Crime, Unions, etc.

John Bush jbush at POST.CIS.SMU.EDU
Mon Aug 25 08:37:07 MDT 1997


On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Richard Swerdlin wrote:

> > From: John Bush <jbush at POST.CIS.SMU.EDU>
> > To: RUSHTALK at athena.csdco.com
> > Subject: Re: Crime, Unions, etc.
> > Date: Tuesday, August 19, 1997 11:31
> >
> > Bull.  The courts would have ruled that way regardless of the union
> > status of the teacher.  And that was my original point.  As another
> > message stated, the only thing unions are concerned with is there own
> > survival.  They don't care what they were created for--anything that
> > might allow them to survive, is what they will do.  They moved in
> > direct opposition to union members desires with regards to the
> > anti-republican campaign last year--but they needed Clinton in the
> > Whitehouse more than they needed to support their members.
> ===============================================
> REPLY
> ===============================================
> JB:
>
>         Groups form in the US to promote various causes, one of which is
> their own survival.  This phenomenon is not confined to a single class in
> our culture.  Groups can be informal too.  In Cincinnati there were
> informal meetings in efforts to fix minimum prices on Chevrolets, as I
> found out by chance in shopping for one.
Of course, you wouldn't tolerate this type of price fixing...just
union price fixing.

>         The concern you express for union members estranged from union
> leaders resembles crocodile tears.  As I said earlier, unions can scarcely
> survive, if this gap is not reduced.  As you indicated, membership may be
> down to 15 percent of workers.  It may diminish further.  However, it is
> also possible that membership will rise.  The future is hard to predict.
>
>         Court decisions do not exist in a social vacuum.  Marshalling
> opinion is useful in promoting more reasonable interpretations of statutes
> or customs.
That is a typical liberal response to the law, but it is not a
reasonable response.  By looking at the debate surrounding the
implementation of a law, we can dicern what was intended.  Judges
should never use public opinion as a factor in rendering decisions.

> The Ohio Education Association has promoted the fair treatment
> of teachers, including situations such as the ones regarding Cincinnati.
> During my membership in OEA, I recall said organization informing members
> that legal advice was available in Columbus, regarding any situation of
> relevance.  Having served on one or two grievance committees, there was an
> assortment of questionable practices in Ohio, that came to my attention.
My father was forced to be a member of the NEA and the OEA.  He often
disagreed with the way he spent his money, but what's that have to do
with anything.

>         The anti-union stance does not enjoy the support you apparently
> think it has.  This is said in looking at overall election results and
> actions in Congress.  This is not surprising, since there is usually a gap
> between rhetoric and votes on election day.  Further, where was the Great
> Mandate regarding the Great Contract with America?
Do you mean when the Republicans took over Congress for the first
time in over 40 years?  That's not a mandate?

> Even Newt Gingrich
> knows better, based on his extended experience in Washington.  The First
> Hundred Days did not interfere with my respiration or that of my neighbors.
Should it have?

>  It may have made points however with public speaking teachers.  Perhaps
> Gingrich really meant the First Thousand Days.  Social aritmetic is more
> treacherous than the more academic kind.
>
>         Opinion polls suggest that there was greater support for IBT than
> UPS in the recent dispute.  I have no particular or vested interest in this
> figure, since I am neither a union member or a user of UPS (several years
> ago I used it just once).

I have no idea who IBT is, nor do I think I care.  The fact is, union
goons will run things as long as they can intimidate employees.  I
can hardly believe union membership is as low as it is.  Most
teachers, government employees, musicians, auto workers, pilots,
and truck drivers are forced to join unions to get a job.  Even with
these types of policies, they can only get 15% union membership.
Maybe they should try representing their members as a way to bolster
membership.



More information about the Rushtalk mailing list