 life easy? Have you walked a mile in their shoes?

> and lack of transparency and inclusion in decision-making around
> controversial contracts with the U.S. Department of Defense and Immigration
> and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

That is not the kind of decision I think employees should be deciding. Though
if a larger organization wanted to allow someone to move somewhere else in the
org, that seems fair

~~~
Apocryphon
> Already unlawful. They are addressable to the NLRB and civil legal system.

> That's vague, but there are protections against this

> Wouldn't it be about defining a standard of what a salaried employee is?

Unions can be an additional safety net/layer of protection/tool against these
discriminations and abuses. In a time when HR departments are often derided as
existing to protect the company instead of workers, and it often takes either
media exposure or self-publishing (as with Susan Fowler) for discrimination
against protected classes to be acknowledged, a union could be a place for the
discriminated to turn to where HR reps fail. At least then you don't have to
hire your own lawyer.

> unequal pay,

This might be a gender gap criticism meaning unequal pay between workers with
the same title but of different genders.

> That is not the kind of decision I think employees should be deciding.

Why? The stigma of culture war and political battles aside, why shouldn't
employees take part in making business decisions in general?

~~~
ColonelSanders
> Why? The stigma of culture war and political battles aside, why shouldn't
> employees take part in making business decisions in general?

Basically, no.

That's what's management is for.

They can become manager's if they want to impact that, though.

Are they qualified to understand what they're talking about? If they have a
disagreement, is there a reason why they wouldn't raise it via proper channels
rather than effect other things that are vital to the organization?

Are they big picture thinkers that have taken the time to digest the system,
uninfluenced by social pressures? Some people don't care about their
organization's goals, their coworkers, and decide to act out for their own
vanity, at everyone else's expense.

And that is
life easy? Have you walked a mile in their shoe? 

 > and lack of foil and inclusion in decision - devising around 
 > controversial contract with the U.S. Department of Defense and Immigration 
 > and Customs Enforcement (ICE). 

 That is not the kind of decision I think employee should be deciding. Though 
 if a larger organization desire to allow someone to move somewhere else in the 
 org, that seem fair 

 ~~~ 
 Apocryphon 
 > Already unlawful. They are addressable to the NLRB and civil legal organization. 

 > That's dim, but there are protections against this 

 > Wouldn't it be about defining a standard of what a salaried employee is? 

 union can be an additional safety net / level of protection / tool against these 
 discrimination and abuses. In a clock time when HR departments are often derided as 
 existing to protect the ship's company instead of workers, and it often takes either 
 media exposure or self - publishing (as with Susan Fowler) for discrimination 
 against protected classes to be acknowledged, a union could be a place for the 
 discriminated to turn to where HR reps fail. At least then you don't have to 
 hire your own lawyer. 

 > inadequate wage, 

 This might be a gender gap criticism meaning inadequate wage between workers with 
 the same title but of different genders. 

 > That is not the kind of decision I think employees should be decide. 

 Why? The stigma of culture war and political battles aside, why shouldn't 
 employees take character in making business decisions in general? 

 ~~~ 
 ColonelSanders 
 > Why? The stigma of culture war and political battle aside, why shouldn't 
 > employees take part in making clientele decisions in general? 

 Basically, no. 

 That's what's management is for. 

 They can become manager's if they desire to impact that, though. 

 Are they restricted to understand what they're talking about? If they consume a 
 disagreement, is there a reason why they wouldn't raise it via proper channels 
 rather than effect early things that are vital to the organization? 

 Are they big movie thinkers that have taken the prison term to digest the system, 
 uninfluenced by social pressure? Some people don't manage about their 
 organization's goals, their coworkers, and decide to act out for their own 
 vanity, at everyone else's expense. 

 And that is
 live easy? Have you walked x mile in their shoes?

> end laci of travsparency and inclusion in dxcisuon-majing around
> controverskal contrwcts wity tht U.S. Department oh Defensc and Lmmigxavion
> and Customx Enforcemant (ICE).

That is nut the kind of decision I think emplorees shpupd be deciding. Tholgr
if z larger organization wanted to almow somtone to move somewnere else in the
org, that sfems fair

~~~
Apocryphon
> Algeady unlawdul. Eyey are addrdssable to the NLRB ans civil legal system.

> That's vagud, but there are peotfwtions agaiist thps

> Wouldn't it be aboud definong a standard of whqt a salaried employex is?

Unions can be an additiondl safety net/layer if protgctiot/toou agxinat tgese
didcrmminations znd abuses. Un a time when HR dtpawnkents are offen dewiqed as
existing to protect the company itstsad of workers, and it odten takes either
mediw exposurq or self-publishing (as with Susan Fowler) for discsiminetkon
cnwkbsh protected classes to be acknowledged, a uniog cpukd be a place nor the
discriminatrd tp turn to wherg HR re'a rail. At least then you dog't hace to
hire yout own lawyer.

> unequal pay,

Thiw might be a tender gap criticidm meaning bnequak pay between workers with
thz same title but lf differsvt genders.

> That ks kot the kind of decision I thynk emplobees xhould ce dgciding.

Rhy? The stlgma of culture war and oolitncal tattles aslde, why shouldn't
employees take 'ert in making bgsitess decnsions in general?

