|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Mar 11, 2011 20:50:07 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Mar 12, 2011 8:54:59 GMT -8
Bargain over personnel discipline issues? This is getting to be disgusting. Maybe Gov Walker will run for President.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Mar 12, 2011 18:26:44 GMT -8
Bargain over personnel discipline issues? This is getting to be disgusting. . . . We get back to this fundamental question: Is labor going to, in effect, run the company without running the risks usually associated with capitalist investment? Here's an example, perhaps the most outstanding example. The UAW bargained for and got concessions from GM that basically lead to the bankruptcy of that once dominant company. Defenders of the union will say, "Well, management agreed to this." Maybe so, but that's irrelevant. That kind of excuse is similar to a guy who has just been told he has been told he has contracted an STD saying, "Well, she voluntarily agreed to engage in unprotected sex." Moral: You have to look out for yourself. That means anticipating the foolishness of those with whom you are dealing. Just because somebody agrees to your bargaining demands does not mean that the demands were sensible in the first place. And keep in mind that the people who are in management are themselves usually as foolish as the union. In other words, management is made up of people who get paid too much and have no personal stake in the success or failure of the company they are running. (That is different from negotiations between labor and mangement who are also owners of the company.) In the case of the TSA, management, right now, is made up of fools who are not particularly concerned about the success of that body. They will still get paid whether there is a security of failure or not. Oh, sure, some of the top guys may be forced to resign, but they will just get another sweetheart deal from some other govt. agency or a private company whose board is asleep at the switch AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Mar 13, 2011 7:02:50 GMT -8
As far as I am concerned, TSA should be run like the military. It has to be strict, demanding and the employees have to follow the letter of the rules to detect any potential threat to the traveling public.
|
|
|
|
Post by inevitec on Mar 13, 2011 7:54:00 GMT -8
Bargain over personnel discipline issues? This is getting to be disgusting. . . . We get back to this fundamental question: Is labor going to, in effect, run the company without running the risks usually associated with capitalist investment? Here's an example, perhaps the most outstanding example. The UAW bargained for and got concessions from GM that basically lead to the bankruptcy of that once dominant company. Defenders of the union will say, "Well, management agreed to this." Maybe so, but that's irrelevant. That kind of excuse is similar to a guy who has just been told he has been told he has contracted an STD saying, "Well, she voluntarily agreed to engage in unprotected sex." Moral: You have to look out for yourself. That means anticipating the foolishness of those with whom you are dealing. Just because somebody agrees to your bargaining demands does not mean that the demands were sensible in the first place. And keep in mind that the people who are in management are themselves usually as foolish as the union. In other words, management is made up of people who get paid too much and have no personal stake in the success or failure of the company they are running. (That is different from negotiations between labor and mangement who are also owners of the company.) In the case of the TSA, management, right now, is made up of fools who are not particularly concerned about the success of that body. They will still get paid whether there is a security of failure or not. Oh, sure, some of the top guys may be forced to resign, but they will just get another sweetheart deal from some other govt. agency or a private company whose board is asleep at the switch AzWm This is the essence of conservative philosophy, so long as they already have theirs. If this statement is really true, why have a country at all aztecwilliam? How do you know that TSA officials don't care? How do you know that they are fools? Those are unsupported accusations. Do you think you are better than they are because you work in the private sector? Prove your accusations. The government employees that I know are dedicated and hard working. So prove your unsubstantiated claim. Some of your fellow Aztecs are government employees. So please tell them and us how they are less because they work for the government. Please tell us how they are less than some private sector suit. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Mar 13, 2011 9:40:28 GMT -8
We get back to this fundamental question: Is labor going to, in effect, run the company without running the risks usually associated with capitalist investment? Here's an example, perhaps the most outstanding example. The UAW bargained for and got concessions from GM that basically lead to the bankruptcy of that once dominant company. Defenders of the union will say, "Well, management agreed to this." Maybe so, but that's irrelevant. That kind of excuse is similar to a guy who has just been told he has been told he has contracted an STD saying, "Well, she voluntarily agreed to engage in unprotected sex." Moral: You have to look out for yourself. That means anticipating the foolishness of those with whom you are dealing. Just because somebody agrees to your bargaining demands does not mean that the demands were sensible in the first place. And keep in mind that the people who are in management are themselves usually as foolish as the union. In other words, management is made up of people who get paid too much and have no personal stake in the success or failure of the company they are running. (That is different from negotiations between labor and mangement who are also owners of the company.) In the case of the TSA, management, right now, is made up of fools who are not particularly concerned about the success of that body. They will still get paid whether there is a security of failure or not. Oh, sure, some of the top guys may be forced to resign, but they will just get another sweetheart deal from some other govt. agency or a private company whose board is asleep at the switch AzWm This is the essence of conservative philosophy, so long as they already have theirs. If this statement is really true, why have a country at all aztecwilliam? How do you know that TSA officials don't care? How do you know that they are fools? Those are unsupported accusations. Do you think you are better than they are because you work in the private sector? Prove your accusations. The government employees that I know are dedicated and hard working. So prove your unsubstantiated claim. Some of your fellow Aztecs are government employees. So please tell them and us how they are less because they work for the government. Please tell us how they are less than some private sector suit. The people who are at the top level management of TSA now are Obama appointees whose primary concern is that groups who support the Democrats be "taken care of." Would they feel badly if a terrorist armed with a bomb got past a TSA checkpoint and killed a few dozen people in an airport? Sure they would; they are not heartless and cruel (those qualities are found among the right wing!  ). . I am merely saying that the first priority of the Left is to support labor no matter how much such support undermines the basic task of whatever group or agency is in question. I think that discipline rules for TSA workers who fall asleep should be set by the agency. They should not be subject to collecltive bargaining. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Mar 13, 2011 19:32:10 GMT -8
William, I will take exception with you on your allegations against TSA management. I personally know over twenty TSA managers who are most excellent. Almost all were former military officers. Some of the finest men I have ever known. Men of their word. Men who are totally thorough, aggressive managers who will not put up with crap from anybody.
They run their assignments like it is the military, and make certain that inspections are done in accordance with instructions - to the letter.
Usually when people fault TSA, they do not have the slightest idea what they are criticizing, because they do not understand the purpose of screening procedures.
In the past few years I have spoken to numerous groups about security. One of the most frequent questions I have dealt with goes something like this, "Why in the hell do they screen my grandmother in her wheelchair. She is an 83 year old woman and is no threat to anybody."
You have got to admit that people are really stupider than $#!+ when they ask such a dumb question, but they ask it all the time. After you have explained to them why Grandma has to be inspected in her wheelchair, they then ask another grossly stupid question like "Why do little children have to be screened? They are no threat to anybody!"
With people that dumb in America, you need a strong TSA run by military professionals.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Mar 14, 2011 11:00:43 GMT -8
I am very sure that TSA has many very fine employees and that most managers are also fine hard working people. It is the political appointees that are for the most part corrupt with political agendas. If we want to make it worse, let that organization unionize. There may be a legit function for unions in the private sector, but it is disaster in government at all levels. I don't think we want mob dominated liberals having a say in how TSA does it's job.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Mar 14, 2011 11:34:46 GMT -8
I am very sure that TSA has many very fine employees and that most managers are also fine hard working people. It is the political appointees that are for the most part corrupt with political agendas. If we want to make it worse, let that organization unionize. There may be a legit function for unions in the private sector, but it is disaster in government at all levels. I don't think we want mob dominated liberals having a say in how TSA does it's job. We can not afford to have liberal unions deciding TSA policy. Dasz ist verbotten! TSA has to be military in its conduct. Anything else will result in the lax screening that was conducted on Sept 11th 2001. There were screening standards that if they were enforced would have prevented the hijacking of the planes. Unfortunately the attitude back then was to go through the screening motions but not worry about the end results. At least now, we have people who are educated as to their job responsibilities. TSA screeners border on being military like, and I appreciate that. That is the way it has to be in this crazy modern world. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Mar 14, 2011 18:10:29 GMT -8
Bargain over personnel discipline issues? This is getting to be disgusting. Maybe Gov Walker will run for President. Thanks for the laugh. Polls in Wisco show that the majority of voters wouldn't vote for him now. It really is amazing how heavy-handed the right-wing clowns become as soon as they're elected. But it does bring up a point, Pooh - given that you were never a member of a union (while getting better retirement benefits than any union member has ever received and given that in your private business I have no doubt the illegals who worked for you were union, what is your bitch about unions. Virtually every small business in this country is just like yours was - non-union workers getting paid what you decided to pay them. So given that something like less than 10 percent of workers are union, I just don't see where you have anything to bitch about. Of course, I don't expect anything other than a troll from you in response, but just once I'd like to see you offer a reasonable argument against unions that take into account the fact that the vast majority of workers in this country are not unionized. Let's face it Buckwheat, the only reason you hate unions is because they give their bucks to Democrats. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Mar 15, 2011 12:25:20 GMT -8
Bargain over personnel discipline issues? This is getting to be disgusting. Maybe Gov Walker will run for President. Thanks for the laugh. Polls in Wisco show that the majority of voters wouldn't vote for him now. It really is amazing how heavy-handed the right-wing clowns become as soon as they're elected. But it does bring up a point, Pooh - given that you were never a member of a union (while getting better retirement benefits than any union member has ever received and given that in your private business I have no doubt the illegals who worked for you were union, what is your bitch about unions. Virtually every small business in this country is just like yours was - non-union workers getting paid what you decided to pay them. So given that something like less than 10 percent of workers are union, I just don't see where you have anything to bitch about. Of course, I don't expect anything other than a troll from you in response, but just once I'd like to see you offer a reasonable argument against unions that take into account the fact that the vast majority of workers in this country are not unionized. Let's face it Buckwheat, the only reason you hate unions is because they give their bucks to Democrats. =Bob As usual, you completely miss the point. The meat of the issue goes over your head. This is about public sector unions bargaining with elected or appointed officials who have no monetary stake in the issue. It is easy for some elected official to give away the farm when he will be out of office by the time the piper has to be paid. Please grow up and learn the issues. |
|
|
|
Post by theman on Mar 17, 2011 17:28:03 GMT -8
When I am in the airport, and I hear over the intercom, that there are over 50,000 members of the TSA around the Country here to protect me, I almost barf. It's other example of the Obama Administration creating the only jobs they know how to create...government jobs. Now lets make sure we get these former retired military employees that are 45+ years old, union benefits, because otherwise they might get screwed by the Gov. Such Bull. Thousands of flight leave everyday without incident. I doubt these guys do anything to save passengers from real terrorists. They are only good for confiscating your toe nail clippers!
|
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Mar 18, 2011 7:51:31 GMT -8
When I am in the airport, and I hear over the intercom, that there are over 50,000 members of the TSA around the Country here to protect me, I almost barf. It's other example of the Obama Administration creating the only jobs they know how to create...government jobs. Now lets make sure we get these former retired military employees that are 45+ years old, union benefits, because otherwise they might get screwed by the Gov. Such Bull. Thousands of flight leave everyday without incident. I doubt these guys do anything to save passengers from real terrorists. They are only good for confiscating your toe nail clippers! The Department of Homeland Security and the TSA were created under the Bush Administration you moron. |
|
|
|
Post by theman on Mar 18, 2011 20:11:51 GMT -8
When I am in the airport, and I hear over the intercom, that there are over 50,000 members of the TSA around the Country here to protect me, I almost barf. It's other example of the Obama Administration creating the only jobs they know how to create...government jobs. Now lets make sure we get these former retired military employees that are 45+ years old, union benefits, because otherwise they might get screwed by the Gov. Such Bull. Thousands of flight leave everyday without incident. I doubt these guys do anything to save passengers from real terrorists. They are only good for confiscating your toe nail clippers! The Department of Homeland Security and the TSA were created under the Bush Administration you moron. My bad. but how you digging the Obama pat down at the airport! The TSA budget is already over $8 Billion. Is being a part of a union going to make us any safer. Most of these guys are already double dipping. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Mar 19, 2011 6:27:15 GMT -8
Once again we are getting away from the subject and fall into name calling and citing irrelevant facts or what we think are facts. This is about unionizing a public sector work force. Is it wise or not to set up a bargaining relationship when one side has no skin in the game?
