GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-29-2013, 10:19   #151
DreamWeaver88
...............
 
DreamWeaver88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Southeast Michigan
Posts: 6,409


Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
No, that isn't compassionate either. What if someone wants to take a job under dangerous conditions? What gives you the right to butt in?
Nothing gives ME the right to butt in.

Some jobs are inherently dangerous, that's just the way it is. If you're just talking about a normal job at a company that doesn't care about worker safety, and as a result the workplace is dangerous because of lack of any safety procedures.... Then that isn't right.

Quote:

I noticed you didn't respond to my post about the ethics of child labor. I gather from this that you're in favor of starving children.
I have no problem with other countries letting children make shoes or whatever. It just shouldn't be in sweatshop conditions, and they shouldn't be told to have sex with the employer.
DreamWeaver88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 10:23   #152
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,667


Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWeaver88 View Post
Nothing gives ME the right to butt in.

Some jobs are inherently dangerous, that's just the way it is. If you're just talking about a normal job at a company that doesn't care about worker safety, and as a result the workplace is dangerous because of lack of any safety procedures.... Then that isn't right.



I have no problem with other countries letting children make shoes or whatever. It just shouldn't be in sweatshop conditions, and they shouldn't be told to have sex with the employer.
But in every post you're asserting that you have a right to but in by overlaying what you think should or shouldn't be allowed instead of letting people accept whatever terms THEY feel are acceptable.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 10:25   #153
Atlas
transmogrifier
 
Atlas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 14,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWeaver88 View Post
Nothing gives ME the right to butt in.

Some jobs are inherently dangerous, that's just the way it is. If you're just talking about a normal job at a company that doesn't care about worker safety, and as a result the workplace is dangerous because of lack of any safety procedures.... Then that isn't right.

..
What is a "normal" job?
Who decides if my job is normal?
__________________
June 28, 2012: the day the American republic died.

Uncontrolled, unaccountable government spending + Graduated income-tax = SLAVERY
Atlas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 10:25   #154
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,667


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
You just need to move to Florida. In these here parts, you're "allowed" to kill your employees for a maximum liability of150 grand each. So from between 10g's, up to 150g's, you can get a new one.)
What should the price be?


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 10:45   #155
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575

__________________
Glock 17, 19, 20SF, 21C, 22, 26, 27, Glock E-Tool, Glock knife
Quod ego haereticus appellari sequere Jesum.
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 10:48   #156
fordstev
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 14
Healthy incentives

My employer got together with unions and came up with something called Healthy Incentives. It boiled down to a three tier deductible for your healthcare.
If you took the health survey and decided to particiate in the action plan, you paid the minimum deductible. If you took the survey and did not participate in the action plan, your deductible was higher. If you didn't participate at all, your deductible was the highest. The employer saved almost 25 million dollars in the first two years. They even paid for stomach surgery for the extreme fatties.

I don't think this is socialism, I think it is good business.
__________________
"They who can give up even a little essential Liberty, to obtain temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Benjamin Franklin, 1755
fordstev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 10:54   #157
Daltini
Senior Member
 
Daltini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 311
If the government stayed out to begin with, not forcing employers to pay for insurance, we would not have this problem. If youre unhealthy YOU pay for it. thats the way it should be. or am I wrong?
Daltini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 14:29   #158
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daltini View Post
If the government stayed out to begin with, not forcing employers to pay for insurance, we would not have this problem. If youre unhealthy YOU pay for it. thats the way it should be. or am I wrong?
You are wrong according to the Socialist Libtards who disagree with me and you.
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 14:44   #159
Daltini
Senior Member
 
Daltini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
You are wrong according to the Socialist Libtards who disagree with me and you.
Yeah. People are responsible for themselves but don't want to be. If you're a fattass you pay for it don't push it on the whole company...
Daltini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 15:05   #160
Drjones
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: CA, just outside the United States
Posts: 17,808
Blog Entries: 1
Send a message via AIM to Drjones


Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2950392.html

I hope more companies take these sorts of steps. As a stock holder it will be good for the country. I would rather they fired out of shape folks to help raise stock values and save on salaries.

But either way, perhaps they will start requiring physicals prior to hiring. Imagine if they start telling smokers that they are ineligible to be hired as they tested positive for tobacco and they told fatties that they are too heavy and must lose weight before they can be hired. Hopefully this will help the nation with its obesity epidemic.

