He doesnt deserve to be drying cars at the end of a car wash.

The French Aristocracy Never Saw it Coming Either!

they didn't think it was anything to lose their heads over.

It just doesn't seem anyone in power chooses to go there.

And that's about all I can say about my deeply held feelings, too.

Can't write it down tho!

Supreme Court Issues 7-1 Decision To Find Scalia's Killer

but, Scalia makes it awfully tempting to change my mind on that.

For a decade or more now, I have truly "had it" with an increasing number of right wingers and conservatives. The obvious racial element with President Obama has really tipped the scale. I'm shocked to now have a list of people that I'd love to see drop dead tomorrow. I don't wish them painful demises, understand: I would just like them GONE.

could replace Ted Cruz, I'd be more comfortable.

would be hurt most, employees.

the benefits are in play as long as the condition exists.

retirees would be provided with health care for life or did it just say it would provide them with health care?
If it didn't say "for life" then that could be the sticking point as far as contract went and if it wasnt in there for life then once the contract expired unless a new contract extended it then the retired workers might well be sol.

The contract in dispute didn't say "for life." I should know that, in law, if it ain't there, it ain't there.

This entire case is based on the legal principle that a temporary agreement states conditions in effect during the term of that agreement:
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mg-polymers-usa-llc-v-tackett/

So far only the Sixth has found for retirees in such cases:

So the SC took this case to provide guidance in the case of highly split circuits. If language in the agreement states that the right to retirees to receive these benefits will extend past the term of the agreement, there's not an issue.

This is a real legal issue, and Scalia probably is pissed that this was done at all, because there is ample precedent for the employee negotiators to know that the agreement would not extend a right to the continuation of the benefits unless the appropriate language was included.

To put it another way, the current workers also have rights to health benefits that are laid out in the agreement. But legally, they have no right to those benefits once the agreement expires. So how do retirees get that right once the agreement expires if that is not stated in the bargaining agreement? This is not a good situation for the retirees - one suspects that they were sold a bill of goods by their own representatives.

Whoever negotiated that agreement is deeply at fault for this. And such a right is not enforceable unless the company's finances can support it, which logically means that to make such an agreement de facto permanent would require setting aside funds for it during the lifetime of the agreement so that a separate pool of funds existed titled to a separate entity - not the company.

Contract law is very interesting, but doesn't support the contention of the retirees here. Nor does federal legal history. Nor does reality, because if the SC does adopt the idea that such benefits are in fact vested, it would bankrupt a number of companies. They would then file for BK, and their obligations would be written off by the BK court!

... would that mean that retirees are never really covered under the contracts that were valid during their working years, if a new contract is negotiated with current employees? Would this mean that, no matter how good your union is, you can never actually count on any retirement, since the company could renegotiate at some time in the future?

If an employee retires while this collective agreement is in effect, then the employee's retirement benefits are covered in perpetuity regardless of the conditions of any future collective bargaining agreements.

It's simple language that was left out. A major mistake by both the company and the union that negotiated this agreement.

My local government retirement plan shares that loophole but all retirees know the healthcare portion is negotiated during contracts and could be taken away.

In all the years it has been in effect though it has never been touched. Not sure what would happen if we lost it since we don't pay in to or qualify for Medicare.

Then again, being the psychopath that he is, he probably really is unable to feel empathy.

lost here. Union attorneys and spokespeople ought to be smart enough to recognize ambiguous language especially in union contracts. They get paid big bucks to negotiate this stuff all the time. I bet there was some "small print" somewhere that allowed some discretionary action on the part of the employer.

coming from someone physically incapable of empathy.

The author of the posted piece says: "This is nothing new for Justice Scalia. Last year, he compared the LGBT community to 'child abusers.'”

Did Scalia suggest that the LGBT community abused anyone or did anything immoral at all? No, but the author of the posted article doesn't care about the truth. Here is what Scalia said:

But there are “all sorts of minorities,” Justice Scalia said, and merely holding minority status should not insulate one from majoritarian policy choices. “Child abusers” are a minority, for instance, but they should not receive special protection as a result, he said.

Scalia's choice of analogy says a lot. He certainly, intentionally or not, likened LGBT's to child abusers.

Period.

I wouldn't feel bad if I saw him go down for the last time in a septic tank.

instead of Shit! when I stub my toe or whatever.

It would be pretty amusing if ya ask me.

It COULD happen you never know.

Deep down you know you want to see it too.

And as a devout Catholic he's the old fashioned type who believes the path to salvation is by partaking in the sacraments rather than through good works.

