<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Shanghaiist: A union of convenience?</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php</link>
<description>All comments for A union of convenience?</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2009 shang_kenneth</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 05:00:13 +0800</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>kenneth@shanghaiist.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>kenneth@shanghaiist.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>andy</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370806</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370806</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:16:12 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Union action is a touchy subject, of course. But you&apos;ve got to laugh at a union leader who says he&apos;ll never strike. The whole point of a union is to unite the workers in order to be able to use the only power they have - the organised withholding of their labour.

&apos;Union&apos; has been a bad word for the amoral business community ever since the winning of the eight hour work day. 

May the First, y&apos;all.
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>nanheyangrouchuan</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370655</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370655</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:03:34 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;This is a genuine &quot;China experience&quot;

 Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Pigs fed on bodybuilder steroids cause food poisoning in Shanghai


AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE in Shanghai
	

Next Story
Updated at 2.37pm:
Over 330 Shanghai residents have been poisoned by pork tainted with a weight-loss steroid popular among bodybuilders, state media said on Tuesday.

Clenbuterol, a product normally marketed to fitness fanatics, was used by farmers in east China to produce leaner pork meat, the China Daily reported.

As a result, a total of 336 people have been poisoned in Shanghai since September 13, in the city’s largest clenbuterol poisoning case, the paper said.

The chemical can reportedly cause damage to the human nervous and cardiovascular system. However, all those affected in Shanghai have been released from hospital, the paper said.

Most of the pigs have been traced to neighbouring Zhejiang where rearing pigs on clenbuterol, known locally as “lean meat powder”, is widespread, the paper said.

The government banned the use of the chemical in the 1990s, it added.

The incident has exposed many loopholes in China’s food safety inspection system, the paper said.

“Many people are still using ‘lean meat powder’,” the local Oriental Morning Post quoted a Zhejiang farmer as saying.

“I’ve raised pigs for 10 years and almost all of them have been fed it.”

According to the report, many farmers stop feeding the pigs with the drug several weeks before they are slaughtered, making detection difficult for food inspectors.

Shanghai officials downplayed the scare, saying it is unlikely that more contaminated pigs are in city markets, the China Daily said.

Clenbuterol is a medication that has been used to treat bronchial diseases such as asthma, but is largely used by bodybuilders or as a weight-loss supplement for the overweight.

It is banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency, which oversees doping in sports. &lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Marty Grass</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370522</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370522</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 13:26:36 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;The articlee does not deny that there was tit-for-tat in the case of Wal-Mart, but we would be most appreciative if Shanghaireader would be so kind as to enlighten the community as to the real nature of Wal-Mart&apos;s arrangement with the ACFTU. But I think Shanghaireader has basically already discredited himself, eh, &quot;dude?&quot;

As business person, this sounds like a lever of state control, oversite, and as noted above, potentially a leg iron in case foreign corps need to be reeled in for political or economic reasons.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>peijin</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370427</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370427</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 12:20:43 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;what exactly constitutes a &quot;band wagon political comments?&quot; was it meant in the context of this post alone? 
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Bistoo</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370393</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-370393</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 11:56:34 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Sometimes, I wish that unions in France were as inoffensive as this one...&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>usagi</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369983</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369983</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 06:58:59 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;back in the 80s, China did use to have something that used to be a Union . &lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Juergen Klug</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369650</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369650</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 02:38:36 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;The WTO emergency brake?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>nanheyangrouchuan</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369298</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369298</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 22:30:07 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Wal Mart will find that its American unions are much less obedient to management than the Chinese unions (oh yeah, in China the management IS the union).&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Owen</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369289</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369289</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 22:25:05 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Shanghaireader.

So this issue you more understand about?

To quote someone I read once: &quot;Seriously dude, cut it out.&quot;  My belly hurts from laughing so much. &lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>PanAsianBiz</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369281</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369281</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 22:01:27 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;So Wal-Mart is yet another company willing to compromise its usuall business practices in order to be allowed to operate in China. Not surprising, I guess. Anyway, if the union is not going to be &quot;pushing for minimum wage increases, limited working hours, worker safety, etc.&quot; then what will they be doing?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>Shanghaireader</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369275</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2006/09/18/a_union_of_conv.php#comment-369275</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2006 21:51:23 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;
And why is walmart coop. happily? Because just like the books you mentioned, this union aint what you think it is.

I love your site, and read it daily but you should seriously write only about things you really understand about or are a matter of &quot;taste&quot;. Just like various &quot;band wagon&quot; political comments that you put here and there. Seriously dude, cut it out.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>