|
|||
|
Bill Would Let Airport Screeners UnionizePosted on Mar 6, 2007
An anti-terrorism bill making its way through the Senate would allow airport screeners to unionize. Republicans in Congress, ever the friends of working men and women, have fought against the provision, arguing that a screener union would threaten security and safety. The argument falls flat when one considers the police, firemen, nurses, Border Patrol agents and others who manage to safeguard the public and their own working conditions at the same time. President Bush has threatened to veto the bill, which implements 9/11 commission recommendations, if it grants airport workers collective bargaining rights.
Advertisement CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment |
By Pete, March 7, 2007 at 6:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
If cops can unionize, why not Airport Screeners?Here in the Northeast, cops make a hell of a lot more money than teachers, accountants and other college grads and myth to the contrary, their behaviour is deplorable. If memory serves me correctly, the republicans didn’t want screeners organized because it was unpatriotic and dangerous. And yet these same “patriots” have no problem selling off America’s ports, water supplies and air space to just about anybody provided they can squeeze another buck out of the vanishing blue collar middle class.
Report thisBy PatrickHenry, March 7, 2007 at 3:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
All workers should be allowed and even encouraged to join a “union” of their fellow peers sharing the same trade or skill, organization or fraternity. By doing this minimum and maximum qualifications are established for each job, rate or position. Retirement and health care are addressed as a condition of employment, which would reduce social security and medicare entitlements.
Report thisBy Alejandro, March 7, 2007 at 6:29 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
This is a tough one for me. I am strongly pro union but I am not so sure that people that are charged with such a public safety task should be unionized. How do you insure quality control? Can a Suporvisor fire any one on the spot for dereliction of duty or incompetance? Will the threat of a strike be allowed to be a negotiating tool? There are a lot of questions that have to be answered before I can endorse unionization of such an important public safty industry. ????.
Report thisBy trantieungoc, March 6, 2007 at 5:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Everything would threaten security and safety but not unionize. The most threatened act is Bush/Cheney are still on their damned throne with blinded eyes and phantom glories !
Report this