RE: Union busting illegal!

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Union busting illegal!

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Union busting illegal!

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 5:46:38 AM

domiguy

Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline

luckydawg...lol.

Reading his shit almost makes me feel sorry for him...almost.

_____________________________

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 5:56:50 AM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

You are just a complex humanitarian Domi

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to domiguy)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 6:14:28 AM

Hippiekinkster

Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline

_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 7:34:57 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Yeah, I hear that but open meeting is pretty fuckin cut and dried and alot of caselaw reinforcing it, I don't care if its Jeb Bush and Scott Walker sitting on that bench, the nebulous miasmatic wending and slithering of legal principle and language interpretation that could make that piece of shit stick .........

And further, given the explication of the law by the current WI Attorney General....

http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dls/OMPR/2010OMCG-PRO/2010_OML_Compliance_Guide.pdf

Who is going to prosecute the case on behalf of the state?

I mean especially given that these fucking idiots down there have the defense that senate rule 93 only states that a 2 hour notice of special session has to be put on the bulletin board, which implies that senate rules are supreme to state law?

Jesus, there is only one person I can think of in the world from wisconsin who would argue that correctness of law, and he aint got a license.

Actually on page 4 of your link it states,

"The open meetings law also does not apply
where it conflicts with a rule of the Legislature, senate, or assembly. Wis. Stat. § 19.87(2)."

Wisconson law specifically says Senate rules take precedence.

Read the ruling, the judge notes that since this was a conference committee, IOW both Senate and House members present, the Senates rules do not apply.

Yeah, his misunderstanding of legal concepts and general lack of acumen is renown.

Now, if rule 93 stated : Any bill under vote has to be posted on the bulletin board for 2 hours before the vote and this satisfys the open meeting law (or even the open meeting law be damned)............then you got a conflict.

But sadly and pathetically, it don't.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 9:20:32 AM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

So the legislature cant reverse a law that granted a "right" that didnt exist before that law? A "right" that the majority of states don't recognize? Anyone want to wager on the SCOTUS decision?

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 9:22:45 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

Could yo start your own thread instead of hijacking this one? What you are blathering about has nothing to do with this thread.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 9:22:47 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

Anyone want to wager on the SCOTUS decision?

That a Union is a person and deserves the same rights?

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 9:34:20 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

So the legislature cant reverse a law that granted a "right" that didnt exist before that law? A "right" that the majority of states don't recognize? Anyone want to wager on the SCOTUS decision?

Unions are based on rights granted in the Constitution. Specifically the Right to Assemble and in the case of government workers the right to petition the government.

SCOTUS as presently constituted may try to ignore those facts but that would just add fire to the argument that Thomas and Scalia need to be removed or additional justices appointed.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 11:23:36 AM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

So the legislature cant reverse a law that granted a "right" that didnt exist before that law? A "right" that the majority of states don't recognize? Anyone want to wager on the SCOTUS decision?

Unions are based on rights granted in the Constitution. Specifically the Right to Assemble and in the case of government workers the right to petition the government.

SCOTUS as presently constituted may try to ignore those facts but that would just add fire to the argument that Thomas and Scalia need to be removed or additional justices appointed.

Whether unions may form and exist isnt the issue. Obviously they can under the Constitution. The question is can an entity be forced to have only union employees as an option for a particular job.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 2:12:36 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

So the legislature cant reverse a law that granted a "right" that didnt exist before that law? A "right" that the majority of states don't recognize? Anyone want to wager on the SCOTUS decision?

Unions are based on rights granted in the Constitution. Specifically the Right to Assemble and in the case of government workers the right to petition the government.

SCOTUS as presently constituted may try to ignore those facts but that would just add fire to the argument that Thomas and Scalia need to be removed or additional justices appointed.

Whether unions may form and exist isnt the issue. Obviously they can under the Constitution. The question is can an entity be forced to have only union employees as an option for a particular job.

So called "Right to Work" wasn't even an issue in Wisconsin. And it would be a 14th violation to change the law only for state workers.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 2:15:49 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

and even moreso for just a select group of them.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 31

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 4:41:27 PM

willbeurdaddy

Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

So the legislature cant reverse a law that granted a "right" that didnt exist before that law? A "right" that the majority of states don't recognize? Anyone want to wager on the SCOTUS decision?

Unions are based on rights granted in the Constitution. Specifically the Right to Assemble and in the case of government workers the right to petition the government.

SCOTUS as presently constituted may try to ignore those facts but that would just add fire to the argument that Thomas and Scalia need to be removed or additional justices appointed.

Whether unions may form and exist isnt the issue. Obviously they can under the Constitution. The question is can an entity be forced to have only union employees as an option for a particular job.

