• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Who Rules America?

Bob Maxey said:
Or . . . that is how it SHOULD work.

I recall a supervisor who was hired by a manager who biked with the director of HR, who once said something like "I hire Vietnamese line assistants because they are smarter than whites. I would never hire a woman because my wife (a non-English speaking person from Vietnam) will not tolerate it" Or words like that.

This HR Director was hired and he brought along his friends and put them into positions they did not understand. When a problem arises, there was no reason to waste your time talking to HR.

This Super said it out loud and was unapologetic. HR listened to some others "whine" and said it was the Supervisor's prerogative to hire anyone he wants to hire. The same HR person who had people fired for cheating on their numbers (as they should have been) did nothing when his friends did exactly the same thing.

This wonk's wife was supposed to run a precision production line and she could not speak a lick of English, or understand a circuit or use a modem.

I recall the incestuous relationships between our Director of HR, several Line Managers and several Supervisors. You had to do your job, naturally, but you had to be careful not say anything that upset a Supervisor or Manager. Should they not like you, HR was no use. This is the same group that openly said they will look at a dozen whites before hiring a black person.

Lots of politics in the workplace and not only do you need to do your job, you have to play lots of games that make it very difficult to do that very job. You must CYA bigtime. Sometimes, you are screwed no matter how good you do your job and getting fired can be a matter of internal politics and BS.
Click to expand...

I belelieve you just described Corporate-America....(or Amercia as Romney spells it)
 
A.Nonymous said:
Everyone works for themselves.
Click to expand...

But some people expect the union to make sure they get paid more than they are worth. I do my own negotiating. On every job. Every day. I don't get paid for showing up. I get paid for showing up with the proper tools and busting butt to get the job done.
 
bberryhill0 said:
But some people expect the union to make sure they get paid more than they are worth. I do my own negotiating. On every job. Every day. I don't get paid for showing up. I get paid for showing up with the proper tools and busting butt to get the job done.
Click to expand...

Good for you.

As it should be.
 
As it should be but how do those of us who do the impossible with nothing save the world? I see the path and continue to walk it.
 
Perhaps one should wake up to the fact that great wealth is built upon manipulating those that create real wealth, that be you.

http://androidforums.com/politics-current-affairs/391716-who-rules-america.html#post3054150

The higher we go up into the top 0.5% the more likely it is that their wealth is in some way tied to the investment industry and borrowed money than from personally selling goods or services or labor as do most in the bottom 99.5%. They are much more likely to have built their net worth from stock options and capital gains in stocks and real estate and private business sales, not from income which is taxed at a much higher rate. These opportunities are largely unavailable to the bottom 99.5%.
 
Bob Maxey said:
Or . . . that is how it SHOULD work.

I recall a supervisor who was hired by a manager who biked with the director of HR, who once said something like "I hire Vietnamese line assistants because they are smarter than whites. I would never hire a woman because my wife (a non-English speaking person from Vietnam) will not tolerate it" Or words like that.

This HR Director was hired and he brought along his friends and put them into positions they did not understand. When a problem arises, there was no reason to waste your time talking to HR.

This Super said it out loud and was unapologetic. HR listened to some others "whine" and said it was the Supervisor's prerogative to hire anyone he wants to hire. The same HR person who had people fired for cheating on their numbers (as they should have been) did nothing when his friends did exactly the same thing.

This wonk's wife was supposed to run a precision production line and she could not speak a lick of English, or understand a circuit or use a modem.

I recall the incestuous relationships between our Director of HR, several Line Managers and several Supervisors. You had to do your job, naturally, but you had to be careful not say anything that upset a Supervisor or Manager. Should they not like you, HR was no use. This is the same group that openly said they will look at a dozen whites before hiring a black person.

Lots of politics in the workplace and not only do you need to do your job, you have to play lots of games that make it very difficult to do that very job. You must CYA bigtime. Sometimes, you are screwed no matter how good you do your job and getting fired can be a matter of internal politics and BS.
Click to expand...

Sadly, this probably happens quite a bit. My personal experiences include operations manager for a branch of a world wide company for 7 years and branch manager for 3. I hired 2 Native American's, not because I had to, but because they were excellent candidates for the job. I would not hesitate to hire any man or woman as long as they are qualified. Many applicants flat out lied on their application. I would mention that we could not hire anyone with a Felony conviction and some said they didn't have one and we would find out later that they did. Our company did extensive background checks as well as a psych exam.

I was ultimately terminated partly because I did not hire a female. I TOLD my boss I would not hire a female just to hire a female. I tried to hire many, but they would never get through the background checks. The job was a high security job and you had to trust and rely on your co-worker big time, plus it was a very physical job with heavy lifting of 50lbs or more. Ironically, my replacement hired a female who didn't last 6 months due to fact she had 3 preventable accidents in that 6 month time frame.

Nothing against females, don't get me wrong, I want to put a person in a position to succeed and enjoy their job.
 
buzzcon said:
Where did/do you work, in a coal mine in 1920? MOST (Burger King, McDonalds etc. not included) companies require documentation (union or not) before a person is terminated. Unless they have a huge screw up (i.e commercial driver having a preventable accident with a death and it was their fault) or if you say something stupid (racist or sexist) to the wrong person. Some circumstances do dictate immediate termination but after the proper investigation.

There are certain circumstances where you can get sent home or turned away for improper footwear. One example is in the iron ore mines here in Minnesota, you MUST have steel toe shoes (bare minimum with metatarsal boots preferred) and a hard hat just to enter their property. Most mines also require MSHA training as well.

If you do your job, nothing more, nothing less, you should not have to keep looking over your shoulder worried about getting fired.
Click to expand...

Different companies may have internal practices for hiring/firing, but at the end of the day, from a legal perspective, they can fire you for just about anything in most states. They can't fire you for age, race, sex, religion, etc... and all the other things that listed in that clause that's on the wall of every business somewhere. Beyond that it's entirely up to them and wrongful terminations suits are very difficult to win. Even if I claim I hate women, that doesn't mean that's why I fired you. I just argue that you were incompetent and it's case closed. You've got the right to walk out and go across the street too. Non-competes and other such nonsense are extremely difficult to enforce from the employers side.

Bob Maxey said:
I am self-employed, but I always work for my clients. Just sayin'
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, everyone is self-employed. You provide services to your clients, employer, etc... Your success and/or failure will be dependent on how well you do that.

OutofDate1980 said:
Perhaps one should wake up to the fact that great wealth is built upon manipulating those that create real wealth, that be you.

http://androidforums.com/politics-current-affairs/391716-who-rules-america.html#post3054150

The higher we go up into the top 0.5% the more likely it is that their wealth is in some way tied to the investment industry and borrowed money than from personally selling goods or services or labor as do most in the bottom 99.5%. They are much more likely to have built their net worth from stock options and capital gains in stocks and real estate and private business sales, not from income which is taxed at a much higher rate. These opportunities are largely unavailable to the bottom 99.5%.
Click to expand...

Wow. I'm not even quite sure how to respond to this. Not only is it so ridiculously wrong, but it's downright offensive. Are you really going to argue that people shouldn't invest? That investing is wrong? Or that there is some sort of rule that you can't invest unless you earn a certain amount of money? Just wow.
 
bberryhill0 said:
As it should be but how do those of us who do the impossible with nothing save the world? I see the path and continue to walk it.
Click to expand...

Start by understanding that you CAN'T save the world. Nobody can save the world. Saving the world is a dream. All you can do is make the planet a tiny bit better and hope others follow.

Most will not because most are only concerned with their own lives. If they live a decent life, things might work out.

This idea that one person can save the world is just plain silly.

I predict we will be attacked and the events of 9/11 will be fondly remembered as an attack where not much happened. I see a breakdown coming and elegy life now because we just might have to endure a decade of hell.

I cannot do anything about that, so I no longer worry about what is sure to happen. I can't save you; all I can do is get by.

Buy War Bonds and Go Yankees.
 
A.Nonymous said:
Wow. I'm not even quite sure how to respond to this. Not only is it so ridiculously wrong, but it's downright offensive. Are you really going to argue that people shouldn't invest? That investing is wrong? Or that there is some sort of rule that you can't invest unless you earn a certain amount of money? Just wow.
Click to expand...

The company he works for is probably tied to investments or some financial instrument of some sort, as is his retirement plans and related things. Without investments/investors, there will be no technology. Or very little.

Some people tie the rich to every national or world problem and when they do, I know that I cannot argue without e-yelling. Basic economics should be taught along side readin, writin and rithmetic.
 
Bob Maxey said:
Start by understanding that you CAN'T save the world. Nobody can save the world. Saving the world is a dream. All you can do is make the planet a tiny bit better and hope others follow.

Most will not because most are only concerned with their own lives. If they live a decent life, things might work out.

This idea that one person can save the world is just plain silly.

I predict we will be attacked and the events of 9/11 will be fondly remembered as an attack where not much happened. I see a breakdown coming and elegy life now because we just might have to endure a decade of hell.

I cannot do anything about that, so I no longer worry about what is sure to happen. I can't save you; all I can do is get by.

Buy War Bonds and Go Yankees.
Click to expand...

