Unions eh?

[Redfrog]

"Dennis Edney told the Ontario Federation of Labour that Khadr is “wonderful attribute to the Canadian Mosaic.”"


http://www.therebel.media/ontario_fe..._s_legal_bills

Money well spent.

[elkhunter11]

What a bunch of retards.

[loyaleddie]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

What a bunch of retards.

"Thread jack"

What's a "retard"?

[Redfrog]

That's a tard that makes the same mistake over and over.

[Carriertxv]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

That's a tard that makes the same mistake over and over.

Ha ha ha ha best I've heard ever.

[loyaleddie]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

That's a tard that makes the same mistake over and over.

LMFAO...

Makes sense

Thanks

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by loyaleddie

"Thread jack"

What's a "retard"?

I think Elkhunter11 doesn't mean to denigrate people with Down's Syndrome by comparing them to the likes of Khadr's lawyer and the Ontario Federation of Labor, perhaps 'festering hemorrhoids' would be more apropos?

[I_forget]

So unions are bad because of a $50,000 questionable donation? The non-union way is to lay off the over paid Canadians and bring in cheap TFW's. To most companies labor is just a cost of doing business. Do you really think the CEO cares about you?

[deerguy]

This has nothing to do with Unions. I domt blame Subway for Jared touching kids do I?

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by I_forget

So unions are bad because of a $50,000 questionable donation? The non-union way is to lay off the over paid Canadians and bring in cheap TFW's. To most companies labor is just a cost of doing business. Do you really think the CEO cares about you?

Reload. you missed the point. Or stand on a chair, it went over your head.

Do you think union dues should go to Kahdr's lawyer or do you think they should be used to help their members?

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Reload. you missed the point. Or stand on a chair, it went over your head.

Do you think union dues should go to Kahdr's lawyer or do you think they should be used to help their members?

Union dues are used for what ever a majority of the members deems fit....so what does it matter what we think? Do we get a vote on what the CEO of Shell does with his money?

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Reload. you missed the point. Or stand on a chair, it went over your head.

Do you think union dues should go to Kahdr's lawyer or do you think they should be used to help their members?

Bingo! We have a winner, the Ontario Federation of Labor is spending wayyyy out of their mandate, how does helping out a convicted murderer play into making the Ontario workplace better/safer for the workers they represent? Maybe it should be instead sponsored by the Ontario Federation of Ambulance Chasers.

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

Union dues are used for what ever a majority of the members deems fit....so what does it matter what we think? Do we get a vote on what the CEO of Shell does with his money?

Keep on trolling. No one is this dense.

[histyle]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

Union dues are used for what ever a majority of the members deems fit....so what does it matter what we think? Do we get a vote on what the CEO of Shell does with his money?

How do you know a majority of the members saw this as a 'fit' way to spend their dues. I guarantee they weren't given the opportunity vote regarding paying a portion of Khadr's legal fees. When I used to belong to a union, the only voting we did was for leaders

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Keep on trolling. No one is this dense.

stomp the frog....he knows not of what he speaks.

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by histyle

How do you know a majority of the members saw this as a 'fit' way to spend their dues. I guarantee they weren't given the opportunity vote regarding paying a portion of Khadr's legal fees. When I used to belong to a union, the only voting we did was for leaders

And when you vote in a leader, you authorize them to function on your behalf...a lot of unions have limits to what the 'executive' can spend without going back to the membership for a vote.

So please tell me how you can guarantee they weren't given the opportunity to vote...when that is the only legal way the union can function.

[Albertacoyotecaller]

Khadar should be nominated for the head of that union if they love him so much.

[histyle]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

And when you vote in a leader, you authorize them to function on your behalf...a lot of unions have limits to what the 'executive' can spend without going back to the membership for a vote.

So please tell me how you can guarantee they weren't given the opportunity to vote...when that is the only legal way the union can function.

You answered your question in the first sentence.

[catnthehat]

You can bet I'll be sending a strongly worded email tomorrow - if course the last time when I sent they type of letter it didn't really go well for myself abc gun owners in general not that I could care less ,mind you!
Cat

[I_forget]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Reload. you missed the point. Or stand on a chair, it went over your head.

Do you think union dues should go to Kahdr's lawyer or do you think they should be used to help their members?

You are 100% right. Abolish unions, the companies will take great care of everyone. After all the companies #1 goal is the well being of its employees!

[mudbug]

What a waste of money

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by I_forget

You are 100% right. Abolish unions, the companies will take great care of everyone. After all the companies #1 goal is the well being of its employees!

Now you nailed it. well done and quick recovery. Welcome back to the real world.

C/S Gatehouse is a good friend of mine.I didn't know he had flipped your switch but it's no surprise.

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

Union dues are used for what ever a majority of the members deems fit....so what does it matter what we think? Do we get a vote on what the CEO of Shell does with his money?

NO, union dues are used for what the EXECUTIVE sees fit. Doesn't matter a bit what the members do or do not support.

Grizz

[score]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

No one is this dense.

slight miscalculation here.

[guywiththemule]

Originally Posted by score

slight miscalculation here.

Bingo! Surprise,surprise !!!!!!!

[EZM]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

Union dues are used for what ever a majority of the members deems fit....so what does it matter what we think? Do we get a vote on what the CEO of Shell does with his money?

That's total bunk sorry .... you have a much better opportunity to influence a large multi national company compared to influencing the working of a corrupt money grabbing union.

There's a big difference here ....... when you work for a non-union company, you are offered a hourly wage (or salary) and are paid to work for the time you put in. You are not forced to work in a non-union. The CEO and executive can't do whatever they want with the proceeds - they require shareholder and board approvals ..... and ..... it doesn't come out of your pocket (as a worker). If you don't like it move along. If you don't perform, or are unable to do what you are hired to do, you get fired.

If you want to be paid like a CEO or executive - then get to work and get the proper credentials, like an undergraduate degree and MBA and work your way up based on your personal VALUE and MERITS and call the shots. Go for it. Pay yourself a bundle and keep performing or else you face the axe - do your time like the rest of us did (and are doing) ..... welcome aboard.

In a union, you pay dues out of your pocket. YOU ARE POWERLESS with What the union does with YOUR money. It is up to the executive you elect to make decisions with complete impunity. You also work for the wages the union says you are entitled to under your classification and under the terms of the ratified labor agreement. Work as hard as you want - it doesn't matter, it all about the time you serve. If your leadership pulls something so completely asinine like giving your money to a murderer and terrorist - suck it up - let's face it the union will protect you if you don't perform. Your are entitled.

The choice is yours.

Defending something so completely ridiculous like funding the scourge of the earth doesn't change anything.

Any CEO (of the non union company) would have faced the axe for doing something so @#$% stupid.

The union president will trudge along with his snot whistling and a dumb look on his face completely clueless of how big of a moron he really is. All he is (was) was the loudest and most obnoxious fist pounder at the last election that all the lemmings voted him in.

That's how I would respond to your comparison.

You made your choice ..... live with it.

[I_forget]

Originally Posted by EZM

That's total bunk sorry .... you have a much better opportunity to influence a large multi national company compared to influencing the working of a corrupt money grabbing union.

There's a big difference here ....... when you work for a non-union company, you are offered a hourly wage (or salary) and are paid to work for the time you put in. You are not forced to work in a non-union. The CEO and executive can't do whatever they want with the proceeds - they require shareholder and board approvals ..... and ..... it doesn't come out of your pocket (as a worker). If you don't like it move along. If you don't perform, or are unable to do what you are hired to do, you get fired.

If you want to be paid like a CEO or executive - then get to work and get the proper credentials, like an undergraduate degree and MBA and work your way up based on your personal VALUE and MERITS and call the shots. Go for it. Pay yourself a bundle and keep performing or else you face the axe - do your time like the rest of us did (and are doing) ..... welcome aboard.

