chasfh Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 10 hours ago, Screwball said: Unions will never make a difference again, NAFTA was that nail in the coffin. Automation will replace labor in every way possible, AI will replace human digital tasks in the same way. It's all about the bottom line ($), humans don't matter. Until they do... That's what's going to make the Trump concentration camps work: after AI and automation has mostly completed the takeover of the jobs, there won't be any need for the vermin in the labor force anymore. And don't worry about the cost of the camps, because they will simply liquidate the vermin's families' assets to pay for it all. 😉 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 Generally speaking, not specific to the UAW or auto industry, and not even to unions.... but I've evolved to the point where I don't hold it against an employee for not going "all out". I can see doing it if you work for a smaller firm, maybe family run, where you might have more "ownership" or a relationship with the owners at least. But for a corporation that is accountable only to shareholders that treat employees like numbers... I don't see the benefit of an employee busting their ass at maximum capacity for their benefit because unless it's specifically spelled out they won't reward you. Especially when it comes to physical jobs. That kind of work wears on you over time. When you are 50 and have arthritis in your hands and a bad back.... they're not going to remember you. They aren't paying you more than they said they would so don't give them more than what they expect of you. Save the over work for when you are volunteering your time for other things like kids events, church functions, etc. That's when it's needed. 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 8 minutes ago, mtutiger said: I will say this for union employees, at least in the industry that I work in (as someone who has practiced in Texas and Illinois, I've seen both sides of this): Unions aren't perfect and the politics that come with them often create a lot of headaches, but in terms of training, union employees tend to be much more skilled, trained and work safer than non-union employees. There's a real tradeoff that exists between the two IMO, boiling it down to "they get paid more to do less work" doesn't really capture what I've seen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) 14 minutes ago, mtutiger said: I will say this for union employees, at least in the industry that I work in (as someone who has practiced in Texas and Illinois, I've seen both sides of this): Unions aren't perfect and the politics that come with them often create a lot of headaches, but in terms of training, union employees tend to be much more skilled, trained and work safer than non-union employees. There's a real tradeoff that exists between the two IMO I have worked a FoMoCo assembly line as a grunt, and I've spent years in union chemical/refining environments - I think the auto companies do have the bigger problem because the nature of moving assembly lines lends itself to more management abuse of workers than other types of tasks and that sets up a context where everyone on the floor is mad most of the time and the anger and distrust just become endemic between the two sides. OTOH, I would admit that one of things that keeps discipline a little better in chem/refining is that unions can't protect bad employees as easily because labor law allows companies that do hazardous work more freedom to fire. And conversely, since employees can be at real immediate risk, operators do have to take safety and welfare more seriously Edited July 30 by gehringer_2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 7 minutes ago, chasfh said: I think I got it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) 11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: OTOH, I would admit that one of things that keeps discipline a little better in chem/refining is that unions can't protect bad employees as easily because labor law allows companies that do hazardous work more freedom to fire. I work the construction field and am adjacent to railroads much of the time (haven't really dealt with railroad labor directly, but am aware of it due to my work).... the very nature of the work makes it easier for management and labor to row in the same direction versus other positions IMO. Take an IBEW lineman working for an electrical contractor.... they get compensated extremely well, but one wrong move and that employee can die. Obviously incentive for the worker, but also incentive for management, because dealing with a dead employee is a massive massive problem on many levels. Especially on the lower levels of management where one may personally know that employee and have a relationship with them. Edited July 30 by mtutiger 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 2 hours ago, Motown Bombers said: Speaking of locking up innocent black men, how are the Central Park Five doing? I forgot Trump was the DA in that case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 3 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: I forgot Trump was the DA in that case. I don't see how Trump being a private citizen at the time means that it was OK using his status as an elite in late 1980s NYC to whip up a mob against five innocent black men.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 6 minutes ago, mtutiger said: I don't see how Trump being a private citizen at the time means that it was OK using his status as an elite in late 1980s NYC to whip up a mob against five innocent black men.... especially since Harris was carrying out her job and following an established set of rules and policies... nobody made Trump get involved but hey... an opportunity to smear some black people... you don't have to ask twice for his help on that. That's fun to him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) 6 minutes ago, oblong said: especially since Harris was carrying out her job and following an established set of rules and policies... nobody made Trump get involved but hey... an opportunity to smear some black people... you don't have to ask twice for his help on that. That's fun to him. And for whatever reason, some folks just don't appear interested to engage on it. It kinda goes to the old theme of "I don't like Trump, but [insert diatribe against some other politician]" meme that has come to symbolize the anti-anti-Trump class. It's inconvenient to engage on any of his flaws, lets pivot to something else. Edited July 30 by mtutiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted July 30 Author Share Posted July 30 34 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: I forgot Trump was the DA in that case. But you remembered very clearly that VP Kamala Harris was the DA in the Smollet case. 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) 38 minutes ago, mtutiger said: I don't see how Trump being a private citizen at the time means that it was OK using his status as an elite in late 1980s NYC to whip up a mob against five innocent black men.... So I will revert back to the lynch mob comment (OMG I said it again!!!!) That news is so old) Harris made about innocent people. Then I will also mention the guy who was falsley imprisoned. Both while Harris was representing the gov't. We can go round and round all day. People ask whyI don't trust her with all my heart. Dems could put a better candidate out there but they won't. Edited July 30 by Tigeraholic1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 9 minutes ago, pfife said: But you remembered very clearly that VP Kamala Harris was the DA in the Smollet case. She was? I thought she was just inciting race baiting..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 11 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said: But Harris has the black vote. so he doesn't identify himself so how do we check the real story? He says Harris "was in the courtroom." That doesn't necessarily mean she was even the lead prosecutor in the case. So need a little more than the TicTok to evaluate this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 Headline in the Detroit News, but paywalled, that said a majority of Michigan voters, including Republicans, support SC term limits. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 53 minutes ago, mtutiger said: because dealing with a dead employee is a massive massive problem on many levels. Ain't it the truth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) 6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: so he doesn't identify himself so how do we check the real story? He says Harris "was in the courtroom." That doesn't necessarily mean she was even the lead prosecutor in the case. So need a little more than the TicTok to evaluate this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Trulove Edited July 30 by Tigeraholic1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 11 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: So I will revert back to the lynch mob comment (OMG I said it again!!!!) That news is so old) Harris made about innocent people. 34 minutes ago, mtutiger said: It's inconvenient to engage on any of his flaws, lets pivot to something else. Rinse, Recycle, Repeat 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_Trulove https://www.youtube.com/@Jamal.Trulove well the Wiki story doesn't identify the prosecutor in the case either. Sounds like he was framed by two cops. Was Kamala on the force? The Youtube site seems to be the same video as the TicTok and a lot of unrelated stuff about his film work to wade through - so I've still got close to nothing here. So we have an individual who has a legitimate beef with the system who understandably is mad at everyone associated but no direct connection to anything Harris did yet. Edited July 30 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 1 minute ago, mtutiger said: Rinse, Recycle, Repeat Why is it when I ask about Harris you don't have an answer but point at trump? ems don;t have to answer for their wrongs just Trump. #echochamber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) 6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: well the Wiki story doesn't identify the prosecutor in the case either. Sounds like he was framed by two cops. Was Kamala on the force? The Youtube seems to be the same video as the TicTok and a lot of unrelated stuff about his film work to wade through - so I've still got close to nothing here. So we have an individual who has a legitimate beef with the system who understandably is made a everyone associated but not real connection to Harris yet. She was the DA G. Her Deputy prosecutor ran the show. Vice quotes Trulove as saying Harris "wanted to be present for a celebration of a conviction." The publication also cites a 2019 New York Times op-ed by law professor Lara Bazelon, who criticizes Harris’ record as a prosecutor. As attorney general of California, Bazelon wrote, "Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors." Edited July 30 by Tigeraholic1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 4 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: Why is it when I ask about Harris you don't have an answer but point at trump? ems don;t have to answer for their wrongs just Trump. #echochamber Do I need to dig up my answer from two days ago on this very subject? That Harris has a record that she will have to defend, good and bad, but ultimately that Jesus Christ isn't on the ballot and this is a binary choice? I'm sorry that you don't like the answer, but it is an answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 This is the best thing I've seen this morning. Key quote: Quote But Americans who imagine their system is universally admired miss an important reality. Such admiration requires constant effort and self-correction. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: She was the DA G. Her Deputy prosecutor ran the show. Vice quotes Trulove as saying Harris "wanted to be present for a celebration of a conviction." The publication also cites a 2019 New York Times op-ed by law professor Lara Bazelon, who criticizes Harris’ record as a prosecutor. As attorney general of California, Bazelon wrote, "Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors." So did the prosecutor or the prosecutor's boss know the cops had cooked the case? Still trying to get to something more concrete than that there were problems in a big city police force. The cops were prosecuted (by that same DA's office one has to presume). I don't see anything about a prosecutor being charged. Every prosecutor tries in as a general principle avoid re-opening cases. It's an adversary system and that is their job. Bazelon is a progressive legal academic and doesn't like Harris - OK that's fine - I'll put that into the mix. Edited July 30 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 30 Share Posted July 30 1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said: So did the prosecutor or the prosecutor's boss know the cops had cooked the case? DA is an extention of the cops. They always work together to prosecute a case. They have full access to all evidence thats how it always works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.