I'm pretty sure much of that is not true. That was one of the emergency exits of the 727, so I can't imagine that many of them were welded shut. Beyond that, MD-80 style aircraft and DC-9 aircraft mostly have the rear stairs so it is far from the only aircraft. I've seen them open on MD-80's this year on AA aircraft, and they probably resent the bulk of aircraft today with functional airstairs.
They should have cited him for driving on the wrong side of the road, which is a higher fine, which he must have done unless he had his car carried there.
If the change was ever a "let's work together to make some radical changes" situation, I think more unions would be up for it. The changes I tend to see as a union member is "here's the new stupid idea that we came up with in a vacuum and that you're going to implement, even though you know as a skilled employee that it won't work like we think it will." Drastic changes in desired skills tend to be the same way... we could try to train our current workforce in whatever new thing it is, but it would generally be easier to try to find a way to lay them all off and hire people who already know the skills we need. Of the unions I associate with, none would turn down a chance to participate in a process of improvement, but they're never asked until it becomes clear that the process is over.
To be clearer, it does NOT say that such images were acquired, just that it is reasonable to believe they may have been based on the usage of the laptops. A subtle difference.
On long flights, that's nearly inhumane. What are you supposed to spend 16 hours doing (personally, 3 would be unreasonable). I was on a flight back from Dublin the other day to the US. Had I not been exhausted, the broken entertainment system would have been a real drag for 6 hours 10 mins.
Would take FOREVER. There are some elevator-only exits in the local subway systems and even with fast huge elevators, I doubt they could handle the amount of people in a major airport like Newark without a major backup.
Only problem is traveling intercontinentally. It does, however, give me impetus to move to Europe. At least I can visit a variety of countries all by land. The same is not quite so convenient in North America.
She's traveling through a border in what is allegedly the only democracy in the middle east. Having no backup is not a good idea wherever she goes, but expecting to be left alone I think is perfectly reasonable.
Trouble is, most Jews I run into that speak out (apparently, like yourself) can't separate hatred of Jews from disagreement with retarded Israeli behaviors. I can think Israel is full of shit without hating the country or the people it. But, apparently, a ton of Jews can't figure that out and attempt to discredit people that disagree with them as anti-Semites. Frankly, pathetic.
PS: sometimes, as with the US, there is a reason why people can't stand your country.
I'd hit you and not apologize, on purpose. Why? Get the fuck out of the way. You picked the most trafficked street in the area and choose to stand in the way. Why should I apologize for ramming into you if you're not going to apologize for standing in traffic?
[quote]I'm not saying shooting the laptop was necessarily justified or the right thing to do. I don't know enough of the details of the situation to say that. But I will say that there are some security measures that Israel absolutely *has* to take, that would be viewed as unacceptably harsh in places with relatively low levels of terrorist violence.[/quote]
Or you could just stop fucking with your neighbors (I live in the US and feel the same way about what we're doing).
Unfortunately, people in my office (which is a university) are still buying inkjet printers from time to time because they appear to have no concept of the difference between inkjet and laser beyond the up-front price difference. I try to stop it, and am sometimes successful, but... often not.
There would not be a problem, except for the fact that most/many people are afraid of their employer (if not afraid of them directly, afraid of the affect that "making waves" may have on their employment) and the fact that the employer holds all of the money. That leaves someone with very little room to maneuver if they feel like they're being treated unfairly (other than looking for another job, which I'm sure you know right now is "challenging"). In many cases, you are not that well protected and the employer can unilaterally make changes to terms.
Do all employers do this? No. But some do, and for those, I don't see how going non-union will solve the problem (other than by disbanding one side of the argument so that the argument doesn't happen).
Why didn't the union take binding arbitration? I couldn't tell you. Perhaps it had a history of not working in that state that they were aware of. Perhaps their leadership was stupid. I really couldn't say. I know that it would be something that we'd take if we were able to get it passed. Right now, it's not happening.
If other locations would unionize, there wouldn't be a problem.
Workers that are happy and being treated fairly do not screw with the bottom line. Wanting to be treated fairly these days is painted as being greedy. Don't know why folks set such low standards for themselves. Hell, this article is about accepting 24/7/365 call. It's simply unnecessary -- you get someone else to handle part of it so people don't have to do that, and so that people get some time that is guaranteed to be theirs. Is that greed?
Yes, but then you need something that will take the place of a strike in case of a dispute like that. One option is binding arbitration (which is something that police have). You have to have something though, otherwise it doesn't work. Since it seems that there is no willingness in many areas to provide that option, strikes have to be allowed.
I flew last internationally on United in 2005. I must have just missed it. I flew international on Delta 6 months ago but it was a short flight that didn't "feel" international so I guess I didn't notice.
