It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by freedomwv
reply to post by ProfessorChaos
I read their statement which you provided a link to and it does not really mention anything about Affordable health care act as a reason for their split from the AFL-CIO.
The ILWU has always had a rocking relationship with all unions due to their history as a very hard as nails independent union(my family has a long history of union activity so I know a little about the ILWU). This time it appears they do not feel they have gotten enough support from the AFL-CIO so they cut ties.
It has nothing to do with the affordable health care act from what I can see.edit on 2-9-2013 by freedomwv because: (no reason given)
President Obama ran on a platform that he would not tax medical plans and at the 2009 AFL-CIO Convention, you stated that labor would not stand for a tax on our benefits. Yet the Federation later lobbied affiliates to support a bill that taxed our health care plans.
Originally posted by onequestion
This country, the world and its people are #ed.
Most of us or them deserve it to be honest, the level of stupidity that is running rampant in this place is out of control.
Everyone in America is an asshole now. How and why?
It took 2 generations for this place to fall apart i wonder what happened.
we had to fend off attacks from other national affiliates, who actively tried to undermine our contract struggle by filing legal claims and walking through our picket lines protesting the ten-day employer lockout. And this was at a time when the Bush Administration had openly threatened to militarize the ports and even shoot some of us to secure the ports for the coming war in Iraq. Even after this passed, six years later, when the longshore contract reopened in 2008, one of these national affiliates filed ULP charges against the ILWU to try again to sabotage our bargaining.
Since then, we have seen a growing surge of attacks from various affiliates. A particularly outrageous raid occurred in 2011, when one affiliate slipped in to longshore jobs at the new EGT grain facility in the Port of Longview, Washington, and then walked through ILWU picket lines for six months until we were able to secure this critical longshore jurisdiction. Your office added insult to injury by issuing a directive to the Oregon State Federation to rescind its support of the ILWU fight at EGT, which threatened to be the first marine terminal on the West Coast to go non-ILWU.
The attacks by affiliates against the ILWU have only increased. One affiliate has filed a string of ULP charges as well as an Article XX charge that not only interfere with ILWU contractual rights at specific ports; the ULP charges also are attempting to dismantle core jurisdictional provisions in our Longshore Contract for the entire West Coast. In Los Angeles and Oakland, another affiliate is imposing internal union fines against dual union members for the “crime” of taking a job as a longshoreman — the stated purpose of the fines being to prevent the ILWU from filling new waterfront jobs that replace traditional longshore work due to new technologies. In Oakland and Tacoma, another affiliate is trying to use a recent NLRB ruling against one of our employers to take over ILWU jobs with some of our other employers. Throughout the Pacific Northwest, we are daily seeing still other affiliates blatantly cross the picket lines of ILWU members who have been locked out for months by the regional grain industry. And just this week, some of the Building Trades affiliates have displaced ILWU workers in the loading of barges at Terminal 46 in Seattle where longshoremen have done this work for generations. They also had the gall to file several ULP charges against us for picketing at our own marine terminal. These multi-state attacks against the ILWU are being coordinated in large part by a law firm with close ties to the Federation.
Originally posted by ProfessorChaos
I hope that this is simply the tip of the iceberg as to what is coming down the line with regard to these Union thugs and their unwavering support for progressive policies that harm the working man.
I was a member of a union years ago, and there are just as many fat cats in the unions as there are in the high-rise offices of corporate America.
What say you ATS?
Originally posted by MyHappyDogShiner
Kind of like my cousin who owns a business, who TRIED to take care of his employees and did for many years, who can no longer provide insurance for them because he can no longer afford it.
It's sad how far we are being dragged down in this country, and somehow most people seem to think it's for some "good" reason somehow.
Capitalism, a nice way of saying "To capitalize upon or from", which is really nothing but a thinly disguised term for "Taking Advantage".
Originally posted by MyHappyDogShiner
reply to post by SubTruth
I know it's not about free markets, or free market economics. It's about being a member of the club wearing big boy pans, and if you can't afford big boy pants, you can't participate.
In a nutshell, kinda sideways, anyway...
The issues are so convoluted and intertwined, that even if one were to take the time to try to explain it, almost nobody has the capacity to comprehend it. It's so twisted it's simple...