UNIONS THREATEN BUSINESS - Page 2

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - UNIONS THREATEN BUSINESS (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 3/11/2011 5:27:50 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

A boycott is when you ask your followers to not buy goods/product, what they are doing is telling the companies to politically switch sides or else. If they wish to tell the lemmings in their group to obey their union masters and do their bidding on who to purchase from, they are free to do that.

Posted: 3/11/2011 5:29:00 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

I remember growing up these pussies would shoot into homes with kids living in them if you crossed the line.

My Pop is a member of Roofers Union Local 30, out of Philadelphia and Atlantic City, NJ. The only paid holiday they get is the day John McCullough, president of the Philadelphia Roofers Union, Local 30, was killed. McCullough began infringing on Nicki Scarfo's Atlantic City rackets and refused to stop his labor racketeering activities. McCullough was shot to death by a hit man posing as a deliveryman.

That union rapes its own members big time. Upon retirement, they take out X amount for the worker's and spouse's medical insurance, amount which stays the same whether one party dies or not. So he's been losing twice as much since my Mom died from cancer in 2005.

They get paid to picket and get paid to work on election day, obviously in support of mostly Democrats.

Quite the racket they've got going. It will be a glorious day when they finally get RICOed out of existence.

F@#$ the unions!

Posted: 3/11/2011 5:29:03 PM EDT

[#3]

This union needs to go the way of the Dodo

Posted: 3/11/2011 5:35:44 PM EDT

[#4]

For those who don't know -

About Marshall & Ilsley

Marshall &
Ilsley, a diversified financial services company based in Wisconsin,
provides comprehensive financial products and services and unparalleled
customer service to personal, business, corporate and institutional
customers nationwide.

In other words, these boneheaded shit stains probably wouldn't know where to even begin a "boycott" against M&I co.

If by "boycott" they mean "vandalize and physically intimidate", then their sternly worded letter makes more sense.

Fuck them in the ass with a rusty AIDS covered rail spike, each and every one of them.

Posted: 3/11/2011 5:35:54 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

Posted: 3/11/2011 5:42:39 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

I was going to type:

Hey YOU!!! You stupid fuck.

There is no FREE MARKET shit in the public sector, you shit for brains cockbreath bastard.

You are being paid by taxes. You do not produce a God da-da-damn mother fucking thing.

But, I won't.

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:06:07 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:09:54 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
I swear I think its only a matter of time before these UNION thugs start firebombing or assaulting people and then I hope to see the Real People stand up and start fighting back.

You mean again!!...........anyone remember the strike at the paper mill in Jay, Maine several years ago.shots fired and all kinds of shit..nothing but union thugs!!!

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:11:59 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:

Quoted:

It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

dont mind him... he forgot to look in the mirror

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:23:38 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Huh, quite "professional" of a police/fire organization to do something like that.

Any cop/FF who would stay in an organization like that deserves to be called a piece of shit.

Guess I'm a piece of shit.

Guess so.

Honestly, you can't see the problem with that letter?

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:34:43 PM EDT

[#11]

This is a fine example on why public service people shouldn't be unionized. So simple.

In before the first person that says "public service employees need Unions or else Government workers will work a grueling 7 hour day"

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:35:51 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

If the letter were from the local pipefitters Union, I would agree with you, but this is a letter to a non retail business, from a Law Enforcement Professionals Organization, and references other Emergency Response Organizations, a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services, as the business doesn't have retail outlets that the Union members would be utilizing in a way that would make a Boycott sensible. If they aren't threatening them with a loss of business, then what is the threat?

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:41:25 PM EDT

[#13]

For a boycott? RICO doesnt apply here.......

Quoted:

Quoted:
Sounds like extortion to me.

Attorney General might look into some indictments.

Since there are several unions involved...RICO?

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:42:50 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

I dont believe you.

If you equate threatening to bring any kind of harm to a company or individual unless they falsely pretend to support your corrupt activity in order to try and sway public opinion to their favor, to the NRA suggesting constitutionally protected 2a supporters boycott anti gun businesses, you are off your rocker.

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:43:36 PM EDT

[#15]

Okay, so they're not oging to do their business with them...I think that's the overt message in the letter. However, I also think it was intentionally worded the way it is to bring up thoughts of Joey Two Fingahs payin youse boids a visit.

When you let the government grow into a major secotr of the economy, this is what you get from your local public services.

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:47:23 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

If the letter were from the local pipefitters Union, I would agree with you, but this is a letter to a non retail business, from a Law Enforcement Professionals Organization, and references other Emergency Response Organizations, a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services, as the business doesn't have retail outlets that the Union members would be utilizing in a way that would make a Boycott sensible. If they aren't threatening them with a loss of business, then what is the threat?

