wrote:
On Nov 13, 8:54 pm, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:
"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."
Here's what I don't understand.
To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.
So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?
What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?
Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?
Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?
Eisboch
Whoooooooosh.
Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Union protection is just glorified welfare for those who don't want to
work. of people like Harry who wouldn't know how. Working for a union,
on the working end of the table, I saw it all the time. The union
going to bat for lazy bitches who wreren't worth 2 dollars an hour.
And before our resident asshole says anything, I was the smallest guy
in the shop of over 350 men, and never had a week where I was not in
the top ten percent of production. BTW, the union hated guys like me,
used to come to some of us and "ask" us to slow down to spare the bums
having to do a days work, for a days pay...

Even now at my advanced age and seniority in the company, my boss has to
tell me to slow down take some time off, stop working so hard. Pass some
work off to the younger guys, let them work through the problems and
come to you if they need help. I can't help myself. I am a producer.

"BAR" wrote in message
...

Even now at my advanced age and seniority in the company, my boss has to
tell me to slow down take some time off, stop working so hard. Pass some
work off to the younger guys, let them work through the problems and come
to you if they need help. I can't help myself. I am a producer.


Heh. Maybe, but you haven't understood the message.
You're being phased out.

Your boss is right. Too many people, some young, but mostly the older group
tend to "protect" their value by keeping knowledge to themselves. What they
don't realize is that they can be much more valuable by teaching and sharing
that knowledge to a group of people, thereby multipying their value's worth
and benefit many, many times.


Eisboch

wrote:
On Nov 13, 8:54 pm, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:
"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."
Here's what I don't understand.
To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.
So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?
What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?
Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?
Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?
Eisboch
Whoooooooosh.
Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Union protection is just glorified welfare for those who don't want to
work. of people like Harry who wouldn't know how. Working for a union,
on the working end of the table, I saw it all the time. The union
going to bat for lazy bitches who wreren't worth 2 dollars an hour.
And before our resident asshole says anything, I was the smallest guy
in the shop of over 350 men, and never had a week where I was not in
the top ten percent of production. BTW, the union hated guys like me,
used to come to some of us and "ask" us to slow down to spare the bums
having to do a days work, for a days pay...


Bull****.

On Nov 13, 9:45*pm, Boater wrote:
wrote:
On Nov 13, 8:54 pm, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:
"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."
Here's what I don't understand.
To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. *Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.
So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?
What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. * Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?
Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job. *
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?
Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?
Eisboch
Whoooooooosh.
Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Union protection is just glorified welfare for those who don't want to
work. of people like Harry who wouldn't know how. Working for a union,
on the working end of the table, I saw it all the time. The union
going to bat for lazy bitches who wreren't worth 2 dollars an hour.
And before our resident asshole says anything, I was the smallest guy
in the shop of over 350 men, and never had a week where I was not in
the top ten percent of production. BTW, the union hated guys like me,
used to come to some of us and "ask" us to slow down to spare the bums
having to do a days work, for a days pay...

Bull****.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

**** you, I don't lie here, you do..

"Boater" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Nov 13, 8:54 pm, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:
"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."
Here's what I don't understand.
To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.
So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?
What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?
Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more
consideration?
Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?
Eisboch
Whoooooooosh.
Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Union protection is just glorified welfare for those who don't want to
work. of people like Harry who wouldn't know how. Working for a union,
on the working end of the table, I saw it all the time. The union
going to bat for lazy bitches who wreren't worth 2 dollars an hour.
And before our resident asshole says anything, I was the smallest guy
in the shop of over 350 men, and never had a week where I was not in
the top ten percent of production. BTW, the union hated guys like me,
used to come to some of us and "ask" us to slow down to spare the bums
having to do a days work, for a days pay...


Bull****.

What was he doing? Picking fly**** out of pepper at the spice plant?

"Boater" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Nov 13, 8:54 pm, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:
"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."
Here's what I don't understand.
To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.
So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?
What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?
Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more
consideration?
Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?
Eisboch
Whoooooooosh.
Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Union protection is just glorified welfare for those who don't want to
work. of people like Harry who wouldn't know how. Working for a union,
on the working end of the table, I saw it all the time. The union
going to bat for lazy bitches who wreren't worth 2 dollars an hour.
And before our resident asshole says anything, I was the smallest guy
in the shop of over 350 men, and never had a week where I was not in
the top ten percent of production. BTW, the union hated guys like me,
used to come to some of us and "ask" us to slow down to spare the bums
having to do a days work, for a days pay...


Bull****.

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive... E&oref=slogin

wrote in message
...
On Nov 13, 8:54 pm, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more
consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch

Whoooooooosh.

Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Union protection is just glorified welfare for those who don't want to
work. of people like Harry who wouldn't know how. Working for a union,
on the working end of the table, I saw it all the time. The union
going to bat for lazy bitches who wreren't worth 2 dollars an hour.
And before our resident asshole says anything, I was the smallest guy
in the shop of over 350 men, and never had a week where I was not in
the top ten percent of production. BTW, the union hated guys like me,
used to come to some of us and "ask" us to slow down to spare the bums
having to do a days work, for a days pay...
-------

That is a common union theme. Work to the lowest possible common loser.

When starting out working I was in a union. The union rep came right up to
me and asked "You like having your job?". I agreed. He then said make that
4 box cars a shift not 8. Idiots, I could empty 12 if I pushed it, 8
safely, 4 made for very long shifts with nothing to do for 4 hours as I
never figured out how to make the fork lift run that slow.

Not my only hit with the union. I was walking by a machine that was just
about to destroy itself with no operator in sight. So I clipped the
emergency stop. Save the company a bundle week down time to repair it as I
caught it early and easy to repair. The union tried to fire me as it
"wasn't your job", company management thanked me and kept me on. The union
rep was on my ass until I quit but management passed them off.

Glad I left too. They are all now unemployed losers. Have been for over a
decade being caught in the last recession. Of those working today, working
poor. Was I glad to get out of that mentality and dysfunctional environment
early.

Now the lazy greedy *******s want our wallets.

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for
a while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they
work for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new
job. Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more
consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch


Whoooooooosh.

Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.


I wish that were so.

"BAR" wrote in message
...
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler and
is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it would
likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been persuaded
that the impact on current workers and retirees would be staggering if
the companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small businesses?
They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much as the auto
industry's union workers. Are they going to get a dedicated and
specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work for in
business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more
consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch


Whoooooooosh.

Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.

Heard on the radio today $100,000,000 was contributed to Democrat
politicians this election cycle. $10,000,000 to Republicans. Payback time.

Calif Bill wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler and
is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it would
likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been persuaded
that the impact on current workers and retirees would be staggering if
the companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small businesses?
They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much as the auto
industry's union workers. Are they going to get a dedicated and
specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work for in
business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more
consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch

Whoooooooosh.
Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.

Heard on the radio today $100,000,000 was contributed to Democrat
politicians this election cycle. $10,000,000 to Republicans. Payback time.



I sure hope so.