a_girl

这两天是惨了我了，metro and autobus 什么都没有，我可怜的银子呀，没人给回我吗？买了月票又不能用，真是！

JetJet

new
Member # 496   posted 2003-11-18 12:38
7 z1 B) a; K9 |+ P3 N% M  X--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
补充几点：
% Z3 J- Q) b5 v1，他们不是在罢工，而是在拿纳税人当人质：我们是纳税人，公车属于公共设施，其大部分运营费用不光是从出售车票获得的，而且很大一部分是从我们的税金中提取的，这种收了我们的税钱而不提供服务的做法根本就不合理。
2，这次闹事的是那些负责维护地铁和公交的人员，比如机械维修师和清洁工等等，并不是司机（因为司机早就通过威胁罢工而提高了待遇），想象一下，他们年平均工资在48000元（每小时23元），而很多移民，手中虽然有很多学位，却不能找到工作，这合理吗？
3，他们闹罢工，工资一点却不能损失，这哪里是罢工。罢工的合理解释是（从报纸上理解的）：罢工人首先要承受个人损失，然后，以暂时的个人损失换取长远的集体利益。同时，罢工是以改善必要的生存和工作条件为前提的。可现在呢？ 他们的所有工资都照发，他们的生存和工作条件还要改善？我的天，我真不理解了。
所以，这种所谓的罢工是源于贪婪的人性。。。
5 f, Q" l" P: m6 E. K   

new 说的很有道理。

我现在正在学Business law & Ethics

发现这次罢工违反Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms 第9.1条的规定：
, d! ~# @8 }* E- v: W4 J
9.1 In exercising his fundamental freedoms and rights, a person shall maintain a
. U5 [9 r7 Y% m4 Z* \  j4 ^0 O
# p4 W) Y  {9 L& v( c8 S  ]! lproper regard for democratic values, public order and the general well-being of
. W' s" m( V/ p2 l3 `4 |
# s8 |/ ]4 I- l/ `2 s2 }7 L7 ethe citizens of Quebec.
3 K0 U' h4 {$ F0 X
In this respect, the scope of the freedoms and rights, and limits to their

0 f5 r+ i: C0 F- d' B2 _exercise may be  fixed by law.
2 d. [3 U( [$ Q7 l+ C# {/ s
有没有学法律的朋友啊。研究研究有没有可能性告STM啊。

pepsigirl

我看大家是不是有必要组织一次大规模的游行呀？我门真的是忍不下这口气了。穷人更穷，富人更富，其实国外也是一样的黑暗。如果有人响应游行的话，请大家出个主意，不能这样坐以待毙。罢乘不是办法，有效制止才是良策。我门有权利保护自己的公民权益，对不对呀？起码的生活都遭到了破坏，大家有多少个人的年新是超过4万的呢？是时候行动了！！！

JetJet

我现在正在学Business law & Ethics
- j# h6 _/ P) U1 c
0 p- u, P2 j( \' F7 V5 x6 T发现这次罢工违反Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms 第9.1条的规定：

5 t3 k2 H, d# y9.1 In exercising his fundamental freedoms and rights, a person shall maintain a proper regard for democratic values, public order and the general well-being of the citizens of Quebec.
. e* h  `3 T- v8 a' M& n
In this respect, the scope of the freedoms and rights, and limits to their exercise may be fixed by law.
$ U3 A4 o+ ~3 @' A0 \
有没有学法律的朋友啊。研究研究有没有可能性告STM啊  :mad:

sign_in

不要急了~ 急也没用！ 这事啊，咱们也不能怎么样，也管不了~ 就只能自己给想办法让自己能好好的回家就好了~ 上次vancouver那里罢工，都大半年呢~ 咱这里啊，希望不那样吧~   

jasminkql03

去年在多伦多，刚LANDING就遇上公务员罢工，不给办SIN卡，健康卡，驾照。不久就是夏天垃圾工人罢工，大街上都臭了。还有医生罢工、老师罢工，都是在原来已经很高的基础上要求锦上添花。
$ X9 L' }- t& i, u. R他们都找最能体现价值的时候：冬天-----工交车、电力、医生，夏天-----垃圾工（约有3万年薪，据说福利是“可以把职位让给亲属”）、啤酒厂工人。老师找期末考，公务员找财政预算期......
# e* f# p& ^/ o& t; k( l% y+ m告不动的，人家法官也是公务员，还要保留罢工权利呀。

cjy

听收音机说是今天双方协商，意图比较接近，可能尽快复工。没有细节透露。

baisheng

Public-transit strike can't be justified
    :confused:    :confused:  
& |& b) G+ N% f! U* j$ V) }0 eThere are so many things wrong with Montreal's transit strike - and I mean wrong as in morally wrong, as in totally unjustifiable - that it is a little hard to believe it's happening.
9 k/ k# I/ u9 Y$ ?( Y# o
Let's begin with the basics. A strike is a last resort by workers who cut off the employer's profits to press for an acceptable contract. They must accept lost wages and the possibility of layoffs if the employer is hurt badly.

0 I+ _7 g+ H  z, w2 hBut the Montreal Transit Corp. makes no profit, has no competition. The strike hurts only the public. And workers risk nothing. They know very well that the transit agency won't go out of business. They don't even lose all their pay, since transit still hobbles along a few hours a day.

2 f- y, a( V. }6 @# eSo what's the justification? It's hard to find one.
2 _1 o% x7 [. d# t
"Allowing strikes in the public sector has never made sense," says Chris Green, chairperson of McGill University's economics department.

  P6 r; H0 V0 c: O7 O* S( u( E"You're making a third party suffer. Strikes are supposed to hurt the employer, not the public," says Mario Polese, an urban economist at the Université du Québec. "In the long run, it's something that has to be fundamentally changed, because it's wrong."

Of course, workers must have some way to resist economic oppression, even if they work for a public service.
& K/ `% r2 E! p; |; ~5 d7 D* o+ v
Yes, but that argument cuts both ways.

9 q' \1 n: D2 K! N8 JThe average wage of striking transit workers is about $23 an hour.
0 U' c) c1 U3 _, Q
; C. [2 l6 E$ @9 \) n0 KThat's 25 per cent more than the average wage of comparable workers in the public and private sectors across Canada. It's safe to say that it's a great deal more than the typical transit user takes home.
; V+ L7 ^0 h2 Q! o
So when a waitress or office cleaner or supermarket worker can't get to work because transit service is only deemed "essential" for nine-to-five types, we impose serious hardship on people who are near the minimum wage to benefit transit workers who are already among the best-paid workers in the country. This is fighting oppression?
; d1 E- ?) E; X* g2 d+ N- M
# D0 C6 G, w, kAnd speaking of essential service, one wonders how the Essential Services Council arrived at the bizarre idea that for citizens without cars, it is "essential" to work or shop or go to school or take a sick kid to the doctor only during a few hours each morning and afternoon, and never on Saturday or Sunday.
; y; V+ `5 K7 q, k2 `! o
It's a safe bet that not one member of the council is without a car. Perhaps none of them has ever had the kind of low-end job where if you don't show up, there is no pay and after a couple of days, maybe no job.

5 r+ @+ D/ M3 [5 T. N7 h( n& Q5 _It's hard to blame the union for this. A union's job is to fight for its members. But government's job is to fight for all of us.

The fault lies with the politicians we elect. On the one hand, they (and we) grandly celebrate Montreal's car-free day as a glimpse of an ideal world where we'll all use excellent transit and cars won't be needed. On the other hand, they stand by while a city of 3 million is held hostage by 2,050 workers.
! i2 ^6 y5 |  \- ^7 S& Y
+ z5 M$ `4 t7 h) CEven the Essential Services Commission is something of a fraud.
. F. }& k; c1 w) o: |& J
# C! F2 U$ b0 A3 RBy ensuring that there's some service, it prevents a complete economic meltdown. But it demands so little of the union that many citizens' lives are still unbearable. "It's a farce," says economist Michel Boucher at the Université du Québec's school of public administration.

The solution? Some cities, like London, have privatized parts of public transit. By contracting out different routes to different private operators, a city can create a system that can't be shut down all at once.
  T9 ]) g6 U3 I0 @! O
Others, like New York, which hasn't had a transit strike in decades, permit public-service unions and collective bargaining, but not strikes, which bring draconian penalties.
3 F* \1 K" ~' A& [
Another possibility would be a system of compulsory arbitration, suggests Polese.
. U0 U! q0 u* Z1 o) H/ P
One thing is clear, though. The system we have now is a mess. The Charest government's sluggish re-engineering experts need to get to work, and quickly.

环游世界

好象是对补贴国际汽车大奖赛的投票