I can't fit square pegs in a round hole, but that does not cause me to rail against companies that make those square pegs. You're just not pushing hard enough.
Can you point me to a good reference to those advantages (I really don't know)? I'm struggling to find anything that isn't largely based on personal opinion.
Fair enough, and maybe I'm a little jaded in the sense that both of those unionized jobs for me were government jobs (one being in edumacation.)
(Again, from what I've seen of them) generally the pro-union people I worked with loved the union because essentially, it meant they couldn't lose their job, short of standing over a body with a smoking gun. Not because of the wages, benefits, etc. And the reason that sickened me so, was these are the people who are supposed to be educating the children.... something about that just doesn't strike right with me.
You're right, there is no easy answer. People will always want to abuse the benefits they have, and unfortunately, I don't see that ending anytime soon.
I'm pretty sure you can't tell someone their job is moving, and that if they don't like it, they can just quit, and get no compensation. I'm sure the same could be said for switching a position from telecommuting to non-telecommuting.
And how that would seem to require a union to even be feasible.
But yeah, I agree with you, having my last two jobs being unionized (and regardless of whether or not I choose to be a memeber, of course everyone else will to be protected) I've seen and grown to hate it. What's worse, no one above or below us sees us as even equal to THAT GUY... we're all seen as the expense that could be replaced by their 15 year old "computer whiz" nephew.
I was referring to this part of the parent:
I'm pretty sure you can't tell someone their job is moving, and that if they don't like it, they can just quit, and get no compensation. I'm sure the same could be said for switching a position from telecommuting to non-telecommuting.
And how that would seem to require a union to even be feasible.
The NSA is spying on all telecom signals passing through the US (including this message. Hi, Dick Cheney! Bomb! Kill! TERROR!). Despite the Constitution's prohibitions. Why would you trust them not to make your crypto crackable? All better. Now they can really watch you.
Now, understand that these people are paid by the hour. I'm not wasting their time, I'm wasting their employers time. Not always the case. I've come across quite a few places that only pay their people commission. Not quite sure how they get away with that... But hey, I guess it's their problem for sticking around.
Google also views open wireless networks as key to sidestep any telephone and cable company efforts to make it difficult for consumers to access Google services, or to charge Google to deliver the services to consumers over their Internet connections.
What's to stop the carriers from doing that? Wasn't their addition to the auction rules only applying to this spectrum? It just seems that other carriers could completely prevent access to that side of the wireless world.
Am I missing something here, people familiar with the matter?
I've stuck with this site for many years, always appreciating the fact that, when I come here, I get what I'm looking for. And that is exactly why I come back, day after day.
Even the thought of that happening sends a chill down my spine, because we've all watched it happen too many times.
So let me take the time, and actually say something here:
Thank you to everyone here for making it what it is.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you. You did a good thing here, and it is obviously well appreciated.
If it wasn't for this place, real life may have stood in the way, and I wouldn't be where I am today.
Say a school or organization has a private intranet that allows posting... does that count with the law stating "on the internet?"
Or better yet, sending winpopup messages to people over their wireless. I hope my neighbor doesn't hear about this.
I don't know...
Something tells me that if I stand there drooling the whole time, they'll think I'm holding something in...
Wow... thank you, that makes so many things make sense now.
Can you point me to a good reference to those advantages (I really don't know)? I'm struggling to find anything that isn't largely based on personal opinion.
Fair enough, and maybe I'm a little jaded in the sense that both of those unionized jobs for me were government jobs (one being in edumacation.)
(Again, from what I've seen of them) generally the pro-union people I worked with loved the union because essentially, it meant they couldn't lose their job, short of standing over a body with a smoking gun. Not because of the wages, benefits, etc. And the reason that sickened me so, was these are the people who are supposed to be educating the children.... something about that just doesn't strike right with me.
You're right, there is no easy answer. People will always want to abuse the benefits they have, and unfortunately, I don't see that ending anytime soon.
I'm pretty sure you can't tell someone their job is moving, and that if they don't like it, they can just quit, and get no compensation. I'm sure the same could be said for switching a position from telecommuting to non-telecommuting.
And how that would seem to require a union to even be feasible.
But yeah, I agree with you, having my last two jobs being unionized (and regardless of whether or not I choose to be a memeber, of course everyone else will to be protected) I've seen and grown to hate it. What's worse, no one above or below us sees us as even equal to THAT GUY... we're all seen as the expense that could be replaced by their 15 year old "computer whiz" nephew.
I'm pretty sure you can't tell someone their job is moving, and that if they don't like it, they can just quit, and get no compensation. I'm sure the same could be said for switching a position from telecommuting to non-telecommuting.
And how that would seem to require a union to even be feasible.
Should've quoted, my fault.
Isn't that an aspect of what unions are for? Protection from "Change in working conditions" or whatever they call it?
None the less, you can count me as glad I don't work for AT&T right now.
Gays have next to no rights...
Really? Last I checked it appears that every "minority"* has more rights than anyone that can't claim to be part of one of these groups**...
*Only those that started out as a minority.
**Also not counting the currently waning "rights" that all americans have.
What's to stop the carriers from doing that? Wasn't their addition to the auction rules only applying to this spectrum? It just seems that other carriers could completely prevent access to that side of the wireless world.
Am I missing something here, people familiar with the matter?
First post! (for me that is)
I've stuck with this site for many years, always appreciating the fact that, when I come here, I get what I'm looking for. And that is exactly why I come back, day after day.
Even the thought of that happening sends a chill down my spine, because we've all watched it happen too many times.
So let me take the time, and actually say something here:
Thank you to everyone here for making it what it is.
And
I wholeheartedly agree.