Your typical Republican power in its Turkish form unsurprisingly against People

[LeftEyeNine]

Following the proposal (and the eventual approval) of the legislation that added aviation sector into those banned from going on strike, the employees of Turkish Airlines (THY) protesting such proposal by going on strike that led to a lot of flights getting cancelled a week or two ago in Ataturk Airport were shown the door by THY, mostly via SMS (yes, SMS) to the employees sacked.

The overly agressive and deliberately totalitarianist intentions and activities of AKP government are nothing new however this certain unfortunate incident bears the potential of international awareness.

That globally yours steaming pile of airlines that was one of the first government-partnered corporations to be directed by managers favored by the current Islamist, proUSA (no offense intended at American fellows) and conspirative government sponsors huge football/soccer teams such as Barcelona and Manchester United.

What I'd ask for, for the sake of a couple of hundered THY employees (if not grown any larger) who were fired for reasons that have nothing to do with human rights, is from you Spanish-speaking fellows to translate a certain English open-letter text that will be addressing Barcelona FC at a petition site asking them for reviewing/cancelling their sponsorship agreement with THY.

Anybody, please ?

Thank you.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I like Erdogan's AKP government. They are planning on banning abortion after the 1st trimester later this week.

[LeftEyeNine]

Yes, that's another story.

Having killed 35 Kurdish people, after his ordinary indifference to the situations his government is to blame for (quote: "we paid for their compensations, what more ?"), he took a new route to spin the agenda of the day to somewhere safe, open to hot debate so that the former is forgotten.

Distancing ourselves from rationalist and scientific point of view every other day more and more, we now have put our fingers up women's vaginas.

That's off-topic anyway. The request stands.

[Strike For The South]

Where is the letter

[Kralizec]

Strike, are you fluent in Spanish?

On topic: labour law is something that I happen to be interested in, allthough I don't really follow developments in other countries. Link please? I vaguely recall that a labour dispute with air controllers happened in the USA under Reagan and that it was resolved by firing them all without prejudice. It happened before I was born so my memory may be off.

[Strike For The South]

*Looks at Fenrings post*

*Wonders about the hostitlity*

*Looks back at LENs post*

*realizes he needs to translate going the oppisite direction and in front of native speakers*

I am fluent enough to be dropped in Mexico and fluent enough to put it on a job application. I can certainly find someone fluent enough willing to translate the letter if I felt as if I couldn't convey the message properly

I'll certainly admit my grammar is shit, but that's the same in English LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

[Tiaexz]

LeftEyeNine, you might be able to answer this, why are they pro-US?

From what I was lead to believe from the news coverage from a while ago during the whole election when they first came into the power, the current government is Anti-Western opposed to the previous secular Government which was meant to be the Pro-US government, and there was a big hoo-aah over Turkey lurching over to the radical islam becoming an "islamistic despot" regime.

Then news coverage later said about Turkey becoming less-EU interested, then there was a ton of anti-Western, US and Israeli sentiment during the whole Gaze Flotilla incident which was mostly state sponsored through back channels by the Turkish government, how human rights campaigners and poets were locked up and were condemned by nations such the USA...

So please forgive me, from the perception and information that is delivered to me, your current government is Anti-US, so you saying it is Pro-US is a really weird opposite.

[ICantSpellDawg]

LeftEyeNine, you might be able to answer this, why are they pro-US?

From what I was lead to believe from the news coverage from a while ago during the whole election when they first came into the power, the current government is Anti-Western opposed to the previous secular Government which was meant to be the Pro-US government, and there was a big hoo-aah over Turkey lurching over to the radical islam becoming an "islamistic despot" regime.

Then news coverage later said about Turkey becoming less-EU interested, then there was a ton of anti-Western, US and Israeli sentiment during the whole Gaze Flotilla incident which was mostly state sponsored through back channels by the Turkish government, how human rights campaigners and poets were locked up and were condemned by nations such the USA...

So please forgive me, from the perception and information that is delivered to me, your current government is Anti-US, so you saying it is Pro-US is a really weird opposite.

Turkey is a pro-U.S. country that is experimenting with religious individuals being part their established secular government. They've gone from being an extremely strongly pro-U.S. government to being just a strongly pro-U.S. government over the past 15 years, due to economic advancement. U.S. policy people are making a stink about it and it is absurd. They make it sound like Turkey isn't still a strong ally just because they don't rubber stamp apartheid Israeli policy and they now formulate their own foreign policy related to the region. They've become a less bulletproof U.S. ally and people think that means they are no longer a U.S. ally when nothing could be further from the truth.

[Skullhead]

we now have put our fingers up women's vaginas.

???

Turkey is a pro-U.S. country that is experimenting with religious individuals being part their established secular government. They've gone from being an extremely strongly pro-U.S. government to being just a strongly pro-U.S. government over the past 15 years, due to economic advancement. U.S. policy people are making a stink about it and it is absurd. They make it sound like Turkey isn't still a strong ally just because they don't rubber stamp apartheid Israeli policy and they now formulate their own foreign policy related to the region. They've become a less bulletproof U.S. ally and people think that means they are no longer a U.S. ally when nothing could be further from the truth.

How come US politicians defend Israel like it is the 51th state?

Distancing ourselves from rationalist and scientific point of view every other day more and more

I always smile a little when people call their own point of view the rational and scientific POV™ .


Besides, I quite like the ban on strikes in the aviation sector. Strikes there are very annoying and expansive for people who have nothing to do with it. Strikes are so 19th century.

I like Erdogan's AKP government. They are planning on banning abortion after the 1st trimester later this week.

3 months to decide is ofc not enough

[Greyblades]

Besides, I quite like the ban on strikes in the aviation sector. Strikes there are very annoying and expansive for people who have nothing to do with it. Strikes are so 19th century.

So what should they do instead to protest against thier employers?

[Fragony]

Yes, that's another story.

Having killed 35 Kurdish people, after his ordinary indifference to the situations his government is to blame for (quote: "we paid for their compensations, what more ?"), he took a new route to spin the agenda of the day to somewhere safe, open to hot debate so that the former is forgotten.

Distancing ourselves from rationalist and scientific point of view every other day more and more, we now have put our fingers up women's vaginas.

That's off-topic anyway. The request stands.

Killing Kurdish people is a bit of a bad habit of Turkey, it isn't very nice imho

[Kadagar_AV]

Killing Kurdish people is a bit of a bad habit of Turkey, it isn't very nice imho

Isn't it more like the national sport, rather than a habit?

[Skullhead]

So what should they do instead to protest against thier employers?

Something that doesn't cost a fortune for people that have absolutely nothing to do with it, I guess.

[Kralizec]

Something that doesn't cost a fortune for people that have absolutely nothing to do with it, I guess.

You're pretty young- so the obvious question is: are you financially independant, and if not, who are you to criticize others who rely on themselves for their livelyhood when they're on strike for their labour conditions?

That said, I imagine that strikes in the aviation sector would be a pain for the customers. In the Dutch public transport sector a popular alternative is to simply stop collecting transit fees and let everyone travel for free; sadly I imagine there are too many practical difficulties for that to work in aviation

Blanket bans are bad though - strikes should be available as a last resort. And they'll happen anyway when the employees think that the stakes are high enough.

[Skullhead]

That said, I imagine that strikes in the aviation sector would be a pain for the customers.

Then we agree.

[Greyblades]

Something that doesn't cost a fortune for people that have absolutely nothing to do with it, I guess.

No such thing as far as anyone knows.

[Skullhead]

No such thing as far as anyone knows.

Meh, would you like it when your flight is cancelled because of some strike? What if you need the flight because someone you know is dying, or your wife is giving birth? Still like avation strikes?

[Kralizec]

Meh, would you like it when your flight is cancelled because of some strike? What if you need the flight because someone you know is dying, or your wife is giving birth? Still like avation strikes?

Yeah, but what if one of the would-be passengers was actually a terrorist, and postponing the flight gives the security services enough time to discover his plot? Still dislike aviation strikes? Why do you hate freedom?

Labour strikes will always cause inconvenience to someone, and they should be deployed sparingly for that reason. I'm sure that you can think of a million hypothetical situations that are particulary sad, but the bottom line is that you want to prohibit strikes because they're a mild discomfort for you, personally. And that's not a good enough reason to deny people a basic tool to protect their rights and interests.

[Greyblades]

Meh, would you like it when your flight is cancelled because of some strike? What if you need the flight because someone you know is dying, or your wife is giving birth? Still like avation strikes?

No, I also dont like having my pay slashed, having whatever benefits I have taken away because someone higher up screwed the pooch and is cutting costs or having the owner threaten to replace me with a mexican who'll work for peanuts if I join a union. Blame the companies not the strikers.

[Skullhead]

No, I also dont like having my pay slashed, having whatever benefits I have taken away because someone higher up screwed the pooch and is cutting costs or having the owner threaten to replace me with a mexican who'll work for peanuts if I join a union. Blame the companies not the strikers.

Ah, why do you hate mexicans? If the employers want to hire mexicans it's their right to do so. If you don't like your pay and your boss is a jerk you might want to wonder if there isn't a better one in town.

[Greyblades]

Skullhead I didn't say I hate Mexicans, I never said I hate Mexicans and I don't even think I even implied I did. I used Mexicans as an example for a large influx of people that have entered into western society with a higher tolerance for poor condition than the average American/British male, I could have as easily said Pole, Indian, Chinese or Korean. I was pointing out the underlying premise that every job could be done by someone who is willing to do it for less and that people are being intimidated into accepting poorer working conditions and pay under the premise that they would be replaced with said Mexican/Pole/Indian/whatever.

