The ads are amazing ... From watching these ads, you would never guess that both sides are talking about the exact same bill.
As for my personal opinion, Unions certainly had their place in earlier times, and maybe if run properly and if they chose to focus on their role of protecting workers ... there still may be a place for them. But taking the auto industry, old line airlines, government workers, health care as major examples of Union involvement ... I just don't see how Unions have improved any industry segment in which they have played an active role ... and in some cases (like the airlines and the domestic auto industry) they have played a key role (along with inept management who still got paid their hefty salaries even after the union contract) in destroying once powerful American industries ... and killing jobs.
To be clear, I'm certainly not for the exploitation of workers, BUT I just don't think that Unions are the best means for battling that problem ... ESPECIALLY in the current economic climate ... ESPECIALLY if the Union is organized through intimidation tactics and not through the secret ballot choice of the workers in a particular workplace.
Anyway ... enjoy the ads.
PRO-CARD CHECK: The Boardroom (0:30) (National Ad)
ANTI-CARD CHECK: Class Elections (0:30)
PRO-CARD CHECK: See Saw (National Ad)(0:31)
ANTI-CARD CHECK: Thanks Union Bosses!(0:31)
PRO-CARD CHECK: Your New Job (2:53)
NOTE: It gives interesting insight to how the left sees business owners.
ANTI-CARD CHECK: EFCA means Intimidation (4:34)
Greetings from Santorini
7 minutes ago
3 comments:
"I'm certainly not for the exploitation of workers, BUT I just don't think that Unions are the best means for battling that problem"
What is the best means? More laws and government regulations with the government acting as a uber-union? Why not let people associate as they fit and enter into whatever contracts they think are the most advantageous for themselves.
I don't think the government should benefit or burden labor or management by sticking its nose into to what is essentially a contractual relationship between two sophisticated parties. To do otherwise just encourages rent-seeking behavior on both sides (both trying to use government to gain an advantage over their counter-party that they could not get on the open market).
Assume you are right that unions are obsolete, then what? Do you outlaw them? Use the government to make organizing more difficult?
Ultimately, your belief that unions are obsolete or ineffective is a business judgment. You might be right or you might be wrong, but each company and each worker should get to decide what is the best arrangement for it/him/her. Intellectually consistent proponents of limited government should believe that the government has very little role regulating the contractual relationship between labor and management.
On card checking, I think a secret ballot is essential to allow people to avoid intimidation (both by management and fellow workers). I am against it on fairness grounds, not because it is good for unions.
A) First off, I'd argue that the very best means of achieving any meaningful change ... whether it be protecting workers, fighting poverty, protecting the environment, etc. etc. is a change in culture.
It's hard work, and it's certainly messy ... BUT our generation needs to lead a fundamental shift in our values to an earlier time where families and community mattered, and individuals via churches, private action and businesses took an interest in each other.
It's not as easy as passing a law, but it is the BEST way to better our society. I'd argue that the best way the elected leaders can show leadership in this work is returning to our federal constitutional structure and devolving power down to the state and local levels.
B) I think my main problem with Unions is how I see them acting TODAY. I see massive bloated bureacracies that force people to join to get a job, and then use membership dues, and intimidation tactics to achieve their own special interest goals ... which don't necessarily match up with the interests of the workers, the businesses or the communities where the businesses and workers function.
What I can imagine is something similar to what you describe ... smaller, leaner, more focused organizations of workers that contract as necessary (and desired) with employers.
If the goal is democratic expression -- letting the majority decide whether or not to unionize -- do the current election ("secret balllot") procedures really offer a perfect instrument for this expression? Pro-card-check advocates will tell you that currently, businesses too often use procedural delays to stall for time before an election, while firing and intimidating pro-union employees.
Collecting signatures over time instead of waiting for an election simply offers a different, less privacy-preserving instrument of expressing the people's will -- like caucuses, or the signature-collecting that gets candidates onto a ballot. Would you support card check if there was some way of collecting signatures anonymously (i.e. using cryptographic techniques, perhaps?).
Second, quoting your last comment: "BUT our generation needs to lead a fundamental shift in our values to an earlier time." When has this ever occurred in history? Is this a realistic expectation?
Finally, a pet peeve: stop using ellipses! Your excessive use of ellipses hurts the perceived quality of your writing.
Post a Comment