For all Johnny Cash Fans

"sf" wrote in

Sensible. They did make a slight bit of progress getting rid of a jet
engine that the military did not need or want. Hurt GE a little, but helps
Pratt-Whiney and the taxpayer.

Of course, we'll be in a cold war type of situation with China soon as they
continue to build jet fighters, carrier killing missiles and submarines.
 
On Feb 18, 7:36?pm, "Michael O'Connor" wrote:

I want to see them all embrace the attitude of these lyrics:

"I wear the black for the poor and the beaten down,
Livin' in the hopeless, hungry side of town,
I wear it for the prisoner who has long paid for his crime,
But is there because he's a victim of the times."
--from *Man In Black* by Johnny Cash

Best wishes to the Democratic Senators from Wisconsin. They are
fighting for all working Americans.

--Bryan
 
On 2/20/2011 12:14 PM, Dave Smith wrote:

Another person who has never been self employed or had to adhere to a
budget or make a payroll. Lets say he used to work say 50 hours/week for
a certain amount of money and now needs to work 70 for the same amount
because of some condition such as business is slow or maybe a customer
didn't pay or filed bankruptcy? What if he even has to work for less
period? Isn't that a defacto pay cut? Would he just give himself a raise
with pixie dust?

I used to be on a board of a charitable organization. One of the other
board members was a school teacher. He would constantly decide to do
things on his own even though we had a tight budget or even no money to
work with. We would ask "Bob, what would you do if you were involved in
a school function and didn't have enough money?" his response was that
he would simply go and get more money.




But teachers fit into a unique category. Typically someone with a
graduate degree is a professional who seeks salaried employment on a 1-1
basis with an employer. And in that employment you typically don't watch
the clock and you do whatever is necessary to get your work done.
Teachers because they are often unionized have become sort of quasi
professionals who want to be treated as if they are punching a time clock.

It actually is pretty common that they work 6 hours/day and don't take
home work. There are multiple teachers in my family and also friends who
are teachers. Get them on the side when they don't have to be a union
brother and they will tell you it isn't a terrible job.
 
On 2/20/2011 2:39 PM, Dave Smith wrote:

So just like the private sector you change the scope of their jobs. If
the art teachers go home at 2 you find something for them to do.
 
On 2/20/2011 5:16 PM, sf wrote:


I can just imagine walking into the "sf" restaurant and seeing that a
basic sandwich costs $15 and asking why only to be told you don't know
how to manage things very well so you just keep on increasing the prices
to compensate...
 
On 2/20/2011 12:14 PM, Dave Smith wrote:

Another person who has never been self employed or had to adhere to a
budget or make a payroll. Lets say he used to work say 50 hours/week for
a certain amount of money and now needs to work 70 for the same amount
because of some condition such as business is slow or maybe a customer
didn't pay or filed bankruptcy? What if he even has to work for less
period? Isn't that a defacto pay cut? Would he just give himself a raise
with pixie dust?

I used to be on a board of a charitable organization. One of the other
board members was a school teacher. He would constantly decide to do
things on his own even though we had a tight budget or even no money to
work with. We would ask "Bob, what would you do if you were involved in
a school function and didn't have enough money?" his response was that
he would simply go and get more money.




But teachers fit into a unique category. Typically someone with a
graduate degree is a professional who seeks salaried employment on a 1-1
basis with an employer. And in that employment you typically don't watch
the clock and you do whatever is necessary to get your work done.
Teachers because they are often unionized have become sort of quasi
professionals who want to be treated as if they are punching a time clock.

It actually is pretty common that they work 6 hours/day and don't take
home work. There are multiple teachers in my family and also friends who
are teachers. Get them on the side when they don't have to be a union
brother and they will tell you it isn't a terrible job.
 
On 2/20/2011 2:26 PM, sf wrote:
Yes, the liberal (often seen hobnobbing with Clinton) who bought our
company had absolutely no respect for ordinary people.

Prior to the new owner the business philosophy was to treat workers well
and with respect. For example one staff person had issues with diabetes
where it would go out of control causing her to miss work which she made
up on her own. She maintained her weight and did everything possible to
keep going but it didn't work some days. She was a good worker and we
simply made allowances for her like you should do for another.

The new liberal owner believed in management by intimidation. Instead of
praising folks for good work you abuse them as much as possible so they
always were in fear of loosing their job. To help accomplish this they
installed an elaborate time keeping system and made sure everyone knew
they were being watched. After some time enough "evidence" was collected
and they simply directed us to throw her under the bus. This happened a
number of times for similar reasons.
 
?
"Steve Pope" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

If every company offered the same deal, they'd sign or there would be no
job. Big business has been too lax in that respect.

As far as divisions, that would depend on the corporate makeup and profit
centers. A division that does well should not be punished because of either
a poor climate for another division or the fact that it is run by slackers.
 
On 2/20/2011 5:25 PM, sf wrote:
Low paying state jobs? That is something from the long ago past. At one
time public sector jobs paid less and then initially they got better
benefits to compensate. Then pay increased to being on par or better
than the private sector and they have better benefits than the private
sector.
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 07:35:18 -0500, George
wrote:


Holier than thou types making edicts and looking down their noses at
the ordinary work-a-day employee just come off as big assholes.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
?
"Bryan" wrote

As usual, the truth lies someplace in the middle. Most every private sector
employee (assuming they are still employed) is making some sacrifice. The
public sector should too. We have too many government employees anyway. We
just can't support their benefits.
 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 07:35:18 -0500, George
wrote:


Holier than thou types making edicts and looking down their noses at
the ordinary work-a-day employee just come off as big assholes.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
 
?
"Steve Pope" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

If every company offered the same deal, they'd sign or there would be no
job. Big business has been too lax in that respect.

As far as divisions, that would depend on the corporate makeup and profit
centers. A division that does well should not be punished because of either
a poor climate for another division or the fact that it is run by slackers.
 
On 2/20/2011 3:40 PM, Stu wrote:

That is exactly why NJ gov Christie cut the Hudson rail tunnel project.
Maybe a tunnel is needed but lets actually figure out what it will cost
and if we can afford to pay for it.
 
On 19/02/2011 10:14 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:


That IMO is a pretty simplistic view.I worked for the government. I had
a summer job while at university that paid better and for a lot less
work. When I first started with the government I was driving a truck. I
was making a little more per hour than a friend of mine who drove a
tractor trailer for a private company. Because of the economy, the
government belt tightened. I had a couple promotions over the next two
years, moving from equipment operator I to equipment operator IV and was
driving a tractor trailer, Despite being promoted three levels, my
friend was then making more than I was.

While we did not get pay raises at that time, we did get concessions on
benefits and job security. |In other words, those benefits came in lieu
of pay raises.

We did have a pretty good pension plan, 50% at age 65, or 90 factor. We
paid into that. I lost 8% off every pay check into my pension plan and
my employer matched that.

FWIW. there are GM plants in this area. While I don't think I would be
happy working on a line, I would have made more money and had better
benefits. The GM pension plan was better than ours and the company paid
everything into it. The works did not have to contribute.
 
On 20/02/2011 1:41 PM, George wrote:


I don't think that is the case at all. Like other professionals teachers
are paid to do a job. There are extra things they have to do outside of
classroom hours. Some teachers have given time to supervise school
teams. That can be a time consuming commitment. A football coach, for
instance is looking at two hours a day every day for the season. That is
a responsibility that tends to fall on the physed teacher. The
librarians and art teachers tend to avoid those chores, so it is hardly
fair that one is expected to put in all that free time while others do
nothing.

FWIW, my son's high school had a ski club. They sent 70-80 students by
bus across the border every Friday night during the winter. I used to go
along as a chaperone. One of the teachers committed to running it. We
left at 3 pm on Friday afternoons and got back at 1-2 am. 10-11 hours
of overtime for the teacher. It was nice of him to do it, but not
something IMO employers should demand.


My wife spend a lot of time working at home every night, weekends on
during school breaks. So did most of the teachers she worked with.
 
Back
Top