"Terasen Gas" Grand Assholes of BC

[nyx]

GBM, I agree with you entirely. Terasen is a black hearted entity. I harbour a pure and simply hatred towards them and have on many occasions hoped that their board of directors burn in hell, slowly. Here is a link to an article I enjoyed on the issue of having a Texas based company owning the pipelines that we depend upon...

Screwed by the Americans... again.

I am wondering if we are going to end up like the Ukraine, when Russia decided to turn off the taps...

 

[butter]

And since you stated that somehow private companies are run more efficiently than government.

I did? Where?

They are lazy, stupid and over paid because that's the kind of people they are and they are in a position of power to get away with it. It has nothing to do with being in a union or not.

Agreed, though while both types of organizations have far too much dead weight unions tend to overpay the deadweight more. Creating the sentiment that cleaning staff in hospitals are worth $25/hour but cleaning staff at McPukes are worth $8/hour. A mop is a mop.

I think the main point here though is that oil/gas have collusive oligopolies and it sucks to have to depend on/support them.

 

[metoo113]

I did? Where?



Agreed, though while both types of organizations have far too much dead weight unions tend to overpay the deadweight more. Creating the sentiment that cleaning staff in hospitals are worth $25/hour but cleaning staff at McPukes are worth $8/hour. A mop is a mop.

I think the main point here though is that oil/gas have collusive oligopolies and it sucks to have to depend on/support them.

Your right a mop is a mop but generally a mop at McD's doesn't have flesh eating bacteria in it, or HIV, or blood, etc.

 

[Maury Beniowski]

That assertion has more to do with risk tolerance than value for work done.

You're connecting two distinct and unrelated dots. Strange comparison, indeed.

Realistically, those hospital cleaning staff are not in any way, "forced" to face these risks at any price, but do so of their own free will.

I could give you hundreds of activities that earn little or no wages but carry even greater risks.

But I won't.

 

[rickoshadows]

That assertion has more to do with risk tolerance than value for work done.

You're connecting two distinct and unrelated dots. Strange comparison, indeed.

Realistically, those hospital cleaning staff are not in any way, "forced" to face these risks at any price, but do so of their own free will.

I could give you hundreds of activities that earn little or no wages but carry even greater risks.

But I won't.

Suppose you're going in for surgery, who would you rather clean your OR and Recovery room? A professional cleaner, or an $8/hour lackey.
The hospitals are having problems with the contract cleaners. the ones who are meeting the standard can't keep employees and others are not meeting the standard. Any job done right requires motiviation and skill, wages and benefits are a large part of aquiring that. When the current contracts expire, there wil be a major shock to the various Health Authorities, and us the taxpayer.

I can't get over that perfectly reasonable people have no issue with paying premium prices for quality goods, don't believe the same should apply to quality labor.

 

[metoo113]

That assertion has more to do with risk tolerance than value for work done.

You're connecting two distinct and unrelated dots. Strange comparison, indeed.

Realistically, those hospital cleaning staff are not in any way, "forced" to face these risks at any price, but do so of their own free will.

I could give you hundreds of activities that earn little or no wages but carry even greater risks.

But I won't.

Give your head a shake. If the guy at Mcd's doesn't mop out the lobby, all you have is a dirty lobby. If someone in the hospital doesn't clean the operating room properly someone could die from an infection. Big difference, and the main reason why I would want the guy cleaning the operating room makin more money then the kid at Mcd's.

 

[expo joe]

I agree with Hatrick,

You'd better start budgeting for your pooning habit and stick to it..... because the warmth supplied by SP's doesn't come anywhere near the duration of the heating system in your home

 

[noneasgood]

wow ... this statement is so wrong.

Terasen does not set the price of natural gas on the open market. Canada and the US, comprise a single market. This means that any changes in production, distribution or demand in one region will affect other regions. ie: hurricane Katrina affected the entire market, a cold snap in one region will affect prices continent wide.

Terasen purchases the gas you use on the open the market. Terasen charges residential customers, what they had to pay for the gas, WITHOUT MARKUP.

Transportation costs apply to interprovincial and international transportation of gas and are regulated by the federal government.

Distribution costs are the costs of taking the gas from the interprovincial / international pipelines and delivering it to the users. These costs are regulated by the provincial government.

Finally, gas is not cheap. Just like oil, there are exploration, extraction, production and distribution costs associated with natural gas.

This is basically my understanding of the relationship as well. Terasen gas makes their profits on the delivery of natural gas, they don't manufacture it, and secondly, prices are regulated and they have to get government approval for any increases.

 

[noneasgood]

Yes but

Suppose you're going in for surgery, who would you rather clean your OR and Recovery room? A professional cleaner, or an $8/hour lackey.
The hospitals are having problems with the contract cleaners. the ones who are meeting the standard can't keep employees and others are not meeting the standard. Any job done right requires motiviation and skill, wages and benefits are a large part of aquiring that. When the current contracts expire, there wil be a major shock to the various Health Authorities, and us the taxpayer.

