[uwish]

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

uwish uwish:

sure, I see your point, and I agree a union is their to negotiate that's their primary role really. However; it doesn't change the fact that defined benefit pensions are non existence in non governmental jobs, that they can easily bankrupt governments (I don't think you actually NEED me to provide evidence on that point) and I have submitted 9 complaints about my stupid community postal box because I keep getting other people's mail. That has NOTHING to do with management but shitty workers.

So you can spout all you want about how we don't know what's going on inside Canpost, and I would grant you some of what you say; that changes nothing of any of the points I have made. NONE, and all it does if verify a collective position of us non Canpost types, that your union is asking for things that are not realistic and not found in any other non-governmental sector. Full stop.

The pension plan is only hugely insolvent if every member retired today. That is a fact.

so the teacher and auto pension deficit of ~ 10 Billion in Ont isn't bankrupting that province huh? new to me...and they sure as shit didn't retire all at the same time.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/08/18/on ... ce-squeeze

and that was in 2012, it's even worse now.

"unfunded liability of 9.6 BILLION"

[smorgdonkey]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

When you refer to "toxic management" you're reffering to all managers. I know this may be beyond your understanding, but if you had said the company had some "toxic managers" that would have been more accurate.

When you label a company as having toxic management, you're referring to all management as a whole.

Actually, if you had paid attention in English class, you would be able to figure out that toxic management does not paint every manager with the brush. Management is an umbrella and unless every person under that umbrella is able to act independently, then they are not all characterized personally by the description of the management as a whole. Management is a term for the collective.

Perhaps you did do ok in English but you are having problems with your comprehension

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

irregardless

of your English scores back then.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

You said, specifically:

$1:

The 'increase' is 0%, 1%, 1%, 1%. We just had a 0% year. That's not an increase.

3% increase is not a increase, in your terms.

Yes, my terms. My terms include connotation. The connotation is that when the managers are all taking home astronomical bonuses, then 3% after 5 years is not an increase - it is an insult.

The biggest issue though is that you actually stated that I said the 'increase' was a 'decrease'.

Now that's 2 things that you completely fabricated.

Here is your quote because with a poorly functioning cerebellum, I am sure that you must have forgotten.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The irony of that is pretty strong considering you just tried to sell me on a 3% increase being a pay decrease.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

If I'm "under 70" what does that say about you,

It isn't what it says about me...it's what it says about you and you continue to show that you think that you are much more capable than you are. It's rather sad actually. You make statements that are untrue and defend them to the death. You change what people say into something else and then ridicule them for saying those things - for the love of whatever is important to you...if you want to fight, at least fight about what people say not about your EDITED version of what they say is.

I'm actually embarrassed for you.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

the postal worker, when I surpassed your career best at 23 years old?

My career best? My career best what? Oh, this should be good...if you could elaborate, I'm sure that I would be absolutely captivated by your story.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

You're so far behind, you actually think you're ahead.

If you know what projection is, well, you are doing it. If you don't know what it is then get someone to explain it to you because, as I said, you're doing it.

A wise man once said "when in a hole, stop digging". I wish you could read and maybe you'd have known that.

Now, just so you know that this isn't personal, I support your cause. I really do.#stupidlivesmatter

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

irregardless

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

irregardless

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

irregardless

[smorgdonkey]

uwish uwish:

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

uwish uwish:

sure, I see your point, and I agree a union is their to negotiate that's their primary role really. However; it doesn't change the fact that defined benefit pensions are non existence in non governmental jobs, that they can easily bankrupt governments (I don't think you actually NEED me to provide evidence on that point) and I have submitted 9 complaints about my stupid community postal box because I keep getting other people's mail. That has NOTHING to do with management but shitty workers.

So you can spout all you want about how we don't know what's going on inside Canpost, and I would grant you some of what you say; that changes nothing of any of the points I have made. NONE, and all it does if verify a collective position of us non Canpost types, that your union is asking for things that are not realistic and not found in any other non-governmental sector. Full stop.

