Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
If you live anywhere that this strike is being carried out, I'm wondering
what the strikers are claiming as the reason(s) for their action. The main reason people where I live are avoiding stores being struck is that they are being intimidated by the picketers and this is likely to get worse now that the maf......er Teamsters are involved. If you'd like to see the contract that they are rejecting you can find it on the KFI640 web site. I think you'll find it very interesting. http://www.kfi640.com/main.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
Michael Mckelvy wrote:
If you live anywhere that this strike is being carried out, I'm wondering what the strikers are claiming as the reason(s) for their action. The companies make billions in profits and want the employees to start paying for healthcare when it was already there for employees for decades. (ie - a pay cut, but in a sneaky manner) Trader Joe's(small chain in California) has literally half the markup of Vons/Safeway and yet is planning on expanding 100 stores in the next three years. Even with the current pay, the companies are still making money hand over fist. The main reason people where I live are avoiding stores being struck is that they are being intimidated by the picketers and this is likely to get worse now that the maf......er Teamsters are involved. Where I live, most of the town supports or was at one time a member of a union and they refuse to shop and support the companies or scabs. The Teamsters got involved because the companies decided to try to break the union, so the employees called in the Teamsters to get some hurt on by not delivering the supplies. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
Obie said: Trader Joe's(small chain in California) has literally half the markup of Vons/Safeway and yet is planning on expanding 100 stores in the next three years. Even with the current pay, the companies are still making money hand over fist. They don't pay union wages, do they. And they only sell packaged goods, which require less labor to display. No meat to cut, no produce to uncrate and place in neat piles. A more apt comparison is a bookstore. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message k.net... Michael Mckelvy wrote: If you live anywhere that this strike is being carried out, I'm wondering what the strikers are claiming as the reason(s) for their action. The companies make billions in profits and want the employees to start paying for healthcare when it was already there for employees for decades. (ie - a pay cut, but in a sneaky manner) Trader Joe's(small chain in California) has literally half the markup of Vons/Safeway and yet is planning on expanding 100 stores in the next three years. Even with the current pay, the companies are still making money hand over fist. The main reason people where I live are avoiding stores being struck is that they are being intimidated by the picketers and this is likely to get worse now that the maf......er Teamsters are involved. Where I live, most of the town supports or was at one time a member of a union and they refuse to shop and support the companies or scabs. The Teamsters got involved because the companies decided to try to break the union, so the employees called in the Teamsters to get some hurt on by not delivering the supplies. Check the earnings statements. The companies are making a whopping 1.3 to 1.5% profit. Walmart is the 400 lb gorilla that is breaking the union. I believe Trader Joes is a non-union store BTW. What health benefits do they provide their employees? The real issue for everyone is, WTF is going on with health care costs? Allow imported pharmaceuticals. ScottW |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
They don't pay union wages, do they. And they only sell packaged goods, which require less labor to display. No meat to cut, no produce to uncrate and place in neat piles. No, they sell fresh produce and many things that you can't get at the major supermarkets. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
S888Wheel said: They don't pay union wages, do they. And they only sell packaged goods, which require less labor to display. No meat to cut, no produce to uncrate and place in neat piles. No, they sell fresh produce and many things that you can't get at the major supermarkets. The ones in Maryland don't sell fresh produce. Except for *packaged* foods. Nor do they have anything not in the supermarkets. They have more choices of some stuff, particularly frozen fish. I guess they tailored the east coast stores to what they thought would sell here. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message k.net... Michael Mckelvy wrote: If you live anywhere that this strike is being carried out, I'm wondering what the strikers are claiming as the reason(s) for their action. The companies make billions in profits and want the employees to start paying for healthcare when it was already there for employees for decades. (ie - a pay cut, but in a sneaky manner) They want them to pay $5.00 per week towards their own healthcare, $15.00 per week for family coverage. The union is also claiming that the stores want to cut 50% of their pension benefits. This is a lie. Trader Joe's(small chain in California) has literally half the markup of Vons/Safeway and yet is planning on expanding 100 stores in the next three years. Even with the current pay, the companies are still making money hand over fist. You've seen their books? The main reason people where I live are avoiding stores being struck is that they are being intimidated by the picketers and this is likely to get worse now that the maf......er Teamsters are involved. Where I live, most of the town supports or was at one time a member of a union and they refuse to shop and support the companies or scabs. The Teamsters got involved because the companies decided to try to break the union, so the employees called in the Teamsters to get some hurt on by not delivering the supplies. The Teamsters are involved because they lend muscle. They are thugs, they have been keying cars of people who cross the picket lines. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
The ones in Maryland don't sell fresh produce. Except for *packaged* foods. Nor do they have anything not in the supermarkets. They have more choices of some stuff, particularly frozen fish. I guess they tailored the east coast stores to what they thought would sell here. I didn't even know they were on the east coast. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
George M. Middius wrote:
