|
I'm dismayed that unions are going to take a thrashing however I would argue that they brought it upon themselves. This is just the pendulum swinging really loving hard, the other way.
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 11:36 |
|
|
Reminder before anyone bothers to reply to our friend hereCultural Imperial posted:Like everything Canadian, I regard this Rob Ford saga the same way I regard the tory senate scandal, the mel lastman paen, the sponsorship fables, jean chretien's bullshit, justin trudeau's ignorance and lack of intelligence: thank god I have dual citizenship because gently caress this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 02:54
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I'm dismayed that unions are going to take a thrashing however I would argue that they brought it upon themselves. This is just the pendulum swinging really loving hard, the other way. Elaborate for the rest of us please, why do you think they brought it upon themselves?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 02:56
|
|
|
Panas posted:Elaborate for the rest of us please, why do you think they brought it upon themselves? I can't cite specific examples because you guys wouldn't believe me anyway, so let me bring up the perspective of a Swedish co-worker who was working in the same public sector union. When I asked her to compare unions in Sweden with Canadian unions, she told me she couldn't understand how Canadian unions became so militant. Today I was talking to a mainland Chinese immigrant and she was appalled that union membership is mandatory, depending on the job role and organization.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I can't cite specific examples because you guys wouldn't believe me anyway, so let me bring up the perspective of a Swedish co-worker who was working in the same public sector union. When I asked her to compare unions in Sweden with Canadian unions, she told me she couldn't understand how Canadian unions became so militant. You're right, we should take all our cues on how to better represent workers' interests in the economy from China.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I can't cite specific examples because you guys wouldn't believe me anyway, Now this is just unfair to us, if you want to seem credible then list your reasons please.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:You're right, we should take all our cues on how to better represent workers' interests in the economy from China. I'm not saying that at all. On the other hand, if you're going to bitch and moan about the demise of unions in Canada, their fate in America should also help inspire a few moments of socialist introspection. I'm not against unions. I think they're a perfectly rational response to the rapacious greed of companies that abuse workers in the interest of 'maximizing value for the shareholder'. On the other hand, the poo poo that goes on in public sector unions to protect the worthless and incompetent is on a whole other plane of space and time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
Drunk Canuck posted:Now this is just unfair to us, if you want to seem credible then list your reasons please. I have seen the following: People who have kept their unionized job after being proven to have: 1) hacked and accessed email during a strike 2) stolen money 3) bully coworkers to the point they have had to take a leave of absence People who have had unions actively defend their employment after they have proven to: 4) access porn at work 5) access child porn 6) maintain a repository of porn With respect to computer related offences listed above, the defence has always been "there is no explicit policy stating the prohibition of said activity". edit: This example is sort of a grey area and I don't have a strong opinion about this practice. I worked in an organization that experienced a massive exodus of baby boomers in the '00s. Many of these employees had months, even years of sick time banked. Near the magic number of their years of employment, nearly all of these employees would go on extended sick leave to use up this bank of time. How does this relate to my earlier pendulum statement? Well if you were the employer and you had a significant portion of your active workforce take sick leave when they were obviously not sick, how would you explain your organization's performance (or lack thereof) to the taxpayer? namaste friends fucked around with this message at 03:29 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:12
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I worked in an organization that experienced a massive exodus of baby boomers in the '00s. Many of these employees had months, even years of sick time banked. Near the magic number of their years of employment, nearly all of these employees would go on extended sick leave to use up this bank of time. So you prefer not giving them back the time they are owed back? How is the UK at this time of year?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
Odddzy posted:So you prefer not giving them back the time they are owed back? How is the UK at this time of year? I already told you I don't have a strong opinion on this practice. Frankly, the people who should be taken to task (if it's deemed necessary) are the managers who negotiated this practice. Personally I think they should take this time off if the organization has a policy that permits it. I don't know what the UK is like this time of year but I'm freezing my rear end off in this poo poo Hole otherwise known as Calgary. Sorry to have offended your patriotic zeal, Captain Canada.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:39
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I already told you I don't have a strong opinion on this practice. Frankly, the people who should be taken to task (if it's deemed necessary) are the managers who negotiated this practice. Personally I think they should take this time off if the organization has a policy that permits it.  you fascist scum.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:How does this relate to my earlier pendulum statement? Well if you were the employer and you had a significant portion of your active workforce take sick leave when they were obviously not sick, how would you explain your organization's performance (or lack thereof) to the taxpayer? Not that I excuse the behaviour, but when civil servants are always looked at first for cuts, what do you expect from them? They cannot do a good enough job because they know that no matter what they do, they'll just get poo poo on. They only stick around to get a pension that the private sector did a good job getting rid of. There are a lot of good civil servants, but the poo poo behaviour you're speaking of comes from decisions from the top down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
OSI bean dip posted:Not that I excuse the behaviour, but when civil servants are always looked at first for cuts, what do you expect from them? They cannot do a good enough job because they know that no matter what they do, they'll just get poo poo on. They only stick around to get a pension that the private sector did a good job getting rid of. I absolutely agree with you on this particular issue. On the other hand, can you expect the electorate to impart the same empathy upon your loyal hardworking government employee? Especially someone who isn't part of a public sector union whose salary has stagnated for over a decade? This is why the tories are emboldened to destroy unions. edit: If said public sector unions weren't run by idiots, they'd recognize that the tide of public opinion would eventually turn against them. But now it's too late isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:Well if you were the employer and you had a significant portion of your active workforce take sick leave when they were obviously not sick, how would you explain your organization's performance (or lack thereof) to the taxpayer? I understand the frustration listed in your examples but as union's have a high priority of guarding their interests and showing strength it's not hard to figure why they'd defend a known morally corrupt person as equally as anyone else. But this point you bring up now, about performance. Why would I care, of private companies profit margins, because I pay taxes?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:56
|
|
|
The private-sector union is becoming a mythical beast, so if you want such a thing to keep existing, maybe give them a pass on their members' porn caches. Unions aren't hurting because the buzz has turned against them. They are hurting because they've been bloodied and broken by the corporations they serve and the governments they count on to defend their rights.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 03:59
|
|
|
Here's something that illustrates my point of the idiocy in this country: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/end-free-rides-for-bc-ferries-employees-critics-argue-1.2432850 quote:The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling for an end to free ferry rides for BC Ferries employees and their family members after recent announcements of financial stress, service cuts, and a reduction in seniors' discounts from the corporation. So loving what? It has been around since the 1970s. This is up there with the lunacy from the CTF when they complained about a government office having a foosball table and other amenities to play with at lunchtime or whenever. Government employees cannot even have a Christmas party on taxpayer money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:02
|
|
|
Drunk Canuck posted:I understand the frustration listed in your examples but as union's have a high priority of guarding their interests and showing strength it's not hard to figure why they'd defend a known morally corrupt person as equally as anyone else. The behaviour I've listed above was all committed by the membership of a public sector union. All I'm saying is, if you want your union to survive, you better hope everyone else who isn't receiving the same latitude isn't gonna get mad when they find out about your sweet rear end deal. Drunk Canuck posted:But this point you bring up now, about performance. Why would I care, of private companies profit margins, because I pay taxes? I don't think you should give a poo poo about helping private companies maximizing their profit margins. What we should all care about are a uniform standard by which all people in Canada should expect as employees, regardless of whether their employers are the public or otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:06
|
|
|
agarjogger posted:The private-sector union is becoming a mythical beast, so if you want such a thing to keep existing, maybe give them a pass on their members' porn caches. Unions aren't hurting because the buzz has turned against them. They are hurting because they've been bloodied and broken by the corporations they serve and the governments they count on to defend their rights. These observations were all within the auspices of a public sector union. Anyway, doesn't the bleeding heart socialist in you scream in rage at the misogyny committed in the viewing of pornography?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:08
|
|
How do people come to decide that they'd like to live in a place where you have to get out your wallet eighty loving times a day. I can't conceptualize the misery that makes one crave this arrangement. It must just be the exclusivity that comes with the incredible inconvenience.Cultural Imperial posted:These observations were all within the auspices of a public sector union. No.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:08
|
|
|
This is the best way to effect positive change: agitating for worse standards instead of better ones. Amazing. Wasting fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:09
|
|
|
Unions have been massively weakened by outside interests, clearly the solution to the problem is to finish them off altogether. Find the lowest paid, most dangerous job in Canada and make sure everyone else has the same working conditions. This, truly, is the way of the future.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
I think government is a place where we can all come together for the common good, solve the problems of the day and make sure that everyone in Canada is fed and has healthcare and a good job. Also gently caress Justin Trudeau.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:26
|
|
|
Yeesh, give Cultural Imperial a little push back and he'll start spouting conservative zeitgeist all over you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:34
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I absolutely agree with you on this particular issue. On the other hand, can you expect the electorate to impart the same empathy upon your loyal hardworking government employee? Especially someone who isn't part of a public sector union whose salary has stagnated for over a decade? Maybe we should be going after the rich people who have been taking all our private sector real wage increases for the last four decades instead of the one sector left that actually has unions strong enough to resist robber barons. Oh no wait, it's easier to mobilize popular opinion in favour of tearing down the few working people left who get to actually live middle class lives so they can be like the rest of us poor shitheads, rather than trying to rebuild the strength of the private working class so that we can all lead those good lives. Never mind. "My salary has stagnated for over a decade! Clearly the solution is to attack the people who have been getting salary increases, because then I will feel better! You know what else would make me feel better? Actually getting the wage increase I deserve for the last ten years of work. But advocating that would be too hard and might anger the Randian supermen who are so gracious as to provide me with just enough money that I don't starve to death in the streets, so gently caress that."
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:39
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:These observations were all within the auspices of a public sector union. Careful now - what if everyone at work watches a combination of Gay porn, sprinkled with Bestiality and a touch of autofellatio vids?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:41
|
|
|
Guigui posted:Careful now - what if everyone at work watches a combination of Gay porn, sprinkled with Bestiality and a touch of autofellatio vids? What about food porn?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:43
|
|
|
Guigui posted:Careful now - what if everyone at work watches a combination of Gay porn, sprinkled with Bestiality and a touch of autofellatio vids? I only watch femdom porn at my work, in order to meet my mandated Public Sector Union Anti-Misogyny quota.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 04:43
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:People who have had unions actively defend their employment after they have proven to: Oh hey sorry about your lovely and likely fictional union. But since we're humouring each other here, you make it sound like these employees were fired. If not, why not, or how not? Or are you just going to leave this implausible anecdote lying here like a dead bird?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 05:11
|
|
|
So about the Sona thing... the implication I get is that, since a bunch of party functionaries testified that he bragged about the robocalls when he wasn't in Canada at the point, the party is throwing him under the bus for some reason. Presumably this is a big enough reason to convince multiple people to lie to investigators. Er, does it count as perjury if you lie to an Elections Canada investigator?Professor Shark posted:It's honest-to-God Evil. I can't imagine any middle/lower class workers nodding their heads and thinking "Yeah, this is a good!", unless they fall for the "I just won't get into accidents!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 06:02
|
|
" mentality like in The Jungle.
|
Albino Squirrel posted:So about the Sona thing... the implication I get is that, since a bunch of party functionaries testified that he bragged about the robocalls when he wasn't in Canada at the point, the party is throwing him under the bus for some reason. Presumably this is a big enough reason to convince multiple people to lie to investigators. Er, does it count as perjury if you lie to an Elections Canada investigator? That may have been the case 5-10 years ago but the oil industry out here are now unmatched safety sticklers. Even poo poo like having a 2x4 lying around in the dirt on an active worksite has the safety officers that patrol around on your case and reporting it to your supervisor and their safety branch.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 06:08
|
|
|
Mederlock posted:That may have been the case 5-10 years ago but the oil industry out here are now unmatched safety sticklers. Even poo poo like having a 2x4 lying around in the dirt on an active worksite has the safety officers that patrol around on your case and reporting it to your supervisor and their safety branch. I know guys in the corporate side of things that have gotten poo poo for not holding the hand-rail as they go down a staircase, because it's safer to do it that way and safety is a company-wide priority. Does dangerous poo poo still go on? Of course, but the companies are certainly not responsible for it in 99% of all cases, and probably didn't know about it until an accident happened despite their best efforts. Agriculture, on the other hand, is horribly loving dangerous, practically unregulated, and most employers don't give a poo poo about safety.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 06:22
|
|
|
Guigui posted:Careful now - what if everyone at work watches a combination of Gay porn, sprinkled with Bestiality and a touch of autofellatio vids? Well, other than the bestiality, that sounds like my old job after graduating college.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 06:26
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I know guys in the corporate side of things that have gotten poo poo for not holding the hand-rail as they go down a staircase, because it's safer to do it that way and safety is a company-wide priority. Yeah but agriculture is all low income immigrant farm works so no one cares. Literally.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 06:34
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I have seen the following: The union doesn't get to pick and choose who it represents. Everyone's in the union, everyone pays dues, everyone gets represented. Even if the stewards are unhappy about it. I don't like the idea of the union having to make a value judgment over whether a worker is "worth it", like we can only represent people who make good PR cases. If unions have an image problem now, imagine if they started abandoning dues-paying members because they had a bad reputation with their co-workers. You know the bullying you claimed to have seen? If a whole department is bullying one co-worker and spreading rumours--and this happens an awful lot--how do we determine if that employee's "worthy" of representation? In my (admittedly short) experience, yes, there are some problem cases that tend to stick around longer than they would in a private job. This is often because despite the employee's behaviour, management is usually making things even worse on their end and dragging things out. There are also way more cases of people who have legitimate issues, or who take the incident as a warning and are able to resolve their issues. This isn't a "sweet rear end deal", this is something unions had to work hard to earn and protect to improve working standards for everybody. I'd also say trying to win the "public opinion" game is pointless if you're defining "public opinion" as "a couple of my co-workers, and the National Post". The NP loves their "unions brought this on themselves" stories, and it usually turns out it's because we dared to negotiate benefits. OSI bean dip posted:Here's something that illustrates my point of the idiocy in this country: I laughed when I heard this this morning, leave it to the CTF to leap to stick it to the unions. I mean, I don't think they're going to get to keep their free passes, but Bateman can't even pretend he cares much about anything else.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
What do you guys this of the Canadian Labour Congress? A universal body seeking to protect and represent workers, both public and private sector, seems like a good thing in theory, I'm just not sure how successful such a broad based approach will be. Though I guess just as a lobbying group it will be a good thing, help reverse some of this anti-labour and worker legislation. That Harper can spout off about helping the average Canadian and the middle-class while moving to make things more dangerous for us is loving shameful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 07:15
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:I have seen the following: I'm aware that Federal government departments (and their unions) can vary widely in their corporate personality, otherwise I'd suggest you're indulging in hyperbole. Let's just say your description is not universal. Cultural Imperial posted:1) hacked and accessed email during a strike Haven't seen this. Should be grounds for dismissal. Union's role, if any would be limited to making sure proper procedures are followed. Or maybe "hacking" = logging in to a normally accessed VPN connection that some clueless manager left open during a strike? Dumb and Dumber. Cultural Imperial posted:2) stolen money Seen that. Soon to be ex-employee escorted outside by a manager into the waiting arms of a couple of uniformed gentlemen. I didn't see extraordinary attempts to "protect his job". Cultural Imperial posted:3) bully coworkers to the point they have had to take a leave of absence Seen that (far too often). This is primarily a management failure as that is where the law and policies place responsibility to deal effectively with the issue. Union involvement can vary depending on circumstances. Last case I heard of had a shop steward advising a manager and victim that anything that left bruises was assault, not bullying, and needed a call to the police. Manager seem to feel having a talk with the aggressor was sufficient.  Cultural Imperial posted:People who have had unions actively defend their employment after they have proven to: Actively defend, or ensure procedure was followed? You know, like the justice system is supposed to do? Cultural Imperial posted:4) access porn at work Must have been a long time ago. The government net filters I'm familiar with even block access to somethingawful.com: Category: Tasteless. (drat straight. Why else would I be reading and posting here?) Cultural Imperial posted:5) access child porn Seen that. Employee mysteriously disappeared. No idea what the union involvement was, but the employee never returned. Unfortunately, if the employer starts taking shortcuts handling the guilty ones it might also take liberties with the next employee who might not actually be guilty, just annoying or inconvenient. Cultural Imperial posted:I worked in an organization that experienced a massive exodus of baby boomers in the '00s. Many of these employees had months, even years of sick time banked. Near the magic number of their years of employment, nearly all of these employees would go on extended sick leave to use up this bank of time. Extended sick leave (anything past 2 - 3 days) requires a doctor's signoff. Are these employees bribing their doctors, or what? Or maybe because they're old, they're starting to develop serious health problems? Or maybe they work in Ottawa, where the rate of depression is so high it was rumoured that a centre for research and treatment was being considered?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 08:29
|
|
|
Hexigrammus posted:
It probably varies by industry, but in health care, they absolutely go after confidentiality breaches and people do get fired, no matter what the union does. And pretty much any computer hijinx is a confidentiality breach in some way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 08:47
|
|
|
Albino Squirrel posted:This is basically Alberta. So many catastrophic accidents up in the sands or on the rigs because you're a pussy if you don't stick your limbs in whirling bits of machinery. To be fair, this isn't a failure of the legislation in Alberta. It has its nuances, but it's pretty much on par with the rest of the provinces. However, what the other poster said is correct, the oil and gas companies have gotten their poo poo together in a big way in terms of safety. Most organizations/industries have to learn about safety the hard way - through injuries, fines and constant regulatory interference. It's a sad state of affairs, but that's the reality of it. Full disclosure here, I work as an H&S specialist. Paring back the legislation concerns me in a big way, because a lot of the time, the legislation is my only support for when I propose a change or need funding for a project. These changes have the potential to negatively affect workplace safety in a big way in federal workplaces. As it stands, I don't see the provinces doing the same thing. But a few years down the line, it's possible - and that's really frightening. Workplace safety has always been one of those untouchable issues that no political party has been willing to scale back in the past, but I guess that's not true for the federal conservatives anymore. jot fucked around with this message at 13:35 on Nov 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 13:31
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:If said public sector unions weren't run by idiots, they'd recognize that the tide of public opinion would eventually turn against them. But now it's too late isn't it? There are lots and lots of people out there who don't appreciate the severity of the robocall scandal, who think Rob Ford has delivered on his campaign promises, who haven't heard about the massive oil spill in northern Alberta, and who haven't considered the potential ramifications of scrapping the mandatory long form census. These same people are supposed to have a well-considered opinion on unions?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 11:36 |
|
|
The Québec Liberals have been backtracking rapidly on the charter of values. A few days ago, they agreed that some functionaries (judges, police officers, prison guards, and prosecutors [??]) shouldn't be allowed to wear religious symbols. Today, they're coming out in support of legislating against daycare workers wearing niqabs in entirely private, non-state funded daycares — which aren't covered by the charter as it stands now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2013 16:48
|
|