The pension plan is only hugely insolvent if every member retired today. That is a fact.

so the teacher and auto pension deficit of ~ 10 Billion in Ont isn't bankrupting that province huh? new to me...and they sure as shit didn't retire all at the same time.

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/08/18/on ... ce-squeeze

and that was in 2012, it's even worse now.

"unfunded liability of 9.6 BILLION"

I can't speak to those pension funds. I can speak to the Canada Post pension fund because I have an idea of how much money is being wasted by management and I know that they have taken what they called 'pension vacations'. That is when they decide not to contribute to the plan.

In 2007-2008, Canada Post took a $373 million pension contribution holiday and that was in an economic downturn. If you know anything about investing, NOT contributing to investments in downturns is a terrible plan because you miss the gains that are made in recovery and you are behind by the amount that you failed to contribute.

It was in this same period that the corporation took out a $2.5 billion loan to buy equipment that did not need to be replaced.

Once again, I don't know much about those pensions but I know a great deal about Canada Post's pension plan and much of the circumstances around it. It is a bit of a sticking point when people realize that if there is a situation in the future which finds the fund in a deficit then the government has guaranteed the pension...but since the government took a $30 billion surplus from the fund in 1999, then that shouldn't be an issue. The money was taken from the fund so the money should be returned to the fund.

[OnTheIce]

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

Actually, if you had paid attention in English class, you would be able to figure out that toxic management does not paint every manager with the brush. Management is an umbrella and unless every person under that umbrella is able to act independently, then they are not all characterized personally by the description of the management as a whole. Management is a term for the collective.

Sure it does. When you talk about toxic management at any business, you're not referring to specific people. You're making a general statement about management and painting them all with the same brush.

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

Yes, my terms. My terms include connotation. The connotation is that when the managers are all taking home astronomical bonuses, then 3% after 5 years is not an increase - it is an insult.

Nice twist. A 3% increase isn't an increase. It's an insult. Got it.

If you want more money, be a manager. That was likely too much of a reach for you.

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

It isn't what it says about me...it's what it says about you and you continue to show that you think that you are much more capable than you are. It's rather sad actually. You make statements that are untrue and defend them to the death You change what people say into something else and then ridicule them for saying those things - for the love of whatever is important to you...if you want to fight, at least fight about what people say not about your EDITED version of what they say is.

I'm actually embarrassed for you.

First, who's fighting? Is an online discussion a fight to you?

I'd be more worried about yourself. I'm doing quite well.

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

My career best? My career best what? Oh, this should be good...if you could elaborate, I'm sure that I would be absolutely captivated by your story.

What do you do for a living? Being a former postie, I suspect it's a job requiring very minimal skills.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

irregardless

Do you have a specific problem with the word?

[smorgdonkey]

You can't possibly be as stupid as you appear by this thread...but I could be wrong about that.

...and I am even more embarrassed for you after that reply.

No wonder you couldn't get a union job!!

[OnTheIce]

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

You can't possibly be as stupid as you appear by this thread...but I could be wrong about that.

...and I am even more embarrassed for you after that reply.

No wonder you couldn't get a union job!!

That's right, donkey...dodge the questions.

Voted "No" for a union both times I had the chance. Never wanted a union job.

[2Cdo]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

You can't possibly be as stupid as you appear by this thread...but I could be wrong about that.

...and I am even more embarrassed for you after that reply.

No wonder you couldn't get a union job!!

That's right, donkey...dodge the questions.

Voted "No" for a union both times I had the chance. Never wanted a union job.

I find it hilarious that he thinks being a postie requires any intelligence beyond the ability to read at a grade 2 or 3 level and know how to walk.

[smorgdonkey]

I thought the same thing before I ever did it.

Give it a try boys. Then have a nice cry.

Oh and ontheice...you dodge my questions AND facts so you are still ahead on the forget factor.

[OnTheIce]

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

I thought the same thing before I ever did it.

Give it a try boys. Then have a nice cry.

Oh and ontheice...you dodge my questions AND facts so you are still ahead on the forget factor.

Questions? You've made a lot of statements along with insults. No questions.

Who's forgetful?

[herbie]

$1:

Voted "No" for a union both times I had the chance. Never wanted a union job.

Well that says it all doesn't it. You didn't want benefits and pensions. Tell ya what, so did I once. Cuz they offered the full union contract wages and benefits plus 25c and hour to keep the union out.
Then they went about making the jobs so miserable most of us quit. And they went under!

So there's my 2c directed at people who don't WANT to be in a union but have the unmitigated GALL to think their opinion on what's right, wrong or ridiculous is worth its weight in shit.

[OnTheIce]

herbie herbie:

Well that says it all doesn't it. You didn't want benefits and pensions. Tell ya what, so did I once. Cuz they offered the full union contract wages and benefits plus 25c and hour to keep the union out.
Then they went about making the jobs so miserable most of us quit. And they went under!

So there's my 2c directed at people who don't WANT to be in a union but have the unmitigated GALL to think their opinion on what's right, wrong or ridiculous is worth its weight in shit.

Your unique experience doesn't represent either situation I was in as both companies continue to treat their workers very well and are major companies within Canada. So I guess your opinion on the matter is worth its weight in shit too

I already had benefits and an existing plan for retirement when I was in a voting position. Paying dues to a union for something I already had didn't seem like a good deal nor did the bullshit rhetoric from the "pro" side.

[herbie]

Well sorry, I misinterpreted your position as one of those anti-unionists who don't have the benefits and wish to take them from others who do.
I did work elsewhere that had a section of management in a similar position. Only the most avid and foolhardy in the union resented them for it, as they did gain by the union's efforts but wouldn't derive anything better by joining up.

[bootlegga]

herbie herbie:

$1:

Voted "No" for a union both times I had the chance. Never wanted a union job.

Well that says it all doesn't it. You didn't want benefits and pensions. Tell ya what, so did I once. Cuz they offered the full union contract wages and benefits plus 25c and hour to keep the union out.
Then they went about making the jobs so miserable most of us quit. And they went under!

So there's my 2c directed at people who don't WANT to be in a union but have the unmitigated GALL to think their opinion on what's right, wrong or ridiculous is worth its weight in shit.

I think unions, like communism, are great ideas that look great on paper.

However, once you add human beings to the equation, it gets all screwed up by things like greed, entitlement, laziness, apathy, and other human traits.

While a lot of people credit unions with the biggest boom in history (1950s-60s), I think it was only one of the factors, others include two decades of pent up consumer demand and most importantly, a world recovering for a global conflict in which most industry was wiped out

[andyt]

The unions may not be the main factor for the boom, but they certainly were the factor that led to the boom being shared more equally with workers (unlike our recent booms) and workers having decent working conditions and protections. Which people take for granted now, and think that the "job givers" will continue to treat workers well. Since the "job givers" are taking more and more of the profits for themselves while shipping jobs to the most scummy places they can find as far as worker exploitation, that doesn't seem to be working out.

[smorgdonkey]

The corporation also complains that the grievance process is too time consuming and costly yet they continue to operate in violation of their own agreement. They have just cut part time workers' hours without consultation with the union on the matter and it will cost them a lot of money so, once again, very poor management not to mention hypocritical.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

Oh and ontheice...you dodge my questions AND facts so you are still ahead on the forget factor.

Questions? You've made a lot of statements along with insults. No questions.

Who's forgetful?

smorgdonkey smorgdonkey:

My career best? My career best what?

Those are questions.
It's too easy.

Just keep ignoring facts and making things up.



For those who think postal workers are overpaid due to them needing no education: have you aways felt that way about oilfield workers? They make twice and three times what postal workers make and they require no education.