quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
This week, workers for Volkswagen will be voting to allow the United Auto Workers union (UAW) to 'set up shop' in a planet in Chattanooga, Tenn. Ironically enough it was the management who pushed for this to come about, NOT, the UAW. in Germany, they have what are called Works Councils. Simply use the link if your curious what those are defined. Anyways, here in the USA, due to laws, a Works Council can not be set up, since we already have such a mechanism for workers: A Union.
The story can be found here.
Typical of FOX News, to always push fear when ever and however it can onto its unsuspecting conservative readership. They state that many organizations are 'fighting' to keep the UAW out of the plant. "Outside groups have launched a vigorous campaign to defeat the union. The Center for Worker Freedom, an offshoot of Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform, has put up billboards in Chattanooga and is airing ads on the radio warning people that their city could become the next Detroit if the UAW gets in." If that center was REALLY for worker freedom, would it not make sense to NOT try to tamper with the process? Since the plant's 1,500 works do have a few days to place their ballots before this Friday. As it stands to reason that if the majority of those workers want the union, they'll vote in favor of it.
No, FOX News, ever willing to show its agenda places commentators to spread the message of doom, gloom, and fear:
Exhibit A ) "They will use the same techniques and they will press other companies to do the same thing as Volkswagen,” said Mallory Factor, a Fox News contributor. “This is a real test and this is a true test for workers’ freedom, and American competitiveness and the American worker.”"
Exhibit B ) " I believe the history of this union shows that it’ll be a threat to both the jobs this plant has created in Chattanooga and the economic health of the community as a whole,” the center’s director Matt Patterson told Fox News"
An to show just how 'good' FOX News reporting is these days, lets consider the following two unnamed people. After all these people could be....anyone....including FOX News itself:
Exhibit C ) "One man speaks to quality: “We’ve made an award-winning car. On our own. With the current leadership that Volkswagen has provided. We did not need the UAW.”
Exhibit D ) "A woman talks up the good relationship workers say they have with VW management in the current non-union environment. “Right now, the perks that we get with Volkswagen are fantastic,” she says. “I don’t see how the union or the UAW could make any improvements in this area at all.”
Isnt it curious that FOX News manages to find two people that give glowing ideas that are anti-Union, but yet, no one knows who they are? You know, to later ask them further information and check on the original story for truthful reporting. Something that FOX News has been known not to report....
An true to politics, Republicans are using threats to force management and plant workers to not...VOTE.....how they want, but instead be.....BULLIED....into submission:
Exhibit E ) Lawmakers in Tennessee have issued dire warnings to Volkswagen of what might happen if it goes union. Republican state Sen. Bo Watson says the company might miss out on much-needed incentives. Watson told a pre-vote press conference, "I believe any additional incentives from the citizens of the state of Tennessee for expansion or otherwise will have a very tough time passing the Tennessee Senate."
So there we have it, the plant is holding a vote to form a union that the management of the company has given its blessing. An FOX News, with its allies are trying to do anything and everything to undermine a fair vote. Way to stay classy Fox News....

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
It's not surprising to me that the anti-Union people quoted aren't named. In some areas, that could open them up to potential danger. Why risk that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
FOX News Channel commentators aren't preventing or undermining a fair vote. The voters will vote (or not) and that will be that. I'm sure there's propaganda going on from the other side of the debate, too. I just hope neither side gets thuggish in their attempts to manipulate and coerce.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Where is the support for the claim that FOX News Channel isn't being truthful/honest?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I do find the TN lawmakers thinly veiled threats to be bullying. I hope there is an investigation into it, and justice win out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
It's not surprising to me that the anti-Union people quoted aren't named. In some areas, that could open them up to potential danger. Why risk that?

The purpose of naming people is to give things legitimacy. I do not live in the area; what if most of the people in the area are rather ok with it? Then FOX News just happened to find two people on the minority side of things, but no one from the majority? Doesn't that sound just....alittle....suspicious? Fox News does side with the anti-union crowd rather than staying neutral and reporting the news.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
FOX News Channel commentators aren't preventing or undermining a fair vote. The voters will vote (or not) and that will be that. I'm sure there's propaganda going on from the other side of the debate, too. I just hope neither side gets thuggish in their attempts to manipulate and coerce.

No, but they are casting things as I said in a 'doom, gloom, and fear'. Because that is sensational news reporting that gets conservatives all emotionally charged and enraged. Someone that is enraged is usually not thinking clearly. Why would Fox News want its conservative viewership to remain calm, considerate, and thinking? That's to much like liberal thinking there DS! :P
I certainly hope no one group, organization, or entity be it singular or many, try things to bully or undermine the voting rocess.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Where is the support for the claim that FOX News Channel isn't being truthful/honest?

By portraying its the evil UAW that is pushing to turn that plant into a union shop. When reality its the management of the company pushing for a 'like' idea to a Works Council. FOX news glosses over the idea, without really explaining it to drive at 'the message'. In additional, that they push the idea that if this plant were to become a union shop, all the others in the South would automatically become union shops. Since its a union shop, the fear, that FOX News pushes, is that all the members there will automatically vote Democrat not Republican. If all the other shops do that, Democrats would start winning elections. What they are doing is building this up to a complete fantasy that is not even true. Or at the very least, have even a fair amount of evidence to support.

quote:

The South is home to nearly a dozen foreign-owned non-union auto plants. In addition to Volkswagen, there is Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai and Honda in Alabama; BMW in South Carolina; Kia in Georgia; Nissan in Tennessee and Mississippi; and Toyota in Kentucky, Mississippi and Texas. The UAW has been trying to break into the South for a decade with no success. Many people fear if Volkswagen workers approve the union, it will be the first of many dominoes to fall.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I do find the TN lawmakers thinly veiled threats to be bullying. I hope there is an investigation into it, and justice win out.

This one state senator and perhaps others have simply stated they are open to the idea of being corruptible with government money. To give it out only to those work shops that support Republican ideology and not 'across the board and fair' is setting the state up for a rough set of future lawsuits.

quote:

Ultimately, the final say is with the workers, and 1,570 of VW’s 2,500 employees in Chattanooga are eligible to vote. Three days of balloting ends Friday at 8:30 p.m. local time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

What's more whacked out is republican legislators promising to punish the VW plant if a union is formed.

Usually that's the kind of politics you see in authoritarian nations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
As joether says: the point of naming sources is to demonstrate that they actually exist, rather than being somebody who's just been invented by a journalist as a mouthpiece for their slant on the story. The papers that Fox's owners (News International) publish on this side of the pond are notorious for inventing authorities to bolster a thin or nonexistant story, or in extreme cases, to come out with some hysterical "the sky is falling!" line that bears no resemblance to reality.
Unless there's a good reason to keep sources anonymous, demonstrating that they exist outside of a journalist or editor's head is normal practice.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
As joether says: the point of naming sources is to demonstrate that they actually exist, rather than being somebody who's just been invented by a journalist as a mouthpiece for their slant on the story. The papers that Fox's owners (News International) publish on this side of the pond are notorious for inventing authorities to bolster a thin or nonexistant story, or in extreme cases, to come out with some hysterical "the sky is falling!" line that bears no resemblance to reality.
Unless there's a good reason to keep sources anonymous, demonstrating that they exist outside of a journalist or editor's head is normal practice.

I agree. But, isn't it possible that there are good reasons?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
As joether says: the point of naming sources is to demonstrate that they actually exist, rather than being somebody who's just been invented by a journalist as a mouthpiece for their slant on the story. The papers that Fox's owners (News International) publish on this side of the pond are notorious for inventing authorities to bolster a thin or nonexistant story, or in extreme cases, to come out with some hysterical "the sky is falling!" line that bears no resemblance to reality.
Unless there's a good reason to keep sources anonymous, demonstrating that they exist outside of a journalist or editor's head is normal practice.

I agree. But, isn't it possible that there are good reasons?

Not in this case, no.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Here is where you aren't being completely upfront and honest. When you mention it's "management of the company," you don't mention it's coming from Germany, and not necessarily from the stateside management. Last time I heard, Germany wasn't quite as "right to work" as the US, so it's not exactly a surprise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
"Automatic?" Not exactly, but once the Union breaks through in right to work states, it'll likely be easier to get into others. Not surprisingly, that's pretty much what was said:

quote:

The South is home to nearly a dozen foreign-owned non-union auto plants. In addition to Volkswagen, there is Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai and Honda in Alabama; BMW in South Carolina; Kia in Georgia; Nissan in Tennessee and Mississippi; and Toyota in Kentucky, Mississippi and Texas. The UAW has been trying to break into the South for a decade with no success. Many people fear if Volkswagen workers approve the union, it will be the first of many dominoes to fall.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
It's entirely possible that the "man" and "woman" quoted didn't want their identities mentioned. While some might balk at using those quotes without others being able to go after talk to the quoted people, there certainly is a fine line there. It's still a potential safety concern, though. The UAW does have a stigma of violence - accurate or not - attached to it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I wouldn't go so far as to say "corruptible," but I know you do tend towards hyperbole against the GOP, so I'm not surprised you did. I would definitely agree that they are implying they'll be biased against unionized shops, but that's not the same as being corruptible. If non-union shops benefit without any effort on the shop's part, that's not them corrupting the State lawmakers. That's the lawmakers being biased. If there is some sort of "pay to play" scheme going on whereby union shops are left out, that's corruption.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The FOX News Channel story does end with the lines:

quote:

Ultimately, the final say is with the workers, and 1,570 of VW’s 2,500 employees in Chattanooga are eligible to vote. Three days of balloting ends Friday at 8:30 p.m. local time.

So, regardless of what you think is accurate, honest or fair, it's still going to be up to the workers and their desires to vote. I hope for a fair, uneventful, and valid vote.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
As joether says: the point of naming sources is to demonstrate that they actually exist, rather than being somebody who's just been invented by a journalist as a mouthpiece for their slant on the story. The papers that Fox's owners (News International) publish on this side of the pond are notorious for inventing authorities to bolster a thin or nonexistant story, or in extreme cases, to come out with some hysterical "the sky is falling!" line that bears no resemblance to reality.
Unless there's a good reason to keep sources anonymous, demonstrating that they exist outside of a journalist or editor's head is normal practice.

I agree. But, isn't it possible that there are good reasons?

Not in this case, no.

I didn't realize you were omniscient. [8|]

You'll have to forgive me for not agreeing with you. I do believe it's possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Hey, DS, FWI, I'm simply deleting some of the previous materials to try to keep the post sizes smaller. If your interested in things posted, just read up above....

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Here is where you aren't being completely upfront and honest. When you mention it's "management of the company," you don't mention it's coming from Germany, and not necessarily from the stateside management. Last time I heard, Germany wasn't quite as "right to work" as the US, so it's not exactly a surprise.

I figured people would read the actual article and thereby learn the company is German owned. Heck, most people in the business world understand Volkswagen *IS* a Germany auto company. "Management" of the plant would never do something radical (like forming a pseudo Works Council) without the blessings and out-right order of the parent company. Perhaps I figured most people on this forum would put two and two together (like yourself for example).

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
"Automatic?" Not exactly, but once the Union breaks through in right to work states, it'll likely be easier to get into others. Not surprisingly, that's pretty much what was said:

quote:

The South is home to nearly a dozen foreign-owned non-union auto plants. In addition to Volkswagen, there is Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai and Honda in Alabama; BMW in South Carolina; Kia in Georgia; Nissan in Tennessee and Mississippi; and Toyota in Kentucky, Mississippi and Texas. The UAW has been trying to break into the South for a decade with no success. Many people fear if Volkswagen workers approve the union, it will be the first of many dominoes to fall.

What you put in italics in that quote *IS* the fear FOX News is pushing out. That If ___ THIS ___ then ___ THAT ___ will take place. Like its a forgone conclusion.

quote:

You treat your employees right, listen to their thoughts on the company, practices, and safety considerations, you generally don't have to worry about a labor union forming. When your seeing eye to eye on everything from the financial history to how long someone must stand in a position, it helps the relation out. When the management and employees are up front, honest, and considerate of the other's position, duties, and responsibility, both sides win out in the long run. In the case with the VW Plant, the management is pushing for this union.

quote:

But no one for sure if the employees do as well. Since FOX News couldn't seem to find one person. They did however....

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
It's entirely possible that the "man" and "woman" quoted didn't want their identities mentioned. While some might balk at using those quotes without others being able to go after talk to the quoted people, there certainly is a fine line there. It's still a potential safety concern, though. The UAW does have a stigma of violence - accurate or not - attached to it.

....found two individuals whom they cant name as supporting FOX News interests/agendas. Its going to look pretty bad on the part of FOX News if that union starts, and most of the employees are onboard with it. Since it means the reporter failed to find anyone that supports the idea.....like management at the VW Plant. When management supports something, there is often plenty of workers that support the idea as well. An they do it openly. So why could this 'journalistic' reporter not find any of those individuals. Even if they too did not want to be identified?

quote:

That's the point here, DS. The side supporting the idea of the union is given a minimal space while the anti-union crowd is given a hefty amount of space to make their political speech.
I myself for disclosure am not a stock or stakeholder. I really am neutral on whether the plant is unionized by the UAW or not. Its just an example of how 'honest' and 'truthful' FOX News is on a typical basis to an unsuspecting audience. The 'low information voter'.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I wouldn't go so far as to say "corruptible," but I know you do tend towards hyperbole against the GOP, so I'm not surprised you did. I would definitely agree that they are implying they'll be biased against unionized shops, but that's not the same as being corruptible. If non-union shops benefit without any effort on the shop's part, that's not them corrupting the State lawmakers. That's the lawmakers being biased. If there is some sort of "pay to play" scheme going on whereby union shops are left out, that's corruption.

When law makers publically say they will do things differently for one company then the others in that industry, corruption is not to fair behind. When nine companies are included in government money or subsidies, but the tenth is not; its up to those law makers to explain in exacting terms why. And leaves the state open to a lawsuit by that tenth company. As a law maker, one tries to keep the tax money being generated to go towards things that....HELP....the people of the state out. Not being wasted in court battles they will eventually lose (i.e. anti-gay marriage laws for example). It could be argued (I myself do not have the evidence in hand) to say a 'pay to play; scheme as been in effect targeting those companies to keep unions of any kind out of those shops from behind closed door meetings between law makers and company representatives. An those subsidies, tax breaks, and other incentives are the 'payment' to keep unions out.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
The FOX News Channel story does end with the lines:

quote:

Ultimately, the final say is with the workers, and 1,570 of VW’s 2,500 employees in Chattanooga are eligible to vote. Three days of balloting ends Friday at 8:30 p.m. local time.

So, regardless of what you think is accurate, honest or fair, it's still going to be up to the workers and their desires to vote. I hope for a fair, uneventful, and valid vote.

I just keep find it fascinating that it was management that pushed for the UAW to enter into shop in he first place. American management theory is that no manager worth his or her weight in gold (and they all will say they are worth more than gold) would support the idea of a union entering into the business. An of FOX News's typical 'doom, gloom, and fear' propaganda that follows stuff like this. Like you, I hope the vote goes through and its valid and honest. If its successful, I wish the best for those workers and management for the future. If not, management tried something, and it was unsuccessful.....back to the drawing board (or the board room...).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
The case you cite is somebody getting aggro in their community.
If they don't actually exist, then that's unlikely to be a problem at all, and if they do, and are that much of a pussy, they wouldn't have dared open their trap to the press. The latter isn't "good reason", it's some whiny little bitch showing a lack of balls and backbone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Someone not wanting to potentially risk putting themselves in danger is nothing more than being whiny. I'm going to go out on a limb and figure they don't give a fuck what anyone else thinks of their decision, so long as they feel safe.