What do you all think?

On the one hand, I'm tempted to agree, but on the other, this seems very similar to new proposals to require gun owners to carry additional liability insurance.
__________________
The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
Drjones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 15:09   #161
Daltini
Senior Member
 
Daltini's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drjones View Post
On the one hand, I'm tempted to agree, but on the other, this seems very similar to new proposals to require gun owners to carry additional liability insurance.
Or people can insure themselves and pay for the consequences of their decisions.
Daltini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 15:37   #162
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drjones View Post
On the one hand, I'm tempted to agree, but on the other, this seems very similar to new proposals to require gun owners to carry additional liability insurance.
Very different situation. The fact is that fatties are choosing to harm their company with their lifestyle choices. The fact is that a private company should have the right to ask you to be responsibel for yourself. This isn't the big gub'mint that many here seem to love, this is their employer and the job creators who are asking for them to be responsible and to take care of themselves in order to better the company. The lifestyle choices of these fatties are harming the companies bottom line, and with less profits they will hire less people. A simple way to put it would be less profits equals less jobs and the job creators can't do their thing and create jobs.

Besides, a company should have the right to hire whomever they want and fire them at will. Especially when they are choosing to put their own desires to eat crisco by the can over the profits of their bosses. It is not fair to the rest of the employees who work hard and it does affect them.

No Christmas bonuses? Well ask Jenny in accounts to go on a diet to lower the cost of her healthcare and maybe we can get some bonuses.

No money for new computers? Well tell Jimmy in shipping to get off the internet and get off his behind, and maybe go for a job and pick up some weights instead of going on a pizza run and picking up beer.

The simple truth is that fatties are harming this nation. They are harming our national defense. They are harming the profits of our bosses. They are just destroying us from the inside out. And we ignore the elephant in the room rather than deal with it because we don't want to call ourselves or our neighbors an elephant.

Last edited by ChiTownPicaro; 03-29-2013 at 15:38..
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 15:39   #163
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daltini View Post
Or people can insure themselves and pay for the consequences of their decisions.
But they don't want to pay, they want the big bad corporations or big daddy gub'mint to pay for them. There fact is that they don't want to be held accountable for their actions.
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2013, 17:15   #164
podwich
Senior Member
 
podwich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: MI
Posts: 9,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
Very different situation. The fact is that fatties are choosing to harm their company with their lifestyle choices. The fact is that a private company should have the right to ask you to be responsibel for yourself. This isn't the big gub'mint that many here seem to love, this is their employer and the job creators who are asking for them to be responsible and to take care of themselves in order to better the company. The lifestyle choices of these fatties are harming the companies bottom line, and with less profits they will hire less people. A simple way to put it would be less profits equals less jobs and the job creators can't do their thing and create jobs.

Besides, a company should have the right to hire whomever they want and fire them at will. Especially when they are choosing to put their own desires to eat crisco by the can over the profits of their bosses. It is not fair to the rest of the employees who work hard and it does affect them.

No Christmas bonuses? Well ask Jenny in accounts to go on a diet to lower the cost of her healthcare and maybe we can get some bonuses.

No money for new computers? Well tell Jimmy in shipping to get off the internet and get off his behind, and maybe go for a job and pick up some weights instead of going on a pizza run and picking up beer.

The simple truth is that fatties are harming this nation. They are harming our national defense. They are harming the profits of our bosses. They are just destroying us from the inside out. And we ignore the elephant in the room rather than deal with it because we don't want to call ourselves or our neighbors an elephant.
What's your game?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
No hypnosis. No Kool-Aid. And I am a proud Chicagoian, though I no longer live there. The fact is that nobody was concerned about these things when Bush did it. But as soon as Obama got into office, they became worried and upset. Fox News tried to blame Obama for the high gas prices but said that the POTUS had nothing to do with gas prices when they skyrocketed under Bush.

It seems that as soon as we get a black POTUS, we get a group of people protesting in the streets and making racist signs as well as using hate filled language to smear him. And Fox News helped create this movement by sponsoring it and allowing Glenn Beck to start it.

