TerribleTyson.com

[Scrambler]

I'd never heard of this situation until a buddy passed this site on to me. I usually not pro-union, but that situation seems a little ridiculous!

TerribleTyson.com

[Hack&Lube]

Seems that there is a sizable Sudanese community that is a workforce there. It sucks to hear they come to Canada and find conditions like this.

Yes the site is biased but I'm sure there is plenty of truth to this. Aren't their laws or labour regulations that protect against this? I'm pretty sure the Alberta Employment Standards Code guarantee breaks, especially washroom breaks.

Every employer must allow each employee a
total of at least 30 minutes of rest, whether paid or unpaid, during each shift
in excess of 5 consecutive hours of work unless

(a) an
accident occurs, urgent work is necessary or other unforeseeable or
unpreventable circumstances occur,

(b) different
rest provisions are agreed to pursuant to a collective agreement, or

© it is not reasonable for the employee to
take a rest period.

So unless these workers contracts stated they couldn't have washroom breaks in the fine print or some ambiguous wrangling of © applied, it's ridiculous that workers have to wear diapers.

[Cowperson]

Bad management causes strong unions . . . .

Cowperson

[moon]

Meh, nothing there that would make me feel anything bad about Tyson or to make me consider boycotting them.

More union whinning and with all this Telus BS I have had just about enough of unions.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by moon@Sep 13 2005, 03:46 PM
Meh, nothing there that would make me feel anything bad about Tyson or to make me consider boycotting them.

More union whinning and with all this Telus BS I have had just about enough of unions.

So you don't mind at all that the meat you eat comes from an unsanitary and dangerous factory?

Nevermind the whole "compassion" thing I guess. I'm not going to eat a chicken that was packed in a dirty factory.

[moon]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos+Sep 13 2005, 02:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RougeUnderoos @ Sep 13 2005, 02:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-moon@Sep 13 2005, 03:46 PM
Meh, nothing there that would make me feel anything bad about Tyson or to make me consider boycotting them.

More union whinning and with all this Telus BS I have had just about enough of unions.

So you don't mind at all that the meat you eat comes from an unsanitary and dangerous factory?

Nevermind the whole "compassion" thing I guess. I'm not going to eat a chicken that was packed in a dirty factory. [/b][/quote]
Well if I could verify it from more than disgruntled workers that it was unsanitary that would concern me. Dangerous conditions however do not concern me. Lots of jobs are dangerous and I don't hear them whinning about it.

Not to sure what "compassion" you are refering to. If it is for the workers than no I do not have any compassion for them.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by moon+Sep 13 2005, 10:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (moon @ Sep 13 2005, 10:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

So you don't mind at all that the meat you eat comes from an unsanitary and dangerous factory?

Nevermind the whole "compassion" thing I guess. I'm not going to eat a chicken that was packed in a dirty factory.

Well if I could verify it from more than disgruntled workers that it was unsanitary that would concern me. Dangerous conditions however do not concern me. Lots of jobs are dangerous and I don't hear them whinning about it.

Not to sure what "compassion" you are refering to. If it is for the workers than no I do not have any compassion for them. [/b][/quote]
You'd need a better source on the sanitary conditions than the workers? What do you think management would say, 'conditions here are totally unhealthy for consumption'??? Of course not.

What the hell does Telus have to do with this ridiculousness?

[moon]

Originally posted by Agamemnon@Sep 13 2005, 03:54 PM

You'd need a better source on the sanitary conditions than the workers? What do you think management would say, 'conditions here are totally unhealthy for consumption'??? Of course not.

What the hell does Telus have to do with this ridiculousness?

Telus had to do with it because I said I am sick of unions lately, one of the main reasons is the Telus union.

Maybe its unsanitary mybe not. If it tastes good to me I will still probably eat it. Can't say for sure though as I have never had anything from Tyson's Chicken.

And I would prefer some sort of agency that monitored the quality and conditions in these types of factories as a reliable source.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by moon+Sep 13 2005, 05:06 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (moon @ Sep 13 2005, 05:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Agamemnon@Sep 13 2005, 03:54 PM

You'd need a better source on the sanitary conditions than the workers? What do you think management would say, 'conditions here are totally unhealthy for consumption'??? Of course not.

What the hell does Telus have to do with this ridiculousness?

Telus had to do with it because I said I am sick of unions lately, one of the main reasons is the Telus union.

Maybe its unsanitary mybe not. If it tastes good to me I will still probably eat it. Can't say for sure though as I have never had anything from Tyson's Chicken.

And I would prefer some sort of agency that monitored the quality and conditions in these types of factories as a reliable source. [/b][/quote]
Fair enough.

