Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu NPUA

Author Topic: NPUA  (Read 336020 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MR BIG

  • Guest
Re: NPUA
« Reply #175 on: Jun 14, 2010, 04:01 »
Jeff, let's get real here... we have companies that have no problem to responding on this site but a Union can't do the same? I know plenty of people who have asked questions on the NPUA site and are still waiting for answers. If nothing else you would think that a professional run organization would have a good P.R. person and that they would be flooding this site with posts in their favor after all this is the most visited site for our industry.

As far as posts being deleted, as a former moderator I don't know of an any posts that have been removed.
[/quote
Here is the web site. www.npua.org  If people REALLY want their questions answered then go to the site on their forum and ask. Simple as that. It's easy to trash someone or something when you don't have all the facts. I challenge people to go their and ask. What are people afraid of? That this thing may possibly work? Come on,..... grow up and act like professionals.

Offline Camella Black

Re: NPUA
« Reply #176 on: Jun 14, 2010, 07:49 »


The same could be said for all the explorers, inventors, researchers and pioneers who never gave up but kept on looking for answers, and asking questions  ;)

MR BIG

  • Guest
Re: NPUA
« Reply #177 on: Jun 14, 2010, 11:39 »



Real professional??? People on this site are a joke. A bunch of wanna bees that don't have the guts to DO anything. Just trash other people to make them feel better about themselves. As far as I'm concerned this will be my LAST post or visit to this site. I don't blame Kevin for not responding on this site. I'm sure your answers to your questions will be addressed on the NPUA site. But then again, most of the people really don't want to know the facts. So I'm sure they probably don't have the guts either to visit the site and "maturely" seek out the truth. They're here just to make cute little funny comments and see who can "out do" the next guy. Don't you people have a life? Geez!
Good Luck!

Offline Camella Black

Re: NPUA
« Reply #178 on: Jun 15, 2010, 12:28 »
The point was:

1. NPUA representation was never going to visit the site to answer questions. I received that answer directly from the President of NPUA himself when I sent him a link to the thread the last time it fired up.

2. NPUA members were never going to answer questions.  This has been confirmed time and time again; you have proved it again tonight.

3. If people want to know about NPUA, they will need to visit the NPUA website to gain information.

4. Any attempt to continue a fact-seeking quest on this thread is, well..beating a dead horse.

As for me personally, I'm not an RP tech and couldn't care less either way if they unionize or not; it doesn't effect my life either way; that is a decision for the techs to make for themselves. Please feel free to PM me if you can produce any posts where I have trashed NPUA or anyone for that matter. I'll be glad to issue a public apology. I even recall helping you via PM MR BIG, to change your profile to some pro-NPUA slogans.

I stand behind my post. This thread is a dead horse.

Best regards,

Tim



Tim, you are correct. I just hate giving up. I went to the NPUA website again tonight and well I do wish them luck; however having said that I left the site with the distinct impression that "they" (the NPUA) and many posters were more worried about Bartlett than looking for new members. I understand that many people believe Bartlett is evil and does us wrong, but there are many sides to the story and to tell the truth, they pay my bills and have treated us well. I can't see Henry or anyone who is loyal and treated well by Bartlett ever supporting the NPUA supporting anyone who is so anti Bartlett but I may be wrong, and to tell you the truth that is sad as we do need a union.

I also have a feeling that nukeworker is frowned upon by some of the members, case in point go there and type nukeworker into the search box and see what comes up.

Please not this is my opinion only...

It is sad really that for a long time now we have been searching for answers, begging for them really and well we just ain't gonna get them are we?
« Last Edit: Jun 15, 2010, 10:21 by Camella Black »

Offline Camella Black

Re: NPUA
« Reply #179 on: Jun 15, 2010, 10:28 »
Bartlett Services & Bartlett Support Services have a long record of employing unionized employees (including radiation protection technicians here and there). You could easily end up being union and still having the Bartlett stamp across your paycheck, there will simply be an extra deduction listed along with all the other deductions.

I am going out on a limb here and taking your word as fact  ;); and I want to be clear... I don't have a problem with unions but I do have a problem with some agendas.... like I said before I know some people have a problem with Bartlett but they aren't the only company out there and they sure aren't the worse offenders either... just look on this very website and read some of the SRS threads about some of the companies there.

It would look a lot better all around to me anyway if the NPUA would quit focusing on just 1 company especially in their news section and focus on the industry itself. I'm repeating myself again ... "you catch more flies with sugar than vinegar".





Offline Rennhack

Re: NPUA
« Reply #180 on: Jun 15, 2010, 01:43 »
I also have a feeling that nukeworker is frowned upon by some of the members, case in point go there and type nukeworker into the search box and see what comes up.

I went there and typed 'nukeworker' into the search box, and you know what came up?  They censor their site (even though they say they don't), if you type the word "nukeworker" in their forum, it is replaced with the words "Other Website".

Camella is right, they seem to have a very narrow view of the buisness.  I wish them luck in making things better for everyone.  Thats what we try to do here too.  (Except, you can type NPUA here, and not have it censored.)

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: NPUA
« Reply #181 on: Jun 15, 2010, 06:36 »
I'm getting just a little tired of all the people who log on to this site and tell me to stop talking about NPUA here, and that I shoulg go to www.npua.org.  The fact is that I have gone there quite a few times to get information.  But, if I want to talk about it HERE I AM GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT HERE!!!  If you don't want to read about it here, don't read about it here, but you cannot stop me from discussing whatever I want to discuss whereever I want to discuss it.

Factoid:  There are 57 people logged onto NukeWorker.com.  The last time I looked, NPUA did not have enough members to staff an outage with 34.

Lots of people claim to be for the NPUA.  Lots of people have listed themselves as fans of NPUA on Facebook.  How many are actual, dues-paying members?  How many of you stayed at home this past outage season rather than work a non-union job?  How many of you will refuse to work non-union this fall?  Y'know what I think?  I think there are a lot of fence riders who really want the NPUA to succeed -- because they want more money than they are making now (who wouldn't?) -- but won't commit to NPUA until they do succeed.  It is a self-defeating proposition.  The NPUA will not succeed as long as everyone who hopes to benefit from it reserves their support for it until after it is safe to support them publicly.  If you are saving your support until they succeed, you are part of the reason that they won't.  The support and commitment of the members needs to come first.  Naturally, they aren't doing themselves any favors in garnering support by turning up their nose at the majority of the population.
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Offline Camella Black

Re: NPUA
« Reply #182 on: Jun 16, 2010, 10:50 »
My question : As of today there are over 8 pages of posts concerning question and or comments about the NPUA; I would like to know if anyone has given real thought about addressing these questions either here or on Other Website.




Part of the reply I recieved from Kevin...

"We don't need to answer to a few people from one website who do not represent the opinions of the people we are helping. People on the other website that make unfounded accusations and personal attacks do not deserve a response. Period. We know what we are doing is right by the acceptance we have received from industry leaders. We have ALWAYS been accessible to anyone wanting to have their questions answered. Our phone number is 832.628.6782. It works fine. We average 12,000 minutes a month talking to people who want to stand up and make a change. Our email is admin@npua.org and it works great too.

There are other websites such as http://www.roadtechs.com and http://www.nuclearstreet.com. One website is not the voice of the industry. We should not be required to answer questions on any other website to be accepted as a credible answer to the problem with our industry. I think the article in the April issue of Nuclear News speaks volumes. We have been contacted by other reporters from industry standard periodicals who have requested information on industry events. These are professionals in their field of expertise. I didn't hear them stating that we had to answer questions posed by users of another website. This is where we will answer the questions.
"

Offline Rennhack

Re: NPUA
« Reply #183 on: Jun 17, 2010, 03:33 »
Kevin (by proxy) and Jeff have a very valid point.  We shouldn't expect people to come to our site to answer our questions about their company.  People should use the proper channels and methods.

That being said.  The other side of the coin has some valid points as well.  This site is a major source of information for their target demographic.  Just as Eric Bartlett is on here answering questions, so could Kevin.  One has chosen to be represented here officially, and one has not.  Kevin is not alone, Atlantic Grp does not come here and answer our questions either.  It's interesting to see the differences in the three 'companies' and how they market themselves.


pittbull29

  • Guest
Re: NPUA
« Reply #184 on: Jun 17, 2010, 08:21 »
And you wonder why people call this a Bartlett website????  Just like NPUA, Atlantic Group has a toll-free phone number and they reply to emails.

Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
NPUA
« Reply #185 on: Jun 17, 2010, 09:53 »
The argument, "I won't dignify that with a response" really means, "I don't have a response".  So, it is getting very tiresome to see all the excuses why nobody from NPUA has the guts to come here and talk to us.  Nobody from NPUA has the guts to come here and tell us why they don't want to talk to us.
Basically, if it isn't their canned message, formatted and presented in the way that they want you to see it, they don't have anything to say.
I would hope that someone who expects to negotiate the livelihood of others would be a little bit stronger a debater than that.
Seriously, if all you have to say is that you have nothing to say, then don't say anything.

Excuses are worthless.  If you want to be trusted with the lives and fortunes of many many people, you need to be a little less afraid of confrontation.  If you are afraid to debate me, the lawyers and union busters are going to eat you up.  But you don't even have to debate me.  In fact, I promise not to debate you at all.  All I ask is that you join the discussion.  I ask you to bring your message here instead of making people come and beg you for it.  If you do that, I'll lay off and let you have your say, but STOP sending your proxies here to snipe for you.  It isn't dignified.
« Last Edit: Jun 17, 2010, 10:04 by BeerCourt »
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Offline lauriedude

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 11
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 16
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: NPUA
« Reply #186 on: Jun 17, 2010, 10:40 »
Gee, I said something good about their site and my post is disappeared!  Am I just lost here?  I sometimes can't figure this site out the way the posts are.

Offline lauriedude

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 11
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 16
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: NPUA
« Reply #187 on: Jun 17, 2010, 10:47 »
I might add....I couldn't post that on the NPUA.org website because only members can post.  WTF?

Offline northstardjn

Re: NPUA
« Reply #188 on: Jun 17, 2010, 11:15 »
I last posted here in the fall of 2009.  Given what I felt were the less than sincere responses received, I decided to not waste my time.

It appears, however, the tone of the conversation has changed, which is good, so I figured I'll try again.

In 1979 when I got into this business, techs got rental cars (which they trashed) per diem, a days pay and per diem for travel, plus mileage.  Where are we now?

In 1992 I was getting $21.50 and hour plus per diem working as an engineering specialist at Fitz.  What were you earning?

Currently at some plants union laborers make as much or more than HPs. 

We carry a heavy knowledge burden, plants cannot have an outage with out us, yet we still make lower wages than most, if not all, skilled craft.  The only reason why our wages are low is because we are not organized.  There is no other answer which makes sense.

Techs have always been a fractious, independent, and stubborn lot, but I can think of no reason why there is no 100% support for the NPUA except fear.  Fear of not working, I guess.

Look around. Does anyone see a surfeit of technicians?  In most businesses supply and demand determine prices.  Why not in ours?  Is it possible that the two major contract companies, together with the utilities, conspire to keep wages low?  If so, what can we do about it?  That is where the NPUA comes in.

All anyone has to do is sign an Authorization Card send it to the NPUA, and wait.  That's it.  The cards are confidential.  The vote, when it comes, will be confidential.  There is really nothing to fear.

Bartlett has been sued in the past for retaliating against techs who supported the last effort, and Bartlett LOST.  They paid out, rather handsomely in a few cases. 

As to why the two major companies do not want to see us unionize, I think the answer is simple:  Money.

If pay, per diem, and benefits are equal across the board, then the only way for those companies to compete would be to cut costs and profit margins.  The money would come out of their pocket instead of the techs.  And, with equal pay across the board, newer, leaner companies would have the advantage at bidding time, not the large bloated ones.  Just imagine, 4 or 5 companies again instead of two.  Companies who would have to compete for techs, not just threaten them if they went somewhere else to work.

Beercort is right when he says this will fail if techs don't get off their duffs and act.  What will be even more pitiful is those same techs, the ones who take counsel of their fears, will be the ones saying "see, I told you it would fail".  It takes a little courage to stand up for yourself, apparently more than some people have.

Remember, the Authorization Cards are confidential.  The vote is confidential.  If you believe you are being retaliated against you can sue, and the NPUA has lawyers on call who can help.  You really do have nothing to fear but fear itself. 

So, why wouldn't you support the NPUA.

BTW, while they may have been just back ups, the NPUA did supply personnel to 5 outages this spring, 5 outages where the techs made more than most of you did.  Granted, that's just one year, but I worked for Bartlett back in 1980 and all Bruce had was backups.   

As to those who say the NPUA website doesn't have a lot of content, I'll bet Nukeworker didn't either when it started.  We could have this discussion there just as easy as here, but this site is a habit for a lot of people.  It will take time to get them all to switch, but I hope they do.  Personally, while I have only the word of people who say their posts have been deleted to rely on, I too believe this site may be a little biased towards a certain co-sponsor.

I could go on but I'm a hunt and peck typist, and this takes me way too long.

Hope to read some intelligent feedback in the coming days

Offline Rennhack

Re: NPUA
« Reply #189 on: Jun 18, 2010, 01:44 »
Personally, while I have only the word of people who say their posts have been deleted to rely on, I too believe this site may be a little biased towards a certain co-sponsor.

I challenge you to say anything you want about me, this site, and any company that sponsors this site.  We allow anyone to say anything.

I would however suggest that you start a new topic to do it, so that you are not off topic.

I started this site because i hated the censorship on roadwhore.  I don't believe in censoring people.  Say anything you like.  If you did a search of this site, you will see many people blasting me, this site, and the companies that sponsor this site.

It's perfectly ok to speak your mind here.

Offline Camella Black

Re: NPUA
« Reply #190 on: Jun 18, 2010, 01:59 »
The argument, "I won't dignify that with a response" really means, "I don't have a response".  So, it is getting very tiresome to see all the excuses why nobody from NPUA has the guts to come here and talk to us.  Nobody from NPUA has the guts to come here and tell us why they don't want to talk to us.
Basically, if it isn't their canned message, formatted and presented in the way that they want you to see it, they don't have anything to say.
I would hope that someone who expects to negotiate the livelihood of others would be a little bit stronger a debater than that.
Seriously, if all you have to say is that you have nothing to say, then don't say anything.

Excuses are worthless.  If you want to be trusted with the lives and fortunes of many many people, you need to be a little less afraid of confrontation.  If you are afraid to debate me, the lawyers and union busters are going to eat you up.  But you don't even have to debate me.  In fact, I promise not to debate you at all.  All I ask is that you join the discussion.  I ask you to bring your message here instead of making people come and beg you for it.  If you do that, I'll lay off and let you have your say, but STOP sending your proxies here to snipe for you.  It isn't dignified.

I could not agree more; this game of I'm not going to tell you unless you come to me is for the birds. I have spent the last couple of hours visiting the 2 other sites that were mentioned to me and wouldn't you know it there is no information to be had on their websites either. So the only source I can find for information is from the NPUA website... even a 5th grader is smart enough to know you must have more sources than one.

I guess it is very clear that we may be talking about the NPUA, but we won't be talking to them. As far as calling or emailing them, I know of people who are still waiting for emails to be answered and I don't understand the refusal to put the facts or data out there for all to see without having to beg for.


MR BIG

  • Guest
Re: NPUA
« Reply #191 on: Jun 18, 2010, 01:12 »
I might add....I couldn't post that on the NPUA.org website because only members can post.  WTF?

Here we go again with mis-information. NO, NO. NO......you DO NOT need to be a member to post on NPUA.org. You do however need to "register" on the forum link. You can remain anonymous. No one will know who you are. You can simply "make up" an e-mail address to register. It will accept it and then you can post.

Just wanted people to know the FACTS.

Offline lauriedude

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 11
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 16
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: NPUA
« Reply #192 on: Jun 18, 2010, 01:30 »
Well, thanks for that.  I guess I thought I registered when I filled out the card(s) at my work sites.  My bad :'(  Sorry

Offline northstardjn

Re: NPUA
« Reply #193 on: Jun 18, 2010, 07:57 »
"I challenge you to say anything you want about me, this site, and any company that sponsors this site.  We allow anyone to say anything.

I would however suggest that you start a new topic to do it, so that you are not off topic.

I started this site because i hated the censorship on roadwhore.  I don't believe in censoring people.  Say anything you like.  If you did a search of this site, you will see many people blasting me, this site, and the companies that sponsor this site.

It's perfectly ok to speak your mind here."  Rennhack

Well, number one, I really can't point to something on this site that has been censored, be it NPUA or anything else.  Proving a negative is always tough.

Number two, I believe somewhere in this thread Camella Black states that as a monerator, she has (had) the right to object
to content ( "First,  Moderators on this site are not, and were never meant to be impartial arbiters. ")  This statement seems to contradict the "lack of censorship" argument posed by you, Mr. Rennhack.  That or you are engaging in sophistry.  You know "I didn't do it.  I can't help what someone else, whom I appointed, does".  That particular scenario shows a lack of calcified vertabrae  (linguini spine).

Third, Bartlett is a co-sponsor.  You work for Bartlett.  As I understand it, you went from deconner to Rad Engineer, a pretty meteoric rise, considering it's hard to get an ALARA tech spot with any company unless you know somebody.  The appearance of a conflict of interest is quite high.

Fourth, as I stated above, while a union will help all techs, it will have a negative effect on the bottom line of rent-a-tech companies, at least the major ones.  I am sure that, as an intelligent man, you can understand why some such as myself are less than assured that Bartlett exerts no influence on you or the content of this site.  This, by the way, is one reason why the NPUA does not post here.  The feeling has been that, in the past, postings have been censored, possibly MS. Black being a less than objective moderator.

As I said, it's tough to prove a negative.  Perhaps, going forward, the NPUA will take you at your word and post here, believing that you won't engage in censorship from here forward.  I'll try to send that message to them.

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 13548
  • Total likes: 542
  • Karma: 5133
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: NPUA
« Reply #194 on: Jun 18, 2010, 09:30 »
Mr northstardjn,
   I am not currently a moderator but had been one for quite some time. We enforced the nukeworker rules as they were posted, when a moderator went beyond that stated function they were no longer moderators. I find your insinuation insulting and pompous. The company you seem to think is favored on this site has had many negative posts and debate about it positive and negative. If you and the NPUA can't handle the same treatment maybe you belong back up on the porch with the rest of the puppies.
  If you are finding some resistance to a union many of us have been there and done that, and when push came to shove many of the vocal advocates were in the plant while a few of us were out on the picket line. I don't have a dog in the union race as I have not swung a meter in a long time but I have recently been a moderator on this site and do take umbrage at your baseless accusations.

Not being a moderator allows me a lot more freedom to respond to tripe like this. We have now both violated rule number 4:

4. Please learn to be respectful, tolerate and support each other.  NukeWorker.com's goal is to help others, not see how many people we can annoy. Do not initiate arguments or tension. This will only cause the triggering of other members and make this site less professional.




Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: NPUA
« Reply #195 on: Jun 18, 2010, 10:20 »
Northstardjn,

You and I seem to have a fairly similar outlook on the situation.  Like you, I have seen the profession falling into a pitiable state over these last few years.  I want NPUA, or any legitimate organizing effort, to succeed.  This is why I am so hard on them.  They simply have to do this right or they will set back the profession even further.

At first, I was skeptical as anyone should be when someone offers you help that you didn't ask for.  I saw the early communication from NPUA as basically a scam.  Since then, I have been given reason to believe that it is not a scam, but perhaps misguided in its approach.  Now, it seems that they are aiming at the proper target, but STILL not using the right ammunition.  They are actually pushing people away -- or at least not attracting them strongly enough.

Remember 1990?  The IBEW never got my support in that effort because they never tried to get it.  They were indifferent, arrogant, or stupid.  Take your pick.  You can not get better wages and conditions without leverage.  By leverage, I mean enough people behind you that the employers have no choice but to bargain with you.  One outage here or there, or a few backups, is not enough to make them change their ways.  It isn't magic.  You just need to get enough technicians to say, "this is my union, and I will not work for you anywhere unless you bargain with them".  That is all.

As for Mike Rennhack being a Bartlett puppet, that is ludicrous.  The last two times I saw him, his hardhat had some other company's logo on it.  The sponsorship fee that Bartlett pays to this site is not enough to sway him or anyone else into saying what we don't believe.  It probably isn't even enough to cover the cost of running the forum.  I haven't worked for Bartlett in over six years.  That doesn't mean that I hate them.  It just means that I got a better job.

