Union fights for Pa. bus driver who hit pedestrian

[Peter3_1]

Remember when fed ex etc overnight letters had to be in a BOX? By law, letters could be delevered only by the USPS, but boxed "freight" could be delevered by anyone.

[DumbAss Tanker]

That doesn't worry me.  If one lacks the balls, to state in public, what they stand for then they are pussies.

IMO.

It doesn't have to bother YOU.  It only has to bother enough people who don't want to have an "Unfortunate accident" to get the union to a simple majority, then you are along for the ride with the union whether you want to be or not, including dues withholding from your pay in closed shop states...of which there would be more, if the unions had more power, and this is a path to that power for them.

[Peter3_1]

I actively fought the Teamsters a few decades ago, and wound up sleeping after work until my parents went to bed, then got up and armed myself, then slept after my Father awoke, then to work . Three union thugs were following me around, armed, for over a week. The smallest outweighed me by about 100 lbs.

I was for that period, resolved to the idea that it was going to be a kill of be killed showdown at some point. It damned near was, and it was very disconcerting too. Ihe illegal use of the local LEOs enabled me to defuse the matter until I was sworn into the Army.

The NEXT DAY the thugs were back, and pulled a gun on my cousin , threatening his life.

Yeah, there are tough guys out there who can, when facing the tiger, jump in, and Satan take the hindmost. But most, with familes, children, homes, cannot, so the threats work, and work well. And the LEO's really don't want to be involved until there's blood. 

[rich_t]

I have freely admitted to the fact that I have never dealt with unions and am possibly a bit niave about their tactics.

I can only speak for myself....  I for one refuse to give into such strong arm tactics as the unions have been known to use in the past.

It's not that I am some "tough" guy.  It's just that I stand by my personal convictions.  I simply will not be intimitated in such a fashion.  I'd rather die 1st and I mean that most seriously.

But I do understand that others don't share my convictions or attitudes.

[AllosaursRus]

I have freely admitted to the fact that I have never dealt with unions and am possibly a bit niave about their tactics.

I can only speak for myself....  I for one refuse to give into such strong arm tactics as the unions have been known to use in the past.

It's not that I am some "tough" guy.  It's just that I stand by my personal convictions.  I simply will not be intimitated in such a fashion.  I'd rather die 1st and I mean that most seriously.

But I do understand that others don't share my convictions or attitudes.

As you can imagine, with my occupation I share your convictions. However, like what was professed above, many members have wives and children and are not willing to endanger them in order to "stick" by their convictions.

Ya know what ah mean "Vern"?

[Eupher]

How much of Detriot's automaker issues are due to the unions?

Yes.

[Peter3_1]

Better face the tiger once or twice in this life, then tell us what you think after. Point is, that these things can get very dangerous very fast, and real people can die needlessly.

But, if they ever come "after you" and  you know they are comming or have a hint, take this advice given to me decades ago by a couple of "semi retired" hit men. KILL the person they send. Don't say "Hello", don't threaten, bargan, discuss, negotiate. They'll kill you dead as you blather. Just shoot until there's no one standing in front of you, THEN get your pow wow and try and resolve the issue.

When these thugs are interested in you, life becomes very interestingm, and occasionally, very SHORT.

[Eupher]

The anti-union sentiment is a bit much... they're legally obligated to ensure due process was followed, including appeals.  As long as the case for his dismissal is solid, there's not much to worry about. 

Aren't the courts supposed to ensure that due process is followed? Judges? Juries?

While I'm no fan of the justice system, mostly since there IS no justice, this is the basic premise that we all live under.

Unions, then, are redundant unless the judicial system is so whacked that it takes more attorneys, hired by the unions, to see to it that criminals like this bus driver are adequately "represented."   

[rich_t]

Ya know what ah mean "Vern"?

I do indeed.

[Eupher]

In an ideal world, there wouldn't be a need for justice systems such as the courts and unions.  Not that I'm placing them at the same level, but to an extent they serve similar purposes, as you yourself mentioned.

Union grievance and arbitration processes, allow an individual to stand up against a tyrannical goliath for what's fair and right.  Without them; few would have the resources, procedures, or capability too.

Personally, I'm enthralled with the idea of all groups within an organization working in unison for a common goal, a partnership driven towards excellence.  But we all know that ceases to exist in many work places.  As the very anti-union sentiment expressed almost instinctively here, tends to carry across to many industries and work places amongst executive management and the non-unionized white collar employees.  Quite often, to my sincerest dismay, it ceases to be about what's best for the stake holders... and degrades into the ugliness of "us versus them".  Where even profitability ceases to be an objective.   

Oddly enough, you seem to have convicted this driver, when it hasn't been mentioned once in the article that they were convicted, cited, ticketed, etc. in any of the cases.  Granted, I'd be absolutely at a loss and astonished if they weren't, but harnessing that rashness to judge and convict is in part... where I find the unions still serve a purpose, among others.

Let's not mix apples and oranges, shall we? As I'm reading it, we have two issues here. The first has to do with the subject of the thread (which we've gotten away from) - the bus driver who reportedly has injured multiple people and even killed one in his "alleged" checkered past.

This, on the very face of the story from purely that story's viewpoint, is an outrage. And it also happens to sell newspapers and gets blog hits on the web, but I digress.

It goes without saying that this person gets his day in court. But if half of what is reported is true, this guy not only should be punished, but punished severely enough to send a clear message.

Enter Issue #2 - the other part of the outrage, the union.

As you've correctly deduced, there very much is an anti-union sentiment on these pages. After having worked around unions for some years and having a number of family members express the value of unions ("so that I get my money so that I don't have to do no work," is the recurring theme stated by my cousin), I've seen over and over again that common "goals" toward profitability and spirit of "fair play" is completely overshadowed by uncommon greed and corruption that has become all too common - particularly by the unions, though that's an arguable point.

At the risk of hijacking this thread even further, one of the largest elements in Detroit's failures (yes, I was born and raised in that area) is due to unions that, in my view, have gone far beyond the mere "oversight committee" that you're suggesting.

Historically, unions have been corrupt, ruthless, and contemptuous. In the distant past, when sweatshops were common and unions were needed to bring a semblance of control to out-of-control business owners, they served a role. Many, many changes regarding job safety were mandated and done, most of which by various governments. There's no question about that. Unions also saw to it that benefit creep and wage increases rose exponentially to the point where you've got a guy pushing a broom who earns $25 per hour plus an unbelievable assortment of benefits. (Little wonder that outsourcing is done - unions have priced themselves out of the market.)

But in this day and age where unions have crippled those business owners to the point that union grievances are filed because a non-union guy takes immediate action and resolves an issue on the production floor (the supposition being that the non-union guy "took" a union guy's job for all of 10 seconds), I think we've gone way beyond the "oversight committee".

Splitting ridiculous hairs seems to be the order of the day.

If I hadn't seen this myself, I wouldn't be talking about it.

But back to Issue #1:

Let's momentarily disregard this particular allegation for just a minute. Why is this bus driver even WORKING as a bus driver after he's killed someone with said bus? Isn't that some kind of showstopper? Is the union so powerful that common sense can't even be used to rid the system of dangerous people?

[Eupher]

Vonne, just for the sake of clarity:

The cousin I referred to in my earlier post, the guy who smoked dope on a regular basis and who was known to park his ass on a cot until he was "needed" to "troubleshoot" problems at Chrysler and who often bragged about how he earned more money by staying at home collecting occasional voluntary unemployment than he did by going to work, is a cousin by marriage. No gene pool issues there.

I'm glad to see that we agree on some of the more apparent issues. And I'd be the first to agree with you that the overall managerial decisions by the overpaid hacks that run these auto companies have led to the majority of problems with the Big (well, not so big anymore) Three.

Going after the quick buck (light trucks, SUVs, etc.) versus building quality and dependability into their products deliberately building in failure rates in components that are singularly designed to compel people to buy more cars instead of getting the old ones fixed (let me talk to you about my 1993 Ford Taurus sometime), has blown up in the faces of the Detroit elite. Empowering employees to take direct responsibility for stopping production instead of allowing the same old shit to be built tends to speak to people, a practice that Toyota has built into their culture.

In short, it's my position that labor unions in general and the UAW in particular has propagated a culture of "**** the company, just grab at whatever you can get" that has, in part, contributed to Detroit's problems. We can argue about the culpability of the auto industry's executive management and I'd be right there with you - those idiots don't get it. Lee Iococca, bless the ol' coot, was probably the most effective of them all and even he couldn't turn a cow's ear into a silk purse. Just check with him about the Chrysler K cars.

The really bizarre thing is, Michigan is a blue state and has been for just about forever. The overall employment picture and economic situation there has sucked for better than 30 years. A sizeable percentage of the population has fled that shithole.

You'd think that the rest of the people would get a clue.....

But, back to our bus driver again - if the guy was driving the bus and he's had more than one infraction, that's too many. You don't play games with people's safety, but sometimes our zealousness in protecting some guy's job overshadows simple common sense.

You don't give a certified klutz a pair of crutches and not expect the guy to not fall down.

[NHSparky]

Considering we're in exactly the same field, do you really consider yourself working with mafia thugs? 

The union I'm currently in is actually pretty loose.  You can't say that about some of the IBEW locals I've deal with, to say nothing of Teamsters or worse.