Friday, 22 December 2017

AT&T Credits Trump for Bonus Its Union Already Negotiated

quote [ AT&T promised $1,000 in bonuses because of the GOP tax plan on Wednesday. But the union representing AT&T workers bargained for that bonus earlier this month. ]

As AT&T hails tax cut with bonuses for some workers, it hands pink slips to others

ICYMI: Chappelle has a new special coming out! It fits the theme. Thanks, Steele.
[SFW] [politics] [+3 Sad]
[by raphael_the_turtle@3:14pmGMT]


satanspenis666 said @ 5:03pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:1 Sad]
Since this bonus is now in relation to the Trump tax cuts, bonuses will be paid every year going forward. Right???
mechanical contrivance said @ 5:22pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:1 Sad]
If the union negotiates it every year.
lilmookieesquire said @ 4:11pm GMT on 22nd Dec
This was in the local print media too, not mentioning unions.
steele said @ 4:55pm GMT on 22nd Dec
Um... The unions not being mentioned was in the local media or the bonuses were in the local media without mentioning the unions? :D
lilmookieesquire said @ 7:49pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:1 Informative]
Latter iirc
steele said @ 4:54pm GMT on 22nd Dec
Wells Fargo says raises were not linked to tax bill passage — then backtracks - LA Times
There's been a bunch of them blowing smoke up people's asses. I do wonder the end game though. Are they all going to abandon ship once they bleed the stone dry or do they honestly not get how badly they're screwing the pooch right now?
1111 said @ 6:55pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:-4 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
foobar said @ 5:25pm GMT on 22nd Dec
I don't see how the layoffs are an issue. I mean, sure, give it a month or so, but what are they supposed to do? Keep people on that they no longer need? For how long?
raphael_the_turtle said @ 5:42pm GMT on 22nd Dec
ATT and other companies are lobbying for and supporting tax cut legislation that are paid for by massively cutting social safety nets all while they're cutting jobs. How do you not see that as an issue?
foobar said @ 6:56am GMT on 23rd Dec
Are they even cutting jobs on the whole, though? Is it really that unreasonable that a certain division might at some point have surplus employees?
raphael_the_turtle said @ 1:44pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:2 Underrated]
What Steele said, but you could clarify something for me, foobar? Why were you so against Clinton if you never seem to have a problem with the people pulling her strings? So far I've seen you call for punching and killing Nazi's, ignoring the plight of poor racists in middle America, but when it comes to the billionaire corporatists lobbying for tax cuts and cutting our social safety nets it's, "Let's not be too hasty!"

These are the people tearing America apart. Your average nazi shithead isn't rewriting the tax code to take healthcare away from millions people, causing more to go hungry, and end up on the street. They're just footsoldiers, suckers being taken advantage of. You're making excuses here for the assholes pulling the strings. And I'm specifically asking because I've seen you dodge the corporate responsibility line before and I would like to understand where you're coming from. It seems very at odds with the rest of the values you share.
foobar said[1] @ 8:07am GMT on 24th Dec [Score:1 Underrated]
Hey, I'm all for taxing them and redistributing their wealth, but forcing them to employ 700 people to sit on their thumbs seems like a pretty weird and inefficient way to do it.

Even if AT&T were a non-profit there would still occasionally be shifts in staffing needs.
milkman666 said @ 2:32pm GMT on 24th Dec
I agree. With increases in efficiency you're going to need less people. The answer to that is not the Donald trump promise of coal jobs. The concern though is what happens to the surplus labor. Idle hands are the devils plaything.
raphael_the_turtle said @ 4:57pm GMT on 24th Dec
I agree with that, but they're also lying about creating jobs and where bonuses are coming from in order to get these tax cuts. Saying they're going to create 500 jobs because of a tax cut while not mentioning the 30% of their workforce they're looking to cut over the next few years is reason enough to be concerned and need to be informed over layoffs, don't you think? If you're going to tell your wife you want a baby it seems only reasonable for her to know whether or not it's going to be with her.
steele said @ 12:25pm GMT on 23rd Dec
From Jan. 31, 2016 to Jan. 31, 2017 AT&T employment fell by 5 percent from 281,000 to 268,000, according to public filings.

A New York Times profile of Stephenson in February 2016 said senior executives believed eliminating 30 percent of AT&T’s workforce by 2020 was not out of the question.
steele said @ 5:49pm GMT on 22nd Dec
Because the big lie people buy into is that tax cuts create jobs and that never works out positive for the lower classes.
Ankylosaur said @ 7:15pm GMT on 22nd Dec
I'm sure that anyone working for one of these companies that gets a bonus and is anti-union will refuse the money.

damnit said @ 8:32pm GMT on 22nd Dec
They won't because they'll need that money to pay for increased premiums and other payments affected by the tax bill.
yogi said @ 8:44pm GMT on 23rd Dec
1) What does it mean when a comment is filtered under my threshold?

2) About a month ago, I tried for a long time to change my password using my computer and my iPhone. Can't, from either.

3) Also, their voice transcription thingie for voice mails doesn't work for me.

4) You can't pick up ATT a mere two blocks from their downtown San Rafael office, and they're mighty defensive about that.
steele said @ 10:51pm GMT on 23rd Dec
1) It means it has been downmod below the threshold set up in your profile.

2) On SE or ATT?

3) I don't think I an help with that.

4) I bet they are.
Fish said[1] @ 5:25am GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:-1 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
Fish said[3] @ 5:27am GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:-3 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
raphael_the_turtle said @ 1:25pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:1 Underrated]
Reagan then had to raise taxes 11 times.

During Reagan's presidency, the national debt grew from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion. This led to the U.S. moving from the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation. Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.
Fish said @ 6:31pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:-5 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
raphael_the_turtle said @ 7:10pm GMT on 22nd Dec
Enjoy your table scraps.
5th Earth said @ 8:08pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:-1]
filtered comment under your threshold
mechanical contrivance said @ 8:35pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:2 Underrated]
He's not trying to make a point. He's trolling. Ignore him.
cb361 said @ 8:24pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:0 Funny]
When I get around to it, I'm going to write a Greasemonkey script to turn all his comments into the utterances of Ralph Wiggum. Then I'll enjoy SE even more.
steele said @ 8:43pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:2 Underrated]
Or, ya know.... Moderate the site. Stop them from hijacking posts with their inane distractions.
ComposerNate said @ 10:02pm GMT on 22nd Dec
Once it reaches -5 or whatever, can it then be unviewable by anyone ever? The comment filtered thing is too tempting, enragement a devilish pleasure, toxic to health and site.
Hugh E. said @ 11:30pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:4]
filtered comments tempt
enragement is a pleasure
toxic to health and sight
lilmookieesquire said @ 1:11am GMT on 23rd Dec
*Claps vigorously*
arrowhen said @ 11:53pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:1 Insightful]
clap clap clap clap clap
clap clap clap clap clap clap clap
clap clap clap clap clap
Headlessfriar said @ 12:23am GMT on 24th Dec
I enjoy haiku
But this one moreso because
It's a palindrome
arrowhen said @ 11:01pm GMT on 22nd Dec
Should we also delete their pictures from the What Do You Look Like threads, Stalin?
ComposerNate said @ 4:24pm GMT on 23rd Dec
steele said @ 11:13pm GMT on 22nd Dec
No, but most people don't bother with looking at moderated comments. I've noticed its the troll feeders who are the most likely to look at comments once they've been hidden. In the grand scheme of things they're the ones who give trolls the most exposure. 9 times out of 10, everybody else can't be bothered most of the time. If they just downmodded and ignored it would be a much different atmosphere, all those silly threads comparing epeens would disappear.
foobar said @ 6:58am GMT on 23rd Dec
How about have comments start modded at their karma score if it's negative? Then maybe there'd be a point to modding.
steele said @ 12:19pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:1 Good]
I'm considering that, also leaning towards a captcha tho. In my head these guys are little more than spammers so I'm trying for something that will handle both disruptive behavior and bots and advertisers.
4321 said[3] @ 1:01pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:-5 Troll]
filtered comment under your threshold
raphael_the_turtle said[1] @ 1:30pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:0 Informative]
steele said @ 2:49pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:1 Funsightful]
raphael_the_turtle said @ 2:56pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:2 Funny]
Alright! I'm moving on! 😁
lilmookieesquire said @ 2:31am GMT on 24th Dec
That one was for Christmas though.
4321 said @ 2:34pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:-5 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
ComposerNate said[1] @ 1:48pm GMT on 23rd Dec
Yes, it mostly works with most people not bothering. Respecting the current system, and wishing to contribute, I sometimes click through to judge for myself. If found again worthless or too often vile, my added downmod adds no benefit. Once a strong enough majority decides the site better without it... shouldn't it best be removed? Filtering as misdemeanor, removal as felony.
steele said @ 2:18pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:2 Underrated]
But if everyone does their part, the toxicity can spread out amongst the masses in small harmless doses. As it stands now there's like 4 or 5 of us vs them and the people feeding them.
steele said[1] @ 4:32pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:1 Funny]
Regarding edit. :)
Removal would be too easy to abuse. Despite my detractors claims, I am trying to build a fair system here, but there's only so much that can be done with people who ignore facts and are looking only for arguments. Downmodding and ignoring them isn't perfect, but to me, it's the most merciful and safest of options.

