[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: HP & DH Movie

[OctobersChild48 at aol.com]

In a message dated 1/16/2008 2:13:39 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes:

The  trouble with strikes, IMO, is that they hurt the very people who
are asking  for "peanuts," depriving them and their families of needed
income,  customers of needed services (in the case of teacher's
strikes, depriving  students of an education if the strike is
extended), and, in the case of  the writers' strike, extending to
people in related industries. All for the  sake of a complicated,
Internet-related problem that, IMO, ought to be  resolved without a
strike. The writers are not helping themselves or anyone  else by
striking because they can't earn an income when they're on the  picket
line, and they can't even write at home, as I understand it,  without
violating their union contract.

Surely, a writer's rights  include the right to write. That's what they
do. That's how they earn their  living. And, regardless of the validity
of their claim to the use of their  work <snip>
 
Sandy responds:
 
You don't seem to understand that it can't be resolved  without a strike. If 
it could be the writers would not be striking. And the  writers most certainly 
*are* helping themselves. I see that I presented it wrong  by using the 
terminology that they are asking for peanuts. Yes, they have a  right to write, but 
they also have the right to be fairly compensated for it.  The claim to the 
use of their work is as valid as any I know. They are being  ripped off and 
they have a right to take a stance against that. They are making  the sacrifice 
of not working now to better secure their future. As I said in a  previous 
post, a strike catches nobody by surprise - you do have time to prepare  for it. 
And you do get strike pay. And when you are on strike you do not walk  the 
picket line 24/7.  It is there 24/7 but the workers only walk it  several hours a 
day and then a new shift takes over. This affords the strikers  the 
opportunity to have a temporary job until the dispute is settled. No, they  can't do 
their normal jobs, but they can flip burgers or wait tables or  whatever. Many of 
us where I work already had temporary jobs lined up this past  Fall when our 
strike was pending. 
 
Carol:
 
As for the idea expressed by Kemper that failing to honor the strike
is  "treachery," I think that word is more than a bit strong,
especially if they  have no other means of earning a living. (Ever try
to live on unemployment  benefits? Are strikers even entitled to them?)
 
Sandy:
 
I don't consider the word strong at all. The union and  striking is all about 
solidarity. Everyone working towards the common goal. I  have lived on 
unemployment, and no, strikers are not entitled to it, but I was  better off with 
the unemployment than nothing at all, just like the strikers are  better off 
with strike pay than nothing at all. Do you think these people *want*  to be on 
strike? I can assure you that they don't. But they have been backed  into a 
place where it is their only option. Why is that so hard for you to  understand? 
It is up to the union members as to how long they are willing to  strike. They 
can vote to accept what is being offered at any time. The union  keeps them 
updated and allows them that opportunity. Whatever the sacrifices  they are 
currently making it must be worth it to them to stand strong and not  back down. 
It is the only tool they have.
 
Sandy







**************Start the year off right.  Easy ways to stay in shape.     
http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]