Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
So if your employer fired you for voting Republican that would be fine by you and your family?
Needless to say, private sector unions that pool worker bargaining power are anathema to today’s suave metropolitan successors to the slave-owning plantocracy. The whole point of the Southern model of economic development is to create a non-union region from Virginia to Texas, to which companies can be induced to move from states with unionized workforces. Besides, unions engage in collective bargaining, in violation of the Southern ideal of employer-worker relations, in which the master gives orders and the fearful worker obeys without question.
This is accurate.
Hostility to unionism post 1970 is universal in America (thanks, neolibz), not just in the South. The culture change in workspaces from happiness to fear is also, coincidentally, universal
A relentless march towards deregulation that has been integral to the formation and nature of the American state, casualization of work, and the advent of human resources management as a temporary alternative worker's rights structure all contributed far more to anti-unionism and the philosophy of governing/employing through fear much more than some uniquely Southern culture.
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
oh my goddddd this paper i'm supposed to summarize is so bad
gels with bands that are still faintly visible where there shouldn't be bands, one sentence descriptions of figures, claims about figures that I can't puzzle out how their figures say what they claim they say
im torn between trying to actually understand everything they did, and just putting the images in my presentation and describing what they claim to have gotten
Do a metasummary of terrible papers.
Also the guy I spoke to is interviewing another person and I'll know a bit after next week and I am almost having a heart attack from anxiety.
Hey so are you still on for coming over to my neck of the woods in a few weeks?
can you briefly explain why exports are a thing that people focus on
like, we need to increase our exports! growing trade imbalance! yadda yadda
it seems like exports would be a symptom of a healthy and productive economy not necessarily a driver. ie. everyone is producing enough for everyone so more and more of the excess starts getting sent abroad for currency.
but i dont really know shit about this stuff so please enlighten or link articles if you have any
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
You don't have to reassure me that you're fine with this.
I know you are.
But you said flat out that the goal of this being to create a fearful environment for employees in which they cannot complain and hold no cards is, and I quote: "Dumb"
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
So if your employer fired you for voting Republican that would be fine by you and your family?
I would obviously be upset!
I don't know if that's legal, but I suspect it's not the same as being fired for being black.
So, while I would be very upset I would not feel it was a travesty that needed a government solution.
Jakobagger you are changing your avatar with sufficient frequency that you are endangering your status as "real person" and drifting towards "background" status.
okay, folks, I need a good domain name for my election data site
obviously it can't be in use already
electiondataminer.com is free
Ah, I completely understand why you think this would work, but the goal here, at least initially, is not to do any heavy-duty statistical work with the electoral data, but simply have it all together in one place for ease of accessibility. There really isn't any place where you can find historical election information except Wikipedia to some extent, and even then it's usually qualitative analysis of the results rather than the actual outcome in each state/district.
ahhhh!
electionhistorydata.com is free
so is historicelectiondata.com
and electoralhistory.com
Hmm. I'm liking the first one the most. I still have a soft spot for calling the site the Election Compendium, but I realize that's not going to work.
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
While an employer should certainly have the right to end a term of employment, it shouldn't be over ANYTHING.
Right to work is bullshit and helps workers not at all.
The NLRB and labor laws that coopt the language of worker's rights are unimaginably ineffective at remedying legitimate grievances. The idea that laws on the books are actually being regulated or enforced in any spirit is demonstrably empirically false
There is literally no recourse for the American worker anymore. Thinking there's any sort of power symmetry between the worker and management is ... unbelievably naive
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
0
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
i don't have a problem with people being fired at will
what i have a problem with is that people can be fired at will without sufficient income/food/health support to hold them up while they look for a new job. but once we get a good social safety net going in the usa i would be perfectly fine with axing all unions and the minimum wage.
"I'm fine with this situation that we already have, provided there is this other situation that will never happen in place to mitigate it."
Is not a really useful sentiment.
i wasn't aware that sentiments were ever useful
and if you think unionizing the south is more likely than a federally mandated social safety net, well
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
+1
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
i don't have a problem with people being fired at will
what i have a problem with is that people can be fired at will without sufficient income/food/health support to hold them up while they look for a new job. but once we get a good social safety net going in the usa i would be perfectly fine with axing all unions and the minimum wage.
If I could secure the American worker by purging all unions I would do so.
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
i don't have a problem with people being fired at will
what i have a problem with is that people can be fired at will without sufficient income/food/health support to hold them up while they look for a new job. but once we get a good social safety net going in the usa i would be perfectly fine with axing all unions and the minimum wage.
"I'm fine with this situation that we already have, provided there is this other situation that will never happen in place to mitigate it."
Again, the entire point is to create a culture of fear so that workers feel lucky that they have a job at all. This makes notions such as fringe benefits or overtime pay laugh-worthy as parameters of discourse
Eliminating deadweight loss with no regard for the human element is the natural goal of late capitalism, etc etc
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
Needless to say, private sector unions that pool worker bargaining power are anathema to today’s suave metropolitan successors to the slave-owning plantocracy. The whole point of the Southern model of economic development is to create a non-union region from Virginia to Texas, to which companies can be induced to move from states with unionized workforces. Besides, unions engage in collective bargaining, in violation of the Southern ideal of employer-worker relations, in which the master gives orders and the fearful worker obeys without question.
This is accurate.
Hostility to unionism post 1970 is universal in America (thanks, neolibz), not just in the South. The culture change in workspaces from happiness to fear is also, coincidentally, universal
A relentless march towards deregulation that has been integral to the formation and nature of the American state, casualization of work, and the advent of human resources management as a temporary alternative worker's rights structure all contributed far more to anti-unionism and the philosophy of governing/employing through fear much more than some uniquely Southern culture.
Hostility to unionism and the prevalence of 'right to fire at will' is much greater in the south.
Our politicians constantly court low-paying shit job companies to set up shop here and then spin it back to the public as job creation.
It was not like this on the west coast at all, at any point when I lived in NorCal, SoCal, or Washington.
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
While an employer should certainly have the right to end a term of employment, it shouldn't be over ANYTHING.
Right to work is bullshit and helps workers not at all.
But why not? I don't understand the logic here. It's my business. I don't like you anymore. So I don't want to pay you. Get out of my store!
Why should the government be able to stop me from doing that?
0
Options
SarksusATTACK AND DETHRONE GODRegistered Userregular
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
So if your employer fired you for voting Republican that would be fine by you and your family?
I would obviously be upset!
I don't know if that's legal, but I suspect it's not the same as being fired for being black.
So, while I would be very upset I would not feel it was a travesty that needed a government solution.
Well you should.
It is an example of an unbalanced power dynamic allowing someone to take advantage of people with few options.
It is basically a case study in why we need government.
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
While an employer should certainly have the right to end a term of employment, it shouldn't be over ANYTHING.
Right to work is bullshit and helps workers not at all.
But why not? I don't understand the logic here. It's my business. I don't like you anymore. So I don't want to pay you. Get out of my store!
Why should the government be able to stop me from doing that?
That isn't the problem
The problem is that it's a huge giant gaping loophole for firing minorities, pregnant women and people of a religion you don't like.
Psn:wazukki
0
Options
ShivahnUnaware of her barrel shifter privilegeWestern coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderatormod
oh my goddddd this paper i'm supposed to summarize is so bad
gels with bands that are still faintly visible where there shouldn't be bands, one sentence descriptions of figures, claims about figures that I can't puzzle out how their figures say what they claim they say
im torn between trying to actually understand everything they did, and just putting the images in my presentation and describing what they claim to have gotten
Do a metasummary of terrible papers.
Also the guy I spoke to is interviewing another person and I'll know a bit after next week and I am almost having a heart attack from anxiety.
Hey so are you still on for coming over to my neck of the woods in a few weeks?
Yep! I mean I can't really back out after they paid for everything anyway :P
But also backup plans are necessary because neither is a sure thing.
+1
Options
Sir Landsharkresting shark faceRegistered Userregular
leaving work. if anyone wants to answer my question please @ me so i dont miss it!
Please consider the environment before printing this post.
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
While an employer should certainly have the right to end a term of employment, it shouldn't be over ANYTHING.
Right to work is bullshit and helps workers not at all.
But why not? I don't understand the logic here. It's my business. I don't like you anymore. So I don't want to pay you. Get out of my store!
Why should the government be able to stop me from doing that?
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
While an employer should certainly have the right to end a term of employment, it shouldn't be over ANYTHING.
Right to work is bullshit and helps workers not at all.
But why not? I don't understand the logic here. It's my business. I don't like you anymore. So I don't want to pay you. Get out of my store!
Why should the government be able to stop me from doing that?
I think spool has it right. I mean, the last time we saw a huge decline in organized labor and massive deregulation of the workplace was 1920-1929, and remember how awesome that worked out?
Spool I'm certain that you are the only person in chat who doesn't know that "right to work state" is a political sleaze euphemism for "no employee rights, you can be fired at will."
Funny how all the southern states are fire at will.
You still get unemployment benefits if you're fired without cause.
I don't have a lot of problem with the idea that an employer can tell people he doesn't want them working in his business anymore. It's his business!
Moreover, I don't have a problem with laws that prevent a union from locking out workers who don't pay dues.
While an employer should certainly have the right to end a term of employment, it shouldn't be over ANYTHING.
Right to work is bullshit and helps workers not at all.
But why not? I don't understand the logic here. It's my business. I don't like you anymore. So I don't want to pay you. Get out of my store!
Why should the government be able to stop me from doing that?
That isn't the problem
The problem is that it's a huge giant gaping loophole for firing minorities, pregnant women and people of a religion you don't like.
Plus, maybe I am naive, but "I don't like this employee" is a really bad reason to fire someone. "This employee doesn't do their job well" is an entirely different matter
Being forced to cowtow to the (non work) opinions of your superiors in spite of doing an otherwise good job is an unfortunate symptom of the current at-will employment state
Posts
So if your employer fired you for voting Republican that would be fine by you and your family?
Hostility to unionism post 1970 is universal in America (thanks, neolibz), not just in the South. The culture change in workspaces from happiness to fear is also, coincidentally, universal
A relentless march towards deregulation that has been integral to the formation and nature of the American state, casualization of work, and the advent of human resources management as a temporary alternative worker's rights structure all contributed far more to anti-unionism and the philosophy of governing/employing through fear much more than some uniquely Southern culture.
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
Hey so are you still on for coming over to my neck of the woods in a few weeks?
I see you've changed your beak to something more aesthetically pleasing for the mortals, S'karsus. Good, good....
I've taken the liberty of saving a picture of your previous form for the Labyrinth of Souls Christmas party.
can you briefly explain why exports are a thing that people focus on
like, we need to increase our exports! growing trade imbalance! yadda yadda
it seems like exports would be a symptom of a healthy and productive economy not necessarily a driver. ie. everyone is producing enough for everyone so more and more of the excess starts getting sent abroad for currency.
but i dont really know shit about this stuff so please enlighten or link articles if you have any
You don't have to reassure me that you're fine with this.
I know you are.
But you said flat out that the goal of this being to create a fearful environment for employees in which they cannot complain and hold no cards is, and I quote: "Dumb"
I was merely pointing out how wrong you are.
Because, you are!
I would obviously be upset!
I don't know if that's legal, but I suspect it's not the same as being fired for being black.
So, while I would be very upset I would not feel it was a travesty that needed a government solution.
Hmm. I'm liking the first one the most. I still have a soft spot for calling the site the Election Compendium, but I realize that's not going to work.
While an employer should certainly have the right to end a term of employment, it shouldn't be over ANYTHING.
Right to work is bullshit and helps workers not at all.
There is literally no recourse for the American worker anymore. Thinking there's any sort of power symmetry between the worker and management is ... unbelievably naive
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
i wasn't aware that sentiments were ever useful
and if you think unionizing the south is more likely than a federally mandated social safety net, well
If I could secure the American worker by purging all unions I would do so.
But that's not really realistic.
Well guess what? You're fired
NEXT GEN AAA TITLE
Eliminating deadweight loss with no regard for the human element is the natural goal of late capitalism, etc etc
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
Hostility to unionism and the prevalence of 'right to fire at will' is much greater in the south.
Our politicians constantly court low-paying shit job companies to set up shop here and then spin it back to the public as job creation.
It was not like this on the west coast at all, at any point when I lived in NorCal, SoCal, or Washington.
But why not? I don't understand the logic here. It's my business. I don't like you anymore. So I don't want to pay you. Get out of my store!
Why should the government be able to stop me from doing that?
marketing a new line of foundation and concealer for archers
going to be rich
Well you should.
It is an example of an unbalanced power dynamic allowing someone to take advantage of people with few options.
It is basically a case study in why we need government.
i mad
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
That isn't the problem
The problem is that it's a huge giant gaping loophole for firing minorities, pregnant women and people of a religion you don't like.
Yep! I mean I can't really back out after they paid for everything anyway :P
But also backup plans are necessary because neither is a sure thing.
wat
and when you make a mistake, you issue an Election Erection Correction
Because that's a retarded way to run an economy.
Employers aren't kings.
i have to write a paper about labor law and instead i'm talking about it on these damned forums
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
Plus, maybe I am naive, but "I don't like this employee" is a really bad reason to fire someone. "This employee doesn't do their job well" is an entirely different matter
Being forced to cowtow to the (non work) opinions of your superiors in spite of doing an otherwise good job is an unfortunate symptom of the current at-will employment state