Bob Macadoo

What? So can anyone else who retires and then goes back to work. Although your 80k is made up as usual. 2.5 days every week with the tax implications won't get you there. Might as well not have retired if you need 80k as it's more like 3.5 days every week. Why are teachers to be different though, just asking. By the way how much of your earnings do you contribute to retirement? 20%, 25%? You keep chanting this and I've repeated that's in "your" control......get to it......or is ranting about it more satisfying?

Sorry. It's amazing the ignorance people actually project when it comes to unions. (See Post 1302) They invent all these unimagineable benefits and ascribe them without proof then promotes them as true allowing it to spread like a virus......like in this thread.If you're going to get mad at union benefits......be mad at real ones.....not Wonderland invented ones.

Does GM? Does Air Canada?The question: Do employers contribute their contracted share into a pension plan after the employee has retired? The answer: whaddayou think?

Why would you think that? Does that happen in your "private" plan? Again why do people think its bizzaro world in the realm of union benefit?

I think its priceless you can make this comment here juxtaposed with your comments in the teacher's thread. Mental block much?

What is so hard for people to believe that when you retire you are no longer a "union goon" and delineated from the benefits afforded full members? Do you really believe these people get gov't kickbacks for no contribution on their part? Maybe you think pensions are some sort of endless welfare that is graced on unionists alone.Its no wonder unions are seen in the light they are if you can suppose they eat babies.....as logic cannot apply to union life ever. They are somehow the illuminati beyond the reach of mortal men.

Is this on purpose or a mistake? The contract <> retirement employment. It is not currently a term nor would become a term unless the gov't agreed. So I ask again.....why not write your MLA and suggest this regulation change.

You mean like pork for Irving?

Might be good for members today/this quarter but like gov'ts are supposed to do it might impact future sustainability.

Again.....maybe you don't listen......it's easy to stop......you don't even have to table a bill as hiring criteria are a regulation already. My rum buddy can be barred with the stroke of a pen, yet is not. Maybe they are the legislator's rum buddy too.

Are the wrong cars selected simply because of location selection? GM does this repeatedly (eg. Yukon, Camaro, etc.) but they continue on in profitability. Are you saying it is due to Board (ie gov't) interference?Even GM/Ford have fixed their Supply Chain problems in 50 years....what's wrong here?

A union is not on their own path....they represent the collective betterment of their members. If that means ensuring enough new entries are made to support those in retirement or a general toss of the Liberals to ease next contract negotiations so be it. Those items are not in conflict with the requirements of the membership even if you may disagree with methodology.On another note, one should regard ON on teacher relations on what can happen and what can be salvaged after scorched earth.

What was negotiated? That retirees must be selected for spot work? Not correct. How is BCTF stopping them from introducing regulation? You don't even need legislation.....guess when there's no one to blame their mistakes on they are a little gunshy.

That logic holds if you presuppose that money is being held due to foresight of incompetance, rather than tightwaddedness or apathy or malice. Are you sure of this assumption, and if so should not upper management shake up supply chain to effect the correct result?

Again....nothing is stopping the gov't from making it a permanent decision. If they aren't it kinda says something.

You are ascribing the wrong intent to actions. You are correct the union represents most often the largest demographic of teachers, in order to keep their job (just like any politician). It just so happens the largest demographic are senior teachers. Retired teachers are NOT bargained for. Any benefits negotiated are not b/c they are entering retirement for double dipping. Do you think the union will bargain for end of career benefits once the boomers are gone? They'd be voted out pretty fast.

It's not a bargaining issue for the union as retirees are no longer under collective representation. The gov't could legislate that retirees are prohibited from spot work and the union wouldn't lift a finger. They won't though I bet.....why would that be I wonder?

Using logic, you just equated being held morally responsible with targeting for death. Please be clear in your diatribe logic next time please. The subject is Netanyahu's apathy for life not retribution......again please be precise in your logic. When you write less than a dissertation its easy to spot the holes.Postscript: I concede you might have also said that holding responsible is asimilar to targeting for death but I played the percentages.

You infer apathy to a situation rather than intent.....well debated sir.....like any true lawyer.

Hard to say....why don't we ask FLA?....and the 98 midterms worked out as well as could be expected.....including the heave ho of Newt.....so....

....probably being seen as an obstructionist president is worse than obstructionist congress for the polls....and presidential elections are not local.

"Don't get mad, get even."

<golf clap> Well served...well served</golf clap>

He did twice.....damn him for respecting the role of legislative bodies......what a monster.

As with many other bill rights...states can place administrative control to such if they choose, like prohibit inmates from possessing weapons......otherwise Cdn posession of weapons under 'merican jurisdiction is all aces.....have at 'er. Typical though of "your ilk" to not admit error. Enjoy.