🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4etc2o$dn9@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA>, g9126311@mcmail.cis.McMaster.CA (Victoria Smallman) says:
>
>Derek Nalecki <naleckid@cadvision.com> wrote:
>>In article <4ee0lq$m5p@grid.direct.ca>, cskelton@direct.ca (craig skelton) says:
>>>bargaining agent. Unions are there to work for their members, and their
>>
>>Unlesss they have been coerced to it by the union bully-boys with the
>>'law-enforcement' looking the other way. Unions are mainly there to 
>>collect dues and give perks of power and privilege to a handfull of thugs
>>who have grabbed the reigns of power.
>
>They are???? gee, I wish I'd known that when I was president of our TA local
>union.  All I got was burnout. Can I get my perks and privilege 
>retroactively?  Can you send along a few bully-boys while you're at it?  
>They'd be handy at my dissertation defense.

You mean you didn't get any?!? You must be one of those suckers the union
lords chuckle about when they dispense the favors. 'Don't need to give
any to Victoria, she's actually dumb enough to believe the rethoric, heh,
heh, heh'. And no, I don't imagine you can get any retroactively, but if
you insist check with White or some other creep; you never know.

>
>>Nobody 'deserves' job security. You *earn* job security by being good at
>>what you do. This is the very problem with leftist/collectivist approach
>>to life. Everything must be delivered on the silver platter. *preferably*
>>unearned.
>
>Ah, but a collective agreement lays out the conditions under which you 
>get job security if you are good at what you do.  Do you have to be good 

Now that *is* funny. If the agreement is collective, it will not define
conditions under which you individually are good at your job; all it
will define is the *average* expectancy factor. No one in his right mind
would give job security to the average. That is the shortest road to 
bankruptcy.

>at what you do to "earn" basic rights like protection from sexual or 
>racial harassment, overwork, or other abuse from your employer?  

Protection from harassment are *not* basic rights. If you feel you are
being harassed by your employer you have a clear choice of leaving and
going to work for competition. If you are truly good at what you do, this
competition gains, your previous employer looses.

>
>You don't have to be a leftist to support union activity.  All you need 
>is a desire to protect the terms and conditions of your employment.  In a 
>situation where power relations in the workplace affect your ability to 
>do this on your own--like in a university where TAs are not only cheap 
>labour but are also trying to pursue degrees and are reticent to complain 

Bullshit. I have been a TA at a college. A small, private college which
did not have unions. The wages I received were small enough but I chose
them. Number one it gave me extra access to computer labs which I used to
good result. Number two it was convienient, I started work immediately
after classes. Finally, I could always get another job, but all this one
paid was fine with me under the circumstances. 

>for fear of academic reprisals--it helps if employees bring their voices 
>together and negotiate collectively.  Certainly in the case of academic 
>unions, there are no "union bully-boys" that are somehow removed from the 
>members.  Members volunteer their time, sacrifice their academic work, 

You mean the bully-boys are the membrs.
You just finished whinning that it was oh sooooo hard to work as a TA *and*
pursue the academic work. Now you're saying you wasted time on your union
in lieu of academic work?!? Let me get this straight. You were in the 
union were you spend time on union activities instead of studying. Then 
you got that union to extort special conditions from your employer to
compensate you for lack of time for studying. Yep, sounds like a union
all right. What did I say about free-loaders, expecting - nay demanding - 
the unearned?!?

>and put up with a lot of crap because they believe in the importance of 
>using our voices together.  Had you ever worked for or with an academic 
>union, you'd know this.  There are no thugs, no perks, and definitely no 
>privilege.

And in another of your opinions, totally unsupported by reality, is the
Earth really flat?!?

>
>>>Also, before most of you continue on this topic, I suggest you contact the 
>>>BCLRB (labour relations board) and learn about the rules of the game before
>>>you make youself seem silly. (some of you already did.)
>>
>>By disagreeing with your estimed self? Hardly.
>>
>
>Oh, it's not disagreement that makes you seem silly.  It's your 
>incredible ignorance of labour legislation and unions in general.  
>

I think you'd find my knowledge of labour legislation and unions in general
quite sufficient to form an understanding. It is my interpretation of the
above which, because is factual and rational, causes you and the other
guy to call me names. Alas that's par for the course.


derek n, RdNck, Pen-Arm of the Righteous, esq.
- member in good standing: Homo Sapiens Interregnum (Caucasian persuasion)
- Sirs, I am no petty noble; an ancestor of mine by the name of Noah
  was once the commanding admiral of the combined fleets of my planet.
  (with apologies to Poul Anderson)
********************* MY OTHER COMPUTER IS A LAP-TOP ********************