Anecdotal evidence busting a union myth

A couple of examples hardly bust a "myth", even if I've never heard this particular one. Now if you want to talk US Gov't Civil Service employees ...

Having worked as an electrician for 10 years, I can say this: If you are in the union's "Good Ol' Boy" network, you aren't going anywhere. There's more nepotism there than in any of Europe's royal families.
Yup....I've seen that type of corruption in quite a few unions. It's a big part of why they've lost community support and with out community backing unions can't be nearly as affective for their membership. Unions have at times been their own worst enemies.
 
Yup....I've seen that type of corruption in quite a few unions. It's a big part of why they've lost community support and with out community backing unions can't be nearly as affective for their membership. Unions have at times been their own worst enemies.

I also noticed one thing that wasn't mentioned ...

I'd like the OP to clarify "fired". When you work for the union, you work for the union, not the company they supply with people (at least it's that way in the IBEW). Getting sent back to the union from a shop isn't exactly being "fired".

The electrical union where I lived put itself out of business, as you say. Trade unions may have been a good idea back when they actually served the members. Now they just serve themselves, and mostly price themselves out of business.
 
Any time I see the work "anecdote" I read it in my head as "Danecdote" becuase of Dano. Remember him? Argument by anecdote was, like, his stock in trade. The Danecdote.
 
Yup....I've seen that type of corruption in quite a few unions. It's a big part of why they've lost community support and with out community backing unions can't be nearly as affective for their membership. Unions have at times been their own worst enemies.

"With all their faults, trade unions have done more for humanity than any other organization of men that ever existed"
Clarence Darrow

Unions are not perfect, because people belong to and run unions. And people are not perfect. But the VAST majority of negative union information is VERY well funded propaganda.

Worse Than Union Busting

The over-the-top mudslinging by the Center for Union Facts, the National Right to Work Committee and other anti-union groups is nothing more than an attempt to pull the wool over our eyes, hiding the real crisis in the American workplace. Too many workers in the U.S. still can’t adequately provide basic necessities for their families, protect themselves from workplace hazards or take care of themselves when they get old or sick. The firings, intimidation and harassment that often befall workers attempting to exercise freedoms of speech and association by forming unions are threats to our democracy. When faced with union organizing drives, 30 percent of employers terminate pro-union workers, 40 percent threaten to close a worksite if a union prevails and 51 percent coerce workers into opposing unions with bribery and favoritism.

The motives behind assailing organized workers are both financial and ideological. Union-busting is big business. Just ask Center for Union Facts founder and D.C. mercenary lobbyist Rick Berman. He’s the mastermind behind the ads and has earned a living attacking other public interest groups—like Mothers Against Drunk Driving and the Centers for Disease Control—for clients including the alcohol and fast food industries. Although he won’t reveal who is bankrolling CUF, attacking unions seems to be the source of his latest windfall.

And Berman isn’t the only one profiting from conspiring to bring about the demise of worker-built organizations. Search for “union buster” on Google and peruse over 3 million hits. The proliferation of “union avoidance” consulting has resulted in 82 percent of employers hiring help to fight worker organizing drives.

But the assault on unions goes deeper than the dollar. It is bolstered by a long-standing conservative political objective to eradicate unions. Right-wingers know something the rest of us seem to have forgotten: Workers still want unions because they are a powerful deterrent to poverty and unfettered corporate greed. When conservative political strategist Grover Norquist says, “We’re going to crush labor as a political entity” and ultimately “break unions,” it isn’t because unions aren’t relevant anymore. The right knows that unions act as the nation’s conscience by advancing civil rights, environmental protections and other causes of equality, justice and fair play far beyond the workplace.

If worker-built organizations weren’t powerful, the right wouldn’t invest so much time and money to dismantle them. And Berman’s supporters would be less concerned with obscuring their support from public view.

So the next time you come across a slick television, radio or newspaper ad pedaling anti-union propaganda, ask yourself who benefits when workers are prevented from joining together to represent themselves. Question what’s at stake when democratic rights are limited in the workplace.

The anti-union network’s vision for the workplace is out of sync with what we value in America.

more

"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru and co-author of the GOP's 'Contract with America'
 
"The firings, intimidation and harassment that often befall workers attempting to exercise freedoms of speech and association by forming unions are threats to our democracy."

It's clear the conservative goal is cheap labor. It's at the core of their ideology. Got to give the right wing propaganda machine credit though, a lot of hard working people still believe their lies.

In 20 years the word 'democracy' will be vilified the same way the word 'union' is today.


"Workers still want unions because they are a powerful deterrent to poverty and unfettered corporate greed."
Only 100 yrs ago the right had it's way with labor, here are some photo...

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&itbs=1&sa=X&ved=0CD4QrQMwCQ
 
As far as school teachers go in OK, a school might have to put up with a sorry teacher (as long as nothing illegal has been done) for a year or two before he can be fired...especially if the local school board is gutless. This is the only union experience I have. I am all for safeguards in place for the teacher as local situations, local politics can endanger a person's job but to have to put up with a poor teacher for any amount of time after it is found out that they are sorry and unwilling to try to improve is not good. Kids often lose a year or two of gains they should be making.


You ever hear of this...?

[h=1]'Rubber Rooms' In New York Schools Cost City $22 Million A Year For Teachers Awaiting Hearings[/h]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/16/rubber-rooms-in-new-york-city-22-million_n_1969749.html
 
I also noticed one thing that wasn't mentioned ...

I'd like the OP to clarify "fired". When you work for the union, you work for the union, not the company they supply with people (at least it's that way in the IBEW). Getting sent back to the union from a shop isn't exactly being "fired".

The electrical union where I lived put itself out of business, as you say. Trade unions may have been a good idea back when they actually served the members. Now they just serve themselves, and mostly price themselves out of business.

Our employees draw a paycheck from our company. If we fire them they lose that paycheck and any perdiem they were drawing based on the job. What the union does is beyond what I know. And it is the IBEW.
 
Back
Top