The Bible is full of rich men in Hell, and since Scalia has doubtless read dante, he should have a very clear idea where any eternity of hsi will be, especially as dante had a talent for showing grafters and high scum brought low. I myself would put him in the nin th circle, for traitors to their country.

The sad part is, I broke with the Church in part because I could not imagine who in a mere 90 pears of life at best could earn eternal punishment, Scalia changes that.

Catholicism denies justification by faith alone."

http://carm.org/catholic-salvation-attain

It's what I learned over a half-century ago.

I learned that likewise. But there are conservative Catholic groups who believe the sacraments are the most important part of their faith.

Thst is not Tradition, Doctrine, nor Magisterium. Who teaches salvation from sacraments?

All of his needs are met for the rest of his life. Everyone else can tread water.

SCROTUS = Supreme Court Republicans of the United States
R.A.T.S. = RobertsAlitoThomasScalia

Whaddya gonna do aboudit?

But I know what that gesture means. Same back atcha, Tony.

... sicken me, disgust me ... yes.... shock me...NO

A$$hole.

if he did that, but he doesn't. Maybe he craves the attention.

The man is a Koch lackey. No surprise he doesn't respect any contract, worker, woman, minority or anything else. That's why they don't respect us on the US Supreme Koch Court.

"A Citizens United conspiracy, complete with two Supremes"

OCTOBER 22, 2010

The New York Times is reported that the billionaire Koch Brothers (pronounced like the soft drink) regularly convene secret conclaves of industrialists aiming to prevent government from regulating business. That wouldn’t be unusual, or even unexpected. But the attendees also include two Supreme Court justices, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, and three news agencies who never report on the meetings.

More at the link:

http://open.salon.com/blog/jimmy_zuma/2010/10/21/a_citizens_united_conspiracy_complete_with_two_supremes

More to be horrified at:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023398818

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024975892

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101689685

There is so much more out there...

I knew it was out there.

I don't see any ambiguity in the contract, myself, but I ain't no contract lawyer. Furthermore, does this employer still contribute to current employee benefits? It seems to me to say, retires get what employees get. Are they arguing that was true for the years covered under the contracts, but not for years beyond the contract?

As the contract doesn't say anything about after the contract ends, I see a colorable argument that the contribution to retirees ended whenever the last contract talking about it did.

Isn't law fun?

Justice Scalia has NEVER interpreted the constitution in search of what the Founding Fathers wanted. He just sides with the corporations who pay for his vacations (sorry, I mean educational trips to resorts). Also he is not now or has he ever been a follower of Jesus Christ.

I'm sick of these jackass rightwing nuts with there attitude I got mine and screw everybody else

Nicest thing I can say about Scalia

The same argument will be applied to legislation which has typos or an ambiguity even once in the body of text. It will not matter that the points are clarified later in the bill.

You shoulda got it right before youse passed it!

I'm getting too old for this shit! Really.

I'm screwed. I honestly don't know what I'm going to do until I'm 65 (in 6 1/2 years). No one's health should be affected by politics. Period.

... is loosing his mind. He can't be sane, saying something like that out loud during session. Has there EVER been a case of a SC judge being removed from his position for being a cruel old senile coot?

See DU, Latest Breaking News, *"SCOTT WALKER: Denying Health Care to Low Income People helps them 'Live the American Dream."
And Arbeit Macht Frei (Works Makes you Free).
Cruelty and abuse are happening all across the country to thousands of Americans under the Right Wing's corporate control and death cult.
How many Americans see these news articles to learn what's happening on a larger scale? Not nearly enough since our media is corrupted. To cleanse our country of corporate pollution we must unify, educate and work very hard. It can be done; far greater challenges have been faced. And, We'll feel good about it.

He has betrayed his own...

I can't say what I really think about him because I would get banned.

he'd be upside down like mussolini by now.

With bells, whistles, and no panties so I can pee on his grave.

He lost his emotion chip, and the 1958 model isn't made anymore.

I should be the morale officer.

Uggghhh, how can someone who cares so little for actual Americans be in a member of the highest court in the land??

But with a republican majority, sadly, we'll get someone just as bad or worse.

just sayin'

I wish Scalia's comments and his actions on the SCOTUS come back to bite him in the ass, very very soon.

bloodless ghoul

he smokes, maybe he moves on soon

cholesterol and BP busters. And much treadmill time, can't see that. Pretty high 'heath ins.' tab $. We pay I guess. What a bad example of power to hold our health coverage in his (pudgy) hands. The irony..

And I missed them all. This looks like it was the first.

K&R!