Is anyone still stupid enough to believe that the Repubs are for worker's rights?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Those are all examples of the Repubs going up against the UNIONS! How many times do I have to tell you that?

Since unions are the same as being for worler's rights, it's the same thing, but to satisfy you I will only list legislation that is w/o union consideration:

----- Fought the minimum wage Bill
----- Passed the Overtime Bill
----- Killed the Ergonomics Bill

There ya go, the overtime law has language excluding labor unions from it, so that has zero union play.

The min wage bill that Congress shot down was not about unions, it was for people unprotected by unions.

The Ergonomic Bill that Bush killed had zero to do with unionization.

SO address how these weren't attacks on labor and then show me examples of how Repubs look out for labor protections. Won't happen, will it Willard?

Quote

Add to that the fact (yes, FACT) that whether these bills were good for workers or not is entirely a matter of opinion. If they weren't, there would have been no argument, right?

A matter of opinion? Uh, keeping min wage earners at 5.25 instead of 7+ is either good or bad for workers? Let me see..... hmmm, that is a difficult question, I'll have to get back to you

The Overtime Law..... hmmm, being unilatterally converted to salary and being required to work unlimited hiurs for the same salary...... huh...... that is tough..... you're really making some great points there Willard

Killing the Ergonomics Bill..... yea, if I have an injury I must go thru work comp rather than have a fasttrack setup to prevent repetitive motion injuries and a quick remedy if it happens. Yea, that makes all kinds of sense

So, Willard, let's hear your opinion as to how the three above are good for workers, I really am dying to read how you take the 3 above and make them viable for workers. Better yet, can you conjure anymore legislative reasons how Repubs have helped the working man? Just sitting here a waitin.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Thank you.
I believe that is close to what I have been saying. I have openly acknowleged that Repubs are historically against the unions. I have openly acknowledged that not all unions are bad. I don't agree with everything the Repubs do where labor is concerned, nor do I think everything the unions do is evil. If I haven't, please feel free to correct me.

You still have avoided like the plague the 3 items that are non-union related:

- Ergonomics Bill
- Overtime law
- Min wage bill

Are you gonna address these or continue to run from them? Also, after addressing how these Republican goodies are good for workers, introduce some of your own, some things that are good for workers that are ideas of teh Repubs.

[Lucky... 0]

All I've done is post citation after another, perhaps you can build an argument by way of comprehensively making a point. 97, the Congress was Repub controlled, so who write it, who voted for it, etc...?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

...the Union guy pushed me and made threats.

And I know of a cop who blew away a person in cold blood, therefore all cops do that.

Just because it SUPPOSEDLY happened that a union guy strongarmed you doesn't mean they all, most do, many do. If you went to teh company you would have his ass, remember theunion drive usually occurs on co property and they look for dissenters to use as poster children.

Quote

BOTH sides lie. I just dislike the Unions version more than the company owners...I have never had an executive threaten to hit me if I didn't shut up.

Yes, they assault you at payday time, every week.

Regardless, how is it that Republcians have done things for workers?

[Lucky... 0]

Here's a more comprehensive list of Bush and Worker safety:


· Killed Workplace Ergonomic Protections - The Bush administration started its assault on worker safety soon after taking office joining with anti-worker business groups to repeal OSHA’s ergonomics standard. The standard, 10 years in the making, would have required employers to protect workers from the nation’s biggest job safety problem - injuries caused by heavy lifting and repetitive work.
The administration’s promised “comprehensive plan” to address ergonomic hazards has turned out to be a sham. In 3 years, only one voluntary enforceable
guideline – for nursing homes- has been issued.

· Repealed Recordkeeping for Ergonomic Injuries – Adding insult to injury, the Bush administration repealed the OSHA rule requiring musculoskeletal disorders to be identified on the workplace injury log. Instead of requiring hazards to be eliminated, they are hoping reports of injuries will simply disappear.

· Shut Down All New Workplace Safety and Health Rules – The Bush administration killed dozens of worker protection measures under development at
OSHA and MSHA, including rules on cancer causing substances, reactive chemicals, and infectious diseases such as TB. They have even refused to issue a rule requiring employers to pay for personal protective equipment, particularly important for immigrant and low wage workers. This Bush administration has the worst record on safety rules in OSHA’s entire history, with no plans to issue any new rules during its 4 year term.

· Favored Employer Voluntary Programs over Enforcement and Excluded Workers and Unions – The administration has made expanding voluntary programs and outreach to employers a top priority. Bush’s OSHA has set up partnerships and alliances with dozens of employers, largely excluding unions.
Union representatives critical of the administration have been removed from all agency advisory committees in an attempt to silence opposition.

· Tried to Dismantle Worker Safety and Health Training Programs – While expanding outreach to employers, the Bush administration has tried to gut the training and education programs for workers, proposing to slash the worker training budget by 75% and eliminate funding for union run programs. Thus far, unions have successfully fought these cuts, but the administration’s efforts to eliminate these important worker programs continue.

· Appointed an Industry Anti-ergo Leader as DOL’s Chief Lawyer – A few weeks after killing the OSHA ergonomics standard, the President nominated
Eugene Scalia, one of the leaders of the industry campaign to kill the ergonomics standard, as the chief lawyer at the Department of Labor. Scalia
called ergonomics “quackery” and “junk science” and claimed workers injuries weren’t real.

· Moved to Slash the Job Safety Budget – For 3 years straight President Bush proposed to cut the OSHA, MSHA and NIOSH budgets, reducing money for enforcement and standards programs in favor of voluntary assistance programs for employers. Due to the unions’ efforts, the Congress has rejected these proposed cuts and maintained the budgets for the job safety agencies.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Thank you.
I believe that is close to what I have been saying. I have openly acknowleged that Repubs are historically against the unions. I have openly acknowledged that not all unions are bad. I don't agree with everything the Repubs do where labor is concerned, nor do I think everything the unions do is evil. If I haven't, please feel free to correct me.

You still have avoided like the plague the 3 items that are non-union related:

- Ergonomics Bill
- Overtime law
- Min wage bill

Are you gonna address these or continue to run from them? Also, after addressing how these Republican goodies are good for workers, introduce some of your own, some things that are good for workers that are ideas of teh Repubs.

#1. In that post I was replying to Billvon, not you.

#2. It is you who have been running. I have nothing to prove...you do.

[willard 0]

Quote

Here's a more comprehensive list of Bush and Worker safety:


· Killed Workplace Ergonomic Protections - The Bush administration started its assault on worker safety soon after taking office joining with anti-worker business groups to repeal OSHA’s ergonomics standard. The standard, 10 years in the making, would have required employers to protect workers from the nation’s biggest job safety problem - injuries caused by heavy lifting and repetitive work.
The administration’s promised “comprehensive plan” to address ergonomic hazards has turned out to be a sham. In 3 years, only one voluntary enforceable
guideline – for nursing homes- has been issued.

· Repealed Recordkeeping for Ergonomic Injuries – Adding insult to injury, the Bush administration repealed the OSHA rule requiring musculoskeletal disorders to be identified on the workplace injury log. Instead of requiring hazards to be eliminated, they are hoping reports of injuries will simply disappear.

· Shut Down All New Workplace Safety and Health Rules – The Bush administration killed dozens of worker protection measures under development at
OSHA and MSHA, including rules on cancer causing substances, reactive chemicals, and infectious diseases such as TB. They have even refused to issue a rule requiring employers to pay for personal protective equipment, particularly important for immigrant and low wage workers. This Bush administration has the worst record on safety rules in OSHA’s entire history, with no plans to issue any new rules during its 4 year term.

· Favored Employer Voluntary Programs over Enforcement and Excluded Workers and Unions – The administration has made expanding voluntary programs and outreach to employers a top priority. Bush’s OSHA has set up partnerships and alliances with dozens of employers, largely excluding unions.
Union representatives critical of the administration have been removed from all agency advisory committees in an attempt to silence opposition.

· Tried to Dismantle Worker Safety and Health Training Programs – While expanding outreach to employers, the Bush administration has tried to gut the training and education programs for workers, proposing to slash the worker training budget by 75% and eliminate funding for union run programs. Thus far, unions have successfully fought these cuts, but the administration’s efforts to eliminate these important worker programs continue.

· Appointed an Industry Anti-ergo Leader as DOL’s Chief Lawyer – A few weeks after killing the OSHA ergonomics standard, the President nominated
Eugene Scalia, one of the leaders of the industry campaign to kill the ergonomics standard, as the chief lawyer at the Department of Labor. Scalia
called ergonomics “quackery” and “junk science” and claimed workers injuries weren’t real.

· Moved to Slash the Job Safety Budget – For 3 years straight President Bush proposed to cut the OSHA, MSHA and NIOSH budgets, reducing money for enforcement and standards programs in favor of voluntary assistance programs for employers. Due to the unions’ efforts, the Congress has rejected these proposed cuts and maintained the budgets for the job safety agencies.

You just don't get it, do you? You keep sounding the same horn and trying to back up sketchy arguments with "evidence" taken from extremely biased websites and opinons.

[willard 0]

Quote

Since unions are the same as being for worler's rights, it's the same thing, but to satisfy you I will only list legislation that is w/o union consideration:

Excuse me, Sir, but the unions are NOT the only groups and people who are for workers rights. That thinking is so far out in left field that if you truly feel that way then there is nothing anyone could ever say or present to you to convince you that unions are anything less than a god.

[willard 0]

Quote

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070215/pl_nm/congress_labor_veto_dc_1

Unionizing bill advances; Cheney threatens veto


Nice, so this is our free market? Hmmm, under the encyclopedic definition of fascism they speak of how fascists dislike organized labor. Hmmmmm

Why don't you address your original post, which you seem to avoid. How can taking away a persons right to privacy is good for them? You have managed to use this thread to bash everyone from George Washington to Bush's dog, yet you haven't explained your logic behind your original post.

[Lucky... 0]

Again, I'm asking you to address these standalone; will you?

You still have avoided like the plague the 3 items that are non-union related:

- Ergonomics Bill
- Overtime law
- Min wage bill

Are you gonna address these or continue to run from them? Also, after addressing how these Republican goodies are good for workers, introduce some of your own, some things that are good for workers that are ideas of teh Repubs.

Come on Willard, these are union-free issues, why ot get to the meat of, Is anyone still stupid enough to believe that the Repubs are for worker's rights? This will let this issue rest here if you can successfully explain how these 3 very recent Republican issues have helped or at least not hurt businesses.

[Lucky... 0]

An argument from any source that is biased that is true is still true. If the NAACP cited the Rodney King case and others as factually correct and claimed the police can be brutal to blacks, they are still correct even tho they have an agenda.

Answer the 3 issues and quit running Willard.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Since unions are the same as being for worler's rights, it's the same thing, but to satisfy you I will only list legislation that is w/o union consideration:

Excuse me, Sir, but the unions are NOT the only groups and people who are for workers rights. That thinking is so far out in left field that if you truly feel that way then there is nothing anyone could ever say or present to you to convince you that unions are anything less than a god.

I think unions are wholly for workers, but to remain 100% objective and away from union bias, I wrote:

but to satisfy you I will only list legislation that is w/o union consideration

OK, so all the issues I have were filtered to remove union consideration and you still refuse to answer them. Willard, you are starting to look PWNED here.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070215/pl_nm/congress_labor_veto_dc_1

Unionizing bill advances; Cheney threatens veto


Nice, so this is our free market? Hmmm, under the encyclopedic definition of fascism they speak of how fascists dislike organized labor. Hmmmmm

Why don't you address your original post, which you seem to avoid. How can taking away a persons right to privacy is good for them? You have managed to use this thread to bash everyone from George Washington to Bush's dog, yet you haven't explained your logic behind your original post.

The country is run on deprivations of everything from privacy to all kinds of things and it uses weights to determine which loss is greater. Any loss of privacy is minimal to being able to organize and gain benefits and worker protection, IMO. Furthermore, there is really no loss of privacy in that there would be no vote under the proposed legislation, the cards would simply substitute as votes, so a non-submission of a card would act as a no vote w/o having to vote, no revealement of privacy. You could tell the union guys that you are still thinking abiout it, if they get nasty tell the co and they will be fired.

EITHER WAY, I HAVE REMOVED ALL UNION ISSUES FROM THE FINAL 3, WHY NOT ANSWER THEM? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM, IS IT THAT THERE IS NO WAY TO ANSWER THEM AND STILL IMMUNIZE THE REPUBS FROM THE FACT THAT THEY FUCK LABOR?

[willard 0]

Quote

Again, I'm asking you to address these standalone; will you?

You still have avoided like the plague the 3 items that are non-union related:

- Ergonomics Bill
- Overtime law
- Min wage bill

Are you gonna address these or continue to run from them? Also, after addressing how these Republican goodies are good for workers, introduce some of your own, some things that are good for workers that are ideas of teh Repubs.

Come on Willard, these are union-free issues, why ot get to the meat of, Is anyone still stupid enough to believe that the Repubs are for worker's rights? This will let this issue rest here if you can successfully explain how these 3 very recent Republican issues have helped or at least not hurt businesses.

Quote

]- Ergonomics Bill
- Overtime law
- Min wage bill

Ok, listen close so I don't have to repeat this for the 2345th time. All three (3) of those issues are a matter of opinion whether they help or hurt workers. If you would read more on each other than what is posted on the union web sites you would know that. There are pros and cons to all three (3) issues.

Now, for the last time...You made the assertions, not I. It is not up to me to prove/disprove anything. What about that do you find so difficult to understand???

On second thought, forget it. I am done with this discussion since all I am doing is giving you a platform on which to bash people by making accusations based only on your opinion.
Since you are so enlightened by websites, try this one.http://www.freeworkplace.org/legislativeupdate/
More than enough examples of the Republicans doing things to protect workers rights. Yes, WORKERS rights, not union rights. But I doubt you will ever realize they are not the same.

Have a Nice Day

• Quote

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

The country is run on deprivations of everything from privacy to all kinds of things and it uses weights to determine which loss is greater. Any loss of privacy is minimal to being able to organize and gain benefits and worker protection, IMO. Furthermore, there is really no loss of privacy in that there would be no vote under the proposed legislation, the cards would simply substitute as votes, so a non-submission of a card would act as a no vote w/o having to vote, no revealement of privacy. You could tell the union guys that you are still thinking abiout it, if they get nasty tell the co and they will be fired.

Right, the company will fire the union organizers based upon your word that they got nasty. Just like your assertion that you will be promoted to management for bringing the complaint to them

You say that the right to privacy is trumped by the ability to 'organize and gain benefits and worker protection'. I would agree that union elections done without privacy is certainly more likely to result in a yes vote for a union. Why do the unions deserve such a special consideration? What is wrong with secret elections?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[billvon 3,120]

>The thread title is that of: Is anyone still stupid enough to believe that the
>Repubs are for worker's rights?

It could have just as accurately been titled "Does anyone believe that democrats care if a company has to fire all its workers?"

Most mainstream republicans that I know are in favor of tax breaks for corporations, thinking that will allow them to grow more rapidly and hire more people. Their position is that if companies go out of business due to onerous worker's-rights requirements (like astronomical pay for sub-par union workers) then that is bad for workers. And that's not wrong; without companies you have no workers, so there can't _be_ any worker's rights.

At the same time they are generally in favor of things like OSHA, anti-discrimination employment laws and the right for unions to exist at all, even if they don't like them much. If anything, the big difference between moderate republicans and democrats is how they rank those in terms of importance. Democrats tend to put individual rights over company rights, whereas republicans tend to put the company over the individual - although both agree in principle on the basics.

[GravityJunky 0]

yes republicans, but only the ones delussional enuff to still think they actually have a chance in the next big election!

*My Inner Child is A Fucking Prick Too!
*Everyones entitled to be stupid but you are abusing the priviledge
*Well I'd love to stay & chat, But youre a total Bitch! {Stewie}

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

With all of the inferrential data I have provided,

That's exactly the point - I can take the same data and make the exact opposite inferences with the same veracity as yours.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

All I've done is post citation after another, perhaps you can build an argument by way of comprehensively making a point. 97, the Congress was Repub controlled, so who write it, who voted for it, etc...?

Hell just look to the last time this bill came up. It was the SAME bill but the Dems voted it down refusing to allow for tax breaks for small business. NOW they are willingt o talk about it. Why when it was a Repub congress it was bad, but now the SAME bill is OK?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

All I've done is post citation after another, perhaps you can build an argument by way of comprehensively making a point. 97, the Congress was Repub controlled, so who write it, who voted for it, etc...?

Hell just look to the last time this bill came up. It was the SAME bill but the Dems voted it down refusing to allow for tax breaks for small business. NOW they are willingt o talk about it. Why when it was a Repub congress it was bad, but now the SAME bill is OK?

Your answer bolded, above.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

And I know of a cop who blew away a person in cold blood, therefore all cops do that

You have made that claim before that all cops are crooks.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2541389#2541389

"Cops are inherent liars"

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2590251#2590251
"Yes, and I am on a quest to find him. I have sailed the seven seas, climbed the tallest mointain and yet have failed to find the honest cop. I know he's out there, perhaps hiding in the haystack, yet I swaer I will find that one honest cop. "

Quote

Just because it SUPPOSEDLY happened that a union guy strongarmed you doesn't mean they all, most do, many do.

I see so now you call me a liar..

Quote

BOTH sides lie. I just dislike the Unions version more than the company owners...I have never had an executive threaten to hit me if I didn't shut up.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Yes, they assault you at payday time, every week.

Total BS, I like getting my paychecks. The COMPANY, not a union made them possible.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>Most mainstream republicans that I know are in favor of tax breaks for corporations, thinking that will allow them to grow more rapidly and hire more people. ......they are generally in favor of things like OSHA, anti-discrimination employment laws and the right for unions to exist at all,

no no NO!!!!

One side has to be pure EVIL, and the other side infinitely PERFECT or it doesn't work.

I can't BELIEVE you are so naive as to think that most people have good intentions and that those that are members of each political party just differ (in a business/economy sense on) which economic theories they believe are most effective for the common good; or what they prioritize in their voting from a list of ideas.

Good, Evil - simple as that. Funny how ALL you hardcore insensitive repubelican lovers overcomplicate things

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Ok, listen close so I don't have to repeat this for the 2345th time. All three (3) of those issues are a matter of opinion whether they help or hurt workers.

OK, so I know your unfounded opinion, I just would like to see you support it. Not gonna happen? That's called a concession. BTW, the 3 matters have no union affilition.

Quote

If you would read more on each other than what is posted on the union web sites you would know that.

I don't need to, these aren't union issues, yet Dems/unions seem to deplore OT Law and Repubs love it, the reciprocal for the other 2, but I guess that's just chance too.

Quote

There are pros and cons to all three (3) issues.

Great, now we're getting somewhere, I'll post my side, you post yours:

- Ergonomics Bill
----- makes it harder and take longer for workes to get medical attention for repetitive motion injuries, like striking a welding rod accrossa seam.
- Overtime law

----- Revokes overtime rights for many workers who management unilatterally labels as management, yet these employees have to work the overime for free.

- Min wage bill
----- Isn't it obvious? If not, I'll spell it out for everyone: The poorest of the poor have basically no money, yet paying them an additonal 2 bucks over what, a 3-year increase period will kill business owners and consumers. This shows a real hate for poor people by anyone pathetic enough to support killing this bill. And then when poor working mothers say fuck it and quit working because welfare pays more, the same humanitarians cry foul again.

