Saturday, January 24, 2009

Our Heartless Unions!

You hear it constantly from Layton, how they are the ones that care about the little people, the downtrodden and the underprivileged. The ace in the NDP hole is the unions, and they have been very active lately. We have unions striking at a time when our economy is tanking, why?

Every person with any common sense understands that they will be lucky to keep their jobs let alone get a raise, but that hasn't stopped the unions, those lefty organizations that get money from their own membership and then spend it on political activism.

They spout about helping workers all the while they do so with a raised fist. They march with Hamas supporters, and shout about workers rights. They are organized and actively oppose the government, yet every union member fee they gather is by force of law, a law that does not allow a worker to opt out of the union. They are the dictators, telling workers how to vote, and how to strike, and how to disrupt our lives, and they tell us it is their RIGHT to do so. They have no compassion for those they disrupt. Read this:

The Survivor: She walks 12 hours a day to save job

Anna. Her name is Anna Kraisingerova, and she is somebody worth knowing. You may have seen her trudging along Prince of Wales Drive and wondered why she was walking alone in the bone-chilling cold and darkness.

She walks because she has no choice.

"I live at Carling at Bronson.

"My job is in Barrhaven. I work nights. I must walk 18 kilometres to work. It takes six hours. And then I must walk six hours home after I work all night. I am nearly 60.

"This strike shouldn't happen," she says. "I come home, I rest for a few hours. Can you imagine to work all night and after to walk 18 kilometres home and then, sit down for two or three hours and then walk back and work all night again?"

Her dignity and her indomitable spirit are evident in the simple language she uses to describe her plight. But mostly it is exhaustion you hear in her voice.

When the buses are running, Anna catches the 85 on Carling. At Merivale, she transfers to the 176 for the run to Strandherd Drive at Woodroffe Avenue in Barrhaven and her job at a grocery store, stocking shelves on the graveyard shift.

She has been working at the store for six years, and the bus ride is part of her routine. And then the transit strike came, shattering Anna's world.
Make sure to read the whole thing!

So, does the union care about the hardships that the "little" people are going through, or do they only want more money and to set their own schedules? Will Layton volunteer to drive Anna to and from work? He doesn't care, he lived in subsidized housing while he was making over $100,000. Read "We The Living" by Ayn Rand, and you will get an idea of what the unions and the NDP/Liberals are up to.

Heartless unions. They want us to save their jobs, and could care less about those that they are hurting with their soviet style activism. These are the same unions that Iggy just met with in Quebec, and they vowed their support to him. So, the coalition is stronger than ever because of the unions using their membership dues to support the NDP and Liberals. Who has the "hidden" agenda? Who is "scary"?

UPDATE:
Olivia Molenda, a fourth-year York student, pronounced herself frustrated with the NDP's stance.

"A lot of people are out of money now, paying for rent and those things. On top of it all, people are just depressed," she said.

Shipley said the union is sympathetic with the students' plight, but noted the university only spent 11 days in bargaining with the union over the 78 days of the strike.

31 comments:

Anonymous said...

"He doesn't care, he lived in subsidized housing while he was making over $100,000."

What are the facts Hunter - were they paying subsidized or market rates for their place?

hunter said...

It doesn't matter if they paid MORE than market rates, mysteree, he and his wife were taking up a spot that someone else needed. They could have lived anywhere, the poor people have no choice.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Wow. That's a sad story, but good for the people that helped her.

What I don't understand is how the NDP can promote public transit on one hand as a solution to environmental problems, and then support strikes like this that force people to use cars and burn more fossil fuels, and where's the concern for the poor people like this one who has no choice but to walk?

Hypocrites.

Fitter said...

I'm a union member and I hate the Liberals and NDP. I've voted Tory for the past 30 years. I do my own thinking.

hunter said...

That's exactly the point Joanne, they talk a big game, but when it comes down to really caring about people like Anna, they are too busy protesting, and demanding higher union wages.

hunter said...

Ewell, I agree with you, my brother just laughs at the union bosses, but he is forced to pay dues, how democratic is that?

Curls said...

This is pitiful. The Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU)went on a one day wildcat strike in Toronto and no this nonsense in Ottawa. It is time to make special rules for public service unions which operate in monopoly fields. As we enter bad economic times, these folks look selfish as time goes on. Perhaps we should contract out transit services. They do it in Markham, ON. They still have strikes, but their unions do NOT have this belligerent screw the public attitude.

RayK said...

Hunter, please get your facts straight.

