Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Superteeth2478" data-source="post: 3577533" data-attributes="member: 73024">I already know what it was about. And it&#039;s too bad you TLDR&#039;d that post, because it completely refutes any crap you can say against what I&#039;m saying, and you know it. But let me TLDR it for you in case you didn&#039;t actually read it:The union is not supposed to be a faction of full-timers and a faction of part-timers. Period. It&#039;s supposed to be a brotherhood. When full-timers pay no attention to what the part-timers are getting (and vice versa), it&#039;s no longer a brotherhood. Period. And guess what? This is exactly what the company wants. So congratulations, WE (not just part-timers, not just full-timers) have already lost.And let me get my crystal ball out real quick...yes, it&#039;s saying that if this contract goes through, and it&#039;s because a record number of part-timers turned out, the next contract will cater even more to the part-timers (even as little as it actually is catering to them now). The company will see it as a tactic for decreasing costs overall, especially through decreasing pay and benefits for full-timers in favor of part-timers. Do I want to see this happen? NO. There&#039;s plenty to go around for part-timers and full-timers. But is it getting more and more likely? Yes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Superteeth2478, post: 3577533, member: 73024"] I already know what it was about. And it's too bad you TLDR'd that post, because it completely refutes any crap you can say against what I'm saying, and you know it. But let me TLDR it for you in case you didn't actually read it: The union is not supposed to be a faction of full-timers and a faction of part-timers. Period. It's supposed to be a brotherhood. When full-timers pay no attention to what the part-timers are getting (and vice versa), it's no longer a brotherhood. Period. And guess what? This is exactly what the company wants. So congratulations, WE (not just part-timers, not just full-timers) have already lost. And let me get my crystal ball out real quick...yes, it's saying that if this contract goes through, and it's because a record number of part-timers turned out, the next contract will cater even more to the part-timers (even as little as it actually is catering to them now). The company will see it as a tactic for decreasing costs overall, especially through decreasing pay and benefits for full-timers in favor of part-timers. Do I want to see this happen? NO. There's plenty to go around for part-timers and full-timers. But is it getting more and more likely? Yes. [/QUOTE]

Verification