Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[looooob]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

There are already processes in place to deal with those types of issues.

If the parents refuse to provide the necessaries of life the Government can step in and take control of the child and make decision for the minors best interest.

Then ####ing charge the parents with failure to provide the necessaries of life.

sure. but remember who the Government is now

[Slava]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

#### them, let them die.

If they want choice, then that is their choice. Take the blood available or die.

I'm purely curious, but is that even tracked? Does the hospital even know whether the blood came from someone who had a vaccine?

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'm purely curious, but is that even tracked? Does the hospital even know whether the blood came from someone who had a vaccine?

I doubt they’re taking blood donations from the unvaccinated.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I doubt they’re taking blood donations from the unvaccinated.

I suspect you mean very few unvaccinated folks have the social compassion to donate blood?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I doubt they’re taking blood donations from the unvaccinated.

Sure they are. Donation criteria hasn't changed. Blood isn't separated vax and unvax.

Dr Cooper is describing a request which is a first for her, but there no way that request can be done anyways.

[Fuzz]

Canadian Blood Services is encouraging people to donate blood, even if they haven't been fully vaccinated against COVID-19.

Gina Leyva, the territory manager at Canadian Blood Services for Waterloo region, says her team has received a lot of questions from people asking whether they can donate blood if they are unvaccinated or only partially vaccinated.

The short answer is "yes, they can," said Leyva.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitch...nate-1.6200266

Canadian Blood Services does not reflect vaccination status for any COVID-19 or other vaccines on the labels of products derived from blood donations.

https://www.blood.ca/en/covid19/vacc...blood-donation

So no, it isn't tracked. At least not labelled.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

When did the ALRB determine that remedial certification was an “egregious stick”?

Egregious was a poor word choice. Remedial certification in Alberta was not used much (once?) - I meant to say that it was used in the most egregious of circumstances i.e. rarely. It is still possible to use remdial certification in Alberta, but only where no other remedy is sufficient. I think that change covers the basis of having the ALRB jump to remedial certification too quickly. It should be used as a last resort.

How can a Union “bait” a company into doing something illegal? Jedi mind trick?

- im not talking about baiting - that was your word. I also didnt mention illegal efforts to get cards. again, you are taking my comments to the extreme.

I know a few occasions where union recruiters would meet up with workers at the bar and speak to everyone etc. In those circumstances, some people noted there was social pressure. I also know other people who got a card just to stop someone at work from hounding them.

You’re free to elaborate on the “tactics” that Unions use to “force” employees to sign and fill out a card

Again, no where did i say force.

As for the need for a vote, since you are clearly knowledgeable in labour relations matters you must be aware that the employees could freely apply for decertification if they really didn’t want a Union representing them so I’m not understanding how you consider it to be a hardship.

Weird tone, but ok. Decertification is certainly possible, but how often does it happen? A union can use its experience and backing to certify. That's great! nothing wrong with that. How does Joe Ironworker go about decertifying? does he know? does he hire a lawyer to do it? who is paying?

Im not arguing that decertification is something that a mjority of unionized workers want, but its not as easy for the average worker.

I get the sense that you don’t think an employer should be able to violate the law by interfering with their employees when they consider unionizing, but at the same time you’re not really offering any alternative remedies that would prevent employers from doing just that

In my overall opinion on this topic, i believe that unionization should always go to a secret ballot. It's a big decision for an employee to make, and they should make that choice on their own in private.

I think you’re contradicting yourself here. If the board only applied it rarely and when they felt that it was necessary what is leading you to expect that it would be abused?

I don't think i was. I noted that remedial certification could have been abused, but the ALRB rarely used it. I did not assert that i expected it to be abused at all.

hypothetical boogeyman scenarios to criticize laws meant to eliminate employer interference.

I get it, Iggy. This is a touchy subject for you and there are more than a few occasions in your page long rebuttal to show that you are all knowing on this front. That's fine. You took a small piece of my Pro-NDP post from a centrist and turned it into a defence of the two areas i flippantly said went too far.

Im sure this post won't end and i can expect another long post on this matter; but i'm done with this topic. I didnt bring it up outside of a flippant comment and my response was basically because I thought you were curious. I did not expect to get into a labour law debate in the middle of discussion about Danielle Smith disastrous first day.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by looooob

sure. but remember who the Government is now

Fair comment.

Perhaps courts is the better wording, or child services, I'm not sure of the exact entity

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

So no, it isn't tracked. At least not labelled.

Imagine calling the unvaxxed segregated and revising human rights laws to prevent discrimination of them, but then introducing a separate blood bank so they feel more comfortable having unvaxxed blood.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

Imagine calling the unvaxxed segregated and revising human rights laws to prevent discrimination of them, but then introducing a separate blood bank so they feel more comfortable having unvaxxed blood.

Would never happen. People requesting unvaxxed blood are just #### out of luck.

I mean a money making opportunity would be opening a private unvaxxed blood bank and charging absorbent mounts of money for that blood to the unvaxxed. But I think that's illegal.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Would never happen. People requesting unvaxxed blood are just #### out of luck ####ing stupid ####### mother####ing pieces of ####.

I mean a money making opportunity would be opening a private unvaxxed blood bank and charging absorbent mounts of money for that blood to the unvaxxed. But I think that's illegal.

fixed

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Would never happen. People requesting unvaxxed blood are just #### out of luck.

I mean a money making opportunity would be opening a private unvaxxed blood bank and charging absorbent mounts of money for that blood to the unvaxxed. But I think that's illegal.

Yes, charging money for any bodily fluids in Canada is illegal.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Would never happen. People requesting unvaxxed blood are just #### out of luck.

I mean a money making opportunity would be opening a private unvaxxed blood bank and charging absorbent mounts of money for that blood to the unvaxxed. But I think that's illegal.

You don't think it's beyond reality that Smith would take up their torch and legislate this? Have you been paying any attention whatsoever?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You don't think it's beyond reality that Smith would take up their torch and legislate this? Have you been paying any attention whatsoever?

It's beyond reality, it's illegal.

Federal law and federal agency collecting blood.

Smith, as bat#### crazy as you think she is, is powerless in this regard.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It's beyond reality, it's illegal.

Federal law and federal agency collecting blood.

Smith, as bat#### crazy as you think she is, is powerless in this regard.

I don't mean the paying for it part. I mean having the medical choice to choose that option. If Smith legislates it, it can be done. Of course, then she'd be in the logical puzzle of requiring blood services to ask about vaccination status to mark it on the blood bag.

And Alberta is planning on ditching all sorts of Federal services, who is to say she wouldn't looking into creating Alberta Blood Services?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It's beyond reality, it's illegal.

Federal law and federal agency collecting blood.

Smith, as bat#### crazy as you think she is, is powerless in this regard.

Alberta Sovereignty Act, come on down!!!!

Do not underestimate just how dumb Danielle Smith might be.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I don't mean the paying for it part. I mean having the medical choice to choose that option. If Smith legislates it, it can be done. Of course, then she'd be in the logical puzzle of requiring blood services to ask about vaccination status to mark it on the blood bag.

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Alberta Sovereignty Act, come on down!!!!

Do not underestimate just how dumb Danielle Smith might be.

She can't legislate the blood to be distinguished, it ends there.

Alberta Sovereignty Act, you can not follow federal laws, you can't make them.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

She can't legislate the blood to be distinguished, it ends there.

Alberta Sovereignty Act, you can not follow federal laws, you can't make them.

I realize that.
You realize that.
Danielle Smith? This is exactly the type of stupid thing she would try.
Unsuccessfully of course, but that's probably part of the plan. Use it to rile up her voters.

She is both smart enough, and dumb enough, to try very dumb things.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

She can't legislate the blood to be distinguished, it ends there.

Alberta Sovereignty Act, you can not follow federal laws, you can't make them.

I don't see a response to the "why not" part? We can get our own police force, ignore federal gun laws, have our own pension plan, what exactly is preventing her from setting up our own blood services? Healthcare, after all, is a provincial responsibility.

[14Roman14]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

#### them, let them die.

If they want choice, then that is their choice. Take the blood available or die.

So if you were in that situation and had a choice between vaxxed or unvaxxed blood you would tell them to grab the first bag? Or would you choose the vaxxed blood first and unvaxxed second?