I can't get over that perfectly reasonable people have no issue with paying premium prices for quality goods, don't believe the same should apply to quality labor.

What happens when you have a situation where you have for example three works getting $20 an hour for premium labour services and only one is providing this type of service. The other two aren't but you can't get ride of these two because they're unionized and have seniority rights. This is where your argument falls apart. If they weren't unionized two would either be gone or get less pay then the premium worker. If all workers were the same and/or you had the power to get ride of the ones not towing the line your argument would have more merit.

 

[Maury Beniowski]

Your right a mop is a mop but generally a mop at McD's doesn't have flesh eating bacteria in it, or HIV, or blood, etc.

So now germs, viruses and bacteria respect boundaries established by specialized training and Unionized wage levels? That's funny, the last time I checked, flesh eating staphylococcus (Necrotizing Fasciitis) germs were still rampant in hospitals. Where were they forty years ago when the wages were low, or should I say reasonable. Statistics have shown repeatedly that hospitals are still one of the worst places to go when you one gets sick. They are the last place I'll go if I ever do. I wouldn't even be caught dead in one. It's a perpetuated myth to believe that there is a correlation between high wages and cleanliness, but that is evidently what is being suggested here. If you'd like a primer on the risks associated with hospitals, read this: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/hospital-infections/. The Internet is filled with professional discussions on the topic. Just hope you never have to stay or even visit in one. One thing is for certain: Paying people more doesn't make hospitals any safer by any stretch of the imagination. But I'm sure there are lots of people who are dependent on the hospital trough, who would have you believe otherwise.

 

[metoo113]

So now germs, viruses and bacteria respect boundaries established by specialized training and Unionized wage levels? That's funny, the last time I checked, flesh eating staphylococcus (Necrotizing Fasciitis) germs were still rampant in hospitals. Where were they forty years ago when the wages were low, or should I say reasonable. Statistics have shown repeatedly that hospitals are still one of the worst places to go when you one gets sick. They are the last place I'll go if I ever do. I wouldn't even be caught dead in one. It's a perpetuated myth to believe that there is a correlation between high wages and cleanliness, but that is evidently what is being suggested here. If you'd like a primer on the risks associated with hospitals, read this: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/hospital-infections/. The Internet is filled with professional discussions on the topic. Just hope you never have to stay or even visit in one. One thing is for certain: Paying people more doesn't make hospitals any safer by any stretch of the imagination. But I'm sure there are lots of people who are dependent on the hospital trough, who would have you believe otherwise.

I don't think Mcd's has ever had a case of flesh eating bacteria in one of their stores.

Forty years ago you didn't hear of (Necrotizing Fasciitis). Since it's caused by a antibiotic resistant bacteria, it most likely wasn't around 40 years ago in its present form. Staph infections 40 years ago were for the most part easily cured with antibiotics. Also staphylococcus is found on most peoples skin so unless the hospital workers were going to scrub down everyone who comes into the hospital it's hard to control. Forty years ago was before they started to put antibacterial stuff in everything. Remember if it only kills 99.9% of the bacteria what happens to the .01%. Bingo Superbug.

Forty years ago wages were lower then today and more reasonable but so were the costs of living. You didn't hear about CEO's of companies making 25million a year while cutting 25,000 workers jobs who all made $15/hr. Companies appeared to have a moral obligation to their employee's to help them prosper as well. That does not appear to be the case today.


I just want someone who cares about their job to be doin the cleaning in the operating room. Someone making a livable wage that pays his mortgage is more likely to care about his job then someone who doesn't make enough to feed himself. The BC gov't cuts cleaning staff wages because it can. But when the doctors come looking for more money they bend over backwards to give them what they want and then they screw the rest of the workers.

 

[metoo113]

What happens when you have a situation where you have for example three works getting $20 an hour for premium labour services and only one is providing this type of service. The other two aren't but you can't get ride of these two because they're unionized and have seniority rights. This is where your argument falls apart. If they weren't unionized two would either be gone or get less pay then the premium worker. If all workers were the same and/or you had the power to get ride of the ones not towing the line your argument would have more merit.

Sorry, but this is one myth that anti-union people love to spread. If someone is not doing their job in a union enviroment you can get rid of them just as easy as in a non-union job. You just have to document, document, document. I've fired many people from their union jobs for not performing properly or violating the rules of the job. All it takes in the management to do their job properly.

 

[butter]

Forty years ago wages were lower then today and more reasonable but so were the costs of living. You didn't hear about CEO's of companies making 25million a year while cutting 25,000 workers jobs who all made $15/hr. Companies appeared to have a moral obligation to their employee's to help them prosper as well. That does not appear to be the case today.

Agreed.

I just want someone who cares about their job to be doin the cleaning in the operating room. Someone making a livable wage that pays his mortgage is more likely to care about his job then someone who doesn't make enough to feed himself. .

Disagree with your premise completely. Firstly some 45% plus of all jobs in North America pay whatever minimum wage is or very close to it. Do you think none of those people care about their jobs? Secondly do they not also deserve to be making a livable wage? Of course increasing thier pay will lead to more inflation and whatever wage they end up with will only be livable for a short period of time.

 

[butter]

I can't get over that perfectly reasonable people have no issue with paying premium prices for quality goods, don't believe the same should apply to quality labor.

I don't have an issue with that at all. As long as the quality labour is reasonably priced when compared to the commodity version of the same work. I think the restaurant industry is one of the few that actually has a reasonable pay scale. Fast food kitchen workers $8/hour apart from a few managers. Fine dining kitchen workers $12-14/h except for a few managers. For someone to be paid 75% more for a "quality" job I have no issues. 200-500% more for doing a job comparable to someone else making minimum wage is obscene. It leads deflating the value of minimum wage.

 

[noneasgood]

Sorry, but this is one myth that anti-union people love to spread. If someone is not doing their job in a union enviroment you can get rid of them just as easy as in a non-union job. You just have to document, document, document. I've fired many people from their union jobs for not performing properly or violating the rules of the job. All it takes in the management to do their job properly.

So then I take it you are now in a mangement position of some kind. Care to expand on that because I simply disagree with your assertion. It's not that you can't fire someone for cause but subjective issues such as performance relative to others isn't one of them. You seem to think you're the only one with any real experience with this issue. I too have been in unions, filed griviences, and been in management. And firing people in the scenario I mentioned isn't easy. And telling the truth of how things work, doesn't make me anti-union.

 

[georgebushmoron]

Call Terasen and ask them to put you on an equal payment plan, whose rate will be calculated based either on a twelve month period, if you've been a client that long, or base it on the previous owner or tenant's consumption charges.

And furthermore, pay your frickin' bill on time next month...

I've thought long and hard about the equal payment plan, and come to the conclusion it would never work for me as I collect rent as well. In the summer time, it would be pretty hard to justify a gas bill to a month-to-month tenant that would be much higher than normal. With tenants, its better to pay per consumption.

And stop telling me to pay the bill on time... what's the big fucking deal being a week late. They can afford the loss on interest income on money they would have otherwise received, and that interest income has much more impact to me. Frankly, I don't see why they can't behave like every other utility company that exists and has a monopoly. It's not like I can shop around to get gas from someone else.

 

[metoo113]

Agreed.



Disagree with your premise completely. Firstly some 45% plus of all jobs in North America pay whatever minimum wage is or very close to it. Do you think none of those people care about their jobs? Secondly do they not also deserve to be making a livable wage? Of course increasing thier pay will lead to more inflation and whatever wage they end up with will only be livable for a short period of time.

I'd love to see information to support your position that giving people a livable wage increases inflation.

 

[metoo113]

So then I take it you are now in a mangement position of some kind. Care to expand on that because I simply disagree with your assertion. It's not that you can't fire someone for cause but subjective issues such as performance relative to others isn't one of them. You seem to think you're the only one with any real experience with this issue. I too have been in unions, filed griviences, and been in management. And firing people in the scenario I mentioned isn't easy. And telling the truth of how things work, doesn't make me anti-union.

Never said I was the only one who has experience on this issue so I don't know where that one came from.

In a union enviroment when you hire someone they are told the expectations of the job and what performance is needed to keep the job. You document, follow up and measure performance which in most cases is not subjective. ie: either they process a certain amount of things or they don't. If they do not have the ability to perform at the expected level or they will not perform to that level then you can fire them. Again document, document, document. All you have to show that you made the effort to improve their performance, they were counselled and talked to about the matter a number of times and then if they still don't improve why would you keep them on.

If you were a mailman and all you could do was deliver half the normal amount of mail in a day compared to the rest of the mailman you would be let go. (our promoted into management)

 

[noneasgood]

Never said I was the only one who has experience on this issue so I don't know where that one came from.

In a union enviroment when you hire someone they are told the expectations of the job and what performance is needed to keep the job. You document, follow up and measure performance which in most cases is not subjective. ie: either they process a certain amount of things or they don't. If they do not have the ability to perform at the expected level or they will not perform to that level then you can fire them. Again document, document, document. All you have to show that you made the effort to improve their performance, they were counselled and talked to about the matter a number of times and then if they still don't improve why would you keep them on.

If you were a mailman and all you could do was deliver half the normal amount of mail in a day compared to the rest of the mailman you would be let go. (our promoted into management)

Well I wouldn't want reality to get in the way of your argument so I'll simply let you go on believing what you think to be true.

 

[rickoshadows]

metoo113 is correct, unfortunately, most managers/supervisors are too fucking incompetent to to do their jobs properly which is why you can't get rd on a numion non-performer. The union has safeguards in plac as part of their contract to protect their membership from arbitrary firings.