Jack Layton lived in a mixed income co-op; he did not live in "subsidized housing" NOR did he "tak[e] up a spot that someone else needed".

Mixed-income co-ops are non-profit housing projects where a certain number of units (usually 30%-40%) are set aside for low-income families who pay rent based on their income. The rest of the units, like Jack Layton’s, are rented to the general public at a fixed rate--i.e. a rate that is not subsidized and not based on their income.

The CMHC gives co-ops a partial subsidy on their mortgage interest for each low-income unit they provide. The units set aside for the general public are not subsidized and--because they generate more rent--actually help subsidize the low-income units by paying a greater share of the mortgage.

The whole idea is to create subsidized housing that is part of a larger mixed-income community and not “ghettoized” in the way so many housing projects are in the United States. These communities depend on higher- income people willing to live side-by-side with much poorer people to create a mixed-income environment and make the projects financially viable.

Had Jack Layton not rented that apartment it would have remained on the market until someone else who was willing to pay the full, non-subsidized rent did, because co-ops don’t just set aside non-subsidized units for the heck of it, they do it to generate income to pay the mortgage on the building or housing complex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Layton#Toronto_City_

RayK said...

The union in this case accepted the settlement recommended by the federal mediator who was brought in by both parties to resolve this dispute--before any strike began--and it was OC Transpo that rejected the recommended settlement.

So isn't it OC Transpo who should be ashamed? Am I missing something?

hunter said...

Well RayK using your own source, here is what I found:

Layton and Chow were also the subject of some dispute when a June 14, 1990 Toronto Star article by Tom Kerr accused them of unfairly living in a housing cooperative subsidized by the federal government, despite their high income.[17] Layton and Chow had both lived in the Hazelburn Co-op since 1985, and lived together in an $800 per month three-bedroom apartment after their marriage in 1988. By 1990, their combined annual income was $120,000, and in March of that year they began voluntarily paying an additional $325 per month to offset their share of the co-op's Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation subsidy, the only members of the co-op to do so.

So, from 1988 to 1990 they paid the subsidized rent amount and only after they were making $120,000 did they decide to pay more. Sounds like they were living at the same rate as the other tenants for over 2 years. Once they were found out, they moved out very quickly. Also doesn't Jack use private doctors while telling all of us that we should not be able to??? Funny how that works.

RayK said...

Hunter, you are misreading the source to which I linked. The next line states: "In response to the article, the co-op's board argued that having mixed-income tenants was crucial to the success of co-ops, and that the laws deliberately set aside apartments for those willing to pay market rates, such as Layton and Chow."

"[S]uch as Layton and Chow". The $800/month paid by Layton and Chow was the fixed rate available to any member of the general public--not a subsidized rate for low-income families.

The additional $350 dollars they paid after this ridiculous smear campaign was launched against them was a voluntary contribution that they made to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. They paid "their share" of the subsidy even though they weren't receiving the reduced--subsidized--rent.

Even at the time those attacking Layton and Chow admitted that the couple was not living in one of the low-income units, but made the ridiculous claim that this was still somehow inappropriate.

This kind of co-op is a totally normal thing and no one who is familiar with the co-op system would describe Layton and Chow's unit as subsidized housing or anything like it. Approximately 150,000 Canadians pay full rent in mixed-income housing co-ops across the country. Suggesting they are somehow doing something immoral even though their rent--and their willingness to live next door to people who are poorer than themselves--helps provides affordable housing to 100,000 people who would otherwise not have it? That's disgusting.

But that's what Layton's opponents did in order to smear him and his wife.

RayK said...

"Also doesn't Jack use private doctors while telling all of us that we should not be able to???"

This, again, is a silly lie that has been spread much too far.

The Shouldice Hospital (not clinic) is a private, non-profit institution that (a)accepts payment from Canadian patients only in the form of their provincial health insurance and (b) was GRANDFATHER INTO MEDICARE under strict regulations by the Ontario government. There are no extra fees. It is fully open to anyone with a health card.

(International patients have to pay, as at many--if not all--Canadian hospitals).

Seeing as how it was grandfathered into Medicare, it really isn't even plausible to confuse it with the kind of fee-for-service and executive clinics the NDP opposes. The Ontario NDP, for example, has opposed all sorts of priovate clinics in Ontario but never the Shouldice Hospital.

Bec said...

My favorite part of this argument? The folks that we know in unions, hate it and are conservatives.

They are weakening in Western Canada and should be dismantled entirely.
I want to dismantle the whole system. We would have much better quality in the services if it was an earned merit system over a status quo system.
The union system reeks of an, "oh well"mentality of workmanship and work ethic.

Southern Quebec said...

The reason that workers are not allowed to opt out of a union is because they enjoy the benefits that have been negotiated by the union.

Not all unions are bad. The pilot of the USAirways plane was a union member, as was the pilot of the ferry boat that picked up the passangers.

Anonymous said...

Additionally: "In response to the article, the co-op's board argued that having mixed-income tenants was crucial to the success of co-ops, and that the laws deliberately set aside apartments for those willing to pay market rates, such as Layton and Chow.[18] During the late 1980s and early 1990s they maintained approximately 30% of their units as low income units and provided the rest at what they considered market rent. In June 1990, the city's solicitor cleared the couple of any wrong-doing,"

You are reading and quoting somewhat selectively Hunter - you only have to think a little about this one - $800 a month would have quite been expensive in 1985.

As per " Also doesn't Jack use private doctors while telling all of us that we should not be able to???" PMSH tried that one already on tv during the debate. Everyone, EVERYONE in Toronto goes to Shouldice for hernia treatment. Procedures there are covered by OHIP.

Alberta Girl said...

RayK - spoken like someone who is a "union" person.

Please provide a link to prove your statement that it was OC that rejected the offer - and what that offer was.

I guess we now know why there was such an uproar over Harper's E.S. saying that strikes were put on hold, huh RayK. GREED!

RayK said...

The crux of the mediator's propsal was to settle the issues where the parties were near an agreement and continue the negotiations for one year on the issue of scheduling in order to avoid a strike. The union agreed, the city did not.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2008/12/30/ot-081230-scheduling.html

jad said...

"The Shouldice Hospital (not clinic) is a private, non-profit institution that (a)accepts payment from Canadian patients only in the form of their provincial health insurance and (b) was GRANDFATHER INTO MEDICARE under strict regulations by the Ontario government"

I don't have a problem with Jack or anyone else from Toronto getting their hernias, etc. etc fixed here. But I do have a problem with Jack using this particular facility and then campaigning against similar private, non-profit hospitals for the rest of the country.

hunter said...

Funny how none of the lefty posters here have disputed the fact that Jack is in the unions pocket, and that the unions are being irresponsible striking without consideration to the students and bus riders, who Jack pretends to care about.

RayK said...

"I do have a problem with Jack using this particular facility and then campaigning against similar private, non-profit hospitals for the rest of the country."

But the NDP is NOT opposed to institutions of this sort. The NDP is opposed to for-profit medical clinics that charge for services paid for by Medicare or charge membership fees ("executive health and wellness" packages) and then bill Medicare for individual services that they are not allowed to charge for privately.

If there was a movement to create privately managed non-profit health clinics that only charge patients using their health cards, I imagine the NDP would have to consider the details of such a proposal, but no such movement exists.

RayK said...

"Funny how none of the lefty posters here have disputed the fact that Jack is in the unions pocket."

The NDP supports collective bargaining rights. They ARE after all protected by the Constitution. If you know any New Democrats, I imagine you know that this is something they genuinely tend to believe in and has nothing to do with being in anyone's pocket.

"The unions are being irresponsible striking without consideration to the students and bus riders, who Jack pretends to care about."

One could say the exact same thing about management--in any such situation--which is what makes it a meaningless standard. Negotiations happen all the time, that's a part of doing business. Why would you expect people to keep working for less money than they're asking for while negotiations go on endlessly, any more than you would expect their employer to pay more than they are willing to pay while negotiations go on indefinitely?

hunter said...

RayK....is that you Jack???

If not, you sure are a cheerleader for the socialist NDP.

Now, why are unions ignoring the hardship they are putting kitchen table Canadians through to get more money from taxpayers in a recession??

RayK said...

"Now, why are unions ignoring the hardship they are putting kitchen table Canadians through to get more money from taxpayers in a recession??"

First of all, the employees in question aren't asking for more money. OC Transpo has already agreed that the union's demands on wages are fair (the employees in question are also owed 18 months worth of back pay on cost of living raises they haven't been given for the last year and a half).

Secondly, they aren't ignoring anyone's hardship. I'm sure OC Transpo workers do care about the difficulties the transit strike is causing for Ottawa residents trying to get to work everyday. Not to mention: THEY CAN'T GO TO WORK THEMSELVES!