Sorry but it is true and I understand the truth hurts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
Exactly. As long as Obama is black and our POTUS people will worry. Especially the fringe right wing and the wingnuts in the Tea Party. It is strange as usually Fox News is winding them up.
podwich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 02:06   #165
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by podwich View Post
What's your game?
I am a Free Market loving Libertarian. Big fan of Ron Paul. No game here, just an observant man who notices things. What is your game?
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 03:54   #166
JuneyBooney
Senior Member
 
JuneyBooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 15,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2950392.html

I hope more companies take these sorts of steps. As a stock holder it will be good for the country. I would rather they fired out of shape folks to help raise stock values and save on salaries.

But either way, perhaps they will start requiring physicals prior to hiring. Imagine if they start telling smokers that they are ineligible to be hired as they tested positive for tobacco and they told fatties that they are too heavy and must lose weight before they can be hired. Hopefully this will help the nation with its obesity epidemic.

What do you all think?
That is totally unrealistic and almost unconstitutional. But liberals like Bloomberg should be called authoritarians because they want to control everyone. I don't think you truly understand the stress level of Americans nowadays and the culture changes along with weight that diversity brings to society.
JuneyBooney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 06:19   #167
meleors
Cranky Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 855
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
Either way I do think that the BMI is a good indicator.
Of what? The BMI charts are BS. I am 5'7" wt 172. Body fat 11%. When I was young (late teens) I lifted weights. I weighed 180 lbs and fat was 9%. The perfect definition of a healthy male.
According to the BMI chart I am overweight and I should weigh no more than 159 lbs.
The charts do not take into account body frame size nor muscle mass.
meleors is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 06:43   #168
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
 
Peace Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 26,158
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
What should the price be?


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
It of course would differ by circumstances, but a general rule of thumb is that it should be UP TO whatever 12 people ultimately apply, or whatever the two sides agree upon prior to presenting it to the 12 people.
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
"Nothing we're gonna do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that [our gun ban legislation] will bring gun deaths down..." - VPOTUS Joe Biden
"Love 'Em All!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible
"You gonna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?" - Josey Wales
Peace Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 06:53   #169
Big Bird
NRA Life Member
 
Big Bird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
Very different situation. The fact is that fatties are choosing to harm their company with their lifestyle choices. The fact is that a private company should have the right to ask you to be responsibel for yourself. This isn't the big gub'mint that many here seem to love, this is their employer and the job creators who are asking for them to be responsible and to take care of themselves in order to better the company. The lifestyle choices of these fatties are harming the companies bottom line, and with less profits they will hire less people. A simple way to put it would be less profits equals less jobs and the job creators can't do their thing and create jobs.

Besides, a company should have the right to hire whomever they want and fire them at will. Especially when they are choosing to put their own desires to eat crisco by the can over the profits of their bosses. It is not fair to the rest of the employees who work hard and it does affect them.

No Christmas bonuses? Well ask Jenny in accounts to go on a diet to lower the cost of her healthcare and maybe we can get some bonuses.

No money for new computers? Well tell Jimmy in shipping to get off the internet and get off his behind, and maybe go for a job and pick up some weights instead of going on a pizza run and picking up beer.

The simple truth is that fatties are harming this nation. They are harming our national defense. They are harming the profits of our bosses. They are just destroying us from the inside out. And we ignore the elephant in the room rather than deal with it because we don't want to call ourselves or our neighbors an elephant.

I just hired a 45 year old fat chick to be my assistant. She outworks the three skinny chicks that work for other folks in my division combined. She kicks ass frankly.

Best loader I ever had on my tank was a slightly fat guy. He could jam a tank shell into the main gun faster than any skinny pencil neck geek. Yeah he couldn't run a 2 mile PT test in record time. And yeah he looked like a sack of potatoes in his uniform. But by god the man could change a roadwheel or break track by himself....


I could give a crap what someone looks like. I only care how they perform. And a fat dude that gets the job done beats skinny dude who is a slacker or underachiever all day and every day.
__________________
Big Bird,

“Est Nulla Via Invia Virute”

Last edited by Big Bird; 03-30-2013 at 06:54..
Big Bird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 07:51   #170
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,667


Quote:
Originally Posted by JuneyBooney View Post
That is totally unrealistic and almost unconstitutional. But liberals like Bloomberg should be called authoritarians because they want to control everyone. I don't think you truly understand the stress level of Americans nowadays and the culture changes along with weight that diversity brings to society.
Unconstitutional? ROFL!


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 07:53   #171
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,667


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
It of course would differ by circumstances, but a general rule of thumb is that it should be UP TO whatever 12 people ultimately apply, or whatever the two sides agree upon prior to presenting it to the 12 people.
But how would you budget?