There ya go Willard, and that just scrapes teh surface as to the cons of these acts, if you reply (yea right) I will list more comprehensive details upon your list of why the erg bill is bad, the OT law is good and the min wage bill is bad.

Quote

Now, for the last time...You made the assertions, not I. It is not up to me to prove/disprove anything. What about that do you find so difficult to understand???

Yes, I made the assertions, then I established via data how unions help workers, Repubs hate unions, Repubs wrote and passed the OT law, killed the Erg bill and the Min Wage bill. Once you respond and have made valid pints the burden shifts to you, you have decided to acquiesce.

Quote

On second thought, forget it. I am done with this discussion since all I am doing is giving you a platform on which to bash people by making accusations based only on your opinion.

You're a victim. We're you the guy wishing I would die just a week ago, now you're feelings are hurt? I haven't bashed anyone here, just legislators. Nice misdirection attempt, just shows you are unable to represent your side of the 3 non-union issues.

Quote

Since you are so enlightened by websites, try this one.http://www.freeworkplace.org/legislativeupdate/
More than enough examples of the Republicans doing things to protect workers rights. Yes, WORKERS rights, not union rights. But I doubt you will ever realize they are not the same.

It's up to you to extrapolate and compile the data, then make your argument, not mine. I would absolutely love to hear an argument establishing how Repubs have been good for labor.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Right, the company will fire the union organizers based upon your word that they got nasty

They would investigate it and they do have a vested interest in killing the union, so why wouldn't they? Who's side ar ethey on, the unions?

Quote

Just like your assertion that you will be promoted to management for bringing the complaint to them

I don't know that I wrote that you WOULD be made managament, but you could be. It's not an automatic that you would be, just good start.

Quote

You say that the right to privacy is trumped by the ability to 'organize and gain benefits and worker protection'. I would agree that union elections done without privacy is certainly more likely to result in a yes vote for a union. Why do the unions deserve such a special consideration? What is wrong with secret elections?

Union election by way of cards still would hav privacy, if you do not submit a card that does not mean you dislike teh union, you just are not decided and don't want to submit a card yet. Yes, there would be a higher rate of unionization dueto honest elections.

Being more affraid of unions over the company is like being more affraid of criminals over cops.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

It could have just as accurately been titled "Does anyone believe that democrats care if a company has to fire all its workers?"

Maybe.

Quote

Most mainstream republicans that I know are in favor of tax breaks for corporations, thinking that will allow them to grow more rapidly and hire more people. Their position is that if companies go out of business due to onerous worker's-rights requirements (like astronomical pay for sub-par union workers) then that is bad for workers. And that's not wrong; without companies you have no workers, so there can't _be_ any worker's rights.

Right, not exactly wrong, just radical. With businesses making massive profits and workiers w/o healthcare in many circumstances, it just doesn't hold water. If businesses were on the way out they might have a point. By businesses I mean large corps who are subject to unionization.

This is just more tired trickle-down, supply side horseshit that has been debunked since Hoover. When you throw cash at businesses by way of grant or tax breaks you produce a bigger produce that will spend when it feels like it, when you throw cash at people in need you create consumers who will immediately spend teh cash, immediatley stimulating the economy. The last 4 presidents over 26 years have established that.

Quote

At the same time they are generally in favor of things like OSHA, anti-discrimination employment laws and the right for unions to exist at all, even if they don't like them much.

I disagree, if you are talking about garden variety Repubs. Altho Nixon started OSHA, that was the day b4 the neo-con. Neo-cons are a different Republican than the old Eisenhower, who despised the Mil Ind Complex, neo-cons are all about that. I think if you got inside a neo-cons mind he/she would despise the entire list.

Quote

Democrats tend to put individual rights over company rights, whereas republicans tend to put the company over the individual - although both agree in principle on the basics.

This right here is brilliant; it goes far deeper than just worker's rights. This describes utilitarianism and the fact that Repubs are for that and Dems are for individual rights. Of course.

Unless you knwo some real moderate Repubs, t ehy despise all that you listed.