J.H. shoeing wrote:

just leave it alone, I have said too much already.
________
Magic flight launch box

now you say you have nothing to do with it after claiming first hand knowledge.

This is a public forum surely you wouldn't be making up stories, or even worse compromising an open federal investigation.

I don't know much about federal statutes but I would venture a guess that compromising a federal investigation would be a federal law violation.

Phil Armitage wrote:


thanks Phil;
I just try to the best farrier work I can; and I do have a lot of good points and not all of them are about farrier work, sometime just to be funny, flirtation sometimes, and sometimes just to joke around with others. This job can get to best of us!..........................Linda.....................
________
Expert Insurance

J.H. shoeing wrote:


ps: old news for many years ago of an incident that happen.

ex: It is a known fact of anorexia, bulimia and some drug use among jockeys, and the use of lasix to keep the weight down, and pain killers for the rest. Many are alcholics. Many others in the business use in order to keep up the hectic schedules of racing a barn of 60-100 head of horses.
________
UGGS

ladyblacksmith wrote: Unfortunately, this is very dark side of racing that no one sees or wants to know about. Everyone always see the Derby, Breeder's cup, ect. the millionaires; no one sees the homeless groom drunk in the shed row.
________
FREE TARGET GIFT CARDS

1. Drugs are involved, federal arrest will happen.

So you don't have first hand knowledge of the incident? are you a co-defendant? or a witness for the prosecusion?


this is from one of my post.

So if all of this drug use at tracks is old news, and you don't have any knowlegde of someone being arrested for a federal offense for being on the "backside" without valid license. What are you talking about?

seems as if you are trying to fit in or trying so hard to be liked or respected by your "peers" that you are making statements that may not be factual. I am giving you the oppertunity to cite refferences that would lend you some credability.

So whats going on? are you just spouting off trying to fit in or do you really have first hand knowledge about a guy being arrested for a federal offense for being on the "backside" without a license?

anyone that has ever been to a track has seen a groom, drunk and homeless? surely you know better than I.

but it seems as if your changing the subject again. Come on tell us, do you rreally have first hand knowledge and cite the refference numbers on the court case from YOUR first hand incident.

Tom Stovall, CJF wrote: I am sure you read it. I am also sure, as you have demonstrated repeatedly, that you also interpreted it exactly the way you wanted to in order to serve your desired purpose and then ignored anything that you couldn't twist around in you flippant replies.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote: 30 years of doing war with unions in California and Tennessee from the management side of the equation gave me my “silly” ideas. California is not a right to work state, Tennessee is. I can tell you from experience watching farmers change their standards for farm workers to avoid Chavez and the Teamsters. I can tell you from management meetings were we discussed the latest applicable unionization efforts in our competitors and how they were going to impact our labor and benefits costs.

The last thing management wants in any state is to have some group of union activists and lawyers mucking up the works and considering the cost associated with defending a single federal labor case it is cheaper for most companies in sectors that are threatened are most likely to have a strong knowledge base on union activities and on where they need to be in wages and benefits to avoid unionization activities. So do not try t sell you naive pabulum to me with you air of experience, you apparently have never been through a union siege and have no direct knowledge of the negative financial impact of one, even in a right to work state.

Oh, and on the issue of piece work. B. S. United Farm Workers and the Teamsters have negotiated piecework contracts in he past that have cost farmers significantly more that the hourly wage rate would have. In fact I have watched some of those downtrodden union workers sending one, two and even three thousand dollars a week home to Mexico from doing piece work.
Tom Stovall, CJF wrote: You may call it reality. But it most certainly is not. In my opinion it is your anti union fanaticism driven by your fantasy of what happens in the real business world and is facilitated by your sometimes impressive ability to turn a phrase.

Stick to art, blacksmithing and horse shoeing. At least there you have a leg to stand on.

George Geist wrote: Hmm. Lets see. The GPF requires you to pass a test. Ahh. What part of the message that I do not like unions, I have never liked unions, I do not respect unions and that is not likely change haven't I managed to convey. Perhaps that is why I do not take JHU seriously. Or it could simply be that I have no desire what so ever to shoe on the track.

My recognizing the union movement and how it has gotten to where it is has been driven and educated by my desire to not repeat management failures of the past. As a corporate manager minimizing cost while maintaining a wage and benefit standard good enough to avoid unionization efforts required a solid foundation in factual knowledge, not the emotion driven rhetoric I so often see disgorged. This is all about maximizing corporate profits through controlled cost to me.
George Geist wrote: Where is it written that life, or the posts on this section, have to be fair?