Completely and totally disagree. The Yankees suck. That is all.
 
A.Nonymous said:
... Wow. I'm not even quite sure how to respond to this. Not only is it so ridiculously wrong, but it's downright offensive. Are you really going to argue that people shouldn't invest? That investing is wrong? Or that there is some sort of rule that you can't invest unless you earn a certain amount of money? Just wow.
Click to expand...

The cited article is just stating the facts, I don't give a flying fork (spelling) that you find the facts offensive. Tell me how much you have/had invested in synthetic credit default swaps ?
 
OutofDate1980 said:
The cited article is just stating the facts, I don't give a flying fork (spelling) that you find the facts offensive. Tell me how much you have/had invested in synthetic credit default swaps ?
Click to expand...

I've highlighted all the completely and totally bogus statements in the paragraph you cite.

The higher we go up into the top 0.5% the more likely it is that their wealth is in some way tied to the investment industry and borrowed money than from personally selling goods or services or labor as do most in the bottom 99.5%.
Click to expand...

Problem with this is?

They are much more likely to have built their net worth from stock options and capital gains in stocks and real estate and private business sales, not from income which is taxed at a much higher rate.
Click to expand...

Again? the problem with this?

These opportunities are largely unavailable to the bottom 99.5%.
Click to expand...

Completely and totally bogus. I'd use stronger language if I could. Please tell me why you cannot buy stock options. Please tell me why you can't benefit from capital gains (disclaimer - I have income from capital gains every year). All the home owners I know write off their mortgages and I know a few people who try to flip houses (which they generally fail at in this economy). How are these opportunities not available to everyone? I call bullcrap on that.
 
We have Our New Commanding Officer & Prez
picsay-1351555043.jpg

​
 
Droidomatic said:
people only have the choice of two candidates?out of millions of Americans?
the same two political parties? from many others? they are both flip sides of the same coin. candidates are selected first, both sponsored by the same corporations...then the media news owned by the very same corporations does their job on telling the masses who to elect...like mindless blind sheep. its worked for nearly a century. it is ingenious if you asked me.
there is more to it...you would have to do extensive research.
what I know took me 5 years of obsessive interest.

g. luck.
Click to expand...

Who say's we have a divided government, both parties are joined at the hip.:knuddel:

Frank Rich on 'This Town' and Washington's Dysfunctional Bipartisanship -- New York Magazine

"It
 
buzzcon said:
Sadly, this probably happens quite a bit. My personal experiences include operations manager for a branch of a world wide company for 7 years and branch manager for 3. I hired 2 Native American's, not because I had to, but because they were excellent candidates for the job. I would not hesitate to hire any man or woman as long as they are qualified. Many applicants flat out lied on their application. I would mention that we could not hire anyone with a Felony conviction and some said they didn't have one and we would find out later that they did. Our company did extensive background checks as well as a psych exam.

I was ultimately terminated partly because I did not hire a female. I TOLD my boss I would not hire a female just to hire a female. I tried to hire many, but they would never get through the background checks. The job was a high security job and you had to trust and rely on your co-worker big time, plus it was a very physical job with heavy lifting of 50lbs or more. Ironically, my replacement hired a female who didn't last 6 months due to fact she had 3 preventable accidents in that 6 month time frame.

Nothing against females, don't get me wrong, I want to put a person in a position to succeed and enjoy their job.
Click to expand...

I do not like those that hire because some PC cretin says they should. I think you should be hired only if you bring value to the company.

That said, my view is MOST corporations want the best but we are too quick to sue and corporations are giun shy. I work with many companies that are well run and with happy workers.
 
Bob Maxey said:
I do not like those that hire because some PC cretin says they should. I think you should be hired only if you bring value to the company.
Click to expand...

I guess "pc cretin" means advocates of "affirmative action."

We had to look long and hard at that whole notion as union stewards working for a company with about 1700 employees back in the mid and late 80s.

We noticed that prior to the union being voted in, the only African Americans and women working at that company were hired in as unskilled labor. Many of the skilled office people were women, of course. All of the skilled trade personnel were white men. There was a training program in place for the trades (carpenter, electrician, plumber and after a bit, computer system analyst and tech).

It took only one meeting with management to get the ship on course and get the message to Human Resources that the community was not being represented very well by that company's hiring policies. The CEO appeared visibly embarrassed as we analysed the demographic data of his employees.

Was this the norm in the 80s? Was it that way in the 70s, 60s, 50s, 40s, 30s? Of course it was, otherwise there never would have been a need for a civil rights movement at all (which gradually brought about changes in the unions as well as some hiring entities across the country).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom