About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Union busting: Right-wing media relentlessly attack worker representation

August 05, 2010 6:59 pm ET — 105 Comments

Media conservatives have waged a relentless war against labor unions, blaming them for a wide variety of problems and smearing them as "communists" and "thugs," among other attacks. However, experts have credited unions for establishing many of the "most fundamental and valued features of today's society" and "paving the road to the middle class for many millions of working families."

The blame game: Conservative media try to pin problems on unions

Beck says unions have "raped" police and fire fighters. On the August 4 edition of his radio program, Glenn Beck said of unions: "Look what they've done to the police and firemen. They've raped these guys. Along with politicians. Along with politicians -- raped them. The bravest among us." Beck went on to ask, "What, do you think the politicians are not in bed with the unions?"

Beck blames unions for woes of local governments and industries. On the February 25 edition of The Glenn Beck Program, Beck blamed unions for the financial woes of local governments, the auto industry, airlines, schools, the steel industry, and the textile industry. He continued: "Mr. President, until you get the unions out of this business, I don't think we have anything to talk about."

Carlson blames cost of living in NYC on "union pensions" and "raising taxes" for "schools." On the August 5 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Gretchen Carlson asserted that the cost of living in New York City, California, and Honolulu is "so expensive" "because of union pensions; because of raising costs for other things; for raising taxes along the way for schools." Carlson concluded: "If you go back in history and look at who incorporated a lot of that, maybe the blame comes right back to the same party. Or maybe it doesn't."

Root: "Unions destroy capitalism and free enterprise." On the May 27, 2009, edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck, guest Wayne Allyn Root stated that a "point we all agree on" is that "unions destroy capitalism and free enterprise." As examples, Root cited the public school system, the auto industry, and the steel industry. Beck pushed back slightly, stating that he's "against unions, but not all unions" and explaining that "the way to success is to be a decent person, treat other people with dignity, give them a good fair living wage because if you're good to your people they're going to make a better product, everybody wins."

Bernard: "[A] lot of labor unions are what holds America back and keeps us from being as good as we can be." On the August 19, 2009, edition of MSNBC's Morning Meeting, Independent Women's Forum CEO Michelle Bernard stated:

The labor unions right now simply exist for one reason: To self-perpetuate, receiving union dues, and having political influence. I think it's absolutely amazing to watch that clip from The Rachel Maddow Show last night where this guy is, he's saying to President Obama, "I'm strong arming you, buddy."

And my answer to this would be they are showing themselves to be as ridiculous as many members of the American public think they are. What happened to pragmatism, what happened to competition, and what actually happened to winning? Maybe it would be great for the Democratic Party to lose the support of labor unions because quite honestly, a lot of labor unions are what holds America back and keeps us from being as good as we can be.

Conservatives smear unions as violent "thugs"

Limbaugh accuses unions of resorting to violence. On the May 18, 2009, broadcast of his radio show, Rush Limbaugh attempted to smear unions as violent, declaring that the Employee Free Choice Act should be titled "The Union Brass Knuckles Busting On Your Knees Act."

Beck warns of "possible super-union" of "out-and-out thugs" that will have "extraordinary power." On the April 14 edition of his radio show, Beck warned listeners of "a possible super-union coming" with "extraordinary power." He added: "And they're thugs. Out-and-out thugs. Not the members, the unions." 

Beck says violence is a "self-fulfilling prophecy" of labor unions. During the May 3 edition of his Fox News show, Beck said, "The unions are in bed with Washington and special interests and they are not in your or this nation's best interest anymore. They are following the playbooks from Europe." Beck went on to spell out the "playbooks from Europe," concluding that the process ends with "violence. ... This is a self-fulfilling prophecy."

Beck suggests unions are prone to violence. On the April 12 broadcast of his radio show, suggesting that unions are prone to violence, Beck asked of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie: "How long does that guy live? Seriously, how long does that guy survive? He's in New Jersey. He's got to break up the union pensions." Beck further said, "If I do my job and I don't get paid, I'm angry too."

Trace Gallagher: "With the 1930s came ... the labor movement -- organization by way of strikes, votes, violence." During the January 15, 2008, edition of The Fox Report with Shepard Smith, in a segment discussing Michigan history and the issues pertinent to voters there, chief correspondent Trace Gallagher asserted: "With the 1930s came men like Jimmy Hoffa and the labor movement -- organization by way of strikes, votes, violence." However, Gallagher did not mention the positive effects of the 1930s labor movement for workers in Michigan, which included banning "oppressive child labor" and federal laws "which strengthened unions' rights to organize and negotiate with employers."

Beck uses blatant distortions to smear SEIU as violent organization of "thugs." During the November 16, 2009, edition of his Fox News program, Beck fired off a series of attacks to claim that SEIU members are "thugs" who "beat down" opponents and command elected officials. In fact, Beck's claims were nothing more than blatant distortions used to smear the SEIU, its former president Andy Stern, and President Obama. These distortions included: A quote falsely attributed to Rep. Michael Michaud (D-ME) that suggested Michaud was "bribe[d]" or "scare[d]" by Obama and SEIU; falsely smearing Stern as a communist because he said, "Workers of the world, unite;" and an absurd claim that "even the Boy Scouts aren't safe from SEIU's thuggery."

Beck pushes Obama "civilian army" conspiracy theory: "The unions are his enforcers." On the April 12 edition of The Glenn Beck Program, Beck told listeners, "People say, 'Oh, Barack Obama's building a civilian defense force -- a civilian army.' He has one. It's called the unions. The unions are his enforcers."