Obie said: Trader Joe's(small chain in California) has literally half the markup of Vons/Safeway and yet is planning on expanding 100 stores in the next three years. Even with the current pay, the companies are still making money hand over fist. They don't pay union wages, do they. And they only sell packaged goods, which require less labor to display. No meat to cut, no produce to uncrate and place in neat piles. Actually, they do have a bakery section and produce section. The meat is pre-packaged, but it's not something they sell a lot of - it's there mostly as specialty items like sausage and imported cheeses the grocery stores don't carry. The fact is, they operate a grocery store. They pay nearly the same wages as the big chains. They operate on a 80-100% markup over cost, as opposed to the local Ralph's at 225% right next door. The same milk and eggs - half as much across the street. $2 a pound for butter. Chicken Bullion $2.69 and $4.59(Ralphs) Same exact products. Yet they make more than enough money to expand. That the large chains are squabbling over a little pay when they are turning billions in profits per year is silly. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
S888Wheel wrote:
They don't pay union wages, do they. And they only sell packaged goods, which require less labor to display. No meat to cut, no produce to uncrate and place in neat piles. I forgot to mention - it's all family owned, like In and Out Burger. Both companies treat their employees well, pay the highest non-union wages in the area, and generally run a fine, ethical business. No shareholders, no board of directors, no earnings nonsense. Unions really are only required when the management is unwilling to run an ethical business, afterall. In and Out is a good comparison. They pay $8-$9 an hour for the exact same job that the other burger chains want you to do, yet make enough money to expand roughly one new store every 2-3 weeks. Oh - they charge less for a burger as well. Healthcare as well for full-tiem employees(unheard of in fast food). Compare that to McDonalds - minimum wage, pay increases every 6 months of 25 cents(half what In and Out does every 3 months), a million rules, more expensive food... And they are closing locations in the U.S. Loosing money because they are profit and shareholder driven. I'm amazed that they don't have a union. The poor slobs working there certainly need one. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
Michael Mckelvy wrote:
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message k.net... Michael Mckelvy wrote: If you live anywhere that this strike is being carried out, I'm wondering what the strikers are claiming as the reason(s) for their action. The companies make billions in profits and want the employees to start paying for healthcare when it was already there for employees for decades. (ie - a pay cut, but in a sneaky manner) They want them to pay $5.00 per week towards their own healthcare, $15.00 per week for family coverage. The union is also claiming that the stores want to cut 50% of their pension benefits. This is a lie. Trader Joe's(small chain in California) has literally half the markup of Vons/Safeway and yet is planning on expanding 100 stores in the next three years. Even with the current pay, the companies are still making money hand over fist. You've seen their books? Kroger had enough money to buy Ralphs a few years ago. Hundreds of millions in profits. The Teamsters are involved because they lend muscle. They are thugs, they have been keying cars of people who cross the picket lines. In a perfect world, they would pay well and have no need for unions. BTW, I talked to a trucker who was there - they drive the truck there, then wait for the temp to show up and drive it in/unload it. He said that he only makes $40-$45K a year. Imagine how little they would be paid if they didn't have a union. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
S888Wheel wrote: They don't pay union wages, do they. And they only sell packaged goods, which require less labor to display. No meat to cut, no produce to uncrate and place in neat piles. I forgot to mention - it's all family owned, like In and Out Burger. Both companies treat their employees well, pay the highest non-union wages in the area, and generally run a fine, ethical business. No shareholders, no board of directors, no earnings nonsense. Unions really are only required when the management is unwilling to run an ethical business, afterall. In and Out is a good comparison. They pay $8-$9 an hour for the exact same job that the other burger chains want you to do, yet make enough money to expand roughly one new store every 2-3 weeks. Oh - they charge less for a burger as well. Healthcare as well for full-tiem employees(unheard of in fast food). Compare that to McDonalds - minimum wage, pay increases every 6 months of 25 cents(half what In and Out does every 3 months), a million rules, more expensive food... And they are closing locations in the U.S. Loosing money because they are profit and shareholder driven. I'm amazed that they don't have a union. The poor slobs working there certainly need one. In and Out also make a much better product than Mc Donalds. That doesn't hurt. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message nk.net... Michael Mckelvy wrote: "Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message k.net... Michael Mckelvy wrote: If you live anywhere that this strike is being carried out, I'm wondering what the strikers are claiming as the reason(s) for their action. The companies make billions in profits and want the employees to start paying for healthcare when it was already there for employees for decades. (ie - a pay cut, but in a sneaky manner) They want them to pay $5.00 per week towards their own healthcare, $15.00 per week for family coverage. The union is also claiming that the stores want to cut 50% of their pension benefits. This is a lie. Trader Joe's(small chain in California) has literally half the markup of Vons/Safeway and yet is planning on expanding 100 stores in the next three years. Even with the current pay, the companies are still making money hand over fist. You've seen their books? Kroger had enough money to buy Ralphs a few years ago. Hundreds of millions in profits. IOW you have not seen the books. The Teamsters are involved because they lend muscle. They are thugs, they have been keying cars of people who cross the picket lines. In a perfect world, they would pay well and have no need for unions. When is there a need for thuggery? They do pay well, there is no need for unions. These people make approx 23,000 a year if they make the top pay rate for working 24 hrs a week. If they don't think they are getting enough to live on they should retrain for another line of work. There's no guarantee nor should there be that things will stay the same. BTW, I talked to a trucker who was there - they drive the truck there, then wait for the temp to show up and drive it in/unload it. He said that he only makes $40-$45K a year. More than a lot of teachers. What's wrong with this picture. Imagine how little they would be paid if they didn't have a union. They also recieve full medical and pension benefits even though they aren't full time employees. You do realize that if they get paid more, your groceries cost more, don' t you? They are not being asked to take a pay cut. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message nk.net... S888Wheel wrote: They don't pay union wages, do they. And they only sell packaged goods, which require less labor to display. No meat to cut, no produce to uncrate and place in neat piles. I forgot to mention - it's all family owned, like In and Out Burger. Both companies treat their employees well, pay the highest non-union wages in the area, and generally run a fine, ethical business. No shareholders, no board of directors, no earnings nonsense. Earnings nonsense? It's earnings that pay the wages. Unions really are only required when the management is unwilling to run an ethical business, afterall. Unions are never required. Every employee has the right to take what is offered or go elsewhere. There is no hint of these chains being unethical. In and Out is a good comparison. They pay $8-$9 an hour for the exact same job that the other burger chains want you to do, yet make enough money to expand roughly one new store every 2-3 weeks. Oh - they charge less for a burger as well. Healthcare as well for full-tiem employees(unheard of in fast food). Compare that to McDonalds - minimum wage, pay increases every 6 months of 25 cents(half what In and Out does every 3 months), a million rules, more expensive food... With oppurtunities for advancement and management and store ownership. And they are closing locations in the U.S. Loosing money because they are profit and shareholder driven. I'm amazed that they don't have a union. The poor slobs working there certainly need one. They are closing stores because they oversaturated the market. It's the first time in their history that they ever lost money. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message nk.net... George M. Middius wrote: Obie said: Trader Joe's(small chain in California) has literally half the markup of Vons/Safeway and yet is planning on expanding 100 stores in the next three years. Even with the current pay, the companies are still making money hand over fist. They don't pay union wages, do they. And they only sell packaged goods, which require less labor to display. No meat to cut, no produce to uncrate and place in neat piles. Actually, they do have a bakery section and produce section. The meat is pre-packaged, but it's not something they sell a lot of - it's there mostly as specialty items like sausage and imported cheeses the grocery stores don't carry. The fact is, they operate a grocery store. They pay nearly the same wages as the big chains. They operate on a 80-100% markup over cost, as opposed to the local Ralph's at 225% right next door. The same milk and eggs - half as much across the street. $2 a pound for butter. Chicken Bullion $2.69 and $4.59(Ralphs) Same exact products. Yet they make more than enough money to expand. That the large chains are squabbling over a little pay when they are turning billions in profits per year is silly. It wouold be if it were true they were making billions. Where are the figures for their profits, or are you just regurgitating the union rhetoric? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Unions are never required. Every employee has the right to take what is offered or go elsewhere. There is no hint of these chains being unethical. If there were no unions, the worker would still have the right to go elsewhere; but only to another nonunion environemnt where he will be treated just as shabbily. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Unions are never required. Every employee has the right to take what is offered or go elsewhere. There is no hint of these chains being unethical. If there were no unions, the worker would still have the right to go elsewhere; but only to another nonunion environemnt where he will be treated just as shabbily. By what standard? 90% of the workforce is non-union. The grocery clerks enjoy a much higher standard than most FULL TIME employees. If they are unhappy with their lot they need to get more education and different jobs. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Unions are never required. Every employee has the right to take what is offered or go elsewhere. There is no hint of these chains being unethical. If there were no unions, the worker would still have the right to go elsewhere; but only to another nonunion environemnt where he will be treated just as shabbily. By what standard? 90% of the workforce is non-union. The grocery clerks enjoy a much higher standard than most FULL TIME employees. If they are unhappy with their lot they need to get more education and different jobs. Easily said, not always so easily done. That there are unions, and laws allowing unions, is the reason wages are decent, even for non union companies. Many non union companies offer wages higher than union rates, just to keep the unions out. Those companies are more afraid of the unions getting into work rules and other aspects of managment prerogatives than they are afraid of paying higher wages and benefits. But, were it not for fear of unions, management would not be so generous. Management represents ownership. Ownership is a conglomeration of many stock holding investors each owning a small interest in the business. Management represents a lot of amassed economic power. Workers can only deal with the power of management on an equitable basis if they are organized into one massed entity (the union), such as the individual stockholder interests are organized into one massed entity (management). ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Unions are never required. Every employee has the right to take what is offered or go elsewhere. There is no hint of these chains being unethical. If there were no unions, the worker would still have the right to go elsewhere; but only to another nonunion environemnt where he will be treated just as shabbily. By what standard? 