Binding mediation? Compulsory agreement? What?

[Neomalthusian]

http://www.pressherald.com/2017/11/27/farmworkers-unions-in-california-win-lawsuit-on-state-role-in-contract-disputes/

 

Let's start with the basics.  A contract is, most simply, an agreement between two parties.  It means the parties actually agree to the terms in it. 

 

Mediation is supposed to mean unbiased, independent, non-binding assistance in reaching agreement between two parties who haven't yet reached agreement.

 

In this case, the two actual parties to a contract are supposed to be farm owners and the farm workers they employ.  The "agreement" is supposed to be between them.  When the farmworkers' union steps in, the contract becomes between the farm owners and the union.  The workers get whatever the union negotiates on their behalf.  And now with this law, the contract is actually just a set of terms dictated by yet another party, which is some mediator flown in from the FMCS in Washington D.C.

 

California lawmakers don't care what words mean.  They say a contract can now be coerced upon one or both parties even when one or both parties genuinely don't agree to the terms.  It means they are coerced into signing a contract and stating they agree to terms with which they factually do not agree.  Whether the terms are unsatisfactory to the workers themselves, or the union, or the employer, or all three, is beside the point.  The law, now upheld by the California Supreme Court, gives ultimately unilateral coercive power to some random mediator so that employers can be forced to buy labor with terms they don't accept, and workers can be forced to work under conditions with which they might not agree.  Don't like it, workers?  Too bad, you'll have to quit your job if you don't like it.  Don't like it, farm owners?  Too bad, you'll have to sell your farm and do something else with your life if you don't like it.

 

And the California Supreme Court agrees.  They are completely crazy.

 

 

 

[sole result]

55 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

http://www.pressherald.com/2017/11/27/farmworkers-unions-in-california-win-lawsuit-on-state-role-in-contract-disputes/

 

Let's start with the basics.  A contract is, most simply, an agreement between two parties.  It means the parties actually agree to the terms in it. 

 

Intellectual social tunnel vision and time relativity believer. ^^^^^

[BeAChooser]

1 hour ago, Neomalthusian said:

http://www.pressherald.com/2017/11/27/farmworkers-unions-in-california-win-lawsuit-on-state-role-in-contract-disputes/

 

Let's start with the basics.  A contract is, most simply, an agreement between two parties.  It means the parties actually agree to the terms in it. 

 

Mediation is supposed to mean unbiased, independent, non-binding assistance in reaching agreement between two parties who haven't yet reached agreement.

 

In this case, the two actual parties to a contract are supposed to be farm owners and the farm workers they employ.  The "agreement" is supposed to be between them.  When the farmworkers' union steps in, the contract becomes between the farm owners and the union.  The workers get whatever the union negotiates on their behalf.  And now with this law, the contract is actually just a set of terms dictated by yet another party, which is some mediator flown in from the FMCS in Washington D.C.

 

California lawmakers don't care what words mean.  They say a contract can now be coerced upon one or both parties even when one or both parties genuinely don't agree to the terms.  It means they are coerced into signing a contract and stating they agree to terms with which they factually do not agree.  Whether the terms are unsatisfactory to the workers themselves, or the union, or the employer, or all three, is beside the point.  The law, now upheld by the California Supreme Court, gives ultimately unilateral coercive power to some random mediator so that employers can be forced to buy labor with terms they don't accept, and workers can be forced to work under conditions with which they might not agree.  Don't like it, workers?  Too bad, you'll have to quit your job if you don't like it.  Don't like it, farm owners?  Too bad, you'll have to sell your farm and do something else with your life if you don't like it.

 

And the California Supreme Court agrees.  They are completely crazy.

 

California is rapidly becoming a socialist hell.

[sole result]

Just now, BeAChooser said:

 

California is rapidly becoming a socialist hell.

Again with the becoming nonsense. it took place over a century ago.

[BeAChooser]

11 minutes ago, sole result said:

Again with the becoming nonsense. it took place over a century ago.

 

No, that's nonsense.

 

And my comment refers to the fact that while the state has been increasingly socialist for some time, it hasn't exactly become "hell" yet.

That takes time.

Because it takes time to burn through the seed corn and poison the fields.

[sole result]

1 minute ago, BeAChooser said:

 

No, that's nonsense.

 

And my comment refers to the fact that while the state has been increasingly socialist for some time, it hasn't exactly become "hell" yet.

That takes time.

Because it takes time to burn through the seed corn and poison the fields.

Hell is a metaphor for what physical result of living simultaneously separated now as biologically arriving one lifetime at a time ir the order of everyone's ancestry so far?

[BeAChooser]

Just now, sole result said:

Hell is a metaphor for what physical result of living simultaneously separated now?

 

Whatever.

[sole result]

2 minutes ago, BeAChooser said:

 

Whatever.

See you won't discredit your own beliefs when they are historically inaccurate as time is considered stationary as it always has been without human interpretation it cannot be intellectually believed so far as evident with use of clocks and calendars naming each spin of the planet a day in the life of this species getting eternally separated now.

 

Deep time, real time, actually existing not arguing potential differences of interpreting hypothetical facts established generations ago.