Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We kick the ass of the ruling class

Occupy Wall Street and Teamsters to Occupy Sotheby’s Tonight

Posted 2 years ago on Nov. 9, 2011, 2:41 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

Biggest Art Auction of the Year Draws Protest in Support of the 99%

Union Art Auction Handlers Have Been Locked in a 3-Month Battle Against Wage Cuts while Sotheby’s CEO Takes Home $60K a day

About 100 protesters from Occupy Wall Street will join a Teamsters picket line at the Sotheby’s auction house in Manhattan tonight (Wed, Nov. 9) to back the union in an important battle to fight wage cuts. The action, called OCCUPY SOTHEBY'S, will picket the 1% in support of locked-out Teamsters art handlers at one of the biggest art auctions of the year.

WHEN: TODAY, Wednesday, November 9th, 6:00pm

WHERE: 1334 York Avenue (between 71st and 72nd St.) *A contingent of NYU students, faculty and alumni will meet at 5pm, by the fountain in Washington Square Park

VIDEO: Occupy Wall St. Protesters Crash Sotheby's Auction:

Sotheby's, the art auction house for the very wealthy, has locked out its union art handlers for the last three months. The company is demanding wage and benefit cuts and the replacement of good union jobs with part-time, temp jobs. Sotheby’s clearly has the money to maintain good jobs. The company made $688 million in profits last year, and CEO Bill Ruprecht takes home $60,000 a day.

Wednesday's auction is one of the two biggest of the year, where Sotheby's makes the bulk of their money. Four pieces of art alone are expected to sell for $50 million. Please join us in supporting Teamsters Local 814's fight against corporate greed — a concrete struggle of the 99% against the 1%.

For background on the Sotheby’s struggle:

VIDEO: Picket of a Sotheby's auction in London:

230 Comments

230 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 7 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

It’s amazing that there are so many union haters that just know how to hate and parrot right wing propaganda. Why is it so hard for you to see that the unions and the OWS share a common enemy?

You apparently don’t realize that 12% of the USA population is union and they know what unions are all about. Their friends, relatives and neighbors know them and know their character and lifestyle. Many of them wish they could get into a good union job.
When many of these people hear stupid anti-worker comments from parrots that seem obviously ignorant of the real deal, or appear as shills, they quickly write them off as brainwashed parrots.

The unions were the only entity in America that gained and protected workers’ rights. Now there is another entity that is trying to protect the “99%/workers” You union haters will get used to it. Your propaganda is becoming more transparent by the day.

[-] 2 points by trippe67 (2) from Birmingham, AL 2 years ago

I have had the privilege to work in both salary and union positions. This has given me insight into both worlds. What salary employees that I work with fail to realize (especially recent college graduates) is that the salary and benefits they currently enjoy come from the hard work and sacrifices of union members and their families. The money and benefits many jobs have are the direct result of union members. If you want to see where we are headed read and watch "The Grapes of Wrath". It won't be long before we are all living in 'Mill Houses' and being paid in 'Company Vouchers'.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Quiet. That's Romneys plan.

[-] 1 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

I agree 100% brother.

People today enjoy all of the things that unions have fought for: 40 hour work week, decent pay, medical, pension, safety, vacation etc

I don't think many people even know where all that came from or who made it happen. And they tear down unions as if they are some sort of evil. I think unions maybe making a come back?

[-] 1 points by brooce (65) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

What qualifys you to make such dumb ass glibb statements. You are the dang parrot. Global-you are an idiot not deserving of a debate on this subject-you would be sent home back to your mothers basement and old Xbox. Have more than a few years dealing with unions-your arguements would be destroyed by facts and personal experiences. Global is a hack.

[-] 1 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

Dream on moron, you are preaching to the choir. I have listened to idiots like you for 30 plus years. All you got is a mouth full of shit.

Your response is nothing but name calling and unsubstantiated stupidity straight from your imagination

Why don’t you just straighten me out in front of everybody here and now? Oh that’s right, you can’t.

[-] 1 points by brooce (65) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

you calling me out-liberal sissy. Laughing-how could you possibly know what skill set I have in the arena? I would suggest you tone your attitude. Those who can simply do without words-those who cant are usually the loudest mouth out there. You may have seen me in the octo-the reason I cant just might be due to being professional. Nothing worse than a loud mouthed clown drinking latte's and eating goat cheese.

[-] 0 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

Was that it?

That's how you straigtened me out?

You said far more about yourself than than you said about me.

[-] 1 points by brooce (65) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

Give it up-this is ridiculous-threaten me, then insult me. Go home-nobody listens to you.Calling a person out-its a little illegal-bravery is not picking a fight with somebody when police are nearby. Its not tough-its just shows you are a big mouth with some short of short coming your are trying to scale.

[-] 0 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

Uhhhh yeah, umhmm, yeah thats what I did alright (-:

[-] 1 points by brooce (65) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

to late-got your IP

[-] 1 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

Oh dang it, now I am soo scared, please do hurt me (-:

[-] 1 points by jdoggma (25) 2 years ago

back to the question by rico, "Hmmm, so they represent 12% of the workers, and you declare they somehow represent the 99% ?"

You never addressed the math problem he presents. It weakens your arguments. Name calling and counterattack don't help either. Can you explain why 12% of the population can speak for 99%?

[-] 1 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

OK here it is. Read really slowly because this will probably seem very abstract to you

The unions are for the working class people, not just members. The 99% is made up of working class people

Get it, the unions and OWS both fight for the 99%

[-] 0 points by jdoggma (25) 2 years ago

I am working class and the unions are working class; however, in the case of government employees, I am their employer but I don't get to negotiate with them. In a corporate situation the union must negotiate with the corporation, each for itself. If the public unions has to negotiate directly with the taxpayers, it would be fair.

[-] -1 points by Rico (3027) 2 years ago

Hmmm, so they represent 12% of the workers, and you declare they somehow represent the 99% ?

[-] 1 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

Sorry Rico I chose not to spend my time dealing with retards.

You seem to have comprehension problems and I am sure you would never be able to grasp anything I might say

[-] 1 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

All I see is you not answering Rico's question. He's stupid? Can't understand anything you might say? Really? And you are so far above the "retards"?

[-] 2 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

You clowns are so fucking transparent and inmature (-:

reread what I wrote carefully and ask a question based on it. Not what you though it meant.

I'll get back to me tomarrow. I know this is very important to you

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 2 years ago

I can already tell I am engaged in a battle of wits with an unarmed enemy by the quality of your response. The 12% was YOUR figure not mine, and the 99% figure is the OWS figure not mine. Explain yourself sir, or remain revealed as a simpleton.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar5 (9) 2 years ago

These clowns don't have a clue...But they are fun to play with...LOL

[-] 0 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

specifically what part don't you get retard?

[-] 0 points by LoneStar5 (9) 2 years ago

Retards? Have you watched any of the reports about OWS? And you are calling Rico retarded when he asked a valid queastion?...You need to look in a mirror to see who the real retard is.

[-] 0 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

What is that valid queston?

[-] 1 points by LoneStar5 (9) 2 years ago

LMAO...You are retarded..(No surprise here)....Try keeping up with the thread dumbass.

[-] 0 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

Don't know what the question is do you?

I don't either

[-] 4 points by Occupytheimf (134) 2 years ago

60k per day bill takes home. Lookin to hire pt temps to save hisself nickels while kickin loyal ft barrowpushers out on the curb. Theres yer cronyrigged economic stimulus package at work america. Your money

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

Sotheby's is a private company. It's none of your business what they earn.

[-] 1 points by jimmessina (1) 2 years ago

Sotheby's is not private. Sotheby's is on the NYSE with symbol BID Here is the latest SEC quarterly filing: http://knobias.10kwizard.com/filing.php?rid=23&ipage=7894851&SQDESC=SECTION_ENTIRE

Employment Arrangements—As of September 30, 2011, Sotheby's had employment arrangements with certain senior employees, which expire at various points between February 2012 and March 2017. Such arrangements may provide, among other benefits, for minimum salary levels and for incentive compensation under Sotheby's incentive compensation programs which is payable only if specified company and individual goals are attained. Additionally, certain of these arrangements provide annual equity grants, the accelerated vesting of certain equity grants, severance payments, other cash compensation, and continuation of benefits upon termination of employment under certain circumstances. The aggregate remaining commitment for salaries and other cash compensation related to these employment arrangements, excluding any participation in Sotheby's incentive compensation and share-based payment programs, was approximately $22.1 million as of September 30, 2011. ......................................................................................................

Sotheby’s ability to conduct business at its New York City office could be disrupted by a work stoppage involving unionized employees.

On June 30, 2011, the collective bargaining agreement applicable to 42 property handlers employed at Sotheby’s New York City office expired. During the process of negotiations with the union representing the property handlers, the union made statements to the media threatening a strike. In order to avoid the impact of the union’s threatened strike during the upcoming sales season and in support of Sotheby’s bargaining proposals, Sotheby’s locked out members of the bargaining unit on July 29, 2011. Although management cannot predict the ultimate outcome of the negotiations and any associated work disruption, Sotheby’s is committed to a good faith bargaining process and resolution of this matter. In the interim, Sotheby’s ability to conduct business at its New York City office could be disrupted by the lockout, though management has contingency plans in place to minimize any potential disruption that could be caused by the lockout. The union has also initiated a broader campaign to try to influence Sotheby’s clients and suppliers to support the union and cease doing business with Sotheby’s. It is impossible to predict the impact of this union campaign, but to-date, the campaign has not had a material impact on Sotheby’s business.

[-] 1 points by jpbarbieux (137) from Palmetto Bay, FL 2 years ago

There are no 'private' companies who are not obligated to pay "public" taxes.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

So, they pay taxes, but they are a private ( NOT public sector) company.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

I know you live in a house...Not a tent like these protesters..So here is my advice...Turn to your wall and talk to it...Talking to these people is just the same.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Why do you participate here? What do you hope to accomplish, beside getting your rocks off insulting everyone?

This is the host site of the OWS movement. Does your hubris extend to a belief that by going out of your way to log in here for the sole purpose of expressing hostility will in ANY way effect this movement? Or have you thought this through as poorly as you have the stances you take and the posts your write?

Really, WTF do hope to accomplish here?

[-] 1 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

I AM sorry. Why did you let me in if this is such a private site. Did I breach your security in some way.

Just because I am here does not rule that I must believe what you present in this "open forum"

If you want to reserve this for OWS movement members only, print some ID cards and keep the rest of us out. We will just pretend to be interested in who you are and what you are about.

[-] 1 points by brooce (65) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

He wants you to drink his kool aid. Progressives love to act like sheep. If you dont agree with them-they lodge a volley of insults on your intellect. Have experienced this in many debates. I have found progressives to be linear in thought-actually they dont have their own, they simply attach themselves to people like Noam Chomsky and then agree with everything he says. Sort of intellect by proxy. If you disagree-well then you are not as smart as they-after all they have a sort of aquired intellect from Noam.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Too a certain extent YES. The only real ideas I have been able to isolate on here have been historical resurrections of something that I grew up with or lived out 40-50 years ago. Then when I realize that many of the people on here are not the same age as me or have come from a far different background, I see the new idea concept.

Noam gleaned some interesting insights through the studies that he did and the overall life work but I don't really think that he will be able to save the world.

[-] 1 points by brooce (65) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

this movement would be sustainable if these rabid people where not so idealogical. Funny how the left preaches critical thinking-yet most every kid out of high school or college is likely to be liberal and a democrat. The curve then changes after they have been in the real world where people coming in second in the sack race or pie eating contest actually dont get a trophy. Have seen this with young folk-it takes a few years.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

I agree. We seem to have a lot of younger people today who are lacking the real world experience that shocked all of us at one time or another. I can remember going from a farm in the mid-west to a big-10 university. My experience in the real world was what carried me through those four years (just the reverse of what I see today in some of our younger people). I am working on my grandkids - but they will still have to experience it themselves at some point in their lives.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

I agree. We seem to have a lot of younger people today who are lacking the real world experience that shocked all of us at one time or another. I can remember going from a farm in the mid-west to a big-10 university. My experience in the real world was what carried me through those four years (just the reverse of what I see today in some of our younger people). I am working on my grandkids - but they will still have to experience it themselves at some point in their lives.