Do you think people out on strike don't take this kind of thing seriously? Of course they do.

The question real is, what's the alternative? Accept whatever management offers no matter how low? Keep working with no cost of living increases ever?

Your not giving any reasons for why you think the union is at fault in this particular case, or how their demands are unreasonable. Why? Is it because you just don't like unions in general? Do you feel that you can just blame them for every Labour/Management dispute, no matter what the facts are in that particular case?

Cause it certainly seems like that's what you're saying.

I'm mean, what world do you think we live in where an employer can just offer employees whatever wages they want and workers are somehow obligated to accept them and not negotiate for more? That how the market works and--whether you approve of them or not--unions are just part of market.

hunter said...

RayG gives us a good indication of the mindset of unionists. Union and wages before the "little" people. RayG does not care about Anna who has to walk to her minimum wage job. He has not referred to the link once in all his multiple posts. He could care less the hardships regular people are going through with these strikes, he's more interested in defending his leader Jack, than telling us how he could help Anna.

RayG feels it's his right to strike for higher wages during a recession, and cloak it in demands for shift control. If as he says management has agreed to the union wage demands, why is the union STILL on strike?? Bloodsuckers.

RayG also has not condemned unions for marching with Hamas and Hezbollah, this says all I need to know about RayG.

Next question, is it proper for a union to spend union dues on protests only against Israel and march with Hamas???

RayK said...

Hunter, you are truly crazy.

First of all, it's RayK, not RayG.

Second, to claim that defending a group of bus drivers--who are trying to negotiate a difficult contact--is somehow abandoning the "little people", shows how obviously you have been blinded to the facts by your raging hatred of all unions. They're bus drivers for Christs' sake!

Third, it was YOU who brought up Jack Layton even though he obviously has nothing to do with a municipal transit strike in Ottawa. I mearly tried to inform you that you were repeating shameless, discredited lies against the man (first in your post and then in the comments). You now want Jack Layton to end a city transit strike? To "help Anna" as you put it? Stop and think how crazy that is for a moment.

Fourth, I quite clearly did refer to the link you posted when I wrote "[s]o isn't it OC Transpo who should be ashamed?" (in my first comment regarding the strike) and when I wrote "they aren't ignoring anyone's hardship. I'm sure OC Transpo workers do care about the difficulties the transit strike is causing for Ottawa residents trying to get to work everyday." (in my forth and last comment regarding the strike).

No one disputes that the Ottawa transit strike is causing "hardship" as you put it, but you are claiming that the union is to blame for this without presented any evidence to that effect (when, in fact, it was management that reject the mediated settlement).

So let me ask you this simple question: why DO you think the union is to blame for the failure to reach a settlement in this dispute?

(Two asides:

First, your comments about Hamas and Hezbollah are ridiculous. There are no unions in this country that have marched with Hamas and Hezbollah. Finding some nutcases who show up at rally who are denounced by those organizing the rally is not the same as "marching" with that person. And I can't possibly be expected to randomly denounce things totally unrelated to the conversation at hand.

Sceond, I particularly like the question: "RayG feels it's his right to strike for higher wages during a recession, and cloak it in demands for shift control. If as he says management has agreed to the union wage demands, why is the union STILL on strike??"

Quite obviously, the union IS in fact on strike because OC Transpo insists on changing the contractual agreement they have with the union to schedule shifts based on senority and OC Transpo further refuses to accept any new contract that does not include such changes.)

hunter said...

You are so funny RayG! Or should I say so blinded by your own unionist mentality that you can not show any compassion for the people you are hurting. RayG go out and drive Anna to work, then I would believe you really care about the "little" people.

By the by, I am forced to be part of a union, but don't ever except me to show up on a picket line.

First, your comments about Hamas and Hezbollah are ridiculous. There are no unions in this country that have marched with Hamas and Hezbollah. Finding some nutcases who show up at rally who are denounced by those organizing the rally is not the same as "marching" with that person.

