Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Wisconsin governor to end ALL collective bargaining rights for state workers.

The spring-peeper mentality in a nutshell:

public-sector-cartoon.jpg
 
S_P's anti unionist drivel stems from hubby having union issues and listening to Rush. Excellent performance on the BA strikes threads whining away about the unions.
 
butchersapron said:
Here's the next step: Food Stamps Cut off for Entire Families If One Member Strikes
Click to expand...

ye gods. I've just wasted a huge chunk of my life reading the comments to that, presumably that's what passes for debate the other side of the pond.

One, semi-sane, post points out "Bogus fear-mongering. That "buried provision" in a "GOP Bill" is already Federal law and has been for years. US Code Title 7, Chapter 51, section 2015 (d) 3 already has this provision in place. (the only proposed change is substituting "food stamp program" for "supplemental nutritional assistance program.")"

which appears to be the case

"(3) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a household shall not participate in the food stamp program at any time that any member of such household, not exempt from the work registration requirements of paragraph (1) of this subsection, is on strike as defined in section 142(2) of title 29, because of a labor dispute (other than a lockout) as defined in section 152(9) of title 29:"


http://vlex.com/vid/sec-eligibility-disqualifications-19270454#ixzz1HbIdBZM9 but be prepared for industrial scale unreadability.. Because of the way US law works I can't tell how long this has been in force, since early 2010 at least.
 
Why has this apparently nominal change been suggested now? Surely to remind administrators of their duty to effectively stop 40 million plus citizens from striking.
 
Yuwipi Woman said:
How is protesting for higher wages and better working conditions not free speech?
Click to expand...
It's not free speech because strikers aren't just protesting or stating an opinion. They are refusing to work to gain something or prevent the loss of something. Some gov workers don't have the right to strike....cops, firefighters, military, air traffic controllers.....but they still have freedom of speech. I'm not against the right of most workers to strike, but I don't see how the right to strike & freedom of speech are the same at all.

And I oppose the law cutting off food stamps.
 
The ability to strike is the ability to express yourself politically.

If you have the freedom of expression if you have the freedom of assembly, you have the right to strike.
 
TomUS said:
It's not free speech because strikers aren't just protesting or stating an opinion. They are refusing to work to gain something or prevent the loss of something. Some gov workers don't have the right to strike....cops, firefighters, military, air traffic controllers.....but they still have freedom of speech. I'm not against the right of most workers to strike, but I don't see how the right to strike & freedom of speech are the same at all.

And I oppose the law cutting off food stamps.
Click to expand...

I was surprised that strikers could get food stamps, but I don't support the removal of this benefit.
 
butchersapron said:
Why has this apparently nominal change been suggested now? Surely to remind administrators of their duty to effectively stop 40 million plus citizens from striking.
Click to expand...

no idea but your cynicism is at least as great as mine.

fwiw, going through the vast slabs of text that seem to comprise US federal law I noticed this: "(iv) Strike against the government. - For the purpose of subparagraph (A)(v), an employee of the Federal Government, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, who is dismissed for participating in a strike against the Federal Government, the State, or the political subdivision of the State shall be considered to have voluntarily quit without good cause." and I'm sure we can all guess what that means.
 
TomUS said:
It's not free speech because strikers aren't just protesting or stating an opinion. They are refusing to work to gain something or prevent the loss of something. Some gov workers don't have the right to strike....cops, firefighters, military, air traffic controllers.....but they still have freedom of speech. I'm not against the right of most workers to strike, but I don't see how the right to strike & freedom of speech are the same at all.

And I oppose the law cutting off food stamps.
Click to expand...

The phrase you're missing is "expressive conduct." The court in many cases has ruled that some types of conduct are expressive and therefore can't be prohitibited by the government. The one that has gotten the most press is the flag burning law.

Statutes that prohibit the desecration of the U.S. flag have been found to restrict free expression unconstitutionally. In texas v. johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 109 S. Ct. 2533, 105 L. Ed. 2d 342 (1989), the Court overturned Gregory L. Johnson's conviction for burning a U.S. flag during a demonstration. Johnson's actions were communicative conduct that warranted First Amendment protection, even though they were repugnant to many people. Similarly, in United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310, 110 S. Ct. 2404, 110 L. Ed. 2d 287 (1990), the Court struck down the federal Flag Protection Act of 1989, 103 Stat. 777, 18 U.S.C.A. § 700, stating that the government's interest in passing the act had been a desire to suppress free expression and the content of the message that the act of flag burning conveys.
Click to expand...