That you have latched onto a none existent hatred instead of addressing the point indicates that you have no points with which to win your argument and that you seem to be relying on demonisation tells me you don't know what you are talking about.

If you don't like your pay and your boss is a jerk you might want to wonder if there isn't a better one in town.

In this economy most cases there isn't a better one in town, you take the crap jobs or you don't get any.

[Skullhead]

Skullhead I didn't say I hate Mexicans, I never said I hate Mexicans and I don't even think I even implied I did. I used Mexicans as an example for a large influx of people that have entered into western society with a higher tolerance for poor condition than the average American/British male, I could have as easily said Pole, Indian, Chinese or Korean. I was pointing out the underlying premise that every job could be done by someone who is willing to do it for less and that people are being intimidated into accepting poorer working conditions and pay under the premise that they would be replaced with said Mexican/Pole/Indian/whatever.

That you have latched onto a none existent hatred instead of addressing the point indicates that you have no points with which to win your argument and are relying on demonisation tells me you don't know what you are talking about.

That's how the market works. If someone will work for less he's hired. If someone sells the same goods at a lower price he will sell more than the competitors.

Skullhead I didn't say I hate Mexicans, I never said I hate Mexicans and I don't even think I even implied I did. I used Mexicans as an example for a large influx of people that have entered into western society with a higher tolerance for poor condition than the average American/British male.

Then either the Americans/Britons shouldn't let them in or become better competitors.

[Greyblades]

And? Life sucks then you die, doesn't mean I shouldn't try to do something about my situation and seeing as most don't have millions of dollars with which to legally combat unfair dismissals, whereas those who oppose them usually do, they have to rely on group actions like strikes and unions.

Then either the Americans/Britons shouldn't let them in or become better competitors.

Immigration is a governmental issue and you know who has most control over governmental issues? Businessmen who profit off it letting in immigrants. As for competition how do you compete against people who consider minimum wage luxury?

[Skullhead]

And? Life sucks then you die, doesn't mean I shouldn't try to do something about my situation and seeing as most don't have millions of dollars with which to legally combat unfair dismissals, whereas those who oppose them usually do, they have to rely on group actions like strikes and unions.

In certain sectors strikes should be outlawed. In the Netherlands it was forbidden up to 1980 for government officials and railroad workers to go on strike. I don't mind strikes at some sectors, but aerial sector, hospitals, railways etc is just not the place to do strikes. But don't be surpirised if the boss kicks you out when you go on strike.

[Greyblades]

Again: And? Life is crap, doesn't mean I should lie down and accept it. To be quite frank unless it's the emergency services any profession should be allowed to strike and that the Netherlands forbade it is not exactly an endorsement for an anti striker agenda to me.

But don't be surprised if the boss kicks you out when you go on strike.

...You really don't understand socioeconomics do you? If the entire workforce goes on strike for the business to fire the lot of them and train new employees it's usually more expensive than giving in, especially considering there's no absolute guarantee the new workers wont strike themselves eventually. That's why strikes are so effective.

[Skullhead]

To be quite frank unless it's the emergency services any profession should be allowed to strike

Ah, so there are exceptions? So not every profession has the right to go on strike?

[Kralizec]

Military personell still technically isn't allowed to go on strike, but I think that's it. Also I was under the impression that we were not the only ones banning strikes for government employees (there was an exception clause for that effect in some international treaties)

Even then, there's still judicial oversight. If a hospital's staff organises a strike without any regard for the patients, the hospital could have the courts forbid them to do so. I don't see the equivalence with airport strikes (except when and insofar it would lead to safety risks), let alone why a general ban would be necessary.

[Greyblades]

Ah, so there are exceptions? So not every profession has the right to go on strike?

Well yeah I dont think emergency services should strike if people could die because of it, though they really shouldnt have to considering they're, you know, considered heroes for saving lives and thier bosses arent concerned with staying in the black.

[Skullhead]

Well yeah I dont think emergency services should strike if people could die because of it.

So, not all should be able to go on strike and where to draw the line is unclear? That's what I think too, but I think airport and railway personnel shouldn't go on strike too, because, like hospitals, strikes there tend to harm bystanders more than the bosses.

[Ironside]

Well yeah I dont think emergency services should strike if people could die because of it, though they really shouldnt have to considering they're, you know, considered heroes for saving lives and thier bosses arent concerned with staying in the black.

They usually run it with significant understaffing to cover the life threating situations, but not the merly bad ones. And they don't shut down the entire city at the same time. They do have considerations for that line of work, even during a strike.