There is also karma to consider, added downmods do contribute to karma which controls posting and moderation abilities.
ComposerNate said @ 5:37pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:1 Underrated]
To be sure, I suggested fully unreadable removal of a heavily and universally downmodded comment, not of the regularly downmodded commenter. It's like neighbors together cleaning their street of graffiti and litter, repairing damage of vandals. The system now feels more like a sheet thrown over we must still live with as reminder of man's falling. If you still disagree, I'll try not to pursue it further.
steele said @ 6:54pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:2]
I don't disagree that it would be nice, but I'll never create removal of comments as part of the automated process. It'd be too easy to abuse and i would never hear the end of it.
ComposerNate said @ 7:45pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:2]
Authoritarian regimes are trending
steele said @ 10:48pm GMT on 23rd Dec
You make a good point.
ComposerNate said @ 12:49pm GMT on 25th Dec [Score:1 Underrated]
-1 Trollfood

There could be some practical use to it, rather than your ahem or similar which may continue to feed, or the -1 Unworthy Self link seen forced to fit.
steele said @ 10:00pm GMT on 25th Dec [Score:1 Informative]
Yeah, been thinking about that. Been thinking about cycling out the mods as well and just going with a plus or minus with the ability to add tags to posts...
HoZay said @ 11:18pm GMT on 23rd Dec
We all appreciate your highly effective leadership, and applaud your many huge successes!
arrowhen said @ 10:20pm GMT on 23rd Dec
It would also cost you a subscriber.
steele said @ 10:47pm GMT on 23rd Dec
Sure, but if I ran the site based purely on that things would be much different. Money can't be the be all, end all. I'm going to run the site the best way I think it should be.

Until I sell it to facebook.
arrowhen said @ 10:20pm GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:1 Interesting]
And what about those jerks that upmod unpopular comments? What's the best way to punish them for their incorrect opinions?
ComposerNate said[1] @ 10:45pm GMT on 23rd Dec
Those upmodding an unpopular opinion support it as that less unpopular.
cb361 said @ 9:03pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:-1]
filtered comment under your threshold
steele said @ 9:12pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:-1]
filtered comment under your threshold
arrowhen said @ 10:56pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:-1]
filtered comment under your threshold
Fish said @ 9:04pm GMT on 22nd Dec [Score:-5 Boring]
filtered comment under your threshold
5th Earth said @ 12:27am GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:-3 Classy Pr0n]
filtered comment under your threshold
Fish said @ 5:22am GMT on 23rd Dec [Score:-5 Troll]
filtered comment under your threshold

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.

Posts of Import
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings