Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
01-26-2014, 08:27 PM
Post: #41
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
Oh, excuse me Narsbars. I dropped the (s) on your handle, too bad. Are you going to start ranting because somebody forget the (s). Thank you for your english lesson but I can define terms fine on my own. I never said that anybody was forced to join MSEA, they are forced to pay a "fair Share" contribution monthly. I am not right wing or conservative but thank you and Strick 3. I don't care who becomes a member of MSEA. I believe what Sonny and others have said if you refuse to pay "fair share" under the Baldacci administration you were threatened with being terminated and that is a fact! Nobody can be forced to be a member of MSEA!
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-26-2014, 09:44 PM (This post was last modified: 01-26-2014 09:48 PM by Narsbars.)
Post: #42
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
First thing you said I agree with. I shouldn't have mentioned the S. I will attempt not to play school marm again.

The first thing the governor and the legislature passed was as you say. I am showing you what I said. Liberals will face facts. Then the Union approached the State and negotiated a way to have the money paid without having anyone fired. Please note, it was the Union that did not want people fired. At that point you had a choice, allow the automatic agency fee to be removed from your paycheck or quit.
After that time the Union offered the current governor a chance to grandfather everyone that had worked for the state at the time fair share was passed. They would not have to pay anything, not lose a job and that would have been the end of it. P.S. Gov. LePage refused.

By law, even in right to work for less states a Union must represent employees or be charged with a federal labor law violation and in Maine at least a state law violation. They may also be sued if a free rider thinks they were not represented well. See a theme? The right would call them "takers".

Free riders are those who want a job in a predominately union work group, want the pay, want the benefits, but refuse to kick in anything to help support the work being done.
I also think if you have been following along you know that the union can not use any of the agency fee for politics under threat of the I.R.S.
The MSEA has been sued numerous times, won all cases and been told in court that they are very conservative in the agency fee charged, they could charge much more.

My first post was in response a comment from Islander, with the words "forced union dues". If you thought I was blaming you, I may have been unclear. There are no forced dues in the U.S. There is no forced Union membership in the U.S. and no one can prove differently.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2014, 06:46 AM
Post: #43
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
Welcome Narsbars, and I hope you have now cooled down a bit and your blood pressure is back to a healthy level. Although I do agree with many of things you've said over the years, do you know why the annual audit does not take a close look at political activities and expenses by SEIU (all levels) being billed under non-political accounting codes?

The mandatory use of a Fair Share Fee (FSF) has been approved by the U.S. Supreme Court, so I don't believe that is worth debating. However, don't you think it would be fair if the Fair Share Fee was actually accurate? Over the past several years, MSEA-SEIU folks have admitted that the financial totals for the non-political billing codes did include political activities/expenses... which inflates the FSF. How fair is that?

-----------
Expose and document the Far-Left,
Support the Right.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2014, 10:34 AM (This post was last modified: 01-27-2014 05:46 PM by Narsbars.)
Post: #44
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
(01-27-2014 06:46 AM)Moving Forward Wrote:  Welcome Narsbars, and I hope you have now cooled down a bit and your blood pressure is back to a healthy level. Although I do agree with many of things you've said over the years, do you know why the annual audit does not take a close look at political activities and expenses by SEIU (all levels) being billed under non-political accounting codes?

The mandatory use of a Fair Share Fee (FSF) has been approved by the U.S. Supreme Court, so I don't believe that is worth debating. However, don't you think it would be fair if the Fair Share Fee was actually accurate? Over the past several years, MSEA-SEIU folks have admitted that the financial totals for the non-political billing codes did include political activities/expenses... which inflates the FSF. How fair is that?

Replying to: MovingForward

You said:
The mandatory use of a Fair Share Fee (FSF) has been approved by the U.S. Supreme Court, so I don't believe that is worth debating. However, don't you think it would be fair if the Fair Share Fee was actually accurate? Over the past several years, MSEA-SEIU folks have admitted that the financial totals for the non-political billing codes did include political activities/expenses... which inflates the FSF. How fair is that?

If true, then the I.R.S. becomes involved. Then, again, if true, the money is refigured and the fees lowered or adjusted. My original point is that after thorough court review it has been determined that the fees are legal, and could be higher.

There is a totally revamped accounting system in place and I suspect you won't see those types of errors.
You also said that the FSF should be accurate. If it is proved that the FSF fee could be calculated to be higher, I take it you would support raising the fee?

Do you have any references for I.R.S. action? Any mistakes of this type must be considered serious, but unless a continuing problem is shown they must be considered just that, a mistake, not some Glen Beck blackboard conspiracy.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2014, 11:40 AM (This post was last modified: 01-27-2014 11:45 AM by Sonny Laymatina.)
Post: #45
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
Quote:You go to a lot of detail to prove you are wrong.

Translation: stop throwing pearls at you.

Quote:Agency fee can be charged, but neither dues and Union membership may not be mandated under both State and Federal law.

That’s a distinction without a difference.

Because workers in a union shop after 30 days of initial employment must join the union…

Or pay the so called agency fee or be fired.

Either way workers have to pay the union for services they don’t want.

That’s like you painting my house without my permission but getting to charge me for it anyway.

Quote:I know for a fact that you are an intelligent person.

My Dad always told me if anyone tells me this don’t believe it because they don’t mean it.

Quote:Don't look like a fool and lie to the ignorant.

Dad was right!

Quote:Try to make your case, state your points and win on the merit of your case.

You are insufferable.

Quote:You won't but you can at least lose graciously.

Word to the wise: don’t drink before coming on here.

Quote:I do not believe you don't know these things, and anyone who does believe them doesn't deserve your time or respect. Get it right, tell the truth, and we can talk.

Bizarre ground rule for discussion….does your Ward Nurse know you’re on her computer?

Quote:B.S. About 'forced dues" and you can continue to preach to the deluded.

If you don’t want to belong to a union but you have to pay them anyway….then you are forced to.

And the fact that you can’t or won’t get your head around this basic fact speaks volumes.

Quote:Never been away: Narantula was afraid to let me post and banned me,

Why? Did you violate the rules? Swear? Defame? Try to expose someone’s identity?

The rules have always been pretty straightforward here…so not hard to comply with.

Quote:several members of "Dead thread" promised to post about it to invite discussion and none of them ever had the guts.

As a Libertarian, I am a big defender of free speech….even yours!

But AMG and this forum are not government websites….so the Constitutions of Maine and the US don’t apply to them.

They're really private clubs with open invitations to all so long as you comply with their basic rules.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2014, 05:45 PM
Post: #46
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
I understand you are unable to deal with facts and are attempting deflection.
If you don't want to belong to a Union, don't take a Union job or pay the fees. You don't want to be called a "taker" do you.

Try to learn to read completely.
I never violated any terms of service on any site. That has already been stated. Unless you can get Naran to fake something up you will never prove any differently.
Over to you. "Got facts?"

Your lack of doing research and just jumping in to spout right wing talking points is showing.

No one gets it right all the time, I apologize when I make a mistake in behavior or in fact. Your ad hominem attacks and slurs referring to a "ward nurse" are infantile.
If you want to be a taker or a free rider on the backs of other employees, say so. Your denial of an agency fee is a distinction without a difference between the terms taker and selfish.

Then in response to an invitation to civil discussion and exchange of viewpoints ( Try to make your case, state your points and win on the merit of your case.) your answer your answer is "You are insufferable. "

Stop trying to be Rodney Dangerfield, he did it far better.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2014, 08:31 PM
Post: #47
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
Quote:I understand you are unable to deal with facts and are attempting deflection.

Nice try…that’s your game!

Quote:If you don't want to belong to a Union, don't take a Union job or pay the fees.

Errr…the State government belongs to all people who live here.

As such no one should have to join or fund the Communist Party or any Party or any Organization to work for the State.

Quote:You don't want to be called a "taker" do you.

I have taken nothing from anyone.

It is labor unions like msea-SEIu that take money from people who’d rather not pay them.

And such public sector labor unions do this with the intervention of the State on their behalf.

What other business gets such a State government guaranteed monopoly?

Why should labor unions be treated any differently than law firms, restaurants or airlines?

And if you’re so worried about “free riders”…

Then you’ll have nothing to worry about regarding right-to-work laws.

Because in right-to-work States labor unions don’t have to represent non-members.

Quote:Try to learn to read completely. I never violated any terms of service on any site. That has already been stated. Unless you can get Naran to fake something up you will never prove any differently.

If so then I would agree that your ouster was uncalled for.

Quote:Over to you. "Got facts?"

Plenty! For instance, Maine law firms operate in a free market but public sector labor unions don’t.

Quote:Your lack of doing research and just jumping in to spout right wing talking points is showing.

Translation: you support government guaranteed labor unions and I support workers right to choose.

Quote:No one gets it right all the time, I apologize when I make a mistake in behavior or in fact.

Good for you! Now why won’t you support worker freedom?

Quote:Your ad hominem attacks and slurs referring to a "ward nurse" are infantile.

Yeesh! This coming from you who said: “Get it right, tell the truth, and we can talk.”

Quote:If you want to be a taker or a free rider on the backs of other employees, say so.

Nice try….but it is public sector labor unions that take from employees who don’t want to belong.

Why are you so opposed to the free market?

Why won’t you support the deregulation of labor unions?

What part of “…in a right-to-work State there are no free rider issues” don’t you understand?

Fact: labor unions in right-to-work States don’t have to and don’t represent non-paying workers.

This forces labor unions to compete for customers everyday just like any other business.

Why would you be opposed to that scenario?

And before you accuse me again of being right-wing know that I am not anti-airline either.

By that I mean just as I supported the deregulation of airlines from their government guaranteed routes...

I support the deregulation of labor unions from their government guaranteed customers.

So I am no more anti-labor union than I am anti-airline.

I am pro-worker and pro-consumer because I am pro-freedom!

Quote:Your denial of an agency fee is a distinction without a difference between the terms taker and selfish.

I have taken nothing from anybody….that’s what msea-SEIu does with the help of the State.

And you support that taking because in your Stalinist mind that’s a just or fair taking.

You really need to stop drinking the SEIu kool-aid.

Quote:Then in response to an invitation to civil discussion and exchange of viewpoints ( Try to make your case, state your points and win on the merit of your case.) your answer your answer is "You are insufferable. "

You are insufferable…you keep accusing me of being a taker…and you’re proof of this is what?

All the while you full well know that it is public sector labor unions in Maine that are the takers.

They are taking people’s money involuntarily with the help of the State.

Quote:Stop trying to be Rodney Dangerfield, he did it far better.

Errr….if I was mimicking anybody (subconsciously maybe) then it would be Bill Hicks.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2014, 09:00 PM (This post was last modified: 01-28-2014 08:36 PM by Moving Forward.)
Post: #48
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
TMC's wooden spoon has just smacked me, so this post will now get an edit:

Narsbars, Does your employer allow you to surf the internet during work hours? For example...
RE: Post #44- Done "Today, 09:34 AM (This post was last modified: Today 04:46 PM by Narsbars.)"
RE: Post #46- Also done "Today, 04:45 PM"

In addition, how can you be sure that MSEA-SEIU has "a totally revamped accounting system in place?"

As for your question about my willingness to pay a higher FSF, absolutely not! The lack of fiscal accountability at MSEA-SEIU is absolutely disgusting and deserves a procedural audit by the IRS... and perhaps that will indeed happen in the near future. Lightbulb

-----------
Expose and document the Far-Left,
Support the Right.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-27-2014, 11:33 PM
Post: #49
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
(01-27-2014 09:00 PM)Moving Forward Wrote:  Narsbars, Does DAFS still allow you to surf the internet during work hours? For example...
RE: Post #44- Done "Today, 09:34 AM (This post was last modified: Today 04:46 PM by Narsbars.)"
RE: Post #46- Also done "Today, 04:45 PM"

So...cats...outta...the...bag.

Narsbars...is...THE TAKER!

Which would explain why he has no problem with msea-SEIu being takers.

And why he ink sprays here about everyone else allegedly being takers.

Like the Good Book says: "The speck is in his own eye."

It's a case of the Animal Farm's Napolean and his pigs all over again.

Yeesh and double yeesh!

Nothing new under the sun.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
01-28-2014, 06:49 AM
Post: #50
RE: MSEA-SEIU Local 1989
Just a reminder, The Maine Citizen does protect anonymity.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | My Site | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication