DotMac4
Shill H8r
Premium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA
| Can't trust the union
The Union is only interested in what is good for the Union (as it of course should be). Trusting the Union's opinion as to why this is bad is no better than trusting the hack mouthpieces as Verizon telling us why this is good.
--
Help keep cable rates low; support "Big Cable" in their fight against the extortionists at the NFL Network! |
|
soothsayer15
join:2002-03-01
Irving, TX
| said by DotMac4  :The Union is only interested in what is good for the Union (as it of course should be). Trusting the Union's opinion as to why this is bad is no better than trusting the hack mouthpieces as Verizon telling us why this is good. That's true. People try to paint one side or the other as evil, but basically it's about money and protecting one's own interest. If I were in the CWA, I'd be complaining too, hearing the benefits Verizon gives union (associate) employees from some of the folks that work there. I'm sure CWA feels that Fairpoint has no way to agree to the same labor contract Verizon has agreed to. Working in corporate America for a while, the first thing new management does when they take over is look for ways to cut costs. Labor is the biggest costs most companies have.
All unions and union employees aren't bad, but in my personal experience, there are some that think they are entitled to something for nothing (or very little). |
|
Acuity
join:2002-06-22
Londonderry, NH | long live Verizon
I hope this doesn't go through. Even before the fuss started over here, the research that I did showed Fairpoint wasn't interested in fiber optics at all. What a horrible loss for New Hampshire it would be if Fairpoint took over. |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ | reply to DotMac4
Re: Can't trust the union
Regardless though, this much of the PR is true:
"you, the taxpayer, are in essence paying for Verizon to walk away from a neglected portion of their network." |
|
jtel
join:2005-06-28
Bristol, RI
| reply to Acuity
Re: long live Verizon
said by Acuity :I hope this doesn't go through. Even before the fuss started over here, the research that I did showed Fairpoint wasn't interested in fiber optics at all. What a horrible loss for New Hampshire it would be if Fairpoint took over. On the other hand how much of those states have FIOS rolled out? Some of southern New Hampshire?
If they feel the area is unprofitable and this doesn't go through what happens then? Do they just do the absolute minimum and wring what they can from the area?
Unfortunately it seems like a no win situation. Imagine what Qwest is up against? The vast majority of their territory is more rural than northern New England (well it looks that way anyway). |
|
KoolMoe
Aw Man
Premium
join:2001-02-14
Annapolis, MD
clubs:
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Speakeasy
| reply to DotMac4
Re: Can't trust the union
Of course each side is looking out for their financial interest, just as each side is (so I'm agreeing with you).
I like the proposal. How about working with VZ to do this, since VZ plainly want to. How about letting VZ take the $600 million (!!) write-off but putting $300 million into the proposed fund? Compromise?
By 'telecommunications providers', does the quoted article include Fairpoint? So the states could use the cash to subsidize Fairpoint's infrastructure expenses. Sounds reasonable...and much like the subsidies AT&T received when they faced large infrastructure costs.
KM |
|
DotMac4
Shill H8r
Premium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA
2 edits | I would be against that in saying why shouldn't Verizon get to use the same laws that other people and companies get. Why should they be denied a right off that they're legally entitled to?
While Verizon shouldn't get preferential treatment (eg free tax money from Penn taxpayers for fiber than never happened) they shouldn't get unequal penalties either.
If they're entitled to the $600M in write-offs then they should get it. Some people seem to think that a write-off is free tax money when it's not. They just get to pay that much LESS in taxes and virtually every tax payer gets to take tax deductions.
Personally I don't think there shouldn't be any corporate taxes since it just ends up being consumers paying the bill and higher taxes results in less companies wanting to do business here thus less employees (and trickle down effect) who do pay taxes. But that is a debate for another topic.
There should be no "subsidies" at all. I would say let local residents vote to pass a bond for deployment and if the bond passes and that local money is invested the municipality representing those taxpayers repaying the bond take partial ownership in their investment.
Locals pay (other taxpayers win), locals benefit (locals win), locals get more control (locals win). And if locals get a say perhaps they could insist on continuing CWA benefit levels should subscribers wish to be so charitable.
Seems under a plan like that everyone wins. |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| No Company Required to Maintain a Low Profit Business
Companies must focus on serving the best interests of their owners. ME, VT and NH simply isn't a lucrative market. That's the fault of the residents and business of those states, not Verizon's fault. The residents and businesses of those states, including its union members, should bear the brunt of the ramifications of their lack of profit potential.
