The article quoted a company representative stating the person was doing it as some sort of union based retribution. 1 the union was on lockout and 2 it’s stupid to think organized labor would tell a member to go and piss on the food. Labor might have a sick-in or a slowdown that’s organized, but that’s it.
So: Making up baseless accusations to foster anti-union sentiment.
Sorry if I’m brusque.
Seriously, what possible benefit would a union get from having a member piss in the food? It makes no sense.
Available for 11.99 on godaddy. Making this site would be some fun design work.
OK, that clears it up. Thanks.
Intimidation, which unions have been known to use. Usually they’re less subtle; slashed tires or outright assaults on “scabs,” but it fits the MO.
That’s pretty broad and also as stated it indicates that such a thing would be common and current.
Attacking scabs has happened, in some clashes it happened a lot. But those kinds of attacks are extremely uncommon today. Saying it “fits their MO” is less accurate than saying “attacking black people fits the police MO”.
As to intimidation being a union tactic. Well you say it like the unions created it out of the ether when anyone who knows labor history can tell you that violence and intimidation were first used by management. Today it just does not happen like that anymore. Union organizers and members face so much hostility and have so little bargaining power that you don’t even raise your voice when arguing your case. Employers, like Wal Mart, on the other hand intimidate and harass people trying to organize, they send private investigators after them and often illegally terminate them. But lets blame the organized workers. All they gave us was the 40 hour work week, an end to child labor, and other shit nobody likes.
The only unions that have enough power to be so actively crooked in this day and age are police unions.
Today there is no real upward mobility, today your boss can fire you with no cause in most states, today your wage growth will not match inflation because you probably don’t even know what COLA is and your boss isn’t going to just give it to you even if you did.
The only way for a worker to improve her lot in life is to organize and bargain collectively for a fair contract.
But in the US we love the job creators a lot more than the job doers.
Attacking black people does fit the police MO. That’s the thing about generalizations; it’s unfair to apply them to individuals, but they do describe groups.
Unions haven’t fought for widespread progress in a long, long time, if they ever did. Today they’re more than happy to throw the actual working class under the bus. Whether that’s by pissing in their cornflakes or by shutting down said bus because they’re unhappy with their $60,000/year salary driving it.
There’s no upward mobility in a union shop. You’ll be stuck behind a useless, entitled boomer who’s only qualification is that he was there first. The only way to advance is to go somewhere that rewards merit rather than just age.
There is nobody other than labor unions trying to protect workers and put money in their hands.
As for no upward mobility in a union shop: No, there isn’t. If you’re on the floor you might make foreman someday but you will never make real management. The union isn’t changing that. What the union does do is try to make sure you have a fair wage and are treated fairly and try to give you a job that allows you to give your kids at least as good a chance as you had.
Labor unions gave working Americans the first real opportunity to send their kids to school in the 50’s and 60’s. Unfortunately a lot of those kids who got successful sold out and started fucking the working class over.
And what is your beef with a metropolitan bus driver making 60k? Have your expectations been so corrupted that you think 60k is an unfair wage for a job that takes skill and responsibility and can be dangerous?
Do you just hate working people or something? Is it self hate or are you somebody that hopes to one day be an exploiter of the workers?
Let’s all shower the “job creators” with praise, but fuck the lazy “job-doer”, if they wanted to be financially secure they should have done a better job picking their parents.
Why bother with standing, anyways? I had to give that up years ago. Sit down! Relax! [I was gonna say take a load off, but then you’d be sitting anyways] I really get so much reading done in the bathroom. Hell, I’ve even figured out how to read in the shower.
Sometimes Dylan just baffles me.
A major thank you for clarifying some thoughts for me. Had a friend that argued that Unions were at best unnecessary in these day. My thoughts have needed marshalling.
Could have been a requirement of their local mafia work council
The IWW are fighting for living wages, and are being undermined by both big business and the mainstream unions. If you really want real change then you are going to have to look to the radicals to do it, not the reformists and bosses.
Labour unions make no effort whatsoever to protect the working class. They will always put their interests above the actual “job doers,” and will quite actively fuck the working class over by shutting down essential services - like public transit - to increase their take of the pie. Even when it’s $60k/year for unskilled labour. Yeah, that’s unfair when it’s paid for by people who earn far less than half that.
Don’t worry about eating it, someone already has! Problem solved!
They don’t. Kelloggs, however, has put out PR that self-loathing dipshits will believe in an instant as God’s Truth, even if it’s later proven that Kellogs lied about the situation.
How is bus driving unskilled?
So the answer is to pull down the wages of better paid workers? Really?
Pretty much all large scale institutions, such as a huge, umbrella union like the AFL-CIO has corruption - but looking at it from the ground up, unions improved the lot of working people (all too often, just white, but still). But there is no denying that the income of union members (and often others who worked in unionized enviroment) WENT UP when unions got a seat at the table and a voice. It’s not even a question, it’s historical fact. Right not, with the rise of at will states, only 7% of American workers in the private sector are unionized. Do you think that the low, stagnate wages are just a coincidence?
Of course, what a lot of unions have done today is agree to tiered plans where those who are already aboard get to keep their salaries/benefits, while every new hire gets a whole lot less.
Eventually these new hires are going to be a majority of the work force, and they are liable to have been thinking, exactly what the fuck am I paying union dues for?
What else should the unions do?
Employers are offering reduced benefits, and unions can agree to phase them out for new employees, or get rid of them immediately for everyone. How does that help? Misery loves company?
