Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Idiot student drives through picketlineFollow

#1 Sep 08 2011 at 4:19 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
This happened at my school police are looking for the driver. No one was hurt but this is the kind of mentality around here. It's sickening.
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#2 Sep 08 2011 at 4:24 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,458 posts
I hate that training kicked in while watching that video. If they wanted to really picket, they should have used vehicles (Hell, even just one vehicle) to block off that gate. Not saying that the driver isn't an ass, just that the protesters weren't trying that hard.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#3 Sep 08 2011 at 4:41 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,889 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
I hate that training kicked in while watching that video. If they wanted to really picket, they should have used vehicles (Hell, even just one vehicle) to block off that gate. Not saying that the driver isn't an ass, just that the protesters weren't trying that hard.

I was thinking the same thing. if they really wanted to restrict entry, they should have blocked off with something more substantial than skittish students.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#4 Sep 08 2011 at 5:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,225 posts
Awww, no GTA style pedestrian squelching. Smiley: frown
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#5 Sep 08 2011 at 5:45 PM Rating: Decent
****
9,268 posts
Edit: Actually, in hindsight, now that I've watched the video, it's exactly what I'd do if I had a vehicle. I shouldn't be kept from my education because they feel they need to stop every single car and talk to them.

Edited, Sep 8th 2011 7:46pm by Driftwood
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#6 Sep 08 2011 at 5:47 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,735 posts
So are the police looking for the person because they ran that stop sign? Or is it really against the law to drive through a road as people move out of the way, just because they are part of a Union? The person didn't seem to be going that fast... 30-35mph maybe? I would treat people standing in the middle of the road the same way...

Sometimes I think these protesters need to use their brains and grow some skin. The last Union protest around here had people sticking their feet out in front of cars to get ran over just to cry foul to the police and try to get the Company and the "scab" employees hit with assault charges.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#7 Sep 08 2011 at 7:08 PM Rating: Decent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,034 posts
Police should be looking for the protestors for blocking traffic. Assholes.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

#8 Sep 08 2011 at 7:16 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,458 posts
[quote=Demea]Police should be looking for the protestors for blocking traffic. **** police, how dare they keep people from peacefully protesting!"
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#9 Sep 08 2011 at 7:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,484 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
[quote=Demea]Police should be looking for the protestors for blocking traffic. **** police, how dare they keep people from peacefully protesting!"


Peaceful!=legal. A legal protest can't involve blocking roads (unless the area is specifically closed off for the protest/rally/whatever of course). If they were blocking the road, they were in violation of the law. Police should have told them (asked them nicely even!) to clear the street. If they don't, you can always ticket them for jaywalking or something.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#10 Sep 08 2011 at 7:34 PM Rating: Good
******
43,458 posts
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
[quote=Demea]Police should be looking for the protestors for blocking traffic. **** police, how dare they keep people from peacefully protesting!"
Peaceful!=legal.
People ≠ Reasonable. You know that would be some people's reaction. Don't even pretend.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#11 Sep 08 2011 at 7:53 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
It's not a protest it's a strike. It's not illegal as the road they are blocking in on college property.(This is happening at all colleges in Ontario right now.) At peak times it's about a 1~2 hour wait to get into school.
The police are looking for the driver and since he's been running around the school bragging about it he'll be caught soon enough.
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#12 Sep 08 2011 at 8:06 PM Rating: Decent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,735 posts
So they want to give him a ticket for running that stop sign?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#13 Sep 08 2011 at 8:08 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
dangerous driving
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#14 Sep 08 2011 at 8:09 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,484 posts
Peimei wrote:
It's not a protest it's a strike.


Which has no more legal authority than a protest. Not sure why you'd think otherwise.

Quote:
It's not illegal as the road they are blocking in on college property.(This is happening at all colleges in Ontario right now.)


Of course it is. It's still a road with public access, right? It's not owned by those who are on strike? Are you suggesting that if someone walks into your house and blocks one of your doors that it's somehow not illegal because it's private property? Or, perhaps a more correct example would be blocking access to the restrooms in a restaurant. It has public access, but is on private property. Unless you are the owner of said property, you have no authority to block access to something which normally is accessible.

Quote:
At peak times it's about a 1~2 hour wait to get into school.


And?


Quote:
The police are looking for the driver and since he's been running around the school bragging about it he'll be caught soon enough.


