Having said that, let me elaborate on some of the myths that some still believe are the essence of the union movement.This suggests that Mr. Persichilli believes that unions are bad because they fight for the interests of their members and are not willing to accept the wages and conditions of their Chinese counterparts. This is no surprise to me. The Oligarchs and their mouthpieces have argued for years that we treat the working class too well and them too harshly. Thank God the unions are around so public anger can be redirected away from things like executive compensation reform (which isn't even on the radar in Canada). Otherwise, people might start asking uncomfortable questions, like, why is it that the gap between rich and poor is getting larger, in spite of those evil unions? Recommend this Post
First, unions do not represent the entire working world. They are only interested in defending the wages and benefits of their members, most of the time at the expense of other, non-unionized, workers.
Second, even though they may claim to support the interests of children, students or patients, in reality there always is a demand for better wages or benefits behind almost every dispute.
Third, they live in isolation. Most of the time, their demands are made with no consideration for the conditions of other workers in the same country, not to mention the reality in other parts of the world.
Unfortunately for them, globalization has exposed their idyllic oasis and they refuse to realize that the emperor is naked. That's why they keep asking for benefits like the sick days Miller has just confirmed for them: pay them because they are not sick!
Sunday, August 02, 2009
In the form of Angelo Persichilli: