How can workers vote Republican?

[Cecilie1200]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

Given all that, how can they bring themselves to vote Republican? Indeed, how? This is the question Democrats need to be pondering, long and hard.

Are you too for corporations over the workers like most here are??? Seems that's where SC has been going

Only if you're such a immature leftist turd that you can only see "for" and "against" instead of "following the law".

YOU are the people the Founding Fathers warned us about.

Are you so dung infested that you believe 4 SC officers would vote against the law?

Well, since it wasn't a unanimous vote, obviously some of the "SC officers" - known to educated people as "Justices" - DID vote against the law.

Oh, and Justice Ginsberg actually SAID, "This is the law", followed by, "But I think it's wrong, so I want to impose my will in place of it."

 

[edward37]

Just shaking my head at this OP. I mean, where to start? So liberals want our companies to be subject to lawsuits over pay and benefits? That might seem like a good idea to people who know nothing about business and law, but thank heavens we have five judges on the Supreme Court who have the sense to rule for sanity and stability. Do liberals just want to bankrupt and ruin any company that employs more than 10 people? Do they have any clue about the Pandora's Box they would be opening and the billions in legal expenses that would follow if employees could sue their companies over such things?

I can hear liberals now, "I don't care! I hate all corporations! They're all evil!" Uh, yeah, and those same corporations provide the kinds of jobs that put people in the middle class and enable them to buy a decent home, buy a car, and save for retirement.

And corporations NEVER step on employees ? An employee never has a legit reason to sue his company? Only in f-up republican world where F the worker is their national anthem

 

[edward37]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

Given all that, how can they bring themselves to vote Republican? Indeed, how? This is the question Democrats need to be pondering, long and hard.

Are you too for corporations over the workers like most here are??? Seems that's where SC has been going

Only if you're such a immature leftist turd that you can only see "for" and "against" instead of "following the law".

YOU are the people the Founding Fathers warned us about.

Are you so dung infested that you believe 4 SC officers would vote against the law?

Well, since it wasn't a unanimous vote, obviously some of the "SC officers" - known to educated people as "Justices" - DID vote against the law.

Oh, and Justice Ginsberg actually SAID, "This is the law", followed by, "But I think it's wrong, so I want to impose my will in place of it."

Cecille pardon me but FK you and your "educated people"

 

[francoHFW]

How can workers vote Republican?

Because Democrats suck.

If you believe garbage propaganda that never reaches the real world, super duper. Instead of malevolent gossip, try looking at policy they want. Publicans cut taxes on the rich and deregulate that ends up as corrupt bubbles and stupid walls. Democrats want to end illegal immigration with a good SS ID card, good vacations minimum wage Healthcare daycare parental leave cheap training and education, infrastructure. Silly dupes...

 

[Avatar4321]

By thinking

 

[toobfreak]

How can workers vote Republican?
The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

You're right. I might not be real happy about that.

But then, working is but a small part of everything politicians do that affect people's lives.

I never sad Trump or any Republican was perfect or that I agreed with him 100%. Just so happens they get more right than wrong, whereas Democrats always get far more wrong than right.

 

[edward37]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

Given all that, how can they bring themselves to vote Republican? Indeed, how? This is the question Democrats need to be pondering, long and hard.

Are you too for corporations over the workers like most here are??? Seems that's where SC has been going

Only if you're such a immature leftist turd that you can only see "for" and "against" instead of "following the law".

YOU are the people the Founding Fathers warned us about.

Are you so dung infested that you believe 4 SC officers would vote against the law?

Well, since it wasn't a unanimous vote, obviously some of the "SC officers" - known to educated people as "Justices" - DID vote against the law.

Oh, and Justice Ginsberg actually SAID, "This is the law", followed by, "But I think it's wrong, so I want to impose my will in place of it."

You have that quote ?? If not you're fos

 

[edward37]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

Given all that, how can they bring themselves to vote Republican? Indeed, how? This is the question Democrats need to be pondering, long and hard.

Are you too for corporations over the workers like most here are??? Seems that's where SC has been going

Only if you're such a immature leftist turd that you can only see "for" and "against" instead of "following the law".

YOU are the people the Founding Fathers warned us about.

Are you so dung infested that you believe 4 SC officers would vote against the law?

Well, since it wasn't a unanimous vote, obviously some of the "SC officers" - known to educated people as "Justices" - DID vote against the law.

Oh, and Justice Ginsberg actually SAID, "This is the law", followed by, "But I think it's wrong, so I want to impose my will in place of it."

In a case involving the rights of tens of millions of private-sector employees, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, delivered a major blow to workers, ruling for the first time that workers may not band together to challenge violations of federal labor laws.

Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch said that the 1925 Federal Arbitration Act trumps the National Labor Relations Act and that employees who sign employment agreements to arbitrate claims must do so on an individual basis — and may not band together to enforce claims of wage and hour violations.


LAW
A 'Yellow Dog Contract' And Other Jabs During Supreme Court Opening Arguments
"The policy may be debatable but the law is clear: Congress has instructed that arbitration agreements like those before us must be enforced as written," Gorsuch writes. "While Congress is of course always free to amend this judgment, we see nothing suggesting it did so in the NLRA — much less that it manifested a clear intention to displace the Arbitration Act. Because we can easily read Congress's statutes to work in harmony, that is where our duty lies."

