I can. It's like a lot of my client contracts. They are good for a certain period of time. If nothing is done, they are automatically terminated. In this case, it is the Republicans who have refused to renew, unless they get their way on a clause they added that would make it more difficult for FAA members to unionize.
Now I am about as anti-union as you can get . But this is complete f*cking stupidity on the part of the GOP.
Any other questions, feel free to ask. And sorry if my frustration with this idiocy seems abrupt or directed at you. It is not meant to be.
The Republicans did not refuse to renew, they passed a bill that funded the FAA for 4 years.
Tell me something, why should the FAA unionize? Unions exist to protect workers form the evil employers who take advantage of workers and refuse to follow safe practices and all the nasty stuff like that. Most federal employes are denied collective bargaining because they, quite obviously, do not need it. The FAA has existed for decades without unions, and suddenly the Democrats want to make an issue of it.
Tell me again how this is the Republicans fault? While you are at it, can you tell me why you claim to be independent and do not know that this union thing is not a new demand from the Republicans, it is actually a new demand from the Democrats that they refuse to back down on? Can you also explain why a person who claims to be anti union does not know this simple fact?
Seriously, what the **** is up with your lack of basic knowledge and integrity?
Quite the emotional little thing, aren't you? Do you always throw little tantrums like this or are you able to occasionally engage in discussions and debate without stomping your little feeties?
I am anti-union. Not altogether but basically, I think that they passed their basic functions long ago and have been abusing their power for decades. But then, I'm not swearing at you and challenging your integrity.
So while you do that, you leave out the fact that the GOP ws the one who changed the terms of the contract by adding a new provision earlier this year, specifying a change on how absentee votes would be counted.
Instead, you write that the GOP did not refuse to renew. So okay, you're a liar. That's fine. This was evident when you called my integrity in to question. It's what liars do.
They claim everyone else is lying. No worries. I don't care. Do you think I'm bothered by the rantings of some emotional whackjob on the internet? LOL hardly. Hell, come here and lie all you want!
Then you claim I don't have basic knowledge. Or at least you hope I don't. Then I wouldn't be able to point out the specific lies in your post. Oh well. I'm sure there are other people who are such complete party drones like you, that they will believe your bullsh*t. So that will be nice!
In the meantime, I can already tell you where you stand on a dozen political issues that are not related to this. It's easy with those who have their thinking done for them by someone else. You can't do that with me because I think for myself.
Hugs and Kisses! Your new BFF
I see, when someone points out that you have no idea what you are talking about they are being emotional. I bet that does help you avoid debates, but it doesn't actually win you any points in the real world, or in a forum that is devoted to debate and arguing.
The simple fact is that the Democrats are asking for something knew here, If that is a lie why is the debate about making it "easier for the FAA to unionize?" I am sure that, since my post was filled with lies you will have no problem proving that Republicans suddenly tried to change the rules to prevent them from joining a union.
Just an FYI, you do not get to declare yourself unilaterally to be anyone's friend. I do not even have a bff, and I certainly would not put you into that category if I did, There are a lot of people who would much more ably fill that position than you.
Why don't you tell me what my stance on, say, same sex marriage is. Or the PATRIOT ACT. Illegal immigration, or even legal immigration. I would just love to see you try to fit me into your little box that you have set aside for me.
By the way, there are many things you might be capable of, but one of them is obviously not thinking. What you actually do is choose a few talking points on issues, and you think that because some of the talking points you choose are liberal, and some are conservative, that somehow makes you capable of thinking for yourself. It doesn't.
No one is ever completely liberal or conservative, Democratic or Republican, that is why I hold hacks who simply repeat a party line in such contempt. They are simply aligning themselves that way on issues even when they know it is wrong.
The reason I have called you a hack is that, when faced with evidence that contradicts your beliefs, you refuse to admit the possibility that you are wrong. Take this particular issue as an example.
FAA employees generally do not have the right to join a union to negotiate working conditions. The exception to that is airline traffic controllers, but even they cannot strike. That is a fact. The Democrats want to change the rules under which FAA employees vote on union membership to make it easier for unions to get into the door, another fact. They could, theoretically, call an election and get union representation with most people not voting for the union. For some obscure reason you want to blame Republicans for this impasse. Another fact.
The simple truth is the Democrats want to change the rules, and the Republicans do not. You can point out that both sides are at fault in this, but you cannot simply say that this is the Republicans fault because they want to change the rules. They do not, they want to keep them the same way they have been all along.
To prove my point I will cite a pro union blog that explains the issue in terms that even a hack can understand.
The old NMB rules counted everyone who didn’t vote as a “no” vote, translating apathy or inattention into anti-union votes. The new rules bring voting into line with other private sector and federal government union voting rules, where the majority of ballots wins.
The rule change has made a difference in some cases. Voting under the new rules, 2,800 fleet and passenger service workers for regional carrier Piedmont Airlines easily won representation last November with the Communication Workers (CWA).
Under the old rules—counting non-voters as “no” votes—they would have fallen short by 264 votes. (Passenger service workers check in passengers, and fleet workers handle baggage and service planes on the ground.)
Additionally, 3,000 AirTran fleet and passenger service workers won representation in March with the Machinists union in a close vote that would have been lost under the old rules. And 400 pilots at Citation Air won a union in a similar July 7 vote.
But the change has hardly resulted in a cake-walk for unions. In an election under the new rules, 20,000 flight attendants at Delta failed to win a union in November, by a 328-vote margin. The flight attendants union (AFA-CWA) appealed, charging that the company pressured workers to vote no. The Machinists also lost a vote at Delta; the NMB is currently investigating charges of management interference by both unions.
Republicans Shut Down Aviation Agency over Union Election Rules | Labor Notes
Are the changes reasonable?
Perhaps, but your point was that the Republicans are trying to make it harder. They are not, the Democrats are trying to make it easier.
Please, come again and tell me I am emotional and lying rather than debate me.
Or better yet, admit you are wrong, again, and thank me for educating you and improving your basic knowledge and, hopefully, improving your integrity.
