 |
|
||
|
|
|
 Unions Aren’t the ProblemPosted on Dec 9, 2008By Marie Cocco As Congress and the White House lurch toward possible approval of a loan package for the crippled auto industry, we are undoubtedly in store for more union-bashing. Note well that we did not hear any such tirades when vastly larger sums of taxpayer money—with fewer strings attached—were lavished upon the banks and financial industry wizards who created the credit crisis. Put aside for a moment the misinformation and outright untruths that characterize conservative attacks on the autoworkers’ unions. No one should be allowed to cast blame on workers who want nothing more than to maintain a middle-class life. Unions aren’t the problem. They are the solution. Creating a viable middle class has been the goal of organized labor since labor first became organized. And it is this goal that was abandoned outright by American political and business leaders as they did all they could over the past three decades to encourage a relentless race to the bottom in wages and benefits. Strip away the financial mumbo jumbo and the credit crisis comes down to this: For decades, as wages and benefits for working and middle-class people stagnated or fell, the only way for them to purchase the goods that make the economy hum was through credit. This was true whether the item purchased was a home, a car—or all the unnecessary gizmos that retailers have been more than happy to tell consumers were the must-haves of the day. Until we understand that we are in the midst of two crises—one the short-term credit crisis and one the longer-term crisis in the failure to pay workers what they need to sustain themselves—we are doomed to repeat this horror. Advertisement It is true that some individuals were reckless in taking on debt. But it is equally valid that American workers simply haven’t been paid what it takes for them to spend enough to keep the American economy growing. “The economy needed levels of expenditure and consumption that most Americans literally could not afford,” Gerstle says. What do unions have to do with this? To start with, unionized workers make about $200 more per week than do nonunion workers, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The great expansion of the American middle class and an unprecedented rise in living standards occurred between the end of World War II and the 1970s—when unions were far more common and powerful than they are today. Beginning in the 1980s, an ideology of deregulation and anti-unionism took hold, with free-market capitalists arguing that no intervention in the markets—including labor’s intervention—was ever beneficial. “The promise of deregulation was that this would create so much energy and dynamism at the top that it would all trickle down,” Gerstle says. “Not only would people on Wall Street make all kinds of money, but people on Main Street would find that there would be more dynamism in their lives, more opportunity, more wages.” Well, people on Wall Street did make all kinds of money. People on Main Street got depressed wages, the demise of guaranteed pensions and 401(k)s that crashed with the stock market. They got health insurance that is barely affordable, if they’ve got insurance at all. We are engulfed by an economic morass that holds the prospect of being the deepest and broadest downturn of the post-World War II era. It is no coincidence that the percentage of private-sector workers in unions—about 7 percent—is roughly the same as what it was before the Great Depression. Historically, Gerstle says, social movements have needed direct and often unsettling action to capture the public’s imagination and take hold. This is why we can only hope that events such as the unfolding peaceful occupation of a Chicago window factory by its newly laid-off workers is the start of something much, much bigger. Marie Cocco’s e-mail address is mariecocco(at)washpost.com. © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
HOME|Digs|Reports|Arts & Culture|Uncovered|Ear to the Ground|A/V Booth|Cartoons
Tags|Bazaar|Podcast|About Us|Contact Us|User Agreement|Privacy Policy|FAQ: Comments and Moderation 
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
When a Time Bomb Is Ticking
Email
Print
Share
BlinkList
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Google
LinkedIn
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Propeller
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
Technorati
TwitThis
YahooMyWeb
YahooBuzz
By KDelphi, December 14, 2008 at 2:45 am #
Non-Union—How long ago were you the tender age of 15?
The reason it seems like “worker against mgmt.” in this country is, well, because it is! All one has to do is to look at who gets “bailed” and who doesnt, and how much money they get…
Do you really believe those guys that were sitting in the Senate Hearing,“worked harder than the laborers to get where they were”?
It is a question of human rights—does the uS believe in them—for anyone—anymore? Or do we just spend our time criticizing everyone else’s record on “sweatshops”? Before Unions, in teh uS , as well as the rest of the “free” world, sweatshhop conditions prevailed.If people in the Deep South dont want to unionize, they must happy with being treated like slave labor,because that is what I saw there. THAT is why the auto manuf. are “competitive” down there..
