free forum make a forum for free message boards free forum hosting free phpbb forum phpbb create free forum

Jaehyouk · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 22

I'm starting the thread
(h.w for tonight)

Free Forum

Jaehyouk · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 22

1. there were many issues that we went over, but i think the key issue was the train issue. Many of people wanted trains to run again, but order to do that we had to come up with solutions of the problems that its blocking the trains (such as what to do with pullman's train).

2. government wants trails to run because that is simply the fastest way to recover from the economy depression.

3. Well.. i think most of them agreed with us (they also wanted to run train cars again), but the problem was many of problems were blocking that from happening.

4. An agreement (Solution), agreement was let all the train cars run again except for Pullman's until the strike ends.

5. I was satisfied with the outcome, but sure will talk more about the out come tomorrow.

6. Um... Georgy Pullman's final argument? Because he wasn't satisfied with the agreement.

Annie C · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 20

Please post and discuss your answers to the following questions. You can use your thoughts from the private writing to inform your answers for the forum. The questions are:

1. What issues were discussed today?
2. What main points did your group offer?
3. How did the othe groups respond? What were their main points?
4. What was the outcome?
5. Are you satisfied with today's negotiation? What one thing could you and your group could have done differently to improve the outcome? What could another group have done better?
6. What do you think will happen next?

lstrickman · Joined: 06 May 2010 Posts: 20

1. we started by talking about whether or not to reinstate the workers, then went on to talk about trains, and if/how we should get them running.
2. We felt very strongly about starting the trains back up, but did not contribute as much to the discussion about whether or not to reinstate the workers. We were mostly trying to find a way to start the trains back up as soon as possible.
3. most of the other groups also wanted to get the trains back up, but that led to questions about whether or not Pullman's cars should run, which in turn led to questions about Pullman's company and treatment of workers, etc. (this showed how connected and intertwined all these issues were with each other) There was a lot more conflict about whether to reinstate the workers, because Curtis and Debs felt strongly that they should be rehired, which Pullman didn't want to do.
4. Adams offered a resolution, which was that all trains but Pullman's would start up and continue to run, and Pullman's cars would either be put back in the trains or stop running, depending on the outcome we decide for the strike. This seemed to work for everyone to an extent,
5. I think we did a really good job, and we came to a good conclusion at the end. (also, tilly and jessica did a really good job) We could have stayed on topic better, and i think that that will be easier once we have had a base discussion about all 3 issues. My group could have been more willing to move the discussion towards wages and treatment of workers, because i feel like we really wanted to keep discussing the trains because they were the most important to us. It also might have been better if people hadn't asked any rhetorical questions-- they seemed to be more for the purpose of making a point than actually advancing the conversation.
6. I'm sure there will be controversy about what to do about the strike and how to resolve it. Hopefully we will come up with a solution that works for everybody, because i think we did a good job of that with the issue we discussed today.

Eleanore Carson · Joined: 11 May 2010 Posts: 14

though there were many issues today, the main one was that everyone believed that the trains should start running again. this did not seem like an issue because everyone agreed but because of the extra little bits accompanied with it, it became an issue.

my group, Everett St. John, did not give that much to the group because we really have no input in it. As lang as the trains are running we are pretty happy, so we are content.

most people did not respond to us as much as redirecting their comment about what we had said to the people we were siding with.

the outcome of the negotiation so far was that we will have the trains running when we are done.

i believe that by tying to keep on topic and making good arguments and relationships the negotiations have and will be better tomorrow.
i am expecting to have lots of voting and agreement making tomorrow.

zatkinsweltman · Joined: 09 May 2010 Posts: 27

1. What issues were discussed today?
I think the biggest issue we discussed today was that we needed the trains to run. We started talking about the grievance committee but we really needed to talk about trains first, which was extremedly helpfuil to my group because It is the issue we feel the strongest abot. We decided in the end that all trains other than Pullman cars should run.
2. What main points did your group offer?
Our group tried to stay with our Idea that all trains need to run immediately. We could not quite get this through, but we did come up with the point that if we start will all non Pullman trains, everyone is happy and then once we discuss the other issues and if we compromised, we could put [pullman cars back on at the end of the metting if everyone's needs were met. I think this was a good solution, because now the cars are able to run and Pullman cars still have a chance if they will make compromises. As we have no real issues with the other two issues, we are fairly compromisable. Ewven though my group agrees with Pullman on these issues, we want a non-violent solution if possible so compromises would be great.
3. How did the othe groups respond? What were their main points?
All groups wanted trains running but Jennie really wanted Pullman cars stopped until the strike was resolved. They brought up the point that they could shut down Pullman's companies, which caused a lot of controversy, and because of this everyone finnaly felt that we needed to reinstate the trains without Pullman cars untill the other issues were resolved and compromised on. Everyone seemed to agree with us that trains must start.
4. What was the outcome?
I already said, All Non Pullman cars can run now and we hope, as Richard Olney that Pullman cars can run once the other issues are resolved.
5. Are you satisfied with today's negotiation? What one thing could you and your group could have done differently to improve the outcome? What could another group have done better?
I think everyone played their parts really well and our compromise worked out well too. It seems like a lot of people are getting what they want and hopefully compromises and negotiations will continue peacefully
6. What do you think will happen next?
I think we will compromise on wages and reinstatement. I think for most groups this won't be directly affecting them so they won't care. That way they will kind be somewhere towards the middle and can try to help make everything even. I would guess that my group won't have to send in troops, but you never know If something doesn't work out right...

zatkinsweltman · Joined: 09 May 2010 Posts: 27

My geuss is nobody will read my post, it is so long so I thought i'd sum it up . It seemed that a lot of people got what they wanted. Trains will move again But Pullman cars will wait until the strike can be resolved. Basically I thought overall the conversation went well. Keep it up!

hkwon · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 24

We have discussed about two issues: Reinstatement(whether the Pullman Company rehire workers from the grievance committee ) and Trains(How do we get the trains run). My group, Everett St. John was invited to this meeting by Pullman, so Mr. Everett generally support and respect Pullman’s opinion. However, Mr. Everett really wants to get the trains running on railroads. Today, my group didn’t really intervene in the reinstatement issue, but we pressured Pullman not to prevent any other trains from running. Other groups didn’t care and make any comment on what my group said either because my group clearly mentioned that this is not our fight. as a outcome, we decided to run trains not including Pullman's car on the railroads again. I am satisfied with today’s negotiation. I really enjoyed it. Above all, I want to give applause to my group. I actually didn’t say any word, as Everett I didn’t want to speak any words unnecessarily. You will hear my voice tomorrow when we discuss about the last issue, wage. We had such a difficult time to understand the proposal that we made and we kind of unilaterally forced Pullman to agree with our proposal. I think that we better make other groups understand with a logical conversation. The next issue that we are going to negotiate is wage. I think that Pullman and his employees will not step back but express strongly what they want to keep.

Hey_look_its_EVAN · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 20

I cant really say it better than leah said it, but what i think is going to happen in tomorrow. we should touch on the issue of wages tommorrow

mswartz · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 43

1.Today we discussed two major issues. They were, "should the workers from the grievance committee be reinstated?" and " What arrangement can be worked out so that the trains will run?"
2.My group was Mr. Everett St. John and the issue of the grievance committee was irrelevant to the GMA. We said that it was not much of our concern. However, we do support Pullman in his reasons for firing the workers. Our group also strongly urged the others group to get the trains back up and running asap for the well being of the entire nation's economy.
3. Jennie Curtis did not like out argument about the grievance workers. On the other hand, the majority of groups supported us in our fight to get the railroads running again.
4. The outcome was that all trains (but pullman cars) would continue to run during the depression/conference. Once the conference was over the pullman cars may/may not (depending on tomorrows negotiation) continue running on the trains.
5.Absolutely! Our group got exactly what we wanted and that was to keep the trains running. I think the outcome went in our favor with the majority agreeing with us. We didn't have to say that much for the outcome to be what we wanted. I think each group should have everyone speak at least once. It seemed that the same people were talking from each group, which was a bit unfair for others.
6. I think tomorrow's negotiation on wages/prices on the Pullman village will become a heated debate. Specifically between Jennie Curtis and George Pullman.

malexander · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 20

1. Today we started the discussion of the grievance workers, but we soon changed to the topic of trains because the two were intertwined. We discussed this for the majority of the time
2. Our group helped keep people on track, and helped form proposals for agreements. We helped groups communicate between each other, and make sure that all the groups feel like their stand-point were being addressed as best as possible.
3. For the most part I think the other groups were pretty open to our ways of running the meeting and the major points being made by other groups were that the trains should continue to run, the workers should have all their rights, and yeah.
4. The only real conclusion we reached today was the agreement to run the trains after we resolve the Pullman strike. Another outcome that doesn't have any real proof is just that we all agreed to make sacrifices, and even Mr. Pullman in the end decided that the RR was more important to the country than just his cars.
5. I am satisfied with today, even though at points it was very frustrating. I think we could've been a bit more forceful with our position, and made our points clearer. Other groups for the most part were okay, and only needed to work on being flexible towards other ideas.
6. I'm hoping that we'll be able to cover both of the topics tomorrow, and come to a peaceful resolution. I think tomorrow we will start with the issues of workers rights and the Pullman towns and factories.

Jessica.Santos · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 21

I think that all three major issues were touch upon. But the two that were discussed were mainly trains and grievance workers. As Jane Addams i think that the proposal the tilly and i suggested contributed a lot, and was a spin on how i thought the discussion was going to be. The response to it at first was a sense of major confusion, and it took a while for us to reword it so all the groups were clear on what we had suggested. But once cleared up i think that all groups responded well and i was very glad to leave that discussion all agreeing on that one statement. There were small confusing parts like hands, representatives, people interrupting, and talking while someone else is talking. But hopefully as Jane Addams, Tilly and I can help sort those things out.

georgia.indigo · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 15

I think that today’s discussion went really well. I think it’s a hard topic because all of the issues are so related that it is hard to separate them. It was really hard to not get confused by who was who and sometimes it was hard for people to stick to one topic. I think that my group at St. John has only one agenda and because that agenda is to get the trains running we don’t have as much input on the little details. I look forward to what negotiations we have to participate in tomorrow with the issue or wages and such. My group is staying quiet now but I hope tomorrow we have more to bring to the table.
Today we talked about the Railroads a little and the grievance workers. I think people may need to look at the big picture more and be willing to make agreements. I don’t know how likely it is that, while in character, we will see each others point of view, but I look forward to seeing the outcome of tomorrow’s discussion. I think everyone made some really profound points today and responded to each other extremely well.

BChangy · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 33

Today we touched the issue of the trains running. Based on the compromise we agreed on today I am a little hesitant on what I bring to the entire group. I ( Jennie Curtis) felt as though I pushed for it to occur. Now that I think about it the compromise doesnt work for us because it does not entirely benifit Pullman. The compromise stated something along the lines that the if the strike where to end then trains would run with or without Pullman. IF the without were to occur I am worried about all the workers who are employed by Pullman. Jobs being cut left & right finding a new job if the Pullman company is put to an end would only influence the depression in a negative way.

As the only worker of the Pullman Company in attendence of the meeting my group offered a form of representation. It seemed minor at the time but we basically spoke for all of the strikers and what they stood for. I am curious of the different views from strikers ( where we all in the same boat? I wish we could explore that more).

3. How did the othe groups respond? What were their main points?
Several group responded through their reactions (such as deep breaths in/ out...ppl were really into their chatacters) also by cutting people off and speaking when ever they wished I felt a negative vibe to what I was saying. I am happy that Mr. Dubs brought us on track when ever we were off topic, made suggestions, asked for clarification ect.

Main points:
1. Tains need to move again
2. That the lack of moving tains are creating a burden on the USA
...thats all I remember lol
Outcome: Agreement Laughing

Tommorrow I hope we will all be organized, everyone seemed to suck at that...sorry to be soOo harsh.

YUJIA · Joined: 07 May 2010 Posts: 14

1．We discussed about ISSUE 3 which is reinstatement for the workers and ISSUE 1 which was arrangements that can be made to get the trains run (according to the order) today.
2．Our group (George Pullman) offered that we want all the trains to run as soon as possible during the strike. We would be very happy if our car can run but if that doesn’t work we would as well agree to have only the mail cars run.
3．The other groups (except for Richard Olney) were very fund of the idea that all trains should get running as soon as possible without Pullman cars. Richard Olney is trying to convince them to continue having our cars on the trains, thank you Richard. The other groups are against us to different degrees and I think Richard is the only one who tried to understand my position. And as we know that Richard is basically representing the government’s attitude, I want to thank him and our government here.
4．All five of us agreed on the proposal that was made by Jane Adams at last.
5．I feel our group is not in a optimistic situation because Jennie obviously have many facts that we as a group didn’t think of before. And also, the distribution of work in our group is also a mess—I didn’t find there a chance to contribute my opinion (because I was afraid that my point would be wrong as Mr. Pullman and that would have destroyed our whole thing.) although my group members have already agreed on each being responsible for one issue but it seems like not everyone is really aware of what he/she should be taking care of so I feel a little disappointed. We should have communicated much more whether/after class in order to make better preparation. I also think that Jennie’s group is being aggressive (in words) and I feel they are challenging or threatening our group…
6．I guess we are going to talk about the wages and rents for the workers on strike right now and decide on whether to raise their wages and keep the rents and hang on with me together until we get through this harsh depression so that everyone will get their original life back.

Free Forum