If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
NATCA Going Down in Flames
Jose wrote:
But why is the union making such a big deal about it? To tell employees that a supervisor making a comment about dress constitutes a "meeting", well...that's why I'm glad we don't have unions at my particular part of the company. To make it difficult for the management, in the hopes that they will rethink their position (or at least be punished for holding it). Again, what's the point? Management isn't the enemy...or is that a naive position? |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
NATCA Going Down in Flames
Jose wrote:
And they better be starched with crisp creases. Why? What positive effect can there be in that? Air safety of course. Would you trust a vector given to you by somebody who doesn't even starch their pants? g I'm glad you can't see how some of my coworkers dress. You'd never get on half the commercial aircraft out there ever again. |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
NATCA Going Down in Flames
To make it difficult for the management, in the hopes that they will rethink their position (or at least be punished for holding it).
Again, what's the point? Management isn't the enemy...or is that a naive position? Thems that came up with the dress code is the enemy. (my presumption - I am not a controller and have no dog in the fight). Sometimes it's unavoidable if there is collateral damage in these fights, but the buck has to stop somewhere. The idea is to make implementation of their plan difficult. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
NATCA Going Down in Flames
Emily wrote:
Steven P. McNicoll wrote: "Emily" wrote in message . .. But why is the union making such a big deal about it? To tell employees that a supervisor making a comment about dress constitutes a "meeting", well...that's why I'm glad we don't have unions at my particular part of the company. I don't think they're making a bid deal about the dress code, they,re making a big deal about the imposed "contract". The dress code is just one part of it. I guess I've never figured out why, if an employee doesn't like the rules he is subjected to, he just doesn't find something else to do. A union certainly isn't the solution. A union is like welfare from the government. It saves people having to think for, and take care of, themselves. Matt |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
POL NATCA Going Down in Flames
A union is like welfare from the government. It saves people having to think for, and take care of, themselves.
Unions have nothing to do with government. A union levels the playing field, which otherwise is skewed towards the employer. Some unions tip the playing field too far the other way. Jose -- The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music. for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
NATCA Going Down in Flames
In article . com,
Jay Honeck wrote: When I take a CAP squadron or Boy Scout Troop on a tower tour, I expect the controllers to look professional -- period. What does it say when we require the kids to be in uniform, but the controllers are wearing flip-flops and cut-off shorts? It says that dressing like a drone is so 1950s? -- Steve Rubin / AE6CH / http://www.altdb.net/ Email: / N6441C / http://www.tch.org/~ser/ "Why don't you mind your own business?" -- John Navas 01/04/05 "If you don't like it, keep it to yourself" -- John Navas 01/04/05 |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
POL NATCA Going Down in Flames
Jose wrote:
A union is like welfare from the government. It saves people having to think for, and take care of, themselves. Unions have nothing to do with government. A union levels the playing field, which otherwise is skewed towards the employer. But what's wrong with that? Granted, I have a great employer, but employers aren't evil. |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
POL NATCA Going Down in Flames
Jose wrote:
A union is like welfare from the government. It saves people having to think for, and take care of, themselves. Unions have nothing to do with government. A union levels the playing field, which otherwise is skewed towards the employer. Some unions tip the playing field too far the other way. I disagree. It distorts the free market of labor causing inefficiency. Matt |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
POL NATCA Going Down in Flames
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 20:45:05 -0500, Emily
wrote: Jose wrote: A union is like welfare from the government. It saves people having to think for, and take care of, themselves. Unions have nothing to do with government. A union levels the playing field, which otherwise is skewed towards the employer. But what's wrong with that? Granted, I have a great employer, but employers aren't evil. Simply amoral. My objective is to maximize the return on my investment in time in working for the company. To the extent that the company considers my time a fungable quantity, I will use whatever tools are available to discourage that view. Collective bargaining one such lever. I'd be a fool not to use it. Don |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
NATCA Going Down in Flames
On 4 Sep 2006 15:17:06 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote
in .com: Of course, Mr. Honeck might not have a problem with the practices at EDS. Okay, I give. What the heck is "EDS"? EDS is Electronic Data Systems, Inc., the folks that do IT for GM. They have a reputation in the industry for draconian labor practices (as did Henry Ford): http://www.realchange.org/perot.htm Abusing His Employees Perot is by all accounts a great motivator, a man who demands great loyalty and extreme hard work from employees, but also can repay it with striking acts of generosity (though rarely much in the way of wages.) He has done things like fly a new employee's wife to Johns Hopkins Hospital in his Lear Jet, after she injured her eye. At the same time, the relationship he creates is one where Perot is all-powerful, and bestows his generosities from on high. He works people extremely hard for little money, and subjects them to intrusive scrutiny, including private investigators, wiretaps, drug tests and lie detector tests. In this regard, he bears a striking resemblance to Ralph Nader, of all people, who also inspires great loyalty, pushes himself at least as hard as he pushes his employees, burns people out for little money, and seems to feel he has a right to monitor and control their lives. For example, discussing salaries has been an immediate firing offense from the first days at EDS, Perot's company. The company dress code, up into the 1970s, required white shirts only for men (he considered blue shirts effeminate), no pants or flats for women, and no "mod looks," as the contract put it. But the intrusion went much further. EDS tapped phones and used detectives to investigate its own employees, according to Posner. He traced license plate numbers in the parking lot to see who came late or left early, just as Nader telephones employees at home on sunny weekends to test how long they work. And in "particularly heated" fights for contracts, employees on the bid team would be physically searched to ensure they did not remove any paperwork that could assist the opposition. (Posner, p94-5) http://www.vault.com/survey/employee...YEER-3100.html |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
An ACE goes down in flames. | PoBoy | Naval Aviation | 25 | December 9th 05 01:30 PM |
AOPA and ATC Privatization | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 139 | November 12th 03 08:26 PM |
AOPA and ATC Privatization | Chip Jones | Piloting | 133 | November 12th 03 08:26 PM |