Portland police union boss slams Oregon gov candidate's claim about defund police stance: 'Simply not true'

[justabubba]

Rationalizing....

learn a new word?

well, your post indicates you don't understand what it means

 

[justabubba]

What union benefits? I had $600 deducted from my paycheck because I was forced to pay dues and all I got was a ****ing bi-monthly newsletter. Unions can go **** themselves.

but you joined one

why, becauase you wanted the pay and benefits of a union job, otherwise you would have settled for a shit job with low pay and shit benefits

 

[PoS]

but you joined one

why, becauase you wanted the pay and benefits of a union job, otherwise you would have settled for a shit job with low pay and shit benefits

No, I joined a company because I needed a job. I never asked to join a union.

 

[Lord of Planar]

learn a new word?

well, your post indicates you don't understand what it means

I completely understood the exchange. You were rationalizing the requirement to pay union dues for the privilege of working that job. Most states have made that illegal.

 

[justabubba]

No, I joined a company because I needed a job. I never asked to join a union.

of course you did, when you sought work at a unionized company

had you wanted to avoid unions, you would not have applied to work at a unionized employer

either that or you had no idea what you were applying for

which then brings into question why you agreed to become a dues paying union member if you were opposed to dues paying union membership once you became aware becoming a union member was a prerequisite to employment

from what you have posted, it looks like you wanted the wages and benefits of working for a unionized employer, only you did not want to have to contribute to the costs of operating a union shop

 

[PoS]

of course you did, when you sought work at a unionized company

had you wanted to avoid unions, you would not have applied to work at a unionized employer

either that or you had no idea what you were applying for

which then brings into question why you agreed to become a dues paying union member if you were opposed to dues paying union membership once you became aware becoming a union member was a prerequisite to employment

from what you have posted, it looks like you wanted the wages and benefits of working for a unionized employer, only you did not want to have to contribute to the costs of operating a union shop

Wrong again. All their fulltime employees were unionized, and I had no say in the matter. I was a young kid, fresh out of college and it was my first job. Wages were average for the state, so no union benefits whatsoever. And the worst part of it was it was a manager in training position, so once I became a manager, I automatically left the union after six months, which made it all for nothing.

 

[justabubba]

Wrong again. All their fulltime employees were unionized, and I had no say in the matter. I was a young kid, fresh out of college and it was my first job. Wages were average for the state, so no union benefits whatsoever. And the worst part of it was it was a manager in training position, so once I became a manager, I automatically left the union after six months, which made it all for nothing.

so much bullshit to wade thru

you DID have a say in the matter. you could have chosen to work for a NON-union employer

and if wages/benefits were not better than those at the NON-union employer, why the hell did you not go elsewhere rather than becoming a member of a union with which you disagreed

there is NO logic in what you say you did

further, you could not have been a manager in training as managers, even those in training, are excluded from being union members. had you needed union assistance, it could not have been provided

if what you are saying was true, then management could lard in its people to serve as union members to disrupt/corrupt the union activities from the inside by presenting their managers to be eligible bargaining unit members

there is a methodology in place at the DoL to assure that crap does not hqppen

so, go blow your smoke under someone else's ass. you write fiction for a living. appears you do it here, too

 

[sub1028]

I've seen lots of really educated people who still had no wisdom at applying what they learned.

I worked with Engineers who always included the SME with all engineering

 

[Lord of Planar]

I worked with Engineers who always included the SME with all engineering

I assume you mean Subject Matter Expert. I have filled those shoes in the past for a piece of CMP equipment (chemical mechanical planarization.)

 

[Glitch]

so much bullshit to wade thru

you DID have a say in the matter. you could have chosen to work for a NON-union employer

and if wages/benefits were not better than those at the NON-union employer, why the hell did you not go elsewhere rather than becoming a member of a union with which you disagreed

there is NO logic in what you say you did

further, you could not have been a manager in training as managers, even those in training, are excluded from being union members. had you needed union assistance, it could not have been provided

if what you are saying was true, then management could lard in its people to serve as union members to disrupt/corrupt the union activities from the inside by presenting their managers to be eligible bargaining unit members

there is a methodology in place at the DoL to assure that crap does not hqppen

so, go blow your smoke under someone else's ass. you write fiction for a living. appears you do it here, too

You are truly clueless. Oregon is not a right-to-work State. Which means everyone who works in Oregon can be forced to work for unions, because they have no choice in the matter.

 

[sub1028]

I assume you mean Subject Matter Expert. I have filled those shoes in the past for a piece of CMP equipment (chemical mechanical planarization.)

I was in Commo and ran much field Wire lol

 

[PoS]

so much bullshit to wade thru

you DID have a say in the matter. you could have chosen to work for a NON-union employer

and if wages/benefits were not better than those at the NON-union employer, why the hell did you not go elsewhere rather than becoming a member of a union with which you disagreed

there is NO logic in what you say you did

further, you could not have been a manager in training as managers, even those in training, are excluded from being union members. had you needed union assistance, it could not have been provided

if what you are saying was true, then management could lard in its people to serve as union members to disrupt/corrupt the union activities from the inside by presenting their managers to be eligible bargaining unit members

there is a methodology in place at the DoL to assure that crap does not hqppen

so, go blow your smoke under someone else's ass. you write fiction for a living. appears you do it here, too

Ah so now youre just calling me a liar because you cant refute what Ive said. Its clear you just parrot union talking points because youre probably part of a union that suckers poor workers and leeches off their livelihoods by taking their dues and buying booze and hookers with it. Keep being you.

