Slashdot Mirror
Labor Lockout Lingers At Honeywell Nuclear Plant
Hugh Pickens writes "Federal News Radio reports that in Metropolis, Illinois, the nation's only site for refining uranium for eventual use in nuclear power plants, some 230 union workers locked out by the company since last June take turns picketing and warning of possible toxic releases into the community while they're not at their jobs. Even in better times, the plant has been a source of concern. In September 2003, toxic hydrogen fluoride was released in an accident. Three months later, seepage of mildly radioactive gas sent four people to the hospital and prompted the evacuation of nearby residents. Now a recent safety inspection by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission found that temporary workers brought in by Honeywell weren't properly trained and were cheating on tests, and that Honeywell had neglected to report liquids that were released into the air. Metropolis' troubles began last spring when efforts to negotiate a new contract broke down at the Honeywell plant. Honeywell opted not to let the union employees work without a contract, citing the lack of bargaining progress and what it called the union's refusal to agree to provide 24 hours of notice before any strike."
Locked out since June? This seems newsworthy to me, where is the lame stream media on this story?
I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
"Everything is under control, our main Technical Adviser is Homer Simpson."
Honeywell didn't train the guys who came to my business to repair the alarm system (they later sold their alarm business).
People showed up with no testing equipment to check for open lines, bad connections, etc.
Seems like if the union workers were to strike, the potential for a lot of damage would be high.
All privately employed people, be they doctors or nuclear plant employees or anything else, should have the right to withhold their labor.
Otherwise, you have a situation known as "slavery".
Now, these guys may very well be in breach of contractual obligations to show up for work.
My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
Time to call Superman...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
The workers didn't choose to quit.
The employer unilaterally decided the workers weren't worth their pay, and isn't letting them come back to work until they capitulate and give the employer everything they want. The people in charge are playing hostage games, not the people who were staffing the plant.
Locked out since June? This seems newsworthy to me, where is the lame stream media on this story?
Hmmm. Union workers are locked out of their jobs by their employer. I wonder why that didn't make the news, when any case of a union considering a vote on talking about thinking about announcing the possibility of maybe polling to take a vote on a half-day strike makes the news immediately?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
They convert uranium ore -- usually in the form of uranium oxides ("yellow cake") -- into uranium hexafluoride by eventually dissolving it in hydrofluoric acid. That gas is then what gets run through centrifuges or gas diffusion plants to isotopically enrich the U-235. So, it's a lot of messy chemistry (see links) with mildly radioactive materials (uranium isn't strongly radioactive). HF is particularly nasty because although it is a weak acid it reacts with almost anything and it is quite toxic.
...ok, you know there is a difference between a lockout and a strike, right? The employer initiates a lockout, the workers/bargaining unit initiates a strike.
So you're saying the plant management should be declared terrorists? I just want to make sure I, and possibly you, understand what you're typing.
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
See http://blip.tv/file/4535436
These guys are hard core and fighting the good fight. Their struggle against corporate greed should be our struggle.
---Technology will liberate us if it doesn't enslave us first.
What did they do, release an aerosol? I hate imprecise reporting.
Anyway, the primary source (the safety report from the NRC) is available from the union local web site. (I confirmed that the same document is available directly from the NRC, but couldn't find a URL that didn't include my personal information.)
Wrong. The employer is playing hardball and chose to lockout the employees. They could have agreed to continue working without a contract but still under the old contract terms until an agreement is reached for a new contract.
Someone needs to look up what "locked out" means.
I'm not assuming that the union workers are being reasonable. I just think that placing blame solely on the unions and make an argument against their existence is just as much bullshit as to blindly accept everything a union says as gospel. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
...it's the people producing it that are dangerous.
Perhaps it might be worth you checking both sides' information before coming a conclusion as well? Though I am afraid your line "No thanks - I've had enough of union rhetoric for one life time" suggests you'll only "disregard one sides propaganda in favour of the other sides propaganda".
Sounds like you're both equally at fault here.
I'm so angry for at the corporate world that pays me all year long
You should be! The only way the shareholders make any money is by paying you less than the full value of your work and keeping the rest for themselves.
Nuclear power is at the very base of the modern economy. Fossil fuels won't supply our energy needs for long. Renewables can't make up the difference in the short term. We can't afford to dismantle our energy production and ship it off to the third world the same way we did with toy manufacturing.
The Honeywell CEO was on the news just a few days ago saying the only reason US businesses are hoarding cash and aren't hiring is that they don't have "certainty". How could you possibly not have "certainty" in the production of something as basic as nuclear fuel? It has a payback of something like forty-to-one. From a purely material perspective, you'd have to be a complete retard not to make obscene profits in nuclear power.
Of course, the reason US industry doesn't have certainty is obvious: their competitors cheat. Thanks to globalization of trade but not of governance, other countries subsidize their businesses, operate under substandard environmental and labor standards, ignore human rights, and block US businesses from competing fairly. In the mean time, with our free trade and open borders, US consumers are exporting real wealth to developing nations, propping up their growth.
So how can US businesses get "certainty"? There's only one way: by making all competitors operate on the same, level playing field. That means one of two things: either import/export tariffs, or global government.
The downsides to global government should be obvious.
Personally, I think the US will be better off if we choose tariffs. Hell, we could completely seal the borders if we wanted to. We are still the wealthiest nation on Earth. We have more resources per capita than anyone. The US spans nearly every climate zone. We can have a completely self-sufficient, world-class standard of living. In the long term, no other nation could come close. Totally free trade is not in our best interests. The founders knew this, and wrote tariffs right into the Constitution. It is only in recent decades that politicians have sold out this power to the WTO and globalist institutions. It didn't improve the lives or earnings of the average American over the last thirty years. And it's high time for the farce to end.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Something tells me that more people die every year from spider bites than from nuclear energy.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
I think unions are a fine thing and every employee ought to have the right to join a union -- and every employer ought to have the right to say "fuck off, you're fired immediately and forever, we will NEVER allow union labor here"
And next time the union will form in secret. It's not like you can control who your employees assemble with in private, right? You won't know about it until the strike.
"Aha!" you say, "I'll fire them all then!" Sure. And next time they won't just strike, they'll lock themselves to their machines.
"But that's illegal!" you exclaim. Sure it is. But who's going to arrest them? In your hypothetical world, what're the odds that you're willing to pay enough in taxes for the police force to be from the upper class? They're most likely worker class folks too, just like your employees (and probably related to them as well). Even if you do manage to get them arrested, what are the odds that they'll be convicted by a jury of their peers? And, even if convicted, why do you think that would matter? People are willing to die to improve the lives of their families - what's a misdemeanor trespassing conviction?
"If I sue them they'll lose everything. That's not protecting their families." you pronounce. What exactly would you sue them for? Their house? Their car? Their retirement savings? In your hypothetical world your workers have none of those, because all of those things became possible because of unions.
Or maybe instead of a sit-in strike, it just so happens that your plant catches fire a few hours after the strike starts and burns down, since the volunteer / worker class firefighters are a bit slow protecting an empty factory. Shucks. One hothead employee gets caught and spends a dime upstate, while his family is the best taken care of in town. Meanwhile you're out of work, too.
In short, your idea has been tried. It failed. Miserably. So something else was tried. It worked at the time. Maybe it's not working as well now, but it hasn't failed yet. If you come up with something better maybe we can try it next.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Oh, and what if you create a safe working environment for your employees, pay them a fair wage, and give them job security in the case of illness or workplace injury?
Then it's not likely your workers would form a union in the first place. Also, you'll be put out of business by the guy down the street who doesn't do any of those things and can undercut your prices - at least until his workers strike.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.