Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low
Author: SLOCONDR
Date: 06-02-2010 - 22:33

Beaver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I work
> for a proud non union family owned business and I
> receive a fair wage, fair treatment and the luxury
> of a flexible workplace unhindered by strangling
> union rules. Unions are not required for a safe
> and productive workplace. A safe atmosphere comes
> from insightful and intelligent management who see
> the value of a workplace that does not jeopardize
> its employees or outsiders. Management hindered
> by collective bargaining may in fact be unable to
> further heighten safety by innovation due to
> leaden union contracts.
>


You may work for a family run business that treats you fairly, but you sure don't work for the great (tongue in cheek) Union Pacific Railroad. There, you are NOT treated fairly, they will not honor agreements that they themselves agree to. I am glad you work for a good company that treats you right, but DO NOT knock the unions on the RR property, for without them our job would not be safer, as you have said. The carriers do not care about safety unless it is going to cost them money. You are amongst the lucky few that do good without a union, but our job wouldn't be very good without it.

V

SLOCONDR



Subject Written By Date/Time (PST)
  Union Pacific sinks to a new low Robert 06-02-2010 - 14:54
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Bill B 06-02-2010 - 15:25
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low M. Harris 06-02-2010 - 16:37
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low WAF 06-02-2010 - 18:23
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low OPRRMS 06-02-2010 - 19:19
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Beaver 06-02-2010 - 19:36
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low OTN 06-02-2010 - 19:41
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Confused 06-02-2010 - 19:46
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low WAF 06-03-2010 - 08:52
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low E 06-03-2010 - 09:50
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low SP 8800 06-02-2010 - 20:20
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Jesse 06-02-2010 - 21:02
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low fkrock 06-03-2010 - 09:27
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Beaver 06-02-2010 - 21:46
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Conductor 06-02-2010 - 22:33
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low SLOCONDR 06-02-2010 - 22:33
  MESSAGE FOR SLOCONDR smitty195 06-02-2010 - 23:48
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low theconductor 06-02-2010 - 23:20
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Sam Reeves 06-03-2010 - 10:19
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low WAF 06-03-2010 - 15:42
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low SP8800 06-02-2010 - 22:55
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Robert 06-02-2010 - 23:26
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low DHB 06-03-2010 - 07:34
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low OTN 06-03-2010 - 10:13
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Peter D Sr 06-03-2010 - 12:24
  Unions and railroads OPRRMS 06-03-2010 - 12:46
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Kevin Dunwoody 06-03-2010 - 13:32
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Mike Swanson 06-03-2010 - 21:45
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low Taxpayer 06-03-2010 - 21:06
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low kEVIN dUNWOODY 06-04-2010 - 11:59
  Re: Union Pacific sinks to a new low OldPoleBurner 06-05-2010 - 12:44
  Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) OPRRMS 06-03-2010 - 17:43
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) JWL 06-03-2010 - 18:56
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) OPRRMS 06-03-2010 - 20:00
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) One more go 'round 06-04-2010 - 12:23
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) jwl 06-04-2010 - 12:59
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) KIE 06-04-2010 - 17:55
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) OPRRMS 06-04-2010 - 21:17
  Re: Answers for the future Severe Duty 06-04-2010 - 22:46
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) JWL 06-05-2010 - 09:19
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) Tom Moungovan 06-05-2010 - 10:17
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) WAF 06-05-2010 - 10:50
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) OPRRMS 06-05-2010 - 11:24
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) JWL 06-05-2010 - 13:23
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) OPRRMS 06-05-2010 - 15:51
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) WAF 06-05-2010 - 16:54
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) JWL 06-05-2010 - 17:13
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) OPRRMS 06-05-2010 - 18:47
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) JWL 06-06-2010 - 07:32
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) WAF 06-06-2010 - 08:08
  Re: Answers for Robert (and anyone interested) OPRRMS 06-06-2010 - 13:04


Go to: Message ListSearch
Subject: 
Your Name: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **    **  ********  **     **  ********  ********  
  **  **      **      **   **      **     **     ** 
   ****       **       ** **       **     **     ** 
    **        **        ***        **     ********  
    **        **       ** **       **     **     ** 
    **        **      **   **      **     **     ** 
    **        **     **     **     **     ********  
This message board is maintained by:Altamont Press
You can send us an email at altamontpress1@gmail.com