Unions under fire: new ads underscore growing opposition to labor

[Omaha Steve]

http://www.mcknights.com/Unions-under-fire-new-ads-underscore-growing-opposition-to-labor/article/113224/

August 01, 2008

It appears that anti-union activists are upping the ante to discredit the labor movement.

Recent full-page ads running in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal target unions as the cause for job losses in the steel, airline and auto industries. An ad in Thursday's New York Times features a photo of a padlocked gate with a "closed" sign under the lock. "The New Union Label," the ad reads. "Like what union leaders did to steel, airline and auto industry jobs? Then you'll love what they do to yours." TV ads have also been running in several states.

The ads are products of UnionFacts.com, which seeks to dispel the effectiveness of unions on its Web site. The ads are, in part, a response to legislation that would replace secret ballots with signed cards as a recruitment method. The Employee Free Choice Act, also known as card-check legislation, has gained support from a large number of House and Senate members. The nursing-home industry has been grappling with the growing influence of The Service Employees Union at facilities in recent years.

[FreakinDJ]

1. I wonder what all the non-union labor does when SSI folds up

The big difference in union labor is they have a forced retirement savings. Often times with multiple investment options for their members.

You want to talk about the burdon the Baby Boomers pose to SSI obligations. The majority of workers for the generations after them come with no retirement savings at all thanks to the sharp declines in union membership

Where the Steel, Airline, industries went wrong is they placed the money set aside for their pension plan obligations into the general fund. Or they plain failed to vest the funds needed to keep the funds viable. When the Bill came due, (thanks to changes in the laws provided by your favorite Ratpublican congress) they claimed bankruptcy to avoid paying out benefits already earned.

[jwirr]

2. I am curious, obviously the opposition comes from owners but who

else is following the leader here?

[AdHocSolver]

3. The unions have to educate people to the real loss of jobs: cartel agreements like NAFTA, WTO, etc.

These are NOT "free trade" agreements. They are collusive agreements whose sole purpose was to export jobs from the U.S. and create a large pool of unemployed people who would be desperate for any kind of job, no matter how little the pay or how dangerous the work.

The unions early on defined the problem in "me" terms thereby losing the "white collar" workers who thought that their jobs were safe. Now that white collar jobs are going to India, the white collar workers are just waking up to the fact that their jobs were on the line as well.

However, the unions are still not understanding the "big picture". Just unionizing more workers, even foreign workers, will NOT solve anything. As long as there are lots more workers than jobs, workers, unionized or not, have no power. The corporations merely tell the workers that if they don't do the company's bidding, the jobs will be sent to another country. So where is the workers' negotiating leverage? It doesn't exist.

Eliminating collusive trade agreements and imposing import quotas and import tariffs to "level the playing field" is the only action that will reverse this trend and bring family supporting jobs back to America. This is something that the government has to be involved in. Any other action is futile.