The purpose of the article was not to demean the homeless. Many are in those circumstances due to things beyond their control. Nor was it meant to say that unions do not have a right to picket they do. A long history of labor law provides that right to workers and all though I am no fan of unions I accept they have that right. And many carpenters are out of work as a result of illegal laborers working in positions that should be filled by Americans or those who have the legal right to work in the US. Authorities should be tough on companies that use illegal labor. And the housing market has certainly been tough on carpenters or at least house framers.
However, in this case these picketers were not "professional" picketers, nor are they carpenters, and if you read the article, this local does make a habit of picking up people off the street corners and "employing" them for the day. If you had read the click through article you would have seen that.
The point of the post was that if a union is trying to make a point, and carpenters were truly unemployed they would have been on the picket line themselves, handing out fliers, informing the public of their plight. No fliers were handed out at this picket line, I know I was down there and saw. The come and they picket for two hours and then are bused somewhere else or back to where they were picked up.
If I were a carpenter and were paying union dues I would be unhappy with how I was being represented and the fact that my dues were going to paying non-union, non-member, hired picketers. I think the local does a disservice to their members by representing in them in that manner and that was my point.
2 comments:
Not only do I agree with you, I was able to discern your meaning from your original post. Keep up the good work!
I think it's perfectly fine to have substitute strikers. In fact, they might do a better job than the real strikers.
Here's the South Park clip that shows you can outsource anything.
:)
Post a Comment