[-] 1 points by mesinger (26) 2 years ago

at least your not edited or censored .... thats reserved for Murdoch,Zuckerman and Bloomberg along with the UPI ... your venom reveals you Your rules of divide and concour will not work here you have no control over this I for one welcome intelligent debate now launch into the standard add hominus attack and prove me correct ...

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

I don't fall for your ploy to prove anyone correct.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

What evasion and obfuscation.

No one suggested that this is a private sight, or should be. In fact, I distinctly cited it as positively open in a previous post. The question is not whether you should be barred, but why you choose, of your own free will, to come to a place that's about change and activism only to use your energies being insulting?

My question isn't about what the OWS site should do, but about your motivations. I simply don't understand what you're trying to do, or how you feel your behavior id appropriate given the purpose of this site. The question is about YOU.

(Actually, it was about the Texan, but since you piped in, perhaps you want to answer as well.)

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Thanks for the invitation - but no thanks.

[-] 0 points by brooce (65) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

You write as a psuedo intellect-as noted by your final acronym. Hostility-look in the mirror sunshine.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Do you feel like contributing something to the movement, an idea or suggestion, or is being insulting the extent of it for you?

[-] 0 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

I don't like you, I believe your wrong,I don’t like the trash that supports you..( Go ahead and ask me who that might be ) And you can bet your_ass I will vigorously oppose you.

[-] 1 points by mesinger (26) 2 years ago

add hominus standard you get b+ letting emotion run your debate hence the I dont like you comment ...drops it to a c- but believing someone is wrong instead of proving someone wrong well thats an F and betting ones ass that you will oppose someone shows a certain lack of open minded ness so you seek to destroy what you can not understand ...really Lone Star focus your anger on the 1% that opress you through economic bondage and political oppresion

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

So why do you come to this site and post anything here? What do you hope to accomplish?

(I ask a second time since you decided to only to insult rather than answer the first time.)

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

If I can change even one of your blind followers to see the light...Then I accomplished my goal

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

And you think you can do that by being arrogant and insulting, calling everyone here who disagrees with you "trash"?

I might rethink my strategy.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

By the way...The 'Trash" I was talking about was supporters that support OWS...Would you like to know who they are? Or do you already know...If so then tell me who supports OWS and I will tell you (With source back up) who the trash is.

[-] 1 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 2 years ago

Let me be real with you. You're not converting anyone. If anything you're making yourself look like a fool.

I'm going to guess you have the inability to think for yourself. The reason I say that is because the rhetoric you and your like consistently like to spew off is always shown to be false yet you people keep coming back.

Now take your ass back to Fox unless you can contribute some logic to the discussion.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

You didn't show me the sources..So your words mean nothing

[-] 1 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 2 years ago

You didn't show me sources of the Occupy group endorsing the groups you mentioned.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

I might as well talk to my dog then you idiots....Have fun with your dead end movement...You will be not much more than an old tee shirt after awhile...Oh...Just to leave for the night on an up note...At least Houston is starting to crack down on your asses...10 arrest last night :)

[-] 1 points by mesinger (26) 2 years ago

They let you have a dog?

[-] 1 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 2 years ago

Cya

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

millions? LMAO And show me where you got that stat

[-] 1 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 2 years ago

There are 2557 Occupy movements as of now registered.

Not just counting the people that are Occupying these areas which is granted most likely under a million but is most likely in the hundreds of thousands.

Actual supporters including those who can't occupy the areas is in the millions.

Either way doesn't change the fact that being supported doesn't mean reverse endorsement.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

Communist Party USA, American Nazi Party, Ayatollah Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran, Barack Obama, The government of North Korea, Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, Revolutionary Communist Party, David Duke, Joe Biden, Hugo Chavez, Revolutionary Guards of Iran, Black Panthers (original), Socialist Party USA, US Border Guard, Industrial Workers of the World, CAIR, Nancy Pelosi, Communist Party of China, Hezbollah, 9/11Truth.org, International Bolshevik Tendency, Anonymous, White Revolution,

Why the long list...What your saying has no merit.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Yep, that's the bogus list I thought it was. meant to scare the pants off of gosh -darned freedom lovin' guys and gals everywhere. It's nothing more that an updated version of "Commie" baiting that occurred during the peace protests of the sixties.

It has been circulating on Libertarian blogs for several days now and is utterly meaningless exept insofar as it shows how scared the right-wing is becoming, stooping to such old worn out tactics.

Both reputable and disreputable organizations have always voiced support for causes that had nothing to do with them. There is no association or collaboration between OWC and these "supporters".

Individual support or opposition must come instead from whether or not one agrees with the basic principles of a group.

In the case of OWC, their focus on a demand to restore democracy and economic equity to this country, along with their spirit, stamina and determination to stay positive, has earned my strongest support.

[-] 1 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 2 years ago

So where has the Occupy movement endorsed these groups in return? Why do I have to keep explaining this simple concept? Just because a group supports the Occupy movement doesn't mean the Occupy movement supports their message in return.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

That was a lot more then one I sent......You want to play..Lets play

[-] 1 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 2 years ago

You could show me 400 I don't give a damn in a worldwide movement of millions these people hardly represent the majority, and play what? I find it amazing that Fox has no clue what these people are protesting about, but can make claims that these people are anti-semitic, nazi, socialists. That just doesn't make sense to me but okay.

At the end of the day unless stated publicly by the Occupy movement with solidarity that they support these groups that support them. None of these people represent the groups message.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

Also....I never seen a KKK member at a Tea Party rally....But I have seen these groups at yours....Hummm…And they seemed to be very welcomed there…Any comment on that…And as you say….Get real….So back up to your statement if you have one with sources.

[-] 1 points by mesinger (26) 2 years ago

Thats cause they leave the hoods at home silly .... now make some more tin foil hats

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

You most certainly have. White supremacists came out on droves.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

Then why don't you renounce these groups?

[-] 1 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 2 years ago

Because it isn't the job of a group with a vast amount of different political beliefs to renounce anyone. That still doesn't mean just because one group supports it that the whole movement is in favor of it. It doesn't work that way and you know it. Whomever you seen there is irrelevant.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

Real nice folks you hang with....GO TO HELL

[-] 1 points by mesinger (26) 2 years ago

your welcome to come by too we arent exclusive we take anybody ...

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

Oh my...Was that to hurt my feelings?.....look like a fool.? inability to think for yourself?....LOL....Go ahead with your blind faith....Best of luck to you there bud.....Oh...And is this some of your friends?

http://www.cpusa.org/communist-party-heralds-occupy-wall-street-movement/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avG4LgTF0ho

[-] 1 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 2 years ago

So how is it the fault of OWS that these groups support them?

I mean that makes about as much sense as me saying the KKK supports Republican party so all Republicans are racists.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Is it that bogus list from that Libertarian blogger?

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

Some of the sources are from YOUR movement...They are from outlets all around the world and some by admission in their own words….So ….Tell me…Who is supporting OWS..Good and bad…Be honest now…Some of us do research unlike many here.

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Senator Ron paul, darling of Libs and Teapers, is widely supported by Nazi and White Supremacist groups. That doesn't disturb me. (His support of them, however, is a real cause for concern.) The reason I can't stand Mr. Paul is not because I dislike others who worship him, but for the dangerous insanity and extremism of his, and his alone, ideas.

Nazis loved Wagner and Beethoven. Does that mean either composer would have agreed to genocide, or that the music is any less sublime?

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

Ummm...And what do you think everyone here calls anyone that don't agree...Oh...How about looking at some of what SwissMiss and many others have to say when they don't agree with you..You seem to be silent about those remarks...So typical for anyone associated with OWS ...And as far as I am concerned...You all are trash that needs to be taken out….Don’t even try to insult me with your better then thou attitude crap…You are no better than the garbage running around Oakland trashing the city..

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

That's very convincing. OK, I no longer support OWC because of your rational, civil argument.

See, you won. You can go home now.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

LOL....You are to easy...:)

[-] 1 points by mesinger (26) 2 years ago

do the Koch brothers pay you per the conversion or the hour of bandwith you consume?

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

You're right about talking to a wall.

[-] 0 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

of course it is.. else how would i have the facts in order to become a shareholder?

[-] 1 points by i8jomomma (80) 2 years ago

it is good that we got the teamsters on board.............now we got to get the hells angels.........bloods, crips,zetas,,,,,,,,,sons of silence and everyone else to put aside our differences and stand together like all the gangs did in the movie the warriors because it is all our turf..........we just need to stand together and take it back one block at a time......united we stand.....divided we fall......it is us against them and there is more of us.........we just need to show them that they can't fuck with all of us as long as we are in this together.....know matter what set your from or who ya represent........they can't fuck with us

[-] 1 points by jaimeordonezvictoria (4) 2 years ago

I have extrapolated this from three recent NPR news casts. I believe that the 99% Occupy Movement should capitalize on this recipe of three existing wrongs that appear to be among (if not) "the" major contributors to this tragedy that we are all protesting:

Imagine (1) a transparent Congress who is not allowed to withhold the names of companies who financially support their campaigns, while (2) abolishing the 501c4 non-profit "campaign contribution" organization tax code loopholes (that they hide their crime behind,) and (3) repeal Corporate Person-hood, and we may have America back, at least out of the major clutches of Corporations who Bribe congress in hidden ways. These are the three legislated policies that formulated this disaster.... It's called "conspiracy," and conspiracy is illegal in this country.

I believe that if you investigate these extrapolations, you will have a story that needs to go viral. — Reform Congress = Reform the 1%!!

Hey,... the 99% Occupation Movement is constantly being criticized for not having a goal and set of requirements. Why not these three?? Why not you??

I am sending this out everywhere, even the White House. Please pass it on. I think NPR has given us clues.

Jaime Ordonez Victoria

[-] 1 points by OWSSucks (1) 2 years ago

OWS get a life! if you dislike the one you have so much in the US take a free trip by plane, boat or whatever means necessary to a country that suits and fits your agenda(s) more so. Such as China or Iran then see how long you can occupy anything and destroy others property. Grow up, quit crying and go find a job!!!

[-] 1 points by TheKing (93) 2 years ago

Nothing screams "ethics" like a union run by a Hoffa.

[-] 1 points by Publius2 (1) 2 years ago

We want to see pictures of the super-rich perp walk as 1%ers are escorted in and out by the cops. Showing pictures of these rich priges and exposing them the harsh light of public ridicule would provide some well deserved bad personal publicity.

[-] 1 points by nofox (8) from Vero Beach, FL 2 years ago

I really admire your courage. You'll be surprised as to how much support you have. If you ever have any doubts and attacks on your resolve just remember "nofox" and others who are right behind you.

[-] 1 points by TheKing (93) 2 years ago

Nothing is as ethical as an organization run by a Hoffa..

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 2 years ago

AWESOME ! That's how we'll win, by allying ourselves with the TEAMSTERS. They have such a WONDERFUL reputation, I bet ALL Americans will RUSH to our side !

[-] 1 points by kongfish (2) 2 years ago

here are the people that should be in jail for creating the financial collapse, or was involved in it and gained financially using the government to commit crimes which created the atmosphere for all this to happen; Hank Paulson passed laws so that he and his cronies could do what they did. Timothy Geitner - worked for the fed in NY and helped paulson create these laws that ruined main street. Ben Bernankie- lied and lied and lied about the condition of the housing mortgage market, had special rules made for the criminals on wall st. Barrack Obama- 28 of the Goldman Sachs traders are now working in the White house helping he to steal money for the 2012 white run. How could any human report to be on track to raise 1 billion dollars for their campaign but very few people are donating money to the man. He is stealing it from the stimulus money that was supposed to help Americans out in this hard time. Stop defending a political party on either side they both are nothing more than the best of the best Con artist. That's who gets to Washington, if you can't see that Obama is a criminal and should be in jail than you are simply brain washed and it is sad, you were programed to believe in false truths. Obama cares about no one, or no party, so get over it and don't allow him to use you. and the unions are just as crooked

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Why can we not just stop while we are ahead sometimes. I have no problems with jail time for crimes committed. However, giving them full credit for creating the financial collapse, and making them out as evil for gaining financially is just diluting and polluting the crimes issue.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 2 years ago

Unions have every right to ask for benefits, when the answer from management is no, they can strike. I don't see hiring union workers as something a business should have to do. We would be much better off in businesses had never offered any benefits to workers at all. We'd have a government health care system if three quarters of the nation didn't already have "free" insurance from their job.

