(CA) State Files Antitrust Suit Against Supermarket Chains
- Thread starter DealMonkey
- Start date
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Yep, anti-trust laws are there for a reason. IF this did infact take place - I hope they'll be fined, but then again I am happy that they did it to break the union.
Unions today still seem to have more power than the actual employer does in many cases.
Ofcourse Union membership is on the decline in the US anyway so it should become less and less of a factor - especially since their impact on the first two primaries was next to nothing. The "union" candidates polled poorly in both states. I hope this signals an increased self responsibility among working people.
Anyway- IF they really did "arrange" things - then they need to be held accountable for breaking applicable laws.
CkG
Unions today still seem to have more power than the actual employer does in many cases.Ofcourse Union membership is on the decline in the US anyway so it should become less and less of a factor - especially since their impact on the first two primaries was next to nothing. The "union" candidates polled poorly in both states. I hope this signals an increased self responsibility among working people.
Anyway- IF they really did "arrange" things - then they need to be held accountable for breaking applicable laws.
CkG
I hope this signals an increased self responsibility among working people.
---------------
More than likely it shows the ignorance of the American worker as amply demonstrated by your post.
---------------
More than likely it shows the ignorance of the American worker as amply demonstrated by your post.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Ah, that's right - ignorance. They don't know what's good for them so they need someone else to tell them - how very elitist of you.
CkG
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Yep, anti-trust laws are there for a reason. IF this did infact take place - I hope they'll be fined, but then again I am happy that they did it to break the union.
Ofcourse Union membership is on the decline in the US anyway so it should become less and less of a factor - especially since their impact on the first two primaries was next to nothing. The "union" candidates polled poorly in both states. I hope this signals an increased self responsibility among working people.
Anyway- IF they really did "arrange" things - then they need to be held accountable for breaking applicable laws.
CkG
A union is nothing more than a group of folks working at the same place united in the recognition of self worth and insuring security by creating an employment contract. You presume the employer ought to have all the power because the employer employs... The power, if it exists, ought to be vested in both entities. The employer barters for the labor folks' commodity.. their labor. The employer seeks to maximize its income as does the labor folks who enable the employer to generate a product upon which the employer's income is derived. If fairness was in abundance the unified labor folks would not need the security of organized and contractual bargaining scenarios.
The only reasons Union membership is declining is due to the loss of jobs and the WalMart type power... power vested in only one side in the take it or leave it 'Coal Mine' of the grocery store. Molly Maguires... to the front..
well I am sorry that you fell that way about american workers.
I suppose in your town that the FOP tells all its members what to do and when to do it.
I suggest that you read up a little on the federal law regarding unions and the relationship between the members and the union officials. Check out the Landrum-Griffith act. The management of the union cannot do anything without the expressed consent of the members, this includes strikes, agreements, and boycots.
Anyone against Unions which after all is just a bunch of people that have decided to get together for a common cause, this is american as it can get . To be anti Union is to be anti american because one of the freedoms we have in this country is the freedom of association which you and those like you would like to do away with.
The Police will be glad to hear that you are against them because they belong to the FOP, and the doctors that belong to to the AMA and the large manifacturing companys that belong to the NAM. And probably the company that you work for that more than likley belongs to the local Chamber of Commerece which by any definition is a Union. There are many more but I would not want to bore you with facts.
I just about forgot about this
I cannto believe that you actually are glad that a company would break the law just to disinfranchise workers from their right of association, and I thought you were to pure of thought and deed to advocate illigal activities to get to a end result. The end justifies the means in your mind. I am astounded.
Bleep
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Umm, I think you missed the point of what you quoted of mine. Moonbeam(in his elitist wisdom) seems to think that the American worker is ignorant whereas I think they are becoming more responsible for themselves instead of letting someone else do their bidding.
I have read that I am very America and I do not favor unions. You can try to paint some sweet picture of unions but they strip individualism from people and make them reliant. Now, my problem isn't with unions perse, but rather with the way they control business. The "Unions" I speak of are the ones where you join(RTW states), or are forced to join(if you choose to take the position) and then they basically control your employment, wages, and such. Any business I run will never have a union. I'd rather not run it if I can't deal directly with those who are employed by the company I run. Unions have overstayed their welcome in society. I can see where people wanted them and thought they needed them in the past but in today's society unions are more like another layer of management/bureaucracy. I wouldn't be so hard on Unions if they didn't bring it upon themselves. They have every opportunity to structure their agreements any way they wish, but they always seem to choose "exclusive" - which I have a HUGE problem with. Thank God RTW states exist.
Now if you want to play the semantics game with "unions" - I'm game, but trying to divert it that way would be a waste of time IMO.
The issue here is the alleged tactics used by Grocery stores to basically break the union. As much as I think the Union was out of line with their demands - it doesn't absolve the Grocery chains of fault IF they actually did break the law.
CkG
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
I think you have a case of selective reading tonight.
From my first post:
"Yep, anti-trust laws are there for a reason. IF this did infact take place - I hope they'll be fined, but then again I am happy that they did it to break the union"
Then also - "Anyway- IF they really did "arrange" things - then they need to be held accountable for breaking applicable laws."
Now again - how do you get that I think they should break the law. I'm happy they broke the union - but if they broke the law they need to be held accountable. Now if I could restate the part you took offense to - it'd just read - "...I am happy they broke the union." "did it" might seem to imply breaking the law, which at this point is only an allegation, but that wasn't the intent of that statement anyways. It was meant as - I'm happy they stood up to the Union and didn't cave. If a company breaks the law - they should face the consequences - period. No matter how hard you or others try to say I would - I don't and didn't advocate breaking the law.
But whatever - you can believe whatever you want.
CkG
People join unions because they like their jobs and they want to have some say in the way they are treated by their employer. If all employers paid a living wage and decent benefits, you wouldn't need unions. Fact is, they don't and therefore they exist. And the people that join *are* taking personal responsibility by teaming up with like-minded fellow employees and making sure the lot of them get paid and treated fairly. In my opinion, that's the ultimate in personal responsibility.
Yes, you hate unions, you've made that abundantly clear in every thread about unions here at P&N. So what if it makes them reliant? They're already reliant on their employers who often can't be trusted to do the right thing. With a union, at least they have someone actually on their side to be reliant upon.
Why shouldn't employees have some say in how the business is run? Frankly, too much control in an employee-employer relationship is given to the employer. Where's the harm in the union controlling wages, etc.? As an employee (if I were one) I'd much rather see the union doing so than my employer who's probably only interested in the cheapest labor he/she can get...
I'm sure if you treated those who worked for you well, there would never need to be a union in the first place. That seems obvious, doesn't it?
CA will lose the suit. There isn't any antitrust actions, because all the grocery stores aren't involved in the strike. Maybe they should sue the unions, for they are doing the same thing by trying to force the businesses to do what they want.
No what kills competitive pricing is the amount they pay their employees who are now striking. Ill just say good luck to CA, they aren't going to win, once all is said and done. In the mean time the stirking employees will eventually be replaced...
You have respect for them wanting to lose their job long term?
As the super walmarts, super targets and super kmarts(maybe on this one) move into the area, these little grocery stores are going to be run out of business if they dont change. Keeping those unions wages will lead to these stores going out of business or jobs be automated as much as possible.
The unions are not looking into the future.
CAD:
No I did not get involved in selective reading, my post was direct quotes from your post, not for you to crab sideways and say that you did not say what you said is persfectly in line with the lies and misinformation that you spew out on this forum.
As far as ever having a business you will never have one because you do not have the guts to strike out on your own you will forever be beholding to someone else to furnish you with employment and a regular paycheck.
You are a basher and a divider not a lets come together type of person, you will never never give a inch from your radical beliefs.
Now you will say that your beliefs are not radical but if I would post only 1 of the PM's that I have recieved from you regarding your racist attitude it would not be good for your image.
Wlhy dont you answer my statement as to the professional unions that I mentioned like the FOP, and the NAM?
I can recall when you were out of work and finially got a job and you stated that it is just level 1 tech support but it is better than nothing then proceded to complain that they sent you out to work on a small LAN, now you profess to be a programmer. I think your whole life is just fantasy with a big mouth that cannot even convince your wife to your radical way of thought.
Well back to the game you play rebutting your own statements.
Bleep
No I did not get involved in selective reading, my post was direct quotes from your post, not for you to crab sideways and say that you did not say what you said is persfectly in line with the lies and misinformation that you spew out on this forum.
As far as ever having a business you will never have one because you do not have the guts to strike out on your own you will forever be beholding to someone else to furnish you with employment and a regular paycheck.
You are a basher and a divider not a lets come together type of person, you will never never give a inch from your radical beliefs.
Now you will say that your beliefs are not radical but if I would post only 1 of the PM's that I have recieved from you regarding your racist attitude it would not be good for your image.
Wlhy dont you answer my statement as to the professional unions that I mentioned like the FOP, and the NAM?
I can recall when you were out of work and finially got a job and you stated that it is just level 1 tech support but it is better than nothing then proceded to complain that they sent you out to work on a small LAN, now you profess to be a programmer. I think your whole life is just fantasy with a big mouth that cannot even convince your wife to your radical way of thought.
Well back to the game you play rebutting your own statements.
Bleep
Errr...you seem to be forgetting that America's founding intellectuals often disagreed bitterly over virtually everything, except the evils of European collectivist and socialist ideals, on which they were unanimous.
The labor union is a staple of those ideals, not American. Further, the labor union as it came to exist fundamentally subverted some ideals that were uniquely American - private property rights and the free market. America was not founded in 1890 and Eugene Debs was no Alexander Hamilton.
The most ardently anti-union person I know has never advocated the position that freedom of association should be restricted. What they do advocate is that, freedom of association doesn't include the right to use economic extortion to get what one wants, seize by violence and economic extortion control of another's property and use it to one's own ends, or harm entire industries by sworn ideological hostility toward the interests of private property owners.
Speaking of affronts to freedom of association, perhaps you would like to "spin" how a favorite union demand - coerced union membership as a condition of employment or practice of one's craft - is not an assault on the freedom of individuals to associate freely and enter mutually-beneficial relationships, agreements, or contracts?
This ought to be good.
Ah yes, "Ah, that's right - ignorance. They don't know what's good for them so they need someone else to tell them - how very elitist of you." he parrots having been programmed to do so by the elitists who control him.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Umm - no. I think you have me confused with someone else there bleep. I'm not a programmer, never have had a job doing level 1 tech support, and I do have the "guts" to strike out on my own
And when I had found myself out of work - I had a job(in a totally different field) the next week. And BTW I'm a CAD guy who doesn't have a racist attitude PM me though with details of what you think was - from looking through my PM exports - I don't believe that any of them had anything to do with race/ethnicity except for one tax related issue/question I posed to you.But anyway - back to the part you only read half of. Taking part of a statement and chopping it up - can change it's intent. Like my reply stated - "did it" was not meant to mean doing something illegal. It was meant as I'm happy they stood up to the Union by not caving into their demands. But I didm't expect people to understand that when I posted " IF this did infact take place - I hope they'll be fined..." and "IF they really did "arrange" things - then they need to be held accountable for breaking applicable laws." - but we'll just continue to ignore that and bleat on and on about some perceived notion of me supporting them breaking the law.
Anyway - you don't seem to want to understand why I don't support Unions. Unionized people give up their individuality to a third party instead of work directly for the employer. Unions don't seem to want to structure their agreements in anything but "exclusive bargaining" style agreements which I think allows for too much power. The U. S. and Canada are the only major countries in which Exclusive bargaining powers are allowed to be used by Unions. Not even in socialist Europe are Unions given that power.
Anyway back to the issue- which is the alleged tactics used by Grocery stores to basically break the union. As much as I think the Union was out of line with their demands - it doesn't absolve the Grocery chains of fault IF they actually did break the law.
CkG
I've never seen a valid argument against unions.
When people have a choice and are able to vote.....people are generally better off.
Pretty simple concept really.
I've never heard of a union member ever having to pay a penny for anything unless it was part of a contract voted on by the people.
If the people want exclusions for certain fees for certain people or whatever for whoever.....then let the people vote on such a contract. If the represented leaders reject such a notion....then let the people vote them out.
People voting is always a good idea.
When people have a choice and are able to vote.....people are generally better off.
Pretty simple concept really.
I've never heard of a union member ever having to pay a penny for anything unless it was part of a contract voted on by the people.
If the people want exclusions for certain fees for certain people or whatever for whoever.....then let the people vote on such a contract. If the represented leaders reject such a notion....then let the people vote them out.
People voting is always a good idea.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Hehe - you want an argument against Unions?
This is what the SLP has to say about Unions today - "What's wrong with the labor unions?"
CkG
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter