USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
- Status
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!
It's nothing new. Americans bravely stand up for the rights of minorities and socially unpopular groups... as long as it is not in the least bit inconvenient. Otherwise, f-ck em. We are a nation of cowards and moral failures.
The Jesushariae should take a long, hard look at this and imagine what it's going to be like in 70 years when the vast majority of this country regards them as potential terrorists. Gonna kinda wish you hadn't gutted 1A then, kittens.
It's nothing new. Americans bravely stand up for the rights of minorities and socially unpopular groups... as long as it is not in the least bit inconvenient. Otherwise, f-ck em. We are a nation of cowards and moral failures.
The Jesushariae should take a long, hard look at this and imagine what it's going to be like in 70 years when the vast majority of this country regards them as potential terrorists. Gonna kinda wish you hadn't gutted 1A then, kittens.
Last edited:
Janus and Heller are in conflict.
Public union dues go some to member benefits and some to lobbying. Mind you the lobbying is to get people sympathetic to your cause elected and then you negotiate with the same people you bought.
But what if those $$$ go to the losing candidate? That's members' dues tossed in a dry hole.
Heller says it is OK to buy candidates.
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!
The nice thing is, the majority will still have the right to publicly express that opinion, and the "terrorists" will have the right to publicly say otherwise.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Look for the GOP Congress to pass national right to work and that’s it for unions in this country.
aparch
Acetaminamerican
aparch
Acetaminamerican
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!
I wouldn't say that. My brother and his business partner, for instance, far prefer dealing with the plumbers union when it comes to hiring and payroll issues. They both worked for a non-union shop before owning a company, and they mostly enjoy working with the union. There's not a lot of hassle in jockeying for pay rates and annual vacation time with their employees. It's all there in the contract.
I wouldn't say that. My brother and his business partner, for instance, far prefer dealing with the plumbers union when it comes to hiring and payroll issues. They both worked for a non-union shop before owning a company, and they mostly enjoy working with the union. There's not a lot of hassle in jockeying for pay rates and annual vacation time with their employees. It's all there in the contract.
ericredaxe
Veteran
As if you don’t already know you are voting “R”.
Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!
I don't know that we'll necessarily see that result.
First, I don't think federal employee unions have a "fair share" fee. I think if you're in the union you pay dues, if not, you don't. Yet I think there are still a lot of unionized federal employees.
Second, union organizing has always just been about numbers. Unions are a business. The Teamsters aren't going to go in and organize a place with three employees, even if the fair share fee was still legal. The Teamsters can't afford to spend the time and money negotiating and arbitrating on behalf of three employees.
That's the reason that you really don't see any sort of organizing effort unless you maybe have 40 or 50 employees, or more. They have to have a certain number to cover the costs of doing the work.
This decision will just require the unions to re-evaluate what sort of "minimum" number of employees have to be in the work place before they try to organize. I imagine that we'll soon see data to the effect that maybe 30-40% of employees will choose to join the union and pay dues, even if they are not forced to.
Thus, if before a union organizer needed 50 employees to make it worth its while to organize, now it might need 80 or a hundred.
But that's the thing about public employment. There are a lot of employees.
I don't know that we'll necessarily see that result.
First, I don't think federal employee unions have a "fair share" fee. I think if you're in the union you pay dues, if not, you don't. Yet I think there are still a lot of unionized federal employees.
Second, union organizing has always just been about numbers. Unions are a business. The Teamsters aren't going to go in and organize a place with three employees, even if the fair share fee was still legal. The Teamsters can't afford to spend the time and money negotiating and arbitrating on behalf of three employees.
That's the reason that you really don't see any sort of organizing effort unless you maybe have 40 or 50 employees, or more. They have to have a certain number to cover the costs of doing the work.
This decision will just require the unions to re-evaluate what sort of "minimum" number of employees have to be in the work place before they try to organize. I imagine that we'll soon see data to the effect that maybe 30-40% of employees will choose to join the union and pay dues, even if they are not forced to.
Thus, if before a union organizer needed 50 employees to make it worth its while to organize, now it might need 80 or a hundred.
But that's the thing about public employment. There are a lot of employees.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!
I nearly always voted Democratic for 20 years before finally accepting that, boringly, I'm a Democrat. It is very important to a certain personality type (mine) to think of oneself as independent and rationally considering one's options for each office at each election.
The truth, however, is that our options under our two party system are so impoverished we will never see a candidate of the opposing party in our lifetime who is good enough to overcome the horror of the rest of that party's agenda. I will literally never vote R in my lifetime, because even if I find someone I think would be a fine office holder I will never willingly do anything to strengthen that party. They are pure scum and I will never help them -- I will not even help them change, except by denying them oxygen.
I nearly always voted Democratic for 20 years before finally accepting that, boringly, I'm a Democrat. It is very important to a certain personality type (mine) to think of oneself as independent and rationally considering one's options for each office at each election.
The truth, however, is that our options under our two party system are so impoverished we will never see a candidate of the opposing party in our lifetime who is good enough to overcome the horror of the rest of that party's agenda. I will literally never vote R in my lifetime, because even if I find someone I think would be a fine office holder I will never willingly do anything to strengthen that party. They are pure scum and I will never help them -- I will not even help them change, except by denying them oxygen.
Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!
Yup. Remember this well kids. The worst Democrat is better than the best Republican. Joe Manchin voted against tax theft for billionaires. Susan Collins voted for it. Andrew Cuomo enacted free college tuition and public universities. I'm not aware of anything like that from Charlie Baker or Larry Hogan.
Yup. Remember this well kids. The worst Democrat is better than the best Republican. Joe Manchin voted against tax theft for billionaires. Susan Collins voted for it. Andrew Cuomo enacted free college tuition and public universities. I'm not aware of anything like that from Charlie Baker or Larry Hogan.
I actually had a chat with one of my state legislaturalists yesterday (they are all D if you wanted to know) after the primary. I had two concerns
1. Amazon. Where are the schools going to be built and who is going to pay for them? His answer was politically vague saying they had money set aside (unspoken is where it is coming from).
2. Gerrymander. He thinks the courts will decide it. Of course you do! Punt the hard choices to somebody else. What I told him was he faces the judgment of the voters every 4 years. Judges do not. He did agree that an independent commission would probably be the best idea. He struck me as someone who is centrist D.
Will he get my vote? Depends on who his opponent is. But it is not a firm no.
Re: SCOTUS 10: Pack the Court!
Kennedy retiring...
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Justice Kennedy is retiring. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a> <a href="https://t.co/jhLIM8VyLL">pic.twitter.com/jhLIM8VyLL</a></p>— Kimberly Robinson (@KimberlyRobinsn) <a href="https://twitter.com/KimberlyRobinsn/status/1012032972143431683?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 27, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Kennedy retiring...
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Justice Kennedy is retiring. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a> <a href="https://t.co/jhLIM8VyLL">pic.twitter.com/jhLIM8VyLL</a></p>— Kimberly Robinson (@KimberlyRobinsn) <a href="https://twitter.com/KimberlyRobinsn/status/1012032972143431683?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 27, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
- Status