Yeah, unless your boss doesn't like you and doesn't want to give you merit pay. Who decides what "merit" is? Here's another circumstance that has come up with merit pay at my workplace... one union has a contract whereby merit raises are given out based on your performance evaluation. Surprise surprise, all of the performance evaluations dropped when the company needed to save money. Did all of those people suddenly start doing lower quality work? At the same time? Really?
Boo hoo for your public services. I supported the MTA when they struck. It was a pain in the ass for me, but I don't see why having a public-sector job should make you the equivalent of an indentured servant. If a union is not allowed to disrupt service, what exactly are they supposed to do when management refuses to bargain? Recently a co-worker was complaining about a local protest that blocked traffic (not a union, a community group). He wished that the protest occurred somewhere where it wouldn't affect anyone. What exactly would be the point of such a protest?
What aspect of having salaries be public (ours are too) prevents people from handing out better salaries and positions to their friends? What aspect of that makes it easier to fight?
Maybe you're lucky and work in a district where that doesn't happen, but managers everyplace else still act how they act and human nature isn't changing just because some parts of society are.
Find me a union with too much power in this day and age. I would say it's a lot easier to find management with too much power.
You have a good job and a high standard of living. First off, much of that is because of previous victories by unions (paid weekends, holidays, sick time, etc.) -- secondly, you have that now. If you are at will and it's not provided for contractually, you can lose it at any time. It does happen that good things happen without unions, but good luck protecting them if the winds change.
Generally, proving that you've done something by the book is many many times more difficult than just firing someone. In the case of an employee, this also takes time. Worked somewhere 20 years and this is the first problem? Maybe it's not worth firing over, and generally a paper trail is required. That is fair. I don't know of a fair way to fire someone that doesn't take at least some effort, and at the very least, infinitely more effort than firing on a whim. What do you think is a fair way to fire someone that isn't much work?
I have looked at it for CFL's (might have been Philipps, but I'm not sure). The deal there was that the shipping and handling cost of a warranty replacement was more than the bulb. With more expensive LED's, that may not be true, but I was pretty ticked off when I found that out (I had one fail in a few weeks that was clearly defective in some way).
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure much of that is not true. That was one of the emergency exits of the 727, so I can't imagine that many of them were welded shut. Beyond that, MD-80 style aircraft and DC-9 aircraft mostly have the rear stairs so it is far from the only aircraft. I've seen them open on MD-80's this year on AA aircraft, and they probably resent the bulk of aircraft today with functional airstairs.
They should have cited him for driving on the wrong side of the road, which is a higher fine, which he must have done unless he had his car carried there.
If the change was ever a "let's work together to make some radical changes" situation, I think more unions would be up for it. The changes I tend to see as a union member is "here's the new stupid idea that we came up with in a vacuum and that you're going to implement, even though you know as a skilled employee that it won't work like we think it will." Drastic changes in desired skills tend to be the same way... we could try to train our current workforce in whatever new thing it is, but it would generally be easier to try to find a way to lay them all off and hire people who already know the skills we need. Of the unions I associate with, none would turn down a chance to participate in a process of improvement, but they're never asked until it becomes clear that the process is over.
The command line is a fine interface, and if you're not a jackass, it's much quicker than hunting through any set of menus.
To be clearer, it does NOT say that such images were acquired, just that it is reasonable to believe they may have been based on the usage of the laptops. A subtle difference.
On long flights, that's nearly inhumane. What are you supposed to spend 16 hours doing (personally, 3 would be unreasonable). I was on a flight back from Dublin the other day to the US. Had I not been exhausted, the broken entertainment system would have been a real drag for 6 hours 10 mins.
Would take FOREVER. There are some elevator-only exits in the local subway systems and even with fast huge elevators, I doubt they could handle the amount of people in a major airport like Newark without a major backup.
Only problem is traveling intercontinentally. It does, however, give me impetus to move to Europe. At least I can visit a variety of countries all by land. The same is not quite so convenient in North America.
She's traveling through a border in what is allegedly the only democracy in the middle east. Having no backup is not a good idea wherever she goes, but expecting to be left alone I think is perfectly reasonable.
Trouble is, most Jews I run into that speak out (apparently, like yourself) can't separate hatred of Jews from disagreement with retarded Israeli behaviors. I can think Israel is full of shit without hating the country or the people it. But, apparently, a ton of Jews can't figure that out and attempt to discredit people that disagree with them as anti-Semites. Frankly, pathetic.
PS: sometimes, as with the US, there is a reason why people can't stand your country.
I'd hit you and not apologize, on purpose. Why? Get the fuck out of the way. You picked the most trafficked street in the area and choose to stand in the way. Why should I apologize for ramming into you if you're not going to apologize for standing in traffic?
[quote]I'm not saying shooting the laptop was necessarily justified or the right thing to do. I don't know enough of the details of the situation to say that. But I will say that there are some security measures that Israel absolutely *has* to take, that would be viewed as unacceptably harsh in places with relatively low levels of terrorist violence.[/quote]
Or you could just stop fucking with your neighbors (I live in the US and feel the same way about what we're doing).
Then how come my bill doesn't go down when I'm done paying off the phone?
Unfortunately, people in my office (which is a university) are still buying inkjet printers from time to time because they appear to have no concept of the difference between inkjet and laser beyond the up-front price difference. I try to stop it, and am sometimes successful, but... often not.
There would not be a problem, except for the fact that most/many people are afraid of their employer (if not afraid of them directly, afraid of the affect that "making waves" may have on their employment) and the fact that the employer holds all of the money. That leaves someone with very little room to maneuver if they feel like they're being treated unfairly (other than looking for another job, which I'm sure you know right now is "challenging"). In many cases, you are not that well protected and the employer can unilaterally make changes to terms.
Do all employers do this? No. But some do, and for those, I don't see how going non-union will solve the problem (other than by disbanding one side of the argument so that the argument doesn't happen).
Why didn't the union take binding arbitration? I couldn't tell you. Perhaps it had a history of not working in that state that they were aware of. Perhaps their leadership was stupid. I really couldn't say. I know that it would be something that we'd take if we were able to get it passed. Right now, it's not happening.
And for others, it doesn't. What's your point?
If other locations would unionize, there wouldn't be a problem.
Workers that are happy and being treated fairly do not screw with the bottom line. Wanting to be treated fairly these days is painted as being greedy. Don't know why folks set such low standards for themselves. Hell, this article is about accepting 24/7/365 call. It's simply unnecessary -- you get someone else to handle part of it so people don't have to do that, and so that people get some time that is guaranteed to be theirs. Is that greed?
Yes, but then you need something that will take the place of a strike in case of a dispute like that. One option is binding arbitration (which is something that police have). You have to have something though, otherwise it doesn't work. Since it seems that there is no willingness in many areas to provide that option, strikes have to be allowed.
I know that Boeing is planning that/doing that on their new aircraft, so it's definitely been thought of.
I flew last internationally on United in 2005. I must have just missed it. I flew international on Delta 6 months ago but it was a short flight that didn't "feel" international so I guess I didn't notice.
Yeah, unless your boss doesn't like you and doesn't want to give you merit pay. Who decides what "merit" is? Here's another circumstance that has come up with merit pay at my workplace... one union has a contract whereby merit raises are given out based on your performance evaluation. Surprise surprise, all of the performance evaluations dropped when the company needed to save money. Did all of those people suddenly start doing lower quality work? At the same time? Really?
Boo hoo for your public services. I supported the MTA when they struck. It was a pain in the ass for me, but I don't see why having a public-sector job should make you the equivalent of an indentured servant. If a union is not allowed to disrupt service, what exactly are they supposed to do when management refuses to bargain? Recently a co-worker was complaining about a local protest that blocked traffic (not a union, a community group). He wished that the protest occurred somewhere where it wouldn't affect anyone. What exactly would be the point of such a protest?
What aspect of having salaries be public (ours are too) prevents people from handing out better salaries and positions to their friends? What aspect of that makes it easier to fight?
Maybe you're lucky and work in a district where that doesn't happen, but managers everyplace else still act how they act and human nature isn't changing just because some parts of society are.
Find me a union with too much power in this day and age. I would say it's a lot easier to find management with too much power.
You have a good job and a high standard of living. First off, much of that is because of previous victories by unions (paid weekends, holidays, sick time, etc.) -- secondly, you have that now. If you are at will and it's not provided for contractually, you can lose it at any time. It does happen that good things happen without unions, but good luck protecting them if the winds change.
And you're telling me you know of cases where people are sleeping with the fishies because they've crossed a union boss?
Generally, proving that you've done something by the book is many many times more difficult than just firing someone. In the case of an employee, this also takes time. Worked somewhere 20 years and this is the first problem? Maybe it's not worth firing over, and generally a paper trail is required. That is fair. I don't know of a fair way to fire someone that doesn't take at least some effort, and at the very least, infinitely more effort than firing on a whim. What do you think is a fair way to fire someone that isn't much work?
I have looked at it for CFL's (might have been Philipps, but I'm not sure). The deal there was that the shipping and handling cost of a warranty replacement was more than the bulb. With more expensive LED's, that may not be true, but I was pretty ticked off when I found that out (I had one fail in a few weeks that was clearly defective in some way).