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the four dissenters, called the majority opinion "egregiously wrong." She said the 1925 arbitration law came well before federal labor laws and should not cover these "arm-twisted," "take-it-or-leave it" provisions that employers are now insisting on.

The inevitable result, she warned, is that there will be huge underenforcement of federal and state statutes designed to advance the well-being of workers.

"[T]he edict that employees with wage and hours claims may seek relief only one-by-one does not come from Congress," Ginsburg writes. "It is the result of take-it-or-leave-it labor contracts harking back to the type called 'yellow dog,' and of the readiness of this Court to enforce those unbargained-for agreements. The FAA demands no such suppression of the right of workers to take concerted action for their 'mutual aid or protection.'"

 

[Cecilie1200]

Given all that, how can they bring themselves to vote Republican? Indeed, how? This is the question Democrats need to be pondering, long and hard.

Are you too for corporations over the workers like most here are??? Seems that's where SC has been going

Only if you're such a immature leftist turd that you can only see "for" and "against" instead of "following the law".

YOU are the people the Founding Fathers warned us about.

Are you so dung infested that you believe 4 SC officers would vote against the law?

Well, since it wasn't a unanimous vote, obviously some of the "SC officers" - known to educated people as "Justices" - DID vote against the law.

Oh, and Justice Ginsberg actually SAID, "This is the law", followed by, "But I think it's wrong, so I want to impose my will in place of it."

Cecille pardon me but FK you and your "educated people"

There is no pardon for people who are not only ignorant, but proud of it and hostile toward those who are not.

Pardon ME, but your opinions just became valueless. FLUSH!

 

[imawhosure]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

The way I read it, you are doing a little spinning there, aren't you friend Ed? Is this ruling not for PUBLIC UNIONS, and not PRIVATE UNIONS? In other words, if you are UAW, Steelworkers, or Teamster, it has no effect on you whatsoever.

If I am incorrect, let me know.

 

[edward37]

Are you too for corporations over the workers like most here are??? Seems that's where SC has been going

Only if you're such a immature leftist turd that you can only see "for" and "against" instead of "following the law".

YOU are the people the Founding Fathers warned us about.

Are you so dung infested that you believe 4 SC officers would vote against the law?

Well, since it wasn't a unanimous vote, obviously some of the "SC officers" - known to educated people as "Justices" - DID vote against the law.

Oh, and Justice Ginsberg actually SAID, "This is the law", followed by, "But I think it's wrong, so I want to impose my will in place of it."

Cecille pardon me but FK you and your "educated people"

There is no pardon for people who are not only ignorant, but proud of it and hostile toward those who are not.

Pardon ME, but your opinions just became valueless. FLUSH!

Thank you,,,,Yours never were

 

[edward37]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

The way I read it, you are doing a little spinning there, aren't you friend Ed? Is this ruling not for PUBLIC UNIONS, and not PRIVATE UNIONS? In other words, if you are UAW, Steelworkers, or Teamster, it has no effect on you whatsoever.

If I am incorrect, let me know.

Honestly ima I'm not sure I'll try and get the answer

 

[initforme]

As this stuff continues expect class division to increase. Until workers voices are squashed too. Show up work hard be loyal to your employer. Slowly those should go away too.

 

[edward37]

As this stuff continues expect class division to increase. Until workers voices are squashed too. Show up work hard be loyal to your employer. Slowly those should go away too.

How does a lady molested ,get justice?

 

[edward37]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

Tweet by tweet lie by lie Vote trump?? Only the brainless
Donald Trump said 11 false things in just 5 tweets Sunday morning - CNNPolitics

 

[Wyatt earp]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

What does that have to do with the supreme Court? They are just enforcing the Constitution..you remember the same right leaning court gave us abortion and gay marriage.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

What does that have to do with the supreme Court? They are just enforcing the Constitution..you remember the same right leaning court gave us abortion and gay marriage.

Um, no, I believe abortion and gay marriage came from previous Supreme Courts with different members.

 

[edward37]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

What does that have to do with the supreme Court? They are just enforcing the Constitution..you remember the same right leaning court gave us abortion and gay marriage.

and corporations are people?

 

[Wyatt earp]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

What does that have to do with the supreme Court? They are just enforcing the Constitution..you remember the same right leaning court gave us abortion and gay marriage.

Um, no, I believe abortion and gay marriage came from previous Supreme Courts with different members.

Uhm that's not what I said tard...the only supreme Court I would just is right leaning, win some lose some.. with a left leaning court is lose them all..

 

[Wyatt earp]

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a blow (5 to 4 along Party lines) to the rights of workers on Monday by allowing companies to require them to sign away their ability to bring class-action claims against management, agreements already in place for about 25 million employees.

High court backs companies over worker class-action claims

.

Workers are being fukked... Cut corporate and high earners taxes (re: business men); allow immediate "expensing" for business

What does that have to do with the supreme Court? They are just enforcing the Constitution..you remember the same right leaning court gave us abortion and gay marriage.

and corporations are people?

Of course they are and why do you ignore the same ruling saved UNIONS from contributing?