I've read here the decertification procedures are different (I've never looked into it not having worked in one, I just know the procedures for decertification in an open shop) then that can be a critical difference, especially in the corrupt union cases you seem so fond of harping - or is it nit-picking on. I'll grant you those two positions- prochoice and legalizing stupidity (how I feel about drugs - hey, with the right ones it's self-correcting) I'll grant you the definite center, not the left. I tend towards being anti-anything that criminalizes non-victimizing behavior, i.e. firearms, prostitution, etc. Of course Berzerker beats me in that arena hands down. Oh, it may not display ignorance, just irritation. I'll be gone for the weekend, the funeral. I've enjoyed taking my mind off things over the last few days.

	10-07-2004 20:27									#189
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Read Fast Food Nation. It shows the problems that have been caused after the unions for slaughterhouse workers were destroyed. The food we eat now is much more unsafe. Working conditions are more dangerous, in many cases fatally dangerous.

That's funny. Food poisoning and other food related illnesses has been going down for years. I have no doubt that nonunionized manual laborers don't make as much money but seenings how post-NAFTA they would have had to compete with cheaper Mexican labor any way the real choice was between firing everyone and moving the factory to Mexico or getting workers to accept competetive wages. Sucks for them but that's what happens who you have little to no skills.

	10-07-2004 20:38									#190
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: if you want an example of why pirvatization is bad look at california.

Paiktis: You need to know a bit about this before you use it as a example. For instance California didn't privitize anything they attempted a partial deregulation of the power industry. Unlike a privitization no company was ever owned by the government; instead the government regulated everything from prices to services the companies must provide and it meant an aweful lot of politics went into every decision the power industry made. The big problem was big corporate money from the likes of Enron wrote the regulations so they could abuse the system. The politicians got cold feet at the last moment though and they ruled that whole salers could charge what ever rates they wanted but distributors couldn't pass on the price to costumers. That meant that no matter what happened to the price of power the electric company would have to charge the same price.

Now enter Enron and a few other theives. They purposefully downed power plants and used legal loop holes to jack the price of power up sky high. The Bush administration could have stopped them at any time but Enron was a big contributor and California traditionally votes democratic so the Republican President didn't care what happened out there.

The way Bush fiddled while millions of retires got their savings wiped out is one reason why I will not vote for Bush and I urge everyone else here not to vote for him either.

	10-07-2004 20:58									#191
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Wow, that's a lot of passing the buck, Oerdin. So let me get this straight. You wanted Bush to dictate a federal solution on a problem that was made in California, impacted mostly only California, and was best solved in California?

Give me a break.

	16-07-2004 16:06									#192
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

No, DanS, Oerdin wanted the FEDERAL Oversight Board to do it's job, not look the other way while a Texas-based company shut down plants both inside and OUSIDE of California, and then the Bush administration claimed nothing was happening. My own personal opinion is that the Bush administration did that, correctly, hoping that the voters would blame Davis (while Enron gave $100 million to Delay to redistrict Texas, quite possibly illegally), while not giving a crap about the regular people, which includes retirees and children, having to choose between a power bill and necessities, or turning off AC when you are old and unable to deal with high termperatures - by the way, that KILLS people. It's Interstate, which means it requires a Federal response, under that funny thing called a constitution.