Discussion for article #224516
I’m just so pissed at these fascists I can only sputter curses like sons’ o’ bitches.
No, I’m not invoking Hitler, but most people know that among the prime targets of fascists in the 30s were labor unions and any kind of liberal parliamentarian leanings.
It’s part of that incestuous relationship of our SCOTUS and corporations that reign supreme. Yep, just keep accommodating the political right.
9 Likes
The Court’s ruling, which will make it harder for many domestic workers to earn higher wages,
Good luck to anyone who needs to find quality caretakers for their loved ones, elderly parents, disabled family members and child care in their home. How can anyone be attracted to this very important work when they are not valued?
5 Likes
The extreme right wing-nuts on the court are only doing the bidding of their handlers which to give every right and privilege to the corporation and robber baron and take away every right and privilege from the individual.
3 Likes
Can’t wait to see how Fat Tony’s home health care people lift him out of bed to change his soiled sheets. Not real work? BALLS!
1 Like
Which of the following is different from the other two?:
- ‘The home is not a Union workplace…’
- ‘Corporations are people…’
- ‘5 members of the SCOTUS are f^cking idiots…’
- is actually true.
jw1
6 Likes
Your point 1 is well taken. In order to obtain fair wages and not be subjected to the religious whims of individual households, we will likely see workers more eager to work in in-patient settings. This will make obtaining in home care more expensive for all and probably care denied for many.
Already, there already rumors of satanists and other republican groups are setting up codes of employment for jobs in a wide range of industries in order to intrude into the wage and reproductive rights of their employees. Some firms are forcing women into little more than forced chattel prostitution and sexual favors. Now that no laws being permitted to abridge corporate religious rights this is perfectly legal. Male employees are being asked to forego protection of the US Fair Labor Standards as a condition of employment, which is now perfectly legal by the religious corporation exclusion clause in this ruling.
That’s it! My father had low-paid health care workers assigned to him during his convalescence, and it took a couple of go rounds to get the right (read: reliable and compassionate) caregivers, which for him was wildly stressful given his fragile nature and the intricate home care he needed. But what do we as a society expect from people who get shit wages doing a difficult and demanding job like home heath care? How good of a job would you do at a $7.50 an hour job with no security, and no future? Here in Illinois they did something about it, it helped the workers, and saved the state money by improving retention, which led to better care (would you want a novice sent to home for post operative care?). And now these misanthropic flunkies for the oligarchy have fucked it all up. I can only hope that those five have all the quality care at the end of their lives that they deserve.
4 Likes
If there’s a god, a couple of minimum wage non-union workers will drop his fat medieval ass on his hard marble floors.
These guys will do anything: The Supremes in 1977 plainly said that employee unions, like regular unions have a right to charge the service fee for union representation. The Supremes now don’t want to take the heat for overruling that straight-forward opinion, so they write half an opinion trashing the 1977 opinion, and just leave it hanging.
Then they decide that the union was confused about who their boss is, and declare it not to be the state but the old people. So the union doesn’t know who its boss is. Who knew?
The lower courts can take a hint: They will invalidate agency clauses in public employee union contracts, on any pretext, knowing the Supremes will be OK with it.
Notice also that today The Supremes venture into a content-based approach to the first amendment. Forced participation in government unions violates the First Amendment because government spending is purely government. Forcing all the lawyers in the state to be part of an integrated bar association is not, because its not as governmental, and the forced association with people you don’t want to be associated with, is evidently of no constitutional significance. In the Hobby Lobby decision they validate the fundamentalist Christian views of the business owners, but warn that will not recognize other less mainstream religious prohibitions.
Are elected officials real employees? Because if they are not then I don’t think i should be paying for their health care or their free lunch for that matter. because they are not actually employees of the government but elected officials.
Funny how for years conservatives have complained about the lack of standards in society yet when Illinois and other states institute laws allowing domestics and home health care workers to organize and improve training thus improving quality for the patient, in particular the most vulnerable in society they seem to have a problem with it. The current court majority are the Monty Burns of judges. Remember when Alito was being confirmed. He spoke eloquently about his working class, immigrant background as his weeping wife sat off to the side. In every decision since he has been on the court he belies his background.
1 Like
The label, the greatest nation on Earth, would be in deep shit if it were brought before this court. They would say that we have the greatest corporations on Earth and that the Earth portion of the label infringed on those corporations personal feefees.
I know that’s a bit technical, so try searching feefees for more insight : )
Of course SCOTUS finds that work inside a home is “not real work.”
Because God forbid, we can’t let WIVES unionize!!! /snark/
So the Supreme Court has made it official: Ann Romney has never really worked a day in her life, Can Hilary Rosen have her job back now?
1 Like
The Roberts Supreme Court doesn’t even pretend to base their rulings on case law anymore.
“We do what we want and fuck everyone who has to clean up the mess.”
1 Like
If the home cannot be a union workplace then all those electricians, plumbers, and other tradespeople better not be union members…because clearly they are not allowed to work in a non-union environment under the terms of their membership and contracts. How utterly out of touch can a Supreme Court justice be. Apparently there is no limit.