Obama remains in bed with organized labor

Obama is either so beholden to Organized Labor that he just can’t get out, or he simply isn’t smart enough to understand the enormous drain that unions have on this economy and how they contribute to our inability to compete in the world market…like say, the Detroit automakers.

I’m giving him credit (at least for now) for being a smart guy, so it must be the former.

By PHILIP ELLIOTT | Associated Press Writer 7:32 AM EST, January 30, 2009
*WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama is playing to one of the *Democratic Party’s most reliable constituencies — organized labor — reversing a number of his predecessor’s executive orders that critics regard as anti-union.

Labor leaders were to visit the White House* for a second consecutive day Friday, where, a union official said, Obama was to abolish four Bush-era directives that unions opposed and then reintroduce Vice President *Joe Biden’s task force focused on the middle class.

Both were meant as a way for the new administration to connect with workers at the end of a week that has seen U.S. companies announce thousands more jobs cuts.

“Over the last 100 years the middle class was built on the back of organized labor. Without their weight, heft and their insistence starting in the early 1900s we wouldn’t have the middle class we have now, in my view,” Biden told CNBC on Thursday. “So I think labor getting a fair share of the pie is part of it.”

*Among the George W. Bush-era executive orders that Obama was to reverse was one that allowed unionized companies to post signs informing workers that they are allowed to decertify their union. Critics claimed it was unfair because nonunion businesses are not **required *to post signs letting workers know they are legally allowed to vote for a union.
**
**
**
I particularly like the argument that the current order was unfair because it allowed companies to do one thing without *requiring *that they do another.

**


**

I’m giving him credit (at least for now) for being a smart guy


You are?

I’m giving him credit (at least for now) for being a smart guy


You are?

Sure, why would you think otherwise?

Let’s imagine what would happen if unions were in place in every industry.

Instead of companies laying off a percentage of their workforce in this economy in order to reduce expenses and save the company, the union would have the entire work force strike in order to save those jobs. The net effect would be that the whole company sunk. Imagine that happening in every industry.

In my opinion, union leadership are just like politicians. They act in their personal best interest; even when it harms those they’re supposed to be representing. There is little difference between the two - except that politicians don’t send thugs to burn your house or threaten your family.

unions don’t have to sink companies if companies get some ball sack and tell them to screw off and start shooting them like they did in the good ole days =)
.

Big unions have definitly done the lion’s share of the damage. UAW, IBEW etc. But there are a lot of small unions that are good for the people that are in them. My mom works at a college, and her department is unionized, the union has helped fight the very political college board environment many times and not in a UAW ‘we’ll walk if we don’t get what we want’ sort of way.

So i think, your smaller less popular unions are doing their job, properly, with no drain at all on the economy.