Mike has specifically instructed the moderators not to delete posts unless they violate the forum rules, and even then only if it is a significant enough violation to warrant the deletion of the post.  The last post I deleted was a one-liner that added NOTHING to the discussion from someone who was a member for only a short while.  And then I only deleted it after he had cancelled his membership.  The comment itself didn't agree or disagree with anyone.  It was just taking up space without saying anything at all.  If you read back a few pages you'll see that I don't tend to delete posts that disagree with me, or even insult me personally.  I delete the ones that don't say anything.  It is difficult for people to follow this discussion if it gets too filled up with meaningless junk.

Still the questions linger and go unanswered.  All we ask is that someone come here and give the NPUA's side of the story.  If we are saying things here that are incorrect, why not set us straight?  What on Earth are they afraid of?
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Offline Camella Black

Re: NPUA
« Reply #196 on: Jun 18, 2010, 10:57 »
"I challenge you to say anything you want about me, this site, and any company that sponsors this site.  We allow anyone to say anything.

I would however suggest that you start a new topic to do it, so that you are not off topic.

I started this site because i hated the censorship on roadwhore.  I don't believe in censoring people.  Say anything you like.  If you did a search of this site, you will see many people blasting me, this site, and the companies that sponsor this site.

It's perfectly ok to speak your mind here."  Rennhack

Well, number one, I really can't point to something on this site that has been censored, be it NPUA or anything else.  Proving a negative is always tough.

Number two, I believe somewhere in this thread Camella Black states that as a monerator, she has (had) the right to object
to content ( "First,  Moderators on this site are not, and were never meant to be impartial arbiters. ")
  This statement seems to contradict the "lack of censorship" argument posed by you, Mr. Rennhack.  That or you are engaging in sophistry.  You know "I didn't do it.  I can't help what someone else, whom I appointed, does".  That particular scenario shows a lack of calcified vertabrae  (linguini spine).

Third, Bartlett is a co-sponsor.  You work for Bartlett.  As I understand it, you went from deconner to Rad Engineer, a pretty meteoric rise, considering it's hard to get an ALARA tech spot with any company unless you know somebody.  The appearance of a conflict of interest is quite high.

Fourth, as I stated above, while a union will help all techs, it will have a negative effect on the bottom line of rent-a-tech companies, at least the major ones.  I am sure that, as an intelligent man, you can understand why some such as myself are less than assured that Bartlett exerts no influence on you or the content of this site.  This, by the way, is one reason why the NPUA does not post here.  The feeling has been that, in the past, postings have been censored, possibly MS. Black being a less than objective moderator.
As I said, it's tough to prove a negative.  Perhaps, going forward, the NPUA will take you at your word and post here, believing that you won't engage in censorship from here forward.  I'll try to send that message to them.

Northstardjn, please recheck your facts and post accordingly; at no time did I make the above statement, however I did state that I agreed with it. The author was in fact Beercourt.

I have to pull out the hip boots on the statement that postings have been censored on this thread as I follow it closely and have never seen anything being removed that related to the topic. As far as my former moderating, please understand that we moderators were assigned areas and moderated only those that we assigned. I'm a big girl and have no problems with pushing for answers or a response from the NPUA....now if you posted an off topic post in either the lodging, community or GM Entertainment sections then yes I may have deleted it.

Offline northstardjn

Re: NPUA
« Reply #197 on: Jun 19, 2010, 08:43 »
Thanks for the responses.

First off, I owe MS Black an apology.  The quote I used was in the body of a response sent to in regards to a Beercort posting, which is where I got it from.  I did read the whole thing, and took away from the quote that moderators were not being objective in their duties.  I really don't have time to read everything on this thread, but I should have caught the quotation marks. I missed them.  Sorry. I was wrong to attribute that to you, Ms Black.  I'll do my best to read closer in the future.

Second, at no time have I said or accused Mr. Rennhack of being a Bartlett puppet, but the conflict of interest remains, and, given what sooo many others have said about being censored, that possibility exists.  I have read enough of Mr. Beercorts posts to know that he has been honest, and , as I stated, going forward I will take this site at face value.

In 1992 I was working for performance engineering, as stated, at Fitz.  I knew the head of the department, who liked my work as an ALARA tech and offered me a position based on that work.  So, yes, I did know somebody.  Your point? 

As to getting the NPUA to post on this site, I'm trying.  I do know some of what the strategy is, and where things are headed, but I am not sure it's my place to speak to those issues.  I am going to try and get someone who can speak to those issues here, but, for all the reasons mentioned in my last two posts, it's tough sledding.  I'm sorry if no one likes it, but this site DOES have the reputation for censoring, there is an apparent conflict of interest, and getting through to those who feel they have been censored isn't easy.   


Offline Already Gone

  • Curmudgeon At Large
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 1769
  • Total likes: 5
  • Karma: 3388
  • Gender: Male
  • Did I say that out loud?
Re: NPUA
« Reply #198 on: Jun 19, 2010, 10:22 »
And thank you for your response.

I see that you are still a little wary of NukeWorker because we have a sponsorship from Bartlett.  I understand that you see the potential for a conflict of interest there.  But, consider this:

Any other company is welcome to sponsor this site at the same or higher level than Bartlett.  The NPUA is free to do so also.  Every utility and the vast majority of companies who contract with nuclear sites have posted jobs on this site.  They compete with each other and with Bartlett.  No sponsorship has made us turn them away.  As Mike has pointed out, there is PUHHHHLLLLEEEENTTTTYYYYY of anti-Bartlett sentiment expressed here all over the forum.  The only reason why Bartlett's side is represented here is that they choose to come here and give it.  This option is, again, available to all their competitors, and to the NPUA, free of charge. 

People will claim censorship whenever their own posts are edited or deleted.  Most of those who cry foul when we moderate their posts will also quickly click the Report to Moderator button on someone else's.  The fact is that we do not censor; we moderate.  The term is exactly what it says.  To moderate means that we keep the conversation civil.  We remove or edit things that are offensive, illegal, libelous, or unfair.  We clean up the clutter, organize the forums by putting posts in the proper places, remind the members of the rules, and try to help and give information.  So, ask yourself this, when someone cries that we are "censoring" his posts, is there a reason why?  Could it not be that the post was beyond the bounds of civil discourse?  Did we warn the member not to break the rules?  Did we ask or give him the opportunity to repost the message without the offensive content?  Really, can you just look around this site and say objectively that we censor people?  I mean, if we allow what we allow, what outrageous exception would we not allow?  If you can see all the posts where people are hanging over the edge of civility, bashing our sponsors, slamming our advertisers, insulting us personally, accusing, complaining, and throwing mud in ALL directions, what in the hell can be left?  No, if someone tell you he was censored on this site, you can be sure that he posted something that was an egregious violation of the rules and it got deleted or edited.

Honestly, I believe that I have never deleted or edited a post where the poster didn't look like a jerk (or more of a jerk) before I moderated his content.  They should actually be thanking us for saving them from embarrassing themselves. 

Now, can we please get back to the discussion?  I really want to know, how many members does NPUA have?  They claim to have hundreds, but there were not hundreds of techs refusing to work this past season for the non-union companies.  They staffed Wolf Creek with 59 people and only 15 showed up.  A union with hundreds of members should not only have filled all 59 spots, but there should have been a waiting list.
So, when I ask how many members they have, I'm not talking about how many resumes they have, or how many authorization cards they've collected; I'm asking how many dues-paying members in good standing are actually affiliated with this union?
"To be content with little is hard; to be content with much, impossible." - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach

Offline Smart People

  • Rad Engineer/Shipper
  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1265
  • Total likes: 2
  • Karma: 2492
  • Gender: Male
  • I like being around smart people
Re: NPUA
« Reply #199 on: Jun 19, 2010, 12:51 »
If I remember correctly, when Rennhack started the co-sponsor idea he offered it to several staffing companies. Bartlett was the only one who took him up on it. They are just paying for advertising space. Bartlett has no influence on the administration of the site.

If you'll check the Bartlett thread, several postings are negative to the company. They don't cry about it. But they do respond and give their side of the story. Knowing that Eric Bartlett will respond to posts and either explain the situation or find out the facts definitely generates respect from this poster.

All we are asking (I think) is that NPUA come on this site and do the same thing.
Blessed is the man who can laugh at himself--he will never cease to be amused
Think twice and say nothing..Chiun
I'm as big a fool as anyone..And bigger than most.. Odd Thomas

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2021 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?