If people really want a society with socialist tendencies, where businesses must serve society's best interests, then they should have the ganas to vote leaders into office who actually support that. It is duplicitous of people to clamor for more social conscience on the part of corporations, which ostensibly exist solely to generate profit, while they themselves are unwilling to subject themselves to that manner of social obligation. |
|
pundekargmailcom
@ac.in | to know about broadband service provider
dear sir, iwant to know about the company that provide the broadband service please send me the info on this thank you |
|
publius
@comcast.net
| reply to DotMac4
Re: Can't trust the union
jumping on the-unions-are-evil bandwagon is so easy if you don't know the facts. Has anyone here thought that members of the union are employees? and those employees work with, and know the phone and internet technology better than most anyone. They as a collective, are trying to inform the uneducated that think that this is just some type of attempt to keep their jobs. They know, more than anyone, who Fairpoint is and what they CANT do. Its going to be all of us consumers in new england that pay for it when Fairpoint fails.
Stop being so anti-union and listen to the facts!
»www.verizonvsfairpoint.com/index.php |
|
DotMac4
Shill H8r
Premium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA
| The union, like Verizon, doesn't give two squirts of piss about customers. They're only looking out for their own best interests which includes protecting their generous benefits packages.
Neither side can be trusted to spout anything but propaganda. |
|
publius
@comcast.net
| reply to bicker
Re: No Company Required to Maintain a Low Profit Business
...said the guy from massachusetts. Don't suppose you have FIOS in Burlington?
You do know that if this sale is approved Verizon wants to sell most of western and southern mass? So that would seem to a problem in your state, wouldn't it? Currently, the state of NH has fios installed in 28 communities, so I think the socialist state of NH is doing just fine thank you.
We are all fighting against Verizon leaving because they made a deal with the state governments to install broadband in exchange for reduced or eliminated taxes. Where is the social justice in them saving hundreds of millions of dollars over the past all the while not upgrading broadband, and THEN using a BS reverse morris trust tax loophole to make ANOTHER $600 million? We should all just let them take their money and walk away because we're not socialist?
No way! I say we hold them to their promises and not let them take the easy way out while selling to a company that CANNOT handle it currently owned company, never mind expanding by 300%?
Sorry I didn't use any big words, I'll open my dictionary next time. |
|
vermonster
@charter.com
| I love how FairPoint's latest TV ad for the merger (yes, they have to use TV ads to convince the people to support them.. wonder where the money for that comes from) mentions using the latest technology for broadband, when FairPoint has no interest in deploying FTTH anytime soon.
Also, the fact they use a political voice to say "FairPoint: Connecting New England to a brighter future" in their commercials is just funny.
FairPoint in VT has more complaints than any other POTS carrier, has slower and more expensive broadband, doesn't even have unlimited long distance packages, and simply can't acquire the debt load. If anything, Verizon should take over the few FairPoint markets here in VT and give us reasonably priced service.
-A |
|
publius
@comcast.net
| reply to DotMac4
Re: Can't trust the union
Do you forget that big ole bad union members are also the customers?
Second to that, what is wrong with someone looking out for their job? I assume that at your job if you find out one day that you may be downsized you're just going to say "okay" and apply at Walmart?
You are completely wrong about propaganda. Whether you believe it or not, the union has 95% of the time just regurtitated what Verizon or Fairpoint has said, but tried to bury. FACTS are facts. If you took your blinders off and tried to actually think for a minute that employees might be telling, at minimum, mostly the truth then maybe you would understand this deal. But because you are already biased against unions you can't see the truth, because you don't want to. |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| reply to publius
Re: No Company Required to Maintain a Low Profit Business
said by publius :
...said the guy from massachusetts. Don't suppose you have FIOS in Burlington? You suppose wrong. FIOS does provide service in Burlington.
Verizon should be allowed to sell whatever it wants. So should Comcast. If customers want to be serviced by an industry leader, then they need to make it such that offering them service is more profitable.
said by publius :
So that would seem to a problem in your state, wouldn't it? It isn't a "problem".
said by publius :
We are all fighting against Verizon leaving because they made a deal with the state governments to install broadband in exchange for reduced or eliminated taxes. Please post links to the actual wording of the agreements that were made. Show me that it precludes them from selling their terrestrial business to Fairpoint.
Don't blame Verizon for your area's lack of value as a market. |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | reply to vermonster
said by vermonster :
If anything, Verizon should take over the few FairPoint markets here in VT and give us reasonably priced service. Why? What possible rationale can you have to assert that? |
|
Publius
@comcast.net
| reply to bicker
"Please post links to the actual wording of the agreements that were made. Show me that it precludes them from selling their terrestrial business to Fairpoint."
Hows this for starters?
Pursuant to 35A M.R.S.A. § 1104, “[n]o public utility may abandon all or part ofits plant, property or system necessary or useful in the performance of its duties to the public, or discontinue the service which it is providing to the public by the use of such facilities, without first securing the commission’s approval.” |
|
vermonster
@charter.com | huh?
My proposal of VZ to takeover FP properties was a joke, not serious.
-A |
|
publius
@comcast.net | reply to bicker
Re: No Company Required to Maintain a Low Profit Business
said by bicker:
"Don't blame Verizon for your area's lack of value as a market."
um, I have Fios. thanks for asking |
|
bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | reply to Publius
Selling off a division is not "abandoning". |
|