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 09:39   #172
donovan655
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
Those unhealthy people are costing someone money and miss work more.

Sorry but the fatties are affecting the bottom line.

So are people who are obsessed with social media--and in a far greater magnitude than people who carry extra weight.

Alot of people who carry extra weight are also carrying extra work and stress because of skills gaps at their job. In other words, they are on the job too much and have little ambition for fine tuning their "problem areas at the gym."

I'd love to see more proficiency examinations along the lines of college level basics and software than whether or not someone can run a mile in 5 min.

And I would also love to see a requirement that your social media be turned off the entire tenure of your employment.

Yeah I can play elitist bad ass on the internet too.

__________________
lots of Glocks, lots of Berettas, no Silverados.
donovan655 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 10:37   #173
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by donovan655 View Post
So are people who are obsessed with social media--and in a far greater magnitude than people who carry extra weight.

Alot of people who carry extra weight are also carrying extra work and stress because of skills gaps at their job. In other words, they are on the job too much and have little ambition for fine tuning their "problem areas at the gym."

I'd love to see more proficiency examinations along the lines of college level basics and software than whether or not someone can run a mile in 5 min.

And I would also love to see a requirement that your social media be turned off the entire tenure of your employment.

Yeah I can play elitist bad ass on the internet too.

I would love to see an article or study that backs up your claim that social media and social media addicts are affecting the bottom line as much as obesity. Please post some sort of facts, not anecdotes or your thoughts, but something that backs that up.

I am sure proficiency exams would be wonderful. I am willing to bet that the healthier person will do just fine, but that those who take care of themselves also have other traits that as they have the discipline to take care of themselves. However physical fitness increases work productivity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1752749.html

Like I said, it is better for the company and the bottom line. That should be all that matters.

Can your elitist badass self please post some links? Methinks I touched a nerve...

Last edited by ChiTownPicaro; 03-30-2013 at 10:42..
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 10:41   #174
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Bird View Post
I just hired a 45 year old fat chick to be my assistant. She outworks the three skinny chicks that work for other folks in my division combined. She kicks ass frankly.

Best loader I ever had on my tank was a slightly fat guy. He could jam a tank shell into the main gun faster than any skinny pencil neck geek. Yeah he couldn't run a 2 mile PT test in record time. And yeah he looked like a sack of potatoes in his uniform. But by god the man could change a roadwheel or break track by himself....


I could give a crap what someone looks like. I only care how they perform. And a fat dude that gets the job done beats skinny dude who is a slacker or underachiever all day and every day.
Your anecdotes are great, but they don't prove anything. I also believe that you failed to comprehend what the argument is about. It is not about how someone looks. I am sure the fat chick you hired is wonderful, but her weight will most likely cost the company more money in the long run than someone who was physically fit. The fact is that fat people can work fine, but when the company has to pay for their health-issues or they lose more work for them, then their physical problems are harming the company, and that is not fair to the other employees who have to take up the slack, and more importantly that is not fair to the stockholders because it lowers the value of their stocks.
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2013, 11:06   #175
Nicky D
CLM Number 42
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Nicky D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Souderton, Pa.
Posts: 3,260
I have mixed feelings on this issue. I do understand the need to maximize profits but I think that it oversteps boundaries when an employer is trying to dictate what I can or can not do on my free time.

Am all for an employer charging more for an at risk employee. I also agree with them offering incentives versus firing to get healthy. Sure I have the choice to look somewhere else for employment, until all companies do have the same requirements.

I am a nurse and I work in a hospital. Many hospitals are starting to not hire smokers. I don't smoke so it does not effect me personally. I still disagree with this practice. Smoking is not illegal, yes it increases health risk but it should not be a reason to either not be hired or to be terminated.

Last year I was forced to take the flu vaccine. Did I have a choice, sure I did, take it be fired. Well I have a family and home to provide for, so of course I took it against my will. No, I could not just quit my job as it is now the standard practice to force all employees to take the vaccine in other hospitals as well, in the name of the greater good.

At what point do we draw the line on what is acceptable both from employers as well as employees? How much say does an employer really have over MY life?
__________________
Nick
NRA,RFA,
Pennsylvania Glocker #90
Niner's #7172
Nicky D is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:18.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 971
259 Members
712 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42