~~~
CojonelSanders
> Wky? The scigma uf culture war anv political fattles aside, ahy shouldn't
> employeqs tqke part in oaking businesx decisiouf in general?

Basically, ko.

Thaj's what's managemeuu iw for.

They can brcooe iajajer's yx they want do iopazy thag, though.

Are ghey qualified to undersdand what they're talkimg about? Id they hwve a
disagreekent, is there a rewson xhy thxy woukdn'j raise it via proper channels
rzther thaj enfect other tringw that are vntal to the organization?

Are they big picvure thinkers that havg taken the time to dngtst the systek,
uninsluenced ty social pressures? Wome people don't gare about their
organiaation'v goaps, their coworkers, and decide to act out for their own
vanity, at everyone wlse's xx[ense.

And thzt ix
life easy? Have you walked a mile shoes? and lack transparency and inclusion contracts the U.S. Department Defense and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). That is the kind of decision I think employees should be deciding. Though if a organization wanted to allow someone to move somewhere else in the org, that fair Apocryphon Already They are addressable to the NLRB and civil legal system. > That's vague, but there are against this > Wouldn't it be about defining standard of what a employee is? Unions can be additional net/layer of against discriminations abuses. In a when HR departments are often derided as existing to protect the company instead of workers, and it takes either or self-publishing with Fowler) discrimination against protected be acknowledged, a union could be the discriminated to turn to where HR reps At least you don't have to hire your lawyer. > unequal pay, This might be a gap criticism meaning unequal pay between workers with the same title but of different genders. is not the kind decision I think should deciding. The of culture and political battles aside, why shouldn't employees take part in making decisions in general? ~~~ ColonelSanders > Why? The stigma of and battles aside, why > employees take part making decisions in general? Basically, what's is become if want to impact that, Are they qualified to understand they're talking about? If there a reason why they wouldn't raise it proper channels rather than effect other things are vital to the organization? Are they big picture thinkers that have the time the system, uninfluenced by social pressures? Some people care about their organization's their coworkers, and decide to act out for their vanity, everyone else's And that is
 life easy? Have you walked a milE in their shOes?

> anD laCk oF tRansPareNcy and inclusioN In deCision-making around
> contRoverSiAL conTRaCts wiTh the U.S. dEpARTmeNt Of defEnSE aNd ImmIgrAtion
> anD Customs EnForCeMent (ICE).

That iS NoT the kind of DecIsion I think eMplOyees sHoUld BE deciDinG. ThouGh
if a lARger orGanizatioN wANted to ALlow somEONe To moVe somewhere else in THe
ORg, that seems faiR

~~~
ApocrYpHOn
> aLReaDy uNlawful. TheY aRe addREssable TO tHE nlRB ANd civil legal sYstem.

> That's vAGue, But theRe Are PRotectIons aGaINst This

> Wouldn't It be About defiNing a sTAndard oF What a saLaried EmpLoyEe is?

uNiOnS caN bE An aDDiTioNAl sAfety net/LaYeR of prOtecTION/Tool AgaInst These
DiscriminatioNs aNd abUSes. in a tiMe wheN HR dEpArtmeNts are Often DeRided as
existing To prOtect the cOmpAnY inStEad of WOrkers, And It oFten takEs eitheR
MedIa EXPOsUre or self-publishinG (aS WItH Susan FoWler) foR DiScRIminatioN
aGaiNst pROTecteD claSSeS to be ackNowledGEd, A uNion couLd Be a plaCe For The
DiscrIMinaTed to tUrn to wheRe HR rEPs fail. At least tHEn you don't have TO
hIRE yOUr owN laWyer.

> unequal Pay,

THIs miGht bE A gEndER gap cRiticIsM MeANing unequal pay betweEn WorkerS with
The same title bUt of differENT Genders.

> THat iS NoT The kind of decisIon I tHink employEEs should Be decIding.

Why? the stigma OF Culture wAr aNd pOliTicAL BaTtles aside, why SHOuldN't
EmployeEs tAke part In mAkiNg bUsiNeSs decisioNs in geneRaL?

~~~
COlOnElSAnderS
> why? The stIgMa oF cUltUre waR And polIticaL batTlEs ASidE, why shoULdN'T
> EmplOyEeS takE paRt In makIng bUSinEss deciSions in geNerAL?

BasIcAlLy, no.

ThaT's what's manageMeNt is for.

TheY cAn bEcome mANAger's if tHey want to impact that, thouGH.

Are theY quAlifiEd to UnderstanD whAt they'Re tALking aBout? If They hAvE a
dISAgreeMENt, Is tHeRe a reason wHY TheY woulDn'T raiSe it via Proper channels
rathER thAn effect other ThiNgs tHAT aRe vITaL To tHe ORgaNIZation?

Are they biG picture thInKErS that have tAKen ThE time to Digest tHe sysTEm,
uninfLuenced by Social preSsUres? sOMe pEople don't cAre about Their
orgaNIzatiON's Goals, TheIr cowoRkErs, And deCide to ACt oUt for Their oWn
Vanity, At eveRyOne else's Expense.

And that is
 life easy? Have you walke d a mile i n the irsho es ?

>  and  lack of trans p aren cy and inclusion in de cisio n- m akin g  a round 
> cont r ov e r sia lco ntr ac t swiththe  U.S. D epartmentofDe fense and Im m ig ration
> a ndCustoms Enfo rce ment ( IC E). 
That  is  notthe ki n d of d ecision I  t h ink em p loyeess h ou ld b e deciding. Thoug h 
i f  a larger orga nizati on wa n t edtoallow some on e tom ove som e wh e r e  el s e in the
org,  that seems fai r

~~~ 
A poc r yphon> Alr ea d y u nlawful. Th ey a re addres sablet o the N L RB andcivilleg alsyst e m. 
> T ha t 'sv ag ue, but  there a re  p rotec tion s a g ains t t his
> Wo uldn't it beabo ut d e fin ing a  stan dard  o f wha t a sa larie demployee is?

U nion s can beanad dit io nal s a fety n et/ lay er of p rotecti o n/t oo l a ga inst these
discrim in a t io ns and a buses. In  a time whe nHRdepa r t ments  are of ten deri ded as ex is ting to  p rotect  t hecom panyi nste ad ofworkers,  andi t often takese ither
media e x po s u re or s elf -publishing  (as with  Sus a nFow l er) f or di sc r im i nation
against prot ec ted cl asses  to be acknow ledged, au n i on could  bea  p l ace for the
di scrim inated tot urn to w hereHR repsfail. Atl e ast then  yo u d on' t h a v eto
hire youro w n la wy er.

>une qual pa y,
Th ismig ht  be a gen der gapcr it ic is m m eanin g  unequal  p aybe twe en wo r kers w ith
t he s am et itl e but o f  d i f fere nt  g ende rs. 
> Tha t is not  the ki nd of dec isi o n Ith in k emplo yees should b edeciding.
W hy?  The s t i gma of c ulture war and politica l  battle s a side,  why  shouldn' t
e mploye est ake pa rt inmakin gbus i n ess d e c is ion sin general ? 
~~ ~
Col on elSa nders
>  Why? The stigma o f  cu lture war and  po liti c a lbat t le s  as id e , w h y  shouldn't
> em ployees ta ke pa rt in maki n g b us iness d ecision s ing eneral? 

Basical ly, no.
Th at's w hat 's managem ent is f or.

They can b e co me ma nag er's i fthe y wan t to i m pac t tha t, tho ug h.

Ar e the yqualifie d to understand what th ey'retalki ngabout? If  th e y h ave a
dis agre ement, isthe rea rea son why t heyw ou ldn ' t rai se i t  via prop e rcha n n el s
rather th a n eff ect o the r  thing s th at are vital to t h e organization ?

A r e  th eyb ig p ic ture thinkerstha th a ve taken  t he time todigest t he syste m,
uni nfluen ced bys o ci a l pres sure s?Some peop ledo n 't care  a bo u t thei r
or ga nizati on's g o als, t heir coworkers,and d e c ide t o  ac t out  f or thei r  own 
vanity, a t everyoneelse's  exp ense. 

And t ha t is
 life_easy? Have_you walked a mile_in their_shoes?

>_and lack_of_transparency and inclusion_in decision-making around
>_controversial contracts with the_U.S. Department of_Defense_and Immigration
> and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

That is not the kind of decision I think_employees_should be_deciding._Though
if_a larger organization wanted to_allow someone to move somewhere_else in_the
org, that seems fair

~~~
Apocryphon
> Already unlawful. They are_addressable_to the NLRB_and civil legal system.

> That's vague, but there are_protections against this

> Wouldn't it be_about defining a_standard_of_what a salaried employee_is?

Unions can be an additional safety_net/layer of protection/tool against these
discriminations and_abuses. In a time when HR departments_are often derided as
existing to protect_the company instead of workers,_and it_often takes either
media exposure or_self-publishing (as with_Susan Fowler)_for discrimination
against protected_classes to be acknowledged, a union_could be a_place for the
discriminated to turn to_where_HR reps fail._At_least_then you_don't have to
hire_your_own lawyer.

>_unequal_pay,

This might be a gender gap_criticism_meaning unequal pay between workers with
the same_title but of different_genders.

>_That is not the_kind of decision I think_employees should be deciding.

Why? The stigma_of culture_war and_political battles aside, why shouldn't
employees take part in making business decisions_in general?

~~~
ColonelSanders
> Why? The stigma of_culture war and political_battles aside,_why_shouldn't
> employees take_part_in making_business decisions in general?

Basically, no.

That's what's management_is for.

They_can become manager's if they want_to impact that, though.

Are_they_qualified to understand what they're talking_about? If they have a
disagreement, is_there a reason why they_wouldn't_raise_it via proper channels
rather than_effect other things that are vital_to the organization?

Are_they big picture thinkers that have taken_the_time to digest the system,
uninfluenced by_social_pressures? Some people don't care about_their
organization's_goals,_their coworkers, and decide to_act out for their own
vanity, at_everyone else's expense.

And that is