I have seen how sharecroppers are treated in the South, as recently as 15 yrs ago—-if the South cant achieve non-union shops , they hire illegal labor, and they are, in effect, slaves.. When I lived there, it seemed that they will do anything to avoid paying a living wage.
Without Unions we will be Third World. Maybe we will be anyway..
I dont suppose anyone bothered to find out how much money Mitch McConnell took from foreign auto corps., who lobbied him against the loan.
The Dems should not be off the hook either…they sat around with their “thumb”, while the laws that made these jobs “outsourceable” were signed in with a smile.
Report thisBy Insider, December 14, 2008 at 1:46 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Reagan’s war on labor began in the summer of 1981, when he fired 13000 striking air traffic controllers and destroyed their union. At this point in time, air traffic controllers have another union and many say there are not enough controllers to keep the skies safe.
After the Washington airport underwent extensive rehab, the republicans pushed through renaming the airport Ronald Reagan Airport. That was like a double smack in the face to all unions. Republicans hate unions, basically, because they keep business honest on payscales. Simple as that. If you work for a living, voting republican is voting against yourself.
Report thisBy Joeseph Schmoltz, December 13, 2008 at 11:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
that was the lowest point in the history of the American labor movement.
NO, the lowest point was when the Teamster’s supported Reagan AFTER he fired PATCO workers.
Report thisBy chabuka, December 12, 2008 at 4:40 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
they have been “dumbed down” by Commerce, GOP and corporations greed..hit from the right and even at times from the left with half-truths and lies…while in Congress the politicians who have been bought and paid for (by these very corporations, Wall Street..etc,) have snipped and shredded the power of the union, organized labor….while holding out their hands for the piles of money the corporations have bestowed on them for doing their “dirty work”....the American worker has not been told the truth and most of them have accepted their lot in life..to the point that they defend “the politician/corporation system” (think that unions are “bad” corporations are “good”)...even though it is killing them and all they love
Report thisBy No union buster, December 12, 2008 at 11:55 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Non union workers have ridden the coat tails of union workers for years and if it wasn’t for unions standing up for decent wages, the non unions would all be working for $9 bucks an hour. It is because of the unions that non union auto workers make a living wage in this nation.
Wait until no cars/trucks are manufactured in the US. Auto workers working for foreign car plants in the US will be fortunate to make a living wage ever again. Their wages will become stagnant, resulting in their new class identification ... working poor.
Look back into the history of unions. They came into being because fatcats refused to pay a living wage. Henry Ford paid decent wages on one contention: that workers could afford the product they built. Eventually, automobiles will be just like health insurance in this country—affordable to upper middle class and the wealthy. Republicans sure know how to turn back the clock.
Report thisBy Jimbo, December 12, 2008 at 10:12 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Unions aren’t the problem but the Repugs and conservatives who want to pay workers less and less money.
Report thisBy cyrena, December 12, 2008 at 6:09 am #
Thebeerdoctor on Regan’s PATCO handling:
“..For myself, that was the lowest point in the history of the American labor movement. Not only for its boundless hypocrisy, but for the fact that the other unions did nothing to stop it. Talk about divide and conquer…”
You’re not alone in seeing that as the lowest point beerdoc. It was for me as well, though I didn’t put it in context until much later, because I was just beginning my career at the time, and didn’t know any better.
It didn’t take me long though, after observing my own company’s behaviors toward both the union and the non-union work groups within the same corporation. I belonged to the only worker group (aside from management and later contract workers) that was NOT unionized. I guess I don’t need to elaborate on what the company would do, or how much they would spend, or what lengths they would go to, to prevent our work group from unionizing. And yep, they have ALWAYS been ‘successful’. (union activists or even ‘suspected’ union activists are easily fired in ‘right to work’ states, which is why so many of these corporations base their operations in those states).
“Right to Work” of course means “Right to Fire/Discharge” without any explanation, and never mind any of those other ‘worker protections’ either.
So, when I hear people talking about the old-style so-called ‘union corruption’ I can only marvel at the irony. I’m not ignoring that it has existed, and that it probably still does. But this sort of corruption is like a kid swiping a sucker compared to the corruption that these corporations perpetrate against their employees, for DECADES now.