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Right+to+free+speech

The reason the fire fighters and police can be exempted from that is because the government has a legitimate interest in protecting the public. Prohibiting them from striking is legitmate because they can't fight fires and arrest criminals if they're on strike.
 
I did because of this article

I looked upon the heap of dead bodies and I remembered these girls were the shirtwaist makers. I remembered their great strike of last year in which these same girls had demanded more sanitary conditions and more safety precautions in the shops. These dead bodies were the answer.
Click to expand...
 
spring-peeper said:
There are times that removing the right to strike meant that they had their freedom of speech revoked. I am sooooo sick of hearing all the adverts/propaganda from the civil servants each time their contract comes up.
Click to expand...

If you don't like it don't listen to it. Actually, maybe you should S_P.
 
frogwoman said:
If you don't like it don't listen to it. Actually, maybe you should S_P.
Click to expand...

I don't have a choice, their adverts are everywhere. "Pay us more because without us, Canada and life as we know it will end.", "Don't vote for such-and-such party because they want to lay us off!!!" are a couple of their paraphrased messages.

What exactly am I listening for, anyway???

Maybe it's just jealous. I know that if I'd leap at a government job that paid well about industry standards, wonderful pension plan, extended maternity leave, and little chance of getting fired or laid off. I would really like the part about a guaranteed wage increase every year. It's been many a year since I've had an increase in our family income.



edit to add - this is really off topic and I have no idea what you are going for here. I've already said that I don't agree with what is happening in Wisconsin. Is this about free speech and the right to strike? If so, I think I've just shown that they still have the right to free speech even though they don't have the right to strike.
 
Here, p/s pay is actually far lower than private sector equivalent. I know two blokes working in university IT staff who could fucking cream it if they moved to the private sector. They accept that lower pay in the knowledge of job stability and good pension etc.

Earning the same but doing better is a myth in your head- there is always a trade off and some people are happy to take it. It doesn't fit 'you are the money in your bank' individualist arse fuckery but hety, thats how they roll.
 
oh and the assault on those people already being paid less than their private sector equivalents is one reason why l fucking despise anti unionism. Its going on right now, slash and fucking burn.
 
DotCommunist said:
oh and the assault on those people already being paid less than their private sector equivalents is one reason why l fucking despise anti unionism. Its going on right now, slash and fucking burn.
Click to expand...

I can sympathize with that point of view and will take into account in the future.

Once I graduate, the government jobs start $8-10 higher than in the private sector. They also have benefits that most can only dream of. I would love a government job!!!!

But I don't qualify because I'm the wrong age, colour and language. So I'll take a low paying job, pay my taxes and listen to those who earn more than me complain about how hard they have it.

This is one of the reasons I'm anti-union. Strange how we both want to protect those getting harmed and we are on different sides.
 
DotCommunist said:
Here, p/s pay is actually far lower than private sector equivalent. I know two blokes working in university IT staff who could fucking cream it if they moved to the private sector. They accept that lower pay in the knowledge of job stability and good pension etc.
Click to expand...

And in my mate's case (he works at Canterbury Christ Church) because of access to the uni's computing resources. They're fairly laissez faire about him using stuff as long as it doesn't compromise normal use for the studes and academics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JimW
Russian-speaking union for migrant workers in Swedish building sector
Replies
0
Views
198
JimW
JimW
krtek a houby
  • Poll
Do you support the rights for smaller countries to defend themselves against larger aggressors?
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
newme
newme
mojo pixy
Give me a reason not to embrace the far-right
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
3K
Lotte
L
tim
State murder in Singapore.
Replies
21
Views
841
A380
A380
bcuster
AT&T says hackers stole records of nearly all cellular customers' calls and texts
2 3
Replies
78
Views
2K
moochedit
moochedit
Back
Top Bottom