J.H. shoeing wrote:

all I can said is if person ever "goes back" to the track, they will be arrested and federally charged; and I know of this person and the incident that happened.
The stabbing too of one of our most popular trainers up here that went to the Fairgrounds; man that stab our friends trainer was charged with attempted murder and robbery, some charges were dropped, and that is in court records.
Crime on the backside is here too, just like any other place.
________
Washington Medical Marijuana Dispensary

ladyblacksmith wrote:

Crime is also on the backside of tracks, mostly petty crimes; but sometimes worse crimes, like every where else.
________
Vapor Genie Pipe Review

Ronald E. Kramedjian in gray, my old stuff in brown, deletia

I read what you wrote

I am sure you read it. I am also sure, as you have demonstrated repeatedly, that you also interpreted it exactly the way you wanted to in order to serve your desired purpose and then ignored anything that you couldn't twist around in you flippant replies.

If you feel your thoughts have been misinterpreted, perhaps you might consider expressing them in a more lucid manner.

Whatever gave you such a silly idea?

30 years of doing war with unions in California and Tennessee from the management side of the equation gave me my “silly” ideas.

Thank goodness you have an excuse.

California is not a right to work state, Tennessee is. I can tell you from experience watching farmers change their standards for farm workers to avoid Chavez and the Teamsters.

Would you care to regale this forum with the "standards for farm workers" that existed before Chavez and his bunch? The pendulum swings both ways.

I can tell you from management meetings were we discussed the latest applicable unionization efforts in our competitors and how they were going to impact our labor and benefits costs.

Bully for you. Did you try to see both sides, or, as a member of management, was your primary concern the corporate bottom line and its impact on the stockholders?

The last thing management wants in any state is to have some group of union activists and lawyers mucking up the works

"Mucking up the works?" What'n hell does that mean? Does that mean you think anything that does not tilt the table in management's favor is a Bad Thing?

and considering the cost associated with defending a single federal labor case it is cheaper for most companies in sectors that are threatened are most likely to have a strong knowledge base on union activities and on where they need to be in wages and benefits to avoid unionization activities.

Your argument is absurd. If your premise were valid, then every company in those sectors "threatened" by unionization would be offering wages and benefits in accord with union demands. It doesn't happen.

So do not try t sell you naive pabulum to me with you air of experience, you apparently have never been through a union siege and have no direct knowledge of the negative financial impact of one, even in a right to work state.

Naivete? Anyone who managed to stay awake during American History and Eco 101 likely has a fair grasp of the impact of both union activity and management avarice on the country's economy.

Oh, and on the issue of piece work. B. S. United Farm Workers and the Teamsters have negotiated piecework contracts in he past that have cost farmers significantly more that the hourly wage rate would have. In fact I have watched some of those downtrodden union workers sending one, two and even three thousand dollars a week home to Mexico from doing piece work.

Speaking of naivete, are you unaware of the difference between labor associated with perishables and non-perishables in terms of negotiating power? Are you unaware that a widget can stay on the shelf 'til hell freezes over, but a crop will rot in the field unless it's harvested on a timely basis?

I don't doubt you've seen a Mexican worker sending home thousands of dollars for doing piece work, but you neglected to mention how many of the Mexican's family were involved in the harvest or how long it took them to earn it. You also forgot to mention that harvest workers have always been paid on the basis of the amount harvested - boxes, sacks, pounds, bunches, etc. - never on an hourly basis.

You may call it reality. But it most certainly is not.

Reality is a matter of perception. As a member of corporate management, your reality is apparently based on tunnel vision that focuses only on management's position; however, labor has another position, and reality for an objective observer exists somewhere in the middle.

In my opinion it is your anti union fanaticism driven by your fantasy of what happens in the real business world and is facilitated by your sometimes impressive ability to turn a phrase.

Had you read my stuff for content, you would've noticed I have nothing against unions, per se; my quarrel is with closed shops. As far as I'm concerned, any union that can exist on its own merit, without the unfair economic benefit of a closed shop, is a Good Thing.

Stick to art, blacksmithing and horse shoeing. At least there you have a leg to stand on.

LMAO! Your condescending assumption that I have no "leg to stand on" when it comes to a discussion of agricultural economics, especially as it relates to migrant labor, enforces the validity of the old saying about the "ass" in assumption. I was raised in Uvalde County, just north of an area of Texas called the "Winter Garden", a region semi-famous for spinach and onion production. As you might expect, the region relies heavily on Hispanic migrant labor; and, unlike yourself, I've seen both sides of the issues, up close and personal.

Dare I suggest that you stick to something you know a little something about? You appear to be mighty good at having meetings.

ladyblacksmith wrote:
I was kind of interested in hearing about the said farrier business thing. Are we ever going to hear about it or was it warm air?

George Geist wrote: Then how is the JHU different than the AFA other than partisipating in the inclusion or exclusion of track platers, and that as a middle man between platers and track management. With a few political strings pulled and a few palms greassed, the even BWFA could take over.
I know the JHU member total is still being searched, but how many members are in your local?
Bill