Why must I be inconvenienced by workers unhappy in their jobs?

104 posts / 0 new
Last post
G. Muffin

I mean it, 500. I don't know what gets into me sometimes.

In our extended family, we've lost two kids already. And my grandmother lived to 101.


I haven't been around for awhile and was just surfing this thread for something to pass the time when I came across this beauty from Michelle:


Sorry, but the job is someone's life.  A semester of school is a semester of school.  When professors strike, it's because this is their livelihood in their full-time job that is at stake, not just a youthful semester of school - and that's not saying that a semester isn't important.  I realize it is, and that school is getting really expensive - and you'll probably find that most professors are allies of the students when it comes to campaigns against rising tuitions.


Now, the reason I call this a "beauty" because this was (I assume) the same Michelle that was calling on the government to legislate back to work the Ottawa Transit drivers, when they were on strike fighting for their jobs and benefits. I've always said, give it some time and people will invariably flip flop on their position on issues to suit their needs. What happened Michelle? What's good enough for transit drivers isn't good enough for elite educated professors???? Sorry but I call Bullsh*t on this one. Can't have it both ways.  Whether an hour, minute, day, month, week or year, you should try to be consistant in your positions on issues related to labour.  And if you care to say that I'm full of it, ask Unionist about the issue.  He / She pmailed me on here calling you out on your anti union viewpoint during the Ottawa Transit strike.


Hi keglerdave, welcome back. I'm not sure why you're referring to some PM which I allegedly (and I have no recall of this) sent you about Michelle. I fully agree with Michelle's posts in this thread. The Ottawa transit discussion last year was triggered by a disgusting anti-worker rabble article by someone called Kassam, and it gave rise to three (at least) memorable threads:




Those threads revealed that some people on babble, and on the "left" I suppose, don't yet grasp that being anti-worker is on a par with being misogynist, racist, homophobic, etc. Michelle's stand on that was very clear and very pro-worker. My disagreement with her was whether such matters should be up for debate in the Labour forum or not. She quite eloquently explained, after much discussion, and [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/rabble-reactions/babble-consensus-no-attacks....

My other disagreement with her was her view that there are people on the "left" who support legislating striking workers back to work even in circumstances where public health or safety are not in danger. I challenged her to name some. None were forthcoming.

The problem with respect to the Labour forum remains - and generally, with respect to workers' rights. Truths which once were, and still should be, taken for granted by progressive people are called into question here. That's not because some babblers are anti-worker. That's because of a massive onslaught in Canada, and around the world, to crush trade unions and negate the acquired rights of workers, and to create divisions among workers and between workers and other oppressed groups. The fight against that onslaught will continue wherever it needs to, including on the pages of babble.