POLITICS SCHMALITICS

[gehringer_2]

4 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

I had to deal with the NC in Chicago as a traffic reporter. There were two companies in town at the time and both enforced the policy. So basically I had to find other employment for a year in order to make a move. 
 

The upside for me was I decided what I was doing between media jobs was more fun than dealing with the politics of my old job. I also figured out without the hour plus commute both ways I was coming out ahead of the game. 

It was weird. All the refinery services companies had them, but guys went from one firm to another all the time, in fact half the guys I worked with had worked for at least two of the major firms. There seemed to be enough ways to rewrite job descriptions that I don't know of anyone actually trying to enforce one - again probably because they were all guilty of raiding one another. The question is why they bothered.

[chasfh]

12 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

This is the kind of action where the Biden administration is making deliberate efforts to force up wages in the US as the most direct was to increase social equity.

If they’re really looking for wage/income/wealth equity, they need to balance the scale on the other side by raising taxes and slashing abatements and subsidies on the ultra wealthy and their business activities. Otherwise all that’ll happen is they push the dollar down by making it cheaper overall and everything just costs commensurately more.

[chasfh]

12 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

I had to deal with the NC in Chicago as a traffic reporter. There were two companies in town at the time and both enforced the policy. So basically I had to find other employment for a year in order to make a move. 
 

The upside for me was I decided what I was doing between media jobs was more fun than dealing with the politics of my old job. I also figured out without the hour plus commute both ways I was coming out ahead of the game. 

I don’t really understand the presumed benefit to the company of forcing a non-compete on a traffic reporter. It’s not like you have any trade secrets you can take over there that will put the other guy out of business. It simply seems punitive to you, and a way for colluding duopolists to maintain complete monopolistic control of its labor market.

[oblong]

12 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I don’t really understand the presumed benefit to the company of forcing a non-compete on a traffic reporter. It’s not like you have any trade secrets you can take over there that will put the other guy out of business. It simply seems punitive to you, and a way for colluding duopolists to maintain complete monopolistic control of its labor market.

a lot of local radio guys on Twitter were talking about this yesterday in such a way that the lack of a NC during the consolidation period would have been game changers.  When one station did their mass firings those guys couldn't work elsewhere even though another station might have wanted them.  It's a back scratching exercise.  I see it as a form of the collusion we saw in MLB in hte 80's.  Keep the talent pool off the market.  

[CMRivdogs]

12 minutes ago, oblong said:

a lot of local radio guys on Twitter were talking about this yesterday in such a way that the lack of a NC during the consolidation period would have been game changers.  When one station did their mass firings those guys couldn't work elsewhere even though another station might have wanted them.  It's a back scratching exercise.  I see it as a form of the collusion we saw in MLB in hte 80's.  Keep the talent pool off the market.  

Basically you had to leave the market and uproot your family if you wanted to stay employed in the industry. In my case I knew in advance the station group was switching services since they had just recently acquired the competition. 
In hindsight, it did seem a bit funny to me that after serving the non compete time, and then some I did work at the second company for a while. On my last day there the announcement came that the two companies were merging. 

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

If they’re really looking for wage/income/wealth equity, they need to balance the scale on the other side by raising taxes and slashing abatements and subsidies on the ultra wealthy and their business activities. Otherwise all that’ll happen is they push the dollar down by making it cheaper overall and everything just costs commensurately more.

Sure, but they know they can't raise taxes significantly without bigger legislative majorities, so the concept of increased backing of workers rights is a practical strategy to deal with political reality. I give them credit for having their feet on the ground and not letting ideality stand in the way of working practically.

Edited April 25 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

5 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Sure, but they know they can't raise taxes significantly without bigger legislative majorities, so the concept of increased backing of workers rights is a practical strategy to deal with political reality. I give them credit for having their feet on the ground and not letting ideality stand in the way of working practically.

That's fair, but eventually, the realization is going to have to be that the scales can't be balanced by continuing to load everything onto only one side of it, in the service of working practically.

That's what makes the Republican position so seductively easy: there is no pretense to wanting to balance any economic scales between the classes, and as with the word 'class" itself, they have basically made "equity" a dirty word.

[pfife]

WAPO push alert that an appeals court overturned Harvey Weinsteins conviction and ordered a new trial.

[gehringer_2]

2 minutes ago, pfife said:

WAPO push alert that an appeals court overturned Harvey Weinsteins conviction and ordered a new trial.

apparently over admission of evidence about events not at trial. Unless CA lets him off also he's not going anywhere.

[oblong]

41 minutes ago, pfife said:

WAPO push alert that an appeals court overturned Harvey Weinsteins conviction and ordered a new trial.

He had multiple convictions though so this only affects one of them.  He's still staying on Rikers and getting pounded probably.

 

[pfife]

Good!  Thanks guys, I don't know much about his case honestly but it's good to know he isn't going anywhere near free because of this.  

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

He had multiple convictions though so this only affects one of them.  He's still staying on Rikers and getting pounded probably.

 

And not in da butt

[chasfh]

Assuming this story is on the level about its effectiveness, this is a great idea and hopefully all schools will be doing this soon. I can’t think of any real down sides to this. Read the story in a private window on your favorite browser.