Home » xyzzy » Dungeon » Mine Safety and Bush
Mine Safety and Bush [message #57875] Sat, 21 January 2006 15:35 Go to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
The administration and secretary and Bush appointee Chao have forced budget cuts and personell cuts in the Mine Safety Division to appease the corporate mining interests. Safety is now almost non-existant in new mining operations. In Europe they think we are deliberately putting our people at risk to save pennies. They have oxygen stations and location devices as a matter of course as well as inspections. The Bushwacker doesn't like those precautions because they cost several pennies per man-day worked so he let the owners flag those fundamental regulations.
Now there are 15 dead in one month.

Time for the union movement to rise again for the same reason they did 150 yrs ago; to protect the workers from the owners. And the Bush should hang his useless head in shame.

Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57876 is a reply to message #57875] Sat, 21 January 2006 20:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PakProtector is currently offline  PakProtector
Messages: 935
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (2nd Degree)
Bush's head is not useless. It has served him and his buddies quite well. It would serve his opponents just as well as the ornament on top of a pike.

It is too bad the unions seem bent on getting some set number of minutes for potty breaks on assembly lines, and re-instating serious screw-ups...instead of doing honourable work.

Read of John Henry, and play a few ballads to one of the pre-union martyrs.
cheers,
Douglas

Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57877 is a reply to message #57876] Sat, 21 January 2006 22:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
Yeah; thats true but in their defense the laws and economic realities are against them. Try any serious negotiating or organising and you are in court the next day. Look at how the local government clamp down on organising at Wal-Mart. How the hell they can defeat the workers right to speak to employees is beyond me.
Think of all the anti-strike laws on the books now; and as soon as you talk tough they threaten to outsource the whole business rather than treat you fairly.
The deck is seriously stacked against even the concept of honoring a contract by management; look at the airlines where the courts simply dissolved a binding contract in the flick of an eye when the companies cried.
9 % of labor is organised; not enough to have any influence at the polls. No; it's going to be a long hard road back to workers rights in this country; but you see it coming; all those court battles that are starting to tilt a little towards labor. I guess people are getting tired of being expendable; having no rights; having management dissolve contracts; not having any security or benefits. Shitty way to live.


Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57878 is a reply to message #57877] Sun, 22 January 2006 07:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
PakProtector is currently offline  PakProtector
Messages: 935
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (2nd Degree)
Part of the union trouble is that they have squandered their power doing foolish things. Protecting those who misbehave and the like. Unfortunately, it is possible to point to as many union atrocities as they have prevented. Just ask your local featherbeder.

cheers,
Douglas

Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57879 is a reply to message #57878] Sun, 22 January 2006 07:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
I know; I served as a union rep for over ten years on the railroad. Unfortunatelly there are no perfect organisations and there will always be those who game the system and abuse the rules. Remmember that goes for those in management also.
But let me say this. The great majority of union workers want to do the job and give a good days work for their pay. Do we have ocassionally to carry someone who is less than stellar in performance? Yep; a small percentage just like the deadwood brother-in -law and friends of the boss that we as workers must support in their incompetence in the upper echelon.
For every union worker who is off base we had to carry one manager promoted for reasons other than competence.
This is an old argument and studying the situation tells another story.
Look to those unions that have remained strong and vital; high steel workers/fireman/local 3 electrical workers...the list grows. Talk to those guys then tell me they are not committed to hard work and pride of accomplishment. Empowering workers with control over their duties and rewards and providing a safe working environment always results in positive outcomes; without fail.

Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57880 is a reply to message #57875] Sun, 22 January 2006 20:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Steve Eddy is currently offline  Steve Eddy
Messages: 28
Registered: May 2009
Chancellor

The administration and secretary and Bush appointee Chao have forced budget cuts and personell cuts in the Mine Safety Division to appease the corporate mining interests. Safety is now almost non-existant in new mining operations.

Really?

Last I looked, we were a federal republic comprising some fifty states which were granted the broadest powers under the Constitution. Powers for example which would allow states to regulate mining operations as they see fit.

Has there been a constitutional amendment or convention that I missed? I haven't kept up with politics as much as I used to, but I'd like to think I'd have noticed something like that.

se

Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57881 is a reply to message #57880] Mon, 23 January 2006 08:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
Mine Safety issues fall under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. The federal govt. is responsible for policing mine safety issues across the states and the budget for this is under a federal mandate.

Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57882 is a reply to message #57881] Mon, 23 January 2006 11:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Steve Eddy is currently offline  Steve Eddy
Messages: 28
Registered: May 2009
Chancellor

Mine Safety issues fall under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. The federal govt. is responsible for policing mine safety issues across the states and the budget for this is under a federal mandate.

So? None of that prohibits states from having and enforcing their own mine safety regulations.

So where do you get the notion that if the Feds aren't doing their job (which personally I don't believe it is their job), that "safety is now almost non-existent in new mining operations"?

se

Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57883 is a reply to message #57882] Mon, 23 January 2006 11:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
Federal Regulations control Mine Safety Issues. Mining Comanies are going to abide by those regulations. Are you saying that States have the ability to over-ride the federal Government rules and establish contrary Mining Safety rules and then tax the citizens heavily in order to provide their own oversight agencies that might or would conflict with the federal government agencies?
Which regulations would the companies abide by; the Federal rules that are favorable to them or the state rules that cost them money?

Re: Mine Safety and Bush [message #57884 is a reply to message #57883] Mon, 23 January 2006 11:54 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Steve Eddy is currently offline  Steve Eddy
Messages: 28
Registered: May 2009
Chancellor


Federal Regulations control Mine Safety Issues.

At the federal level.


Mining Comanies are going to abide by those regulations.

They must also abide by state regulations.


Are you saying that States have the ability to over-ride the federal Government rules and establish contrary Mining Safety rules and then tax the citizens heavily in order to provide their own oversight agencies that might or would conflict with the federal government agencies?

They certainly do.


Which regulations would the companies abide by; the Federal rules that are favorable to them or the state rules that cost them money?

If the state regulations are more strict, they would have to abide by the state regulations, just as automobile makers who sell cars in California must abide by our more strict fuel and emissions standards.

And virtually every state which has mining has mining safety regulations.

So this notion that because the Feds aren't doing their job (and I don't know that they aren't) that safety is now almost non-existent in new mining operations is just plain nonsense and apparently little more than partisan politics.

se



Previous Topic: No faith in Government
Next Topic: Kraft is laying off 8000 workers.
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed May 08 02:09:41 CDT 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Smith & Larson Audio
Smith & Larson Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest