The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    melensdad

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 94.7%
    18   1   0
    Apr 2, 2008
    24,387
    77
    Far West Suburban Lowellabama
    I see what you're saying and I'm kinda the same way but I will respect a line if one is formed. :patriot:

    I view it as a dispute between the employer and the employee.

    I do not view it as a dispute between the employee and the customer (me).

    As a customer of a product, I buy/replinish the product when I need/want it, not when an employee wants me to buy it.

    If I go to buy the product when the employee is upset at his employer, that is not my problem. If the employee then scratches/spits upon/blocks my car as I pull into the parking lot then clearly the employee does not want me as a customer . . . except at his personal convenience. His convenience is no concern of mine.

    My concern is to fullfil my needs and the needs of my family.

    So if I go to get my legal product, when I need/want it, and I am thwarted by a group of disgruntled employees, then the likelyhood of me EVER GOING BACK is slim to none. F'em. They injure me (my car, my ability to shop, etc) and I have no problem injuring them (by no longer buying said product/service). Now if the employee chooses to kiss and make up with his boss, he may still end up out of a job because of the way he treated me.

    Its my money, I will spend it as I wish, and I choose to spend it at stores/with services that value me as a customer.
     

    jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    38,352
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    No, how about CUSTOMER, the one you should treat with RESPECT.

    If you don't want me at your store/shop/business today then why should I ever come there and pay for your product? And if I don't pay for your product then you will never make a living. How about you not bite the hand that ultimately feeds you?

    You got a beef with your boss, that is not my problem. You make it my problem and I'll go shop elsewhere and you are screwed.

    But in the case of Culver's on Ridge it's not the current workers that are striking/boycotting the business. It's people (carpentor's union) that did not get the business in the first place. So it's not an internal fight.

    It similar to use boycotting "Cheaper Than Dirt" for their flip-flopping on 2A at least in my mind.
     

    jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    38,352
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    Point Jedi. Score- (melensdad-1) (jedi-1)

    Oh you young lad.
    You will soon learn that daddy (melensdad) and mommy (jedi) seldom agree. :D mommy 95% of the time will just disagree cause it's daddy that stated something. :laugh:

    When you price yourself out of the market...

    True that!
    However the owner of these Culver's (per the flyer) went before the Highland board for 'tax credits' and the board wanted him to use "prevaling local area wages for workers who will do the construction" (ie. probably means use union members) and he agreed to that.

    Said owner per the flyer backed out on that agreement. He could of always said no i don't agree with that and I'm sure the highland board would probably not have given him the tax credits.

    There in lines my issue with this. He gave his word and he broke it so if his word is not good enough then f**** him!
     

    xfrostybeersx

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Dec 26, 2011
    1,974
    48
    C.P.
    Each person is entitled to their own opinion and how they would conduct a business transaction. With myself being in the Labor Field, I WILL ALWAYS support any labor disputes. I know how companies will say one thing and quickly renig on an agreement. How is that fair? The town supposably gave them a tax break and Culvers backed out the agreement. It's gonna make it hard to do business with the Culvers guy in future towns now see that his lack of honesty is showing.
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    95,267
    113
    Merrillville
    Only day off, and I'm at work for a physical. Answering a stupid questionnaire. 5 pages on questions about a respirator I don't even use. The rest would be simpler if they asked about changes in the last year. I don't remember when why family members passed, or when I started certain meds. I'm rapidly losing patience.
     

    medic6882

    Plinker
    Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 10, 2013
    106
    18
    Demotte
    Oh you young lad.
    You will soon learn that daddy (melensdad) and mommy (jedi) seldom agree. :D mommy 95% of the time will just disagree cause it's daddy that stated something. :laugh:



    True that!
    However the owner of these Culver's (per the flyer) went before the Highland board for 'tax credits' and the board wanted him to use "prevaling local area wages for workers who will do the construction" (ie. probably means use union members) and he agreed to that.

    Said owner per the flyer backed out on that agreement. He could of always said no i don't agree with that and I'm sure the highland board would probably not have given him the tax credits.

    There in lines my issue with this. He gave his word and he broke it so if his word is not good enough then f**** him!

    But when Culvers applied for the building permit it could have been an approved general contractor they hired and then the general contractor hired the sub contractors. So is Culvers responsible for who the general contractor hires. It would be like me hiring a lawn care company and telling them only midgets are allowed to mow my lawn. Just my thoughts , which really mean nothing in this world.
     

    jedi

    Da PinkFather
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    51   0   0
    Oct 27, 2008
    38,352
    113
    NWI, North of US-30
    But when Culvers applied for the building permit it could have been an approved general contractor they hired and then the general contractor hired the sub contractors. So is Culvers responsible for who the general contractor hires. It would be like me hiring a lawn care company and telling them only midgets are allowed to mow my lawn. Just my thoughts , which really mean nothing in this world.

    I think that is what occured but not sure. I only glanced at the flyer. It's still in my car. Will hopefully post it in full tonight.

    Will have tell the wife of these. Any other good mexican food?
    Wife and I both enjoy some good mexican food lol


    In EC or NWI?
     

    the only Qualk

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Apr 29, 2011
    462
    18
    Valpo
    I think that is what occured but not sure. I only glanced at the flyer. It's still in my car. Will hopefully post it in full tonight.




    In EC or NWI?

    Both haha ec and nwi I know a few Michigan city,, rios, el bracero, la azteca, el cajete and in Valpo la cabana is tasty
     

    melensdad

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 94.7%
    18   1   0
    Apr 2, 2008
    24,387
    77
    Far West Suburban Lowellabama
    ... The town supposably gave them a tax break and Culvers backed out the agreement. It's gonna make it hard to do business with the Culvers guy in future towns now see that his lack of honesty is showing.

    There is ZERO evidence that Culvers backed out of any agreement.

    All we actually know is that Culver's contractor did not use this particular union.

    Perhaps they used a different union and still paid prevailing wages! That has happened before, will happen again.

    Perhaps they used non-union and paid prevailing wages. That has also happened many times before and will happen again.

    IF Culvers backed out of an agreement them Highland would not have to give them any tax break. Where is the evidence that Highland pulled the tax breaks? There is none. So if Highland is honoring the tax break then its very likely that this is a simple case of one pissed off union that didn't get a job because some other union, or some non-union workers, were paid prevailing wages.

    It amazes me that people make so many assumptions without factual info. If it comes out that Highland pulled the tax break then its likely Culvers didn't pay prevailing wages. That is still legal.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom