Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Labor hates New Season's?

‪I love organized labor but something about this anti-New Seasons campaign seems hinky.


  • Seems straightforward to me. Non-union-represented grocery chain expands into town with union representation; union does some digging to see what they can find. Possible outcomes include clarification on reporting (if facts are misrepresented), New Seasons can prove it is lies, and/or New Seasons feels local pressure to unionize. That's what unions do... what's off?
  • edited December 2016
    ** EDITED **

    Clearly I'm wrong. Apologies for the Brooks.
  • This... from the guy who outfits himself in Brooks Brothers? Very bold, I must say!

    Although they didn't meet your lofty standard of providing peer-reviewed studies of union-organized stores as a whole, they did present some numbers comparing the local stores to the newcomer:

    You may not like their tone or tack, but it's perfectly logical and relevant to worker organization. Also, your assumption that they convey a "rational, clear, non-emotional tone" is quite classist. Most people (present company included) base their decisions on more factors than "logic" alone. I'd think the election would have taught you that. It's impractical to ask a union to adhere to a higher standard than the businesses they compete with.

    Here are some specific arguments that the UCFW 21 made about the Mercer Island store:

    And just to be fair, the same information presented in a way more flattering to New Seasons:

    If I were you, I'd be embarrassed to publicly compare a LABOR UNION to the GOP ("fake news").
  • Of all the shenanigans that this group of people have come up with... all the eccentricities and boundary-stomping that have been indulged and tolerated... this is where you draw the line?
  • [meta]
    Ok, when do we admit that our problem here is simply a lack of moderation? It's sad to admit that we have joined the rest of the internet, but I think we might have to craft a policy to limit those who can't resist ad-hominem tactics or lack the social skills to participate in a community discussion.

    Pretending for a moment that the only other non-OP participant in this thread is interested in an exchange of ideas; from what I can tell this is a classic "selective data" tactic. It looks like they pulled some data via a FOIA request and then grabbed the most sensational bits from the opposition and found some fun stock images of rat poop and voila!

    My favorite is the options for the feedback form, Senator, when did you stop beating your wife?

    Anyone see any actual data sets to reference or download? They left their directory listings open, and not a lot of meat on the bone that I can see...

    If you were truly interested in food safely, and the argument that union labor results in safer food services then you would publish your data set. But that would result in them having to display the New Seasons rat poop reports too.

    TL;DR for LT- I agree with the labor side of the argument but still can apply critical thinking skills.
  • I agree that ad-hominem and unprovoked personal attacks should not be tolerated but phrases like "lacking social skills" concern me in the same way phrases like "I only work with the best and brightest" and "We should only let smart people vote" do. It's more of the powerful punching down, and to me just sounds like a sort of social passive aggressive eugenics. I know that is an inflammatory word but I think it is apt. I do want to make it clear that I am not calling anyone a nazi though. I have watched over and over people say thing like "let's have a contest to see who can get famous first" to reacting defensively to a humble statement of "we are all a bunch of assholes" by completely missing the point and expressing how much everyone on this board is trying to make this world a better place each and every day like no one else in the world is. If this board really wants to be a better place then it should learn how to be actually inclusive instead of passive aggressively crappy to people and fooling themselves into believing that they are better than everyone else by patting each other on the back and treating everyone who can't give them fame or social status, isn't part of the inner circle, or who isn't made like them, made in a way they approve of, or who communicates differently like dirt and running them out. Mike is a super smart, generally kind, and successful guy. Maybe I misread it, but if someone being a little rude and making a bad argument to him on a message board causes him this much stress that he leaves the board and deletes comments I would hope that down the road he could look at that and maybe see that he could use a little refill in the old humility tank and maybe go work a soup kitchen alone or commit some other completely thankless kindness to put things in perspective a little. There are a lot of better peeps than me here who could become even better peeps if they ever got out of their back patting bubbles every now and again and put themselves in situations where people don't give a fuck that they are cooler, smarter, and more successful. Just my two cents. I'm going to do my self a favor and try to finally let go of the anger I have and hope I had that there will someday be interest in making amends I have felt towards some people on this board who treated me like I was invisible during a time when being seen would've made the kind of difference I honestly doubt they will ever really understand. There were a few nice things and times in there at least, and I'll try to remember those as I make one of my New Years resolutions not to come back to the toxic relationship I have, honestly, mostly self-made for myself with this board and URHO. Merry Christmas. See you around, and a genuine good luck and happy New Years to y'all!
  • Labor v Management it a time honored conflict which should be honored.
  • edited December 2016
    Facetweet, what is the point of criticizing this specific union action? What is it to you?

    Unless it's "this stuff will hurt my livelihood" or "I care about unions and I don't want this tactic to backfire on them," you are just arguing for its own sake.
  • edited December 2016
    Reminder that this is real life for people, not just something abstract to talk about like whether a taco is a sandwich. You can't just say anything you want about labor, race, poverty... or, you can, but then I will also have something to say about it (that is more informed than 90% of the people on this board).
  • edited December 2016
    Annnnnnd, I'm out. ✌️

  • But you didn't say anything earlier in this convo...

    Have I said something offensive????
  • edited December 2016
    Yes, I'm pushing back on a specific individual with mild criticism about social skills. But please understand this is after being told that I'm an ivory-tower racist specifically, and generally watching them ambush (via a rhetorical suicide belt, but ambush nonetheless) well-meaning remarks with what would only be described as verbal diarrhea if not entered via keyboard.

    LT: Reminder that this is a discussion board for many smart humans, not just somewhere to make polemic statements and manifestos that serve a litmus tests for your personal social and political boundaries. You can indeed say anything you want about labor, race, poverty.... but you need to stay on topic and find a few paragraphs that add to the discussion rather than attacks and bluster (that is the part that involves social skills).

    And regarding the point of discussing this specific union action: someone posted a discussion topic about it. Right? When I read between the lines of this plaintive cry what I actually see is "how could you POSSIBLY DISAGREE with me?!"

    Plus I'm a data guy, so forgive me for critiquing the data set, but that is the first thing I tend to look at when presented with a conclusion.
  • meta: That FuckTheory person blocked me on twitter for AGREEING with them! They tweeted something and I was like: "yeah! that resonates with my experience" and then they tweeted something nasty at me and blocked me! And then I saw in their bio it says "please do not reply to my tweets."

    So, i think there's "tone policing" which is like a legit concern, and then there's sorta fetishizing political anger as a means of avoiding personal accountability to communicate in pro-social ways, which is sort of what I think that FuckTheory person is about. (which is sucky, because i miss reading their tweets now!)
  • edited January 2017
    Twitter is funny like that. People get harassed so horribly that I wouldn't take it personally. One of my favorites blocked me after we had good interactions (for a while her handle was BLOCKAVELLI lol); I think I was auto-blocked for writing "KKK."

    OK here's a really funny one (I am Gerry Mandered):
    - Then the person I RT'd quoted me and, to paraphrase, said "you have a radio show at 6 AM so you should know about jokes because you're a CLOWN!" (since deleted)
    - Then I wrote back something like "do you do this to everyone who RTs you??"
    AND THEN!!! (in DM)

    That about killed me. Twitter is CRAZY full of life, the best and the worst.

    Also I really like that thread you posted Miranda July
  • Is it OK if I start a twitter thread? I'm sorry I'm annoying onhere everyone I just am a guard dog for the things I care about
  • "fetishizing political anger as a means of avoiding personal accountability to communicate in pro-social ways"

    Sorry for the lag but finally reading this thread and just wanted to highlight this awesome string of words from kdawg. The Politics of Righteousness is a safe haven for many on both sides and I'm looking forward to the day we can respectfully challenge each other and discuss What the Fuck Really Happened in 2016.

    And guard dog is a good metaphor for what you were doing LT. That dog has been literally conditioned to do its job and does not respond to logic or empathy. And I have the bite marks to prove it.
  • edited January 2017
    You don't understand dogs and you don't understand me.

    Anyone who knows me knows that
    1. I am more empathetic than most people
    2. While I may lack in common sense (remembering where my house keys are, knowing what day of the month it is) and verbal restraint, I'm logical to a fault

    This board is where the left comes to the center. Where you can just come out and say... "you know, some people really just get TOO ANGRY when it comes to politics."

    I find it interesting that you are saying I didn't have empathy for you... when our argument was me telling you that you were being insensitive to non-white people. And then you have bites because me telling you that you are being rude hurts you. It's like when a little kid cries when they've been scolded and they know they were naughty. That's how you are acting except you're an adult man.
  • edited January 2017
    **Edited to condense rantings**
  • edited January 2017
    **Edited to condense rantings**
  • edited January 2017
    If anyone generally agrees with me, now would be a good time to say so.
  • edited January 2017
    This still looks like the same community I remember. Sticking up for aggressive, abusive men. Making racist jokes and then saying "it's a joke." Saying really racist and misogynist stuff in private.

    That's especially important. EVERYTHING in private. Friend acting up again? Talk to him in private.

    Then looking down your nose at me for the way I talk about politics.

    Does anyone think that a lot of this comes down to class difference? I grew up way different than most of you. I know more about poverty and injustice. Never thought I'd say those words proudly, but here we are. I forget that this community is 90% relatively privileged white guys. Turns out, that isn't the rest of the world, including me.

    Why not treat me like I know what the fuck I'm talking about, instead of like I'm Debbie Downer?
  • P.S. the phrase "personal accountability" is used a lot in dog whistle politics.
  • Who is going to jump in and tell Face Tweet that he doesn't have bite marks?
  • I dislike the use of the dog metaphor here, and you def do not have bite marks.

    I haven't been checking in on these convos very much... they don't feel productive to me and I often don't know what we are even talking about after a certain point. That being said, I respect LH's viewpoint.

    I'm tired, I'm trying to keep up, I prefer having these conversations in person or via longer form writing.
  • edited January 2017
    Thank you. I don't know that these convos have been productive, but I believe that is because people are so conflict-averse that they'd rather have quiet than confront the problem. (or just plain don't care about UHX which I understand and have no grudge against)

    I admit that talking online is something I do more than others. I check twitter pretty regularly and track conversations that unravel over hours and weeks. It is totally just my preference... that said, I also love a good in-person.

    I'm going to press more to FT and KD on these fine points...
    I understand that people can be obnoxious about their activism. But when we talk about anger, I believe it is wrong to condemn it wholesale. The anger that you feel when someone is cruel to you is valid. Getting angry when a cop wrote you an excessive ticket, or when your boss treats you unfairly, all seems pretty reasonable to me.

    But when we condemn justifiable anger, we get this extremely common viewpoint illustrated here by a has-been, yet still powerful, actor:

    These conversations have, at least, made me reflect on the how emotion and reason are pitted against one another in the political conversation. I don't see much difference with how people talk about political anger now with the way that some men put women down by saying they are too sensitive or emotional.
  • I have had a hard time figuring out how to articulate my support for LT in written words here, but I do support her and her passion, and I bristled when you said you had bite marks, FT.

    While I admit that LT has been aggressive, I think there is some amount of choosing to play victim here, which is a distraction from the topics.

    I agree that LT is extremely empathetic, and I think that a lot of the experience of communicating with her is lost in this format. I'm still not quite sure what else to say.

  • edited January 2017
    I have bites b/c I've been told I'm a racist twerp and to urgently perform oral sex as a result of a vague political disagreement. If I wasn't on UHX I would have just ignored it like on Olive, Reddit, etc. but I have come to expect more from this community so I kept picking the scab. But as of this moment I will tear up that victim card! No more tears. (Or pithy references to canines.)

    I should just take LT out for coffee because I don't think we've made a full input/output loop yet. I want to learn new perspectives. That's the point of jumping into the original political discussion! I was super excited to discuss that topic with UHX and get everyone's takes on the situation.

    But LT came on both so very strong and so very sensitive at the same time that I'm not sure I've learned anything other than how important threading and moderation is to online discussion boards. And how tough professors must have it these days...
  • You are right. I should have taken it back earlier. My crude demand for fellatio was a violation of all social mores and was hypocritical.

    As a demonstration of good faith towards you and all of UHX, I have deleted it--not to erase my misdeeds, but to spare you the trouble of having it touch your eyes again. Since it's erased, let the record here show that I did verbally assault IT in just the way he's described (except he says it like the "after" version of My Fair Lady whereas I said it like Nicki Minaj in 2012).

    I'll buy YOU coffee if you'll have me. It is very cool of you to bring that up as a possibility.

    An element of our stand still is that, to me, our disagreements aren't vague, but very specific and meaningful--indeed, I felt frustrated when I felt that you thought it was a trivial difference. I would be very reluctant to brush the specificity of it aside, to put it up to a mutual misunderstanding; but I know that if I can't build a case for my position in a language you understand, I can forget about winning you--and many, many others--over. Part of the vividness of my obscene language is down to the fact that I've doubted how much I should try to win people over--I've put in a bit of time with that in my life and changed directions--if this isn't instead the time to draw lines in the sand. Not sure; it's an open question for me.

    Having reflected over these back-and-forths, I do appreciate how left-of-field my proclamations have been; I need to finesse my communication skills so I don't strike out in the first round of disagreement. My motives are grounded in passion and feeling as much as knowledge. My words will never reach people to whom that is a disqualifier. If I am reaching for "trust me, I've been through it," my ability to use my words is already inadequate.

    For what it's worth, it's not just you (or Flossy) on the other end of my righteous accusations. Friends, co-workers, families, and strangers (even my boss, though that is a minefield). If we get together in person, I will tell you why I do it this way--all the missteps and regrets, the times I hurt other people, the times I was ashamed of myself, the times I learned lessons. I know that understanding between people doesn't grow on trees. Even if you don't agree with my approach, I would want to express that I've come to this point by holding myself accountable and that my ideas are based off experience, research and an earnest desire to do the right thing. And, because I am proud, I would want you to know that my beliefs are based in logic.

    If I could reach you with my position--to somehow give you an idea that you hadn't thought of before, but makes sense to you--it would mean more than if we had been on the same page at the start. For your part, you know more than I do about why my words splattered UHX like so many flaming bags of doggie doo.

    Power to the people baby
Sign In or Register to comment.