I'm not saying that the guy didn't act recklessly. However, if it's illegal for him to do so and the police are the ones enforcing the road rules on him, then shouldn't they *also* enforce those rules on those who are blocking the entrances?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#15 Sep 08 2011 at 8:13 PM Rating: Excellent
TirithRR the Eccentric wrote:
So they want to give him a ticket for running that stop sign?


& Maybe illegal lane usage? He passes 8-9 cars. 2 ahead of him at the stop sign (who are stopped), plus one that looks to be making a left onto that road, and then the rest that are being stopped. He was not in a passing zone.
____________________________
Sandinmyeye | **** | Dihydrogen Monoxide (it kills)
#16 Sep 08 2011 at 8:15 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
No Gbaji. Strikes are legal in Canada. In fact so are protests. They can hold up each car for up to 5 minutes but rarely do. What other course of action are they suppose to take? Give in and let there pensions, benefits and full time positions diesappear to be replaced with 1 year part time contracts? Maybe we should go back to the days where weekends didn't exist and once you could walk you could work in a factory.
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#17 Sep 08 2011 at 8:18 PM Rating: Default
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,735 posts
Ya gbaji, didn't you know, if you don't let the Unions have their way, the only other choice is slave labor.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#18 Sep 08 2011 at 8:19 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,429 posts
Going off of this they're protesting because they don't want schools adding part-time jobs, possibly threatening the full-time positions. They're also arguing about wages since they felt what they were being offered wasn't enough, even though it would have put the average salary around 60K a year. Now these aren't professors or teachers, but your average school employees, like retail shop and cafeteria workers?

Is this correct or is there more that isn't being reported?
#19 Sep 08 2011 at 8:27 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
Raolan wrote:
Going off of this they're protesting because they don't want schools adding part-time jobs, possibly threatening the full-time positions. They're also arguing about wages since they felt what they were being offered wasn't enough, even though it would have put the average salary around 60K a year. Now these aren't professors or teachers, but your average school employees, like retail shop and cafeteria workers?

Is this correct or is there more that isn't being reported?


The issues are the schools have blocked part timers from being unionized. Part timers out number fulltime positions by a significant margin. The schools essentially are trying to eliminate full time positions which would mean no pensions, no benefits, short term contract positions and no bargaining rights at all in the future.
Obviously the media reports that they workers were offered a 4.8% wage increase over 3 years and rejected it but they rejected all the other clawbacks added to that offer not the the wage increase.
The workers represent everyone from the toilet scrubber to the registrars office staff.
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#20 Sep 08 2011 at 8:30 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,484 posts
Peimei wrote:
No Gbaji. Strikes are legal in Canada. In fact so are protests.


False dilemma. I didn't say that strikes or protests were illegal. I said that blocking traffic is illegal regardless of whether one is striking/protesting or not.

Quote:
They can hold up each car for up to 5 minutes but rarely do.


Really? It's legal in Canada for a non-police person to just decide to block traffic as long as they only do it for 5 minutes for each car? Or is there some special law giving special powers to people as long as they're "on strike"? If so, that's the dumbest law ever.

Having the right to do something doesn't include granting those doing it special powers they would not have otherwise.

Quote:
What other course of action are they suppose to take?


Huh? I thought a strike was about refusing to work? I thought it was about showing the employer that the workers are more able to stand not getting paid than the employer is not having them labor for him. That's what it's supposed to be about, anyway. You strike because you believe that there's some work condition that is unfair, or unsafe, or that compensation isn't high enough. And you strike based on the assumption that your labor is valuable enough to your employer that he'll be willing to change whatever it is you're striking over rather than have you not work.

I'm not sure where disrupting traffic comes into this at all. If you don't have sufficient labor leverage to successfully strike without creating additional disruption, violence, damage, etc, then the thing you're striking for isn't legitimate. It's somewhat axiomatic.


Quote:
Give in and let there pensions, benefits and full time positions diesappear to be replaced with 1 year part time contracts? Maybe we should go back to the days where weekends didn't exist and once you could walk you could work in a factory.


If their labor is worth being paid those pensions, benefits, and full time positions, then their employer will give in to their demands. Strikers resort to actions other than simply refusing to work when they know that their labor *isn't* worth what they're demanding. The idea that the government would (according to you) pass special laws allowing striking workers to do more to disrupt a business than simply not doing their jobs seems to be unfair to the employer and frankly just plain moronic all the way around.


I'm all for labor fighting to get their "fair share". But that's got to be defined based on the value of their labor itself. It's no longer a fair share if they're allowed to legally apply additional costs or pain to the employer unrelated to the cost of replacing their labor. The only consideration an employer should have to calculate when dealing with a strike is whether or not the cost of hiring and training replacements is less than the cost of giving the workers what they want. Anything beyond that amounts to extortion and should not be legal IMO.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#21 Sep 08 2011 at 8:32 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,034 posts
Peimei wrote:
Strikes are legal in Canada. In fact so are protests. They can hold up each car for up to 5 minutes...

Canada is dumb.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I'm biased against statistics

#22 Sep 08 2011 at 8:33 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
TirithRR the Eccentric wrote:
Ya gbaji, didn't you know, if you don't let the Unions have their way, the only other choice is slave labor.

So who was it that brought about changes to labour?
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#23 Sep 08 2011 at 8:35 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,484 posts
Peimei wrote:
The issues are the schools have blocked part timers from being unionized. Part timers out number fulltime positions by a significant margin. The schools essentially are trying to eliminate full time positions which would mean no pensions, no benefits, short term contract positions and no bargaining rights at all in the future.


If the school is able to provide the same quality of service with those part time non-union workers, then don't they have a right to do this? Heaven forbid that the cost to a student for a meal at the cafeteria might just go down significantly because the school isn't paying an insanely high wage to someone who could easily be replaced by the average McDonald's employee (who'd be happy for the job too boot). And if you can be replaced by a hundred other people perfectly willing to do your job for half the salary, then your job isn't really worth what you've been being paid.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#24 Sep 08 2011 at 8:36 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
gbaji wrote:
Too much for me to respond to.


You win I need to sleep so I can get up an hour earlier to get into class on time.
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#25 Sep 08 2011 at 8:43 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
gbaji wrote:


If the school is able to provide the same quality of service with those part time non-union workers, then don't they have a right to do this? Heaven forbid that the cost to a student for a meal at the cafeteria might just go down significantly because the school isn't paying an insanely high wage to someone who could easily be replaced by the average McDonald's employee (who'd be happy for the job too boot). And if you can be replaced by a hundred other people perfectly willing to do your job for half the salary, then your job isn't really worth what you've been being paid.

That's a big if!

This would open a pandoras box. Cheaper labour with the same results but without a union whats to stop them from lowering wages more a few years down the road?
I'm (quite obviously) on the left. More so then most on this board even I would wager but in so many instances I have NOT been behind the unions. I think for the most part they have degenerated into a lazy cesspool of self-entitlement. However this particular strike is justified in that they are trying to preserve job security. That is something that everyone should have.
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
#26 Sep 08 2011 at 8:43 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,429 posts
Peimei wrote:
Raolan wrote:
Going off of this they're protesting because they don't want schools adding part-time jobs, possibly threatening the full-time positions. They're also arguing about wages since they felt what they were being offered wasn't enough, even though it would have put the average salary around 60K a year. Now these aren't professors or teachers, but your average school employees, like retail shop and cafeteria workers?

Is this correct or is there more that isn't being reported?


The issues are the schools have blocked part timers from being unionized. Part timers out number fulltime positions by a significant margin. The schools essentially are trying to eliminate full time positions which would mean no pensions, no benefits, short term contract positions and no bargaining rights at all in the future.
Obviously the media reports that they workers were offered a 4.8% wage increase over 3 years and rejected it but they rejected all the other clawbacks added to that offer not the the wage increase.
The workers represent everyone from the toilet scrubber to the registrars office staff.


So union employees are making a fairly decent wage (not up to speed on cost of living in Canada so I assume 60K is a decent wage) working in positions that don't require any significant educational or professional background, and they're **** that the school is trying to push out the union. So their answer is to strike and create issues with students who are trying to attend class?

Gee, I just can't understand why the school would be trying to push out the union.
#27 Sep 08 2011 at 8:58 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,484 posts
Peimei wrote:
gbaji wrote:


If the school is able to provide the same quality of service with those part time non-union workers, then don't they have a right to do this? Heaven forbid that the cost to a student for a meal at the cafeteria might just go down significantly because the school isn't paying an insanely high wage to someone who could easily be replaced by the average McDonald's employee (who'd be happy for the job too boot). And if you can be replaced by a hundred other people perfectly willing to do your job for half the salary, then your job isn't really worth what you've been being paid.

