This one's for "Hoffa" pBills

[ExiledInIllinois]

Premises for Unions when my grandfather helped start one in the 40's:

1. Only the best workers get to join, not everybody. Union status was earned, not entitled.

2. By definition, the union workers(see #1) had every right to demand more pay than non-union workers

3. If you didn't hold up your end of the deal, it's bye bye union card

4. Managers had a choice, hire the union, pay more, but, get a quality job done faster.

5. Based on 1-4, union labor had every right to say "hey, we are the guys doing the job, we want a cut, based on our performance"

 

Premises for Unions now:

1. Everyone is forced to join the union, or is entitled to, regardless of how they work

2. Since everybody is paid the same, based only on time they have been there, not how well they work, the good worker has no incentive to do any better than the turd, and is often discouraged from standing out, lest he expose the turd for being...a turd. Experience is more about how to be a better turd, not good, worker. The younger worker does a better job for a few years, until the veterans wear them down. Of course there are exceptions, but, those are the guys you meet in the bar who say they retired early because they were sick of the turds, and consequently, the turd management that has also given up...due to the turds.

3. Nobody gets tossed, short of work abandonment, and even then, its a lawsuit, grievance process, blah, blah, blah

4. Managers have no choice, they have to take all the turds with the good workers....and they usually end up in the bar sitting next to the frustrated good worker.

5. The average union leader/organizer is looking to do a volume business, not stand up for the good workers. The concept of paying the best workers for the best work has been replaced by: if you show up relatively sober, you are entitled to more $ than you are worth, free health care, and "hey, slow down or you will work yourself out of a job, and, if I have to tell you again, we will throw you out of the union for working too hard"....because I get paid by the head, not by the quality of work.

 

"Let me be clear": my grandfather was talking about unions, and what he worked for, being abused, and essentially over with, in the 80s. There simply is no incentive for a turd to do anything to improve. In fact, if anything, now its more about the the stud being turned into a turd. Spare me the anecdotes and platitudes: I have lived and seen this right in front of me, so, I have one of mine for every single one of yours.

 

I can't help thinking that if things went back to the original set of premises, we would all have a much better view of unions. But, then again, historically, I also think that the big mistake was letting the CIO join the AFL.

 

I think we can all agree that skilled labor, and the good workers involved, have every right to collective bargain no different that how any other association works on behalf of its workers.

 

However, I also think that when we allow non-skilled labor to demand wages that the market doesn't support....we end up with factories in China, and again, no incentive for unskilled labor to improve themselves. When we let/force everybody to join the union, we end up with the teacher's union, the results we have, and the endless "just throw money at it" nonsense.

 

Where does enviro regulations fit into all this? And how these regs are chasing jobs oveseas and causing twice as much harm to the global enviro.

 

Business doesn't care about quality, it is all about quantity in a throw away society that talks out the side of its mouth about being earth friendly.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Also, regarding the Teamsters:

 

I find it highly ironic that they complain about wages, threaten to strike, etc., get higher wages, and then complain about the price of the very goods they haul, like milk, going up....which of course causes the price of most other things to go up too.

 

WTF do they expect to happen?

 

Yet, every time, they haul out the tired, old, "standard of living" and "cost of inflation" arguments, when they want more money, again.

 

My brother was a Teamster, got laid off back in fall of 2008... Hauled cars... Now he is non-union hauling cars. Not because of his own doing, he would gladly go back if he could.

[OCinBuffalo]

Where does enviro regulations fit into all this? And how these regs are chasing jobs oveseas and causing twice as much harm to the global enviro.

Honestly? It fits in exactly as the nonsense deflection from my basic point that it is. While I agree that subjecting our economy to one set of standards, and subjecting Russia/India/China to... nothing, while talking about *GLOBAL* environmental concerns, and then calling us rich, stupid, and of course, evil, is perhaps the pinnacle of retarded discourse....

 

...it doesn't change a damn thing about what I am saying about where, why, and how unions started, and the bastardization that has occurred that has them where they are now.

Business doesn't care about quality, it is all about quantity in a throw away society that talks out the side of its mouth about being earth friendly.

Buddy, you are talking to a guy who, in his first job, had to build a system to track his own help desk calls, by time, standard, and quality of response to the point of ridiculousness(ISO 9003), and I was nowhere near the production line and had nothing to do with the product. I didn't even work at the damn company. I was consultant for pete's sake.....but....that client didn't care about: quality? WTF?

