UAW Thugs Bully and Intimidate Non-Union Workers

[Harry Dresden]

When it comes to trusting ones employer that is a problem also... they don't want to look after their good employees.

Why would you trust your employer?

Is it your employers responsibility to look after you? No, that is YOUR responsibility. The employee looks after themselves. The company looks after itself. It is asinine to think that the company bears some vaunted responsibility for you - that is not why they exist. In that same manner, it is not your responsibility to look after the company. That is why you can simply walk out the door when a competitor offers a better rate for your time or better benefits. The concept is not hard to understand and yet almost no one seems to get it anymore. Personal responsibility - a concept completely foreign to Americans today.

if the company wants the best people working for them they will take care of their employees,who in turn, will take care of the company by making it one of the best....

Yes, they will. What is your point? Nothing there refutes anything I stated.

You are responsible for yourself - not the company. A GOOD company recognizes those employees that are worth the added expenses required to keep them. A good employee finds those companies. Interesting that a union facilitates neither of those outcomes...

a company that takes care of its people does not need a Union.......you have a hard time with posts dont you?.....you act like everything is refuting what you say....i made a statement adding on to what you said.....geezus...

 

[Harry Dresden]

what the ****?.....am i talking to a Dean clone?....you answered the question.....and if you dont get the point.....i dont know what the **** to tell you....it was a simple question.....even Franco could handle it....

That is an awful lot of vitriol without reason.

Whatever. I thought you wanted a reasonable conversation around it.

without reason?.....you are turning a simple question into a Dean type of thread.......you gave me YOUR answer....there aint much more you can say....but thanks for at least replying....

 

[bripat9643]

your dodging the question Kosh.....

AM I dodging a hypothetical question designed in an unrealistic scenario for me?

Kosh i dont care if your a ******* Millionaire....its a simple question for anti-Union people....if you needed a job,had a family to feed,would you take a good paying good benefit UNION job?....or would you pass just because its UNION..... .but dont feel bad,if you notice none of the anti-union people here have said anything.....i asked this before in a Union thread were i was being pushed around a circle by the anti-union people....no one answered the question in that one.....which told me....they would,but were waiting to see who would be the first one to reply......like i said.....silence.....at least you said something....

If I needed the job, yes I would take it. When you have a great need, you do a lot of things that you would otherwise not want to do.

What is your point with this question?

you have to ask?.....there are people here bad mouthing unions....but when you need a job....a union job dont look to bad does it?...i was in a thread about unions were a bunch of people got on me about 2 things.....1...i took a Govt job.....2 ...i had the gall and audacity to join the Union....this thread was in the old forum and was bigger than this thread way more people in it....when i asked the same question to all the anti-union people in that thread.....not one of those fuckers answered me.....because if they would have said no,they knew they would a lying sack of shit.....i was called a leech a teet sucker....someone to stupid to get a real job.....but yet not one ******* reply from all those assholes.....and on top of that i was neg repped a few times ....now that hurt....

Yes I have to ask because that entire line of reasoning is pretty damn dumb. Just because you are against the principals of a particular system or concept does not mean that you cannot be forced into it. It is like Social Security. The left here have challenged those against the current Social Security system many times to not draw it when the time come or they are hypocrites. Of course that is asinine considering that, through the force of law, they are forced to fund the program and therefore have the right to draw from it weather or not they disagree with the system in general. I don't see a whole lot of differences with unions. We live in a world that supports those unions both public and private and there may very well be a time when you need to be a participant in that process for the good of yourself and your family. There is no reason I can think of to purposefully stab yourself ion the back because you don't like the fact that a particular job is union or not.

I find the idea of being 'anti-union' in of itself rather dumb anyway. Unionism, at its core, is nothing more than workers banning together and working as a team. The problem is not the idea of unions but rather what they have become and how they are implemented today.

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

 

[FA_Q2]

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery. You cant be taken from your house and find yourself a part of a union the next day without any ability to resist.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes I have to ask because that entire line of reasoning is pretty damn dumb. Just because you are against the principals of a particular system or concept does not mean that you cannot be forced into it. It is like Social Security. The left here have challenged those against the current Social Security system many times to not draw it when the time come or they are hypocrites. Of course that is asinine considering that, through the force of law, they are forced to fund the program and therefore have the right to draw from it weather or not they disagree with the system in general. I don't see a whole lot of differences with unions. We live in a world that supports those unions both public and private and there may very well be a time when you need to be a participant in that process for the good of yourself and your family. There is no reason I can think of to purposefully stab yourself ion the back because you don't like the fact that a particular job is union or not.

I find the idea of being 'anti-union' in of itself rather dumb anyway. Unionism, at its core, is nothing more than workers banning together and working as a team. The problem is not the idea of unions but rather what they have become and how they are implemented today.

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery.

The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory.

 

[Plasmaball]

Of course you will...you LOVE extortion!

no because in a right to work state they can work you 12 hours without even a break. doesn't matter the weather or anything. I also support unions because typically you get better wages and benefits.

But hey you keep posting like an ass.

That simply isn't true. Each state is different.

Florida , for example , is a right to work state and by law employees are entitled to a 30 minute meal break if they work at least 6-8 hours.

I'm sure there are other examples.

I would like to see the state laws that support Plasma's assertion considering I have never seen anything like what he is claiming.

I would bet that the ONLY area where such is even remotely true is in a one deep job where there are no other options. A gas station attendant where there is no relief for example. Such is allowed in EVERY state and there are other requirements to that as well such as the employee must be able to take breaks as needed on the clock and have time to eat a meal. That does not sound all doom and gloom though.

I've already cited the state law...go look it up.

 

[Plasmaball]

Yes I have to ask because that entire line of reasoning is pretty damn dumb. Just because you are against the principals of a particular system or concept does not mean that you cannot be forced into it. It is like Social Security. The left here have challenged those against the current Social Security system many times to not draw it when the time come or they are hypocrites. Of course that is asinine considering that, through the force of law, they are forced to fund the program and therefore have the right to draw from it weather or not they disagree with the system in general. I don't see a whole lot of differences with unions. We live in a world that supports those unions both public and private and there may very well be a time when you need to be a participant in that process for the good of yourself and your family. There is no reason I can think of to purposefully stab yourself ion the back because you don't like the fact that a particular job is union or not.

I find the idea of being 'anti-union' in of itself rather dumb anyway. Unionism, at its core, is nothing more than workers banning together and working as a team. The problem is not the idea of unions but rather what they have become and how they are implemented today.

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery.

The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory.

It's not forced..but you knew this

 

[bripat9643]

Yes I have to ask because that entire line of reasoning is pretty damn dumb. Just because you are against the principals of a particular system or concept does not mean that you cannot be forced into it. It is like Social Security. The left here have challenged those against the current Social Security system many times to not draw it when the time come or they are hypocrites. Of course that is asinine considering that, through the force of law, they are forced to fund the program and therefore have the right to draw from it weather or not they disagree with the system in general. I don't see a whole lot of differences with unions. We live in a world that supports those unions both public and private and there may very well be a time when you need to be a participant in that process for the good of yourself and your family. There is no reason I can think of to purposefully stab yourself ion the back because you don't like the fact that a particular job is union or not.

I find the idea of being 'anti-union' in of itself rather dumb anyway. Unionism, at its core, is nothing more than workers banning together and working as a team. The problem is not the idea of unions but rather what they have become and how they are implemented today.

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery.

The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory.

It's not forced..but you knew this

It's forced, you Nazi asshole. Only a Guido or a Nazi would deny it.

 

[Plasmaball]

Yes I have to ask because that entire line of reasoning is pretty damn dumb. Just because you are against the principals of a particular system or concept does not mean that you cannot be forced into it. It is like Social Security. The left here have challenged those against the current Social Security system many times to not draw it when the time come or they are hypocrites. Of course that is asinine considering that, through the force of law, they are forced to fund the program and therefore have the right to draw from it weather or not they disagree with the system in general. I don't see a whole lot of differences with unions. We live in a world that supports those unions both public and private and there may very well be a time when you need to be a participant in that process for the good of yourself and your family. There is no reason I can think of to purposefully stab yourself ion the back because you don't like the fact that a particular job is union or not.

I find the idea of being 'anti-union' in of itself rather dumb anyway. Unionism, at its core, is nothing more than workers banning together and working as a team. The problem is not the idea of unions but rather what they have become and how they are implemented today.

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery.

The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory.

It's not forced..but you knew this

It's forced, you Nazi asshole. Only a Guido or a Nazi would deny it.

That was quick...guess you are back to being irrelevant now

 

[bripat9643]

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery.

