News Is the US Congress Hostage Crisis Over FAA Funding Justified?

  • Thread starter Thread starter turbo
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the ongoing political standoff in the U.S. Congress, primarily involving the GOP's refusal to fund the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the implications of a proposed change to labor voting rules in the airline industry. The GOP claims that the issue is a $16 million annual subsidy for rural air travel, but critics argue that the real cost of the shutdown is projected to be $1.2 billion in lost tax revenue this month alone. The contention revolves around whether airline workers should be allowed to vote on labor issues in a straightforward manner or if uncast votes should count as "no" votes, a practice currently in place that contradicts labor laws in other sectors.The partial FAA shutdown has already resulted in the furlough of 4,000 FAA employees, halted over 200 construction projects, and affected approximately 70,000 private-sector jobs.
turbo
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
3,157
Reaction score
57
The US Congress is again being held up by radicals. Once again, a normally routine procedure is being held up on ideological grounds by the far right. The GOP says that the sticking point is $16M/year in subsidies for air travel to rural communities, but the truth is that we are on track to lose $1.2 Billion this month alone because the GOP has refused to fund the FAA and allow the airlines to collect taxes on air-fare. The sticking point is whether we allow labor in the airlines industry to vote up-or-down on labor issues or whether every uncast vote is counted as a "No" (current practice, contrary to labor law in other sectors). For the sake of killing organized labor in the airline industry, the GOP is willing to forgo $1.2 Billion of revenue this month alone.

Where are the adults in this country? For that matter, where are the adults in the media who are not hammering this travesty night after night on the network news? There have been mentions here and there about the tens of thousands of people put out of work because of the halted projects, but I haven't seen any responsible reporting about the real costs of this shutdown.

On the surface, the partial shutdown of the Federal Aviation Administration is about whether to cut $16 million in air service subsidies, a pretty small amount in this town. Underneath are layers upon layers of political gamesmanship that, at its heart, is about whether Democrats or Republicans get to call the shots in Congress.
The immediate price is high. Already, 4,000 FAA employees have been furloughed, more than 200 construction projects have been halted and an estimated 70,000 other private-sector workers affected. Air traffic controllers and safety inspectors have remained on the job because the agency still has money from another pool of funds to pay them.
The government has been losing about $30 million a day in uncollected airline ticket taxes since the shutdown began on July 23. If it's not resolved until after Congress returns from its August recess in early September, lost revenue will tally about $1.2 billion.

http://news.yahoo.com/more-faa-shutdown-air-subsidies-071241612.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The real issue is that the Democrat controlled congress has just kicked the can for FAA spending since 2007. Why couldn't they resolve it permanently on their own? Now there's debate, actual difference of opinion and... name calling? Why isn't the left being called radical for their desire to hold onto a thin ruling that overturned a century of organized labor relations in the country?

Besides, except for lower ticket prices, has anyone even noticed this shutdown anyhow? Isn't that the kicker? If there was actual on the street impact and travellers were being effected this would be headlines. Unfortunately for the MSM there is no story to benefit their collectivist motives because the story just exposes how the government has 70,000 people on the payroll that are hardly missed.

Also, here's some good reads relevant to your title: here and here.
 
turbo said:
The US Congress is again being held up by radicals. Once again, a normally routine procedure is being held up on ideological grounds by the far right. The GOP says that the sticking point is $16M/year in subsidies for air travel to rural communities, but the truth is that we are on track to lose $1.2 Billion this month alone because the GOP has refused to fund the FAA and allow the airlines to collect taxes on air-fare. The sticking point is whether we allow labor in the airlines industry to vote up-or-down on labor issues or whether every uncast vote is counted as a "No" (current practice, contrary to labor law in other sectors). For the sake of killing organized labor in the airline industry, the GOP is willing to forgo $1.2 Billion of revenue this month alone.

Where are the adults in this country? For that matter, where are the adults in the media who are not hammering this travesty night after night on the network news? There have been mentions here and there about the tens of thousands of people put out of work because of the halted projects, but I haven't seen any responsible reporting about the real costs of this shutdown.

http://news.yahoo.com/more-faa-shutdown-air-subsidies-071241612.html

Your link says the program costs $200 million per year. My guess is this legislation was stalled when John Murtha passed away - Johnstown PA is one of the subsidized locations along with 6 other nearby (of the 12 total) locations including Jamestown NY, Hagerstown, MD, Franklin/Oil City PA, Morgantown WV, Lancaster PA, and Bradford PA. It looks like Harry Reid might have one as well?

Also from your link "A few days ago, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, indicated to Democrats that he'd be willing to accept their extension bill without the subsidy cuts in exchange for concessions on the labor issue, but Democrats refused the offer, Rockefeller said.".

This hardly meets the standard of qualification for your dramatic assertion "The US Congress is again being held up by radicals. Once again, a normally routine procedure is being held up on ideological grounds by the far right." - does it?
 
WhoWee said:
This hardly meets the standard of qualification for your dramatic assertion "The US Congress is again being held up by radicals. Once again, a normally routine procedure is being held up on ideological grounds by the far right." - does it?
Yes, it does. Is it acceptable to trade $1.2 Billion/month in lost tax revenue for the sake of preventing airline labor groups the right to have fair votes regarding collective bargaining? So much for the "fiscal conservatives" that the Republicans claim to be.
 
turbo said:
Yes, it does. Is it acceptable to trade $1.2 Billion/month in lost tax revenue for the sake of preventing airline labor groups the right to have fair votes regarding collective bargaining? So much for the "fiscal conservatives" that the Republicans claim to be.

Is it acceptable to pass a 2,000 plus page healthcare reform Bill (of unknown cost) without allowing time to read the FINAL copy - the real radicals are Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and President Obama - aren't they? These three radicals have our national debt on a $20+Trillion trajectory - don't they - the debt deal only managed to cut $2Trillion of the ADDITIONAL $10Trillion of the radical Pelosi, Reid, and Obama spending.

The Republicans (in your example) wanted the labor issue separated from the funding issue - not a radical concept at all - considering YOU are FOR smaller and more precise Bills.
 
By the way - they already agreed to extend a few hours ago.
http://indiana.onpolitix.com/news/66289/reid-announces-faa-agreement
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are once again changing the subject quite abruptly in order to avoid acknowledging GOP's intransigence and hostage-taking WRT the FAA funding extension. The GOP wanted to force labor in the transportation industry to come up with super-majorities. In other words, in their legislation, if you had 100 workers, and 49 voted to organize, and 48 voted not to, and the other 3 couldn't make it to the ballot box for some reason, those 3 non-votes would count as "no" votes, killing the organization drive 51-49. I live in a state that has town-hall municipal elections, and if every abstention was counted as a "no", NOTHING would ever get approved. No bond issues, no road repairs, no school budgets...nothing. The GOP is dumping money down the sewer to prevent collective bargaining. Is it worth it to you?
 
turbo said:
You are once again changing the subject quite abruptly in order to avoid acknowledging GOP's intransigence and hostage-taking WRT the FAA funding extension. The GOP wanted to force labor in the transportation industry to come up with super-majorities. In other words, in their legislation, if you had 100 workers, and 49 voted to organize, and 48 voted not to, and the other 3 couldn't make it to the ballot box for some reason, those 3 non-votes would count as "no" votes, killing the organization drive 51-49. I live in a state that has town-hall municipal elections, and if every abstention was counted as a "no", NOTHING would ever get approved. No bond issues, no road repairs, no school budgets...nothing. The GOP is dumping money down the sewer to prevent collective bargaining. Is it worth it to you?

51 is a simple majority.

are these ballots secret?
 
