Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Charles H. Buchholtz wrote: The French is _Qu'ils mangent de la brioche_ (not _gateau_ as one might expect). And Queen Marie-Antoinette did *not* say this. (When famine struck Paris, she actually took an active role in relieving it.) Jean-Jacques Rousseau attributed the words to a great princess in book 6 of his _Confessions_. _Confessions_ was published posthumously, but book 6 was written 2 or 3 years before Marie-Antoinette arrived in France in 1770. John Wexler writes: French law obliged bakers to sell certain standard varieties of loaf at fixed weights and prices. (It still does, which explains why the most expensive patisserie will sell you a baguette for the same price as a supermarket.) At the time when this quotation originated, the law also obliged the baker to sell a fancier loaf for the price of the cheap one when the cheap ones were all gone. This was to forestall the obvious trick of baking just a few standard loaves, so that one could make more profit by using the rest of the flour for price-unregulated loaves. So whoever it was who said _Qu'ils mangent de la brioche_, she (or he) was not being wholly flippant. The idea was that the bread shortage could be alleviated if the law was enforced against profiteering bakers. I have seen this explanation quoted in defence of Marie Antoinette. It seems a pity, after all that, if she didn't say it. interesting. this got me wondering about the phrase baker's dozen, whether there was any connection ... lots of theories out there, but here's one that caught my eye: http://www.wordorigins.org/wordorb.htm Baker's Dozen The popular tale behind this phrase's origin is that a medieval law specified the weight of loaves of bread and any baker who shorted a customer was in for dire punishment. So, baker's would include a thirteenth loaf with each dozen just to be safe. The story is partly true. There was such a law, but the practice of adding an extra loaf to the dozen had nothing to do with fear of punishment. The law in question was the Assize of Bread and Ale, first promulgated in England in 1266. There are various versions of the law, but they all regulated the weight and price of loaves of bread that were sold on the market. During years of good harvests, bakers could make more bread than they could sell locally, so they would sell the excess loaves to hucksters, or middlemen. But since the weight and price was strictly regulated, the only way for these distributors to make money would be to give them extra loaves. The baker would give the huckster a thirteenth, or vantage, loaf for each dozen. This extra loaf provided the profit for the middleman. The practice of adding the thirteenth loaf is older than the phrase. The phrase only dates to 1599. . laserbeam® [aka ray] metropolitan bakery rules, but their bagels--quelle dommage __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
At 10:28 AM 12/7/2004, Kyle Cassidy wrote: The Carpenters Union is picketing outside of our soon-to-be bowling alley. http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/temp/strikes1.jpg http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/temp/strikes2.jpg Nobody would talk to me, but my guess is they're hiring non-union labor, since there were some guys loading wood from the site into a truck with what appeared to be a police escourt. Sigh, my biggest issue with Philadelphia (and Penn in general) -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see .
RE: [UC] striking at strikes ....
If I am not mistaken, scab labor is labor hired to replace striking workers. The trades people working on the project are not scabs, they are just non-union. Jonathan A. Cass -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 11:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes What is your biggest issue? Scab labor? In a message dated 12/7/2004 10:30:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, Ben Rhoades [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sigh, my biggest issue with Philadelphia (and Penn in general) -Ben At 10:28 AM 12/7/2004, Kyle Cassidy wrote: The Carpenters Union is picketing outside of our soon-to-be bowling alley. http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/temp/strikes1.jpg http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/temp/strikes2.jpg Nobody would talk to me, but my guess is they're hiring non-union labor, since there were some guys loading wood from the site into a truck with what appeared to be a police escourt. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
What is your biggest issue? Scab labor? In a message dated 12/7/2004 10:30:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, Ben Rhoades [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sigh, my biggest issue with Philadelphia (and Penn in general) -Ben At 10:28 AM 12/7/2004, Kyle Cassidy wrote: The Carpenters Union is picketing outside of our soon-to-be bowling alley. http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/temp/strikes1.jpg http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/temp/strikes2.jpg Nobody would talk to me, but my guess is they're hiring non-union labor, since there were some guys loading wood from the site into a truck with what appeared to be a police escourt. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
At 11:48 AM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is your biggest issue? Scab labor? Over-Unionization of the city/state which leads to everything being much more unaffordable. It is possible to get a good wage and not be part of a Union. Unions had their day (and a few actually do still serve a purpose) but the vast majority of them seem to corrupt and gouge for unreasonable pay. For example, the PA tollbooth operators starting wage is $15.76 an hour and they want more. These are people who could and should be replaced with machines and workfare workers (parts of FL make people on welfare work for it and one of the jobs they provide is min wage tollbooth operators). http://www.layover.com/cgi-bin/portal/printnews.pl/7613.html If they laid off all these people, they could afford to run septa and probably have a surplus. -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Hi, It has been proven that unions keep the general wage rates up in an area. Does anyone want to donate part of their wage to back-up their anti-unionism? I think not. I don't get paid enough. At 11:48 AM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is your biggest issue? Scab labor? Over-Unionization of the city/state which leads to everything being much more unaffordable. It is possible to get a good wage and not be part of a Union. Unions had their day (and a few actually do still serve a purpose) but the vast majority of them seem to corrupt and gouge for unreasonable pay. For example, the PA tollbooth operators starting wage is $15.76 an hour and they want more. These are people who could and should be replaced with machines and workfare workers (parts of FL make people on welfare work for it and one of the jobs they provide is min wage tollbooth operators). http://www.layover.com/cgi-bin/portal/printnews.pl/7613.html If they laid off all these people, they could afford to run septa and probably have a surplus. -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
RE: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Unionists use the epithet scab to refer to workers who are willing to accept terms that union workers have rejected... and that's why you are a civil litigator, and not a labor law attorney. In a message dated 12/7/2004 12:04:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, Jonathan Cass [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If I am not mistaken, scab labor is labor hired to replace striking workers. The trades people working on the project are not scabs, they are just non-union. Jonathan A. Cass -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 11:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes What is your biggest issue? Scab labor? In a message dated 12/7/2004 10:30:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, Ben Rhoades [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sigh, my biggest issue with Philadelphia (and Penn in general) -Ben At 10:28 AM 12/7/2004, Kyle Cassidy wrote: The Carpenters Union is picketing outside of our soon-to-be bowling alley. http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/temp/strikes1.jpg http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/temp/strikes2.jpg Nobody would talk to me, but my guess is they're hiring non-union labor, since there were some guys loading wood from the site into a truck with what appeared to be a police escourt. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Unions exist to protect the interests of workers. They are meant to check the abuses of employers. Here is a great example heard on TODAY's Morning Edition: Stressed-Out Game Designers Sue Software Maker Those amazing video games that some people spend months playing take even longer to create. Now, overworked programmers have filed a lawsuit against their employers, citing extreme job stress and health problems. Laura Sydell reports. http://www.npr.org/rundowns/segment.php?wfId=4206253 Yo can also read the Amended Complaint Against Electronic Arts ... In a message dated 12/7/2004 12:11:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, Ben Rhoades [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 11:48 AM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is your biggest issue? Scab labor? Over-Unionization of the city/state which leads to everything being much more unaffordable. It is possible to get a good wage and not be part of a Union. Unions had their day (and a few actually do still serve a purpose) but the vast majority of them seem to corrupt and gouge for unreasonable pay. For example, the PA tollbooth operators starting wage is $15.76 an hour and they want more. These are people who could and should be replaced with machines and workfare workers (parts of FL make people on welfare work for it and one of the jobs they provide is min wage tollbooth operators). http://www.layover.com/cgi-bin/portal/printnews.pl/7613.html If they laid off all these people, they could afford to run septa and probably have a surplus. -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Ben Rhoades wrote: At 11:48 AM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is your biggest issue? Scab labor? Over-Unionization of the city/state which leads to everything being much more unaffordable. It is possible to get a good wage and not be part of a Union. Unions had their day (and a few actually do still serve a purpose) but the vast majority of them seem to corrupt and gouge for unreasonable pay. For example, the PA tollbooth operators starting wage is $15.76 an hour and they want more. These are people who could and should be replaced with machines and workfare workers (parts of FL make people on welfare work for it and one of the jobs they provide is min wage tollbooth operators). http://www.layover.com/cgi-bin/portal/printnews.pl/7613.html If they laid off all these people, they could afford to run septa and probably have a surplus. And pray tell, what is _your_ salary, and can you justify it when others are willing (and capable) of doing your job for less? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
If they laid off all these people, they could afford to run septa and probably have a surplus. SEPTAs problems are much greater than the cost of their labour. While every Philadelphian has their stories of rude SEPTA workers, most of them do their jobs very well in work conditions that most of us wouldn't choose. SEPTA is one of the most 'efficient' transportation providers in the country because of the states mandate that they recover 50% of their operating expenses from farebox revenue. Transportation will never have a surplus. There is no money to be made in moving people which is why all of the private transportation systems disolved. Fund public transport at the same levels that highways are funded. Then SEPTA will run all night, every five minutes and be clean and fast and Philadelphians will have to come up with something else to complain about. I have plenty of complaints about how SEPTA is run, but I try to keep my complaints framed by pointing out the realities of mass transit. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
At 01:07 PM 12/7/2004, Clinton, J. Scott wrote: If they laid off all these people, they could afford to run septa and probably have a surplus. SEPTAs problems are much greater than the cost of their labour. While every Philadelphian has their stories of rude SEPTA workers, most of them do their jobs very well in work conditions that most of us wouldn't choose. SEPTA is one of the most 'efficient' transportation providers in the country because of the states mandate that they recover 50% of their operating expenses from farebox revenue. Slight misquote due to a miscut of me here. I said firing Tollbooth operators would free up a lot of transportation money would could be used for SEPTA. I mentioned nothing about firing SEPTA workers. -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
At 01:00 PM 12/7/2004, Brian Siano wrote: And pray tell, what is _your_ salary, and can you justify it when others are willing (and capable) of doing your job for less? My salary is not enough but that doesn't mean I think I should Unionize my job classification to get more money and yes I can justify it. I've earned it with years of schooling and years on the job. I'm just saying, my salary would be worth more (as would yours) if the Unions didn't knock the cost of everything up so much. -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Ben Rhoades wrote: At 01:00 PM 12/7/2004, Brian Siano wrote: And pray tell, what is _your_ salary, and can you justify it when others are willing (and capable) of doing your job for less? My salary is not enough but that doesn't mean I think I should Unionize my job classification to get more money and yes I can justify it. I've earned it with years of schooling and years on the job. You're telling me that, rather than get more money, you would follow principle and _not_ unionize your job classification? This doesn't sound as though you're working for your own self-interest. As far as having earned your salary... well, I'm sure you find it comforting to think that your salary is solely due to the sweat of your brow and your own talents, but that's never the case. For one thing, the pay grades in most jobs are determined by job markets, rules of seniority, previous negotiations between labor and management (many of which are the result of union organizing), and federal law. In other words, your schooling and experience could just as easily be _ignored_ by your employers, if they hadn't had to consider such things in the past. Look at it this way. You're doing fine now. But let's say you're downsized. Would _that_ be attributable to your schooling, experience, and general personal qualities? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
At 01:38 PM 12/7/2004, Brian Siano wrote: You're telling me that, rather than get more money, you would follow principle and _not_ unionize your job classification? This doesn't sound as though you're working for your own self-interest. I'm not totally dumb, of course I'd rather have more money however, I would be much happier with pay scales for everyone being much more in tune with worth of work which would make my money be able to go further. I do believe that scale is important. You work for Penn and do you think you deserve less money for doing a scientific job than say a maybe high-school graduated bus-driver? As far as having earned your salary... well, I'm sure you find it comforting to think that your salary is solely due to the sweat of your brow and your own talents, but that's never the case. For one thing, the pay grades in most jobs are determined by job markets, rules of seniority, previous negotiations between labor and management (many of which are the result of union organizing), and federal law. In other words, your schooling and experience could just as easily be _ignored_ by your employers, if they hadn't had to consider such things in the past. Yes but that is the past and I'd like to think the vast majority of places are past the point where they need unions and can get good labor and pay a decent wage w/o having to have it be over the top because a mass of people force it to be. Look at it this way. You're doing fine now. But let's say you're downsized. Would _that_ be attributable to your schooling, experience, and general personal qualities? No idea, you? -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Title: Message Yes but that is the past and I'd like to think the vast majority of placesare past the point where they need unions and can get good labor and pay adecent wage w/o having to have it be over the top because a mass of peopleforce it to be. I'd like to think that too, but do you shop at Wal-Mart? A lot of people are starting to make a distinction between "minimum wage" and "living wage". Personally, I believe that my earnings impart a responsibility upon me to use those monies wisely...a concept that Christians refer to as "stewardship". Because of my conviction, I don't shop at Wal-Mart (though I do buy things from Home Despot...mostly out of frustration and lack of selection at my local hardware stores) and I don't feel that my biggest requirement in purchasing things is that the price be as low as possible. I am willing to pay more for a quality product. I believe that it benefits me as well as society for people to be able to earn a living that allows them to live above the poverty line. regarding the union and the turnpike, I would have to agree that the case is completely unlike wal-mart. I remember reading about a study that someone did for a turnpike (might have been MA) for how to cut costs. The reccomendation was to eliminate fares because the cost of collecting them was greater than the fares collected. This is not the case on the PA turnpike, but when EZ pass was launched, an agreement was reached that the EZ pass would not eliminate any tolltaker jobs. The turnpike is a political entity, and eliminating patronage jobs is not the goal of any politician that I know of. Like most things, unions bring negatives along with their positives.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
At 02:32 PM 12/7/2004, Clinton, J. Scott wrote: I'd like to think that too, but do you shop at Wal-Mart? A lot of people are starting to make a distinction between minimum wage and living wage. Personally, I believe that my earnings impart a responsibility upon me to use those monies wisely...a concept that Christians refer to as stewardship. Because of my conviction, I don't shop at Wal-Mart (though I do buy things from Home Despot...mostly out of frustration and lack of selection at my local hardware stores) and I don't feel that my biggest requirement in purchasing things is that the price be as low as possible. I am willing to pay more for a quality product. I believe that it benefits me as well as society for people to be able to earn a living that allows them to live above the poverty line. Well, the Wal-mart example is a good one however, I do look at it sort of different, and maybe I'm living in the 50s. I see most of the people working at as a job, not as a career. I don't think of Wal-mart as a career place other than maybe some management. I shop there with that mindset and think that many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family. However, I also I agree that you get what you pay for in terms of quality and I will often pay more to get something I think will last longer. regarding the union and the turnpike, I would have to agree that the case is completely unlike wal-mart. I remember reading about a study that someone did for a turnpike (might have been MA) for how to cut costs. The reccomendation was to eliminate fares because the cost of collecting them was greater than the fares collected. This is not the case on the PA turnpike, but when EZ pass was launched, an agreement was reached that the EZ pass would not eliminate any tolltaker jobs. The turnpike is a political entity, and eliminating patronage jobs is not the goal of any politician that I know of. Yeah, it's interesting that doing things that would have a positive affect on the greater good but bad for patronage turns out with patronage winning... Like most things, unions bring negatives along with their positives. Of course, this is true of almost anything. -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see .
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Ben Rhoades wrote: At 01:38 PM 12/7/2004, Brian Siano wrote: You're telling me that, rather than get more money, you would follow principle and _not_ unionize your job classification? This doesn't sound as though you're working for your own self-interest. I'm not totally dumb, of course I'd rather have more money however, I would be much happier with pay scales for everyone being much more in tune with worth of work which would make my money be able to go further. I do believe that scale is important. You work for Penn and do you think you deserve less money for doing a scientific job than say a maybe high-school graduated bus-driver? Well, look at your first comment, about wanting pay scales that would give you more bang for your buck. That's perfectly fine, and it does reflect your own interests. BUT... you have to consider that others may be making that very same calculation. As a result, their desire may infringe upon your salary. Or, it may drive up the price of something you want. And as ought to be pointed out, this issue of scale is far from a serious yardstick. For one thing, you're pretty vague about what a scientific job is, and matter of fact, many bus drivers do make more than many grad students. But still: is there any really _empirical _reason why a high school educated bus driver should make less than, say, a research scientist? I'm serious. One can say that a research scientist has invested more in terms of education to become a research scientist-- that's fine, but it presumes that people ought to be paid more when they're better educated. One could say that a scientific researcher's doing more for society-- but many aren't doing much, and I can think of a number of jobs which are paid well for hurting society. (Say, a lawyer who defends keeping a harmful drug on the market.) Or, one could argue that paying people higher wages would drive prices up-- true, but that could also be raised as an argument to _lower_ white-collar pay until it's more in line with blue-collar work. This is why I'm suspicious of glib assertions about the proper pay scales in our society. As far as having earned your salary... well, I'm sure you find it comforting to think that your salary is solely due to the sweat of your brow and your own talents, but that's never the case. For one thing, the pay grades in most jobs are determined by job markets, rules of seniority, previous negotiations between labor and management (many of which are the result of union organizing), and federal law. In other words, your schooling and experience could just as easily be _ignored_ by your employers, if they hadn't had to consider such things in the past. Yes but that is the past and I'd like to think the vast majority of places are past the point where they need unions and can get good labor and pay a decent wage w/o having to have it be over the top because a mass of people force it to be. But that is the past. Yes, it's in the past. And the past is relevant, especially to your assertions about your success being due to your labor. Let's apply your logic in a different situation: A: Look at this wonderful computer. It's cutting-edge technology, has the finest software on it, and its monitor is crisp and clear. And it's due to my hard work and wise judgement. B: But you didn't design the computer. You didn't make the chips. You didn't make the Internet. The basic architecture was theorized by von Neuman in the Fifties, the chips were developed by Intel and nVidia, and the screen was made by Dell. A: That's all in the past. Look at it this way. You're doing fine now. But let's say you're downsized. Would _that_ be attributable to your schooling, experience, and general personal qualities? No idea, you? By your logic, it would be. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Ben Rhoades wrote: At 02:32 PM 12/7/2004, Clinton, J. Scott wrote: I'd like to think that too, but do you shop at Wal-Mart? A lot of people are starting to make a distinction between minimum wage and living wage.Personally, I believe that my earnings impart a responsibility upon me to use those monies wisely...a concept that Christians refer to as stewardship. Because of my conviction, I don't shop at Wal-Mart (though I do buy things from Home Despot...mostly out of frustration and lack of selection at my local hardware stores) and I don't feel that my biggest requirement in purchasing things is that the price be as low as possible. I am willing to pay more for a quality product. I believe that it benefits me as well as society for people to be able to earn a living that allows them to live above the poverty line. Well, the Wal-mart example is a good one however, I do look at it sort of different, and maybe I'm living in the 50s. I see most of the people working at as a job, not as a career. I don't think of Wal-mart as a career place other than maybe some management. I shop there with that mindset and think that many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family. However, I also I agree that you get what you pay for in terms of quality and I will often pay more to get something I think will last longer. So the yardstick we're using for determing pay scales is the _intent_ of the employee to make the job a career. As for your comment that many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family, well, that's amazingly stupid. That's why most people have jobs in the first place-- otherwise, we'd be spending time with our spouses and kids. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
At 03:18 PM 12/7/2004, Brian Siano wrote: So the yardstick we're using for determing pay scales is the _intent_ of the employee to make the job a career. As for your comment that many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family, well, that's amazingly stupid. That's why most people have jobs in the first place-- otherwise, we'd be spending time with our spouses and kids. Wow, you must have had a great childhood as you did not have a job during high school and/or college? All the ones I had were not things I would expect to support a family on. They were to minorly off-set loans and give me a little spending cash. I can't believe you don't believe there is a difference between a job and a career. -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Iencourage all of you who are thinking about union or non and minimum vs. living wages, particularly asthey relate to Wal-Mart, to read Nickle and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich. - Original Message - From: Ben Rhoades To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 2:43 PM Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes At 02:32 PM 12/7/2004, Clinton, J. Scott wrote: I'd like to think that too, but do you shop at Wal-Mart? A lot of people are starting to make a distinction between "minimum wage" and "living wage". Personally, I believe that my earnings impart a responsibility upon me to use those monies wisely...a concept that Christians refer to as "stewardship". Because of my conviction, I don't shop at Wal-Mart (though I do buy things from Home Despot...mostly out of frustration and lack of selection at my local hardware stores) and I don't feel that my biggest requirement in purchasing things is that the price be as low as possible. I am willing to pay more for a quality product. I believe that it benefits me as well as society for people to be able to earn a living that allows them to live above the poverty line.Well, the Wal-mart example is a good one however, I do look at it sort of different, and maybe I'm living in the 50s. I see most of the people working at as a job, not as a career. I don't think of Wal-mart as a career place other than maybe some management. I shop there with that mindset and think that many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family. However, I also I agree that you get what you pay for in terms of quality and I will often pay more to get something I think will last longer. regarding the union and the turnpike, I would have to agree that the case is completely unlike wal-mart. I remember reading about a study that someone did for a turnpike (might have been MA) for how to cut costs. The reccomendation was to eliminate fares because the cost of collecting them was greater than the fares collected. This is not the case on the PA turnpike, but when EZ pass was launched, an agreement was reached that the EZ pass would not eliminate any tolltaker jobs. The turnpike is a political entity, and eliminating patronage jobs is not the goal of any politician that I know of.Yeah, it's interesting that doing things that would have a positive affect on the greater good but bad for patronage turns out with patronage winning... Like most things, unions bring negatives along with their positives.Of course, this is true of almost anything.-Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see .
RE: [UC] striking at strikes .... (nickle and dimed)
Title: RE: [UC] striking at strikes (nickle and dimed) at the urging of many colleagues, i read nickle and dimed earlier this year and found myself thinking, more than anything else barbara ehrenreich is a snivling whiner who really ought to get a roommate and then she'd stop spending so much of her income on rent. having the luxury of not growing up broke, ms. Ehrenreich made numerous mistakes that I never made while living on $8,000 a year. The biggest two of which were 1) living alone, and 2) driving a car. I also found her book pandering -- like margaret meede coming down the amazon, here comes Ehrenreich, studying the poor people, knowing that they'll never be able to appreciate opera, polysyllabolic words, dickens, and heated towel racks. She really let me down when she had to confide in her wallmart co-workers that she really wasn't rabble like them, no, she was researching a book. And her attempts at starting a union at walmart (where a union might do some good) wasn't more than lip service. Having lived on walmart wages (actually walden book wages) for a long time I wasn't as impressed with Nickle and Dimed as a lot of other people seem to be. Just my .02 kc -Original Message- From: Marni Sweet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:35 PM To: Ben Rhoades; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes I encourage all of you who are thinking about union or non and minimum vs. living wages, particularly as they relate to Wal-Mart, to read Nickle and Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Ben Rhoades wrote: At 03:18 PM 12/7/2004, Brian Siano wrote: So the yardstick we're using for determing pay scales is the _intent_ of the employee to make the job a career. As for your comment that many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family, well, that's amazingly stupid. That's why most people have jobs in the first place-- otherwise, we'd be spending time with our spouses and kids. Wow, you must have had a great childhood as you did not have a job during high school and/or college? All the ones I had were not things I would expect to support a family on. They were to minorly off-set loans and give me a little spending cash. I can't believe you don't believe there is a difference between a job and a career. The difference here is mainly the employee's regard for the position. This is not something any reasonable person would want to base social policy on. But bear in mind that many people _do_ get jobs in high school and college to support a family, or at least, a child. But I'll grant that the main reason people get jobs is to be able to survive in our society. One needs money for food, shelter, and much more. As for my childhood, let's ask about your adult life. All the jobs you've had were just to make small offsets in paying off loans and a little spending cash? Where'd the rest of it come from-- family inheritance? Trust fund? Lucky investments? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes .... (nickle and dimed)
Kyle Cassidy wrote: at the urging of many colleagues, i read nickle and dimed earlier this year and found myself thinking, more than anything else barbara ehrenreich is a snivling whiner who really ought to get a roommate and then she'd stop spending so much of her income on rent. having the luxury of not growing up broke, ms. Ehrenreich made numerous mistakes that I never made while living on $8,000 a year. The biggest two of which were 1) living alone, and 2) driving a car. I also found her book pandering -- like margaret meede coming down the amazon, here comes Ehrenreich, studying the poor people, knowing that they'll never be able to appreciate opera, polysyllabolic words, dickens, and heated towel racks. She really let me down when she had to confide in her wallmart co-workers that she really wasn't rabble like them, no, she was researching a book. And her attempts at starting a union at walmart (where a union might do some good) wasn't more than lip service. Having lived on walmart wages (actually walden book wages) for a long time I wasn't as impressed with Nickle and Dimed as a lot of other people seem to be. This is pretty much the usual complaint about Ehrenreich, and it's pretty much bullshit. For one thing, the charges of Ehrenreich's elitism are pretty much a fantasy. I've read Ehrenreich, and I've met her on occasion, and she's not an elitist. She is an extremely sharp and very grounded writer who does serious research when she writes. And if we accept Kyle's miserable attempt at logic for a moment, we are led the the conclusion that no one should even try to write about shitty jobs unless one were stuck in one for many years. In fact, _anyone_ who's done free-lance writing can be called a pandering elitist by know-nothings, because they aren't busting their humps in shitty jobs. The convenient thing about this argument is that the only people allowed to do this kind of muckraking are those with the least resources to do it. Soi much for Upton Sinclair, Jacob Riis, or John Howard Griffin. (And I suspect that, even when working stiff do manage to write about their experiences, we can count on Kyle to denounce them as snivelling whiners and moaners.) The simple fact is this. Comments such as Kyle are a cheap way of asserting superiority. Ehrenreich did her research, and wrote a good book that calls into question a great many assumptions we _all_ make about the lives of the working poor. She also had the balls to go out a _live_ under circumstances under which, as she repeatedly says, thousands of Americans live. This is good, solid, muckraking research with a fine history. Frankly, the fact that Ehrenreich did a _fine_ job has provoked even liberals to hold their cigarettes disdainfully and strike a well she didn't _really_ live like that, you know pose. Okay, Let's leave that point , and focus on Kyle's comment about Ehrenreich's mistakes. Considering that Ehrenreich writes about co-workers who share rooms, who co-habit with families and with lovers and exes, this is another empty complaint. Given that Ehrenreich was doing this for research, it's asking a bit much to demand that she go in with a stranger as a roomie for a short-term. (In other words: it wasn't a mistake, and since Ehrenreich says that doubling and tripling up is how many workers cope with shitty wages, it's kind of silly for Kyle to call this a mistake.) I'm really amused at Kyle's need to cite that he worked in a bookstore rather than a Wal-Mart. He's not content to say he lived on crummy wages in his youth (a time when most people do). He has to stress that he was a _bookstore clerk_, and not one of those lower-class Wal-mart whiners. I detect a sharp and distinct aroma of elitism on Kyle's part. As for driving a car, well, that's nice to avoid if you have decent public transportation. But Kyle, mutual friends have told me you're a sharp and intelligent guy. Don't spoil that by posting brainless, imbecile, reactionary drivel like this, okay? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
"Well, the Wal-mart example is a good one however, I do look at it sort of different, and maybe I'm living in the 50s. I see most of the people working at as a job, not as a career. I don't think of Wal-mart as a career place other than maybe some management. I shop there with that mindset and think that many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family." Do you really think that "many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family" is valid? Do you have any idea just how many people do exactly that? Work in retail or some other low paying job because it's the best they can do or it's the only job they can get ... that that job IS what helps pay the rent, utilities, puts food on the table, etc. I've known college graduates ending up working in a store because that's the only job they could get. I myself have been through the working in retail, having a roommate, living on eggs and pasta with margarine cause I couldn't even afford tomato sauce and struggling to make ends meet. Why? I had no choice. I had gone from being homeless - having been kicked out of my house to taking the first job I could get to get me off the street. I'm not a college graduate, I am a high school graduate. I did end up working for many years as a legal secretary before I became disabled. Going from a legal secretary salary to SSDI has been like going back in time money wise. I guess the point is anything can happen to any one of us at any time, so don't assume that a degree or anything else can prevent you from ending up in a position of being poor or the working poor. W
RE: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Title: Message Somehow,Mr.. Rhoades' comments bring myfavorite description ofG.W. Bush to mind -- "He was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple to get there". The government's unemployment figures hide a lot of hard truths -- that there are many people working at jobs that 20-30 years ago might have been filled by teenagers (McDonalds, stock clerks, etc.)because they don't have skills/qualifications to find a "career". And why aren't they going to school or doing something to "improve" themselves so they can find a career? Probably because they're not working at Wal-Mart OR McDonalds; they're working at Wal-Mart AND McDonalds, and probably another part time job as well, all without health benefits. Kathleen -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 4:33 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes "Well, the Wal-mart example is a good one however, I do look at it sort of different, and maybe I'm living in the 50s. I see most of the people working at as a job, not as a career. I don't think of Wal-mart as a career place other than maybe some management. I shop there with that mindset and think that many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family." Do you really think that "many of the problems are people believing that their job at Wal-mart should be something to support their family" is valid? Do you have any idea just how many people do exactly that? Work in retail or some other low paying job because it's the best they can do or it's the only job they can get ... that that job IS what helps pay the rent, utilities, puts food on the table, etc. I've known college graduates ending up working in a store because that's the only job they could get. I myself have been through the working in retail, having a roommate, living on eggs and pasta with margarine cause I couldn't even afford tomato sauce and struggling to make ends meet. Why? I had no choice. I had gone from being homeless - having been kicked out of my house to taking the first job I could get to get me off the street. I'm not a college graduate, I am a high school graduate. I did end up working for many years as a legal secretary before I became disabled. Going from a legal secretary salary to SSDI has been like going back in time money wise. I guess the point is anything can happen to any one of us at any time, so don't assume that a degree or anything else can prevent you from ending up in a position of being poor or the working poor. W
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
In a message dated 12/7/2004 6:16:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: And why aren't they going to school or doing something to "improve" themselves so they can find a career? Probably because they're not working at Wal-Mart OR McDonalds; they're working at Wal-Mart AND McDonalds, and probably another part time job as well, all without health benefits. IMHO, you've asked the right question but come up with the wrong answer. Sure, there are some people who get to be adults without having acquired much of an education, any saleable skills, a work habit, or decent work ethics, and who pull themselves up by the bootstraps and remedy one or more of these deficiencies. But, for the vast majority of people in this category, the very deficiencies create the situation that keeps them from getting out of the rut. In atragic but very real sense, it's just too late. The die is cast, so to speak. Many are barely employable at the McDonalds' jobs -- and don't last long if they get them. It's not at all that they're too busy holding down two menial, low-paying, no-benefit jobs and therefore don't have the time or energy for -- as you say -- "going to school or doing something to 'improve' themselves so they can find a career." I don't mean to be insulting, but this is the Marie Antoinette syndrome -- when told that people were starving -- had no bread to eat -- she (supposedly) said something to the effect that there were so many elegant little bakeries in Paris and we should just "let them eat cake." As an employer, I can give you lots of examples from first hand experience. A syndrome that's been played out for me often enough to see the pattern, and that I know from conversations with my colleagues,is that I hire someone who's in the above rut to do something like clean the hallways, take out the trash, maybe act as a helper-gofer for the more skilled workers. Rather than take the opportunity for what it is, maybe try to acquire skills "on the job," what I get is resentment that so-and-so (a skilled carpenter, plumber, painter, etc who gets to work on time every day) is making more money, or doesn't have to do the dirty jobs, or the like. Next thing I know, there's absenteeism -- each time with a good excuse but after a while all the good excuses coalesce into a big bad excuse. Even the people who are "pros" at getting people into the workforce have only limited success -- and are thrilled when they do succeed. I see this constantly at the thrift tore across from my office where I (naturally) get to know everybody. In the past year alone, I hiredfour workers from there, part time (on their days off at the store). I think (hope, pray)the current person will "make it" and eventually I'll be able to hire him full time. The other three worked for a few days then disappeared -- both from me and from the store (well, one still works for the store). That's batting 25%. This is a serious social problem. It can't be answered by someone who made the sacrifices to get an education or acquire skills and a work ethic saying that anybody can do it. For some, it's too late. I believe we have to focus on the emerging generation -- so the kids in families with adults in this group don't follow in their parents' footsteps. And this isn't easy, either, because it would be wrong to usurp parental rights, too, or to disgrace parents in the eyes of their children. Al Krigman(Left of Ivan Groznyj)
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
In a message dated 12/7/2004 12:47:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It has been proven that unions keep the general wage rates up in an area. Citation please: OMB, CBO, Federal Reserve PhDs currently employed by labor councils, liberal think tanks, and munchkin former Cabinet members may be considered. Ciao, Craig
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....Unions Right To Work
In a message dated 12/7/2004 12:49:11 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: that's why you are a civil litigator, and not a labor law attorney. The Easter EggMan shows his dark side. If he was a "labor lawyer" how would you determine his value to society, by which side of the table he sat at? I am a member of the IBT; is there anyone on this list who is a former or current dues paying member of a labor union that is nationally affiliated? Ciao, Craig
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....Unions Right To Work
At 07:34 PM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am a member of the IBT; is there anyone on this list who is a former or current dues paying member of a labor union that is nationally affiliated? Actually, I was a member of the Communications Workers of America 3xx (I forget which, it was a while ago). -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 18:57:43 EST This is a serious social problem. It can't be answered by someone who made the sacrifices to get an education or acquire skills and a work ethic saying that anybody can do it. For some, it's too late. I believe we have to focus on the emerging generation -- so the kids in families with adults in this group don't follow in their parents' footsteps. And this isn't easy, either, because it would be wrong to usurp parental rights, too, or to disgrace parents in the eyes of their children. I've seen a *very* strong instinct for parents to raise their children the way they were raised. This is ameliorated by having two or more adults cooperate in raising a child; common sense and experience have a chance of over-riding one parent's instincts when another parent is there to say, Why on earth would you do that! The kid also is exposed to more role models, and so has a better chance to choose a path that will work well for him or her. So, maybe being an involved god-parent is one way to help. Not preaching and criticizing, but baby sitting, helping cook meals, buying birthday gifts, asking, What happened today? How are you going to handle that? Can I help? and just being there to bounce ideas off of, and to talk about your own experiences. It's hard to imagine a parent turning down that sort of help. I wish I could say that I do this. I'm a somewhat involved god-parent for two little kids, but they aren't in the at risk group we're talking about. This is just an idea that popped into my head when I read Al's post. I'm not sure how I'd go about getting adopted into a family in this sort of role. Rather than take the opportunity for what it is, maybe try to acquire skills on the job, what I get is resentment that so-and-so (a skilled carpenter, plumber, painter, etc who gets to work on time every day) is making more money, or doesn't have to do the dirty jobs, or the like. I heard an interview with someone working to help underclass kids get jobs. He said that one common problem is that a young man would look around and see that he had to clean up and get lunch for everyone, and he'd refuse to be anyone's servant, and quit. The owner would be hurt and confused, and say, But everyone here started off by cleaning up and running errands. I started off by cleaning up and running errands. I was trying to give him a chance. So, it's important to explain the career path, so the person knows what they can achieve and has some idea of what they need to do to achieve it. I don't mean to be insulting, but this is the Marie Antoinette syndrome -- when told that people were starving -- had no bread to eat -- she (supposedly) said something to the effect that there were so many elegant little bakeries in Paris and we should just let them eat cake. http://www.yaelf.com/aueFAQ/mifletmeatcake.shtml The French is _Qu'ils mangent de la brioche_ (not _gateau_ as one might expect). And Queen Marie-Antoinette did *not* say this. (When famine struck Paris, she actually took an active role in relieving it.) Jean-Jacques Rousseau attributed the words to a great princess in book 6 of his _Confessions_. _Confessions_ was published posthumously, but book 6 was written 2 or 3 years before Marie-Antoinette arrived in France in 1770. John Wexler writes: French law obliged bakers to sell certain standard varieties of loaf at fixed weights and prices. (It still does, which explains why the most expensive patisserie will sell you a baguette for the same price as a supermarket.) At the time when this quotation originated, the law also obliged the baker to sell a fancier loaf for the price of the cheap one when the cheap ones were all gone. This was to forestall the obvious trick of baking just a few standard loaves, so that one could make more profit by using the rest of the flour for price-unregulated loaves. So whoever it was who said _Qu'ils mangent de la brioche_, she (or he) was not being wholly flippant. The idea was that the bread shortage could be alleviated if the law was enforced against profiteering bakers. I have seen this explanation quoted in defence of Marie Antoinette. It seems a pity, after all that, if she didn't say it. Yet another long post by --- Chip You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....Unions Right To Work
Officer with the United Steel Workers Union (Financia Sec, Bargaining Unit Charperson and Trustee (1992-1998), now with the American Federation of Teachers (PFT Local 6, Phila) Bruce Haskin - Original Message - From: Ben [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:06 PM Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes Unions Right To Work At 07:34 PM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am a member of the IBT; is there anyone on this list who is a former or current dues paying member of a labor union that is nationally affiliated? Actually, I was a member of the Communications Workers of America 3xx (I forget which, it was a while ago). -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
RE: [UC] striking at strikes ....Unions Right To Work
Secretarial unions at CCP and Temple. Penn pays at a lower rate than the above. Don't even talk about Drexel. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bruce and Cynthia Haskin Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:31 PM To: Ben; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes Unions Right To Work Officer with the United Steel Workers Union (Financia Sec, Bargaining Unit Charperson and Trustee (1992-1998), now with the American Federation of Teachers (PFT Local 6, Phila) Bruce Haskin - Original Message - From: Ben [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 8:06 PM Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes Unions Right To Work At 07:34 PM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am a member of the IBT; is there anyone on this list who is a former or current dues paying member of a labor union that is nationally affiliated? Actually, I was a member of the Communications Workers of America 3xx (I forget which, it was a while ago). -Ben You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named UnivCity. To unsubscribe or for archive information, see http://www.purple.com/list.html.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....Unions Right To Work
NCFLL (AFGE) # 630 In a message dated 12/7/04 8:20:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 07:34 PM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am a member of the IBT; is there anyone on this list who is a former or current dues paying member of a labor union that is nationally affiliated?
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....
Union Wage Spillover Effects Unions are likely to raise the wages of their members above market levels, and create the union-nonunion wage differential. *The observed differential is between 10-25%. *The observed differential doesn't fully tell us the correct story, because of a variety of factors we need to control for: -Union and non-union workers are not otherwise identical, they may differ by age or education or other factors that affect wages. -Unions may affect productivity of their workers (up or down), and we need to control for this. -Unions will affect the wages in their own industry, but also wages in other industries that they are being compared to ?the spillover effects. First, the union-nonunion differential is affected by the threat effect. *Non-union firms may be forced to keep wages higher to keep workers from either leaving to go to the union firms within their industry, or to keep them from organizing in a union. http://www.econ.uregina.ca/king/econ381-2002/notes/381-200230-section%2011%20unions.htm Unions protect the well-being of both union and nonunion workers . Unions have fought for shorter work weeks, safer working conditions, more holidays (such as labor day), and improved health care benefits and retirement programs, that have benefited all workers in the economy. http://amosweb.com/cgi-bin/pdg.pl?fcd=dspterm=An+Altogether+Look+at+UNIONS In a message dated 12/7/04 8:15:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Citation please: OMB, CBO, Federal Reserve PhDs currently employed by labor councils, liberal think tanks, and munchkin former Cabinet members may be considered. Ciao, Craig In a message dated 12/7/2004 12:47:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It has been proven that unions keep the general wage rates up in an area.
Re: [UC] striking at strikes ....Unions Right To Work
Local 668 SEIU -Mark-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Dec 7, 2004 11:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [UC] striking at strikes Unions Right To Work NCFLL (AFGE) # 630In a message dated 12/7/04 8:20:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 07:34 PM 12/7/2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I am a member of the IBT; is there anyone on this list who is a former orcurrent dues paying member of a labor union that is nationally affiliated? You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see .