If someone makes a profit why are they obligated to spend it on employees? The employer hires you if you can do them some good, some offer profit sharing, some don't. Either way you get what you can and are free to negotiate for more, or not take the job if the benefits aren't what you like. I don't understand why people get so worked up over a business making a profit, that's why they are there, it's not welfare.

[-] 1 points by AkbarLightning (54) from Tillson, NY 2 years ago

as an artist and supporter of this movement I was very happy to see this. more than anything else, I look forward to how this profound cultural change will affect the tone and subject matter in our artistic practices..a practice that has, for many years, celebrated futility and ironic detachment from values...i look forward to seeing the sincerity and solidarity that is an innate part of the Occupy Movement move into the art openings and gallery spaces...Occupy Art!

[-] 1 points by Monkeyboy69 (150) 2 years ago

Sotheby's is a private co .... If they don't want to hire union workers ... They don't have to

[-] 1 points by JustAsking01 (4) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

So I understand- The protest is to show that not providing work to Union workers is unfair.. Will there be a protest for non-Union workers who are not provided Union jobs? it goes both ways correct or is OWS just for Unions

[-] 1 points by GlobalSucks (87) 2 years ago

I am fairly certain it would go both ways, but the only problem is the non-union workers would have to strike or walk out first.

For instance if the employees of Wal-Mart decided to walkout for better pay or unfair hours that keep them ineligible for healthcare etc. I would bet that OWS would be right beside them

This is only my opinion, who knows for sure what would happen

[-] 1 points by SmallBizGuy (378) from Savannah, GA 2 years ago

This is fun to watch. As the State goes bankrupt. Maybe then, all of the idiots that think everything is FREE, will get what they deserve. Please....don't come to Georgia.

[-] 1 points by rickMoss (435) 2 years ago

Wall Street is not the cause, it is a SYMPTOM!

JOIN THE REVOLUTION Read “Common Sense 3.1” at ( www.revolution2.osixs.org )

FIGHT THE CAUSE - NOT THE SYMPTOM We don’t have to live like this. "Spread the News"

[-] 1 points by gley (3) 2 years ago

If the Occupy movement can adopt an anti-corruption platform instead of the disjointed messages, they will be much more respected. An Occupy member's page http://owwc.gu.ma , supporting a business owner who lost millions of dollars to a corrupt officials, seems to go a long way in starting down that road.

[-] 1 points by Jester (30) 2 years ago

Now you're losing me OWS. Wage cuts, while awful, are not illegal, immoral, or fattening. If this occupation/movement, whatever, turns into a general rag session, it will dematerialize, IMO. STAY FOCUSED! What does OWS stand for? What is your image? What are your concerns? Do you have a common world view?

[-] 0 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

LMAO...You have not figured that out yet? If not I’ll help you out...NO they don’t….But they do bang the bongo well..

[-] 1 points by Jester (30) 2 years ago

Oh God! Now it's Trolling me. Ugh!

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

Yes ''IT" is....

[-] 0 points by hahaha (-41) 2 years ago

Made quite a splash with this on the news! (No you didn't, see I'm being sarcastic there. Did it even happen or did you call it off? Too cold to walk up there and back?)

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

Uh, Globalsucks: where are you? You call everyone else retards but you don't back anything up. Please don't turn out to be that standard Marxist/liberal/ leftist dumbass that is continually embarrassing you filthy Bolshevik ass wipes.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

And it accomplished?

[-] 0 points by steven2002 (363) 2 years ago

Take over Sotheby's. Storm the bidding floor and occupy it. If the cops come fight, kick and spit on them. Start screaming about being arrested. If the cops persist grab their guns, do not let them take you. Bite them, punch them and charge them with assault. You will win.

[-] 0 points by steven2002 (363) 2 years ago

Yes occupy Sotheby's. Charge the bidding floor and sit down. If the cops come and try to remove you resist. Kick, punch and spit at them. Scream at the top of your lungs about being arrested. So the 1% that we mean business.

[-] 0 points by velveeta (230) 2 years ago

dead artists, dead art, money laundering, scumbag art dealers, union thugs

[-] 0 points by Jaccav (0) 2 years ago

How, exactly, are air horns, drums and whistles free speech? I am unfortunate enough to work in the Wall STreet area and on 72nd street right near Sothebys. Why must I have MY peace disrupted by the protesters? There is a nursing home across the street. Should these sick and elderly folks living there Have to deal with this? Why must people that have nothing to do with any of this suffer as collateral damage? Does the means really justify the ends here? Really? Its

[-] 0 points by Occupytheimf (134) 2 years ago

Www.talk2thewalls.com bigger than facebook. Antisocial networking. 24 7. Plenty variety of walls u can chat to

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 2 years ago

Whoa,the most corrupt,thuggish,evildoing union in the country joining you may not really help your cause.

[-] 1 points by LoneStar3 (45) 2 years ago

You should see who else supports them...These guys are little league to some of them...

[-] -1 points by jayp74 (195) 2 years ago

With OWS aligning itself with unions, I really don't know what the hell you people stand for.

How do you think aligning yourselves with unions is going to help your cause? Unions are just as bad as the corporations: greed, corruption and huge executive salaries.

Wake up.

[-] 1 points by TheCloser (200) 2 years ago

Sure, but these devils are being helpful. Standing up against corruption is everyone's obligation - even the Union - a different flavor of corporate schmuck, if you ask me.

[-] 0 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

maybe.. but unions produce jobs. corporations eliminate them. unions make no money unless there are jobs. corporations make more money when there are no jobs. i do not mind the boss making more than me.. i mind the boss taking my job when it is for his own monetary benefit.

[-] 1 points by JustAsking01 (4) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

So Union produce jobs.. name one.... If it was not for Corporations there would be need for Unions.. Like asking what came 1st the chicken or the egg.. really the roaster did.. that is another story...

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

What jobs to be specific, other than union officials, employees etc. The only job that I ever saw a union create was actually the preservation of a job that was held by the W O R S T teacher that I ever encountered in an elementary school and they fought tooth and toenail to preserve that one - beyond that - no jobs.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

yes i should have said preserve not produce. and it is a plethora of jobs that with out unions would be like a walmart jobs. minimun wage, part time no benifits. just so the ceo could get rich.

[-] 1 points by TheCloser (200) 2 years ago

I would support the Union in Wal-Mart. They're the scourge!

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

And you have questions about why companies outsource jobs to a nation offering the same as walmart??

Just imagine a country (USA) where the policies of walmart applied to all jobs in the country. Then where would walmart purchase its good for resale??

Somewhere in all this, there has to be a happy medium. Unionizing walmart doesn't solve the problem, prices simply rise to provide all the benefits you note above, the CEO makes the same salary, and we all get the benefits of: HIGHER PRICES.

So to remain competitive, WalMart now looks for sources of production and goods that are cheaper than China-and there are places in this world where labor is cheaper than China. You only have to look at a few production histories to see this process in action. One of the best examples is the production of kitchen dinette sets. Trace production from the USA, to Tiawan, to Mexico, to Malasia, to China and you will see how it all works. It will tell you why the largest dinette manufacturer in the USA closed a few years ago-even though it imported much of its raw cast goods from Mexico.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

as you stated the ceo salary remains the same.. that is the problem. the greed of managment. this concept of ceo's taking 80 percent of the profit and using the other 20 percent for operations and workers is what has to change if this economy is to survive. if it takes unionizing all workers in america to do that then thats what has to be done.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Please, I think taking 50% of the profits as a ceo would be too much for me to stomach. Just where did you come up with the 20-80 split of corporation profits. Are we talking about one corporation in particular, an average of all corporations, or just what.

If this is a fabricated generalization, don't expect me to buy such garbage.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

yes it is fabricated. im just pointing out that when times get tough.. it is always the workers and not management that gets reduced.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

We would get a lot further in a discussion if you simply stated things like you did in the above reply, rather than misleading me and all the other possible readers of this post.

You sound like a politicial - "BUT, what I really meant was....."

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Actually, to be more specific, they fought to preserve the teacher in that job at the very expense of the good teachers that were available to hold that job and to really make a difference in the lives of 25 children year in and year out.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

the union im sure did not prohibit you reassigning that teacher to study hall and lunch monitor. and if you had proof of the problem then you would have won the case. are you sure it wasnt just a judment call on your part.. which is of course prohibited.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

With a position description like she had - what would be the point of continuing that kind of salary for a lunch monitor??

My observation and reasoning are always based on a lot more than my own judgement call. And by the way, prohibited by whom??

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

because you have to have a lunch monitor thats why. and who else are you going to have for that? another teacher that should be concentrating on teaching. it sounds as if you are deciding that a lunch monitor does not deserve the same pay as a teacher.. that is a judgment. you are making a judgment call. its not for you to judge. its for you to operate within parameters. prohibited by the union contract. and the reason for that contract is exactly this situation.. you do not get to make judgment calls. then only the ones that suit you personally would get a job. or keep a job. not for you to decide personally.. you must show proof of your reasoning in order to fire someone.. not just your opinion. thats why we need unions.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

BS You rant and rave about what you do not know.

[-] 0 points by jayp74 (195) 2 years ago

Unions do not produce jobs.

Corporations will eliminate jobs and either outsource or move jobs them overseas if union demands for higher wages drives them. A corporation must produce its good and services for the lowest possible price, else its competitor will sell the same thing for less and drive it out of business. Pretty simple really.

Yes, you and I and all workers are commodities in the corporate world. And I have absolutely no complaint about that. The cold, hard fact is that our jobs would be eliminated if there were another way to fulfill the role we serve in any company. To survive, you need to have the right skills and be relevant. If your job can be replaced by a machine, it will be.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

you dont see that soon.. america will be like any other poor country.. to survive you will have to move to another country. you cant just stand by and do nothing while that happens.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

no our government could stop them from outsourcing. this society could stop them from operating for the pure purpose of greed. if they dont like it they can move the corporate to the country they are exploiting. but we can stop them from exploiting america.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

And what of the poor consumer that is forced to pay a much higher price for the goods that they need or want. Unless you have been in business, you have no way to even imagine the balance that has to be maintained among all the factors: customer, employee, the manufacturer, the wholesale price, the retail price, competitors.

Sure we could shut down WalMart or any other business for buying goods from foreign sources or outsourcing jobs BUT What are you going to do when that retailer or manufacturer is owned by a foreign source, as well as, sell foreign goods.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

that wouldnt happen if not for the greed of the ceo. if management would take the cut.. this would not happen. and again.. laws could be passed to prohibit the sale of american resources to foriegn entities.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Do you have the facts to support your claim. If the CEO of a large corporation, say WalMart, was to work for $0 salary starting tomorrow, how would that affect the price of any one item or the overall profit margin of WalMart. Same for any other example you want to pick from the greedy ceo list you have.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

What you better hope is that China doesn't pass a law prohibiting the sale of "rare earth" elements to the USA.

I am sure that you are current on all the market in and outs especially one so critical to our energy conservation measures, production etc. as the rare earth "metals" being mined primarily in China.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

i meant in terms of a business that is based in america being sold to a foreign entity.. not natural resources.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Thanks for the clarification. Same point - then American companies also would be prevented from purchasing interest in or entire foreign companies.

Sounds like a good trade off to me. Tell KFC and WalMart etc to get out of China and Mexico and every other country.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

exactly

[-] 0 points by jayp74 (195) 2 years ago

Yes, the US government could stop outsourcing. In a few years, you would go down to Best Buy and get a $3000 union made flat screen TV, which you can get today for $1000. Wages would be higher. But so would prices.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

and so what? this insures cash flow. the life blood of economy.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

you have got to be kidding - bought any $3,000 tv's lately just to keep the cash flowing??

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

i have bought 14 dollar shampoo though..

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

And if I was the one selling that $14.00 shampoo. I would lavish thanks all over you and tell you what a great product you got so cheaply. Check WalMart - $2.95 - national brand. Some ingredients, just mixed in bigger batches.

Just for Fun There is a small Mom-Pop operation in East Kansas that is noted for their dill pickels. People drive from around the areas of Topeka, etc to buy them. I got a jar for Christmas last year - with the admonition to eat them and then I would be told how they were made.

Reply for the rest of the story.....

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

just helping the ecomony. yes i could buy the cheapest but why hoard my money? im not a ceo.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Maybe so you could buy a home like the CEO?? Just asking.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

i would never buy a house like a ceo.. the house i have does the job. why buy a house soo big it cost 20k just to heat? and saving 5 bucks on shampoo would take a long long time to save up a million

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

gestopomilly - There was no place to reply to your comment so here goes. I have a friend that lives in a one room house West of here probably less than 200 square feet.

He thinks that you already have a house like a ceo.

[-] 0 points by jayp74 (195) 2 years ago

Sure, there will be plenty of cash flow. It's called inflation. And before very long, you'll need a wheelbarrow of cash to do your weekly grocery shopping.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

not so. u just use a card. the actual money transfer is electronic not physical.

[-] 0 points by jayp74 (195) 2 years ago

You're right. You'll just have to have your credit limit raised to $1,000,000.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

use a debit card you did say wages would go up to match prices soo no problem

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

Unions don't produce jobs, people do.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Unions ARE people. Corporations are not.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

That is because you say they are not. I personally know a lot of very real people in corporations - not as many in unions.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Let's try this again: Unions are comprised of people. The word "union" simply refers to the act of people coming together. Their purpose in coming together is to help each other gain rights.

Corporation are legal organizations Their purpose is to make money. They have no obligation, legally or morally, to do anything else. People may work for/in a corporation, but that corporation is not human, but a legal construct only.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

card check = a non private vote.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

All unionizing activity begins with the signing of cards. That is never private. Card-check simply allows the NLRB to recognize those cards as votes which they are and always have been. There is NO loss to privacy in voting with vote-check: it is a right wing straw man.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

No, card check makes a a private vote public. No more secret balloting.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

No, signing the initial cards has to happen regardless, and is not private. Signing those cards is always a vote for the union, and no election can happen until a majority of employees has ALREADY signed cards. The election itself, because it can be delayed by many months after the cards have already been signed, only acts to undermine the original vote - signing cards - by opening the door to management harassment, arbitrary firings, and all sorts of intimidation. I use to organize for unions, so I know the process intimately.

Your insistence that card check makes voting non-private is a straw man, since card-signing has to occur anyway prior to any vote being taken. THERE IS NO PRIVATE VOTE AND NEVER HAS BEEN. Card check would simply make the ORIGINAL VOTE in the form of signing a card actually matter.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

So, if my wife and I form a corporation, we are in no way people anymore?? What about my employees within the corporation or my brother who may be a stockholder.

I think if you will delve into the nature of a corporation, it is a legal construct with certain legal rights to do things not afforded to the individual or not possible for the individual to accomplish. AND from my point of view, it is a means of limiting an individual (stockholder etc) from the financial liabilities associated with our "I'll sue you for everythink you have got" social mentality. This liability is, therefore, limited to the value-assets of the corporation NOT the value-assets of any one individual within that corporation (excluding personal legal or civil liabilities proven in a court of law).

And some people think that the purpose of unions has extended beyond people coming together to help each other gain rights and that they have moved over into the area of gaining priviledges beyond what the others in the society can continue to support. I don't know who is right and who is wrong but I do have a pretty good understanding of how both unions and corporations are set up and what their purposes are susposed to be about.

You will note that the basic function of both in some way or the other involves that old thing called MONEY.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

Where do you think unions invest? In wall street corporations.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

So does everybody else. Stocks can only be bought on Wall Street. Pensions need to be funded.

But it proves another point: Unions are not the enemy of business. They WANT businesses to succeed so jobs, health care and pensions are protected and enhanced. The myth of unions being anti-business is just that: a myth. It is propagated by the corporations, who don't see their success as intertwined with successful unions. But unions work for the success of businesses.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

So why are the unions backing OWS?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Because OWS is trying to bring back democracy and fairness. Industry capture of government may help large corporations write their own tickets, but we have just seen how devastating it is for millions of working people, and how corrosive it has been to democracy..

OWS is not anti business, it is anti-corruption. It is about businesses unacceptably gaining control over Government, and reducing access to that government by the people, the workers. The movement is against vast disparities in wealth, so vast they mean unlimited power for the haves and greater numbers of the have-nots. That's not anti-business, it's anti oligarchy. And it just happens to be what unions have always opposed, too.

Enormous disparities in wealth create structural problems for the economy as a whole (and the US leads the world in such disparities). It also depresses intergenerational incomes rising from one class to another. These are all anathema to unions. And they are anathema to OWS. They are natural allies.

The are also philosophical issues. Union leaders are elected by their rank and file. By-laws are ratified by them. All results of contract negotiations are subject to a vote by members. It is a democratic process. Corporations are not democratic. Votes about policies and procedures are not ratified by the workers who must adhere to them and carry them out, sometimes at great physical risk. Unions are therefore far more sympathetic to democracy than to plutocracy. Unions are, after all, nothing more than a union of people, individual workers who joined together to be able to speak with one voice. Democracy is "in their blood".

Anything to restore democracy is in everyone's interest. That includes even business as a whole. But the only ones who don't see that, and are even now spending tens (if not hundreds) of millions of dollars to make sure that democracy and equity are never restored are those corporations. Fiduciary responsibility has come to mean short-term gain at the expense of sustainable, long-term growth among shareholders. But it is in the company's best interest to have longevity. The unions know that, and work for it (more members working). The CEOs might know t, too, but don't care. What the Dow/jones does today is the only important thing.

Even if, as you say, union leaders are in it for the sake of power only, they have NO power if people aren't working.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

and your stand on card check?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I'm not sure how you're defining it, but I am in favor of cards being signed by people who are trying to unionize, and those signed cards being treated as the votes they are.