90% of the workforce is non-union. The grocery clerks enjoy a much higher standard than most FULL TIME employees. If they are unhappy with their lot they need to get more education and different jobs. Easily said, not always so easily done. That there are unions, and laws allowing unions, is the reason wages are decent, even for non union companies. Prove it. Many non union companies offer wages higher than union rates, just to keep the unions out. Those companies are more afraid of the unions getting into work rules and other aspects of managment prerogatives than they are afraid of paying higher wages and benefits. No, they are afraid of the endless bull**** about who isn't going to do what. The unions have a long history of corruption and mismangement of things like pension funds. The only reason the Teamsters exist is because of Mafia connections and Mafia muscle. They only succeed in keeping people who are willing to work out. They never cease in trying to get more money for less work. Grocery clerks are unsilled labor and are already being replaced. It takes about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike are going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest bidder. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. But, were it not for fear of unions, management would not be so generous. Management represents ownership. Ownership is a conglomeration of many stock holding investors each owning a small interest in the business. Management represents a lot of amassed economic power. Workers can only deal with the power of management on an equitable basis if they are organized into one massed entity (the union), such as the individual stockholder interests are organized into one massed entity (management). Oh, gang war. Bull****. People with skills in demand get paid well, people with skills that are readily available get paid less. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
Michael Mckelvy wrote:
Many non union companies offer wages higher than union rates, just to keep the unions out. Those companies are more afraid of the unions getting into work rules and other aspects of managment prerogatives than they are afraid of paying higher wages and benefits. No, they are afraid of the endless bull**** about who isn't going to do what. Reguardless, fear is all that most large corporations understand. Like the second ammendment - just KNOWING that the people were given the express (potential)ability to overthrow you does wonders to keep a healthy balance of power and respect on both sides. Grocery clerks are unsilled labor and are already being replaced. It takes about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike are going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest bidder. Actually, no. More like 2 weeks. You must be fast, you must know how to deal with errors, scan checks, deal with food stamps and WIC(one mistake here legally requires you to be written up - two is mandated fired). Then there's all the codes for produce and meat and... It's not like taking orders for pizzas anymore. Then ethere's the butchers and bakery. They aren't even trying to replace them it's such specialized work. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. True, but since the companies have an attitude of "we owe you nothing other than a paycheck and you owe us everything(including your intelectual property) in return", it's not surprizing that unions are so popular in the U.S. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Unions are never required. Every employee has the right to take what is offered or go elsewhere. There is no hint of these chains being unethical. If there were no unions, the worker would still have the right to go elsewhere; but only to another nonunion environemnt where he will be treated just as shabbily. By what standard? 90% of the workforce is non-union. The grocery clerks enjoy a much higher standard than most FULL TIME employees. If they are unhappy with their lot they need to get more education and different jobs. Easily said, not always so easily done. That there are unions, and laws allowing unions, is the reason wages are decent, even for non union companies. Prove it. Common sense. It follows from the precepts of Capitalism, competition and human nature. Many non union companies offer wages higher than union rates, just to keep the unions out. Those companies are more afraid of the unions getting into work rules and other aspects of managment prerogatives than they are afraid of paying higher wages and benefits. No, they are afraid of the endless bull**** about who isn't going to do what. A more crude way of saying exactly what I just said. The unions have a long history of corruption and mismangement of things like pension funds. So, corporations also have a long history of corruption, mismanagement, stockholder fraud, bribery, and price fixing. The only reason the Teamsters exist is because of Mafia connections and Mafia muscle. They only succeed in keeping people who are willing to work out. Using your analogy, they can go find another job is one of the 90% (according to you) non union workplaces. They never cease in trying to get more money for less work. Hence the 40 hour work week and a decent standard of living in the USA. You are the beneficiary of a century of American unionism. Grocery clerks are unsilled labor and are already being replaced. It takes about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike are going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest bidder. Like the slaves of yore. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. What you are worth is a matter of what you are able to negotiate. But, were it not for fear of unions, management would not be so generous. Management represents ownership. Ownership is a conglomeration of many stock holding investors each owning a small interest in the business. Management represents a lot of amassed economic power. Workers can only deal with the power of management on an equitable basis if they are organized into one massed entity (the union), such as the individual stockholder interests are organized into one massed entity (management). Oh, gang war. Bull****. People with skills in demand get paid well, people with skills that are readily available get paid less. It's trogladytes like you that prevent me from taking the last step in severing myself from the Democratic party and actually registering as a Republican. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
Joseph Oberlander wrote in message ink.net...
Michael Mckelvy wrote: Many non union companies offer wages higher than union rates, just to keep the unions out. Those companies are more afraid of the unions getting into work rules and other aspects of managment prerogatives than they are afraid of paying higher wages and benefits. No, they are afraid of the endless bull**** about who isn't going to do what. Reguardless, fear is all that most large corporations understand. Like the second ammendment - just KNOWING that the people were given the express (potential)ability to overthrow you does wonders to keep a healthy balance of power and respect on both sides. Grocery clerks are unsilled labor and are already being replaced. It takes about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike are going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest bidder. Actually, no. More like 2 weeks. You must be fast, you must know how to deal with errors, scan checks, deal with food stamps and WIC(one mistake here legally requires you to be written up - two is mandated fired). Then there's all the codes for produce and meat and... It's not like taking orders for pizzas anymore. Then ethere's the butchers and bakery. They aren't even trying to replace them it's such specialized work. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. True, but since the companies have an attitude of "we owe you nothing other than a paycheck and you owe us everything(including your intelectual property) in return", it's not surprizing that unions are so popular in the U.S. "unions are so popular in the U.S.?" This here U.S.? Union membership has been in a 40 year downward death spiral and if you remove federal employees from the mix, only about 8% of private sector U.S. workers are union. That strikes you as "popular?" What would you call the other 92%? Really popular? |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message nk.net... Michael Mckelvy wrote: Many non union companies offer wages higher than union rates, just to keep the unions out. Those companies are more afraid of the unions getting into work rules and other aspects of managment prerogatives than they are afraid of paying higher wages and benefits. No, they are afraid of the endless bull**** about who isn't going to do what. Reguardless, fear is all that most large corporations understand. Like the second ammendment - just KNOWING that the people were given the express (potential)ability to overthrow you does wonders to keep a healthy balance of power and respect on both sides. Grocery clerks are unsilled labor and are already being replaced. It takes about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike are going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest bidder. Actually, no. More like 2 weeks. You must be fast, you must know how to deal with errors, scan checks, deal with food stamps and WIC(one mistake here legally requires you to be written up - two is mandated fired). Then there's all the codes for produce and meat and... It's not like taking orders for pizzas anymore. Then ethere's the butchers and bakery. They aren't even trying to replace them it's such specialized work. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. True, but since the companies have an attitude of "we owe you nothing other than a paycheck and you owe us everything(including your intelectual property) in return", it's not surprizing that unions are so popular in the U.S. They are not popular except with the very bottom end of the intellectual scale. Those with the least skill are doing the most complaining and expecting the most pay and benefits. Of the entire workforce only 10-15% of it is unionized, this hardly qualifies as popular. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Unions are never required. Every employee has the right to take what is offered or go elsewhere. There is no hint of these chains being unethical. If there were no unions, the worker would still have the right to go elsewhere; but only to another nonunion environemnt where he will be treated just as shabbily. By what standard? 90% of the workforce is non-union. The grocery clerks enjoy a much higher standard than most FULL TIME employees. If they are unhappy with their lot they need to get more education and different jobs. Easily said, not always so easily done. That there are unions, and laws allowing unions, is the reason wages are decent, even for non union companies. Prove it. Common sense. It follows from the precepts of Capitalism, competition and human nature. Many non union companies offer wages higher than union rates, just to keep the unions out. Those companies are more afraid of the unions getting into work rules and other aspects of managment prerogatives than they are afraid of paying higher wages and benefits. No, they are afraid of the endless bull**** about who isn't going to do what. A more crude way of saying exactly what I just said. The unions have a long history of corruption and mismangement of things like pension funds. So, corporations also have a long history of corruption, mismanagement, stockholder fraud, bribery, and price fixing. The only reason the Teamsters exist is because of Mafia connections and Mafia muscle. They only succeed in keeping people who are willing to work out. Using your analogy, they can go find another job is one of the 90% (according to you) non union workplaces. They never cease in trying to get more money for less work. Hence the 40 hour work week and a decent standard of living in the USA. You are the beneficiary of a century of American unionism. These have nothing to do with unionism, they have everything to do with productivity. Grocery clerks are unskilled labor and are already being replaced. It takes about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike are going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest bidder. Like the slaves of yore. Slaves had no choice clerks do. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. What you are worth is a matter of what you are able to negotiate. Keying cars, slamming people's hands in doors and other acts of vandalism are your idea of negotiation? But, were it not for fear of unions, management would not be so generous. Management represents ownership. Ownership is a conglomeration of many stock holding investors each owning a small interest in the business. Management represents a lot of amassed economic power. Workers can only deal with the power of management on an equitable basis if they are organized into one massed entity (the union), such as the individual stockholder interests are organized into one massed entity (management). Complete nonsense, 90% of the workforce does very well without unions, they are able to aquire skills and negotiate on their own merits. Oh, gang war. Bull****. People with skills in demand get paid well, people with skills that are readily available get paid less. It's trogladytes like you that prevent me from taking the last step in severing myself from the Democratic party and actually registering as a Republican. Unwarranted personal attack noted. Don't let me stop you, I'm not a Republican. I'm also not a Democrat. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... They are not popular except with the very bottom end of the intellectual scale. Those with the least skill are doing the most complaining and expecting the most pay and benefits. Of the entire workforce only 10-15% of it is unionized, this hardly qualifies as popular. It was a sad day when Lincoln signed the Emancipation Procalmation. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Hence the 40 hour work week and a decent standard of living in the USA. You are the beneficiary of a century of American unionism. These have nothing to do with unionism, they have everything to do with productivity. You are absolutley flat out wrong. Grocery clerks are unskilled labor and are already being replaced. It takes about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike are going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest bidder. Like the slaves of yore. Slaves had no choice clerks do. Not if they are merely a product to be bid, as you allege. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. What you are worth is a matter of what you are able to negotiate. Keying cars, slamming people's hands in doors and other acts of vandalism are your idea of negotiation? No Neither are extreme management tactics. It happens Complete nonsense, 90% of the workforce does very well without unions, they are able to aquire skills and negotiate on their own merits. The environment which allows this has evovlved, in large part, because of unionism. Oh, gang war. Bull****. People with skills in demand get paid well, people with skills that are readily available get paid less. It's trogladytes like you that prevent me from taking the last step in severing myself from the Democratic party and actually registering as a Republican. Unwarranted personal attack noted. The statement is warranted, and not an attack Your brand of. Neanderthal conservatism is noted. Don't let me stop you, I'm not a Republican. I'm also not a Democrat. I hate to ask what you are. I have my suspicions you lean towards Fascism. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... They are not popular except with the very bottom end of the intellectual scale. Those with the least skill are doing the most complaining and expecting the most pay and benefits. Of the entire workforce only 10-15% of it is unionized, this hardly qualifies as popular. It was a sad day when Lincoln signed the Emancipation Procalmation. Your equating non-union with slavery shows a major disconnect with reality. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Hence the 40 hour work week and a decent standard of living in the USA. You are the beneficiary of a century of American unionism. These have nothing to do with unionism, they have everything to do with productivity. You are absolutley flat out wrong. Prove it. Grocery clerks are unskilled labor and are already being replaced. It takes about 4 hours of training and poof you're a cashier. Those on strike are going to lose in the end. Labor is a product to be sold to the highest bidder. Like the slaves of yore. Slaves had no choice clerks do. Not if they are merely a product to be bid, as you allege. If you don't like the conditions where you work you are free to get more training or education in order to gain advancement. Slaves had no such option. You seem to be syaing that 90% of the workforce are slaves. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. What you are worth is a matter of what you are able to negotiate. Keying cars, slamming people's hands in doors and other acts of vandalism are your idea of negotiation? No Neither are extreme management tactics. It happens It happend only when unionists are on strike and not getting their way. The Teamsters have a very long history of this. What is extreme about trying to keep your business competitive by reducing labor costs? Complete nonsense, 90% of the workforce does very well without unions, they are able to aquire skills and negotiate on their own merits. The environment which allows this has evovlved, in large part, because of unionism. Popular myth. Oh, gang war. Bull****. People with skills in demand get paid well, people with skills that are readily available get paid less. It's trogladytes like you that prevent me from taking the last step in severing myself from the Democratic party and actually registering as a Republican. Unwarranted personal attack noted. The statement is warranted, and not an attack Your brand of. Neanderthal conservatism is noted. Once again name calling, the act of someone without a case. I'm not a conservative, not a Republican, just somebody who has worked for in a union shop and who is aware that they do more harm than good. Don't let me stop you, I'm not a Republican. I'm also not a Democrat. I hate to ask what you are. I have my suspicions you lean towards Fascism. Anybody who disagrees with a Liberal must be a Fascist? Did you graduate from the Trotsky school of intellectual dishonesty? ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... They are not popular except with the very bottom end of the intellectual scale. Those with the least skill are doing the most complaining and expecting the most pay and benefits. Of the entire workforce only 10-15% of it is unionized, this hardly qualifies as popular. It was a sad day when Lincoln signed the Emancipation Procalmation. Your equating non-union with slavery shows a major disconnect with reality. No, I am equating you with antiquated thinking, even for a reactionary right winger. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Hence the 40 hour work week and a decent standard of living in the USA. You are the beneficiary of a century of American unionism. These have nothing to do with unionism, they have everything to do with productivity. You are absolutley flat out wrong. Prove it. Reductions in the work week were won in ealry union contracts, for example, by the ILGWU If you don't like the conditions where you work you are free to get more training or education in order to gain advancement. Slaves had no such option. That's a nice story book dream, reality is often quite different. BTW, unionized workplaces frequently have such arrangements in cooperatrive ventures with management. You seem to be syaing that 90% of the workforce are slaves. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. What you are worth is a matter of what you are able to negotiate. Keying cars, slamming people's hands in doors and other acts of vandalism are your idea of negotiation? No Neither are extreme management tactics. It happens It happend only when unionists are on strike and not getting their way. The Teamsters have a very long history of this. No, management has their own bag of dirty tricks. What is extreme about trying to keep your business competitive by reducing labor costs? Complete nonsense, 90% of the workforce does very well without unions, they are able to aquire skills and negotiate on their own merits. The environment which allows this has evovlved, in large part, because of unionism. Popular myth. No, its true. This is acknowledged by main stram historians, Oh, gang war. Bull****. People with skills in demand get paid well, people with skills that are readily available get paid less. It's trogladytes like you that prevent me from taking the last step in severing myself from the Democratic party and actually registering as a Republican. Unwarranted personal attack noted. The statement is warranted, and not an attack Your brand of. Neanderthal conservatism is noted. Once again name calling, the act of someone without a case. Your arguments speak for themselves, relevant to Neanderthal views. I'm not a conservative, not a Republican, just somebody who has worked for in a union shop and who is aware that they do more harm than good. You lie about not being a conservative. This is in consideration of my having heard your views on other political subjects otehr than unionism. Don't let me stop you, I'm not a Republican. I'm also not a Democrat. I hate to ask what you are. I have my suspicions you lean towards Fascism. Anybody who disagrees with a Liberal must be a Fascist? No, and I am not a Liberal. I voted for George Bush. I support our President's war on terror. I support his tax cutting economic policies. I would calssify you as a Neanderthal reactionary conservative, with leanings towards Fascism. That is NOT because you disagree with me. And certainly not because I am a Liberal Did you graduate from the Trotsky school of intellectual dishonesty? Talk about personal attacks!! ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... Hence the 40 hour work week and a decent standard of living in the USA. You are the beneficiary of a century of American unionism. These have nothing to do with unionism, they have everything to do with productivity. You are absolutley flat out wrong. Prove it. Reductions in the work week were won in ealry union contracts, for example, by the ILGWU If you don't like the conditions where you work you are free to get more training or education in order to gain advancement. Slaves had no such option. That's a nice story book dream, reality is often quite different. BTW, unionized workplaces frequently have such arrangements in cooperatrive ventures with management. You seem to be syaing that 90% of the workforce are slaves. Nobody owes you a living or a living wage. You get paid for what you're worth in the marketplace. What you are worth is a matter of what you are able to negotiate. Keying cars, slamming people's hands in doors and other acts of vandalism are your idea of negotiation? No Neither are extreme management tactics. It happens It happend only when unionists are on strike and not getting their way. The Teamsters have a very long history of this. No, management has their own bag of dirty tricks. What is extreme about trying to keep your business competitive by reducing labor costs? Complete nonsense, 90% of the workforce does very well without unions, they are able to aquire skills and negotiate on their own merits. The environment which allows this has evovlved, in large part, because of unionism. Popular myth. No, its true. This is acknowledged by main stram historians, Oh, gang war. Bull****. People with skills in demand get paid well, people with skills that are readily available get paid less. It's trogladytes like you that prevent me from taking the last step in severing myself from the Democratic party and actually registering as a Republican. Unwarranted personal attack noted. The statement is warranted, and not an attack Your brand of. Neanderthal conservatism is noted. Once again name calling, the act of someone without a case. Your arguments speak for themselves, relevant to Neanderthal views. I'm not a conservative, not a Republican, just somebody who has worked for in a union shop and who is aware that they do more harm than good. You lie about not being a conservative. This is in consideration of my having heard your views on other political subjects otehr than unionism. Don't let me stop you, I'm not a Republican. I'm also not a Democrat. I hate to ask what you are. I have my suspicions you lean towards Fascism. Anybody who disagrees with a Liberal must be a Fascist? No, and I am not a Liberal. I voted for George Bush. I support our President's war on terror. I support his tax cutting economic policies. I would calssify you as a Neanderthal reactionary conservative, with leanings towards Fascism. That is NOT because you disagree with me. And certainly not because I am a Liberal Did you graduate from the Trotsky school of intellectual dishonesty? Talk about personal attacks!! |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... They really are just more of the same arguments, from the same doctrianire voices. They ignore U.S. history from 1850 to 1950. Historically, Unionism has improved the wages and working conditions of the American worker. Although you are not a union member, and neither am I, unionism has created the environment which allows you to enjoy a good standard of living, a reasonable and safe work environment, and many of the legal protections you now enjoy. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... They are not popular except with the very bottom end of the intellectual scale. Those with the least skill are doing the most complaining and expecting the most pay and benefits. Of the entire workforce only 10-15% of it is unionized, this hardly qualifies as popular. It was a sad day when Lincoln signed the Emancipation Procalmation. Your equating non-union with slavery shows a major disconnect with reality. No, I am equating you with antiquated thinking, even for a reactionary right winger. There's nothing antiquated about realizing that the economydoes better all around when people get appropriate compensation for the labor they perform. It's not how much you money you make, it's how much you can buy with it. The more it costs in labor the more it costs at the check out line. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... "Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message ... They really are just more of the same arguments, from the same doctrianire voices. They ignore U.S. history from 1850 to 1950. Historically, Unionism has improved the wages and working conditions of the American worker. Although you are not a union member, and neither am I, unionism has created the environment which allows you to enjoy a good standard of living, a reasonable and safe work environment, and many of the legal protections you now enjoy. There is ample evidence that these things would have evloved without unions. People want a safe environment to work in and vote with their feet when such is not provided. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
'Bolshevik' Yustabe wrote:
Michael Mckelvy wrote: Anybody who disagrees with a Liberal must be a Fascist? No, and I am not a Liberal. I voted for George Bush. I support our President's war on terror. I support his tax cutting economic policies. Come off it, Sackman - you're spinning like a top. Mikey made a monkey out of you on this thread. You're arguing sheer mendacity or you're on the verge of supporting socialism. Which is it? ;-) GeoSynch |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
GeoSynch wrote:
'Bolshevik' Yustabe wrote: Michael Mckelvy wrote: Anybody who disagrees with a Liberal must be a Fascist? No, and I am not a Liberal. I voted for George Bush. I support our President's war on terror. I support his tax cutting economic policies. Come off it, Sackman - you're spinning like a top. Mikey made a monkey out of you on this thread. You're arguing sheer mendacity or you're on the verge of supporting socialism. Which is it? ;-) GeoSynch I don't think that socialism never brings to much trouble in USA so please Geo keep on speaking what you really know. Lionel |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
"GeoSynch" wrote in message ink.net... 'Bolshevik' Yustabe wrote: Michael Mckelvy wrote: Anybody who disagrees with a Liberal must be a Fascist? No, and I am not a Liberal. I voted for George Bush. I support our President's war on terror. I support his tax cutting economic policies. Come off it, Sackman - you're spinning like a top. Mikey made a monkey out of you on this thread. You're arguing sheer mendacity or you're on the verge of supporting socialism. Which is it? ;-) GeoSynch The concept of unionism is not Socialism. Although, in the past, Socialists have tried to infiltrate unions, sometimes successfully. At its core, unionism is basedupon capitalistic principals. Coprorations are a conglomeration of individual investm,ents amassed to form one large enterprise, larger than on any of the individual investors could intiate. This brings economy of scale, and masses the corporate entity's economic power. The labor union does the same thing for the employee. BTW, I am slightly right of center!! GeoSynch calls me a Bolshevik, and Sanders calls me a Reactionary!!! ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
"GeoSynch" wrote in message ink.net... 'Bolshevik' Yustabe wrote: Michael Mckelvy wrote: Anybody who disagrees with a Liberal must be a Fascist? No, and I am not a Liberal. I voted for George Bush. I support our President's war on terror. I support his tax cutting economic policies. Come off it, Sackman - you're spinning like a top. Mikey made a monkey out of you on this thread. You're arguing sheer mendacity or you're on the verge of supporting socialism. Which is it? ;-) GeoSynch The concept of unionism is not Socialism. Although, in the past, Socialists have tried to infiltrate unions, sometimes successfully. The above reminds me the old American's paranoia. I thought that it was now only Muslims and French ! (LOL) Need more Rosenberg ? I don't like what I'm going to say but it's not more stupdid than what you have said : The mafia has also successfully infiltrate the unions sometimes... ;o) |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
O.T. Grocery clerks strike
Lionel wrote:
I don't think that socialism never brings to much trouble in USA so please Geo keep on speaking what you really know. So, how are you getting along with all those Muslims who have in recent years seemingly invaded your country? I hear they like to overturn cars just for the fun of it. GeoSynch |