Author Topic: All Union Brothers and Sisters (Read 3051 times)

JB88 · « **Reply #75 on:** March 12, 2005, 10:35:24 PM »

it really wouldnt be so shocking if all of you pin heads werent fixated on my sexy writing tone.

my work here is done.

nahhhh...not really.

Toad · « **Reply #76 on:** March 12, 2005, 10:51:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lazerus
Why is a union needed to avoid this situation? I'm pretty sure this factory was in severe violation of federal safety codes. The inspectors that allowed this place to remain open and operate should be tried for manslaughter.

I'm sure you realize you answered your own question.

Sled · « **Reply #77 on:** March 12, 2005, 10:53:43 PM »

No doubt Toad

Lazerus · « **Reply #78 on:** March 12, 2005, 10:58:53 PM »

I did. There is no need for a union in this situation. There is a need for enforcement of the codes that are in place to ensure a safe work environment. A call to OSHA from an employee could have prevented that tragedy. I see no need to pay someone to make that call for me.

Airhead · « **Reply #79 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:01:26 PM »

Grun, it's a BS story.

Toad · « **Reply #80 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:17:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lazerus
A call to OSHA from an employee could have prevented that tragedy.

Quote

In its eleven years of operation, the poultry plant had never been inspected for health and safety violations.

The workers at Imperial knew that the doors were locked and that there were frequent fires in the fryer area. However, workers were afraid to report these abuses.

They feared, with good reason, that they would be fired for registering a complaint with the Occupational Safety & Health Administration , (OSHA).

This silence born of fear -deliberately instilled by management and exacerbated by government inaction -was another cause of the needless loss of life at Imperial.

In the ideal world, you'd be right.

But the ideal world does not exist and never has. That's why Unions were formed to begin with.

That fire has been pretty thoroughly investigated.

Quote

The majority of Imperial’s workers were poor women--and many were single mothers--who worked at or slightly above the minimum wage. Most of them probably had no idea that Imperial was breaking the law and that there was a government agency to which they could complain.

If you were a poor single mother, would you have complained with the risk of losing you job in an area without any other jobs to be had?

That's real world.

Lazerus · « **Reply #81 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:19:13 PM »

Where's OneWordAnswer when you need him.

anonymity

Lazerus · « **Reply #82 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:21:49 PM »

Quote

In its eleven years of operation, the poultry plant had never been inspected for health and safety violations.

[/SIZE]

Again, the person(s) responsible for inspecting that plant should be tried for manslaughter.

There is a system in place to prevent this type of thing. There is no reason to install a redundant system.

Sled · « **Reply #83 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:28:53 PM »

You would rely on the Government to insure the safety of YOUR Mom or Sister working in that plant! Why would they? They have no vested interest in those people. If we ever move to Zanadu maybe it will work the way you purpose. Untill then I want a Union watching over my familys safety.

Sled · « **Reply #84 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:33:32 PM »

To add, OSHA is so over worked! it can't possibly keep up with the work it needs to perform. Even if they could, it's the GOVERMENT! Far from a well oiled machine.

Toad · « **Reply #85 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:40:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lazerus
There is a system in place to prevent this type of thing. There is no reason to install a redundant system.

The system doesn't work. Even OSHA admits it doesn't have enough inspectors and can't do the job.

That isn't going to change.

Again, you're argument is "In a perfect world....".

Hey... it AIN'T a perfect world. It's never going to be.

In a perfect world, you wouldn't have management that locks the exit doors.

That's why you have Unions. If you remove Unions, you'll have more Triangle Shirtwaist and Imperial Chicken fires... and a boatload of other crimes as well.

Without Unions there is no counterbalance to piss-poor or criminal management. Your reliance on "the government" is completely unrealistic. The OSHA itself proves that beyond a doubt. OSHA never inspected that plant... they don't have enough inspectors to inspect all the plants.

Lazerus · « **Reply #86 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:47:41 PM »

My personal opinion is that the unions are far more corrupt than the regulatory agencies of the US. Granted, the same people that abuse the unions would probably migrate into those agencies as experts and corrupt them further if the unions were eliminated. And I'm not saying that they should be eliminated BTW.

I just think that the power of the unions needs to be moved back to the local level. The national representatives have a track record of not looking out for the employees or their company.

We obviously have a difference of opinion. I don't think either one of us is going to change our mind.

But before you write me off as some anti-worker fascist, consider the option of maintaining authority in local unions, where people who's day to day lives are involved with the people they represent and the companies who's welfare has a direct effect on those people.

Toad · « **Reply #87 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:48:43 PM »

Quote

05/14/2004

The number of inspectors were at a high during the Carter administration, with 1,388. Today there are 1,186. Fewer inspectors mean fewer inspections for the 6.5 million workplaces covered by OSH Act. States have either a federally administered OSHA or a state administered OSHA. There are 23 states that have an OSHA approved state plan.

This is the system you think is "in place to prevent this type of thing".

6.5 million workplaces, ~1200 inspectors. Do the math.

If each inspector worked an 8 hour day/40 hour week and spent 10 minutes at each plant, could they visit all the plants in a year?

Do you think they could do a realistic inspection in 10 minutes?

THAT'S why you have to have a "redundant" system... because the "system in place" is incapable of performing it's duty. In fact, "laughably incapable" is being generous.

Toad · « **Reply #88 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:50:33 PM »

Like most, you pigeon-hole me and do so incorrectly.

I refer you farther up the thread where I pointed out that the only thing worse than a Union is no Union.

If you really believe in OSHA's ability to inspect, there is no point in further discussion. I chat with Boroda enough to get my fill of that sort of belief system.

Lazerus · « **Reply #89 on:** March 12, 2005, 11:56:24 PM »

Well, I'm just going to say one more thing on that subject. Local health and fire inspectors are responsible for the periodic inspection of all places of employment. Eleven years is not periodic. Quarterly or bi-yearly is periodic. There are already redundant systems in place to prevent that type of thing. In that one instance, the people responsible for those inspections were grossly negligent. The employees should have taken the initiative to point that out.

One month of it, maybe.

Six months of it. Well, I can't see it, but OK.

ELEVEN years of it??