Ive been trying to read into that strike. In reality, if you are currently under some kind of contract, it is illegal to strike. Its hard to tell if they are indeed currently under some contract and are just trying to get better wages off something that was already given up in 2009.. Maybe I'll have time later to read more into the dispute. But if it is a law breaking strike, there is nothing the President can do about it. This is where those people need to break the law and stand up for what is right if they have legitamate reasons. and with that many involved it seems like there is definitely something going wrong there. Now, as far as job specifics, they can unite a walkout for, say, lack of safety conditions. As we had walked out of our job due to the temperatures being at dangerous levels and the boss's in the climate controlled trailers thought otherwise. We walked and conditions bettered the very next day. They set in motion instantly to better the conditions within that hot box we were working in. But at the end of that job, they never wanted to use our company again for anymore work because we stood up for ourselves. But thats okay, theres other companies that would of worked their guys in it and gladly sent em to the hospital, of course, right after they pee in a cup all half dead and shit. But we got their building built and everything worked properly, your welcome.

If your correct, then thats bull shit and those workers should keep striking. Fuck em.Its not far fetched though, I just didn't want to jump to conclusions yet. I'm no where near Philly.D's are just as company men as the R's, has been on both tickets for so long. You can't beat it out of em, its just the way they operate, money 1st, I guess. Strike laws are ment to be broken, but the workers are powerless these days..hoping for a better tomorrow. keep your chin up.IBEW member # 6000636But this # has a voice.

This is referring to the UK political party but it works for the labor movement too. Minneapolis Teamsters negotiating with the government in 1934.

Andrew. wrote:The Republican governor asked Obama to intervene against the strike and Obama agreed to do that. That was a choice on O's part. The unions immediately rolled over (despite nearly 99% of trainmen and engineers having voted for the strike). Unless I'm missing something, the strike was legal until Obama's executive order made it illegal.As Mike Davis says, the long marriage between the labor unions and the Democrats has been barren.

A very smart old man told me a long time ago.Kid, the unions and the companies are like a bad marrage that you have to some how make work.You cant give the company nice diamond rings and jewelry and expect it to work.You both have to work at it. I think the same goes for dem's, but the dems know once they get office. the money rolls in more on the company side of things..$$$$$$$both sides want it. But, how do you give each other a fair shake and walk away without any doubts?Shit politics has to hang around and get their beaks wet and fuck it all up.Need to keep it between company and union, no one else. Its a private contract and if they can't agree, they have to rehire a new workforce. But, don't push em to, pissed of mode, cause they will..

Not crap with an anecdote. The summer after my senior year in high school, I was a meat department porter (poo/cleanup boy) at a grocery store working 20 hours a week. I was making $4.75 an hour and they still wanted me to pay $50 in union dues a month. That put me well below minimum wage. The first month, they automatically took it out of my paycheck, but for July and August it was up to me to send it in. Obviously, I did not and eventually I got a letter in the mail terminating my membership in the meat cutters union. The letter ended with "fraternally yours." What a pisser.

Along with virtually every major retail and restaurant chain, Starbucks relies on software that choreographs workers in precise, intricate ballets, using sales patterns and other data to determine which of its 130,000 baristas are needed in its thousands of locations and exactly when. Big-box retailers or mall clothing chains are now capable of bringing in more hands in anticipation of a delivery truck pulling in or the weather changing, and sending workers home when real-time analyses show sales are slowing. Managers are often compensated based on the efficiency of their staffing.Scheduling is now a powerful tool to bolster profits, allowing businesses to cut labor costs with a few keystrokes. œIt s like magic, said Charles DeWitt, vice president for business development at Kronos, which supplies the software for Starbucks and many other chains.Yet those advances are injecting turbulence into parents routines and personal relationships, undermining efforts to expand preschool access, driving some mothers out of the work force and redistributing some of the uncertainty of doing business from corporations to families, say parents, child care providers and policy experts.Starbucks life. Ms. Navarro s fluctuating hours, combined with her limited resources, had also turned their lives into a chronic crisis over the clock. She rarely learned her schedule more than three days before the start of a workweek, plunging her into urgent logistical puzzles over who would watch the boy. Months after starting the job she moved out of her aunt s home, in part because of mounting friction over the erratic schedule, which the aunt felt was also holding her family captive. Ms. Navarro s degree was on indefinite pause because her shifting hours left her unable to commit to classes. She needed to work all she could, sometimes counting on dimes from the tip jar to make the bus fare home. If she dared ask for more stable hours, she feared, she would get fewer work hours over all.http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014 ... .html?\_r=0

A newer thing with larger retail chains like Bed Bath, Pier 1, etc., is to have their employees be scheduled for certain shifts and "on call" for others. If at any time during that on call period they get called they are expected to show up, and they are not paid anything for the time on call. Total fucking bullshit.

sitwell wrote:enframed wrote:A newer thing with larger retail chains like Bed Bath, Pier 1, etc., is to have their employees be scheduled for certain shifts and "on call" for others. If at any time during that on call period they get called they are expected to show up, and they are not paid anything for the time on call. Total fucking bullshit.Agreed 100%. Total fucking bullshit.I noticed this with my brother in law in the US. He works in property management and they put him "on call" during weekends, not paid. Basically if a tenant has an issue on the weekend and they call him he has to deal with it... but still isn't paid. He can't go out for a drink, can be away from his phone, in fact he has to sit in front of his laptop because emails count as "calls"... how can employers get away with that?

It's all about leverage. You have to be able to destroy a business if everyone walks away. A lot of people like to talk about this thing in philosophical terms, but that's all that matters.