 

Apparently you have never been through an ISO 9000 audit....oh, wait, that's right, you work for the government, so, when it comes to quality, I suppose you know nothing. I might as well be speaking Swahili.

 

Suggestion: please don't apply your experience(= 0) when talking about what "Business" cares about, or "quality" for that matter, you'll come off as less of an idiot.

[OCinBuffalo]

My brother was a Teamster, got laid off back in fall of 2008... Hauled cars... Now he is non-union hauling cars. Not because of his own doing, he would gladly go back if he could.

Remember that part above, where I said "no anecdotes or platitudes because for every one you have I have one that counters it"?

 

I literally just ran into a guy who worked in a similar job as you, NYS Power Authority, who said he quit and took retirement because of the the jackasses in the union, laziness etc. He said that unions have all gone to hell, will take anybody, don't do anything to help good workers, only spend their time trying to force management to keep the bad workers, etc.

 

He quit by his own doing, he wouldn't gladly go back if he could.

 

So, as I said, spare us with the stories/platitudes about unions, for every one you have, I am like the F You mirror.

[pBills]

Simple question.

 

What is covered by the $56,000/year budget?

 

 

Read much? The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation; facility maintenance; and technology

 

I have stated COUNTLESS times the budget I am talking about DOES NOT INCLUDE SALARIES FOR TEACHERS, ADMINISTRATORS AND OTHER STAFF OR TRANSPORTATION!!!

[pBills]

Now with that be taken care of... I still say we need to spend more on education, but spend wisely. Spend in areas that truly need help. Example: Inner City Schools.

[Jim in Anchorage]

Read much? The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; [u]salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation;[/u] facility maintenance; and technology

 

I have stated COUNTLESS times the budget I am talking about DOES NOT INCLUDE SALARIES FOR TEACHERS, ADMINISTRATORS AND OTHER STAFF OR TRANSPORTATION!!!

You are not making yourself clear. Is it one, or the other?

[3rdnlng]

Read much? The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation; facility maintenance; and technology

 

I have stated COUNTLESS times the budget I am talking about DOES NOT INCLUDE SALARIES FOR TEACHERS, ADMINISTRATORS AND OTHER STAFF OR TRANSPORTATION!!!

 

You have also stated COUNTLESS times that the budget includes salaries. Which one of you are we to believe? Dumb, or Dumber?

[pBills]

You have also stated COUNTLESS times that the budget includes salaries. Which one of you are we to believe? Dumb, or Dumber?

 

 

Where have I said that?

[Alaska Darin]

Where have I said that?

 

The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff

[erynthered]

The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff

 

 

buck says he still doesnt get it!

[pBills]

The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff

 

 

READ A BIT MORE OR THIS TO HARD FOR YOU!!!

 

The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation; facility maintenance; and technology.

 

Salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation... was OBVIOUSLY NOT PART OF THE EQUATION. According to what was said, the funding left over to cover the rest was roughly $56,000.

 

With that being said. Next time their is a meeting I will let you know.

[Alaska Darin]

READ A BIT MORE OR THIS TO HARD FOR YOU!!!

"too"

 

Seriously, is it so difficult to use the correct form of the word?

The budget also covers the cost of providing and supporting day-to-day activities in our schools: instructional materials and supplies; program and services; salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation; facility maintenance; and technology.

 

Salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation... was OBVIOUSLY NOT PART OF THE EQUATION. According to what was said, the funding left over to cover the rest was roughly $56,000.

You don't get to be all condescending when you contradict yourself within a post. The mistake is yours, not ours. Take 10 seconds to read the !@#$ing thing so you don't look so stupid.

 

As far as it being obvious: No kidding. That's why we're asking for clarification of what the !@#$ing $56k is actually for.

With that being said. Next time their is a meeting I will let you know.

"there"

 

We're certainly awaiting your findings.

[pBills]

"too"

 

Seriously, is it so difficult to use the correct form of the word?

 

You don't get to be all condescending when you contradict yourself within a post. The mistake is yours, not ours. Take 10 seconds to read the !@#$ing thing so you don't look so stupid.

 

As far as it being obvious: No kidding. That's why we're asking for clarification of what the !@#$ing $56k is actually for.

 

"there"

 

We're certainly awaiting your findings.

 

 

Thank you for correcting my spelling. I appreciate it.

 

I gave them clarification... a monkey could understand that post. Especially the part:

 

"Salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation... was OBVIOUSLY NOT PART OF THE EQUATION. According to what was said, the funding left over to cover the rest was roughly $56,000."

[VABills]

Thank you for correcting my spelling. I appreciate it.

 

I gave them clarification... a monkey could understand that post. Especially the part:

 

"Salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation... was OBVIOUSLY NOT PART OF THE EQUATION. According to what was said, the funding left over to cover the rest was roughly $56,000."

So what does the 56K cover exactly. Which school? We can find the meeting notes, it is publically available.

[pBills]

So what does the 56K cover exactly. Which school? We can find the meeting notes, it is publically available.

 

 

This was not an official meeting, so highly doubt the notes were published. The meeting was intended for teachers, some staff and parents.

 

I hope you people put this much effort into your careers.

[Joe Miner]

Thank you for correcting my spelling. I appreciate it.

 

I gave them clarification... a monkey could understand that post. Especially the part:

 

"Salaries for teachers, administrators and other staff; transportation... was OBVIOUSLY NOT PART OF THE EQUATION. According to what was said, the funding left over to cover the rest was roughly $56,000."

 

You're a tool.

 

You screwed up your own posts by your complete lack of literary competency, muddled through some kind of asinine explanation, and then contradicted yourself in the very same post.

 

But somehow it's us that doesn't get it.

 

When no matter what you're trying to babble about now, the fact is that you were initially wrong about your claim that the $56,000/year budget was to cover EVERYTHING. That's the real point people are calling bull **** on. But that fact seems to continually elude you. 3/4 of this thread is people telling you that $56,000/year isn't enough for all the costs of a school, and you continually defending your lack of understanding of whatever you heard in some meeting.

 

Now that you know what was being talked about in the school meeting you attended, you'll be much more prepared to participate next time, and maybe they won't make you sit at the little kids' table again.

[3rdnlng]

This was not an official meeting, so highly doubt the notes were published. The meeting was intended for teachers, some staff and parents.

 

I hope you people put this much effort into your careers.

 

 

Don't really want to pile on anymore, but you are doing this to yourself. Every time you backtrack or spew out bs to defend one of your many differing opinions you invite criticism. Everyone of us are capable of either misspelling a word, hitting the wrong key or having a brainfart. I try to read my posts before actually posting them. You are careless, inattentive or don't know any better. That contributes to the perception that you just plain don't know what you are talking about.

[pBills]

You're a tool.

 

You screwed up your own posts by your complete lack of literary competency, muddled through some kind of asinine explanation, and then contradicted yourself in the very same post.

 

But somehow it's us that doesn't get it.

 

When no matter what you're trying to babble about now, the fact is that you were initially wrong about your claim that the $56,000/year budget was to cover EVERYTHING. That's the real point people are calling bull **** on. But that fact seems to continually elude you. 3/4 of this thread is people telling you that $56,000/year isn't enough for all the costs of a school, and you continually defending your lack of understanding of whatever you heard in some meeting.

 

Now that you know what was being talked about in the school meeting you attended, you'll be much more prepared to participate next time, and maybe they won't make you sit at the little kids' table again.

 

 

How was initially wrong ass hat? I have stated ALL ALONG the part of budget I was talking about did not cover salaries, etc. The $56K covered other daily operations.

 

So kiss my butt d-bag.

[Joe Miner]

How was initially wrong ass hat? I have stated ALL ALONG the part of budget I was talking about did not cover salaries, etc. The $56K covered other daily operations.

 

So kiss my butt d-bag.

 

Wow...

 

 

Oh and in all seriousness, we don't spend enough on education in this country. One of the schools (elementary) I live near has a YEARLY budget of $56,000 to cover everything. And some people say that is a bit high.

 

Explain to me how these two posts of yours mean the same thing.

 

You posted this BS. People called you out on it. You got defensive about this nugget of information that you misunderstood at some school meeting you attended. People didn't care and still told you that you were full of ****. It wasn't until later that you decided to backtrack and try to incoherently (mis)spell out what you thought the grownups at the meeting were really talking about. Now you're claiming you never made these initial comments.