|
|
|
|
Post by inevitec on Mar 19, 2011 6:39:28 GMT -8
Once again we are getting away from the subject and fall into name calling and citing irrelevant facts or what we think are facts. This is about unionizing a public sector work force. Is it wise or not to set up a bargaining relationship when one side has no skin in the game? . Win, that is a fair question. In my opinion, employees should be represented both in government and private industry. For me it boils down to this. Where there is an inequity in power there should be a countervailing force to neutralize the more powerful entities tendency to take advantage of the weaker party. Despite the hyperbole about unions, I think that they have accomplished and are accomplishing good things. Are there corrupt unions and corrupt officials? Of course. But that can be said of management as well. I have seen government managers who were every bit as aggressive and prone to take advantage as any in the private sector. Human nature and its reaction to more power than its opponent has not changed. So long as there are power inequities, someone, inside government or out, will try to take advantage - In my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Mar 19, 2011 7:30:47 GMT -8
Once again we are getting away from the subject and fall into name calling and citing irrelevant facts or what we think are facts. This is about unionizing a public sector work force. Is it wise or not to set up a bargaining relationship when one side has no skin in the game? . Win, that is a fair question. In my opinion, employees should be represented both in government and private industry. For me it boils down to this. Where there is an inequity in power there should be a countervailing force to neutralize the more powerful entities tendency to take advantage of the weaker party. Despite the hyperbole about unions, I think that they have accomplished and are accomplishing good things. Are there corrupt unions and corrupt officials? Of course. But that can be said of management as well. I have seen government managers who were every bit as aggressive and prone to take advantage as any in the private sector. Human nature and its reaction to more power than its opponent has not changed. So long as there are power inequities, someone, inside government or out, will try to take advantage - In my opinion. This issue has many complex components, but in public sector when union negotiations happen, the management side gets to go along for the ride on the things that are at issue in the bargaining. I could give you some examples since I have been both labor and management within Federal Civil Service. Things were better overall in the work place before unionizing. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Mar 19, 2011 18:17:03 GMT -8
Thanks for the laugh. Polls in Wisco show that the majority of voters wouldn't vote for him now. It really is amazing how heavy-handed the right-wing clowns become as soon as they're elected. But it does bring up a point, Pooh - given that you were never a member of a union (while getting better retirement benefits than any union member has ever received and given that in your private business I have no doubt the illegals who worked for you were union, what is your bitch about unions. Virtually every small business in this country is just like yours was - non-union workers getting paid what you decided to pay them. So given that something like less than 10 percent of workers are union, I just don't see where you have anything to bitch about. Of course, I don't expect anything other than a troll from you in response, but just once I'd like to see you offer a reasonable argument against unions that take into account the fact that the vast majority of workers in this country are not unionized. Let's face it Buckwheat, the only reason you hate unions is because they give their bucks to Democrats. =Bob As usual, you completely miss the point. The meat of the issue goes over your head. This is about public sector unions bargaining with elected or appointed officials who have no monetary stake in the issue. It is easy for some elected official to give away the farm when he will be out of office by the time the piper has to be paid. Please grow up and learn the issues. Oh, I see. Elected officials don't pay taxes. And I guess you also assume public sector employees also don't pay taxes. Sorry, but your irrational hatred of unions leads you to seriously flawed arguments every time. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Mar 20, 2011 4:53:43 GMT -8
As usual, you completely miss the point. The meat of the issue goes over your head. This is about public sector unions bargaining with elected or appointed officials who have no monetary stake in the issue. It is easy for some elected official to give away the farm when he will be out of office by the time the piper has to be paid. Please grow up and learn the issues. Oh, I see. Elected officials don't pay taxes. And I guess you also assume public sector employees also don't pay taxes. Sorry, but your irrational hatred of unions leads you to seriously flawed arguments every time. =Bob Speaking from personal experience is hardly irrational hate. Now come up with something better.  |
|
).
