Posted on 08/08/2005 6:12:56 PM PDT by betty boop
Why Did the AFL-CIO Self-Destruct?
The 96th Convention of the American Federation of Musicians — a unit of the AFL-CIO — gathered in Las Vegas July 17-20. I wasn’t there; but I have seen the write-up of the public meetings described in International Musician, the flagship periodical of the AFM.
I wanted to “file a report” on these proceedings. So in the interest of full disclosure, I need to give some background here. My husband has been a member of the AFM since he was 16 years old; but then he’s a fulltime working musician, and having a union card “can make life go more smoothly.” I was a long-time member, until five years ago, when I couldn’t stand it anymore and quit in disgust. What I couldn’t stand was the way the union was being co-opted by political interests that tended to resonate with the Left Progressive wing of the Democrat party. Or so I thought then. And still do, as it turns out. The problem seems only to have grown worse in the last five years.
But be your own judge of that, dear reader.
The great theme of the Convention seems to have been “HEALING.” Let me present a numbered list of the main business before the General Assembly at the Convention. As Marcia Schweitzer writes [for IM August 2005]:
(1) “The two years since the 2003 Convention saw increased discord and erosion of trust among several segments of our membership [e.g., between AFM and certain other closely-related unions that have long-standing contractual relations with AFM].”
(2) Skipping over a lot of “internal business” (i.e., internal politicking), other “actions of note included passage of a resolution calling for a North American boycott of the anti-union Blue Man Group….
“…which has been staunchly refusing to bargain with any unions in any of the cities in which it performs. A strong coalition of the Toronto Musicians Association and the Canadian Actors’ Equity Association, and the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE) has been holding firm in its boycott and public education campaign in Toronto, causing much bad press and mediocre ticket sales for the Blue Man Group there. This resolution urges all AFM members and locals to spread the boycott across North America.”
(3) Next item: “Another passed resolution, to ‘bring our troops home from Iraq as expeditiously as possible,’ elicited some of the most passionate and profound oratory on the Convention floor.
“Some delegates spoke against the resolution as unpatriotic or against the troops. However, several delegates who had attended parts of the Iraqi Labor Tour spoke of the need to support workers in Iraq by ending the occupation and restoring true sovereignty. Other delegates brought up concerns about the siphoning off of billions of dollars of taxpayer money from social programs – and support for the arts – to line the pockets of multinational corporations. One delegate, a veteran of the Korean War, spoke movingly of his experience as a young soldier and of the ongoing effects of the horrors he witnessed. 'I only wish,' he said, ‘that people back home had tried to get me out of there, too.’”
(4) Continuing on, “In response to one delegate’s questioning [the AFM] getting involved outside music, International Officer Ken Shirk pointed to the tradition of unions, particularly the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), using their clout to make political statements, sometimes effecting beneficial outcomes almost single-handed. This was perhaps the most provocative statement on the power of unionism in the whole convention.” [Note to reader: the most recent ILWU dispute basically was about maintaining $120+K annual salaries, plus benefits, for the people who offload ships in U.S. ports. ILWU won. I can’t figure out why…. To put that into perspective, think about the typical annual salaries that school teachers earn....]
Alas, it seems that, for all his incisiveness and profundity, Mr. Shirk lost his re-election to the International Executive Board of the AFM at this convention. [I have actually met this person. I do not mourn his loss….]
SO, to return to our original question, Why Did the AFL-CIO Self-Destruct? A couple of weeks ago, the SEIU and the Teamsters peeled off. My suspicion is that their leaderships are no longer willing to settle for the “wardheeler style of leadership” of AFL-CIO’s John Sweeney. But even more than that, I think SEIU/Teamsters realize that “union bosses” like Sweeney have abandoned the “classical union model”: Which requires the leadership to serve the actual, direct interests of their members. What people may be catching onto today is that the “union model” has changed in recent times. Now, local boards, and international leadership, think their job is to “hire on” the “right politicians” to do the job of “looking after the interests of the membership” for them. Which is a joke: If you make “a deal with the devil,” count on it: he’s not working for YOU; YOU are working for HIM.
And IMHO, that is why SEIU and Teamsters – two huge sectors of the “triumvirate” that had up till now constituted organized labor in the United States and Canada – have split from AFL-CIO.
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi must be having fits over this … in private, of course.
It’s probably obvious that I have a point of view here, but I’ve tried to keep it down to a dull roar. What I’m mainly interested in here is: What do you, dear reader, think about these potentially momentous developments? (That might possibly affect the Democrat party’s pocketbook in a very serious way before too long? Does that mean that the “Hollyweird crowd” increasingly must pay the freight for its candidates, going forward?)
Just a little change of pace, if anyone's up for it....
It's a good development, because it's bad for the dems; but I'm not up for discussing it. Don't know enough about unions.
And I love your FR name....
I just love classical Jimi Hendrix music...
I've been a union member, and have always been dis-satisfied with the Union being engaged in politics, always supporting a party I could not stomach, and forcing me to pay dues to the union for it to turn around and give to some Jerk who wanted to tax me more.
I've also had strict orders from my shop steward not to produce that extra pallett of product for the company when I finished my "quota" early. This for a company I owned Stock in, as well as worked for.
Unions have LONG ago lost any pretense of being for the Little Guy, and are some of the most corrupt organizations in America.
And it shows, Union membership is at rock bottom.
I can only hope the individual unions breaking away from AFL-CIO will take heed of their memberships wishes, and leave the political crap out of it.
/rant
It seems logical the Teamsters would be among the first to notice that they'd hitched their wagon to a stump.
Patrick...!
And I thought you were a lawyer, with a passing interest in Constitutional Law.
Sing it with me, from School House Rock:
We the People
in order to form a more perfect Union...
Cheers!
I am a Union member and have disagreed with their political alignments for a long time. After the 2000 election our members were polled anomyously about why membership was divided by not showing a strong pro- Gore vote.
The results.......gun control was a biggie. Most of our members are avid hunters and shooting enthusiasts and did not trust Gore potentially tampering with the 2nd Amendment.
Abortion. Pretty much self explanatory about the divide between religious views.
Now since the union's candidate Kerry was defeated soundly in 2004 the leadership, at least in our union (BAC) our leaders are seeking out labor friendly candidates rather than following party lines. There has been a division in the membership because endorsing party elections has not helped the cause of labor. It has been recognized that particular candidates, rather than particular partys can do more for protecting good paying jobs, benefits, and job safety than partys that cannot be elected. it has been acknowledged that there are good candidates on both sides of the aisle.
Organized labor recognizes that if America is to survive, we cannot export jobs, we cannot work for less, and we have to have medical insurance and pensions. Allowing any or all of those issues to be discontinued and America will begin a slide to be equalized with the 3rd world when it comes to our standard of living.
There are those who think Union workers make too much. But the flip side of the coin says lawyers and doctors and pro athletes and CEO's and stockbrokers make too much also. As Americans we all have to get along and patronize our companies and businesses and pass the money around. Someone will always be overpaid and someone will always be underpaid. But the people who earn enough to own a house and a car, send a son to college, seek medical care without the hospital owning the house are the backbone of America.
Being pro labor and pro worker is a good thing. As Americans, United We Stand, divided we fall. Same with Union workers. If we let others dictate how much money they think we should make we will never prosper. If we do good work and have a good work ethic we should be justly rewarded the same as if we do shoddy work be reprimanded.
The free market decides value, not politicians.
These free trade agreements like CAFTA and the WTO and NAFTA stifle competition and set arbitrary limits on wages and productivity. High oil prices are hurting us all. The middle class cost of living wage increases in America is not keeping pace with inflation. And since most Union workers are middle class Americans we are neither robbing the bank or collecting welfare. But to hear some people scream that Union workers are making too much money is bulls*hit. It seems to be vogue to accuse workers of breaking the bank. Forget Enron and Global Crossing and Tyco and unscrupulous accounting fraud and how much that costs America.
Yes the times are a changing. America is going to meet the 3rd world and we all will lose, except the filthy rich who will still have their nest egg and the influence it buys.
They are self destructing because leadership no longer represents the "total" of the membership....
While there are still plenty of diehard died in the wool leftists in the ranks....there are plenty of libertarian minded and even a few conservatives....
A lot of vets are union guys....and they dont like the venom being spewed at the troops..OR the commander and chief...
I would remind people of that 2004 UAW vote for political endorsement...
Bush came in SECOND....IE..he beat 8 of the dems hands down...
Trust me...such a thing is HUGE...
A lot of us are pushing for our unions to be NON-political in matters that dont directly effect workers...
And remember please....not all unions are created equal....
It might surprise some to find out that my local has a no strike clause in our contract...becuase interuption of major projects and literally put a contractor out of bussiness...and thus..workers out of work...
Shoddy Electrical work kills people....bad workers are shown the door...we maintian high standards and expect people to meet them...I Maintain 3 state licenses and several OSHA recognized licenses for heavy equipment operation including Forklift , all terrain forklift ,articulated booms and lifts...
Remember...the bedrock of this country was set by union men and women...we do...
You can hire someone who barely speaks english ,if at all...or you can hire someone who will re-invest in America and American products...
You get what you pay for...
Now if we could only get the teachers union to follow the same damn example...because the next time they hold my local town hostage for double digit raises...I'll cross the picket myself...
Member in good standing, local 8 , International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)...Closet conservative...
Me, too brivette. "All Along the Watchtower" and "Hey Joe" really stir me up....
From your lips to God's ear, konaice!
Thank you so much for writing!
I suppose that is a possibility, o_zarkman44. Still, something tells me it will not be actually realized. There's too much "common sense" in the world for that to happen.
Thank you so very much for your plain-spoken, "common sense" testimony regarding the present issue.
From your lips to God's ear, Crim! Thank you so very much for your true and excellent insights, from "inside" the IBEW! May God ever bless you.
Yes, to what you said. Unions are NECESSARY when you have BAD Management....that's why they were started......and we still, in some cases, have BAD Management.....BUT, when union bosses get the money THEY GET, and play politics with the workers money, THAT'S BAD MANAGEMENT, too.
(I'm a former HR Management type)
The plain truth is that the unions are the members and not the leadership, and when, in any political organization, the leadership forgets this, the members tend to remind them in precisely this fashion. "When, in the course of human events..."
"I'm just a bill
I'm just a bill
And I'm sittin' here on Capitol Hill"
No Clinton jokes, please...
You don't need to defend your statement. I was floored when the teamsters split.
Union workers who depend on private industry for employment, and their unions for standards and long term security have found it increasingly difficult to side with communists and anarchists who intend to destroy private industry and transfer their long term security over to a government entity.
A government entity that is controlled by communists who aggregate more power based on the number of people they can make suffer.
The rats thought that they could control the people they prevented from being properly educated. They never counted on the historical reality that uneducated people act in enlightened self interest.
I just couln't stand handing over hard earned pay to some fat, greasy bastard with soft hands.
How much do you need to know? They've government subsidized extortion rackets, consisting of thuggish, greedy, corrupt lazy goons extorting far too much money, for doing far too little, for morons often doing things monkeys would happily do for a couple of bananas now and then.
Like those button-pushers getting $120k + bennies for "unloading" ships. Like they actually break a sweat as they get machines to grab containers. The extortion rackets ensure that the 30,000 other dolts who could easily do the same job of each union thug never get the chance to compete.
Unions must die. Die, unions, die. Die, Die, Die!
And you know what? They are dying! Cool.
I may have to catch a Blue Man Group show next chance I get.
Anyway, thx for the awful (but appropriate) image.
Regards, DS.
He'll be back in the news tomorrow. Your turn then!
Apparently what's going on with the breakup is the beginning of a super union with an international reach.
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review(no stranger to union thuggishness)published a disturbing article in yesterday's paper about it March of the union elite
Oh dear Bill -- I think you have got that exactly right....
Thank you oh so very much for writing!
I hire people who don't need the handholding of corrupt thugs.
Thank you so very much for writing -- and for the valuable link!
Go work at McDonalds for awhile. See if you can buy a home or a car on those fat wages. I assume you think 6 or 7$ an hour is too much pay for simply flipping burgers?
Damn those button pusher who make$15 an hour. Damn those road construction workers making $20 an hour leaning on their shovels in 100 degree heat while you sip coffee in your air conditioned office.
Damn those workers who live in a city where houses cost an average of $350,000 and gas is $3.50 a gallon and property taxes are sky high, who have to work overtime to make ends meet. Does $100k a year sound like too much money?
How much $ do you make? What kind of car do you drive?
Your take on unions is about 50 years old and a lot has changed. Some things remain the same however. People still have to work to make an honest living. In my union slackers do not have employment. How many government employees retire with lots of perks and fat pensions?
I doubt Unions had much to do with the wages of those people.
Enron took how many people for how many hundred million dollars with their corruption? How many retirement pension funds got took by Global Crossing? Don't tell me about corruption as a singular issue that only involves unions!
Perhaps you employ illegal immigrants because you believe they can do a job for much less than American citizens?
It's ok to break the law to pad your pocket yes? And it does no harm to America either does it? Maybe 50% of your doctor bill goes to cover government mandated medical treatment of your illegal imported immigrants that work for cheap?
I have no use for people with your attitude. Your failure to grasp the scope of the entire big picture is narrowmindedness and harmful to America. Drive your KIA down to WalMart and go ahead and support America with your phony flag sticker. Your attitude will be the death of America.
Jeepers, PH -- the fact that I'm no "expert" on unions doesn't mean I have to shut up. And as you may have noticed, I don't do that too much. That's probably because I do not believe that self-described "experts" have a monopoly on Truth.
Why can't you just reciprocate every now and then? That is, just let your hair down and tell me what you actually think?
My concern has to do with corruption,whether it be in organized labor,or government for that matter.When either one shows evidence of promoting a socialist agenda that is detrimental to capitalism and free markets,well then that is bothersome.
>> In my union slackers do not have employment.
With the carpenters only the stweart does not get the ax for nomperformance.
Last company I worked for before going back to my company brought in 27 sheetrockers on monday, by friday they had the 7 they were looking for.
I look foreward to these jobs, as they are like family reunions; and you know at the beginning who will go bad by the end.
Every year it is the same. Union companies pay top dollar, but only for performance.
My company just dumped two guys today, and called the hall for two more, anyone but them. It will take all week to get me another partner... My regular partner was injured, and hauled off last week with a slipped disk. I guess he should have worked safer before he fell... If it was a non union job, he would not have had a harness and would be dead today.
I am glad I missed his performance, I heard there was a lot of screaming before and after the shock cord kicked in. I hate it when they scream, it gives me nightmares.
The old labor model was based on organizing and negotiating wages and benefits -- things upon which all (or nearly all) of it's members could agree. Politics beyond that, while heavily slanted to the Dems, was at least slightly non-partisan. To wit: Labor would support Republicans who were friendly to their interests and, generally, eschew issues in which they had no stake and which might divide their members (gun control, abortion, school prayer, etc).
Under Sweeney that all changed. He made the AFL-CIO a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party. That meant signing on to "non-labor" issues and dumping a ton of money into campaigns, most of which were failures. It served to both alienate much of the rank and file and, also, Republicans who might have been predisposed to support some of labor's issues. It also sent a signal to Dems that they could take "labor's" support for granted. That's a bad move at any time, but it's especially ridiculous when redistricting and simple mathematics guarantees a Republican majority in the House until a least 2012, and in the Senate until at least 2009.
Sweeney is either an idiot or he's been bought an paid for by the DNC. I'm guessing the latter.
I am not union, never have been, and have never been related to anyone who was except the teachers in the family. But, Jeepers, why would a regular union meeting of a non-government funded group become a political rally off season?
Something terrible happens when an organization or government beaurocracy outlives its reason for existing. Seems to me, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy, probably the closest thing to immortality on earth. It's as if the whose purpose morphs from satisfying a need to creating a need (often, an ideology) to justify its continuing existence.
My two cents, FWIW…
Nah; union thugs got in the way of actual work, productivity and creativity a few times too often, so I (and everyone else I know who has started companies) started to go around them and make sure they have no impact.
We form voluntary associations amongst competent professional individuals, and if the companies do not provide proper safety standards our voluntary association of competent professional carpenters will not work for them; not a one of us.
Does your "voluntary association" force people to join "voluntarily" to work at a company under the thumb of the "voluntary association"? Or can free people work alongside of, and compete with, members of your "voluntary association" without intimidation?
Can a company pick and choose to hire the people they prefer from amongst your "voluntary association" as well as free people, or do you picket and harass companies that choose to freely associate with those who haven't "voluntarily associated" with your gang? Blue Man Group comes to mind as an example in this thread.
Professionals with self-respect form associations all the time, such as the ASME, IEEE and the like. These serve to educate members and promote their interests. But they're not thugs going around trying to force companies to hire them, at their prices (regardless of what the market will bear), if someone isn't a member it's no big deal and if a company doesn't choose to hire members, that's fine too.
That's not a union. Unions are thuggish gangs of extortionists, supported (for now) by bought politicians. You tell me why some moron pushing buttons to load/unload already-loaded containers are "worth" $120k/year plus bennies? They'll be replaced by robots, guaranteed, and will spend the rest of their stupid lives bitching about it because they "deserve" outrageous compensation.
And unions are dying, for good reason. Those who are desperately trying to prop them up, here and elsewhere, are having fits about it - that's just gravy, but fun to watch.
The other evening, a local agent for a union of highly skilled professionals told me that he was hearing from the AFL-CIO that the Teamsters were in a cash bind and could not repay borrowings from the AFL-CIO. In time, we will know more, especially as new union financial reporting requirements go into effect. I surmise that a lot of problems and chicanery will become evident.
Well, I know enough about economics to give an extemporaneous lecture for a few hours about the benefits of free enterprise compared to any form of un-free enterprise, and I can easily discuss the role of unions within that general framework. When they go beyond being purely voluntary associations, then they're bad -- by definition. But as for the AFL-CIO, I'm not informed enough. Although no one may have ever noticed -- I try not to speak unless I can make what I judge to be a meaningful contribution.
I have made this point to a few union supporters on FR and they denied that goes on. (I have several friends who will attest to what you report.) They insisted that time and motion studies had determined the "quotas". Regardless of how the work load was determined they still punish producers and good workers. I have often said that union work rules hurt our competiveness more than union salaries.
You are a musician too?
I've had some experience with unions, both reasonably good, and bad.
My normal employment is not a unionized profession. But I have been on projects where it was my job to direct work executed by union craftsmen, and sometimes to work alongside union craftsmen.
On the good side, they are generally well-trained. Their union training means that there is a certain body of knowledge that all are expected to have, and generally do have. With non-union craftsmen, since there is no standardized training, there is more "diversity" in their background, since they have found their way into the profession by a variety of means. Some non-union craftsmen are very good, of course, unions don't have a monopoly on talent, but there is something to say for a standardized apprenticeship program. That is one area where unions shine.
In areas where union contractors have to compete with non-union, they are almost as flexible and cooperative as non-union workers. The union companies here, for example, are very good to work with. Their labor costs are higher, but they maintain their competitive edge by being good.
A lot of the annoying union rules that might tie my hands in other areas don't apply here, I have worked with and alongside union contractors here without knowing they were union, and found them to be as helpful as any non-union contractor. In my work, while I am technically "white collar", it is not unusual for me to take tool in hand to make something work, and around here it is not an issue.
Years ago I worked in an area where we were required to use unions, and while the local union guys were, again, quite good to work with, a lot of guys from the eastern unions came in. They were almost impossible to work with, and made the project hell on earth. "Thuggish" described many of them to a "t".
So, my experience is that where unions have to compete, and have that kind of competitive reality check, they can be quite good to work with. Where they control, and they don't have to compete, they can be a nightmare.
Finally, I had an interesting experience a couple of years ago. The business cycle in my line of work hit an extended low after the war started, and I was offered union employment in a field that had nothing to do with my normal work. Having nothing better to do, I accepted it.
It was an interesting experience on several levels. But while the guys were convinced as union guys usually are that it was only thanks to the union that they had a decent life, I took away the opposite impression. Their belief that a job is a kind of property, that they were owed a living, that anyone who left the union to work in management had broken solidarity with them, created a very negative work atmosphere. They were generally miserable, and probably none of them knew why.
In general terms, I consider unions to be a kind of cancer. Companies who have unions usually deserve them, they have allowed an "us-versus-them" mentality to invade their workplace, and that opens the door to unionization. Once the unions are in, of course, the "us-versus-them" only gets worse unless you make a concerted effort to turn it around. Since most companies don't understand what they did to bring unions on themselves, they will never turn it around, they will just live with a permanently adversarial work environment and consider it normal. Which, for them, it is.
Unions and management of unionized industries can't imagine that its possible to have a non-adversarial workplace. For them, it isn't.
WASHINGTON -- A small and elite group, many of them connected to Washington's radical think tank, the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), has decided they will create a new international organization for the 21st century. It will be a massive labor alliance to rival the AFL.
Not only IPS is involved with the new concept. There also are Andrew Stern, 54, president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and his ultra-wealthy allies, George Soros and philanthropist Eli Broad.
And there are others. Jimmy Hoffa of the Teamsters; Steve Rosenthal of America Coming Together; Drummond Pike, president and CEO of the Tides Foundation; and a raftful of lefty rebels defecting from the AFL.
The list is not complete without Wade Rathke, the founder of the leftist Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). Wade also is chief organizer of SEIU's Local 100 and the founder and director of the Organizers' Forum, a major force on the Left.
The United States' comparative and small advantages do not generally lie in those areas where unions are strongest, as people like Stern, Rathke and Soros know. Already, their concepts for the future of large global unions and meetings with more than a dozen European, Australian and Chinese labor unions have begun to globalize unions on an industry-by-industry basis.
The SEIU, with more than 1.8 million members, is the fastest-growing labor union in the country. The SEIU has a high percentage of immigrant and female workers on its paid-up rolls -- from Central and South America, from Eastern Europe and from Asia. This feature is shared with other supporters of CTW, whose memberships are also nonwhite, aggressive and under 35.
Unions were founded as Communists organizations to exploit class warfare in this country by championing the "workers". This is the tactic they use in all countries. If there is no unrest they create it. The goal is to defeat "capitalism", free enterprise to the rest of us, and eliminate our republic form of government.
Nothing has changed. This so called split is just to energize more activism and recruitment activity while expanding the Communist agenda worldwide. Free enterprise is still doing too well for them.
Thank you so much for all of your insight on this subject, marron!!!
Organized labor recognizes that if America is to survive, we cannot export jobs, we cannot work for less, and we have to have medical insurance and pensions.
If so, your leadership is working in the opposite direction of its members. They are supporting politicians who favor tax laws which penalize free enterprise and the very companies who hire union workers. They favor unnecessary environmental and safety rules which raise costs without protecting the environment nor improving safety, making it more difficult for the companies you work for to stay in business and provide what you want. Many environmental and safety regulations are sensible and necessary but many are not. Those which are not add an unnecessary burden and dampen innovation and change.
To consider medical care and pensions to be a right rather than a bonus given to you by the company is socialistic and anti-business.
There are those who think Union workers make too much. But the flip side of the coin says lawyers and doctors and pro athletes and CEO's and stockbrokers make too much also.
The difference is that union workers make their's through coercion by a labor monopoly while the others make their's on the open market. No one has to patronized the others but they have no choice with unions. Most union workers would make more if they individually marketed their skills rather than riding on the coattails of extortion.
As Americans we all have to get along and patronize our companies and businesses and pass the money around. Someone will always be overpaid and someone will always be underpaid. But the people who earn enough to own a house and a car, send a son to college, seek medical care without the hospital owning the house are the backbone of America.
I agree and I use your own words to make my point.
Being pro labor and pro worker is a good thing.
As long as they are the same but they are not. Workers are you and your colleagues. Labor is the agglomeration of organizations who are working against your success while convincing you that some outside force, evil big business and management, are you enemies. That is no different than any tyrannical government in the world. All blame the USA for the problems they created for their own people in order to point the blame away from themselves.
As Americans, United We Stand, divided we fall. Same with Union workers. If we let others dictate how much money they think we should make we will never prosper. If we do good work and have a good work ethic we should be justly rewarded the same as if we do shoddy work be reprimanded.
Others always dictate how much you make. It is called the free market. Unions and the politicians they support distort the free market and prevent it from working as it should.
Also, when have you ever seen a worker reprimanded for shoddy work. There are many stories of shoddy work being done to get back at mangement by hurting the customer, poor slobs like you and me. I have personally experienced that on several occassions.
The free market decides value, not politicians.
See, we agree, or rather you agree with me but not yourself.
These free trade agreements like CAFTA and the WTO and NAFTA stifle competition and set arbitrary limits on wages and productivity.
Quite the contrary, they increase competition. That is why unions don't like them. It is the competition which sets limits on prices, and therefore wages, but it also encourages increased productivity. The union MO is decreased productivity, through work rules that limit how much a worker con produce, and increased wages and it has been for years.
High oil prices are hurting us all.
Not much we can do about that at the moment but the Democrats, who get all the union money and support, are fighting every meaningful thing we try to do to change it. They insist on wind and solar power, which can never solve the problem and they know it, and alternative fuels which only benefit the rich agricultural corporations like ADM (I thought they hated big business), while preventing us from drilling in the vast waste land in Alaska they call pristine wilderness.
The middle class cost of living wage increases in America is not keeping pace with inflation. And since most Union workers are middle class Americans we are neither robbing the bank or collecting welfare. But to hear some people scream that Union workers are making too much money is bulls*hit. It seems to be vogue to accuse workers of breaking the bank. Forget Enron and Global Crossing and Tyco and unscrupulous accounting fraud and how much that costs America.
If wages aren't keeping up with inflation the workers will buy less, the economy will cool, and inflation will go down. Artificially pegging things to inflation, except for the elderly on fixed income, only feeds inflation. It is not union wages that are the problem as much as union work rules, and the costs of healthcare and pensions, which burden business. Add to that the taxes and regulations of the party unions support, as well as the tremendous costs and lost opportunities by another supporter of the left, the trial lawyers, and you get a clearer picture of the problem.
The complaint about CEOs and such taking advantage of their positions is just class warfare. At least they are getting caught and punished while your bosses skate.
I repeat, I don't question anything about you as a person. I just think you have been exposed too much to the union story and not enough to the story of the free enterprise.
I worked non union for 18 years and could barely afford rent...
Since joining the IBEW in 96 I've bought two houses, three cars , a 38'travel trailer and a boat, provide for a family of 5, and my wife no longer has to work...
I'm am by no means "wealthy"...but I am comfortable and secure...with the ablity to provide a reletively steady income for my family..
I've put more money back into the economy than three non union workers....
I've recieved training and education un paralleled in all but the but the best engineering colleges..I've wired malls, prisons, and factories...
I've built a 5000 volt 3000 amp service and power distibution system with my own two hands...
The extra few bucks an hour makes a hell of a difference for my family...and the safety and occupational training is night and day...
Are all unions equal?...hell no...and I pointed that out allready...the teachers union(just to name one) sucks....half of them show their union support by driving vehicles produced by foriegn owned companies...
It's "all about the children" until contract time floats around....then it's unreasonble salery demands and threats of strikes...*spits*
But if you think for a second that one uneducated and unskilled worker will get anymore out of a non union contractor, than a highly trained and educated worker will get through a collective barganing agreement, in an industry with a high injury and morality rate..then your a better spinner than bagdad bob...
I've lived your senario....I know different...
Go to collage for 4 years...get an electrical degree...hunt for a non union job...good luck getting more than 12 to 15 bucks and hour on a good day....and good luck having any kind of security or future or benifits....about the time you will be expecting a promotion or raise...you'll have a new boss....the old bosses snot nosed, know nothing, greedy kid...
If you live that long...after sticking your untrained hands in a live 5000 volt transformer....
but please....before you do....sign me up as your next of kin.
I could still use the money...
*evil closet conservative grin*
The next time your power is out...it's raining or snowing or freezing rain....you remember that guy on the pole fixing your power ,in mortal danger, has a family too...he's worth every penny he makes.....and then some...
Respectfully,
Crim
So, who are these “thugs?”
Whoever they are, it seems they do not sympathize with the idea of “classical” unionized labors’ concerns about workplace safety, or the provision of apprentice programs that propagate valuable, vital human technical knowledge and skill from one generation to the next.
When I say “classical,” I mean “pre-Marxian.” Marxists always want you to think in terms of their own strict doctrine regarding how to make major, that is “progressive,” improvements in “reality.”
But it seems to me, most human beings want to think about how they’re actually getting along in life, and doctrine be damned (a pox on all their houses!!!)….
People do not live in/as abstractions: They actually suffer and bleed from time to time, and the people they love do this, too. This was the “inconvenience” that Marx tried to expunge from his theory; which paradoxically would later prove to be the only way his theory could be realized. Marx may have been totally crazy; but it seems he was prescient. That doesn’t necessarily mean that his analysis was correct, only that a whole lot of people would “buy into it” by some future time. That is, sooner or later one could convene a public poll that would decide that Marxian analysis is “correct.”
And that is the question before us: Was Marx “right?”
Anyhoot, getting back to “thugs.” I think they are just so many termites, or cockroaches, scurrying blindly around in the dark, doing as much damage as possible to whatever structures supporting the “normal” or expected, reliable ways of doing things to which human beings have become accustomed over their millennial history, that are within their reach. Getting a tad theological here, they are like a legion of little, screaming, pitiable minor devils whose mission in life/death is to eat out the very heart of meaning in Life – ultimately to leave man high and dry, without support, of the only validating basis he has of his own existence as a human being.
The easiest way to spot a thug, a termite, a cockroach, is to “shine the light” on them. Then sit back and notice: Inevitably, invariably, they scurry away into darkness.
Another helpful hint might be this: These “thugs” ALL learned their “manners” from Saul Alinsky – Hillary!’s great guru in life, post-Wellesley daze….
Jeepers, dear marron – it is time to “adjust my meds,” or what? LOL!!!
Thank you so very much for writing, dear marron – and for listening to my little screed here…. Thank you! Must say goodnight for now, and God bless!
The easiest way to spot a thug, a termite, a cockroach, is to “shine the light” on them. Then sit back and notice: Inevitably, invariably, they scurry away into darkness.
In a word: greed.
The very notion that a service or labor provider can set his own worth, kind of distorts the whole notion of "free exchange" and "private enterprise".
Doesn't it?
I'm a County Public works employee that's a member of SEIU which was affiliated with AFL-CIO. The guys I work with who are all truck driving, gun owning, church going conservatives are fed up with our union giving money to anti gun, pro tax increase, pro illegal immigrant, pro homosexual agenda democrat politicians.
As road and bridge construction workers we realize that under democratic regimes the likelihood of us actually building roads and fixing bridges is nil. Especially in Oregon the faggoty pedophile controlled democrats believe in increased density, urban growth boundaries, zero constuction, traffic "calming", illegal diversion of gas tax revenues, increased bike lanes, and astronomically expensive ineffective light rail projects.
We are also fed up that come contract time, we are sold down the river because the Union won't pay for a professional contract negotiator and lets the elected local union busybodies negotiate with the professional paid negotiator from the management's side. The reason why the Union won't pay is because they have no money left after all the democratic mafiosi get to "dip their beaks".
Is that clear enough?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.