Cavuto tells union spokesman: "You politely do your Tony Soprano thing, albeit in your little sweater vest there." During the January 11 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, Stewart Acuff of the Utility Workers Union of America appeared to discuss union leader opposition to a tax on health care plans backed by President Obama. Cavuto told Acuff: "You politely do your Tony Soprano thing, albeit in your little sweater vest there, 'cause you're such a decent guy, but you're saying 'Mr. President, may I remind you that you are sitting in this room because of us.' Which is a very nice way of saying, 'Tread slowly, big guy.' "

Breitbart fabricates smear that SEIU's Stern is "sending SEIU goons" to "beat up innocent Americans." In November 8, 2009, comments posted on his Twitter account, Andrew Breitbart accused Service Employees International Union president Andy Stern of "sending SEIU goons" to "beat up innocent Americans." In fact, the article to which Breitbart linked offered no evidence to support the claim that Stern was involved in violence at a local SEIU office in Sacramento, and it reported comments from local SEIU leaders that disputed the purported victim's account of the incident.

Beck asserts union "members" don't bother him, just "Leadership & Thugs." In a Twitter post, Beck wrote:

Limbaugh invokes Tony Soprano "with a lead pipe" to describe the EFCA: On the March 10, 2009, broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show, Limbaugh said of the Employee Free Choice Act, "After this legislation passes, one day Tony Soprano will walk in with a lead pipe and he will start beating people upside the head to vote to unionize because you cannot vote in private."

Right-wing media attack unions as "freeloaders," "communists," terrorists

Limbaugh says public-sector union employees are "freeloaders" and "leftist, socialist, neo-communist." On the April 22 edition of his radio program, Limbaugh asserted that public-sector union employees are "freeloaders" who "live off taxes." Limbaugh went on to decry these public-sector union employees as "leftist, socialist, neo-communist."

Beck and crew state that labor unions are assumed to be subversive. On the February 12 broadcast of his radio show, while discussing South Carolina's "Subversive Activities Registration Act," Beck asked, "Why are [labor unions] exempt?" Co-host Pat Gray responded: "It's already assumed they are subversive." 

Limbaugh says "government union" leaders "essentially are communists." On the March 4 edition of his radio program, Limbaugh said, "The union heads -- the leaders of these unions -- essentially are communists." He added: "I'm talking about government union people. I'm not talking about the UAW and Teamsters -- although they might be. But I'm talking about unions that exist in the federal government."  

Kristol: "Thank God most of the workforce isn't unionized." On the October 18, 2009, edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, while defending remarks made by Rush Limbaugh, The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol declared: "Thank God most of the workforce isn't unionized."

Limbaugh: "If you want to clean up the schools, get rid of the unions." On the October 19, 2009, broadcast of his radio show, Limbaugh said, "Until we get rid of the unions, we're not going to have any change in public schools." Limbaugh continued: "If you want to clean up the schools, get rid of the unions."

Beck compares the SEIU to al Qaeda: The leaders get "the youth" to do their dirty work. On the August 2 edition of his radio program, Beck called members of the SEIU "burnout, loser hippies." Beck then compared the SEIU to al Qaeda, saying: "You'll notice that people in al Qaeda, the leaders never blow themselves up. They just get the youth to do it." He went on: "Well here you have SEIU and SDS in bed in California, or I mean in Arizona. Here you have these grand leaders ... that, you know, they did their tour of duty. Now it's the young. And they'll reap all of the benefits."

Dobbs claims that half of Culinary Workers Union "are illegal aliens." On the January 16, 2008, edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, host Lou Dobbs claimed: "[I]n point of fact, as many as half of the [Culinary Workers] union's members are illegal aliens." Near the end of the segment, Dobbs again referred to the "Culinary Workers Union, with just about half of its membership assumed to be illegal aliens." In fact, the Associated Press reported that, according to the Union's then-political director, "about half" of the union's members are "immigrants."

Experts credit unions for many "valued features of today's society," and greatly expanding the middle class

UC Berkeley Professor Shaiken: Labor movement "pav[ed] the road to the middle class for many millions of working families." In a June 2004 report, University of California-Berkeley Professor Harley Shaiken wrote that after World War II, "the labor movement forged the link between economic growth and rising wages," helping improve working conditions for both union workers and nonunion workers. From The High Road to a Competitive Economy: A Labor Law Strategy:

In postwar America the labor movement forged the link between economic growth and rising wages, paving the road to the middle class for many millions of working families. Unions did benefit their members, but union wage and benefit gains coursed their way through the economy aiding those who did not belong as well. The result was a more vibrant economy in which strong consumer-led growth led to a virtuous circle of prosperity and jobs. At the lower end of the pay scale, unions have been particularly critical in winning decent compensation for low-skilled workers who often have had few opportunities and less hope.

Author Philip Dine: "Unions have had a lead role in establishing many of the most fundamental and valued features of today's society." In his 2008 book State of the Unions: How Labor Can Strengthen the Middle Class, Improve Our Economy, and Regain Political Influence, journalist and author Philip M. Dine wrote:

Unions have had a lead role in establishing many of the most fundamental and valued features of today's society. The eight-hour workday, five-day workweek, paid vacations, retirement and health-care benefits, safety regulations, bans on sweatshops or child labor, protections against employment discrimination, and other workplace advances now taken for granted were the result of struggles -- invariably protracted, often bloody, and sometimes even deadly -- by workers and their unions.

Labor has also played an integral part in the expansion of the middle class, a phenomenon that helped define America and that has been key to assuring its political and social stability.

Nobel laureate Krugman links "strong union movement" to "strong middle class. In a December 2007 New York Times column, Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman wrote that America's "strong middle class" and "strong union movement" were "connected":

Once upon a time, back when America had a strong middle class, it also had a strong union movement.

These two facts were connected. Unions negotiated good wages and benefits for their workers, gains that often ended up being matched even by nonunion employers. They also provided an important counterbalance to the political influence of corporations and the economic elite.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by ajzito (August 05, 2010 7:30 pm ET)
      13 1
      My first thought when I saw the headline was of Krugman, and it is fitting that this item ends with a Krugman quote. It is hard to argue that the heyday of the American middle class can be separated from the strong unions of those days. It is a mystery to me that so many with so much to lose were so easily turned against unionism. I can tell you what my family would have without my union: Nothin'.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ProgLib (August 05, 2010 8:40 pm ET)
      9 1
      Unions are being neglected way too much these days. President Obama needs to focus on giving them more credit for being the good, hard-working people we all know them to be.

      I remember when MSNBC's Dylan Ratigan held his program at one of the AFL-CIO's protest rallies... the people were perfectly peaceful and normal, contrary to the way the conservatives and wing nuts want to paint them as.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by usp (August 06, 2010 9:51 am ET)
        2  
        you mean as opposed to the teatards?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Andy Kreiss (August 06, 2010 10:01 am ET)
          4  
          The teabaggers sent a very warm and fuzzy message to the GOP and their corporate amigos; a certain segment of America will go out and work for free to promote the agenda of the GOP and corporate America.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by wookie (August 06, 2010 7:04 am ET)
      8  
      Unions are one of the most basic parts of a democratic society. The right to bargain for a decent price for your work. Its totally expected for conservatives to attack them. Reagan and Bush Jr in particular used the government to fire or shut down striking workers. Before that it was corporate backed Senator McCarthy doing the "unions are Commies" thing. The right wants an absolute corporate liberty that restricts the citizens' rights publically advocate these issues.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (August 06, 2010 8:08 am ET)
      9 1
      Republicans represent MANAGEMENT, and management would have people work for free if they could. To them, labor is no more than a cost.

      It's all about money and greed. And you can't really turn that statement back on organized labor, because management already HAS all the money. GREED is wanting more when you already have the most, not wanting you fair share when you've worked to make someone else rich.

      And without those healthy wages being paid to the unwashed masses, you can't sustain demand! Basically, any company owner wants to pay HIS GUYS nothing, but hopes that EVERYONE ELSE pays their guys well. (So he has a market to sell to.) But that doesn't work - because EVERYONE thinks that way! And given free reign, no one, opther than the owers would have any decent income. (And even THEN they couldn't sustain it!)

      Unions are the only way the wealth gets distributed evenly enough for our economy to keep working. Otherwise the top 2% grab all the money, but then can't sell anything and wonder why there's no more growth!

      ----------------------------------------------------
      Their greed makes them shortsighted.


      Report Abuse
      • Author by usp (August 06, 2010 9:52 am ET)
        1 1
        unions should learn from teabag nation- come armed to rallies and negotiations
        Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 11:36 am ET)
        2  
        Right on, man. Wages is the stuff that buys things and that's what drives demand.

        Here's a nice little 10 minute animation critiquing the system that enables this worker exploitation garbage.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:17 pm ET)
        1 7
        "Basically, any company owner wants to pay HIS GUYS nothing, but hopes that EVERYONE ELSE pays their guys well"

        Huh? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. Obviously you know nothing about running a business or employing quality people. Think about what you wrote. So you are saying that I want to pay my guys nothing but I hope that everyone other employer pays his guys a lot more? Great. I will really have some happy satisfied employees won't I? If I thought that way I would be out of employees and out of business in one day.

        Wow.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by alienofwar (August 06, 2010 12:37 pm ET)
          5 1
          So your saying employers will voluntarily pay their employees good wages out of the goodness of their hearts?

          No offense, but that's very naive thinking and completely ignores the history of labor movements in this country.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:42 pm ET)
            1 5
            Did you read what I wrote? And what Eddie wrote that I replied too? Anyone that thinks that is true is bizarre.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 12:44 pm ET)
              3 1
              You are either blind or terribly naive about the wage system in this country and the practices of companies here.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:47 pm ET)
                1 5
                So you are going to sit there and tell me that I hope other companies pay their employees far better wages than I do so I will have a market to sell my stuff? And what, hope my employees don't find out?

                You're not serious.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 12:52 pm ET)
                  5 1
                  Yes, I am telling you that. Companies are able to undercut the competition by keeping labor costs down. Actually I believe there is more collusion between companies to keep their employee wages low.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 2:06 pm ET)
                    2 4
                    So now you are changing the whole dynamic. Keeping labor costs down is one thing, hoping other companies pay more than you do is not the same thing at all, and frankly ridiculous.

                    Companies also realize that hiring and keeping good employees is very valuable to the well being of their company. It's a fact, unskilled labor jobs will never demand huge salaries because there is more competition for those jobs. So, it is incumbent upon each of us to do what we can to make ourselves the most employable we can be. That means staying in school, working to get the best grades possible, staying out of trouble, and being more "attractive" to an employer than someone else.

                    Nobody is owed a job, or a salary.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 2:14 pm ET)
                      5 2
                      It is NOT rediculous, You were given WalMart as an example of a corperation that does this practice. They are so big that they can afford to take a loss at a few stores in order to rid itself of the competition. Companies don't give a crap about low level employee because they know they can replace them easily. It doesn't matter how important you think you are in a company, everyone is replaceable in a corperation and if that corperation thinks they can get someone to do your job and do it for less pay, then you are out on your arse.
                      Report Abuse
                    • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 3:25 pm ET)
                      2  
                      Wow, you seem to think you know what I believe? Have I said poor people are lazy? You are a liar. I have never said that nor do I believe it.


                      RO

                      Then he posts this...

                      That means staying in school, working to get the best grades possible, staying out of trouble, and being more "attractive" to an employer than someone else.

                      Nobody is owed a job, or a salary.


                      Looks like the liar is at it again. He blames poor folks, in this case the working poor in menial jobs, for their situation after he has stated he doesn't do that!

                      Is the countdown to WalMart's demise still on?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by DellDolly (August 06, 2010 4:08 pm ET)
                        2 1
                        Suddenly, crickets when you call him out on his dishonesty!
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 4:15 pm ET)
                          1 1
                          Break time in trollville.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 4:35 pm ET)
                            1 2
                            HAHA! So in your feeble mind staying in school means poor people are lazy? You always get pi$$ed when I call out your blatant dishonesty.

                            Now that is unattractive.

                            Go ahead, call me a racist again and then run like a baby.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 4:58 pm ET)
                              2 2
                              No, not at all. You are just so silly today.

                              Run like a baby? You get more hysterically emotional as this rolls along. It's quite revelaing.

                              When you state that the obstacles to bettering oneself are centred on...

                              ...staying in school, working to get the best grades possible, staying out of trouble, and being more "attractive" to an employer than someone else.


                              What conclusion would one make about a poor person that hasn't bettered themselves based on your criteria? Seems it would be resonable to assume that person is lazy. See? Oh, I know, you will claim you don't and then call me more names. Cause that's what Mr Manly Man does.

                              And you really seem to be hung up on the non-statement that you are a racist. Why is that?
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 5:23 pm ET)
                                3 2
                                I find you rather funny today. You can never seem to intelligently argue your point without twisting my words to fit the argument with me you'd like to have, that is the rub, and you know it. And when I don't take your bait, you get irritated and start cutting and pasting and implying and parsing. It's cute. And you keep trying, but you always come out looking like a fool, every single time.

                                So today you try a new tactic, saying I don't like "brown people", and then deny you called me a racist. Duh. If you don't think you look like a little child on that one, think again.

                                I say exactly what is on my mind and exactly what I mean. If you are not capable of taking my opinions on in that simple direct format, and feel some victory after you try and tell me what I meant, you go ahead. I won't stand in the way of making you feel better about yourself.

                                I just find you rather funny today.
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 5:33 pm ET)
                                  3 2
                                  So today you try a new tactic, saying I don't like "brown people", and then deny you called me a racist.


                                  Another demonstrable lie.

                                  This is what I posted (again)

                                  You know like further down thread where you blame the brown folks for depressing wages (you call them illegal immigrants).


                                  Nothing about you being a racist or disliking "brown people". Only that you blamed them. So, who's "twisting my words to fit the argument".

                                  If this is too hard for you, I understand. I can tell because sometimes when a simple person can't grasp more complex ideas they get angry and lash out.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 5:36 pm ET)
                                    1 2
                                    "Nothing about you being a racist or disliking "brown people". Only that you blamed them"

                                    So blaming "brown people" is not disliking them or having any racial animosity towards them?

                                    Why then did you change my words, illegal immigrants, to "brown people"?

                                    I stand by what I just wrote above.
                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 5:59 pm ET)
                                      2 2
                                      Good for you troll boy!

                                      Why then did you change my words, illegal immigrants, to "brown people"?


                                      I find that you folks that love to rail against "illegal immigrants" use that term when referring to latin american undocumented workers/immigrants. So I just switched it up.

                                      Anyway, I see that I have allowed you enough distracting posts around the non-allegation of you being a racist. I'm sure that made you happy in that you no longer had to defend your assertion that WalMart is on the verge of handing out big raises because they are about to go under due to their poor labour relations.


                                      Buh bye troll. See you at your next stupid post.
                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 6:07 pm ET)
                                        1 2
                                        "So I just switched it up" - You, now.

                                        "You can never seem to intelligently argue your point without twisting my words to fit the argument with me you'd like to have, that is the rub, and you know it" - Me, earlier.

                                        Lol, god was I right about you.

                                        Buh bye now.
                                        Report Abuse
                                        • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 07, 2010 6:16 pm ET)
                                          1  
                                          Nice- try to claim that "securing the border" wasn't a refernece to the southern border and those who enter there.

                                          And I still don't see those WalMart is about to hand out...
                                          Report Abuse
                • Author by NiceguyEddie (August 06, 2010 1:57 pm ET)
                  5 1
                  You are missing the point, perhaps intentionally, or perhaps because I was unclear.

                  The point is not literally just that you want your ocmpetition to pay more than you do. That's a very narrow, literal interpretation of what I wrote. Legitimate, perhaps, but not what I meant. (ANd I think most everyone understands it as I intended.)

                  The point is that you want to pay as little as possible, and let someone else (or everyone else) pick up the slack, so that we don't kill demmand for our produtc or seyvrice.

                  A rational person realizes taht we can't ALL pay slave wages, or no one will be able to sell anything. But the owners themselves seek to pay as little as possible to increase THEIR OWN profits.

                  You recognize that you benefit from lots of people having healthy, disposable income - you just don't want it coming from YOUR payroll.

                  Basically: Let the other guy over pay HIS lazy bums, and I'll benefit without haveing to do the same.

                  Unfortunately (for the worker) EVERYONES thinks this way. So without Unions, NO ONE gets more than the lowest wage possible to keep them from quitting.

                  -------------------------------------
                  Labor's only negotiating power in their numbers. Hence their need to organize.
                  Report Abuse
            • Author by alienofwar (August 06, 2010 12:47 pm ET)
              4 1
              I am asking is that's what you think and I didn't get a response.

              Do you think employers will pay their employees fair wages out of the goodness of their heart?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:49 pm ET)
                1 5
                Oh get over yourself. You can dodge what I wrote and ask me an irrelevant question and expect a response?

                It isn't out of the "goodness of their hearts". Your premise is stupid as is your question.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by alienofwar (August 06, 2010 12:55 pm ET)
                  4 1
                  I don't care what you wrote and maybe the person you responded to should be more clear in what they meant, but clearly you are anti-union and I'm just trying to engage you in debate but clearly you are only interested in instigating and derailing the thread.

                  Fine, you don't have to answer my question.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 1:09 pm ET)
                    1 5
                    "I don't care what you wrote"

                    And that's why your question is irrelevant.
                    Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (August 06, 2010 1:37 pm ET)
          3 1
          In my experience, you [the company owner] probably WANT "happy, satisfied, quality workers." The problem is that, as I said, you don't want to PAY for them.

          See the difference?

          And as for losing all your employees? You really needn't worry about the other guy scooping them all up, because you can rest assured that he thinks the same way you do.

          -----------------------------------------
          Which is why we need unions.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by little poncho (August 06, 2010 9:03 am ET)
        2
      lets do away with all sighned contracts, for all the big mouth right wings hacks''''''''''' these know it all idiots, would say not in my back yard, NOT MY CONTRACT....if it wasn't for the UNIONS, the rich would be a WHOLE LOT RICHER..... wake up AMERICANS!!!!!!!!!!!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by time to fight back (August 06, 2010 9:15 am ET)
      9 2
      Unions helped build and define the middle class. The only reason the right wing screamers go after unions is because they want to get rid of them and make all of us minimum wage slaves.

      Never has the chasm been so great between the wages of the average worker and CEO wages. In 1980 the ratio was 42:1, in 2000 it was 531:1, 364:1 in 2006...and they have the nerve to complain about unions?

      "Emerging Markets" is the republicants new meme. Emerging Markets is nothing but a euphamism for "Cheap Labor."

      Meanwhile the financial sector is sitting on $1.7 trillion dollars because they are too "scared" to invest here, while America is still teetering on the brink? It's a load of hogwash and poppycock.

      Time for unions to start recruiting.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by usp (August 06, 2010 9:53 am ET)
        4 3
        the only thing management understands or ever did understand? a kick in the teeth.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by terrapin53 (August 06, 2010 10:18 am ET)
      8 1
      I am non-union, but I get some darn good benfits because of what unions have done in the past and I keep those benefits because my company does not want us to organize. If unions went away, I would guarantee so would my current benefits.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by blk-in-alabam (August 06, 2010 11:13 am ET)
      2  
      Why is it ok for all the employees of republican party media talking this noise to employment contracts,but bad for anyone else to have one.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (August 06, 2010 11:21 am ET)
      6  
      This entire column is a testament to the right wing's devaluation of labor and laborers. To them, labor is just another impediment to amassing vast amounts of personal capital. Therefore, labor must be purchased at an ever decreasing price, regardless of what affect this has on the domestic economy as more and more companies slash wages or outsource their labor altogether. Abraham Lincoln once asserted that labor's value far exceeds that of capital. The party of Lincoln no longer values labor.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by rikntx (August 06, 2010 11:27 am ET)
      2  
      Man these guys really do want to take us back to those thrilling days of yesteryear. I wonder how many of these clowns belong to AFTRA?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Oldphoto678 (August 06, 2010 11:28 am ET)
      4  
      The real problem that the far right has with unions is the fact that union members represent votes for the left.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 11:36 am ET)
        5
      Who's going to pay for it?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 11:41 am ET)
        6  
        You're such a good little conjob true believer.

        Get knee jerk conservative class warfare out of here. If you think drumming up enmity for public employees and their livelihood isn't pitting one class against another- private against public- then you're simply dishonest.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 11:45 am ET)
          1 6
          Fine, ignore the article and the ramrod mentality of public employee unions and how they now dominate and exceed private ones, at our expense. And these ridiculous pension plans that are bankrupting states, look at California for proof.

          But you with your head in the sand with your hand out looking for money from somebody else. How pathetic. Grow up.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 11:51 am ET)
            6  
            Screw that I don't want to hear it unless and until you can accept the truth about the private sector. Namely, the low wages that companies pay are destructive to our democracy and freedom. And it is our business what companies are paying people in the private sector, just like in the public realm, because we are all tied together in this economy and we all sink our swim together in this economy.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 11:53 am ET)
              3 7
              Nope, don't agree. When a private company enters into a private agreement with a private individual on private salary, it is not my business, it is not your business, it is only their business.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 12:15 pm ET)
                8  
                Bull.

                We are all affected and brought down by bad business practices. We are all brought down. We don't keep quiet when a company pollutes and low wages are a societal pollutant. We have a responsibility to act up for the good of working people and their families.

                It's every bit our obligation to speak our minds about cheap labor and to hold business owners accountable for the people who make them rich as it is to hold politicians accountable for their policy decisions.

                It's the simple truth of living in an open democracy. Sorry you don't like it. Maybe you should go live in a fascist country where dissent is crushed, wealth is strictly controlled and labor keeps their mouth shut?
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:21 pm ET)
                  1 5
                  Bad business practices, such as staggering low wages, will put companies who do it out of business. They can't compete, they will suffer, they will be forced to raise their wages so they can attract the quality people that work for their competitors at much better wages.

                  If you can't see that, then you don't want to.

                  It is none of your business to stick your nose into somebody elses salary structure.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 12:31 pm ET)
                    7 1
                    Bad business practices, such as staggering low wages, will put companies who do it out of business.


                    So Wal Mart is about to go out of business?
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:35 pm ET)
                        4
                      If they can't find people that want to work there, yes, they will go out of business. Pretty simple.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 12:38 pm ET)
                        3  
                        There will always be people who will work there or any other sweatshop type emloyer.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:41 pm ET)
                            4
                          See my response to you below.

                          So WalMart employees are not to be respected because they just bring down the curve for everyone else? And WalMart is a sweatshop?
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 12:49 pm ET)
                            5 1
                            No, WalMart is not to be respected, not their employees. Yes, WalMart is a sweatshop, WalMart doesn't give two sh!ts about their employees and if there were less regulations in place, they would treat them even more like sh!t
                            Report Abuse
                      • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 12:41 pm ET)
                        5  
                        Oh I see - you moved the goal posts again.

                        Have you noticed what they do? The decimating of local businesses so there are very few or no other retail jobs in an area, so if that's your line of work, you have no choice but to work for crap wages.

                        But I am glad to hear that according to you, Wal Mart is about to run out of their pool of potential employees and will be forced to raise their wages and/or benefits. Or they will fail.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:45 pm ET)
                            5
                          Moved what goalposts? I said business will go out of business if they pay staggering low wages as compared to their competitors, and employ bad business practices.

                          I said the same thing in my reply to you.

                          And your constant victim whining regarding this or that is tiring. My god, don't you get sick of it?
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 12:56 pm ET)
                            4  
                            but what you say is not true. Companies don't go out of business by paying their employees staggering low wages, if that were the case the companies that hire illegal immigrants would be closing.
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:59 pm ET)
                                3
                              And those companies are breaking the laws we have in place.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 1:04 pm ET)
                                5  
                                Many companies that aren't hiring illegal aliens are also breaking the laws we have in place. You know why? Because they can. Either the agency charged with enforcing the laws have been kneecapped so much that they have no real regulatory power, or the fines are so low, that these companies are willing to take a fine or two to save in labor costs.
                                Report Abuse
                          • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 12:58 pm ET)
                            5  
                            Moved what goalposts?


                            Oh I see, your lack of understanding of the english language coupled with your inability to realize your posts are there for all to see led us to this point.

                            So I'll do this...

                            Bad business practices, such as staggering low wages, will put companies who do it out of business. They can't compete, they will suffer, they will be forced to raise their wages so they can attract the quality people that work for their competitors at much better wages.


                            And then I point out WalMart, which has been engaging in these types of business practices and is flourishing, you come back with...

                            If they can't find people that want to work there, yes, they will go out of business.


                            So now you have changed the argument from attracting better employees through better wages or they will go out of business to eventually no one will work there because of crap wages and then WalMart will go out of business.

                            And again, you do realize WalMart is quite successful with their business model and does not appear to be in any peril because of it?

                            My victim whining? No that would be you when called out on your stupidity. You know like further down thread where you blame the brown folks for depressing wages (you call them illegal immigrants).
                            Report Abuse
                            • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 1:01 pm ET)
                                4
                              You are a moron. So you don't think illegal immigrants depress wages for American citizens? Is that your position?

                              And you supposedly are concerned with low wages for people in this country after such a staggeringly stupid assertion that they don't. You are a phony.
                              Report Abuse
                              • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 1:12 pm ET)
                                3  
                                Is that your position?


                                Of course not. I just don't think they are the sole reason as your post indicated. There are citizens that take lower wage jobs when that's all that's available. I would however, put the majority of the blame on falling wages on the employers hiring undocumented workers and/or paying low wages to citizens. But that's probably way to nuanced to a dolt such as yourself.

                                And I'm a moron? This from the guy who is predicting the imminent demise of WalMart due to their low wage business model. You must be proud!
                                Report Abuse
                                • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 1:21 pm ET)
                                    3
                                  "You know like further down thread where you blame the brown folks for depressing wages (you call them illegal immigrants)" - you, 10 minutes ago.

                                  "So you don't think illegal immigrants depress wages for American citizens? Is that your position?" - me, in response.

                                  "Of course not" - you, now.

                                  And you wonder why your dishonesty trumps any reasonable discussion you and I can have.

                                  This is why.

