09-09-2012, 03:58 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-09-2012, 10:53 PM by FireIceTalon.)
LMAO at Bolty saying my post is a personal attack, but Deebye's post above me isnt' a personal attack. Bullshit.
This is a weak argument. Empty threat or not, it's STILL a threat, and the corporation is in the wrong, the workers are NOT. Just because you don't like the people there, or like the place itself, doesn't mean they don't have rights in the work place. Your post, in fact, is an illustration of a growing and very frightening philosophy in this country: Randism. There is no "terrible grasp" of English here, I think the quote and its context is clear as day. And if any place is the ass crack of the US, I'd say it's probably Florida - they can't even vote right over there. Nevertheless, Florida workers have just as many rights as any other workers do.
This is completely irrelevant. Indeed, if you have nothing of merit to add, move along, and let the people who actually know something about it, like myself, discuss it. Thank you.
Hey, he attacked me personally first, just like Ashock and Och did in that other thread recently - people here seem to hold a grudge when I prove them wrong about something. But apparently, it is ok for members to ad hominem me, but the minute I do it back, post edited. What a fucking joke - clearly we have a double standard here, and I suspect it's because of my political views. Well, I ain't changin' em, and fuck anyone who has a problem with that.
But on the topic, yea, your analysis is pretty straight forward. "Mandatory" means someone has to do something, so the company basically put its foot in its mouth. Regardless of how Deebye interprets what what was said, it was IN FACT, said. But even just the fact these workers were told they had to attend, and do so without pay, is a problem - regardless whether or not there were consequences for not attending. Really, I hope these workers file a class-action lawsuit or something, yet many of them are probably in no position to do so financially since capital exploits labor, and they have no choice in the matter cause their survival depends on it. Just a very small step above something called S-L-A-V-E-R-Y. But hey, thats Crapitalism for ya - a system of collective psychosis where corporations and a oligarchical ruling elite that protects said corporations interests, owns everyone else, including their dignity and their livelihood.
(09-09-2012, 01:07 PM)shoju Wrote: Ohio is the ass crack of the united states. Trust me. I live there. This place sucks, most of the people suck, and people have a terrible grasp of the english language here.
They very well could have said "You HAVE to be there" and then not done anything to the people who didn't show. It's an empty threat, and FiT is pouncing on it.
Go ahead and show me the people who get fired for not being there, and then I might care.
This is a weak argument. Empty threat or not, it's STILL a threat, and the corporation is in the wrong, the workers are NOT. Just because you don't like the people there, or like the place itself, doesn't mean they don't have rights in the work place. Your post, in fact, is an illustration of a growing and very frightening philosophy in this country: Randism. There is no "terrible grasp" of English here, I think the quote and its context is clear as day. And if any place is the ass crack of the US, I'd say it's probably Florida - they can't even vote right over there. Nevertheless, Florida workers have just as many rights as any other workers do.
(09-09-2012, 01:45 PM)Mavfin Wrote: Huffington Post. 'nuff said.
As biased as Fox News, just the other way. Move along, nothing to see here. Just FIT having keyboard diarrhea over things he doesn't understand.
This is completely irrelevant. Indeed, if you have nothing of merit to add, move along, and let the people who actually know something about it, like myself, discuss it. Thank you.
(09-09-2012, 10:44 AM)eppie Wrote:(09-09-2012, 05:58 AM)DeeBye Wrote: What he actually said within context is:In a last try to make this thread go somewhere reasonable;
"There were no workers that were forced to attend the event. We had managers that communicated to our workforce that the attendance to the Romney event was mandatory, but no one was forced to attend the event."
Please can someone explain to a non-native English speaker what this means.
They way I read it managers told their workers they had to attend......but no one was FORCED.....meaning what? They could say no but they would be fired?
To me this sounds like a pretty heavy thing. In Holland these managers would be fired and probably prosecuted as well. (as would be the case in most other developed country is my guess).
So probably I just understood it wrong.
ps FIT is it so difficult to keep things a bit decent here?
Hey, he attacked me personally first, just like Ashock and Och did in that other thread recently - people here seem to hold a grudge when I prove them wrong about something. But apparently, it is ok for members to ad hominem me, but the minute I do it back, post edited. What a fucking joke - clearly we have a double standard here, and I suspect it's because of my political views. Well, I ain't changin' em, and fuck anyone who has a problem with that.
But on the topic, yea, your analysis is pretty straight forward. "Mandatory" means someone has to do something, so the company basically put its foot in its mouth. Regardless of how Deebye interprets what what was said, it was IN FACT, said. But even just the fact these workers were told they had to attend, and do so without pay, is a problem - regardless whether or not there were consequences for not attending. Really, I hope these workers file a class-action lawsuit or something, yet many of them are probably in no position to do so financially since capital exploits labor, and they have no choice in the matter cause their survival depends on it. Just a very small step above something called S-L-A-V-E-R-Y. But hey, thats Crapitalism for ya - a system of collective psychosis where corporations and a oligarchical ruling elite that protects said corporations interests, owns everyone else, including their dignity and their livelihood.
https://www.youtube.com/user/FireIceTalon
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)
"Your very ideas are but the outgrowth of conditions of your bourgeois production and bourgeois property, just as your jurisprudence is but the will of your class, made into law for all, a will whose essential character and direction are determined by the economic conditions of the existence of your class." - Marx (addressing the bourgeois)