"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Gene Kearns wrote:

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:25:58 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:




Thanks, guys. I'd put up a self-portrait, but every time I try to take
one, my camera reboots.


Guess that is why I am still attached to my 35+ year old Nikons that
have been drug up and down mountains, to the sea, and about everywhere
else during their long life... technology sucks...



Don't Forget the Homeland Security site:

http://urlsnip.com/290935


We're prepared for all intruders!


ROFL... the pics are funny... specially the squirrel! One of my
(Army, retired) co-workers will get a special kick out of that....

Sad thing is, though, as an airport employee, "Homeland Security"
isn't all that far from true.....



Last time I was at National Airport, the TSA employee guarding the "exit"
of one of the passenger to terminal areas was sound asleep.


Way back in September 2002 (when the Democrats still controlled the
Senate), the Dems were holding up the Homeland Security bill for one
reason in particular:

Bush wanted the right to fire any security personnel that proved to be
incompetent or derelict in his/her duties.





You guys argued against giving him that right. And now you complain when
one of them isn't performing up to par?!?







No, what he wanted to do was avoid unionization.

But unions protect the jobs of those who are derelict in their duties.

NOYB,
It's been my experience the the managers don't want to go through the
hassle of dealing with incompitant workers. They in turn blame "labor
relations" for not backing them up. If management takes action against a
worker all they can do is file a grievance. They can petition the
grievance up to an arbitrator. They don't like to arbitrate unless they
think they've got a good case as these rulings set p residence. On the
other hand neither does management what to arbitrate unless they think
they can win. In 30 years of being in the UAW I've yet to see a walk out
or even organized protest over disciplinary action. As one union
official told be, "I have to take his side of it, as he's paying dues.
If I don't, I could get sued."
Most of the time it's just easier for the manager to go to someone who
does his job then deal with the one who doesn't want to. This just makes
it harder on those that do the job. We probably complain about this more
than anything else. We don't want to turn in our fellow workers but we
expect management to do their jobs of disciplining the bad one. They
being human are no different than the hourly worker, some do their jobs,
some don't.
Paul


NOYB wrote:
snipped
But unions protect the jobs of those who are derelict in their duties.