                                  I prefer to discuss and debate people with integrity who don't change their opinions every 10 minutes. Go away.
                                  Report Abuse
                                  • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 1:30 pm ET)
                                    2 1
                                    Really? You are this stupid?. I accuse you of blaming "illegal immigrants" for being solely responsible for depressing wages in your post. Are you denying that's what you did?

                                    You then ask me if I don't agree with that assertion. I state I don't and explain why.

                                    I'd ask how that is inconsistant, but I'm a bit frightened as to what might flow forth from your diseased mind.

                                    Report Abuse
                                    • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 1:34 pm ET)
                                        2
                                      I said "solely responsible"? Hmmm?

                                      You know, when you lie you usually have to cover it up with another. That is why you look foolish here.

                                      Obviously dishonesty is what flows from your mind.
                                      I'd work on that, but you won't.

                                      Report Abuse
                                      • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 1:47 pm ET)
                                        2  
                                        If you did not mean "illegal immigrants" are the sole reason for depressed wages when you post this...

                                        Exactly, and the best argument yet for securing our borders and halt the flow of illegal immigrant who will do exactly what you say.


                                        Which was a reply to this...

                                        Employee wages aren't free market based, never have, never will because there will always be someone willing to work for less. Especially when the economy is not very well.


                                        Readers may think your position is that the undocuumented worker is the sole reason for depressed wages.

                                        Why, here's another reader that had to point out the same thing to you...

                                        Because it isn't just the illegal immigrants willing to work for less than the prevailing wages.


                                        So I wasn't the only one to get the same impression from your post.

                                        But what should I expect from the guy that thinks WalMart is about to fail or start paying fair wages. You must be proud.


                                        Report Abuse
                                        • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 1:51 pm ET)
                                            2
                                          Oh, so I never really said "solely responsible", you just made that up.

                                          Tsk, tsk, lies upon lies only demand more lying so I am casually interested in seeing where you go now.
                                          Report Abuse
                                          • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 2:04 pm ET)
                                            2  
                                            Twist man, twist. If you can't back up what you posted - suck it up.

                                            See if you had said something along the lines of "part of the solution would be..." or some such. But no - you blamed "illegal immigrants".

                                            Oh wait, what's this...

                                            Because securing the border does nothing to convince illegal employers to stop hiring illegal immigrants.


                                            To which you reply...

                                            Not entirely, but it also cannot be done without it.


                                            See - you qualified your original position without calling names or accusing others of lying. It wasn't hard there, why the vitriol when I'm making a similar point?

                                            Oh well, I'll just be celebrating the big fat raises WalMart is about to hand out to their employee's in order to avoid going out of business! It's a great day for workers!
                                            Report Abuse
                                            • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 2:08 pm ET)
                                                2
                                              Because you lied about what I said, and called me a racist. And you expect civility after that? Forget it. You deserve exactly what you dish out, that's why the vitriol.
                                              Report Abuse
                                              • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 2:10 pm ET)
                                                2  
                                                Talk about lies! Where exactly did I call you a racist?
                                                Report Abuse
                                                • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 2:14 pm ET)
                                                    2
                                                  "You know like further down thread where you blame the brown folks for depressing wages (you call them illegal immigrants)"

                                                  What the hell was this?
                                                  Report Abuse
                                                  • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 2:19 pm ET)
                                                    2 1
                                                    Ummm, my take on what you posted...

                                                    Is that where I supposedly called you a racist? Oh my, thin-skinned much?

                                                    What an emotional cry-baby whiner you are. Grow up.

                                                    And once again - a big congratulations to all WalMart employees on their imepending huge pay raises!
                                                    Report Abuse
                                                    • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 2:23 pm ET)
                                                        3
                                                      Yes, your take is calling me a racist. And you aren't even man enough to own it. You pathetic little small boy.

                                                      Enjoy your afternoon and your weekend.
                                                      Report Abuse
                                                      • Author by dontbestupid (August 06, 2010 2:42 pm ET)
                                                        2  
                                                        Troll you lost go away now.
                                                        Report Abuse
                                                      • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 3:28 pm ET)
                                                        1  
                                                        No, I have no problem calling a racist a racist. But that's not what I did.

                                                        Small boy! Ohhh does that make you a BIG MAN? Getting so emotional at being called on your sh!t isn't very manly, you know?
                                                        Report Abuse
                                                        • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 4:36 pm ET)
                                                             
                                                          You are a pathetic child, you called me a racist and you can't even admit to it.

                                                          And you're proud of...?

                                                          Report Abuse
                                                          • Author by Old_Benjamin (August 06, 2010 5:02 pm ET)
                                                            1  
                                                            LOL! You really are flailing now.

                                                            C'mon, post again the quote where I called you a racist! Here, I'll even do it for you...

                                                            You know like further down thread where you blame the brown folks for depressing wages (you call them illegal immigrants)"


                                                            Old_Benjamin

                                                            See everybody! This is where I ummm, said you blame brown folks. Which in the diseased mind of ro means I called him a racist!

                                                            It's freakin' hilarious!
                                                            Report Abuse
                  • Author by pete592 (August 06, 2010 12:32 pm ET)
                    3  
                    "Bad business practices, such as staggering low wages, will put companies who do it out of business."
                    Yeah. Let me know when that little fantasy finally starts coming true.

                    Meanwhile in reality, if an American company is facing the prospect of having to raise or even maintain domestic wage levels to get quality people, they simply look elsewhere.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:37 pm ET)
                        5
                      Really? So American companies don't give raises to anyone or pay anyone a decent wage, they just ship them all to India? Wow, I guess people that I see working and making a living around me, right here in America, are just my imagination.

                      I mean, if you can generalize, so can I.
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 12:42 pm ET)
                        4  
                        Right On, you KNOW there are many companies, especially manufacturing jobs, that have shipped jobs to other countries because labor is cheaper there.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by pete592 (August 06, 2010 12:59 pm ET)
                        2  
                        There are many others who also used to think their jobs were safe.

                        I imagine your employer has competitors. What happens when one of those competitors starts off-shoring and gains a significant advantage?
                        Report Abuse
                  • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 12:36 pm ET)
                    4  
                    Employee wages aren't free market based, never have, never will because there will always be someone willing to work for less. Especially when the economy is not very well.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:39 pm ET)
                        3
                      Exactly, and the best argument yet for securing our borders and halt the flow of illegal immigrant who will do exactly what you say.

                      So why are you not on board with that?
                      Report Abuse
                      • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 12:47 pm ET)
                        4  
                        Because it isn't just the illegal immigrants willing to work for less than the prevailing wages.
                        Report Abuse
                      • Author by pete592 (August 06, 2010 1:00 pm ET)
                        2  
                        Because securing the border does nothing to convince illegal employers to stop hiring illegal immigrants.
                        Report Abuse
                        • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 1:03 pm ET)
                            3
                          Not entirely, but it also cannot be done without it.
                          Report Abuse
                          • Author by raddave43 (August 06, 2010 1:06 pm ET)
                            2  
                            Sure it can, it has been done in this country way before illegal immigration became a big issue.
                            Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 11:44 am ET)
        5  
        Apparently the only public sector folks allowed to make a good living are the ones who get elected and cry about how well everyone else has it. And you echo their crap for them.

        You're such a disgusting hypocrite. RO.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 11:45 am ET)
            6
          Your whine is the same vintage as always.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 11:55 am ET)
            3  
            Whatever. Keep pumping that class warfare angle for all its worth. And keep being a hypocrite every time you call class warfare on the rest of us here.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 11:58 am ET)
                5
              You can call it class envy if you want. Or class warfare. You are so invested in tearing down one class, I'd say that is pretty warlike. I have no such investment for I want to see all people in all classes succeed. You can't say that, can you?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 12:04 pm ET)
                4  
                Yeah? You want all to succeed except for the public employee class that is. You are seriously dedicated to seeing them taken down several notches.

                You also believe that poor people are poor because they're lazy; you have no interest in seeing them succeed. You'd rather see them get what they deserve. So stop lying to us with your phony altruism. Hypocrite.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:07 pm ET)
                    5
                  Wow, you seem to think you know what I believe? Have I said poor people are lazy? You are a liar. I have never said that nor do I believe it.

                  But it fits into your phony narrative so you have to say it. We both know why. And I thought you at least argued from integrity and honesty, I guess I was wrong.
                  Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 11:45 am ET)
        3  
        Get over it and worry about making your own living, RO. Get a government job if you envy them so much.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 11:49 am ET)
            4
          You are more than free to ignore economic facts and the financial reality governments are facing in 2010, and sit around and yearn for a socialistic rescue to reward your mediocrity, but it will never happen. Never. Sorry to burst your bubble. I'd say join us in the new century, soon.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 11:53 am ET)
            4  
            Your conjob rhetoric is the only mediocrity I'm seeing.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 11:55 am ET)
                5
              I will repeat it again for you, since you must have missed it the other times I have said it here;

              You cannot make somebody rich by making somebody else poor.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by roundhouse (August 06, 2010 11:59 am ET)
                3  
                Trite and dated my friend.

                You can't build a fair and just economy on slave wages. You can't have a vibrant society when politics, policy and the money changers hinder your path to real financial security.


                This crap is gonna break down even worse if we don't adjust our current course.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by southerngal (August 06, 2010 12:01 pm ET)
                    5
                  Real financial security? So is the path to that only open to those born into it? Are you saying it never happens otherwise?
                  Report Abuse
              • Author by shaggles (August 06, 2010 1:13 pm ET)
                2  
                I disagree. There is a limited supply of wealth. The more it is concentrated at the top the less there is for everyone else. Poverty is the natural outcome.
                Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (August 06, 2010 1:09 pm ET)
        3  
        I don't think comparing the public sector to the private sector today tells the whole story. Public sector employees have not amassed power over the years leaving private sector employees behind. Private sector employees have lost or given away most of their power. What the public sector unions have is what everyone used to have. The defined benefit pension plan that he mentions is the perfect example. That used to be the norm. One of the biggest cons of all time was convincing workers to give up their defined benefit plans for 401Ks.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by mhughen (August 06, 2010 1:28 pm ET)
        3  
        RO, I'll borrow one of your fav attacks on "libs." Why are you such an elitist? You clearly have less concern for low wage workers than your obvious, limitless concern for the poor ole business entities who hire them.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by alienofwar (August 06, 2010 12:45 pm ET)
      5  
      It's interesting to not how the decline of union membership in this country is in sync with the decline of wages, jobs and a decent standard of living.

      We went from having over 30% of the private workforce unionized down to 9% today and things have not gotten any better. Yet, when union membership was at it's highest, we had the strongest middle class ever.

      I think public employees who are unionized will be fighting a losing battle because the low standards of the private sector with drag them down. This country is going backwards instead of forwards and it's sad to watch.
      Report Abuse