l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 By Brendon S. Peck
Confronted with an unwelcome intrusion, employees at a Target store in New
York rejected unionization and dealt a blow to the grand plans of the UFCW.
That average Americans continue to stand against these job-killing, profit-
leaching forces is most encouraging. But make no mistake, the fight is far
from over.
Labor unions are in decline and desperate. Today, union membership is under
12% of the U.S. workforce -- it was over 20% in the 1980's. Among retail
unions, like the United Food and Commercial Workers International (UFCW),
membership has also undergone sizeable erosion, down over 40% nationwide
since 1983.
More, public support for unions has fallen sharply and, according to the Pew
Research Center, at near quarter-century lows. Not surprisingly, unions
are seen as having both a negative impact on the "availability of good jobs"
in the U.S., while placing our companies at a competitive disadvantage
globally.
Yes, even with its allies in the White House, the press, and the National
Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Americans are not fooled. And the "collective
" repulsion of unionization is increasing. Like employees of the Target
chain, most do not want, nor need, its tentacles in the workplace.
At the Target store in Valley Stream, NY, the UFCW's efforts to unionize
workers was supposed to be a harbinger of things to come -- a national
comeback if you will. But over 60% of employees voted down the measure. As
one worker put it, "what do I need a union to fight for me for?" Good
question.
Another voter rejected the very idea of paying union dues, dismissing Big
Labor as for those who do not "want to work anymore." Remember the infamous
Union Jobs Bank program that helped drive GM into bankruptcy? Thousands of
union laborers were paid almost their full salary not to work.
Predictably, and on cue, the UFCW sought to invalidate the election results.
In fact, the union called on their comrades at the NLRB to investigate
Target for illegality, supposedly for employing fear, intimidation, and
threats against workers. How typical of union thugs.
They refuse to acknowledge that it was average Americans who rejected their
radical agenda and the need to hand over part of their paycheck to union
bosses for the privilege of keeping their job. Instead, they raise the
tired and overused specter of corporate interference...when no such evidence
exists. They accuse Target of engaging in the same destructive tactics so
readily used by the unions themselves.
Consider the bullying, boldfaced propaganda and calculated anger on display
during the Wisconsin protests -- the true face of Union fascism. Under
Mussolini, unions were politically linked to the regime in the "corporatist"
state. And, not unlike their fascist brethren of old, unsatisfied with the
outcome, they demand that the "federal government direct a new election."
And why not? It has been done before.
As Charles Krauthammer reminds us, Delta Air lines employees "have voted
four times to reject unionization." A fifth vote is possible. After four
votes, we are supposed to believe it is not clear that workers want to be
rid of these union marauders? Well, sure, but for Democrats that is beside
the point. More elections, Krauthammer notes, serve only as an opportunity
to give the Obama campaign the result it is pushing for. UFCW leaders know
they have an activist White House at the ready. Obama needs their money and
campaign manpower as much as he needs their votes.
Indeed, the UFCW is intent on moving forward with a unionization campaign at
all other Target locations in New York, with a nationwide effort to follow
thereafter. Note if you will, how their slogan, Target: Democracy, is
unintentionally revealing. For Democracy and free thinking are exactly what
they target. And with help from their leftist political allies, this will
continue. But Target is prepared. After all, the company stood down a
union incursion in Detroit -- and won.
For the UFCW, Target remains but a part of an overall strategy designed to
increase its membership, a scheme that calls for continuous skirmishes with
yet another thriving non-union giant.
With Joseph T. Hansen as leader, the UFCW has long fought against Walmart.
One such method: engaging in what it calls "site fights" in an attempt to
keep the company out of a community. As Walmart seeks entrance into the New
York City marketplace, union attacks have grown more pointed and more
personal.
This month, Walmart announced it will donate upwards of 5 million dollars to
the city for a vital summer youth jobs program. The Bloomberg
Administration says 3,400 jobs will be saved as a result. But this matters
not to the UFCW. Their bombastic broadsides include the charge that Walmart
's gesture was "political," an act of "penance" for supposed economic sins.
Such charges are echoed by politicians beholden to union power, ever willing
to lob bile and threats Walmart's way.
At a City Council meeting earlier this year, Councilman Charles Barron, a
Democrat, warned Walmart "don't you even think about coming to East New York
." He claimed Walmart jobs were humiliating work. One Democratic
functionary has even compared Walmart work to slavery.
Is it not telling that many New York union members actually disagree? They
are desperate for work in the Obama economy.
Democratic pollster Douglas Schoen found that 74% of New York's union
members want Walmart. The superstore means thousands of new jobs. As usual
, union bosses are not looking out for their members, but themselves.
Thus far, unionization efforts against Walmart, like Target, have been
repelled. Rejected not by manipulated employees, as union and Democrat
rhetoric would have us believe, but rather, by well-informed workers who
understand the pernicious impact of mandatory union membership. With their
history of corruption, lost opportunity, and lost jobs, unions are not
conducive to our economic health. Higher labor costs strangle business.
Worse, unions remain committed to fundamentally altering worker's rights
through the elimination of the secret ballot. It is hardly news that Obama'
s NLRB cronies have shown themselves willing to assist, but this anti-
democratic scheme is not lost on the public. In the 2010 midterms, voters
in several states reaffirmed the "right to a secret ballot in union
organizing elections."
It is worth noting, too, that even President Obama's onetime National
Economic Council director understood the burden unions place on the economy,
particularly that unionization remains a significant "cause of long-term
unemployment." No matter. For unions, it's never about facts, but control.
And they will not stop unless they are defeated.
Brendon S. Peck holds a Master of Arts in history and political science from
the College of Saint Rose and has completed graduate work at Columbia
University. He is a freelance writer. Reach him at b*****[email protected]. |
|
