On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:49:22 -0600, "Gregory Morrow" >
wrote:

>
>Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 14:10:30 -0600, "Gregory Morrow" >
>> wrote:

>> >Speaking of wierd laws, until 30 years you could not buy meat in Chicago
>> >after 6:00 PM, on Sunday not at all...
>>
>> That was a butchers union rule. Meat couldn't be sold unless there
>> was a union member on duty. I remember the meat being covered in
>> white paper at 5:59. But back then many women didn't work full time
>> so it was a bit easier. Today it would be tough on families where both
>> parents work. It was a dumb rule.
>
>
>Thanks, Lou, I thought it was probaly a union thang...

Unions still control things that make no sense. Plumbers objecting to
PVC pipe is just crazy. Although I hate all the cameras going up on
the streets the FOP makes some pretty lame claims against them. The
list could go on.

>Another question (this has also been asked in chi.general): at the several
>Walgreens I patronise I'll sometimes hear an intercom announcement saying
>"Help needed in the shaved meat department". What on earth could this mean?
>I guess I should ask somebody that works there, it must a "code" message or
>something...

I'd assume it's a code. I worked at Osco for a few months 30 years
ago. You asked for Mr. Blue, or Green, or whoever depending on what
was going on. There were other codes but I don't remember most. The
price tags were all coded with the "Charleston" code. Each letter
stood for a digit and reflected store cost. Employees paid cost +10%
IIRC. I'm sure now it's all in the computers.

>Good to see ya, you've been kinda "scarce" around here lately...

Thanks, I've been lurking but more interested in the real life news
currently. I'll be around.

Lou

On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:56:17 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:27:11 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

>> That was a butchers union rule. Meat couldn't be sold unless there
>> was a union member on duty. I remember the meat being covered in
>> white paper at 5:59. But back then many women didn't work full time
>> so it was a bit easier. Today it would be tough on families where both
>> parents work. It was a dumb rule.
>>
>> Lou
>
>i'd say the butchers had a mighty good union at that time.

I don't know about good, but they were strong. As long as they were
doing all the cutting and wrapping I see no reason to control sales
hours.

Lou

In article > ,
says...
>
> sf wrote:
> >
> > If I ever tried that job, I'd probably be in that category. You can
> > only imagine the abuse you'd have to take from customers. From what
> > I've seen in this thread, it would be more than I'd be willing to put
> > up with.
>
> I have not been a cashier per se, but have done counter service. I was a
> part time clerk in a department store for two years. Some people are an
> absolute pleasure to deal with. Some are just there. Then there is a
> minority who are just a royal pain in the butt.

I should have gone into hostage negotiation. I always always good at
defusing things with customers when I did the retail thing for a few
years.

On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:23:57 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:56:17 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:27:11 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>>> That was a butchers union rule. Meat couldn't be sold unless there
>>> was a union member on duty. I remember the meat being covered in
>>> white paper at 5:59. But back then many women didn't work full time
>>> so it was a bit easier. Today it would be tough on families where both
>>> parents work. It was a dumb rule.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>>i'd say the butchers had a mighty good union at that time.
>
> I don't know about good, but they were strong. As long as they were
> doing all the cutting and wrapping I see no reason to control sales
> hours.
>
> Lou

'strong' would be a good word for it.

i know we possibly differ on this, but i think i'd prefer the times when
unions were stronger than the state they are in today. many people are
getting screwed today who would have been better off then even if they
didn't belong to a union.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:23:57 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 17:56:17 GMT, blake murphy
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 15:27:11 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
> >
> >>> That was a butchers union rule. Meat couldn't be sold unless there
> >>> was a union member on duty. I remember the meat being covered in
> >>> white paper at 5:59. But back then many women didn't work full time
> >>> so it was a bit easier. Today it would be tough on families where both
> >>> parents work. It was a dumb rule.
> >>>
> >>> Lou
> >>
> >>i'd say the butchers had a mighty good union at that time.
> >
> > I don't know about good, but they were strong. As long as they were
> > doing all the cutting and wrapping I see no reason to control sales
> > hours.
> >
> > Lou
>
> 'strong' would be a good word for it.
>
> i know we possibly differ on this, but i think i'd prefer the times when
> unions were stronger than the state they are in today. many people are
> getting screwed today who would have been better off then even if they
> didn't belong to a union.


Hey blake, I'm not meaning to be all coy and stuff but how do ya like my new
sig...???

;-p


--
Best
Greg

"The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other
people's money."~~~~Margaret Thatcher

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:24:40 -0600, "Gregory Morrow" >
wrote:
>
>
>Hey blake, I'm not meaning to be all coy and stuff but how do ya like my new
>sig...???
>
I like it. However, capitalists became avid socialists when the chips
were down.



--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Mar 29, 4:55*pm, "Jean B." > wrote:
> The Ranger wrote:
> > Jean B. > wrote in message ...
> > [snip]
> >> I was in the parking lot, waiting for my daughter, when an SUV pulled up
> >> beside me and stopped in the middle of the one-lane route past the door.

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:30:16 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:23:57 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

>>
>> I don't know about good, but they were strong. As long as they were
>> doing all the cutting and wrapping I see no reason to control sales
>> hours.
>>
>> Lou
>
>'strong' would be a good word for it.
>
>i know we possibly differ on this, but i think i'd prefer the times when
>unions were stronger than the state they are in today. many people are
>getting screwed today who would have been better off then even if they
>didn't belong to a union.

We don't differ as much as you're probably assuming. I'm a union
member. So are two of my siblings. My dad was a union welder for
International Harvester in the 50's. He still carries a card with a
different union. I've also been in two unions myself. That doesn't
mean I think everything about unions is right.

Lou

On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:21:29 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:30:16 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 14:23:57 -0500, Lou Decruss wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I don't know about good, but they were strong. As long as they were
>>> doing all the cutting and wrapping I see no reason to control sales
>>> hours.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>>'strong' would be a good word for it.
>>
>>i know we possibly differ on this, but i think i'd prefer the times when
>>unions were stronger than the state they are in today. many people are
>>getting screwed today who would have been better off then even if they
>>didn't belong to a union.
>
> We don't differ as much as you're probably assuming. I'm a union
> member. So are two of my siblings. My dad was a union welder for
> International Harvester in the 50's. He still carries a card with a
> different union. I've also been in two unions myself. That doesn't
> mean I think everything about unions is right.
>
> Lou

nope, not everything. but i think the pendulum has swung way too far in
the other direction. old-time union members would be appalled at some of
the shit pulled by, say, wall-mart (and many others).

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
>>
>> We don't differ as much as you're probably assuming. I'm a union
>> member. So are two of my siblings. My dad was a union welder for
>> International Harvester in the 50's. He still carries a card with a
>> different union. I've also been in two unions myself. That doesn't
>> mean I think everything about unions is right.
>>
>> Lou
>
> nope, not everything. but i think the pendulum has swung way too far in
> the other direction. old-time union members would be appalled at some of
> the shit pulled by, say, wall-mart (and many others).
>
> your pal,
> blake

I have no use for present unions and have seen what they do and have
"negotiated" with them also. I put negotiated in quotes because the deal was
made before the alleged negotiation charade took place. BUT, I'm also
thankful for what unions did many years ago. Without them, we'd still be
working 6 day weeks, ten hours a day. The pendulum swung too far and is
maybe now correcting.

On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 14:43:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> "blake murphy" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> We don't differ as much as you're probably assuming. I'm a union
>>> member. So are two of my siblings. My dad was a union welder for
>>> International Harvester in the 50's. He still carries a card with a
>>> different union. I've also been in two unions myself. That doesn't
>>> mean I think everything about unions is right.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>
>> nope, not everything. but i think the pendulum has swung way too far in
>> the other direction. old-time union members would be appalled at some of
>> the shit pulled by, say, wall-mart (and many others).
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> I have no use for present unions and have seen what they do and have
> "negotiated" with them also. I put negotiated in quotes because the deal was
> made before the alleged negotiation charade took place. BUT, I'm also
> thankful for what unions did many years ago. Without them, we'd still be
> working 6 day weeks, ten hours a day. The pendulum swung too far and is
> maybe now correcting.

in view of the give-backs and whatnot forced on the auto and newspaper
workers, it's hard to view the unions as 'too powerful' today.

your pal,
blake

On Apr 4, 1:43*pm, "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote:
> "blake murphy" > wrote in message
>
> >> We don't differ as much as you're probably assuming. *I'm a union
> >> member. *So are two of my siblings. *My dad was a union welder for
> >> International Harvester in the 50's. *He still carries a card with a
> >> different union. *I've also been in two unions myself. *That doesn't
> >> mean I think everything about unions is right.
>
> >> Lou
>
> > nope, not everything. *but i think the pendulum has swung way too far in
> > the other direction. *old-time union members would be appalled at some of
> > the shit pulled by, say, wall-mart (and many others).
>
> > your pal,
> > blake
>
> I have no use for present unions and have seen what they do and have
> "negotiated" with them also. I put negotiated in quotes because the deal was
> made before the alleged negotiation charade took place. *BUT, I'm also
> thankful for what unions did many years ago. *Without them, we'd still be
> working 6 day weeks, ten hours a day. *The pendulum swung too far and is
> maybe now correcting.

One problem with modern unions is this:

When stores like Target opened as non-union, instead of plumbers and
auto workers sabotaging them, they shopped there. Union wages are
only exorbitant when you have two tiers of wages, one union, one not.

--Bryan

"Bobo Bonobo®" > wrote in message

One problem with modern unions is this:

When stores like Target opened as non-union, instead of plumbers and
auto workers sabotaging them, they shopped there. Union wages are
only exorbitant when you have two tiers of wages, one union, one not.

***********************************************

True, I always made more money than the union people. What a shame they are
held back by the lowest common denominator.

blake murphy wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 14:43:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>> I have no use for present unions and have seen what they do and have
>> "negotiated" with them also. I put negotiated in quotes because the deal was
>> made before the alleged negotiation charade took place. BUT, I'm also
>> thankful for what unions did many years ago. Without them, we'd still be
>> working 6 day weeks, ten hours a day. The pendulum swung too far and is
>> maybe now correcting.
>
> in view of the give-backs and whatnot forced on the auto and newspaper
> workers, it's hard to view the unions as 'too powerful' today.
>
> your pal,
> blake


It does make you wonder why, then, builders buy rotten
plasterboard from China and shipping costs don't make it
cost prohibitive. SOMETHING is making ours too expensive!

gloria p

On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 12:39:36 -0600, Puester >
wrote:
>
>It does make you wonder why, then, builders buy rotten
>plasterboard from China and shipping costs don't make it
>cost prohibitive. SOMETHING is making ours too expensive!

So you want us to go back to having an underclass? Look at how the
workers who produce those products in china live, then get back to me.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

"Puester" > wrote in message
>
> It does make you wonder why, then, builders buy rotten plasterboard from
> China and shipping costs don't make it cost prohibitive. SOMETHING is
> making ours too expensive!
>
> gloria p

A few years ago I saw on a TV show how it is made . They bring in the
gypsum rock by ship. If the raw material is closer to the factory, it is
probably about as cheap to ship the finished product, especially to the west
coast.

On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 12:39:36 -0600, Puester wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 14:43:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>> I have no use for present unions and have seen what they do and have
>>> "negotiated" with them also. I put negotiated in quotes because the deal was
>>> made before the alleged negotiation charade took place. BUT, I'm also
>>> thankful for what unions did many years ago. Without them, we'd still be
>>> working 6 day weeks, ten hours a day. The pendulum swung too far and is
>>> maybe now correcting.
>>
>> in view of the give-backs and whatnot forced on the auto and newspaper
>> workers, it's hard to view the unions as 'too powerful' today.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> It does make you wonder why, then, builders buy rotten
> plasterboard from China and shipping costs don't make it
> cost prohibitive. SOMETHING is making ours too expensive!
>
> gloria p

too expensive for what?

don't american plasterboard workers (whatever you'd call them) deserve to
make a decent living?

your pal,
blake

"Becca" > wrote in message
...
> Gregory Morrow wrote:
>> My main stupormarket is steps from my corner tavern, I find that having a
>> drink or two before going shopping takes something of the "edge" off of
>> the
>> shopping "experience"...also in the evening (which is when I generally
>> go)
>> shopping is less stress - inducing, you don't get the yuppie stroller
>> mafia
>> or the old-ladies-in-your-way sets that can be so annoying.
>>
>> Natcherly I tend to spend a bit more money when I'm "happy", but it's
>> worth
>> it to me...
>>
>> I also like shopping very early in the morning, say 6-7:00 AM, I normally
>> have the store to myself...
>
>
> Well, I can forgive the old ladies since I hope to be one some day, but no
> matter where you go, someone in front of you will be dragging their feet.
> One of my friends refers to them as walking cholesterol.


We call it the Zephyrhills Shuffle here.

TFM®

blake replied to gloria:

>> It does make you wonder why, then, builders buy rotten
>> plasterboard from China and shipping costs don't make it
>> cost prohibitive. SOMETHING is making ours too expensive!
>>
>
> too expensive for what?
>
> don't american plasterboard workers (whatever you'd call them) deserve to
> make a decent living?


Too expensive to compete with the rotten drywall from China, even with
overseas shipping costs tacked on.

The real problem I see is the fact that the builder explicitly lied to the
home buyers, telling them that the drywall had been manufactured in the USA.
I'm sure the buyers would have been willing to spend a bit more to have a
house in which it's safe to live. But I think it's more likely that the
builder just cut corners to increase his profit.

Bob