Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Federal: Union Tee Shirt Federal

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    free speech in the workplace

    Union advocates are fired for thier beliefs every day. The law has no teeth, your rights to freedom of speech and association, for all intents and purposes, do not exist in the workplace. African Americans are discriminated against in the workplace everyday, women still dont make the same wages for the same work as men. Anyone want to dispute me? I"m doing something about it, how about you?

    Anyone can pontificate all they want. The reality of the situation is that over 60 percent of the workers in this nation would join a labor organization if they could, but when it comes down to brass tacks they are scared for thier jobs and witness retribution from employers when they exercise thier "rights" in the workplace.

    The figures on American immigration to Canada are availabe through the Canadian immigration web site. You can listen to NPR and get the same information, if you like. I have four torts cases to brief. I don't have time to do the leg work for you

    Eric

    Comment


    • #17
      Doing Something About It

      Other than being a union member for 40 years in the construction industry…….This topic is about “doing something about it”. But the old days seem to be over, now we have to do something about it from a legal prospective. We need, the union needs a broader foundation. Not only a brotherhood, in which we do have, but knowledge to fight battles with. Replacing baseball bats, you understand? We seem to be on their turf now.

      Any ideas that you would have would be listened to.

      Comment


      • #18
        Sorry, this thread is coming faster than my email system can respond to........keep going.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by sposito View Post
          So the government won’t take you away for expressing your right to association or expression but your employer gets to commit economic capital punishment for you exercising your right to freedom of association or speech.

          Why don’t you explain that to the group of people that just found themselves unemployed for exercising their first amendment rights to associate with whomever they want.

          Oh yeah, and the people that just lost their jobs are free to hire an attorney at great expense and sue a well healed company. My god, you don’t see the problem here do you?

          Forgive me for the trouble I have seeing the difference.
          Its funny how this doesn’t work the same way in the rest of the industrialized world. Oh yeah, they got it wrong and we got it right.
          I don't know what you want to hear.... that you can say whatever you want to whomever you want and never suffer any consequences. That isn't true.

          All the first admendment states is freedom from government prosecution. However, civil prosecution is still on the table.

          What would you do if I emailed everyone you know a completely untrue and detailed message about your ... well, anything? Something terrible. Against all reason, God and man's.

          That's easy.... you would sue me for slander... rightly. There are limits to what can be said in a civilized society.

          If you want protection from slander and libel, you must also be willing to live under the umbrella of restraint such recourse requires.

          I would look to joe's response to see if anything can be done because of the union angle. He is very researched in these matters.
          Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

          I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

          Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

          Comment


          • #20
            what can we do?

            <<Other than being a union member for 40 years in the construction industry…….This topic is about “doing something about it”. But the old days seem to be over, now we have to do something about it from a legal prospective. We need, the union needs a broader foundation. Not only a brotherhood, in which we do have, but knowledge to fight battles with. Replacing baseball bats, you understand? We seem to be on their turf now.

            Any ideas that you would have would be listened to.>>

            Buzz,

            I've been tortured about this for too many years. I tryed internal union politics, but all the members of my union want is someone to tell them what they want to hear and fight for them, as long as you dont ask them to do any work. I'm done with that.

            I've taken the only road i know. I am 48 years old and I'm going to law school for the next four years so I'll be in a position to help represent those that do not have the tools or the money to represent themselves.

            I"ve been schooled by the very best the labor movement has to offer in the latest tactics and strategies available.

            I'll put my money where my mouth is, and I'll take the fight to my grave.

            I believe in working men and women. I don't believe they get a fair shake in America. I'll do what I can.

            Eric

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by sposito View Post
              Anyone can pontificate all they want. The reality of the situation is that over 60 percent of the workers in this nation would join a labor organization if they could, but when it comes down to brass tacks they are scared for thier jobs and witness retribution from employers when they exercise thier "rights" in the workplace.
              Please post where I could find the statistics for this statement.

