Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You didn't explain how the captain was the one who sank the ship. And in the case of Hostess, the "captain" on board when the company started to sink is no longer on board. So where does your anaolgy fit into the reality, specifically?I never blamed the passengers, the lifeboats had both crew and passengers on board and you have studiously avoided my point that the captain being on the bridge as the Titanic sank showed that management could still be working when they are the ones to sink the company.
And in the case of Hostess, the "captain" on board when the company started to sink is no longer on board.
So you're onboard with blaming the passengers for the sinking of the Titanic? Go figure
Which demonstrates the failure of the proposed analogy[serious];61878541 said:Maybe if it's opposite day. We need to blame the maids. They could have stayed on board and plugged the holes with their bodies. Since they didn't want to save the ship so they could keep working there, they should now get kicked off the life rafts.
Oh good you stopped blaming the unions.You didn't explain how the captain was the one who sank the ship. And in the case of Hostess, the "captain" on board when the company started to sink is no longer on board. So where does your anaolgy fit into the reality, specifically?
In any analogy you will find plenty of things are different, the question is whether it does match on the points where they do compare. You were using the management still being in the jobs to blame the people who left. I showed you that this wasn't any indication of who was at fault since the management of the Titanic stayed on the bridge. Doesn't matter in the case of hostess that there have been a series of managers getting rich from the company while overseeing it going under. It is still the management who are responsible.If you ignore the parts that don't compare (all of them), you'd be right
If you ignore the parts that don't compare (all of them), you'd be right
And ultimately, the workers refused to work at a critical time and now they are OUT OF WORK.In any analogy you will find plenty of things are different, the question is whether it does match on the points where they do compare. You were using the management still being in the jobs to blame the people who left. I showed you that this wasn't any indication of who was at fault since the management of the Titanic stayed on the bridge. Doesn't matter in the case of hostess that there have been a series of managers getting rich from the company while overseeing it going under. It is still the management who are responsible.
And ultimately, the workers refused to work at a critical time and now they are OUT OF WORK.
Not any more. Soon to be on the dole. Good job Mr Union boss.
The way it works is that the union workers (the ones who refused to work) would have been employed during the bankruptcy, and beyond. Had the wages during that time not been sufficient, the smart thing to do would have been to maintain the employment while looking for a job somewhere else. Instead, they elected to drive the company into liquidation and themselves onto the dole. Maybe that's what they wanted all along, to get paid for not working.[serious];61884029 said:Yup, they didn't have to be on those lifeboats. It would have been far better for them to still be on the ship! Get those bodies in those holes!
You are still haven't dealt with the fact management can be at fault yet still be on the bridge as the ship goes down. You have kept dodging the point, so I will leave it there.And ultimately, the workers refused to work at a critical time and now they are OUT OF WORK.
It's a hypothetical so it's not relevant. what we know is that the workers refused to work and the company was then forced into liquidation.You are still haven't dealt with the fact management can be at fault yet still be on the bridge as the ship goes down. You have kept dodging the point, so I will leave it there.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?