It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nevada casino workers launch hunger strike after employer refuses to improve conditions

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Nevada casino workers launch hunger strike after employer refuses to improve conditions
By Jessica Pieklo
Friday, April 20, 2012 17:02 EDT -- The Raw Story


Casino workers in Las Vegas are supporting a hunger strike that is part of a union campaign against a Las Vegas based owner named Stations Casinos.

Stations owns 18 different casinos in Las Vegas (none are on "The Strip").

This has been dragging on for a long time. and there are labor disputes past and present.


“I’m fasting and praying to God that this company will be benevolent enough to see that the company is its workers,” cocktail waitress Dawn Vaseur said, pushing back tears. Vaseur, one of thirteen Station Casinos workers on a week-long hunger strike, is literally starving to protest the working conditions and the union-busting campaign taking place just outside the Las Vegas Strip.

Station Casinos, the third-largest private employer in the metro area, operates 18 casinos in Las Vegas which are largely off the tourist-heavy Strip and designed to cater to locals. Unlike the casinos on the Strip, Station Casinos’ 12,000 employees are without union cards, or the benefits they bring — in part because the company has engaged in one of the most staunch anti-union campaigns in the country. “We are the company. We’ve sacrificed our time and our bodies to make this company billions but they refuse to respect us,” Vaseur said.

Vaseur, her co-workers and five other union members launched a week-long Fasting with Faith campaign yesterday to draw attention to what has become the nastiest union battle in Nevada history. They plan to go without food until April 23 and have attracted the attention of progressive lawmakers like John A. Perez, speaker of the California Assembly, who joined the protestors and their supporters Thursday in a show of solidarity for a workforce that is largely invisible even in an economy dominated by the service sector.


Long story, but it looks like the main staging area is at Palace Station Casino on Sahara Ave and I-15 highway.
A side street west of the hotel is partially blocked off to protect the protesters from traffic.

There are tents up on the sidewalk.

Any Stations employees here ?

We need some views.

I don't work for the casinos myself.

But I have friends that do (some at Stations !!)

"We Luff are Jubs".




posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


I do know someone who dealt cards at the Station. Said it was the worst place he ever worked. The women need to do the Sex strike like they did in Columbia to get that road built.



posted on Apr, 20 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
I find myself at a crossroads with threads like this.

On the one hand, I understand that the expected, politically correct response is to immediately and unquestioningly sympathise with the workers, who are obviously being exploited by sociopathic corporate assholes.

On the other hand, I really can't help but reflexively view a hunger strike as being the ultimate expression of victimhood and non-sovereignty, in all honesty.

Common sense would tend to dictate to me, that these people should leave this environment, if it is so detrimental to them, band together, and attempt to create their own scenario which is more beneficial to them.

I know that the immediate, Marxist response to that would likely be that they can't do that, because they supposedly have no choice, for whatever reason. This is my central problem with the usual interpretation of Marxism. It automatically assumes that the employer, manager, or capitalist is the person holding all the cards, and that workers are nothing but helpless victims with zero options.

I am not necessarily advocating a non-Leftist solution, here; quite the contrary, in fact. Let these people form their co-operative, where they are able to democratically determine what their own vision of fair and non-exploitative treatment is.

So one response is to shed tears for these people in the moment. (Give a man a fish and feed him for a day)

Another response is, while honouring and acknowledging their suffering, to encourage them to remember and assert their own sovereignty, leave the current abusive situation, and rather than starving and abusing themselves, and hoping (most likely unsuccessfully) that they will shame what is most likely a psychopathic employer into improving their conditions, working together to develop their own scenario where their rights are maintained, recognised, and respected. (Teach a man to fish, and he eats both today, and forever after)
edit on 20-4-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


The problem is that not all employees of all 18 casinos are in a union.

And there are more than one union present in the casinos.

The large union is the Culinary Union.

They have lots of different jobs in their ranks.

It's difficult to get support from other workers.

That's why the grievances are plentiful.

This current protest is only getting a few dozen up to 100 people in the "staging" area outside.

Just Palace Station casino alone has thousands of employees.

We need some direct opinions from employees.

I don't know if any are ATS members ?

The few people I know that work there are not members here.



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
It's difficult to get support from other workers.

That's why the grievances are plentiful.

This current protest is only getting a few dozen up to 100 people in the "staging" area outside.

Just Palace Station casino alone has thousands of employees.


This is always the problem, xuenchen. Human complacency is eternal and epidemic, even among those who are suffering. You can't implement a collective solution to these problems, unless you first have a willing collective response; and individuals alone, will be unable to do much.



posted on Apr, 21 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 





I know that the immediate, Marxist response to that would likely be that they can't do that, because they supposedly have no choice, for whatever reason. This is my central problem with the usual interpretation of Marxism. It automatically assumes that the employer, manager, or capitalist is the person holding all the cards, and that workers are nothing but helpless victims with zero options.


I'm no Marxist (in fact i think both sides of this argument are full of it as their argument require infinite resources and there is simply no such thing), but I think you oversimplify their position. In order for these workers to band together to perhaps start their own casino they would need enormous amounts of capital. Where are they going to get that? They could go get another job, but they need to be is a position to do so. That would mean they need some degree of financial independence. I don't know if you've ever been to Vegas, but the pay isn't great and the living expenses aren't low. If you have kids your lot is even worse. So, if they don't have enough capital, and they don't have the financial independence to leave their job then they are stuck there. It's either work or starve for many people. There really aren't many choices. I don't agree with a hunger strike, a general strike would make more sense.


edit on 21-4-2012 by antonia because: added something




top topics
 
2

log in

join