If you don't mind some guy wearing diapers or sick with the flu preparing your dinner then that is your business. I guess my standards are just a little higher.

I gotta wonder though, who gains what by just making this stuff up?

If the allegations are true, is it okay? Would you make your employees work in such conditions?

[Cowperson]

Although I railed against the leadership of the NHLPA in the last CBA dispute, I was NOT one of those people on this board railing against unions in general.

And for the record, I also don't have much sympathy for the Telus and CBC unions right now.

But . . . . I think there are good, pro-active unions which work well with management and work places where workers should organize.

The dispute in Brooks seems a pretty obvious example of a work place that would benefit from union organization. . . . . and the reason for that is horribly short-sighted management.

Bad management causes strong unions . . . . . just as a strong union will eventually create stronger management. The never-ending dance.

Right now, it seems to me the management in Brooks is practically begging their workers to organize by their terrible management skills.

Cowperson

[JiriHrdina]

I'm not a fan of unions in general but recognize that they are a necessity in certain industries - such as this one. Really working in this type of place would suck in general, and if your boss's treat you like dirt then it would be intolerable. There's been stories in the news about this company and the working conditions in the past so it seems legit.

[Hack&Lube]

Unions are so hypocritical and even more destructive in other circumstances. Unions need their own unions to protect workers.

http://www.lasvegasweekly.com/2005/09/08/awsi1.html
Check out this horrible story about a union hiring poor folks for $6/hour to picket Wal-Mart while the actual people who belong to the union live much better lives. These guys are like virtual prisoners, being bused to a Wal-Mart in the middle of nowhere and basically dumped on the streets.

The shade from the Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market sign is minimal around noon; still, six picketers squeeze their thermoses and Dasani bottles onto the dirt below, trying to keep their water cool. They're walking five-hour shifts on this corner at Stephanie Street and American Pacific Drive in Henderson—anti-Wal-Mart signs propped lazily on their shoulders, deep suntans on their faces and arms—with two 15-minute breaks to run across the street and use the washroom at a gas station.

...

They're not union members; they're temp workers employed through Allied Forces/Labor Express by the union—United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW). They're making $6 an hour, with no benefits; it's 104 F, and they're protesting the working conditions inside the new Wal-Mart grocery store.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Hack&Lube@Sep 13 2005, 06:17 PM
Unions are so hypocritical and even more destructive in other circumstances. Unions need their own unions to protect workers.

http://www.lasvegasweekly.com/2005/09/08/awsi1.html
Check out this horrible story about a union hiring poor folks for $6/hour to picket Wal-Mart while the actual people who belong to the union live much better lives. These guys are like virtual prisoners, being bused to a Wal-Mart in the middle of nowhere and basically dumped on the streets.

...

Okay. So then you agree that it is a scummy thing to do to treat employees like dogs?

Maybe those $6/hr picketers need a better union?

[InTheSlot]

I thought this was a Mike Tyson thread.

Either way, I eat a lot of Tyson products, specifically the chicken (is that all they make/sell?) It's pretty good and fairly inexpensive.

[Shawnski]

So they are bitching that they held an illegal strike? That seems to be the cause of the whole video that is sited on their website. I recall some of the stories from that day. Seems like the union was informed on the previous day about the illegality of the "strike" but waited until the morning to inform the workers. Even in the early morning video it clearly indicates the union was informed at "four o'clock yesterday afternoon" that the strike was illegal (even though the union implies is WAS legal) yet waited until the morning hours to tell the members. Posturing the next day doesn't make their position any better.

Good, bad or otherwise, if they follow the rules of labour negotiations within the province they might have a case and even gain public support for their cause. They would need to clarify some of their positions like the diaper wearing issue, as to whether the worker(s) in said cases were either abusing that privilege, or were experiencing a recurring medical condition that caused abnormal cases of bathroom trips. Should it be cases of the latter whereby the company had no way of addressing the situation legally without the option they chose, hmmm. That is a sticky wicket. I can't see too many cases whereby a "one-off" case where one had to run to the room would not be allowed. One would think that contract language/ company practice would be similar in the auto industry to that of their plight. (line/assembly work, clearly limited breaks, washroom language stipulated...)

And if memory serves, the company negotiated almost $10 million in federal assistance to try to save hundreds of jobs there. Considering everything that has happened since that one Mad Cow appeared, is this the best timing to go into a labour war dispute?

Definitely a strange case here. Glad I am not involved. And I don't eat chicken, just choke them.... (kidding Fotze... get your bloody head outta da gutta!!)