The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory.

It's not forced..but you knew this

It's forced, you Nazi asshole. Only a Guido or a Nazi would deny it.

That was quick...guess you are back to being irrelevant now

I give the kind of answer your post deserves. In this case, virtually nothing.

 

[Plasmaball]

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery.

The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory.

It's not forced..but you knew this

It's forced, you Nazi asshole. Only a Guido or a Nazi would deny it.

That was quick...guess you are back to being irrelevant now

I give the kind of answer your post deserves. In this case, virtually nothing.

because you are nothing

 

[initforme]

My how times have changed. I remember walking off of a job when I was expected to meet with an important potential client. The company I worked for lost that account. I found a better job 3 days later and never did give even 2 weeks notice. I had the upper hand and tried to stick it to my employer who was a terrible employer. I guess it isn't that way today but it was one of the GREATEST days of my entire life. If one can do it by all means go for it... quite rewarding.

 

[initforme]

"
Click to expand...
The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory."

Its not forced where I live. Big business is winning on all fronts here ...you would be happy

 

[FA_Q2]

Yes I have to ask because that entire line of reasoning is pretty damn dumb. Just because you are against the principals of a particular system or concept does not mean that you cannot be forced into it. It is like Social Security. The left here have challenged those against the current Social Security system many times to not draw it when the time come or they are hypocrites. Of course that is asinine considering that, through the force of law, they are forced to fund the program and therefore have the right to draw from it weather or not they disagree with the system in general. I don't see a whole lot of differences with unions. We live in a world that supports those unions both public and private and there may very well be a time when you need to be a participant in that process for the good of yourself and your family. There is no reason I can think of to purposefully stab yourself ion the back because you don't like the fact that a particular job is union or not.

I find the idea of being 'anti-union' in of itself rather dumb anyway. Unionism, at its core, is nothing more than workers banning together and working as a team. The problem is not the idea of unions but rather what they have become and how they are implemented today.

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery.

The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory.

I have to give you that BUT equating it with slavery is a false equivocation. They are not similar.

 

[bripat9643]

Yes I have to ask because that entire line of reasoning is pretty damn dumb. Just because you are against the principals of a particular system or concept does not mean that you cannot be forced into it. It is like Social Security. The left here have challenged those against the current Social Security system many times to not draw it when the time come or they are hypocrites. Of course that is asinine considering that, through the force of law, they are forced to fund the program and therefore have the right to draw from it weather or not they disagree with the system in general. I don't see a whole lot of differences with unions. We live in a world that supports those unions both public and private and there may very well be a time when you need to be a participant in that process for the good of yourself and your family. There is no reason I can think of to purposefully stab yourself ion the back because you don't like the fact that a particular job is union or not.

I find the idea of being 'anti-union' in of itself rather dumb anyway. Unionism, at its core, is nothing more than workers banning together and working as a team. The problem is not the idea of unions but rather what they have become and how they are implemented today.

Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds.

the difference, of course, being that slavery is forced upon the enslaved without recourse.

At no time is a union forced in the same manner - you can choose not to be a part of one. Many time it requires a career field change though. That is not on the same level s slavery.

The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory.

I have to give you that BUT equating it with slavery is a false equivocation. They are not similar.

I didn't equate it with slavery. I equated it with extortion. That's what it is: extortion, pure and simple.

 

[FA_Q2]

I didn't equate it with slavery. I equated it with extortion. That's what it is: extortion, pure and simple.

I took this:
"Just substitute the word "slavery" for the word "union" and you'll see how absurd your "reasoning" sounds."

As a pretty clear equivocation. I don't know any other way to read that statement as it pertains to my statements.

It is certainly extortion which is why I support the right to work laws - they take the extortion out of the equation and return unions to what they are supposed to be - voluntary cooperation of employees.

 

[Moonglow]

"
Click to expand...
The claim that union membership isn't forced is idiotic. Of course it's forced. Is the protection money a business pays to Guido the Leg Breaker forced? After all, the business can leave if it doesn't like the terms of the deal, right? The nature of union membership is exactly the same. It's amazing to me how many people claim union membership is voluntary in states where it's mandatory."

Its not forced where I live. Big business is winning on all fronts here ...you would be happy

Oklahoma and other states passed laws forbidding union fees to be charged..the choice to go to a Right to Work state or a prevailing wage.. were done by plebiscite and passed into laws..