Labor unions have long been a mainstay of the American workforce since the coal mining, auto making, and railroad laying days.
They have done much to assist the population in being a force for labor rights.
Lately though this is appearing much differently.
They are changing their names to warm fuzzy group hug sounding monikers. Shall we all "Unite" together for the betterment of the working class? Ever
work in an "open" union environment? It is far from what they profess as there is no such thing as an "open" union environment whereas an employee
is allowed to choose if they would like to join, and still remain employed without affiliation. Instead of "Unite" it is more "Divide and
Conquer", with dis-information, reality-creation, and name-calling the prevalent methodology. Enough pressure applied (either directly by
higher-level members, or certain portions of management that seem to offer "winks & nods" to the stewards acknowledging that a non-member may be
"readied" to be approached for membership.) and their ranks increase.
Labor unions today need more than ever a disenfranchised workforce to maintain the diminishing ranks of their clan. If they were given everything they
asked for, they would still have to maintain an adversarial front. After all, a happy worker that is satisfied with his work experience, is less
likely to desire to conflict with the employer over benefits or rights. A negative atmosphere MUST be maintained for the surety of the union's
How do the unions appear to their constituent clans....
(seems like their is a little power play going on behind the curtain amungst themselves...)
AFL-CIO Finds UNITE Guilty of Raiding UFCW
Article XX prohibits raiding by one affiliate on the membership of another. Ignoring the provision puts an offending union in jeopardy of being raided
Could this "Unite"d breakdown be because of the intent of the AFL-CIO to consolidate as many independent unions into one big powerful political
Focusing the AFL-CIO debate: Bureaucracy v. Democracy
The NUP looks for the answer in the ultra bureaucratization of the labor movement, more extreme than anything we have seen before. They would
swallow up independent small unions and reduce the whole labor movement to an assemblage of 15 or 20 monster organizations, which would parcel out all
jurisdictional rights among themselves. Workers, dissatisfied with their union leaders and unable to replace them, would be eternally locked in, with
nowhere to turn. Central labor councils in cities and states would be deprived of autonomy and subject to strict control by the officers of those
huge internationals who would appoint all their delegates and officers. They view union democracy and even talk of union democracy as a diversion or
an impediment to carrying out their plans.
In reorganizing, the Carpenters union has emptied locals of power, autonomy, and dignity and turned them into impotent social clubs. Locals are merged
into sprawling regional councils, each subject to the authoritarian power of an executive secretary treasurer, who determines who can hold a paid
union position. Carpenter locals are forbidden to pay their own elected local officers, or any other staffers except clericals. In any event, locals
are deprived of the major source of construction union income: the work tax, which now goes directly to the region for disbursement by the
all-powerful executive secretary treasurer. The NUP vision is a labor movement in the grip of well-meaning, self-appointed saviors.
So it seems the desire may be to be a major political power. Thats going to get expensive for the members I would expect in more than one way, all the
while losing the local powers they once enjoyed in order to make the new goal.
We will see where this goes eventually,... at least we know that the union bosses and administrator's are no longer the corrupt people of history
gone past,.... or are they?
Union Corruption Update
(Seems to be alot of hands in the till still, as well as a plethora of other "internal" problems.
[edit on 24-3-2005 by smirkley]