The ability for companies to harass and intimidate without that is far too great. I have seen it myself countless times. The damage done to people is enormous, even if the unionizing effort is ultimately successful. Without card check individuals are simply too exposed and subject to never-ending retaliation. I have seen workers beaten, their lives threatened, their hours reduced to nothing, and more, during unionizing efforts. Workers wanting to organize and bargain collectively should not be treated as an act of war. Without card check, that's exactly the result.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

card check means a NON PRIVATE vote.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

All union activity begins with the signing of cards. That is never private. Card-check, as far as I understand your meaning allows the NLRB to recognize those cards as a vote. It is no more or less private than the two step process wherein the cards are signed by a majority, only to have to vote again. That "private" vote displays to management everyone who is interested in the union, and before the process is finalized, the bosses have a chance to harass everyone who's shown up. Indeed, that harassment usually begins earlier. As soon the company is informed that a sufficient number of cards (representing a majority of employees) have been signed to schedule an election, the intimidation, firings, threats, etc, begins.

What card check does is eliminate that horrific time in between the first vote and the second. Since a majority has already been reached once via card sighing, it would be wonderful if that torture period would be eliminated.

And make no mistake, saying "no" about signing a card to someone with little or no power over your paycheck is a hell of a lot easier than withstanding the opposite pressure from the boss and possibly losing your job in the process..

I support it completely.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

yes.. the corporate boss is a person. taking my job. union boss is a person keeping my job

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

What the union bosses care about is their own power and the money they collect from you. That money insures their power because they use it for politcal donations to the dem party.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

The donations are to help create new jobs and protect and enhance existing ones.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

AKA union slavery.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

AKA JOBS.

And jobs with dignity, to boot. That's something no corporate CEO cares anything about. A CEOs legal, fiduciary responsibility is to shareholders. Maximizing profits, even if that means cutting thousands of people loose without pensions they worked over twenty years for, is the sole obligation.

That is the opposite task of the unions. If I have to choose between someone whose obligation it is to fight for my job versus someone whose obligation it is to rob me of my pension, I'll go with the the one who protects me.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

The people that I know that work and do not belong to unions are doing just fine without them.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

They are only doing fine because of what unions won for them. A little gratitude is in order.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

Wrong. Owners of succeful companies know what they have to pay in order to have a competent work force. Nothing to do with unions.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Wrong. The scale of expectations for what they have to pay was created by unions and unions only.

The rise of unions precipitated a rise in EVERYONE'S pay. The mechanism is well-known among economists.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

Ford paid his people a high wage, it had nothing to do with unions.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

at least they understand that i have to have a job in order for me to pay. so i still have a job.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

All they understand is their own power. All you are to them is a source of money.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Their power is derived from people having work. That's a good thing. Were it only true of CEOs.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

Trumpka, Stern and Gerard are CEO's. How well did Trumpka do with GM?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Trumpka did very well considering the financial meltdown.

That meltdown, need I remind you, WAS NOT CAUSED BY UNIONS.

It was caused by bankers and CEOS of corporations. Trumpka managed to stem the bleeding, which would have been FAR worse without the union leaders working hard for their constituents.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

gm died because of the union.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

First off, GM is NOT dead. It is smaller and leaner, and is quite profitable.

GM NEARLY died because of a series of short-sight, horribly stupid management decisions combined with, what was that again? Oh, yes, THE WORST RECESSION SINCE THE 1930s !

The Unions helped make GM and all the rest of the American automakers the best, most profitable in the world for over 50 years. They began losing market share as a result of the Arab Oil Embargo in the late 1970s, and management was too slow to realize that raod battleships had to be replaced with smaller vehicles that were more fuel efficient.

Your history is totally manufactured.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

Lack of engineering inovations helped to kill Gm , so did the huge union contracts.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

that is a good thing. they know the only way i am ever going to have money is by having a job. corporations do not know this

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

More people that are working do NOT belong to a union than do.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

But everyone working is indebted to the unions for the 40 hour work week, time and a half, sick leave, paid vacations, health care benefits, pensions or 401K plans. These would not have existed without the unions exerting pressure. Non-union companies once had to compete with unionized ones, and to attract workers, they had to offer comparable benefits. And politicians had to enact las to protect worker's rights when unions have real numbers and real power.

The best way to increase pay, benefits and security at all jobs, union or not, is for unions to get back to power they once had.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

Unions were useful,once upon a time ago. Now they're bankrupting states. Bankrupting you.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

They are perhaps the only hope for the American population. People like Gov. Scott Walker created a crises by giving HUGE tax breaks to the wealthiest corporations in his state, then cried poverty when it came to public unions. It is clear that he created the crisis specifically in order to bust those unions. It was a ruse.

The unions, as I have pointed out before, created the middle class. They did so in the face of criticisms very much like the ones you are repeating today. Those criticism weren't legitimate 50 years ago, and they are not legitimate now.

If more people earned a true living wage - something a stronger unions could attain - the tax base would be much larger, and bankruptcy would be no threat whatsoever. It is only when people must work for low wages, have no benefits or security, when unemployment is high, tax revenue shrinks, consumers don't spend, do states get squeezed and are at risk of bankurptcy.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

they have fooled you into thinking you would be paid the same and get the same benefits through the goodness of the ceo's heart. this is not true. if not for the checks an balances of the unions.. your employer would stop offering benefits,, reduce your pay to a pittance and laugh in your face when you ask for a raise. do not believe otherwise.

[-] 1 points by gestopomilly (497) 2 years ago

yes.. the power of free will.. but if those people want a union the more power to them.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 2 years ago

large company , privately owned, NO unionss, everyone well paid, grate benefits. People that I know wroking for non union companies, well paid, happy in what they do.

[-] -2 points by velveeta (230) 2 years ago

Lets make sure the guys who cart around the dead artist paintings get paid more, while the dead artists and their heirs get nothing

[-] 1 points by Occupytheimf (134) 2 years ago

Whats a dead artist need a wage for

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 2 years ago

Upkeep??

[-] -3 points by Jimboiam (812) 2 years ago

After reading all the posts, this has to be the most delusional thread of the week. ANYONE who thinks the Teamsters are working for the common man, clearly does not know who runs the Teamsters or their long documented history. The Teamsters leadership is the MOB people. No different than the 1% you hate so much. Wake the fuck up all of you.

[-] 1 points by Occupytheimf (134) 2 years ago

Are we getting prizes?

[-] 0 points by Jimboiam (812) 2 years ago

First class tickets to Utopia didn't you know?