 

[Glitch]

Ah so now youre just calling me a liar because you cant refute what Ive said. Its clear you just parrot union talking points because youre probably part of a union that suckers poor workers and leeches off their livelihoods by taking their dues and buying booze and hookers with it. Keep being you.

I can empathize with the plight of workers in Oregon, because Alaska is not a right-to-work State either.

I managed to get around the union tyranny by going into business for myself and only hiring sub-contractors, not "employees." They got a 1099 from me, and not a W2.

 

[justabubba]

You are truly clueless. Oregon is not a right-to-work State. Which means everyone who works in Oregon can be forced to work for unions, because they have no choice in the matter.

And you chose to apply for employment at a facility that compelled union membership. How is it that you were distressed because you applied for a job where you knew of the prerequisite for eligibility was union membership?

 

[ModernDiogenes]

The police are usually the first ones to be union busters, always have been. Police unions also act as a larger shield against accountability than other unions. Lastly police have an immense power at their disposal.

Most folks speak to this out of perception based opinion that actual, factually based, reality.

Do law enforcers have some level of professional courtesy extended to them by other law enforcers the same way doctors do for other doctors, etc, sure. I have seen it cut the other way though. I l personally know multiple officers who have lost their livelihoods; decades of time invested, the loss of pension that an entire life was planned around with no time to make up the difference, over minor issues that would have been a slap on the wrist in other professional career paths.

It cuts BOTH ways.

 

[bomberfox]

Most folks speak to this out of perception based opinion that actual, factually based, reality.

Do law enforcers have some level of professional courtesy extended to them by other law enforcers the same way doctors do for other doctors, etc, sure. I have seen it cut the other way though. I l personally know multiple officers who have lost their livelihoods; decades of time invested, the loss of pension that an entire life was planned around with no time to make up the difference, over minor issues that would have been a slap on the wrist in other professional career paths.

It cuts BOTH ways.

It cuts muuuch more to the police’s favor.

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181465.pdf

They are even given quotas, qualified immunity, able to confiscate funds to fund the police on a guilty until proven innocent basis. Doctors dont have qualified immunity and they dont have a system of taxpayers funding their lawsuit losses.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

It cuts muuuch more to the police’s favor.

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181465.pdf

They are even given quotas, qualified immunity, able to confiscate funds to fund the police on a guilty until proven innocent basis. Doctors dont have qualified immunity and they dont have a system of taxpayers funding their lawsuit losses.

IF you totally get rid of qualified immunity no qualified, educated, person is going to take on the job.

I am a college educated, technically skilled, individual who had a concurrent successful careers in tech fields [photojournalist, computer networking and security] and in today's climate I would never have taken on a career in public sector law enforcement. You combine the triple whammy of reduced starting salaries [when I started we had pay parity, base pay for a rookie was the same as a veteran. The difference was longevity pay], public sentiment and the removal of qualified immunity and the public reaps what it has sown: less skilled officers who take on the low paying gig at low pay for reasons other than public service.

We get what we pay for, and what we attract with the work environment we create.

I have been trying to explain that to folks since way back when I helped negotiate contracts for my PBA collective bargaining unit and other locals. If the quality of policing has declined since the 1990's that is why. A guy can make a better living at starting wages driving trucks than being a law enforcement officer. Sure, if one wants to wade through 5-10 years of salary steps one can make a decent living being a cop when they reach full base pay. Why, if one has a decent head on their shoulders, deal with all the nonsense today to have to cope with making crap for while on that escalator for the headaches involved?

 

[bomberfox]

IF you totally get rid of qualified immunity no qualified, educated, person is going to take on the job.

I am a college educated, technically skilled, individual who had a concurrent successful careers in tech fields [photojournalist, computer networking and security] and in today's climate I would never have taken on a career in public sector law enforcement. You combine the triple whammy of reduced starting salaries [when I started we had pay parity, base pay for a rookie was the same as a veteran. The difference was longevity pay], public sentiment and the removal of qualified immunity and the public reaps what it has sown: less skilled officers who take on the low paying gig at low pay for reasons other than public service.

We get what we pay for, and what we attract with the work environment we create.

I have been trying to explain that to folks since way back when I helped negotiate contracts for my PBA collective bargaining unit and other locals. If the quality of policing has declined since the 1990's that is why. A guy can make a better living at starting wages driving trucks than being a law enforcement officer. Sure, if one wants to wade through 5-10 years of salary steps one can make a decent living being a cop when they reach full base pay. Why, if one has a decent head on their shoulders, deal with all the nonsense today to have to cope with making crap for while on that escalator for the headaches involved?

Im so sorry cops are so weak they cant hack accountability like doctors do. NO other profession has this kind of immunity. I might even get a tissue for those sods.

Psst we already get that with qualified immunity on top of me as a taxpayer having to pay everytime some dickhead gets a power trip. Qualified immunity is so so bad that you have to have an EXACT to the letter precedent in order to even begin charging an officer. Mah dude what the **** do you think ER doctors have to put up with with less immunity to consequences? Do you have any idea how hard it is for a victim brutally murdered by a cop to get justice?

No other profession gets this privilege and they have to pay boatloads of cash to get their jobs and risk life and limb.

Now pray tell what more cushion does your ass need that none of us get to get officers to be less piggy? We have been declining in crime rates since the 90s yet the police only grew more numerous and more militarized.

I simply understand why so many people are fed up with the insanity of the silly notion America has of law and order.

 

[bomberfox]

Tell me what makes cops so much more special they need a damn near impenetrable shield that protects murderers and police gangs? That enables them to steal from you on mere assumption of guilt and pocket the cash they pilfered from you on a departmental basis? Eyyyy? Do you have any idea what its like to be on the receiving end?

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Im so sorry cops are so weak they cant hack accountability like doctors do. NO other profession has this kind of immunity. I might even get a tissue for those sods.

Psst we already get that with qualified immunity on top of me as a taxpayer having to pay everytime some dickhead gets a power trip. Qualified immunity is so so bad that you have to have an EXACT to the letter precedent in order to even begin charging an officer. Mah dude what the **** do you think ER doctors have to put up with with less immunity to consequences? Do you have any idea how hard it is for a victim brutally murdered by a cop to get justice?

No other profession gets this privilege and they have to pay boatloads of cash to get their jobs and risk life and limb.

Now pray tell what more cushion does your ass need that none of us get to get officers to be less piggy? We have been declining in crime rates since the 90s yet the police only grew more numerous and more militarized.

I simply understand why so many people are fed up with the insanity of the silly notion America has of law and order.

First off, doctors have insurance to indemnify them against the risks of being sued.

Get rid of qualified immunity, but pay starting cops what doctors get paid, and allow them to purchase malpractice insurance en mass. That’s responsible and reasonable.

If not, my answer is what I tell others with similar sentiments: If you won’t protect your police officers, don’t ask them to protect you. Do the job yourself.

I can protect myself and my family. I have that skill set, the will and the strength to do so. I wish most of the rest of this nation good luck with that setup where the rule of law goes out the window*, might makes right, and the average and weak are subject to the good wishes and grace of the strong.

*in case you didn’t know, the rule of law anyplace is only as good as it’s law enforcers. This nation’s isn’t perfect, and no one is claiming it is, but it’s a far cry better than most, which is precisely why we have room for the option to strive for better.

 

[bomberfox]

First off, doctors have insurance to indemnify them against the risks of being sued.

Get rid of qualified immunity, but pay starting cops what doctors get paid, and allow them to purchase malpractice insurance en mass. That’s responsible and reasonable.

If not, my answer is what I tell others with similar sentiments: If you won’t protect your police officers, don’t ask them to protect you. Do the job yourself.

I can protect myself and my family. I have that skill set, the will and the strength to do so. I wish most of the rest of this nation good luck with that setup where the rule of law goes out the window*, might makes right, and the average and weak are subject to the good wishes and grace of the strong.

*in case you didn’t know, the rule of law anyplace is only as good as it’s law enforcers. This nation’s isn’t perfect, and no one is claiming it is, but it’s a far cry better than most, which is precisely why we have room for the option to strive for better.

Your proposal is quite acceptable and i will vote for raising pay to enable that to happen. Insurance is good for that sort of thing.

The point with qualified immunity is its near impossible to have a case unless you establish the most airtight precedence imaginable. CATO surprisingly had a good article about the injustice of qualified immunity.

https://www.cato.org/publications/publications/cato-campaign-qualified-immunity?gclid=Cj0KCQiA4OybBhCzARIsAIcfn9nujG5YAX0WA0DHSHXJ5zkb2X9TLx4j46KaYVzLOM6k7p3wf9QJH4saAl02EALw_wcB

Is it a far cry from most? I think the sheer number of people imprisoned would suggest otherwise.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Is it a far cry from most? I think the sheer number of people imprisoned would suggest otherwise.

That isn’t a matter of enforcement of the law. That is a matter of the laws legislated to be enforced and the courts system that sentences.

Take a private, for profit, prison system. Corporate greed. A nonsense war on drugs and that’s the lion’s share of the problem. The LEO’s that are charged with enforcing that law who do it by the book are scripted in their response, and not directly at fault for the outcome of following a script they have little input into, but simply play their part as written.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Tell me what makes cops so much more special they need a damn near impenetrable shield that protects murderers and police gangs? That enables them to steal from you on mere assumption of guilt and pocket the cash they pilfered from you on a departmental basis? Eyyyy? Do you have any idea what its like to be on the receiving end?

They aren’t, as there is due process if one knows how to invoke it. They problem is many don’t, and those that might frequently don’t have the resources, financial and otherwise, to access it if they do know what that entails.

That’s not the fault of the police. That’s the fault of a tiered justice system where those without resources can’t access the same level of representation in that system as those who do have the resources.