Twinkie maker Hostess to wind down ops, lay off 18,500 workers, put brands up for sale
POSTED BY: Geezer
UPDATED: Saturday, November 24, 2012 18:01
VIEWED: 12327
PAGE 6 of 9
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
No it is not dumbass. If you are going to make claims be ready to back them up or shut the fuck up.
Not only will I NOT 'shut the fuck up', but with Kwickie, his monotonous asking for 'cites' is exactly as I described it. He uses that reply to avoid even having to deal w/ the bigger issue. It's a dodge, a hustle, and quite frankly, boring as hell.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Not only will I NOT 'shut the fuck up', but with Kwickie, his monotonous asking for 'cites' is exactly as I described it. He uses that reply to avoid even having to deal w/ the bigger issue. It's a dodge, a hustle, and quite frankly, boring as hell.
If you can't cite your claims they are nothing but opinion a can be ignored, and may times should be. See Rappy facts matter to thinking people. If you produce the citation Kwickie can not longer avoid it without and is forced to deal with it or should be called out on it. Until you back up your claims your the one who gets called out. That is the way it goes.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Do you have any cites to back your claim that unions are "forcing employees to join"?
Any cites to say they weren't?
So you've got nothing, eh? Figures.
You're big on claiming things that simply are not true. It'd be nice to think that you have a factual basis for the things you claim, which is why I ask for cites for your claims. That you can rarely or never provide them says far more about you and your "facts" than it does about me.
Quote:
Your tedious claim of 'cites', is nothing more than a clear attempt to distract from the issue at hand. The union voted to kill Hostess, as unions have voted to shut down many businesses before.
Does the union have the ability to vote to kill a company? Can they unincorporate the company and fire all the board of directors and sign the papers to liquidate all the assets?
Or do you not know what the hell you're talking about, as usual?
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
By the way, here's the cite I found with a simple Google search:
http://www.nrtw.org/a/a_1_p.htm
Quote:
You may not be required to be a union member. But, if you do not work in a Right to Work state, you may be required to pay union fees.
Employment relations for almost all private sector employees (other than those in the airline and railroad industries) are covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Under the NLRA, you cannot be required to be a member of a union or pay it any monies as a condition of employment unless the collective bargaining agreement between your employer and your union contains a provision requiring all employees to either join the union or pay union fees.
Even if there is such a provision in the agreement, the most that can be required of you is to pay the union fees (generally called an "agency fee.") Most employees are not told by their employer and union that full union membership cannot lawfully be required. In Pattern Makers v. NLRB, 473 U.S. 95 (1985), the United States Supreme Court held that union members have the right to resign their union membership at any time.
If you are not a member, you are still fully covered by the collective bargaining agreement that was negotiated between your employer and the union, and the union is obligated to represent you. Any benefits that are provided to you by your employer pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement (e.g., wages, seniority, vacations, pensions, health insurance)are not affected by your nonmembership. (If the union offers some "members-only" benefits, you might be excluded from receiving those.) If you are not a member, you may not be able to participate in union elections or meetings, vote in collective bargaining ratification elections, or participate in other "internal" union activities. However, you cannot be disciplined by the union for anything you do while not a member.
So *NO*, nobody is "forcing" anyone to join a union.
Your turn, shitbritches.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, no you can't be forced to join the Union, but you can be forced to pay the dues.
I'm glad I'm in a Right to Work state.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Every time I come back here from the real world, or from hunting stuff up on the internet to better understand an issue, I read a post from Rap, then a response, and immediately think "Why does anyone respond to him? He's so obviously clueless and DELIBERATELY not interested in any facts, only able to spout what he's been told." You're arguing with him--debate isn't possible and you know precisely what you'll get from him...so I keep wondering "why???".
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Does the union have the ability to vote to kill a company? Can they unincorporate the company and fire all the board of directors and sign the papers to liquidate all the assets?
No, but you know they can go on strike and kill the company that way.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Does the union have the ability to vote to kill a company? Can they unincorporate the company and fire all the board of directors and sign the papers to liquidate all the assets?
No, but you know they can go on strike and kill the company that way.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
A warning to everyone, AURaptor is a known liar.
...and now a Fundie!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=53359
Thing is, the union going on strike isn't the same thing as the company's execs filing for bankruptcy and liquidation. The union going on strike is the workers saying that there are minimum conditions for work, conditions below which they will not voluntarily report for work.
According to Rappy, they aren't doing anything to the company, because those aren't their jobs anyway.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Every time I come back here from the real world, or from hunting stuff up on the internet to better understand an issue, I read a post from Rap, then a response, and immediately think "Why does anyone respond to him? He's so obviously clueless and DELIBERATELY not interested in any facts, only able to spout what he's been told." You're arguing with him--debate isn't possible and you know precisely what you'll get from him...so I keep wondering "why???".
Probably for the same reason "why" you keep having to come back and bring up the exact same thing.
I was told that people were being FORCED to join unions; I disputed that. Of the people arguing the point, I was the only one who brought cites and facts to the discussion. I do believe more than one person in this discussion was thereby able to learn something they hadn't known before.
Quit trying to convince yourself that it's about convincing Rappy. I've explained to you ad nauseum that it's not about him, because he has proven himself ineducable.
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero
"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012
Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"
Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wasn't talking to you, Mike, I'm well aware of your reasons for engaging him. Guess I was mostly talking to Nick. And yeah, I'll keep making the point, ad nauseum, because there's always hope that enough people will get sick of beating their heads against the wall that they'll stop responding to (encouraging) him and we can scroll right past him while having a REAL discussion, instead of everyone being hijacked into replying to him. Bite me. 
Don't mean I don't still luv 'ya.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME