The Unknown Poster Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 @mikeoncrime: Manitoba lumber company fined $25,000 after log sent flying through groin of employee, exiting out his buttocks. Story coming. #bn
The Unknown Poster Posted October 23, 2015 Author Report Posted October 23, 2015 Anyone else surprised by the sudden layoffs at banks, and ofcourse MTS also? Anyone here impacted? My buddy was offered a package from TD a few weeks ago. He did well, though I think I'd prefer a good-paying job to a nice severance package. Seems to be a few businesses, even very profitable ones, wanting to streamline. TD Bank has begun a massive round of layoffs in Canada and the United States. The move comes after Boston Consulting Group reviewed the company’s operations and suggested cost-cutting measures. Staff were notified two weeks ago and the layoffs began immediately, with another round to continue next week. Reports say the bank plans to cut several hundred positions ranging from consultants to department heads by the end of the year. The bank recently expanded into the American market where it is now in the top 10. Bharat Masrani, who was named CEO a year ago, plans to expand that share over 2016 through acquisitions. TD Bank is the largest lender in Canada by assets and is looking for efficiency the economy struggles along. Scotiabank is the latest bank to slash jobs during a time of healthy profits. CBC News has learned that the company will be eliminating back office support staff jobs across the country. The positions typically involve paperwork for everything from commercial loans to account operations. The cuts will come over the next two years as Scotiabank closes regional operations and consolidates the services into two high-tech hubs in Toronto. Earlier this month, National Bank of Canada also announced job cuts. Canada's sixth biggest bank said it was eliminating "a few hundred employees" as part of a restructuring plan to address a slow-growth economy and new technologies. Staffing cutbacks are coming to MTS. Months after announcing it was cutting staffing levels at its Ontario-based Allstream division by 500 people to prepare it for sale, the telecommunications company has announced its Manitoba labour force will also be scaled down. A voluntary workforce reduction program is being offered to both unionized and non-unionized staff, with the number of reductions dependent on employee interest and organizational needs.
The Unknown Poster Posted October 23, 2015 Author Report Posted October 23, 2015 Something that impacts many of us. I don't know about you guys but I've found the snow clearing the last couple of years to be atrocious.Free PressThe union representing several thousand civic workers says it can save city hall millions of dollars annually by reducing the share of snowclearing work done by private contractors and doing more of the work using city employees.Union sources said a report from CUPE Local 500 will show that city hall can save on average $3 million annually for up to 10 years through a series a measures, relying increasingly on the civic workforce.Mike Davidson, president of CUPE Local 500, which represents about 4,600 city employees across most civic departments, is holding a 10:30 a.m. news conference at the Union Centre, where the report and details will be released."This is a detailed plan that we believe will show what we’re proposing is workable, will save taxpayers money and provide improved service," Davidson said in August when discussing the findings that will be released this morning.The city contracts out about 80 per cent of its snowclearing work but Davidson maintains private contractors are unreliable, unable to meet standards and cause thousands of dollars in damages every year to private property, for which the city refuses to accept responsibility.Davidson has come to city hall several times in the last two years demanding pubic works demonstrate with a proper study that private contractors are a cost-effective way to clear snow. Davidson said giving a greater share of the snowclearing work to city staff would produce better results with less cost and ensure accountability for prompt and proper snowclearing.Observers have been skeptical of Davidson's claims, questioning how the city could maintain the staff and the fleet of heavy equipment that private contractors are required to have on hand.Davidson was ready to bring his report to city hall in September but held it back after the public works department failed to produce an internal cost-benefit analysis comparing snowclearing work done by the private sector with what might be achieved with a greater reliance on city employees.The department was given an extension to November to produce its findings.The role of private contractors in the city's snowclearing program came under fire during the extreme weather conditions two winters ago, when residents across the city complained about the poor quality of work -- one contractor repeatedly failed to clear the area assigned to it and parts of Sage Creek and South St. Vital were repeatedly missed.Despite that poor showing, public works director Brad Sacher maintained the city was getting good value for the money it was paying contractors.Earlier this year, the union capitalized on public anger over snowclearing efforts and set up a hotline and website to collect those complaints.While not a scientific survey, CUPE 500 said in June two-thirds of those who contacted the union were unhappy with the quality of snowclearing by private contractors; and that using private contractors has impacted the city’s accountability to citizens and its reputation.The public works department was thrown into disarray in September when Sacher unexpectedly announced his resignation. He had been under intense pressure lately, coping with the problematic Plessis underpass project, which is behind schedule and over budget, the snowclearing program and other issues within the department.Transcona Coun. Russ Wyatt has been a harsh critic of Sacher and the department, attacking it for failing to complete the Plessis project and most recently questioning the decision to hire a consultant for the pedestrian and cycling strategy who is the spouse of the city's traffic engineer. Wyatt recently called fro Sacher's suspension.Sacher came to the city in 2005 after a successful career with the provincial highways department. He became the department director in 2009.Sacher's wife, Diane Sacher, is the director of water and waste. She has been on an unexplained leave since April.
The Unknown Poster Posted October 29, 2015 Author Report Posted October 29, 2015 @CTVNews: Manitoba hockey team asked to change 'derogatory' Redskins name https://t.co/uazRLSpCWOhttps://t.co/W6gZ1p79RK Just a reminder, it's 2015.
Noeller Posted October 29, 2015 Report Posted October 29, 2015 I was on the team exec committee during the 06/07 season. There's First Nations members on the team and they don't want it changed. This is white people complaining for the sake of complaining.
The Unknown Poster Posted October 29, 2015 Author Report Posted October 29, 2015 I was on the team exec committee during the 06/07 season. There's First Nations members on the team and they don't want it changed. This is white people complaining for the sake of complaining. I think there is a thread with a long debate about this. But a white person wanting it changed doesnt speak for all white people, First Nations people not wanting it changed dont speak for all Aboriginals. Its a racial slur. And it's silly that its still even debated. sweep the leg 1
The Unknown Poster Posted October 29, 2015 Author Report Posted October 29, 2015 In totally different news: @winnipegsun: Taylor Swift files countersuit against radio DJ accused of groping her backstage https://t.co/RxoGNx1V5S Good for her.
New_Earth_Mud Posted October 30, 2015 Report Posted October 30, 2015 As for the snow clearing thing.... Id say dont complain unless you have tried it. I have drove a plow in this city the last few years. Go try it and then you can complain about it. My advice if its to be done better and faster. When out driving and you see it being done? Go away and let them remove it. The amount of people that seem to want to drive in the way of what im doing is remarkable to me. I was shocked the first year i did it. Sry for the rant... I live on both sides.
Logan007 Posted October 30, 2015 Report Posted October 30, 2015 I was on the team exec committee during the 06/07 season. There's First Nations members on the team and they don't want it changed. This is white people complaining for the sake of complaining. I think there is a thread with a long debate about this. But a white person wanting it changed doesnt speak for all white people, First Nations people not wanting it changed dont speak for all Aboriginals. Its a racial slur. And it's silly that its still even debated. That's like telling me that when Russell Peters makes fun of East Indian's, that it's racist. The N word is a racial slur that should never be used...yet nowadays people are using it left right and center as if it's no big deal. It's one thing if someone says it to someone else or to a group of people as a slur, but calling a team Redskins that even the aboriginals on the team don't care about, then who cares? People like you need to get off your high horse. All that "political correctness" that people spew and telling us what we should and shouldn't be allowed to think is right or wrong, is what's wrong with this world. Just remember, you don't speak for all the Aboriginals in this world either. It's your opinion, and that's it. FYI, I'm just using this post as a point. You tend to do this in a lot of threads where your opinion is the correct one and whoever doesn't follow it is a racist or doesn't know what they're talking about or is just plain wrong.
The Unknown Poster Posted October 30, 2015 Author Report Posted October 30, 2015 I had a great post and lost it but Ill paraphrase. You tend to do this in a lot of threads where your opinion is the correct one and whoever doesn't follow it is a racist or doesn't know what they're talking about or is just plain wrong. People like you need to get off your high horse. You've already lost the debate if you're going to break out rhetoric and nonsense like that. How often do you express your opinion and think its wrong? Where is the logic behind your statement that I express that my opinion is the correct one. ofcourse I think my opinion is correct. If I thought it was wrong it wouldnt be my opinion. But its still an OPINION. You dont know me. Im not politically correct for political correctness sake. I suppose you are correct in that the N word is used a lot. I anxiously await when a major sport names a team the Las Vegas N'ers. I tend to think teams like Blackhawks and Braves chose those names out of a sense of honor. I havent done the research. But to me, choosing those names was to imply the honor, courage, fighting spirt of the people. Redskins? Come on. This isnt me saying Im right and you're a racist. Im subscribing to common sense and logic. And if you think thats me just dismissing your opinion, well all I can say is yes I think if you believe Redskin is a suitable and acceptable way to describe Aboriginal people, then you are wrong. I think people on both sides (but mostly the ones who support the name) have formed opinions without doing some research. So a little paraphrased history: Those against the term generally subscribe to the idea that "Redskin" refers to the scalped heads of Aboriginal people slaughtered by white men. But more often than not, this isnt the case (though I'd strongly assume the term *was* used in that context but not specifically). "Red Skin" originated with Aboriginals as a way to describe themselves to differentiate from "White Skins". So it was originally a benign term. Red Skin and White Skin used much like we'd say Black and White today without any negative racial connotations. But then again, the N word was used in every day conversations in the 1800's and no one thought it was racist. It sure is now though isnt it? And thats the issue here. Its not what the word used to mean or what its intent is. If the original namers of the Washington Redskins intended the name as an honor of Aboriginal people, then great for them. But if a football team from 1890 was called the Tennesee N'ers, would that name still exist today? Ofcourse not. Not even a discussion. Personally, in my experience (i have Aboriginal siblings, friends and ex'es) many Aboriginal people use the term "Indian" to describe themselves and others without negative connotation. But never have I heard them use the word Redskin. I've never heard the term used, outside of sports, in a non-offensive way. Have you? Do you ever have conversations with people where you discuss "Redskins"? I doubt it. Why not? We both know why. My opinion doesnt make me right. And you're assertion that I think Im right is not a reasonable counter argument.
Taynted_Fayth Posted October 30, 2015 Report Posted October 30, 2015 U cant win with the natives, some dont like being called indians, some dont like being called aboriginal. Hell some dont like to be called canadian either. Its all a white man label. As much as ur awaiting the las vegas n'ers, (lol btw) I waiting for the university of north dakota fighting you guys. Ppl need to stop droppin the racial card cuz that's usually what makes it about race to begin with
bigg jay Posted October 30, 2015 Report Posted October 30, 2015 U cant win with the natives, some dont like being called indians, some dont like being called aboriginal. Hell some dont like to be called canadian either. Its all a white man label. As much as ur awaiting the las vegas n'ers, (lol btw) I waiting for the university of north dakota fighting you guys. Ppl need to stop droppin the racial card cuz that's usually what makes it about race to begin with The Unknown Poster and bearpants 2
Taynted_Fayth Posted October 30, 2015 Report Posted October 30, 2015 lol of course I do, i referenced the UofND because as far as i know people were trying to have the name fighting sioux changed. not sure how recent this redskins issue is but the fighting sioux one was a few years ago
bigg jay Posted October 30, 2015 Report Posted October 30, 2015 As much as ur awaiting the las vegas n'ers, (lol btw) I waiting for the university of north dakota fighting you guys. Can you please explain the above sentence then because right now... bearpants 1
Taynted_Fayth Posted October 30, 2015 Report Posted October 30, 2015 I stated some natives dont like to be called indians, some dont like to be called aboriginial, some dont even like to be called canadian. like TUP says (sarcastically) hes anxiously waiting the las vegas n'ers i said i was also waiting for the name change of the UND fighting sioux to the UND fighting "you guys" cuz people were bitching about that name too which was the basis for a similar conversation a while back. no body had a problem with the name, the name wasnt meant to be offensive, then 1 person cries racism and suddenly its in jeopardy of being changed
bigg jay Posted October 30, 2015 Report Posted October 30, 2015 Perhaps you should use take the extra half second and use proper grammar then (even half-assed grammar would be a step up). I know you have the time.
New_Earth_Mud Posted October 31, 2015 Report Posted October 31, 2015 U cant win with the natives, some dont like being called indians, some dont like being called aboriginal. Hell some dont like to be called canadian either. Its all a white man label. As much as ur awaiting the las vegas n'ers, (lol btw) I waiting for the university of north dakota fighting you guys. Ppl need to stop droppin the racial card cuz that's usually what makes it about race to begin with LOL Native is pretty much acceptable. Aboriginal is pretty much also. Indians come from India. We are all Canadians thats a name meant for ALL or us here not just one race of people. Polish people prolly dont like to be called pollacks or polls, and this can be said for many races of people. Its not that you just cant win with the Natives.
Taynted_Fayth Posted October 31, 2015 Report Posted October 31, 2015 Do u think the irish would have an issue with notre dame?
New_Earth_Mud Posted October 31, 2015 Report Posted October 31, 2015 I had a great post and lost it but Ill paraphrase. You tend to do this in a lot of threads where your opinion is the correct one and whoever doesn't follow it is a racist or doesn't know what they're talking about or is just plain wrong. People like you need to get off your high horse. You've already lost the debate if you're going to break out rhetoric and nonsense like that. How often do you express your opinion and think its wrong? Where is the logic behind your statement that I express that my opinion is the correct one. ofcourse I think my opinion is correct. If I thought it was wrong it wouldnt be my opinion. But its still an OPINION. You dont know me. Im not politically correct for political correctness sake. I suppose you are correct in that the N word is used a lot. I anxiously await when a major sport names a team the Las Vegas N'ers. I tend to think teams like Blackhawks and Braves chose those names out of a sense of honor. I havent done the research. But to me, choosing those names was to imply the honor, courage, fighting spirt of the people. Redskins? Come on. This isnt me saying Im right and you're a racist. Im subscribing to common sense and logic. And if you think thats me just dismissing your opinion, well all I can say is yes I think if you believe Redskin is a suitable and acceptable way to describe Aboriginal people, then you are wrong. I think people on both sides (but mostly the ones who support the name) have formed opinions without doing some research. So a little paraphrased history: Those against the term generally subscribe to the idea that "Redskin" refers to the scalped heads of Aboriginal people slaughtered by white men. But more often than not, this isnt the case (though I'd strongly assume the term *was* used in that context but not specifically). "Red Skin" originated with Aboriginals as a way to describe themselves to differentiate from "White Skins". So it was originally a benign term. Red Skin and White Skin used much like we'd say Black and White today without any negative racial connotations. But then again, the N word was used in every day conversations in the 1800's and no one thought it was racist. It sure is now though isnt it? And thats the issue here. Its not what the word used to mean or what its intent is. If the original namers of the Washington Redskins intended the name as an honor of Aboriginal people, then great for them. But if a football team from 1890 was called the Tennesee N'ers, would that name still exist today? Ofcourse not. Not even a discussion. Personally, in my experience (i have Aboriginal siblings, friends and ex'es) many Aboriginal people use the term "Indian" to describe themselves and others without negative connotation. But never have I heard them use the word Redskin. I've never heard the term used, outside of sports, in a non-offensive way. Have you? Do you ever have conversations with people where you discuss "Redskins"? I doubt it. Why not? We both know why. My opinion doesnt make me right. And you're assertion that I think Im right is not a reasonable counter argument. Id agree with this.
New_Earth_Mud Posted October 31, 2015 Report Posted October 31, 2015 Do u think the irish would have an issue with notre dame? No.... and im guessing thats his point. The Irish are Irish. Your not calling them something they dont call themselves
Taynted_Fayth Posted October 31, 2015 Report Posted October 31, 2015 Im more refering to the fighting sioux which was a hot topic before with same premise. I lived on a reserve and have many native friends. Plenty of them call themselves indians, and for sake of debate, the native community refer to themselves as the red portion on the medicine wheel, or circle of life...ect
New_Earth_Mud Posted October 31, 2015 Report Posted October 31, 2015 And back to the snow clearing.... GET OUT OF THE WAY. LOL bearpants 1
The Unknown Poster Posted October 31, 2015 Author Report Posted October 31, 2015 I had a great post and lost it but Ill paraphrase. You tend to do this in a lot of threads where your opinion is the correct one and whoever doesn't follow it is a racist or doesn't know what they're talking about or is just plain wrong. People like you need to get off your high horse. You've already lost the debate if you're going to break out rhetoric and nonsense like that. How often do you express your opinion and think its wrong? Where is the logic behind your statement that I express that my opinion is the correct one. ofcourse I think my opinion is correct. If I thought it was wrong it wouldnt be my opinion. But its still an OPINION. You dont know me. Im not politically correct for political correctness sake. I suppose you are correct in that the N word is used a lot. I anxiously await when a major sport names a team the Las Vegas N'ers. I tend to think teams like Blackhawks and Braves chose those names out of a sense of honor. I havent done the research. But to me, choosing those names was to imply the honor, courage, fighting spirt of the people. Redskins? Come on. This isnt me saying Im right and you're a racist. Im subscribing to common sense and logic. And if you think thats me just dismissing your opinion, well all I can say is yes I think if you believe Redskin is a suitable and acceptable way to describe Aboriginal people, then you are wrong. I think people on both sides (but mostly the ones who support the name) have formed opinions without doing some research. So a little paraphrased history: Those against the term generally subscribe to the idea that "Redskin" refers to the scalped heads of Aboriginal people slaughtered by white men. But more often than not, this isnt the case (though I'd strongly assume the term *was* used in that context but not specifically). "Red Skin" originated with Aboriginals as a way to describe themselves to differentiate from "White Skins". So it was originally a benign term. Red Skin and White Skin used much like we'd say Black and White today without any negative racial connotations. But then again, the N word was used in every day conversations in the 1800's and no one thought it was racist. It sure is now though isnt it? And thats the issue here. Its not what the word used to mean or what its intent is. If the original namers of the Washington Redskins intended the name as an honor of Aboriginal people, then great for them. But if a football team from 1890 was called the Tennesee N'ers, would that name still exist today? Ofcourse not. Not even a discussion. Personally, in my experience (i have Aboriginal siblings, friends and ex'es) many Aboriginal people use the term "Indian" to describe themselves and others without negative connotation. But never have I heard them use the word Redskin. I've never heard the term used, outside of sports, in a non-offensive way. Have you? Do you ever have conversations with people where you discuss "Redskins"? I doubt it. Why not? We both know why. My opinion doesnt make me right. And you're assertion that I think Im right is not a reasonable counter argument. Id agree with this. Another example of being wrong unfortunately. High horse. Hilarious. Much rather be right than ignorant.
New_Earth_Mud Posted October 31, 2015 Report Posted October 31, 2015 Im more refering to the fighting sioux which was a hot topic before with same premise. I lived on a reserve and have many native friends. Plenty of them call themselves indians, and for sake of debate, the native community refer to themselves as the red portion on the medicine wheel, or circle of life...ect May i ask what your background is? As for your thing with the Sioux ... Its different because its a Tribe. Its not the same issue and calling you team the Redskins. Sioux , Cree and so on. Its more a trademark money thing rather then a race. Use their name.... Pay them.
Recommended Posts