Too funny, what planet are you living on? From your favorite source Wiki:

In 2006, under Sid Ryan's leadership, CUPE Ontario voted to endorse a global campaign of boycott and divestment against the State of Israel's "apartheid-like policies" towards the Palestinians.[4] The resolution received support from Willie Madisha, President of the Congress of South African Trade Unions and apartheid opponent.[5]

In June 2007, Ryan stated that CUPE resolution against Israel "was heard around the world. While it taught me how vicious a campaign can be against those who speak out for peace and social justice, it is gratifying that support for our stand came from organizations and trade unions across the globe."[6]

In January 2009, Sid Ryan expressed strong support for a proposal to ban Israeli academics from teaching at Ontario Universities. Ryan stated that "we are ready to say Israeli academics should not be on our campuses unless they explicitly condemn the university bombing and the assault on Gaza in general."[7][8] Ryan later made a remark comparing Israel’s missile attacks on the Islamic University of Gaza to Nazi book burning practices,[9] a remark for which he subsequently issued an apology.[10] He calls Israel an ever-expanding apartheid-type regime.[11]


This is the face of unions today, and it is disgusting!

Anonymous said...

Stereo - it doesn't matter. As long as he and Olivia were living there, one less person who really needed the housing was not able to live there. Layton is a hypocrite of the highest order.

Anonymous said...

Joanne - the NDP is just another word for liar. Howard Hampton's excuse for voting against McGuinty's legislation is pure politics although he denies that. I was stunned when he voted against the legislation. I hope all those students grow up to NEVER vote NDP.

Anonymous said...

Joanne - sorry, I was referring to the York strike and you were referring to our transit strike. Unfortunately, our system has two routes which cross to the Quebec side and are, as such, federal services about which McGuinty can do nothing. Our own CPC let us down on this one - much to my dismay and fury.

Ewell - I am also a union member and I have voted Tory all of my life. The NDP lies like crazy. I lived through two NDP provincial governments and they actually worsened the lives of us working stiffs.

RayK - actually, I have to disagree with you on the ATU's concern for the public. André Cornellier has made it clear that he doesn't give a rat's butt about the public - unless you have heard this jerk speak in interviews, you have no idea what it's like to be without a transit system. Because it's under federal jurisdiction, there is nothing McGuinty can do but sit on the sidelines and watch us suffer.

Personally, I can get around because I own a car. Normally, I take the bus to and from work at a cost of $85 per month.

Since December 10, I have had to drive to work. This means close to $100 per week for gas and parking: one week now costs me more than one month of transit. I had to increase my car insurance to allow me to drive to work and that cost. I normally drive only on weekends and only when the roads are safe for all-season tires. This year, I have had to unexpectedly buy winter tires and rims at a cost of $1,100. This has put me in debt. I have had to stop putting extra on my mortgage and have stopped putting money into my RRSP because of the weekly cost and the cost of rims and tires. But, I am lucky because I can get around. Others are not so lucky.

When asked if he cared about the plight of vulnerable transit users, Cornellier said "no".

Sorry RayK - the ATU leadership is in the wrong. In addition, many of the members are now in bankruptcy or are in over their heads in debt because of the absence of several paycheques. They will NEVER make up for the lost money.

One of my closest friends in part of this local and he was planning to retire this summer after a lifelong career with OC. He won't be able to do that, now.

So, as far as who is right and who is wrong - the ATU is wrong. The belligerent attitude from the get-go has turned practically an entire city against the ATU.

And where is the NDP - there are vulnerable people who are suffering hardship as a result of this unethical strike. Is it not interesting that the NDP is totally silent on this - I guess the union contributions mean more to the NDP than the people the party PRETENDS to support.

And people wonder why we have such disgust for the left-wing parties.

Anonymous said...

I forgot to mention - that $100 or so I'm spending on parking and gas every week during this strike - I had planned to have some much-needed dental work this year. I have had to shelve that plan and put it off until next year. I just love how the lefties really look out for guys like me who make barely enough to survive but who have to suffer financial hardship because the NDP is so in the unions' pockets.

Anonymous said...

Regarding "Funny how none of the lefty posters here have disputed the fact that Jack is in the unions pocket, and that the unions are being irresponsible striking without consideration to the students and bus riders, who Jack pretends to care about."

and

Regarding: "Stereo - it doesn't matter. As long as he and Olivia were living there, one less person who really needed the housing was not able to live there. Layton is a hypocrite of the highest order."

If only 30% of the housing was subsidized and Jack and Olivia were living in a unit belonging to the other 70% of units for which they paid market value please explain how they were taking housing away from the 30% allotted to assuage need.

This issue has come and gone - the reporters involved were discredited
and Layton and Chow absolved of wrongdoing - yet how many years later (?)both Hunter and East of Eden (union loathing union members though though they are) prefer to repeat inaccuracies about old old old news.

Hunter if you stuck to your topic, and your argument demonstrated how the unions are actually being irresponsible you might find someone to engage with on this.

PS - take care of your teeth, EoE.