JimH wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com...
Dan Krueger wrote:

""Collective bargaining" is the only means by which the worker can even
begin to establish a level playing field." In what world? What is a
level playing field anyway? If they are good, they get paid well. If
they are lazy or they don't like to report for work on time, they are
gone.

"The power of the employer to withhold pay"? What the hell is that
about. They work 9 hours, they get paid for 9 hours. It's the law, not
a power. There are other jobs out there. If someone is a hard worker
and not getting paid accordingly, there and many employers willing to
compensate them based on their individual merit.

So now every employee needs an agent? This isn't the NFL. When I run
an ad for a driver, for example, there are always at least three dozen
applicants. I choose the best and pay them what they are worth. In
fact, I tend to pay more so they are happy and don't feel like they have
to look for a better job the next day. It pays off in a number of ways:
Less training time & expense, more seasoned employees, solid customer
relationships, etc.

Dan
The way in which any person makes money from employees is by paying the
employee fewer dollars per hour in wages than the employee produces in
value. No secret, and nothing wrong with that in the least. Collective
bargaining allows the workers the opportunity to participate in the
decisions about how much of their productivity will be retained by
management. Nothing wrong with that in the least. If you don't have the
union signing up your truck drivers, it is probably becuase you pay a
fair and competitive wage and treat your employees properly. It's the
disgruntled workers that are susceptible to the siren song of the union
organizer, not the group that's happy and satisfied with current
conditions.


Serenity now.......serenity now.

If I could offer some advice to you Chuck I would suggest you avoid non
boating related topics such as this and keep to boating related topics. I
recall you asking for such a commitment from others here just a month or so
ago.............but hey, I may be mistaken.

I don't think so though. :-)


I remember you agreeing with Chuck that it made sense to avoid off topic
and inflammatory post. Chuck responded to a post about the price of
Boat Show Tickets and how different cost impact on the boat show. He
did not use this post as a reason to get into a silly argument.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

JimH wrote:
Serenity now.......serenity now.

If I could offer some advice to you Chuck I would suggest you avoid non
boating related topics such as this and keep to boating related topics. I
recall you asking for such a commitment from others here just a month or so
ago.............but hey, I may be mistaken.

I don't think so though. :-)

I guess we disagree about whether a discussion of the impact of "union
wages" on boat show ticket prices and exhibitor costs is boating
related. No worries. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that you also
disagree with my personal perspective on the issue. Do be careful, as
there are those who would incorrectly assume your possible disagreement
with my personal perspective (rather than a strict concern for the
content and character of the NG) was the underlying motivation for your
remarks about my post being OT.

The NG is headed right back to where it was just a few months ago- so
from the perspective of many of our regulars things will be normal
again soon. Many the old inflammatory topics are back, boating content
is tough to find, and the only difference is that so far there is a
little less name calling. Hard to tell how long the experiment with
being "just a little bit pregnant" will endure before the wheels fall
off again entirely, but the group is self defined by the majority of
posters- as it should be.

On 18 Feb 2006 07:21:16 -0800, wrote:


JimH wrote:
Serenity now.......serenity now.

If I could offer some advice to you Chuck I would suggest you avoid non
boating related topics such as this and keep to boating related topics. I
recall you asking for such a commitment from others here just a month or so
ago.............but hey, I may be mistaken.

I don't think so though. :-)

I guess we disagree about whether a discussion of the impact of "union
wages" on boat show ticket prices and exhibitor costs is boating
related. No worries. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that you also
disagree with my personal perspective on the issue. Do be careful, as
there are those who would incorrectly assume your possible disagreement
with my personal perspective (rather than a strict concern for the
content and character of the NG) was the underlying motivation for your
remarks about my post being OT.

The NG is headed right back to where it was just a few months ago- so
from the perspective of many of our regulars things will be normal
again soon. Many the old inflammatory topics are back, boating content
is tough to find, and the only difference is that so far there is a
little less name calling. Hard to tell how long the experiment with
being "just a little bit pregnant" will endure before the wheels fall
off again entirely, but the group is self defined by the majority of
posters- as it should be.

Don't give up hope. There is a sizeable group of 'regulars' who are able to
stay out of the inflammatory threads. Jim H is trying his best to pick
fights with anyone he can, just to say "I told you so."

His comments to you were obvious from the start.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 18 Feb 2006 07:21:16 -0800, wrote:


JimH wrote:
Serenity now.......serenity now.

If I could offer some advice to you Chuck I would suggest you avoid non
boating related topics such as this and keep to boating related topics.
I
recall you asking for such a commitment from others here just a month or
so
ago.............but hey, I may be mistaken.

I don't think so though. :-)

I guess we disagree about whether a discussion of the impact of "union
wages" on boat show ticket prices and exhibitor costs is boating
related. No worries. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that you also
disagree with my personal perspective on the issue. Do be careful, as
there are those who would incorrectly assume your possible disagreement
with my personal perspective (rather than a strict concern for the
content and character of the NG) was the underlying motivation for your
remarks about my post being OT.

The NG is headed right back to where it was just a few months ago- so
from the perspective of many of our regulars things will be normal
again soon. Many the old inflammatory topics are back, boating content
is tough to find, and the only difference is that so far there is a
little less name calling. Hard to tell how long the experiment with
being "just a little bit pregnant" will endure before the wheels fall
off again entirely, but the group is self defined by the majority of
posters- as it should be.

Don't give up hope. There is a sizeable group of 'regulars' who are able
to
stay out of the inflammatory threads. Jim H is trying his best to pick
fights with anyone he can, just to say "I told you so."

His comments to you were obvious from the start.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Actually John you seem to be the one following me around and stirring the
pot. We used to be best buds but because I didn't follow your mandate I am
now a bad guy, black hat and all.

I made a comment to Chuck. I could care less if you approve or disapprove
of it. The bottom line is that it had nothing to do with you.

Giddyup Sheriff.

JimH wrote:

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Actually John you seem to be the one following me around and stirring the
pot. We used to be best buds but because I didn't follow your mandate I am
now a bad guy, black hat and all.

I made a comment to Chuck. I could care less if you approve or disapprove
of it. The bottom line is that it had nothing to do with you.

Giddyup Sheriff.



JimH,
I have to point out the obvious, JohnH made a comment to Chuck. "The
bottom line is that it had nothing to do with you."

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************
That's my story and I am sticking to it.

************************************************** *************

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 11:50:56 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On 18 Feb 2006 07:21:16 -0800, wrote:


JimH wrote:
Serenity now.......serenity now.

If I could offer some advice to you Chuck I would suggest you avoid non
boating related topics such as this and keep to boating related topics.
I
recall you asking for such a commitment from others here just a month or
so
ago.............but hey, I may be mistaken.

I don't think so though. :-)

I guess we disagree about whether a discussion of the impact of "union
wages" on boat show ticket prices and exhibitor costs is boating
related. No worries. It wouldn't surprise me to discover that you also
disagree with my personal perspective on the issue. Do be careful, as
there are those who would incorrectly assume your possible disagreement
with my personal perspective (rather than a strict concern for the
content and character of the NG) was the underlying motivation for your
remarks about my post being OT.

The NG is headed right back to where it was just a few months ago- so
from the perspective of many of our regulars things will be normal
again soon. Many the old inflammatory topics are back, boating content
is tough to find, and the only difference is that so far there is a
little less name calling. Hard to tell how long the experiment with
being "just a little bit pregnant" will endure before the wheels fall
off again entirely, but the group is self defined by the majority of
posters- as it should be.

Don't give up hope. There is a sizeable group of 'regulars' who are able
to
stay out of the inflammatory threads. Jim H is trying his best to pick
fights with anyone he can, just to say "I told you so."

His comments to you were obvious from the start.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

Actually John you seem to be the one following me around and stirring the
pot. We used to be best buds but because I didn't follow your mandate I am
now a bad guy, black hat and all.

I made a comment to Chuck. I could care less if you approve or disapprove
of it. The bottom line is that it had nothing to do with you.

Giddyup Sheriff.


Yup, you're probably right.
--
'Til next time,

John H

******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:


Collective bargaining fails when all workers, good and bad, are treated
equal.


What prevents you from paying your top people more than the union
minimum?
If the employees are all treated "equally" regardless of merit, that's
a decision made by the employer, not the union.

Exactly..... we always brought up this point, and certain employees did
receive additional compensation. Our regotated rate scales were really
just a minimum.

wrote:
Dan Krueger wrote:


Collective bargaining fails when all workers, good and bad, are treated
equal.


What prevents you from paying your top people more than the union
minimum?
If the employees are all treated "equally" regardless of merit, that's
a decision made by the employer, not the union.


Really? Everyone gets the same, negotiated, raise and seniority (not
performance) determine who gets overtime, the best shifts, etc.