HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The nightmare of Reagan a...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu May 24, 2012, 09:28 PM

The nightmare of Reagan and the useful idiots who voted for him is still with us

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/05/24/150067/lockheed-to-hire-temporary-workers.html

Lockheed to hire temporary workers to fill in for strikers

Posted on Thursday, May 24, 2012Modified Thursday, May 24, 2012

By BOB COX | McClatchy Newspapers

FORT WORTH, Texas Lockheed Martin on Thursday turned up the pressure on striking Machinists union members, announcing it would begin hiring temporary replacement workers to fill aircraft production jobs.

A handful of workers were being brought in from a temporary employment service and a few dozen more would be added next week, Lockheed spokesman Joe Stout said.

"We will add people incrementally each week as we need to," Stout said, with the goal of improving and boosting production until the Machinists return to work.

The action by Lockheed to begin augmenting its production workforce comes as the strike by about 3,600 members of the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers is in its fifth week.

----------------------------------------------


Replacement Workers: Management's Big Gun

By PETER T. KILBORN, Special to The New York Times

Published: March 13, 1990

<snip>One reason that companies now think that goal is possible is the lesson they drew from the illegal strike of 11,500 Federal air traffic controllers in August 1981, seven months into Ronald Reagan's first term as President. After the controllers defied a back-to-work order, Mr. Reagan dismissed them, filled their ranks with permanent replacements, and the union collapsed.

'A Signal to Other Employers'

The Government's success in keeping the air traffic system working impressed many unionized companies.''Reagan made it respectable to bust unions,'' Mr. Baptiste said.

Gary Burtless, a labor economist at the Brookings Institution, said Mr. Reagan emboldened management to risk the strain to its business of taking on less experienced workers. ''The fact that the President was able to keep the air traffic system going indicated that there was a lot more scope for replacing workers than people imagined,'' Mr. Burtless said. ''If you can replace air traffic controllers you can certainly replace bus drivers.''

The permanent replacements, often recruited from the ranks of the unemployed or from low-paid employees of other businesses, are a variation on the temporary substitutes vilified by trade unionists as ''scabs'' or ''strikebreakers'' but nevertheless regarded as a part of management's legitimate arsenal. Temporary replacements leave at the end of a strike, but permanent replacements are assured the strikers' jobs. After a strike, the law allows strikers first claim on their old jobs, but only if replacements vacate them.

10 replies, 1344 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to NNN0LHI (Original post)

Thu May 24, 2012, 09:38 PM

1. "Reagan Democrats" have made the lives of their children and grandchildren so much worse. Like

so many short-sighted people, they didn't have a clue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libinnyandia (Reply #1)

Thu May 24, 2012, 09:50 PM

3. Reagan did receive 26% of the Democratic vote in 1980 but he also received 54% of Independents

No clean hands here.

Don

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Reply #3)

Thu May 24, 2012, 10:42 PM

4. The Democrats forgot what the GOP stood for and unfortunately independents often vote with no

clue about what the 2 parties stand for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Original post)

Thu May 24, 2012, 09:47 PM

2. IN the good ol' days those scabs would have been shot...

 

because there was no other way to stop management from just replacing the strikers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Original post)

Fri May 25, 2012, 11:04 AM

5. I know some Reaganites who can't figure out why their union has been weakened

Or why their adult children can only find low paying jobs and can't afford to move out.

It is a mystery to them.

Don

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Original post)

Fri May 25, 2012, 11:09 AM

6. Let us not forget also the spinelessness of the AFL-CIO and its head

 

Geroge Meany in failing to call a general strike to counter Reagan's union busting.

I to this day believe that the credible threat of a general strike would have called Reagan's bluff and forced him and his goons to back down. Reagan might have been able to use the military as scabs for PATCO, but no way could he have kept the economy functioning in the wake of a full general strike. At the time, unions represented 30% of American households, IIRC. That's now down to somewhere just north of 10% (including government workers).

Brought back some painful memories, you did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #6)

Fri May 25, 2012, 04:18 PM

7. George Meany couldn't have called a general strike to counter Reagan's union busting

George Meany died before Reagan was sworn in for his first term.

If we are going to blame someone lets at least blame people who were alive at the time.

Don

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Reply #7)

Fri May 25, 2012, 05:23 PM

10. Ouch, my memories have grown rusty with age. I thought I remembered

 

it as Meany, but I actually think it was Lane Kirkland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_Kirkland

Sorry, my mind tends to play tricks on me like this as I get older. Apologize to the Meany fans out there for an unintentional slur on his name. Thanks for flagging my error.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Original post)

Fri May 25, 2012, 04:49 PM

8. Another useless mindnumbed thread designed to divide Democrats.

and the suckers fall for it everytime!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whistler162 (Reply #8)

Fri May 25, 2012, 04:59 PM

9. What part of this thread bothers you?

Be specific and perhaps I will edit out the part that offends you.

Don

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread