Ridin’ with Biden

As for Amazon.....the same old BS I've heard from literally every, single employer I've ever run an organizing campaign against.....the old "you won't be able to negotiate directly with your employer anymore". Yeah, dumb ass......that's the point; we'll negotiate collectively. Bunch of bullS***....with a LARGE, BOLD "S".
And let's be honest, how much "negotiating power" does your average non-union worker have with their employer? I don't even know who the people are that approve my raises. I can plead my case with my boss and my director, but even they have to get HR's approval, and that's hidden away deep in a whole other building.
 
Honestly just open it up to everyone at this point. The demand is more than there and can’t let a single drop go to waste.
 
And let's be honest, how much "negotiating power" does your average non-union worker have with their employer? I don't even know who the people are that approve my raises. I can plead my case with my boss and my director, but even they have to get HR's approval, and that's hidden away deep in a whole other building.

How about this for an answer? "None".

For those of you who are non-union, how many have heard this one before "Oh, I think you deserve a raise and if it was up to me, you'd get it" or any other number of excuses? Ask for a meeting with the person who actually CAN make that decision and let me know how that works out for you. :whatever:

Negotiating a good contract can be a difficult, protracted, and messy process, but if you are organized within your bargaining group, you can flex your collective muscle. We had to engage in a few strikes and other actions, but when the dust settled, we got, to name just a few things:

Guaranteed COLAs and within range pay increases (retroactively)
Enforceable health and safety provisions and work rules
Binding grievance procedures
Enhanced leaves
Mandatory reclassification reviews

And you know what else? The employer can't change those provisions even after the contract expired due to "status quo" regulations.

This is NOT BS, you will be better off if you are unionized. There's just no doubt about it.

One of our actions was to call a strike the day of the Chancellor's Inauguration. The keynote speaker, Leon Panetta, refused to cross the picket line. I was the local president at the time and guess who got a meeting with the Chancellor? Me. This was after several previous failed attempts to meet with her because "it was an HR issue and she couldn't get involved." Ha ha. She never liked me much after that one. LOL.
 
Why not make federal union that american employees can turn to for help if their employer doesn't have a union? Like a federal healthcare option.
 
Why not make federal union that american employees can turn to for help if their employer doesn't have a union? Like a federal healthcare option.

The bottom line is that a union's strength comes directly from the membership and there's no way to get around that. A union's gains at the bargaining table are directly correlated to how strong their membership is. At the University of California, for example, the nurse's union (CNA) is the 800 pound gorilla in the room and they consistently get better pay raises and protections than any other group. You want to screw with the nurses? Try running your hospital without them and call me in the morning.

That being said, I'm sure there could be some sort of federal support for people who are having work related issues, but I don't like the odds of the federal government lining up directly against employers.
 
I’m not really familiar with unions. Are the pay increases negotiated by the union based on performance? How do the pay increases work?
 
I’m not really familiar with unions. Are the pay increases negotiated by the union based on performance? How do the pay increases work?

It depends. The contract is basically anything the employer agrees to. The more pressure you put on them, the more you can get.

We had ranges for various classifications and steps within those ranges. Management wanted the ranges, but no steps and "management discretion" to decide on which employees got how much, if any, for their within range increases. The way is ended up was we kept our steps (2.5% per half step and the range was usually 5 steps). If you got a satisfactory performance eval, you got at least a half step. If you got unsatisfactory, you could file a grievance and take it to outside, binding arbitration. Cost of living adjustments (COLAs) were guaranteed and negotiated as part of the contract. COLAs moved the ranges and people up. We called it "the tides that lifts all boats).

Other provisions were generally negotiated to comport with best practices of other bargaining units and sometimes we would get a bit more; which allowed other bargaining units to bring themselves up to our standards. One thing we got was to combine bargaining of the technical (TX) and research staff (RX) we represented at a single table and lined up contract expiration of these units. This essentially allowed us control of the research function of the university; a nice lever for pressure. Lab assistants were in the TX unit and staff research associates were in the RX unit. That basically covered laboratory staffing with the exception of the Principle Investigator (PI) who ran the lab.
 


This is a big deal -- and while progressives may scoff at it, it says a lot about having competent leadership.

Trump would've blown up any opportunity like the Merck/J&J deal and not exercised the options for more doses from Pfizer and Moderna.
 
While I am not a fan, it does not say good things about Manchin given who he voted for Trump's positions.
It doesn't at all. Manchin's reasons are all wrong on this topic. But you take the victories where they come. Tanden was an elitist warmongering wall-street stooge. Whatever Manchin might've gained pales in comparison to blocking someone like her.
 
Not going to make a drops role in the bucket of difference. They’ll find some other competent person who will carry out the exact same policies.

Snore.......
There's the off chance that it sends the message: do better.

I mean, probably not, but one can hope.
 
And for those of you that want to continue to frame this as being about tweets.

Stop it: What the Neera Tanden affair reveals about the Washington DC swamp | David Sirota

The senators objecting to her made it about tweets.

Collins said Tanden isnt transparent because she deleted tweets. The tweets in question. She called Collins "the worst" and she tweeted that Collins treatment of Dr. Ford should haunt Susan Collins, she called McConnell "Moscow Mitch" and Voldemort, and said vampires have more heart than Cruz. She called out the GOP supporting Roy Moore.

All true and reasonable sentiments.

Manchin says he can't support her because she made mean tweets directed at his colleagues Bernie, Mitch and others.

Its just more of their BS "unity" narrative. There opposition to her amounts to school kids whining because meanie Neera hurt their feelings.
 
Last edited:
There's the off chance that it sends the message: do better.

I mean, probably not, but one can hope.

Oh yay. You, of all people, are saying there's a chance Biden picks someone "better"......this is about carrying out Biden's policies. Nothing more or nothing less....

I'm not adept or interested in crawling inside someone's head, but this sounded like it turned personal and that's not something we should expect from adults. I don't give a rat's ass about Tanden and her replacement isn't going to move the needle in any way, shape or form. Her replacement will be cut from the same cloth; a competent, seasoned bureaucrat, but probably one who played good girl (most likely will be a woman of color IMO) and didn't offend poor Joe, Bernie, Mitch, etc.

This was, in fact, about her public facing tweets and the poor boys in the club didn't like it. Waaaahhhhh. She would have done the job expected of her and so will the next person. Next nominee please.
 
This is a big deal -- and while progressives may scoff at it, it says a lot about having competent leadership.

Trump would've blown up any opportunity like the Merck/J&J deal and not exercised the options for more doses from Pfizer and Moderna.

Not trying to start something here, but what does that even mean? Most progressives aren’t going out of their way to criticize Biden for legitimate accomplishments. I have criticized things he’s done, but I voted for him because he would be a huge improvement when it came to COVID response, and at least a moderate improvement on social issues, infrastructure, etc. No one is criticizing his response to Coronavirus outside the relief bill because his response has been appropriate, and it’s kind of insulting to insinuate progressives would.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"