News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

If an election was held today, who would you vote for?

  • UCP

    Votes: 8 13.3%

  • NDP

    Votes: 44 73.3%

  • Liberal

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Alberta Party

    Votes: 4 6.7%

  • Undecided

    Votes: 4 6.7%
  • Total voters
    60
I expected NDP support would have some kind of a dip in Edmonton, but as long as the dip doesn't drop to the point of losing seats, winning seats in Calgary is all that matters. I've seen a fair number of Edmontonians on social media complaining about Nenshi changing the culture of the party with a few people complaining that the NDP would become a 'Calgary type party', and stating that they weren't going to vote. We'll see if they actually do that in the end. I think the NDP's numbers will drop somewhat in the Edmonton ridings, but they'll keep all of their seats. It's really all about winning extra seats in Calgary.
 
I actually think the bigger factor for the next provincial election will not be who's leading the ANDP, but who is Prime Minister. Most likely it will be Poilievre. My sense is that Canadians are more likely to split their vote at the provincial and federal levels. I don't think it's coincidence that Albertans turfed the provincial Conservatives while Harper was PM. And PM Trudeau has always made it awkward for the ANDP. At the very least, where does all the right-wing populist anger get directed when conservatives control every level of government?
 
DougB said:
Much of the opposition to the UCP is from public sector unions. How long will their marriage of convenience to Nenshi last?

Only in delusional unionland has AHS been "hacked"? It's budget is up 4.4%: https://www.alberta.ca/budget-highlights. That is lower than inflation plus population growth but that will be true of all budgets everywhere as inflation erodes living standards.

I suspect Nenshi's thin skin will get him before an NDP civil war takes root. Will the party be on the hook to cover his legal bills when he defames a real estate developer or ridesharing service or whomever doesn't bow down to his superior GPA?
Click to expand...
It has been incredibly demoralizing. No job is fun when the top leadership continually pushes a moronic agenda
 
Ramsayite said:
Or grow a spine, form a union, and advocate to improve their job through collective actions.
Click to expand...
Advocacy or collective action would be the opposite of growing a spine. The true test of one's worth in the job market is to see how one would fare elsewhere.
 
DougB said:
Advocacy or collective action would be the opposite of growing a spine. The true test of one's worth in the job market is to see how one would fare elsewhere.
Click to expand...
The number of companies that react rationally to hiring and wage considerations is low.

The number of times one hears "we had big plans for you", or you get a counter offer of a big raise. And its like, if you had big plans, or were willing to spend more for retention: why didn't you tell me/do it in the first place!

That being said, I think collective action is very important, and discounted greatly. In absence of that, we can do things to make the market function better, by removing the information disparity between potential hires and companies.

1) Full salary and compensation transparency: everyone's wages and compensation, and job titles, is public information
2) Job descriptions must include salary ranges on them, and if someone was recently in the same or similar role and left, what they were paid.

The job market like any market is full of market failures, and you can solve them in many ways. For many roles, collective bargaining is what makes sense. For others, individual bargaining does. A ten year process engineer negotiating is very different than a 6 month amazon packer.
 
darwink said:
The number of companies that react rationally to hiring and wage considerations is low.

The number of times one hears "we had big plans for you", or you get a counter offer of a big raise. And its like, if you had big plans, or were willing to spend more for retention: why didn't you tell me/do it in the first place!

That being said, I think collective action is very important, and discounted greatly. In absence of that, we can do things to make the market function better, by removing the information disparity between potential hires and companies.

1) Full salary and compensation transparency: everyone's wages and compensation, and job titles, is public information
2) Job descriptions must include salary ranges on them, and if someone was recently in the same or similar role and left, what they were paid.

The job market like any market is full of market failures, and you can solve them in many ways. For many roles, collective bargaining is what makes sense. For others, individual bargaining does. A ten year process engineer negotiating is very different than a 6 month amazon packer.
Click to expand...
I just went through this, went from a role with a multi-national company where I had to negotiate my salary every year and left for a union job where my pay is structured and doesn't mean I have to hold my hat out every year and beg for more. the multi-national offered significantly more when I resigned, I still left. Companies, at least the ones I've worked for, do not place nearly the importance on retention as they should.

Compensation transparency would be smart, when I applied for the union job I knew the pay range going in. I still negotiated where I thought I was on that pay range, so I went in eyes wide open.
 
DougB said:
Advocacy or collective action would be the opposite of growing a spine. The true test of one's worth in the job market is to see how one would fare elsewhere.
Click to expand...

I'd call this an archaic, decrepit, or out-of-date perspective if it wasn't for the fact that people in the 1950s would have, on average, exhibited a more nuanced understanding of collective actions than you appear to.

So I think this is really just evidence of how effective capitalist propaganda has been at manufacturing the opinions of an entire generation while erasing historical literacy.

You should spend an afternoon learning about the history of collective action and what it has brought about in contemporary society. I don't think any other responses necessary until you do your homework.
 
The issue with discarding collective action and instead embracing the free market of labour is companies actively prevent you from accessing the information needed to compete. I have worked for companies that explicitly state its against policy for employees to share compensation information with each other. When one side monopolizes there is no free market.
 
JoeUrban said:
there is no free market.
Click to expand...
You would think shareholders would be interested in how compensation compares. Granted there are expenditures but yeah... There just isn't a free market, industries get subsidized and propped up. Different governments pick different winners and thus let some be losers. It is what it is.
 
Mountain Man said:
Sounds like the right wing crazies think we need guns, cause that's going so well in the US. Article
Click to expand...
Read about her tour through the constituency associations to find out who she is beholden to... The "I just don't want the NDP" crowd should realize who they're getting into bed with.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top