aquapub
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2005
- Messages
- 7,317
- Reaction score
- 344
- Location
- America (A.K.A., a red state)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/20/D8EK82K80.html
Commuters trudged through the freezing cold, rode bicycles and shared cabs Tuesday as New York's bus and subway workers went on strike for the first time in more than 25 years and stranded millions of riders at the height of the Christmas rush. A judge slapped the union with a $1 million-a-day fine. State Justice Theodore Jones leveled the sanction against the Transport Workers Union for violating a state law that bars public employees from going on strike. The city and state had asked Jones to hit the union with a "very potent fine."
"This is a very, very sad day in the history of labor relations for New York City," the judge said in imposing the fine.
The union said it would immediately appeal, calling the penalty excessive.
The strike came just five days before Christmas, at a time when the city is especially busy with shoppers and tourists. The heavy penalty could force the union off the picket lines and back on the job. Under the law, the union's 33,000 members will also lose two days' pay for every day they are on strike, and they could also be thrown in jail.
DeeJayH said:good for that judge
jallman said:No, not good for that judge...shame on the instigators of that law. In effect, you are saying that it is ok for the state of New York to force labor out of employees who have grievance with their employer? Thats so American of you. :roll:
DeeJayH said:dont hate the playa, hate the game
the law is the law, even if it is wrong
if it is wrong change it
but they should not be able to put NYC in a stranglehold, at christmas of all times, to better their lot in life. NYC has suffered enough in recent years.
I personally think, the time for unions has come and gone
its served its purpose, and now it is time to move on
jallman said:Well now, I agree with you on that point. I think what the labor union in NYC is doing right now is deplorable...and I think they should be fired, which is the penalty for walking out on the job. But to fine them because they walked off the job...come on now, that law is definitely out of line, dont you think?
DeeJayH said:but if you knowingly break a law, are you not expected to take the responsibility
lets take my least favorite twat, Cindy Sheehan
she chose civil disobedience to get her point across
and she willingly went to jail for that freak show
as far as out of line
I was a Stock Broker and am now a realtor
I am subject to Treble damages for some offenses
which means, for those not in the know, if i commit fraud or some other things, that materially affect the value of a property i sell, i can be Sued for TRIPLE the amount of damages
the point being, that they make the penalty extreme, so as to discourage those from breaking it
Deegan said:Anyone making 63 grand a year driving a bus, and still has "grievances" should be slapped silly, then fired, and left to work at McDonald's, or Taco Bell.:roll:
jallman said:Barring the slapped silly, I can agree with you. I am just saying that fining is out of bounds.
jallman said:These people are exercising a personal choice not to work for an employer they have grievance with. The law itself seems unconstitutional and against the right to peacefully demonstrate. Thats all I am saying..
Barring the slapped silly, I can agree with you. I am just saying that fining is out of bounds.
aquapub said:The labor union that recently shut down New York for not giving in to their senselessly greedy demands has just voted down a compromise contract. Here we go again?
Union bosses seriously need to be stripped of their enormously powerful, unaccountable, needlessly destructive capabilities.
aquapub said:New York City's transit labor union has gone on strike to bully the taxpayers into letting them retire at the age of 55 and a whole host of other obscenely expensive, greedy arrangements.
In Election 2004, several unions forced employers to hold jobs for people who left to campaign for Kerry in battleground states. They force employees to join them and/or to pay them (EVEN GOVERNMENT employees. This means tax dollars are being strong-armed into the pockets of Democrat campaigns). They are nothing more than a legalized mafia for Democrat activism.
They make it unaffordable for employers to hire Americans. They raise everyone's cost of living needlessly.
They have utterly destroyed public education-which they have held firmly in their clutches for decades and decades now.
Everything they USE to serve a purpose for is now covered by federal law.
Do you think they need to exist? Be put on a tight leash?
http://money.cnn.com/2005/12/17/news/nytransit/index.htm
jallman said:Barring the slapped silly, I can agree with you. I am just saying that fining is out of bounds.
debate_junkie said:Not true. I am a government employee in Pennsylvania. In this state, government employees are free to endorse any candidate, on their own time. Government employess are free to contribute to any candidate, with their own dollars.
Now, having said that... it is grounds for termination to join a candidate's campaign, and begin working for them. State employees, as our code requires, must appear to be neutral, when we are conducting the government's business. Are we free to have our own opinions.. of course. Most of us despise our current governor. But since this is an gubenatorial election year, we cannot campaign with any of his opponents.
As far as our Union goes, these things I've mentioned above are PART of our contract. If we violate them in any way.. the Union can require NOTHING of the state of Pennsylvania to maintain our jobs. The Union's only response can be "See ya.. wouldn't want to be ya" and that's that.
So your blanket statement is false. If you know of a state that allows such practices, you should say so.
Navy Pride said:The labor unions I know of contribute members dues strictly to the democratic party...........They are trying to put a stop out here with the NEA.......There are republicans that do not want their dues going to democratic candidates and causes........
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?