That's a big if!


The beauty of a free market is that if the cheaper labor's performance is sufficiently poor so as to affect revenue (like say no one eats at the cafeteria because it sucks, or people choose to go to a different school because the bathrooms are filthy), then the school will place a higher value on those jobs and will be willing to pay more for them. Believe it or not, it does work.

Quote:
This would open a pandoras box. Cheaper labour with the same results but without a union whats to stop them from lowering wages more a few years down the road?


Because at some point, no one will be willing to do those jobs for that price. Was this a trick question? This only appears to be some bottomless pay pit because right now unions have so significantly and artificially inflated wages for their workers that there's a massive gap between what they are currently being paid and what the free market would naturally value their labor. That's not a good thing btw.

There is a bottom to that process. And it's a very natural one that has normal market forces governing it. You don't need regulations or government interventions, or payscale police to ensure that someone is paid what their labor is worth. You only need those things to force people to pay them more than they're worth. You're just so used to it that it's hard to grasp just how out of whack current union pay is (in some cases).


Quote:
I'm (quite obviously) on the left. More so then most on this board even I would wager but in so many instances I have NOT been behind the unions. I think for the most part they have degenerated into a lazy cesspool of self-entitlement. However this particular strike is justified in that they are trying to preserve job security. That is something that everyone should have.



For me, it's not about what a union is striking for, but the methods they use (and unfair help/advantages they have) while striking. If a union can successfully strike to force their employer to give them all Swedish Massages every day, without using any levers for this than the threat of not working for the employer, then that's absolutely fine with me. If they want pensions, great! It's not about "what". It's about "how". Because as long as the methods used are legitimate and fair, then we know that no one's abusing the situation, no matter how ridiculous the demands may seem. If the employer is willing to give it to them, and there's no unfair leverage being used, then it *must* be something that is worth giving them in exchange for their labor.

____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#28 Sep 09 2011 at 6:07 AM Rating: Decent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,678 posts
gbaji wrote:
Which has no more legal authority than a protest. Not sure why you'd think otherwise.
Different country, different laws numb nuts. Not sure why you'd think otherwise.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#29 Sep 09 2011 at 7:27 AM Rating: Good
******
43,458 posts
By not sure, you mean you know exactly why, right?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#30 Sep 09 2011 at 7:29 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,678 posts
Totally. I just like to mock.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#31 Sep 09 2011 at 8:00 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,254 posts
Where is this $60k number coming from?

My wife made $12.50 an hour after 6 years working for food services at a college. That's a union position.
#32 Sep 09 2011 at 8:13 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,678 posts
Yodabunny wrote:
Where is this $60k number coming from?

My wife made $12.50 an hour after 6 years working for food services at a college. That's a union position.

From the extreme cases. I have friends who are Longshoremen and they can earn wages at around $125/hr, given magically circumstances, like working Christmas Day when it falls on a Sunday.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#33 Sep 09 2011 at 10:31 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
4,254 posts
Right, so "it would have put the average salary around 60K" is as stupid a statement as I thought it was.
#34 Sep 09 2011 at 12:35 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,089 posts
Yodabunny wrote:
Right, so "it would have put the average salary around 60K" is as stupid a statement as I thought it was.

No that's right from opseu. Unfortunetly with the way things are progressing I can't find a link for you right now but to think that's a stupid statement is well, stupid. The support staff aren't just meanial low wage jobs they also run IT, the libraries, the registrars office. Just to name a few so if you understand what the word average means it's a perfectly valid statement.

Edited found the quote


Quote:
On Friday, the CEC bargaining team representing Ontario's colleges issued a press release that confirmed an offer of salary increases and no concessions from employees in a proposed three-year contract with support staff. Some of the offer highlights include a salary increase over three years –year one with a one-time lump sum payment equal to 1.5 percent of annual salary. Year two would see a salary increase of 1.5 per cent, and year three would be a salary increase of 1.75 per cent. The offer would raise the average annual support staff salary by approximately $1,845, to just under $58,172 after three years and provide an average lump sum payment of $845 in the first year.


Edited, Sep 9th 2011 2:38pm by Peimei
____________________________
SSubZero wrote:

MNK: "OK we're gonna go in and get those items."
WHM: "Did you have a plan?"
MNK: "Plan? I was going to walk through the front door and start punching people."
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 43 All times are in CDT
Bijou, Anonymous Guests (42)