" a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services"

I'm sorry but, I just don't see THAT threatened in the letter posted by the OP.

Again, IF that is what they're threatening then it's something else entirely but I'm just going off what they say in the
letter posted.

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:51:04 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

Nah, they just like throwing around impressive sounding phrases that they heard on TV. "Herp Derp! Boycott?!? Extortion! Smash their heads in with brisks because they're thugs! Enforce the free makret by not letting them choose not to use certain services!"

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:53:49 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

Nah, they just like throwing around impressive sounding phrases that they heard on TV. "Herp Derp! Boycott?!? Extortion! Smash their heads in with brisks because they're thugs! Enforce the free makret by not letting them choose not to use certain services!"

More like do what we say, or else. From a public union that is paid through their taxes. You might want to think about it.

Posted: 3/11/2011 6:57:20 PM EDT

[#19]

Unions don't get how the real world works.

If their boycott had the intended effect on buisinesses that don't tow the union line, there will be fewer WI buisnesses left to unionize.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:01:23 PM EDT

[#20]

Well thats fucking disgusting

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:03:02 PM EDT

[#21]

For all of you saying RICO, forget it.

Unions have a specific exemption from the law under RICO and the Hobbs act.

There have been attempts to close the loopholes but they have yet to pass- Info here

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:05:06 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

If the letter were from the local pipefitters Union, I would agree with you, but this is a letter to a non retail business, from a Law Enforcement Professionals Organization, and references other Emergency Response Organizations, a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services, as the business doesn't have retail outlets that the Union members would be utilizing in a way that would make a Boycott sensible. If they aren't threatening them with a loss of business, then what is the threat?

" a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services"

I'm sorry but, I just don't see THAT threatened in the letter posted by the OP.

Again, IF that is what they're threatening then it's something else entirely but I'm just going off what they say in the
letter posted.

Then what were they threatening? The letter clearly stated that they would advise their members that the business was against them, and that the decision would affect their business, the business of the company threatened is not a retail business, it is a commercial banking company, unless the Union has investment accounts with the firm, then there is no way that they could be threatening a voluntary boycott by the members of the union. What are they threatening? What the letter forces us to do is read between the lines, if it isn't a direct loss of retail business what else can the Union members withhold from the business other than their professional services should the business need them?

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:05:06 PM EDT

[#23]

Um... a threat to boycott someone's business is not extortion.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:11:46 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

If the letter were from the local pipefitters Union, I would agree with you, but this is a letter to a non retail business, from a Law Enforcement Professionals Organization, and references other Emergency Response Organizations, a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services, as the business doesn't have retail outlets that the Union members would be utilizing in a way that would make a Boycott sensible. If they aren't threatening them with a loss of business, then what is the threat?

" a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services"

I'm sorry but, I just don't see THAT threatened in the letter posted by the OP.

Again, IF that is what they're threatening then it's something else entirely but I'm just going off what they say in the
letter posted.

Then what were they threatening? The letter clearly stated that they would advise their members that the business was against them, and that the decision would affect their business, the business of the company threatened is not a retail business, it is a commercial banking company, unless the Union has investment accounts with the firm, then there is no way that they could be threatening a voluntary boycott by the members of the union. What are they threatening? What the letter forces us to do is read between the lines, if it isn't a direct loss of retail business what else can the Union members withhold from the business other than their professional services should the business need them?

That bank offers all sorts of personal services (Credit cards, car loans ect).....

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:15:32 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

Nah, they just like throwing around impressive sounding phrases that they heard on TV. "Herp Derp! Boycott?!? Extortion! Smash their heads in with brisks because they're thugs! Enforce the free makret by not letting them choose not to use certain services!"

More like do what we say, or else. From a public union that is paid through their taxes. You might want to think about it.

They didn't say "or else..." letting it hang threatening and dripping menace... they said or we will boycott you. Just like we say "if you won't support my 2nd ammendment rights, I will not shop at your store."

What someone does for a living shouldn't prevent them from freely choosing what businesses to patronize.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:20:54 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

If the letter were from the local pipefitters Union, I would agree with you, but this is a letter to a non retail business, from a Law Enforcement Professionals Organization, and references other Emergency Response Organizations, a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services, as the business doesn't have retail outlets that the Union members would be utilizing in a way that would make a Boycott sensible. If they aren't threatening them with a loss of business, then what is the threat?

" a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services"

I'm sorry but, I just don't see THAT threatened in the letter posted by the OP.

Again, IF that is what they're threatening then it's something else entirely but I'm just going off what they say in the
letter posted.

Then what were they threatening? The letter clearly stated that they would advise their members that the business was against them, and that the decision would affect their business, the business of the company threatened is not a retail business, it is a commercial banking company, unless the Union has investment accounts with the firm, then there is no way that they could be threatening a voluntary boycott by the members of the union. What are they threatening? What the letter forces us to do is read between the lines, if it isn't a direct loss of retail business what else can the Union members withhold from the business other than their professional services should the business need them?

That bank offers all sorts of personal services (Credit cards, car loans ect).....

OK, I just looked over their site again, and yep, you are right. I think I must have went to a site through a link directly to their commercial department, because I didn't see any references to the retail side, which they do indeed have.

Isn't that nice, somebody admitting they were wrong? I will even admit that I only realized I was wrong because you corrected me.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:21:01 PM EDT

[#27]

Reads like desperation to me, this and anything worse that they will pull will only turn the public against them, more and faster.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:26:48 PM EDT

[#28]

Sounds like someone needs to send a 'Cleveland Stadium' response.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:28:44 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

If the letter were from the local pipefitters Union, I would agree with you, but this is a letter to a non retail business, from a Law Enforcement Professionals Organization, and references other Emergency Response Organizations, a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services, as the business doesn't have retail outlets that the Union members would be utilizing in a way that would make a Boycott sensible. If they aren't threatening them with a loss of business, then what is the threat?

" a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services"

I'm sorry but, I just don't see THAT threatened in the letter posted by the OP.

Again, IF that is what they're threatening then it's something else entirely but I'm just going off what they say in the
letter posted.

Then what were they threatening? The letter clearly stated that they would advise their members that the business was against them, and that the decision would affect their business, the business of the company threatened is not a retail business, it is a commercial banking company, unless the Union has investment accounts with the firm, then there is no way that they could be threatening a voluntary boycott by the members of the union. What are they threatening? What the letter forces us to do is read between the lines, if it isn't a direct loss of retail business what else can the Union members withhold from the business other than their professional services should the business need them?

That bank offers all sorts of personal services (Credit cards, car loans ect).....

OK, I just looked over their site again, and yep, you are right. I think I must have went to a site through a link directly to their commercial department, because I didn't see any references to the retail side, which they do indeed have.

Isn't that nice, somebody admitting they were wrong? I will even admit that I only realized I was wrong because you corrected me.

Who are you, and what are you doing in GD?

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:39:22 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

If the letter were from the local pipefitters Union, I would agree with you, but this is a letter to a non retail business, from a Law Enforcement Professionals Organization, and references other Emergency Response Organizations, a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services, as the business doesn't have retail outlets that the Union members would be utilizing in a way that would make a Boycott sensible. If they aren't threatening them with a loss of business, then what is the threat?

" a reasonable person would see this as a threat of deprivation of services"

I'm sorry but, I just don't see THAT threatened in the letter posted by the OP.

Again, IF that is what they're threatening then it's something else entirely but I'm just going off what they say in the
letter posted.

Then what were they threatening? The letter clearly stated that they would advise their members that the business was against them, and that the decision would affect their business, the business of the company threatened is not a retail business, it is a commercial banking company, unless the Union has investment accounts with the firm, then there is no way that they could be threatening a voluntary boycott by the members of the union. What are they threatening? What the letter forces us to do is read between the lines, if it isn't a direct loss of retail business what else can the Union members withhold from the business other than their professional services should the business need them?

That bank offers all sorts of personal services (Credit cards, car loans ect).....

OK, I just looked over their site again, and yep, you are right. I think I must have went to a site through a link directly to their commercial department, because I didn't see any references to the retail side, which they do indeed have.

Isn't that nice, somebody admitting they were wrong? I will even admit that I only realized I was wrong because you corrected me.

This may be a GD first!...

Seriously man, I hate the fuckers as much or more as most.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:43:36 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Um... a threat to boycott someone's business is not extortion.

From a private citizen? Or, group of private citizens? Sure. From a public employees union? It's a bit different since the affected business/individual pays taxes that directly fund the paychecks.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:44:59 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

Nah, they just like throwing around impressive sounding phrases that they heard on TV. "Herp Derp! Boycott?!? Extortion! Smash their heads in with brisks because they're thugs! Enforce the free makret by not letting them choose not to use certain services!"

More like do what we say, or else. From a public union that is paid through their taxes. You might want to think about it.

They didn't say "or else..." letting it hang threatening and dripping menace... they said or we will boycott you. Just like we say "if you won't support my 2nd ammendment rights, I will not shop at your store."

What someone does for a living shouldn't prevent them from freely choosing what businesses to patronize.

As a private citizen you are free to do so. As the head of a union, threatening to do so, and have your fellow public servants do so? That is a bit different.

Posted: 3/11/2011 7:51:25 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
UNION SCUM!

Those Union people are the very reason you don't have to shop at the company store or get paid in company script that is valid only at the company store. Better educate yourself before spouting off.

And no I'm not a union member but I know how it was before there were unions.

Posted: 3/11/2011 8:02:06 PM EDT

[#34]

I still think the NG is going to have to bust some thug heads, since it appears the thugs aren't going to understand they lost. May as well start now. Thump

Posted: 3/11/2011 8:06:59 PM EDT

[#35]

wow

Posted: 3/11/2011 8:31:53 PM EDT

[#36]

Better get on the right side, you people. That Business you have could suffer a shall we say... accident.

Posted: 3/11/2011 8:36:40 PM EDT

[#37]

I misread the title at first to be "Unicorns threaten business" and was like WTF?

I need help.

Posted: 3/11/2011 8:42:32 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
I misread the title at first to be "Unicorns threaten business" and was like WTF?

I need help.

The unions will always help a brother up.

Looks like you qualify for the Librarian Union.

Posted: 3/11/2011 9:00:24 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
http://rawjustice.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/goodfellas.jpg

Better get on the right side, you people. That Business you have could suffer a shall we say... accident.

Thank you in advance for your consideration. We look forward to hearing from
you soon.

James L. Palmer, Executive Director
Wisconsin Professional Police Association
Mahlon Mitchell,President
Professional Professional Fire Fighters
Jim Conway], President

are you fucking kidding me?
truth IS stranger than fiction.

Posted: 3/12/2011 8:18:21 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Um... a threat to boycott someone's business is not extortion.

Yeah no implied threat there.

Posted: 3/12/2011 8:30:00 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

Quoted:
You did misread. The letter is external to a private business........It is not a internal union newsletter.

No, I understood that part. They're threatening to boycott the bank if they don't support them. Assuming the bank
tells them to go pound sand (Or doesn't respond at all) they're going to tell their members to avoid doing business
with the bank. I still don't see that as "over the top". We (Gun owners) and our groups do the same thing and there's
any number of boycotts out there these days based on who supports this or that piece of gun legislation (IIRC none
of us are supposed to be buying anything made by Kraft foods because they've supported congress critters that support
various bans).

The fact that the public sector unions receive their dues from members paid with tax revenues doesn't eliminate their
ability to advocate one way or another who their members might or might not conduct business with (AFAIC).

Anyway, as I've said before, I'm no fan of unions (I'm probably even more "reactionary" than most here in that I don't
even think they were "good" back in the old days) but this letter just doesn't trip my outrage meter.

What if the Bank is doing buisness with the School Dist ,Firefighter,Police ETC? The letter doesnt make that distinction.

I sell products to Cities Manicipalities and Schoool Dist. They cannot even take a free lunch or a hat for that matter . If they came to me and told me that if i didnt support their political cause that they would boycott my buisness how would that be legal?
Public employees cannot use their positions for personal gaines not matter how you feel things should be.

Posted: 3/12/2011 8:56:12 AM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
UNION SCUM!

Those Union people are the very reason you don't have to shop at the company store or get paid in company script that is valid only at the company store. Better educate yourself before spouting off.

And no I'm not a union member but I know how it was before there were unions.

Well how about instead of unions we petition our elected representatives in Congress to establish laws that protect workers? We could have laws that limit how many hours one can work in a week and make sure employees are paid more for working over that time. Hell you could probly create an entire agency devoted to nothing more than work place safety.

ETA: You know how it was before unions?

UAW - 1935
ALPA - 1931
UMWA - 1890
IBEW - 1891
UA - 1889

Just how fucking old are you?

Posted: 3/14/2011 8:26:14 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

i guess some people cant wrap their head around the fact that the govt isnt the free market..

No, but their members are consumers. They will buy where they're supported.

so please... before you call others window lickers... maybe you should wash that taste out of your mouth first.

Looks like the anti union tards forgot that union members vote with their dollars, too. That must really burn...

Posted: 3/14/2011 8:29:29 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
It's funny watching the anti union window lickers show their hypocrisy!

It was all fun and games lecturing to us about the free market until the public employee unions started to use the free market in their favor.

Now they're committing extortion?!?!?!

I was going to type:

Hey YOU!!! You stupid fuck.

There is no FREE MARKET shit in the public sector, you shit for brains cockbreath bastard.

You are being paid by taxes. You do not produce a God da-da-damn mother fucking thing.

But, I won't.

Georgia, eh?

It shows...

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - UNIONS THREATEN BUSINESS (Page 2 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us