              I am researching the Canadian immigration statistics as we speak.
              Last edited by cyjeff; 08-26-2007, 06:08 PM.
              Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

              I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

              Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by cyjeff View Post
                Please post where I could find the statistics for this statement.

                I am researching the Canadian immigration statistics as we speak.
                Okay....

                Canadian statistics...http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resourc...2006/index.asp

                Source area 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
                Number
                United States 2,495 2,603 2,953 3,180 3,615 2,782 2,986 3,705 4,145 4,468

                So about a 10% increase per year over the last 4 years.

                Okay, but let's look at the whole picture.... if the US is so bad a place to work, most of the immigrants would be coming from there, right?

                Source area 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

                Africa and the Middle East 10.1 10.1 10.6 11.6 11.7 10.3 11.5 12.7 12.0 11.8
                Asia and Pacific 54.1 53.8 53.6 53.7 52.8 58.8 59.4 54.7 57.7 61.0
                South and Central America 17.3 15.8 15.8 14.4 15.0 12.6 11.3 12.0 11.3 10.0
                United States 4.2 5.1 5.3 5.2 5.4 4.5 4.6 6.0 6.5 6.3
                Europe and the United Kingdom 14.4 15.2 14.7 15.0 15.1 13.9 13.2 14.6 12.4 10.8
                Source area not stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

                So, the US counts for the lowest rate of ANY listed country... hmmm. Further, the total percentage of US vs. other immigrants is dropping in the last couple of years. Interesting.

                Now, lets look at stated reasons for immigration. Of all that are immigrating for economic reasons, the US falls low again...rising, yes... but still almost statistically insignificant when compared to the other immigrant sources.

                Economic immigrants
                Africa and the Middle East 32.8 33.5 34.9 34.4 34.6 35.1 36.7 38.5 32.0 31.5
                Asia and Pacific 29.6 27.2 29.8 31.0 35.3 40.6 39.1 37.2 33.1 32.5
                South and Central America 7.2 5.8 5.8 7.4 9.5 11.3 14.3 14.1 21.3 23.4
                United States 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.4 2.2 3.8
                Europe and the United Kingdom 30.1 33.2 29.4 27.0 20.4 12.8 9.7 9.7 11.2 8.5
                Source area not stated 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3

                So, in summation.

                Yes, immigration is at an all time high...by 10%. An extra 323 people.

                And to assume that everyone moved to Canada because of a labor issue is assuming that would be the only reason people move.

                When you only look at one issue, one issue is all you see. Human migration patterns have a multitude of facets... of which economic opportunity is only one.
                Not everything that makes you mad, sad or uncomfortable is legally actionable.

                I am not now nor ever was an attorney.

                Any statements I make are based purely upon my personal experiences and research which may or may not be accurate in a court of law.

                Comment


                • #23
                  You will need to give more specific information on the issue. The answer will be different depending on the specifics.

                  For example, if the employer was 1) a casino (as in Joes example) and 2) the employees were required to wear a uniform and 3) they were involved in face to face interaction with guests, the Board has held that an employee may wear a small, tasteful button expressing their support for the union. And an employer would be violating the law if they disciplined the employee for wearing that button. If however, if the employee wore a T-shirt, rather than the uniform, the employer would have the right to discipline the employee.

                  As another example...if the employer was for example an aircraft manufacturer where 1) the employees wore their own clothes on the assembly line and 2) were not in view or had any interaction with customers....they have the right to wear a t-shirt supporting the union and the employer would violate the law if they disciplined the employee for it.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Thanks to All

                    I would like to thank everyone for their participation in this topic. The reference to a Supreme Court Decision by joec was the proof that I had needed. That is, an interpolation of many facts and considerations by the Supreme Court. Basically, it is legal for a union member to wear a tee shirt bearing a union insignia. Provided, I’ll venture, the insignia only is thereon (affiliation only).

                    A person may dislike unions----but a union of people had given that person the freedom to do that.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X