Apply Now!

Business, as usual

clcooper

clcooper

Expert Expediter
they are in business to make a profit not to worry about the workers . profit are more important then peoples lives . or the furture peoples lives . if the workers didnt like how things were being handled they should of got their own mine . then they can do things the way they want .

as long as the business makes a profit that is all that matters . RIGHT ??
 
cheri1122

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
I agree with Tbubster on one thing: we can get used to dam near anything, if it happens often enough.
The verdict of the investigation is that Mr Blankenship's policy of putting profit ahead of safety makes him guilty of the deaths of 29 men, but is this mass murderer in prison?
Nope, he's free [in the legal sense - he was actually extremely expensive to Massey, what with the multimillion dollar salary and incredibly generous 'perks' he was given, even AFTER the deaths he didn't care to prevent] to set up another corporation in the same mining industry, and he is doing just that.
If this is what passes for presidential qualifications [business experience], then stick a fork in our 'civilized society', cause we're DONE.
And people actually wonder why the protesters are angry?!
 
greg334

greg334

Veteran Expediter
See Cheri, you are soooo wrong about this, Blankenship has the same guilt as those who are there to protect the miners.

No matter how you want to put forth the company is at fault, it is not their obligation to ensure the safety of the workers is first and foremost - that obligation belongs to the Union that represents them and has the power to put a stop to a lot of this but has failed to do so.

No matter if the company paid our a billion dollars, the same issues will pop up in another mine and there will again someone dying because of it and it has been that way for decades. The union, and those who are part of it have the power, not the company.
 
clcooper

clcooper

Expert Expediter
that doesnt happen only in union jobs . the union doesnt buy for the safety items. the union tells the company to buy the safety items.

yes Blankenship has the same guilt as others . so do we just say ok and move forward and forget about it . or do we say Blankenship and all that are guilty are to be punished .
 
greg334

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Who said anything about buying safety items, it has to do with being on the ground and knowing that your workers are unsafe. The Union is as much to blame, they could strike that mine, take the owners/state to court to have the regulations enforced and a whole number of things. As much as people think that the owners of the mine are at fault, the union is there to protect the workers by the workers joining them otherwise the union is useless and should be done away with.
 
cheri1122

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
greg334 said:
Who said anything about buying safety items, it has to do with being on the ground and knowing that your workers are unsafe. The Union is as much to blame, they could strike that mine, take the owners/state to court to have the regulations enforced and a whole number of things.
As much as people think that the owners of the mine are at fault, the union is there to protect the workers by the workers joining them otherwise the union is useless and should be done away with.
Click to expand...

No matter what the union does, it's the management that has the final say, period.
The union can strike, but as weapons go, it's as effective as a cheap Saturday night special: more likely to backfire than not. Workers, [believe it or not], don't want to be out of work, and they know that the company can outspend and outwait them. [Or fire them all]
Take the company to court? Sure, and see how many 'disgruntled workers' become jobless. Even if they [eventually] prove otherwise, they could starve in the meantime. And let's not forget those blacklists - of course they don't exist, but as long as executives golf together, some folks will remain unable to find employment in their chosen field, and they know it.
Whatever tactics they used to 'persuade' the workers to continue working without adequate safety equipment & procedures, the responsibility to protect workers from known risks is entirely management's, and so is the blatant failure to do it.
All the speeches about 'taking responsibility' ring pretty hollow, when the concept doesn't apply to the privileged wealthy.
 
greg334

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Then Cheri, the problem comes down to the burden being on the workers at that point.

If they don't want to strike or the union doesn't want to do their job, I can't see what the reason why we should be all too concern with the outcome.

No one forces anyone to work, this isn't the Soviet Union or where we are using forced labor to work to provide coal to power the war machine. The worker has the right to strike, the worker also has an obligation to hold their union accountable for their lack of using their power to fix the problem.

I'm not siding with the company on this one, they have an obligation but I am tired of hearing about how the company screws people while the union collects dues and does nothing for the worker. My grandfather and many of my uncles worked in these mines and I know the games played by the company but when they worked, the union did things to bring a lot of safety issues up and striking was one tool they used. Another tool was suing the state/feds to enforce the laws, which the state/feds also have a part in all of this. So it started with the workers who refused to work then the union to fight for those workers at that point.
 
clcooper

clcooper

Expert Expediter
greg334 said:
Then Cheri, the problem comes down to the burden being on the workers at that point.

If they don't want to strike or the union doesn't want to do their job, I can't see what the reason why we should be all too concern with the outcome.

No one forces anyone to work, this isn't the Soviet Union or where we are using forced labor to work to provide coal to power the war machine. The worker has the right to strike, the worker also has an obligation to hold their union accountable for their lack of using their power to fix the problem.

I'm not siding with the company on this one, they have an obligation but I am tired of hearing about how the company screws people while the union collects dues and does nothing for the worker. My grandfather and many of my uncles worked in these mines and I know the games played by the company but when they worked, the union did things to bring a lot of safety issues up and striking was one tool they used. Another tool was suing the state/feds to enforce the laws, which the state/feds also have a part in all of this. So it started with the workers who refused to work then the union to fight for those workers at that point.
Click to expand...


my point is people don't know and don't what to know what is really going on today. because the GAMES are still being played .
and when people say "No one forces anyone to work" is a joke . stop and think if you didn't work where will you live . how will you feed yourself .

people ***** because of collective bargaining . now you say the workers should strike . which way should it be .

"If they don't want to strike or the union doesn't want to do their job, I can't see what the reason why we should be all too concern with the outcome."
why don't you just say you don't care about other people and you only care about myself .
just like you see a Bully picking on the small kid at the playground you say nobody forced the kid to go to the playground . and if the small kid doesn't fight back he wont help him . just think about you and Chuck Norris .you already know you aren't going to win why should .

never mind people don't want for things to be batter . people enjoy the corruption
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top