In a union, you pay dues out of your pocket. YOU ARE POWERLESS with What the union does with YOUR money. It is up to the executive you elect to make decisions with complete impunity. You also work for the wages the union says you are entitled to under your classification and under the terms of the ratified labor agreement. Work as hard as you want - it doesn't matter, it all about the time you serve. If your leadership pulls something so completely asinine like giving your money to a murderer and terrorist - suck it up - let's face it the union will protect you if you don't perform. Your are entitled.

The choice is yours.

Defending something so completely ridiculous like funding the scourge of the earth doesn't change anything.

Any CEO (of the non union company) would have faced the axe for doing something so @#$% stupid.

The union president will trudge along with his snot whistling and a dumb look on his face completely clueless of how big of a moron he really is. All he is (was) was the loudest and most obnoxious fist pounder at the last election that all the lemmings voted him in.

That's how I would respond to your comparison.

You made your choice ..... live with it.

What a ridiculous post. Publicly traded corporations and union executive positions are both voted in by the shareholders and members. No difference that way. Corporations do plenty of shady lobbying and donations. Your vote in a union election has more power than a typical shareholder does unless your a hedge fund.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by I_forget

What a ridiculous post. Publicly traded corporations and union executive positions are both voted in by the shareholders and members. No difference that way. Corporations do plenty of shady lobbying and donations. Your vote in a union election has more power than a typical shareholder does unless your a hedge fund.

The board works for the shareholders and in most cases board members are they, themselves, major shareholders who OWN the company and have their best interests in place to protect their money. In most publically traded organizations there is a provision that ONLY the CEO (who reports to the board) is selected by the board. They have little influence beyond that in most organizations (by purposeful design to limit conflict of interest, onerous influence provisions, control of seats, etc..)

All other executives are typically hired from within the organization and not the board - they don't elect them.

People from within the organization don't vote their bosses

That's not the way it works in ANY organization that I have ever seen.

All in All - I think you completely missed my point which, admittedly, was a bit of a rant on my part to try and distinguish operating with impunity versus operating in an environment where you are held accountable for your actions. So I apologize if it was a bit of a silly rant. I own that part.

If you still think all executives in both the union and in publically traded companies are "voted in" .... you are simply 100% wrong - sorry.

Either way - my point was made.

[I_forget]

Originally Posted by EZM

The board works for the shareholders and in most cases board members are they, themselves, major shareholders who OWN the company and have their best interests in place to protect their money. In most publically traded organizations there is a provision that ONLY the CEO (who reports to the board) is selected by the board. They have little influence beyond that in most organizations (by purposeful design to limit conflict of interest, onerous influence provisions, control of seats, etc..)

All other executives are typically hired from within the organization and not the board - they don't elect them.

People from within the organization don't vote their bosses

That's not the way it works in ANY organization that I have ever seen.

All in All - I think you completely missed my point which, admittedly, was a bit of a rant on my part to try and distinguish operating with impunity versus operating in an environment where you are held accountable for your actions. So I apologize if it was a bit of a silly rant. I own that part.

If you still think all executives in both the union and in publically traded companies are "voted in" .... you are simply 100% wrong - sorry.

Either way - my point was made.

So if some positions in publicly traded corporations are not voted in they're even less accountable to shareholders than a union which is 100% voted in.

[schmedlap]

Originally Posted by CanuckShooter

And when you vote in a leader, you authorize them to function on your behalf...a lot of unions have limits to what the 'executive' can spend without going back to the membership for a vote.

So please tell me how you can guarantee they weren't given the opportunity to vote...when that is the only legal way the union can function.

I guarantee the members were not given any opportunity to vote on this, and that if they were it would not happen. Those union leaders (many of whom are just as corrupt as our "native leaders") care only about their own featherbeds and personal political interests. It is just a shame that the membership (you?) are apparently too inert and sheeplike to toss them out.