So called "Right to Work" wasn't even an issue in Wisconsin. And it would be a 14th violation to change the law only for state workers.

I didnt say anything about right to work, although its a similar issue. It took legislation to grant bargaining powers to a specific job..ie the state gave up the right to hire non-union workers. It cant possibly be unconstitutional to either retract those powers or hire non-union workers in parallel. There is a constitutional right to form a union, there is no constitutional right to force union employees on any employer or to force an employee to join one in order to work.

There is a difference between public jobs and private sector jobs that further weakens the union's argument.

And the 14th amendment argument is just silly. If it wasnt unconstitutional to grant bargaining to only state workers it cant be unconstitutional to retract it.

< Message edited by willbeurdaddy -- 5/27/2011 4:44:24 PM >

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 32

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 4:46:50 PM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

thats ignoring alot of realities, issues, contracts currently in force, and good faith, among other things.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)

Profile

Post #: 33

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 7:53:57 PM

luckydawg

Posts: 2448
Joined: 9/2/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

Anyone want to wager on the SCOTUS decision?

That a Union is a person and deserves the same rights?

The right to force people to pay them as a condition of employment?

Which people have that right?

_____________________________

I was posting as Right Wing Hippie, but that account got messed up.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 34

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 7:55:11 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

OK, more rights.

(in reply to luckydawg)

Profile

Post #: 35

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 7:58:57 PM

luckydawg

Posts: 2448
Joined: 9/2/2009
Status: offline

and why would they grant that? And would that also grant the same power to Corparations?

And individuals?

< Message edited by luckydawg -- 5/27/2011 7:59:21 PM >

_____________________________

I was posting as Right Wing Hippie, but that account got messed up.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 36

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 8:02:26 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

You tell me. It's your game.

I simply conceded your point.

(in reply to luckydawg)

Profile

Post #: 37

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 8:10:38 PM

luckydawg

Posts: 2448
Joined: 9/2/2009
Status: offline

It was wilburs point actually.

_____________________________

I was posting as Right Wing Hippie, but that account got messed up.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 38

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 8:41:24 PM

Brain

Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline

There is no valid reason to reverse the lower court ruling. I expect if it is reversed to find out the judges are biased Republicans who think they can do whatever they want. A reversal would be unfortunate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Yeah, ok...that's coming into focus, now.

It's pretty much a foregone conclusion that the Wisconsin Supreme Court will reverse the lower court and the plaintiffs will appeal to the federal appelate level etc.

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 39

RE: Union busting illegal! - 5/27/2011 8:52:47 PM

Brain

Posts: 3792
Joined: 2/14/2007
Status: offline

The state's have plenty of money and these 'crises' are manufactured by Republican governors to justify unionbusting.

Republican governors that they engage in these unnecessary wasteful boondoggles? And at the same time they neglect the legitimate needs of people that need help.

4 Fantastically Stupid Projects Pushed By Republicans Aiming to Please Their Corporate Masters

The narrative that there isn’t enough money isn’t true. In state after state, legislatures are able to find hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on the whims of the rich.

1. Kentucky’s $43 million Bible theme Park
2. Texas’s tax break for yacht owners
3. Gov. Christie’s Money Pit
4. Public funding of union-busting corporations

South Carolina’s unemployment rate remains above the national average in a state with some of the country’s least generous jobless benefits. Meanwhile, thousands of residents are currently protesting officials’ plans to cut $700 million from the state’s Medicaid and education programs.

In state after state, legislatures are able to find hundreds of millions of dollars for the pet projects of yacht-owners, and for the every whim and desire of their corporate masters. The truth is that America’s vast resources aren’t being spent in an efficient manner. Officials throw money at big, glamorous-sounding Xanadu fantasies, or to bible-thumping constituents and strong-arming corporate cronies who make unfounded claims of trickle-down prosperity. Politicians do this in order to build monuments for their own legacies in a pathetic effort to obtain immortality, or to buy off the right players in attempts to seize power again in two, or four years, so they can prop up more extravagant headstones.

But in no way is this system meant to provide for the majority of American citizens. In fact, from what we see by examining these spectacularly stupid projects, the opposite is usually the case.

http://www.alternet.org/story/151043/4_fantastically_stupid_projects_bankrolled_by_republicans_aiming_to_please_their_corporate_masters?page=entire

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Let me explain. City and states only have so much money in the budget. If they can't afford the benefits that public unions demand, then the only choice will be to lay some of them off so they can afford the benefits for the others.

Another likely possibility is to contract out the work to private contractors who will do it for far less and no benefits. Public unions are going to shoot themselves in the foot just like private sector unions do.

(in reply to cuckoldmepls)

Profile

Post #: 40