Republicans & Democrats

[av8torntn]

You would support not getting paid your overtime for a year? Wow

You support no paid time off? Wow

 

[av8torntn]

The bill number? Oh i forgot, the other half is missing... here ya go bro..

http://democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/issue/hr-1406-republican-bill-upend-overtime-pay-workers

Try again that says nothing about changing our contract.

 

[upschuck]

What's the bill number that would have changed our contract? You have a long track record of fabrication, but I would support this change to our contract if it is in fact a real thing, but I'm afraid like most of your statements it is just some delusional fantasy you came up with.

Try again that says nothing about changing our contract.

No, but you did.

 

[The Other Side]

Try again that says nothing about changing our contract.

It doesnt have to say anything about our contract. Its the law. I already replied to you on this subject, but the mods felt it better to protect you by not posting it so Ill explain it to you again.

Our CONTRACT is not law. Its an agreement. Our contract cannot ever violate state law. Case and point. Here in california, we used to be able to skip our lunches or take them whenever we wanted. We could work all day and then take our lunch late in the day waiting for pickups to start.

This VIOLATED state law, and UPS was sued for this. The ruling was very clear, no matter what our contract stated was the lunch rules, we could never violate state law.

Lets say for example, in california, our contract didnt include a raise for parttimers, and they stayed at 8.50 an hour starting wage. Here in california, minimum wage will go to 10 bucks an hour in just a few months. Do you think UPS could get away with paying less than the states minimum wage just because its in our contract?



TOS.

 

[MAKAVELI]

Lets see how the faux news junkies spin this one. I know it's Obama's fault.

 

[upschuck]

You support no paid time off? Wow

I have plenty of time off, don't need more. Thank you for your concern.

 

[cheryl]

You forgot to mention another so cal congressman retiring this year. BUCK McKeon (R), who was CAUGHT in a bribery scandal and faced ethics charges has decided to retire and not seek re-election. McKeon who had recieved his bribes from countrywide for homes he purchased ( here in my town) pocketed thousands of dollars.

Darryl Issa promised to prosecute all those responsible for these bribes, but McKeon escaped when the committee failed to hold him repsonsible. What else would we expect from the republicans who control the committee.

The story..
Several Members of Congress were caught being bribed by Countrywide Financial with discount mortgages and waived fees. The poster boy in this scandal was Representative Howard “Buck” McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform conducted a nearly yearlong investigation resulting in this 135 page report.

There is NOBODY who will miss Buck McKeon in my district. He would have been defeated anyways this year and before that happened, McKeon chose to leave before he was embarrassed.

Again, another GOP gangster gets away with a crime and simply walks away. So much for ISSA's hound dog approach for justice.

Later BUCK, i hope you go bankrupt like your business in town did.

TOS.

7 Ways to Get Your Posts Edited or Deleted

1. VIOLATE COPYRIGHTS. Copying and pasting an entire article, story or any other copyrighted materials here is a no-no because that's AGAINST COPYRIGHT LAW! It's okay to post small excerpts and/or your own comments and a link to the original work. If you find copyright laws too restrictive feel free to start a thread in the Current Events forum debating the merits of Copyright laws.

Read more: http://www.browncafe.com/community/help/terms#tldr

 

[The Other Side]

7 Ways to Get Your Posts Edited or Deleted

1. VIOLATE COPYRIGHTS. Copying and pasting an entire article, story or any other copyrighted materials here is a no-no because that's AGAINST COPYRIGHT LAW! It's okay to post small excerpts and/or your own comments and a link to the original work. If you find copyright laws too restrictive feel free to start a thread in the Current Events forum debating the merits of Copyright laws.

Read more: http://www.browncafe.com/community/help/terms#tldr

You are barely getting around to posting this ?? I posted that story weeks ago. Hey, I get it, you dont want people bagging on republicans.

TOS.

 

[tonyexpress]

Its the law. I already replied to you on this subject, but the mods felt it better to protect you by not posting it so Ill explain it to you again. TOS.

The mods felt better to not to let your insults fly... As a well seasoned TROLL you're lucky to be posting here at all! Many of your posts are deleted as they come into the queue because you continue to post insults and attacks..

Tell me why we should continue to waste our time reading and approving your posts when it's obvious you don't care??

 

[The Other Side]

The mods felt better to not to let your insults fly... As a well seasoned TROLL you're lucky to be posting here at all! Many of your posts are deleted as they come into the queue because you continue to post insults and attacks..

Tell me why we should continue to waste our time reading and approving your posts when it's obvious you don't care??

Because you cant have an intelligent conversation with only one side presenting an argument. Thats called FOX news.

TOS.

 

[upschuck]

You are barely getting around to posting this ?? I posted that story weeks ago. Hey, I get it, you dont want people bagging on republicans.

TOS.

Even though I agree with little of what you say, I would miss some of your posts(not the mentioning of Fox all the time though), if you got banned. Not a smart thing to antagonize the person who can, with one click, kick you off the site. Her motives are to keep BC, and you to a lesser extent, out of legal trouble, I would imagine.

 

[wkmac]

Because you cant have an intelligent conversation with only one side presenting an argument. Thats called FOX news.

TOS.

TOS

That's pure BS. There are times I post stuff both sides of the political narrative oppose and often for the same or similar reasons and I've never had the first problem posting my POV. The couple of times I've been moderated I knew it was coming and I posted anyway for my own purpose. Never cried foul either. A lot of people may not like at times what I have to say or offer but I've never been suppressed in doing so. The first order in having an intelligent conversation is too begin and maintain one. Maybe this is where you are going wrong.

 

[wkmac]

Even though I agree with little of what you say, I would miss some of your posts(not the mentioning of Fox all the time though), if you got banned. Not a smart thing to antagonize the person who can, with one click, kick you off the site. Her motives are to keep BC, and you to a lesser extent, out of legal trouble, I would imagine.

Have to admit without TOS I'd not even know Fox or Rush Limbaugh even existed.

 

[av8torntn]

It doesnt have to say anything about our contract. Its the law. I already replied to you on this subject, but the mods felt it better to protect you by not posting it so Ill explain it to you again.

Our CONTRACT is not law. Its an agreement. Our contract cannot ever violate state law. Case and point. Here in california, we used to be able to skip our lunches or take them whenever we wanted. We could work all day and then take our lunch late in the day waiting for pickups to start.

This VIOLATED state law, and UPS was sued for this. The ruling was very clear, no matter what our contract stated was the lunch rules, we could never violate state law.

Lets say for example, in california, our contract didnt include a raise for parttimers, and they stayed at 8.50 an hour starting wage. Here in california, minimum wage will go to 10 bucks an hour in just a few months. Do you think UPS could get away with paying less than the states minimum wage just because its in our contract?



TOS.

This is for you as well ups upchuck so do not feel left out. I thank you both for providing the bill number as it was evident from your posts that you did not read the bill. That must be an extreme leftist thing.

This is straight from the bill.

" Authorizes an employer to provide compensatory time only if it is in accordance with an applicable collective bargaining agreement or, in the absence of such an agreement, an agreement between the employer and employee."


It's amazing how consistently wrong that you are. I would assume that you could be accidentally correct every now and again. I was wrong there and can admit it.

 

[av8torntn]

I have plenty of time off, don't need more. Thank you for your concern.

Good for you. One thing though it isn't very progressive of you to oppose paid time off for those that do not have enough.

 

[MAKAVELI]

This is for you as well ups upchuck so do not feel left out. I thank you both for providing the bill number as it was evident from your posts that you did not read the bill. That must be an extreme leftist thing.

This is straight from the bill.

" Authorizes an employer to provide compensatory time only if it is in accordance with an applicable collective bargaining agreement or, in the absence of such an agreement, an agreement between the employer and employee."


It's amazing how consistently wrong that you are. I would assume that you could be accidentally correct every now and again. I was wrong there and can admit it.

There is nothing stopping an employer and an employee group from negotiating an option to choose compensation or time off. But that choice is solely at the discretion of the employee. I had worked a job at one time where we had that option. Most of the time I took the money. And the time off was scheduled just like vacation or pto. And the unused comp time was paid out at the end of the year less the allotted amount to carry over.

 

[upschuck]

Good for you. One thing though it isn't very progressive of you to oppose paid time off for those that do not have enough.

You are right, I am not a progressive.....I believe in less government(to a certain extent). I am part republican, part democrat, part libertarian. You can't stick me in a party and assume I believe all their agenda.

 

[av8torntn]

There is nothing stopping an employer and an employee group from negotiating an option to choose compensation or time off. But that choice is solely at the discretion of the employee. I had worked a job at one time where we had that option. Most of the time I took the money. And the time off was scheduled just like vacation or pto. And the unused comp time was paid out at the end of the year less the allotted amount to carry over.

Well in certain jobs Federal law does prohibit that very thing(Fair Labor Standards Act). This proposed bill(Working Families Flexibility Act) would change that. In broad terms if you are engaged in interstate commerce or produce goods or services used in interstate commerce the FLSA applies to you.

 

[av8torntn]

You are right, I am not a progressive.....I believe in less government(to a certain extent). I am part republican, part democrat, part libertarian. You can't stick me in a party and assume I believe all their agenda.

Yet you oppose the liberty of others to negotiate their paid time off because you "have enough".

 

[upschuck]

Yet you oppose the liberty of others to negotiate their paid time off because you "have enough".

Nope, wrong again...I oppose the government mandating that it is ok that your employer to keep your OT for a year after you work it. I don't think there is a law on the books that says a company can't offer that, in fact some companies already do that.