[lbo-talk] Raw video of LN conference contradicts CNA propaganda

[John Thornton]

Mark Rickling wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 8:02 PM, John Thornton <jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>   
>>  We'll have to agree to disagree here as well. I think the SEIU deal
>>  isn't very good and I think had SEIU wanted to it could have crafted a
>>  better deal.
>>  CNA has crafted better deals as has, to the best of my knowledge, SEIU.
>>     
>
> I guess I'm risking the list moderator's ire by continuing to post in
> a thread he's declared closed  -- so this my last post, I promise! But
> couldn't resist pointing out that you simply have no idea what you're
> talking about here. A collective bargaining agreement is a different
> "deal" than a "peace accord," aka an organizing agreement. Neither CNA
> nor SEIU has divulged the contents of organizing agreements publicly,
> except to the workers they have covered. So you've got no clue
> whatsoever what the contents of these agreements are, which renders
> your evaluation of the SEIU deal in OH absurd. This simple fact of the
> matter is that the SEIU and CNA organizing agreements with both CHW
> and Tenet are EXACTLY THE SAME.
>
> My thoughts on the quality of CNA vs. SEIU CBAs, as well as comparing
> standards set in high density geographies vs. low density geographies,
> can be found in a previous thread.
> ___________________________________

Since the thread is closed I'll make one last off-list post and then be 
done with it.
You're misreading me again and I'm tempted to say deliberately 
misreading me.
My response was to your contention that this wasn't a "crappy backroom 
deal". Read the thread just above my response you clipped.
I think the SEIU deal isn't very good because I disagree with the manner 
in which they tried to implement it. A crappy backroom deal.
It was the opposite of what a fair democratic union should be doing.
They could have crafted a deal that allowed the workers a voice in its 
content.
So I do in fact have a very good idea what I'm talking about it is you 
that doesn't know what you're replying to.
Why are you having such a difficult time being civil? I'm frequently a 
prick in real life as well as on this list but you're outpacing me handily.

I'm pretty well finished here. You have chosen to play SEIU cheerleader 
and have closed you mind to anything anyone says that does not conform 
to your preconceived ideas.
One cannot have a debate with ideologues. Revealed truth can never be 
disputed.

Incidentally as an ex-hospital worker I still have friends in several 
states who are represented by SEIU and CNA so I may know more about the 
contents of many of these deals that you imagine I do.
Always believing you have more inside information that your opponents in 
any debate is a good way to look foolish very quickly. Friends of mine 
have never been reticent about sharing their opinions of their work 
conditions or union agreements. I don't currently know any food service 
workers so for future reference feel free to assume I'm ignorant of any 
SEIU agreements with people in that line of work.

Hopefully Stern won't label those of us on LBO or elsewhere who disagree 
with SEIU's thuggish attempts to shout down a labor notes meeting or 
those who dislike backroom sweetheart deals as "unionbusters" and send 
goons to spy on us and maybe even assault us.
Since vocally disagreeing with SEIU is now nearly the equivalent of 
unionbusting I guess I'd best be careful.

Don't bother to reply off-list since I am completely finished with this 
thread.

John Thornton