Those who have no knowledge of the labor movement, have no appreciation for what unions have brought to the basic survival of our socio-economic system. Without that movement, there would be no such thing as five day workweeks, holidays, or even 8 hour days. They don’t have a clue to what the nationally recognized “Labor Day” is about, other than to go to sales and consume more.
Maybe we could do without unions if the labor laws really had teeth, and they were nationally applied. But when the corps can set up their operations using slave labor in other countries, or set up the same here via contract workers, and skirting national labor laws, we get what we’ve wound up with since Regan began that destruction, way back when.
Report thisBy Margaret Currey, December 11, 2008 at 9:22 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
People must know that some union workers must have a certificate, take for instance electrical workers who worked non union, the electrical system had a break down, and non union worker suffered burns on his arms.
It may true that unions are a problem but when there were no unions people were made to do on starvation wages, hense people started a union, unfortunately corruption got in the way.
And even our own government uses abuses of power, the FBI abuses power, the courts abuse power, and when the country is run by a crook(s) everyone takes its marching orders.
And then there is the arrest of the governor of Illinois, very convient that it happened even before Obama became the real president, smells like a bad fish out of water too long.
Report thisBy Dave, December 11, 2008 at 4:05 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The basic argument here is that a strong middle class will lead to a stronger economy. Understandable thesis. But the caveat to this as written here is, the best way to a stronger middle class is through unionization.
Therefore we should see stronger economic growth in highly unionized areas.
The empirical evidence isn’t just lacking in support of this ultimate thesis, but it actually disproves it. Look at growth rates and unemployment rates for highly unionized states vs Right to work states. The evidence very strongly supports that unions are harmful to economic growth and job creation. Look at Michigan, the most highly unionized state, they have been in economic turmoil for years. According to Cocco, they should have the strongest economy of any state. The evidence just isn’t there.
Report thisBy Expat, December 10, 2008 at 11:02 pm #
@ thebeerdoctor, December 10 at 7:55 am;
My point was; blogging seems to be mistaken for action. I’m not critical of blogging or bloggers per se, just the mistaken idea that blogging is, of and by itself, a substitute for acting. Writing congressmen, sit ins, and marching are active dissension. I wonder how many posters here think they are actually accomplishing something by the mere existence of their comments? It’s a sometimes interesting pastime and nothing more IMO.
Report thisBy Bklynguy, December 10, 2008 at 8:25 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The comment by Timothy L. Pennell shows the utter contempt that the Right has for working Americans. Sure, they’ll celebrate a stooge like “Joe the Plumber” as a working class hero when he attacks Obama but just let ol’ Joe forget he’s a stooge and he goes out and joins a union or takes over a factory to protect his job and then Joe becomes working class scum to be beaten by police. The Right supports working Americans like a rope supports a hanged man
Report thisBy Leefeller, December 10, 2008 at 2:09 pm #
Non Union
Absolutism’s are healthy for one reason only.
“I object to unions and unionization for the primary reason that I believe that a hard worker who performs good work will be paid commensurate with his efforts.”
Nice to know slackers only work in union shops. Right to work is really nice if you own a business, except you get marginal skilled people. Some unions provide schooling for better skilled workers, such as the carpenters union.
Sure unions can be corrupt and useless, sort of like our government, without Unions we would all be living in Texas were prices are the same for everything except housing and wages are paid commensurate with managements desires. Maybe is is like the gun lobby’s says for Unions, Unions don’t slack, people slack.
Unions are decisive in the minds of the manipulated.
Report thisBy Non Union, December 10, 2008 at 12:56 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
At the tender young age of 15 I received instruction in what union shops do. I was told by the union boss at the Stop & Shop I was working for to “slow down, you are working to fast, and my guys won’t get their overtime”. They also coerced me into giving up a portion of my pay just to keep my job, by paying to become a member of the union, and paying “union dues”. Meanwhile, I saw that the people who talked loudest about the “union protecting them” were also the people who shirked the most and put the least amount of effort into any assignment they were given. I object to unions and unionization for the primary reason that I believe that a hard worker who performs good work will be paid commensurate with his efforts. Unfortunately my (small) experience with unions shows me that many people see them as a dodge that pits the workers against the management, and the union stewards are happy to keep this war going. That is not the way to run a business, and is the primary reason why non-union persons such as myself “bash” the unions.
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, December 10, 2008 at 12:55 pm #
re: Expat
Report thisAh Ms. Christiane Amanpour! The ex-Iranian, excuse that, ex-Persian whose family found itself on the wrong end of the stick when the Shia fundamentalists decided that this was in fact their country.
I still remember that voice of hers, after 9-11, when she announced: “Jihad does not mean holy war.”
Must be nice to be amongst that professional journalist firmament who hate the fact that blogging presents an opportunity for internet peasants, such as myself, to rear our gnarly heads and announce that we don’t buy into it anymore. What the hell do we know anyway? What is worse, especially for the likes of Ms. Amanpour, we actually question their expert authority.
Another way to look at it, take this business about the Governor of Illinois. You can read the indictment yourself. You do not need some well paid middle man to explain it to you.
The International Tribune article on how the Big Three comes up with that $70 dollar an hour wage myth… do the television professionals question this number? It is just like questioning whether or not the supposed “surge” work in Iraq.
Christiane Amanpour has gone through some career transformations herself. From her emotional reporting on the Bosnian war to marrying an ex- state department official, the chief foreign correspondent of CNN finds herself in the precarious position of explaining the status quo, in order to maintain her position. God forbid she should find herself on the isolated island that Robert Fisk inhabits, where all he has going for him is to try to tell the truth.
By csavage, December 10, 2008 at 11:53 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Correction about the op-ed piece in WSJ (owned by Newscorp)
Report thisCAFE standards did not doom the domestic auto industry, the Japanese makers here did just fine following those standards. The domestic makers’ overseas models do just fine following tougher EU standards.
As mentioned before, the sheeple are being led by their noses and bleating according to prompting.
The truth is, lack of innovation killed the big 3. I drive a BMW 530-why? It’s sporty, great handling, even better braking, has a manual tranny and gets 30 mph on the highway. Does Detroit offer a similar model? NO. I grew up riding in GM cars and I owned several GM cars. A union worker on the line does not design the cars-he/she just puts them together.
Also, once the Japanese plants have been open long enough to have to support their retired workers healthcare, you’ll see those labor costs go up with them. Providing healthcare to employees is just an additional tax placed on all of our domestic industries. As long as the American people are content to pay twice as much for half as good care, that problem will persist. As for Walmart, they’ve figured out how to get Medicaid to pick up the tab for their employees-they’re mostly listed as “Part-time” and ineligible for employer sponsored benefits. Walmart is the biggest recipient of corporate welfare in this country. I wouldn’t point to them as a success story.
As for journalism v blogging, the failure of the press to point out the success of the Japanese single payer system, or the Norwegian system, or the German system when the Repubs/rightwingers play the Canadian or British systems shows that the MSM should probably pay attention or, at least, compete with other sources of info out there.
Yes, vetting is good, but until you’ve been “quoted” in the paper when no one even called you and then, in turn, have your letter to the editor edited to remove reference to the fact you weren’t contacted at all, you won’t appreciate that the MSM doesn’t always check their sources either
By Imustbecrazy, December 10, 2008 at 11:40 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Throwing money at Detroit won’t solve the problem. It’s two fold. First, Detroit has to produce cars that people want to buy. Second, they have to be priced at a price that I want to buy it at.
My belief is Unions only work where global labor can’t compete i.e. teachers, police, ...
So, again, praise Unions all you want, but will you can’t people to buy is the question.
And, for the record, I have always bought U.S. automakers cars. I drive a Ford truck now. So, for me, if your posting here Pro-Union for Detroit, but you’re not driving an American car, then just go away.
1996 Ford Ranger
Report this2000 Sebring Conv (Mexician)
1992 Saturn
1995 Ford Windstar
1987 Olds Cutlass
1985 Z28
1979 Monza
1972 Monte Carlo
1979 Pontiac Sunbird
1968 MGB-GT - My only foreign car
By VAJones, December 10, 2008 at 11:38 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
What union supporters apparently fail to understand is that union labor must prove to be the most productive and expert labor available. If producers and consumers are going to pay top dollar in wages and benefits for union-made goods, those goods must be a better value than comparably priced goods made with non-union labor.
Cheaper goods of comparable quality improve the standard of living for consumers by increasing their purchasing power - they can buy more goods with the same paycheck or save the difference. That’s why Walmart is such a success. Everyone wants to improve his standard of living, so why should one be forced to buy (or support the production of) an American union-made good for significantly more money than an imported or non-union-made good of the same quality (i.e., a better value)? Is he not entitled to as high a standard of living as possible? Why should he reduce his standard of living to improve someone else’s standard of living?
If American unions want to reap all the benefits of organized labor and collective bargaining, they need to insist in the bargain that the goods they produce are the most innovative, highest quality, best value on the market place; otherwise, the consumer will spend his dollars elsewhere.
Report thisBy Richard Cranium, December 10, 2008 at 11:04 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Watch this video tour of a plant that Ford runs in Brasil. Do you think the unions would let the Big 3 build a plant this efficient here? Probably not.
http://info.detnews.com/video/index.cfm?id=1189
Report thisBy Expat, December 10, 2008 at 10:02 am #
thebeerdoctor, December 10 at 4:41 am
As I told one Muslim I know: you think that Caliphates only exist in Arabia? Obviously you know nothing about the fortunes of Sam Walton’s daughters.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This isn’t a funny subject, but I had a chuckle from your last sentence. Look, you of all people should know that active dissent in the U.S. is finished. I have a great quote from Christiane Amanpour that says what I’ve been saying for far too long. That’s why I quit posting for a long time and will likely not continue for much longer.
Report thisChristiane Amanpour: “I think that in the West sometimes blogging is an excuse for sitting back and just commenting on life as it passes by and putting out your opinions on what is happening. Sometimes those are interesting, but not always. And the truth of the matter is I do not believe, no matter how sophisticated the delivery platform, I don’t think there is a substitute or should there be a substitute for professional journalism, which comes with training, with experience, with credibility, with developing trust based on the accuracy of your record in the field. I think that is an absolute must. That must stay with us so that people have an accurate and objective reference point for their information.”
IMO, that pretty much says it. I have tremendous respect for her journalism and god, do I hate isms…..
By thebeerdoctor, December 10, 2008 at 9:41 am #
re: Expat
Report this“The Big Three and the UAW had the bad luck of helping to create the middle class in a country where individual companies-as opposed to all of society—must shoulder much of the burden of paying for retirement.”
What a sentence. As for anti-union Truthdiggers, this should be expected. Programming works. Look how long the Communist menace served the needs of those entrenched with power. The Red menace became the labor movement menace. The corporate orthodoxy taught everyone that actually demanding your rights was unAmerican. But then the Soviet Empire disappeared, and the new Muslim boogie man does not give a damn about labor rights. So what is the corporate response for repressing the workers? As I told one Muslim I know: you think that Caliphates only exist in Arabia? Obviously you know nothing about the fortunes of Sam Walton’s daughters.
By Expat, December 10, 2008 at 9:05 am #
thebeerdoctor, December 10 at 3:51 am;
I would suggest, we are about to see the lowest point for labor, coming soon. This site tends not to attract the general folks and even though I disagree with some of the posters here; they do represent the mainstream, union bashing, anti-labor mentality. The thing that bugs me the most; the utter lack of critical thinking; the blind following of dogma and outright fabrications and twisting of the facts. There is a great article in http://www.iht.com It the International Herald Tribune. Great read, check it out.
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, December 10, 2008 at 8:51 am #
re: Expat
Report thisI do not know if you noticed Expat, but many of the very same folks who cheered Ronald Reagan’s handling of the PATCO strike, said next to nothing when the Savings and Loan debacle came down like a house of rotten cards.
But this is to be expected, in a country and culture that has sought to demonize organized labor at every turn. After years of Hollywood portraying labor corruption, is it not stingingly ironic that a former union president of the Screen Actors Guild (who during his tenure, actually worked as a government informant, turning in the names of his fellow actors with “questionable” political affiliations) told the Air Traffic Controllers: Do what I say or lose your jobs.
For myself, that was the lowest point in the history of the American labor movement. Not only for its boundless hypocrisy, but for the fact that the other unions did nothing to stop it. Talk about divide and conquer…
By Expat, December 10, 2008 at 2:04 am #
thebeerdoctor, December 9 at 7:18 am #
re: Expat
That is called a rhetorical question. Absurdity abounds.
Report this~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry about that, I missed it. I couldn’t agree more. I’ve had a love hate relationship (I’m an ex-teamster) with Unions; I now realize, in spite of some blatant corruption, that they’re the only thing trying to protect the middle class living wage battle. We’re losing of course. Are there problems with some of the Unions? Sure, but it pales when compared with the robber barons greatest rip-off in human history. The one we’re living through now. Some of the comments here are just ludicrous and completely miss reality. 90% of the American people has been screwed and nobody said I love you. We take it anyway. Whats wrong with us? We act like the whipped dogs we are.
By purplewolf, December 9, 2008 at 11:58 pm #
P.T. I agree with the military spending comment. To bad that the G.M. tank plant(Grand Blanc, Mich.) no longer exists. The main building is still there, very few people left mostly security, but all the surrounding area that stored the built tanks for WWII has been sold to open what was said to be “small boutique and gift shops”. Turned out to be Walmart, Sam’s Club, Kohl’s and several other big name stores. To bad, as if the only way to save the economy is by producing war equipment, they could have made the new safer vehicles for our soldiers in Iraq sooner at that factory, even though I do not support the continuation of these wars.
If it was left up to most of these employers, they would pay their employees as little as possible, paid sick leave, vacation, medical benefits would never be heard of without the unions. It would cut into the profits of the owners of these companies, so what if the employees get sick, there are so many people out there looking for work that sick employees can be easily replaced by those so desperate they will work for next to nothing.
Do we really want to go back to the days where people work in unsafe environments and didn’t even earn a living wage? If minimum wage had kept up with inflation, it would be over $18.00/hr today-what some auto workers make now in their former Buick City USA. Yet those in government, including John McCain and mostly the Republicans party gets extremely irate when the minimum wage raise issue comes up. Why do they begrudge workers a living wage in America, do they want to make us the newest 3rd world country?
Report thisBy P. T., December 9, 2008 at 8:52 pm #
American auto workers for Japanese companies would not make as much money as they do if the Japanese did not have the United Auto Workers union to be concerned about. Those workers can thank the UAW for their wages.
Report thisBy Mudbones, December 9, 2008 at 5:50 pm #
Let’s face it, Unions are big business too. I was a member of CWA and it was like pulling teeth to get them to help you out. They only wanted to take on your problem if they had skin in the game.
Report thisBy P. T., December 9, 2008 at 4:47 pm #
Some middle class people seem to resent working class people without college educations who make middle class pay—even those doing hard work. Incompetent millionaire bankers don’t bother them though. Go figure!
Report thisBy Ruith Skidmore, December 9, 2008 at 3:43 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
What do you call paying union members 3/4 of their salary for two years after laid off or fired? Union members aren’t fired because their is none who is incomptebt, right?Does the Post pay their employees those kind of wages & benefits? I think not. The mangement of these companies are stupid as they thought the US citizens wouldn’t say go screw yourselves. Why do you think Wal Mart hasn’t faltered in this economy??? Dumb. umb, dumb.
Report thisBy P. T., December 9, 2008 at 3:06 pm #
The U.S. elite’s solution to the problem of creating the demand necessary to keep the economy from stagnating has been the use of military spending. The elite has preferred that to better living standards for workers.
Report thisBy Rigby, December 9, 2008 at 1:50 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The UAW are leaches that will see their salaries and benefits come into line with reality, or the will join the unemployment line. I have no incentive to pay 30% more for a car than necessary so that a person who invested NO money in his education can retire at age 50.
Cash is king. Mine is going to Toyota and Honda. The big 3 can suck it in bankruptcy court!!!
Report thisBy Timothy L. Pennell, December 9, 2008 at 1:34 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Yeah. I’m sure all of you ‘Unions are Great’ guys, are probably right. I’m sure it’s everybody else’ fault. It’s just a COINCIDENCE that EVERY industry that the Unions get their hands on, they RUN IN TO THE GROUND. Steel, Textiles, Airlines, AUTO. What about Coal? They don’t need to. Obama will take care of killing coal. And I’m sure that it’s just a fantasy that the MOB controls the Unions. The Unions and Organized Crime. Perfect together. As far as the ‘occupation’ at the closed up window factory…Nothing a good whack up beside the head, with a police baton, couldn’t solve. Oh wait. I guess you can add Window Factories to the list. Idiots.
Report thisBy Tim, December 9, 2008 at 1:22 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
all the socialists on here!.
