Ford workers likely to strike

[Cancel 2018. 3]

i saw this in the news over the weekend and noticed that GM and chrysler cannot strike because of their agreement with the government for the bailout in 2009. did obama or bush make this agreement?

[/MSG/]

i saw this in the news over the weekend and noticed that GM and chrysler cannot strike because of their agreement with the government for the bailout in 2009. did obama or bush make this agreement?

Likely neither, it was probably the Congress.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Likely neither, it was probably the Congress.

the president had to sign off on it...and if the president was powerless, i would be surprised, dems had both houses and in 09' obama had the presidency after the 20th...but i don't know when the agreement was struck. i tried to find it...and i find it interesting that a liberal congress would take away their striking rights...

[/MSG/]

I find it even more interesting that those provisions were not extended to Ford, who received credit from the government.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

i thought it was only the gop who wanted to take away workers right or ability to strike

[Bonestorm]

i thought it was only the gop who wanted to take away workers right or ability to strike

The UAW agreed to the no-strike clauses as unions often do.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

The UAW agreed to the no-strike clauses as unions often do.

who wanted them to agree to it? the dems.....

i'm not sure which president signed off on it, i think it was obama....

funny how you aren't bitching about it though

[The Dude]

Bush started the negotiating and Obama finished and signed. Ford should fire them, and pay 2/3 got the assembly replacements.

[Bonestorm]

who wanted them to agree to it? the dems.....

i'm not sure which president signed off on it, i think it was obama....

funny how you aren't bitching about it though

Why is it funny? Unions agree to no-strike clauses all the time. There is a difference between a negotiated no-strike clause that a union agrees to as part of the collective bargaining process and a legislature banning unions from striking.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Why is it funny? Unions agree to no-strike clauses all the time. There is a difference between a negotiated no-strike clause that a union agrees to as part of the collective bargaining process and a legislature banning unions from striking.

do both take away the rights of the workers to strike?

and here, it is basically, you will lose your jobs or we can give you money but you have to agree not to strike....it is hilarious how you are defending this. but that is because the DEMS wanted it.

[Bonestorm]

do both take away the rights of the workers to strike?

That's like claiming that me stealing your car and you selling it to me are the same thing because in both instances you no longer have a car.

and here, it is basically, you will lose your jobs or we can give you money but you have to agree not to strike....it is hilarious how you are defending this. but that is because the DEMS wanted it.

I don't really care about it either way. The union agreed to it as part of a larger deal and the rank and file approved it. That's good enough for me. If Ford negotiated a no-strike clause I'd feel the same way.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

That's like claiming that me stealing your car and you selling it to me are the same thing because in both instances you no longer have a car.



I don't really care about it either way. The union agreed to it as part of a larger deal and the rank and file approved it. That's good enough for me. If Ford negotiated a no-strike clause I'd feel the same way.

that is a really bad analogy. and you're of course desperately spinning the issue. let be more clear so you can't spinning:

the DEMS wanted the workers to give up their right to strike

can you comprehend that?

[PostmodernProphet]

uh, guys?......the unions now own GM and Chrysler.....why would they strike against themselves?......