WhoWee said:
Is it acceptable to pass a 2,000 plus page healthcare reform Bill (of unknown cost) without allowing time to read the FINAL copy - the real radicals are Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and President Obama - aren't they?
Are they?
 
  • #10
turbo said:
You are once again changing the subject quite abruptly in order to avoid acknowledging GOP's intransigence and hostage-taking WRT the FAA funding extension. The GOP wanted to force labor in the transportation industry to come up with super-majorities. In other words, in their legislation, if you had 100 workers, and 49 voted to organize, and 48 voted not to, and the other 3 couldn't make it to the ballot box for some reason, those 3 non-votes would count as "no" votes, killing the organization drive 51-49. I live in a state that has town-hall municipal elections, and if every abstention was counted as a "no", NOTHING would ever get approved. No bond issues, no road repairs, no school budgets...nothing. The GOP is dumping money down the sewer to prevent collective bargaining. Is it worth it to you?

First, did you take note of what I said about the passing of John Murtha and the close proximity of 7 of the airports receiving funds - PURE PORK.

Second, I know that YOU are against complicated legislation where this type of situation results. I would think YOU would be happy to separate the issues?

Last, as your link indicates - the Republicans are requiring the labor issue be addressed in Congress (even though Harry Reid refuses to negotiate) - why isn't that acceptable?

"The more politically difficult issue is a GOP proposal to overturn a National Mediation Board rule approved last year that allows airline and railroad employees to form a union by a simple majority of those voting. Under the old rule, workers who didn't vote were treated as "no" votes.

Democrats and union officials say the change puts airline and railroad elections under the same democratic rules required for unionizing all other companies. But Republicans say the new rule reverses 75 years of precedent to favor labor unions.

The GOP labor provision has the backing of the airline industry. The biggest beneficiary would be Delta Air Lines, the largest carrier whose workers aren't primarily union members.

Last month, in comments to the House Rules Committee and separately to reporters, Mica said the labor provision was the only issue standing in the way of the House and Senate reaching an agreement on a long-term FAA bill. He said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has refused to negotiate with Republicans on the issue."

I would think a rule that flies in the face of 75 years of established practice would be called "radical"?
 
  • #11
Willowz said:
Are they?

Clearly.
 
  • #12
Proton Soup said:
51 is a simple majority.

are these ballots secret?
51 is NOT a simple majority when you game the rules to make the vote of every eligible but unavailable member automatically represent a "no". Have you read any of the articles on this?
 
  • #13
BTW, The right is quite disingenuously portraying the the total $200M budget for upgrading and modernizing airports as if it were all being used to subsidize rural air-travel tickets. The fact is that the ticket subsidies are $16M/year, and the remainder of the $200M is used to improve and modernize facilities. By de-funding the FAA, the GOP has thrown 70,000 construction workers and contractors out of work. Not too helpful in a jobless recovery, but then again, the GOP long ago ceased to care about working stiffs.

I will point out (hopefully not to the tone-deaf) that de-funding the FAA loses our government as much tax revenue in a WEEK as the entire rural-airports budget (including all modernization projects) cost us in a YEAR. Thanks a ton, Republicans!
 
  • #14
turbo said:
51 is NOT a simple majority when you game the rules to make the vote of every eligible but unavailable member automatically represent a "no". Have you read any of the articles on this?

Hasn't this been the practice for 75 years - hardly the definition of "gaming the rules" - quite the opposite.
 
  • #15
WhoWee said:
Hasn't this been the practice for 75 years - hardly the definition of "gaming the rules" - quite the opposite.
The fact that the deck has been stacked against transportation workers for a long time makes it right? What a concept!
 
  • #17
WhoWee said:
turbo - you need to pick your fights better:
http://www.thegreatilluminator.com/blog/?p=4144

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/18/AR2009041802128.html

http://ohmygov.com/blogs/general_ne...-please-pick-up-the-white-courtesy-phone.aspx

There are plenty more if you like?

I can pull up all the Murtha pork articles that I like. If you want to want to bring up a very powerful Washington figure that gamed the transportation department, I will point you to Ted Stevens. The fact is that underserved rural areas might need some help establishing air-links, especially when the region is ripe for development and would benefit from links to regional or hub airports.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #18
Also, let's stick to the facts. The entire rural air program (including construction/modernization costs) is about $200M/year. Republican hostage-taking of the FAA funding bill is costing us $200M/week.
 
  • #19
turbo said:
I can pull up all the Murtha pork articles that I like. If you want to want to bring up a very powerful Washington figure that gamed the transportation department, I will point you to Ted Stevens. The fact is that underserved rural areas might need some help establishing air-links, especially when the region is ripe for development and would benefit from links to regional or hub airports.

This legislation involves seven (7) airports in or near Murtha's district.
 
  • #20
So potentially... if only 10 of 5000 voted in the election, 6 people saying 'yes' can force $1000+/yr in dues to the other 4990?

That doesn't seem right and seems like a great opportunity for some of the worst corruption this coutnry has ever seen (and is seeing).
 
  • #21
turbo said:
Also, let's stick to the facts. The entire rural air program (including construction/modernization costs) is about $200M/year. Republican hostage-taking of the FAA funding bill is costing us $200M/week.

It seems the President would have made this his priority - rather than a birthday fundraiser if it's such a major problem - fortunately the cost of shut down was only for a few days - they reached an agreement a few hours ago.
 
  • #22
WhoWee said:
I would think a rule that flies in the face of 75 years of established practice would be called "radical"?

Maybe. What is odd about it is that if you have 1000 workers, and 3 of them cast votes - 2 for, 1 against - all 1000 are now unionized.
 
  • #23
The OP is misleading nonsense. Contrary to the OP claim "...the GOP has refused to fund the FAA and allow the airlines to collect taxes on air-fare.", the House authorized funding extension for the FAA on July 14th in http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-2553" Reid supported passage in the Senate, but Senator Boxer (D) objected, and now the extension has been blocked in particular by Senator Rockefeller (D), one man.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #24
From your second link.
As part of its ongoing efforts
to further the statutory goals of the Railway Labor Act, the National Mediation Board (NMB or Board) is amending its Railway Labor Act rules to provide that, in representation disputes, a majority of valid ballots cast will determine the craft or class representative. This change to its election procedures will provide a more reliable measure/indicator of employee sentiment in representation disputes and provide employees with clear choices in representation matters.

In other words, the National Mediation Board says that we should count the valid votes cast. Not count any uncast vote as a vote against collective representation. Is it worth $1.2Billion a month to undo this decision? Apparently, the GOP thought so. I hope that the short-term compromise doesn't give away the farm.
 
  • #25
turbo said:
From your second link.

In other words, the National Mediation Board says that we should count the valid votes cast. Not count any uncast vote as a vote against collective representation. Is it worth $1.2Billion a month to undo this decision? Apparently, the GOP thought so. I hope that the short-term compromise doesn't give away the farm.

Please demonstrate how this will incur a cost of $1.2Billion per month - they have an agreement in place - don't they?
 
  • #26
Please read the post that I linked in the OP. The FAA shutdown was already costing us over $200M/week, plus throwing 70,000 contractors out of work with their multiplication factors (they DO spend their checks). Is all that fiscal damage worth it, just to attack the ability of transportation workers to bargain collectively? You haven't answered that, and I'd like to get an answer.
 
  • #27
turbo said:
Please read the post that I linked in the OP. The FAA shutdown was already costing us over $200M/week, plus throwing 70,000 contractors out of work with their multiplication factors (they DO spend their checks). Is all that fiscal damage worth it, just to attack the ability of transportation workers to bargain collectively? You haven't answered that, and I'd like to get an answer.

How many weeks (or days) has the shut down lasted at $200Million per week?
 
  • #28
WhoWee said:
Clearly.
Rhetoric doodle daddle.
 
  • #29
Willowz said:
Rhetoric doodle daddle.

Should I agree or respond - that's fiddle faddle?:smile:
 
  • #30
Read this. You may not agree, but I would love to see a rebational rebuttal.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/08/01/national/main20086665.shtml
 
  • #31
turbo said:
Read this. You may not agree, but I would love to see a rebational rebuttal.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/08/01/national/main20086665.shtml

You are making an argument of what COULD HAVE HAPPENED - they reached a deal - moot point.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/05/us-usa-infrastructure-faa-idUSTRE7736C020110805

Considering the stock market lost $800Billion today - and over $1Trillion in the past 10 days - I'm not overly concerned about Congress taking it's time to scrutinize an over-reach of regulations and scrutiny of Murtha-flavored PORK.
 
  • #32
turbo said:
51 is NOT a simple majority when you game the rules to make the vote of every eligible but unavailable member automatically represent a "no". Have you read any of the articles on this?

first of all, you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. it's not like they need a 2/3 or 3/4 vote, not that kind of a supermajority. if they really miss these things by 2 votes, maybe there's not that much of a demand for it.

second, are these secret or open ballots? would there be people that might be intimidated by having to vote?
 
  • #33
Proton Soup said:
first of all, you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. it's not like they need a 2/3 or 3/4 vote, not that kind of a supermajority. if they really miss these things by 2 votes, maybe there's not that much of a demand for it.

second, are these secret or open ballots? would there be people that might be intimidated by having to vote?
I am not making a mountain out of a molehill.

Did you read any of the links links in this thread? Do you propose that every person who misses a vote is a "no" vote and has to be counted that way (unlike the rest of US labor)?

What are you intimating regarding the availability of secret ballots in labor votes? Apparently you have some kind of agenda in this process. Is it amateur or professional?
 
  • #34
Nearly all modern legislative bodies are required to have a majority of their total population vote 'yay' to pass a bill. Why should unionization be any different?

Why do people have to be AGAINST something being forced on them? Then the status quo becomes unionization and the burden of 'nos' are on the employees to reject the union rather than the status quo being non-unionization with a majority required to accept the union.

Besides, what do federal employees need with a union anyhow? It's not like there's profits to skim from the government, or maybe that's the greater problem? The union PAC-machine can press pro-union officials into office then get larger contracts, etc. Vicious cycle that needs to stop somewhere.
 
  • #35
turbo said:
I am not making a mountain out of a molehill.

Did you read any of the links links in this thread? Do you propose that every person who misses a vote is a "no" vote and has to be counted that way (unlike the rest of US labor)?

What are you intimating regarding the availability of secret ballots in labor votes? Apparently you have some kind of agenda in this process. Is it amateur or professional?

I cannot imagine the level of discourse if a regulatory body changed a 75 year custom that you were in favor of - IMO - you would be calling for Congressional hearings - wouldn't you?
 
  • #36
WhoWee said:
The Republicans (in your example) wanted the labor issue separated from the funding issue - not a radical concept at all - considering YOU are FOR smaller and more precise Bills.

That's not what the link said:

The more politically difficult issue is a GOP proposal to overturn a National Mediation Board rule approved last year that allows airline and railroad employees to form a union by a simple majority of those voting. Under the old rule, workers who didn't vote were treated as "no" votes.
(my bold)

So (assuming the story was correct and not misleading), it was the GOP that linked the labor issue in with the funding issue.
 
  • #37
turbo said:
The US Congress is again being held up by radicals. Once again, a normally routine procedure is being held up on ideological grounds by the far right. The GOP says that the sticking point is $16M/year in subsidies for air travel to rural communities, but the truth is that we are on track to lose $1.2 Billion this month alone because the GOP has refused to fund the FAA and allow the airlines to collect taxes on air-fare. The sticking point is whether we allow labor in the airlines industry to vote up-or-down on labor issues or whether every uncast vote is counted as a "No" (current practice, contrary to labor law in other sectors). For the sake of killing organized labor in the airline industry, the GOP is willing to forgo $1.2 Billion of revenue this month alone.

Where are the adults in this country? For that matter, where are the adults in the media who are not hammering this travesty night after night on the network news? There have been mentions here and there about the tens of thousands of people put out of work because of the halted projects, but I haven't seen any responsible reporting about the real costs of this shutdown.



http://news.yahoo.com/more-faa-shutdown-air-subsidies-071241612.html

Good news turbo - I just heard a news report that Harry Reid (Dem leader of the Senate) just took up and passed the Bill the House (led by Republicans) passed 2 weeks ago - why did Harry Reid not address this when the members were in session? I realize he needed to give MANY speeches while the Republicans worked on the debt deal in the House - but what was the Senate working on during that time? Harry Reid waited until the last minute to put a debt deal on the table - shame on you Harry Reid and the other Dems that control the Senate.
 
  • #38
Vanadium 50 said:
Maybe. What is odd about it is that if you have 1000 workers, and 3 of them cast votes - 2 for, 1 against - all 1000 are now unionized.
As are all of the legacy major air carriers in the US with the exception of Delta.
 
  • #39
turbo said:
From your second link.

In other words, the National Mediation Board says that we should count the valid votes cast. Not count any uncast vote as a vote against collective representation.
Not quite. That should be count and decide representation on votes cast, no matter how small the vote count, as has not been the case for the last 75 years with air carriers, which are already all unionized with the exception of Delta (among the traditional majors).
Is it worth $1.2Billion a month to undo this decision? Apparently, the GOP thought so. I hope that the short-term compromise doesn't give away the farm.
Lost taxes are all the fault of the GOP? The House passed a bill to continue FAA funding and tax authority back in July, as the constitution mandates it alone should do via Art I, Sec 7: All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. Give away the farm? Hostage-taking? No adults? You left out a racism charge. Look, last month did you give https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3409953&postcount=328" on your rhetoric any consideration?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #40
turbo said:
The US Congress is again being held up by radicals...

Terrorists holding a real gun to your head and demanding everyone pray to their god or they shoot is "hostage-taking by radicals."

Duly-elected representatives casting their votes in ways you don't agree with is called "democracy". Please don't get them confused.
 
  • #41
WhoWee said:
... why did Harry Reid not address this when the members were in session? ...
As I've said above, http://finance.senate.gov/newsroom/ranking/release/?id=6c60d111-377c-48c5-9f76-59f2f5cadf8d" to his credit. The bill was blocked by others in the Senate, mainly Rockefeller.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid was asked if Senate Democrats would accept the short-term House-passed FAA extension, he said:

“Yes… And I think as we -- we learned with this big deal we've just done, sometimes you have to step back and find out what's best for the country and not be bound by some of your own personal issues. And I'm willing to give that up. I hope the other senators would do the same." (Sen. Reid, Media Availability Following Debt Ceiling Vote, 8/2/11)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #42
mheslep said:
As I've said above, http://finance.senate.gov/newsroom/ranking/release/?id=6c60d111-377c-48c5-9f76-59f2f5cadf8d" to his credit. The bill was blocked by others in the Senate, mainly Rockefeller.

That's fine.

However, turbo's link had indicated that Reid refused to negotiate - which basically negates turbo's assertion that the "right Wing" was hostage holding. my bold

"Last month, in comments to the House Rules Committee and separately to reporters, Mica said the labor provision was the only issue standing in the way of the House and Senate reaching an agreement on a long-term FAA bill. He said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has refused to negotiate with Republicans on the issue."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #43
turbo said:
I am not making a mountain out of a molehill.

Did you read any of the links links in this thread? Do you propose that every person who misses a vote is a "no" vote and has to be counted that way (unlike the rest of US labor)?

What are you intimating regarding the availability of secret ballots in labor votes? Apparently you have some kind of agenda in this process. Is it amateur or professional?

i'm simply asking you a question about voting procedure for unions. are ballots secret or not? do people need to worry about harassment if they do vote? it's a simple question that goes to why someone might not want to go on the record as voting no. can you answer my simple question here, or perhaps you have some kind of agenda?
 
  • #44
Proton Soup said:
i'm simply asking you a question about voting procedure for unions. are ballots secret or not? do people need to worry about harassment if they do vote? it's a simple question that goes to why someone might not want to go on the record as voting no. can you answer my simple question here, or perhaps you have some kind of agenda?
I have been a shop steward, a union officer and negotiator. In our union, votes were generally held in-person, and in shifts, since we represented shift-workers in the pulp and paper industry. Members who did not vote for some reason did not have their votes counted as "No".

Our union rules might have varied from others, so don't make generalizations from this, but I do have experience in this area. The insistence by the GOP that the anti-union tactic used against transportation workers is perpetuated is typical, and unfair. Every member who is on vacation, sick leave, family leave, etc is automatically counted as a "no" vote for purposes of organization. As an illustrative example, how many Senators did it take to pass the FAA funding extension? Two Senators to propose and approve a unanimous consent resolution. Only two. What if all the absent Senators were counted as "nays"?
 
  • #45
turbo said:
I have been a shop steward, a union officer and negotiator. In our union, votes were generally held in-person, and in shifts, since we represented shift-workers in the pulp and paper industry. Members who did not vote for some reason did not have their votes counted as "No".

Our union rules might have varied from others, so don't make generalizations from this, but I do have experience in this area. The insistence by the GOP that the anti-union tactic used against transportation workers is perpetuated is typical, and unfair. Every member who is on vacation, sick leave, family leave, etc is automatically counted as a "no" vote for purposes of organization. As an illustrative example, how many Senators did it take to pass the FAA funding extension? Two Senators to propose and approve a unanimous consent resolution. Only two. What if all the absent Senators were counted as "nays"?

fine then, don't answer the question. go on pushing your agendas while accusing others of having agendas if they happen to have a question about it, or think you're overreacting a bit.
 
  • #46
turbo said:
... As an illustrative example, how many Senators did it take to pass the FAA funding extension? Two Senators to propose and approve a unanimous consent resolution. Only two. What if all the absent Senators were counted as "nays"? ...
Most all our legislative bodies require a quorum to pass laws, including the Senate, hence the several state lawmaker's vanishing acts across state lines in an attempt to stop the democratic process.
 
Last edited:
  • #47
Proton Soup said:
i'm simply asking you a question about voting procedure for unions. are ballots secret or not? do people need to worry about harassment if they do vote? it's a simple question that goes to why someone might not want to go on the record as voting no. can you answer my simple question here, or perhaps you have some kind of agenda?

There can be harassment on both sides if the votes are not secret. Those voting no might feel harassed by the union, and those voting yes might feel harassed by the company reps.
 
  • #48
daveb said:
There can be harassment on both sides if the votes are not secret. Those voting no might feel harassed by the union, and those voting yes might feel harassed by the company reps.

Perhaps the question should be WHY the regulators got involved - who called them or who sent them to render a decision?
 
  • #49
Not sure why you quoted me on that one, but I have no idea. This isn't an item that's been on my radar all that much.
 
  • #50
daveb said:
Not sure why you quoted me on that one, but I have no idea. This isn't an item that's been on my radar all that much.

Just furthering the conversation - I don't know how/why the regulators got involved either?
 

Similar threads

News International organizations, globalization, and super power paradigms.
Replies
16
Views
9K
News Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Energy Independence
3
Replies
133
Views
27K
News Bush Administration: My Indictment
Replies
3
Views
3K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
2
Replies
65
Views
10K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top