The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: formerlurker on September 23, 2012, 05:03:43 PM

Title: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: formerlurker on September 23, 2012, 05:03:43 PM
Quote
Pterodactyl (544 posts)

View profile
Unions reject partner benefits
Source: Toledo Blade

The majority of members belonging to three city of Toledo union locals declined to let employees in domestic partnerships receive the same health-insurance benefits extended to spouses of legally married city employees — something that Mayor Mike Bell and city council approved this year.

The Toledo Police Patrolman’s Association and two units of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 7, in three separate votes, rejected the benefit.

Don Czerniak, Local 7 president, said the employees overwhelmingly disagreed with extending the benefit to unmarried couples — which could have covered both heterosexual and same-sex couples who register as domestic partners.

“We had to bring back to the members and they felt — some of them felt — it wasn’t right,” Mr. Czerniak said. “Even though the mayor and city council have their own personal feelings, each one of the members just didn’t think it was right under their moral ethics or whatever you want to call it.”


Read more: http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/09/22/Unions-reject-partner-benefits.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014241894

Thank goodness OS is around to explain it all to us:

Quote
Star Member Omaha Steve (33,130 posts)
10. Just like non member workers don't pay dues in right to work states to save a few $

It would raise the cost of their insurance. So they saved a few $. I don't agree with it. But that is why.

To change or amend a contract takes a majority vote of the effected members.



It is what it is - am I right Steve?

Angry misfit alert!!    :panic:

Quote
pasto76 (1,042 posts)
4. morals and ethics are two seperate things. Some more proof that unions are not solidly democratic

View profile
I hear "******" almost exclusively from union people. What a bunch fo shitheads.


Quote
Omaha Steve (33,130 posts)
8. I resent that statement

View profile

(http://www.prideatwork.org/components/com_fpss/images/Join_Squarer.jpg)

This union member supports http://www.prideatwork.org/

The Omaha Police Dept. negotiated same sex benefits for it's members years ago. It was the tax payers that raised such a stink that the offer was dropped by the city.

And one of the best benefits of being in a union is equality for all in the work place. Minorities work side by side with white males for equal scale pay. It is in the contract.

Omaha Steve

So, this explains what... that you don't do it in Omaha also and you aren't picketing that injustice either Stevie?

 
Quote
pasto76 (1,042 posts)
13. Im glad you resent that. Speak up like I do when you hear it!

View profile
Cause when Im sitting at break with my union coworkers, "******" comes up all too often. The problem with that is that they are talking about the black soldiers who very literally saved my life in Iraq dozens of times. I owe them my life, and I owe them the discomfort and loss of social hierarchy benefits by calling these people out.

The downfall of the modern union is that shitheads like those in dayton do get the same benefits as real democrats and real union members. Way back in the day, Unions became such a strong workplace compared to everyone else, that everybody in this country knows it is a better deal to work union, whether they like it or not. A lot of people come into the union to reap the benfits, and do not a ******* thing to further our cause or maintain our legacy of superior work, training and competence.

Everything Ive ever had growing up, literally, came from a union dollar. Everything I have now, is from the union dollar. My dad was president of his large city local. I grew up hearing the politics, the workings and seeing what happens when unions diminish. Those guys in dayton should be ashamed. I know gay/lesbian officers in my city. They are excellent officers, and deserve equal rights and benefits. Actually putting a second thought into this, they should have their charters suspended for not supporting fellow officers because of "morals". truth is, they dont want to be called fag lovers or whatever.

Ironworkers Local #24

Oh pasto76 - Steve doesn't care.  Unless there are mini-tacos involved, he ain't even putting on his pants to venture outside.    


Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: Texacon on September 23, 2012, 05:22:26 PM
Lord have mercy I hate forbidden words. Seriously. I thought the conversation above was about ******* only to go look and find out it's about *******.

It's just stupid.

KC
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: franksolich on September 23, 2012, 05:28:05 PM
I wish the big guy, instead of blabbing about this stuff, would tell the primitives how his campaign for vice-president of the union is going.

Thus far, he's dropped not a word to the primitives, and so he's probably been missing out on some campaign contributions too.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: notaDUmmie on September 23, 2012, 05:32:30 PM
Quote
Everything Ive ever had growing up, literally, came from a union dollar. Everything I have now, is from the union dollar.


Typical DUmbass - doesn't even realize that the union doesn't pay wages, the employer does.

Darwinism is failing, badly.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: JohnnyReb on September 23, 2012, 05:41:44 PM
A lot of jobs were priced out of existance in this country by unions. I'd say the majority of union jobs that are left are government jobs....and they're working on pricing themselves out of those jobs.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: franksolich on September 23, 2012, 06:06:34 PM
A lot of jobs were priced out of existance in this country by unions. I'd say the majority of union jobs that are left are government jobs....and they're working on pricing themselves out of those jobs.

Isn't that funny how that worked out?

The people who least needed job security, the people who already had good benefits, the people whose paychecks matched, and even exceeded, the rate of inflation, ended up being the mainstay of labor unions?
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: jukin on September 23, 2012, 07:13:35 PM
Unions were once a necessary counterweight.

now unions protect the bad worker. that is all the do and that kills the USA as a competitive force in the world.

Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: Undies on September 23, 2012, 07:33:23 PM
It was the union of Unions that killed the goose/golden egg.  The Teamsters and the SEIU are union's worst enemies.

Also, I think it is hilarious those union folks in this OP gave a big middle finger to their otherwise-sexualized brothers and sisters.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: Karin on September 24, 2012, 08:17:06 AM
I love it when the interest groups clash. 
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: NHSparky on September 24, 2012, 08:20:15 AM
Oh, tell us the truth, Stevie--your "buddy" loves that little tickle on the underside of his crank when it slides along your neckbeard before popping into your slobbering near-toothless mouth.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on September 24, 2012, 08:21:13 AM
Poor, poor Marta.

The wife is always the last to find out.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: Undies on September 24, 2012, 08:22:12 AM
Oh, tell us the truth, Stevie--your "buddy" loves that little tickle on the underside of his crank when it slides along your neckbeard before popping into your slobbering near-toothless mouth.

You should write children's books.   O-)
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: Mike220 on September 24, 2012, 08:25:30 AM
Quote
The downfall of the modern union is that shitheads like those in dayton do get the same benefits as real democrats and real union members.

I thought that was originally the point? All workers get good benefits. Sounds like they managed without the union. Makes you shitheads superfluous, doesn't it?

Quote
Way back in the day, Unions became such a strong workplace compared to everyone else, that everybody in this country knows it is a better deal to work union, whether they like it or not

The union motto, right there. Do it or else...
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: NHSparky on September 24, 2012, 08:29:59 AM
Poor, poor Marta.

The wife is always the last to find out.

Oh, I dunno about that--she's probably his "nurse" in the leather nightie and whip while he craps in an adult diaper and collects SSDI.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: Chris_ on September 24, 2012, 08:55:55 AM
Quote
The downfall of the modern union is that shitheads like those in dayton do get the same benefits as real democrats and real union members.

Quite telling.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: JohnnyReb on September 24, 2012, 09:10:42 AM
NO, NO, NO...we don't want the cost of keeping up queers with AIDS to run up the cost of our insurance taking money we might get to spend on ourselves....we want it to run up YOUR cost and take YOUR money....you homophobic bigots.
Title: Re: OS plays apologist for Unions that reject partner benefits
Post by: Airwolf on September 24, 2012, 01:02:42 PM
I wish the big guy, instead of blabbing about this stuff, would tell the primitives how his campaign for vice-president of the union is going.

Thus far, he's dropped not a word to the primitives, and so he's probably been missing out on some campaign contributions too.

Does it matter if we know anything or not? He is like 0- for 3 in running for office and he is trying to become VP of a union where he doesn't work. I'd have better luck running for VP of Union Pacific before he gets into office.