If unions aren’ the problem then why do the southern carmakers do great? Why does GM do well over seas?
Unions have destroyed schools too.
Congress is also telling them what cars to make, cars that the public doesn’t want.
grow up people!
Report thisBy Leefeller, December 9, 2008 at 12:51 pm #
Every perk labor has fought and died for has been attacked constantly, with the same ruthless nipping away we have seen of our alleged rights in the Constitution. We are in a new world order, and labor rights need get out of the way.
Labor history like most other history of abuses preformed in United States against the peoples has always been marginalized and hidden, actually non existent in the watered down history taught in our schools. From abuses of the American Indian, the ugliness of slavery to the internment of the Japanese, Ignorance has always provided for successful manipulation by special interests, in gathering public support or sentiment.
in the early 20th century big money was successful in fostering public opinion against Steel workers, this continues today. Divisive techniques sponsored by big business have been able to guide public opinion in order to conjure sentiment against peoples own best interests. Example today medical reform the problems it has endured. Using key words like socialism, Communism and what ever else may be useful at the time, these are the basic tools of special interests. Fear is usually a good foundation for subsidized rhetoric to build on, look at the success of religion.
If you notice blame or accountability never starts at the top, may have something to do with who has the money, and maybe even powerl.
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, December 9, 2008 at 12:18 pm #
re: Expat
That is called a rhetorical question. Absurdity abounds.
Report thisBy Pod, December 9, 2008 at 12:01 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
When Reagan became president he immediately showed his disdain and contempt for the middle class and working people. By firing the air traffic controllers, he sent a message to the middle class which said if you don’t stay in line we’ll put you out in the street. He also sent a message to the corporate CEO,s saying treat your people any way you desire and my administration has your back. He demonized the words “union ” and “liberal” which believe it or not never held the negative connotation that they still do to this day. But it was really hard not to like the guy as he wrapped himself in the flag and talked non stop about God and Country. Another “Charismatic” president totally bamboozling the populace. It’s been all downhill since then for the middle class to where we are today. As wealth at the top keeps piling on, it never seems to “trickle down” to the rest of us. The unregulated free market that Reagan espoused has brought us to a $700,000,000 bailout, massive housing, credit, and unemployment crisis and other problems which can be linked to his presidency. So when you hear politicians proclaiming that they are “Reagan Republicans” this is what you can expect from them.
Report thisBy KDelphi, December 9, 2008 at 11:49 am #
Without Unions, US will be 3rd world..it will trickle up, folks.(for those in such a situation, feeling “safe”....
The question is, do you belive in human rights and worker dignity. Unions can be the conscience of a society, if they are empowered.
Thanks
Report thisBy Expat, December 9, 2008 at 11:34 am #
@ thebeerdoctor, December 9 at 5:49 am;
I would have 90+% agreed with you until I saw the question mark at the end of your final sentence. What’s your point?
Report thisBy hippy pam, December 9, 2008 at 11:25 am #
THANK YOU Expat and Beerdoctor…..very few understand….you BOTH DO….Thank You….
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, December 9, 2008 at 10:49 am #
According to U.S. government survey, only 12% of the workforce is represented by a union. So they are responsible for all the economic failures of the other 88%?
Report thisBy Expat, December 9, 2008 at 9:43 am #
Well, for once (maybe twice) Marie, you got it mostly correct. Some, not all, union jobs are the only way some Americans have kept up with and have real living wages. The attack on the middle class has been unrelenting and effective. The Detroit Automaker bailout/bankruptcy may well signal the end of living wages for the remaining workers. The government has been trying to bust them for years and may now finally succeed. Detroit has been so mismanaged for so many years it should be a criminal offense; they’ll take the money and run (the CEO’s) and will do fine on the backs of the workers as usual.
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, December 9, 2008 at 8:41 am #
Marie Cocco is correct about unionization in the United States made the middle class possible. At one time, the United Auto Workers set the gold standard for improving the condition of the workers who actually produce the corporate wealth. But that was compromised through a series of rather venal concessions made for political expediency. Now there is plenty of blame to go around, but organized labor has become the much too convenient scape goat of main stream news, and why not? TV news dances to the tune of the corporate masters. Television extols the alleged virtues of the billionaires and blames the unions for all the corporate woes. A huge lie that unfortunately, too many of the American people actually believe.
Report this