Wal-Mart undermining key workers' rights bill

Home » Opinion » Commentary

Friday, August 22, 2008

Comment

By Byron Salazar

Recently the Washington Post reported that America’s largest private employer convened mandatory, closed-door meetings with thousands of its store managers and department heads over the past weeks to “warn” them about the negative consequences if Sen. Barack Obama wins the presidential election. The corporation pointed to Obama’s support of legislation called the Employee Free Choice Act, which would put the choice on how to form a union back in employees’ hands.

The news of Wal-Mart’s actions has set me off in a firestorm of anger and left me with the gut feeling that it’s wrong for a big company to use its muscle to influence its workers’ private choices. “I’m not a stupid person,” one peeved Missouri Wal-Mart employee said. “They were telling us how to vote.”

What’s ironic about Wal-Mart’s electioneering is that the Employee Free Choice Act is designed to combat exactly this kind of unfair corporate bullying. Wal-Mart has long been accustomed to acting like a school yard bully toward its employees when they try to exercise their freedom to improve their lives by forming unions. The government has found that the company has illegally threatened and discharged workers, prevented them from reading union literature or talking about their working conditions and retaliated against union supporters.

It isn’t just Wal-Mart. Around the country, companies routinely intimidate, harass, coerce and even fire people who try to form unions, and our nation’s labor laws are powerless to stop them. A worker must go through a complicated long-term process in order to file a complaint and penalties for violations by companies are low.

Three-quarters of companies make workers undergo intimidating one-on-one meetings where they are personally urged by higher-ups to oppose the union, according to UC Berkeley research, while a quarter of private-sector employers fire at least one worker during a union organizing campaign. By the time employees vote in a National Labor Relations Board-sponsored election, the environment has been so poisoned that free and fair choice isn’t an option.

This company-dominated system is exactly what the Employee Free Choice Act is designed to mend. The act would strengthen penalties for companies that coerce or intimidate employees and ensure that workers have a fair chance at winning a contract guaranteeing their wages and benefits. When a majority of workers at a workplace want a union, they can choose to show their support by signing cards — majority sign-up.

Why should all of this matter to us? Working families in California, like millions across the country, are being left behind, even as those at the top of the economic ladder are raking in record profits. Wages are falling, health care costs are rising and retirement security is all but disappearing. Millions of good, family-supporting jobs are being shipped overseas.

Employers like Wal-Mart, which pays its sales associates an average of just $8.23 per hour, are a big part of the problem. We learned in 2004 that California’s taxpayers shelled out more than $80 million for Wal-Mart’s employees who had no health insurance. Clearly Wal-Mart is placing an undue burden on American taxpayers. Leaked internal documents in 2006 showed that close to 60 percent of its workers didn’t have the company’s health insurance or any other insurance.

In order to reverse the downhill trend of America’s quickly shrinking middle-class, we must restore working people’s ability to bargain with their employers — employers like Wal-Mart — for better wages and benefits through unions. Today, a union card is still the best ticket to the middle class. People who have a union earn, on average, 30 percent more than workers who don’t have a union, according to government statistics, and they are much more likely to have health care and pensions. And when workers joined together in unions bargain with their employers for improvements, the rising tide lifts up the entire workforce.

The Employee Free Choice Act would restore America’s workers’ freedom to chose to come together to bargain for a better life. That, apparently, is why Wal-Mart has subjected its workers to this latest round of shameful bullying.

(Salazar lives in American Canyon.)

51 comment(s)

kevin wrote on Aug 22, 2008 4:59 AM:

" You were making sense Byron, until you got to the part about

"Millions of good, family-supporting jobs are being shipped overseas."

In many cases, unions ARE the reason the job are leaving. And don't forget, it was thanks to union support that Bill Clinton was elected and able to pass NAFTA... "

glenroy wrote on Aug 22, 2008 5:57 AM:

" Isn’t that sooooo Democrat, if they can’t control it, tax it or unionize it….they hate it.

I’m shopping Walmart from now on…. "

MarkMathews wrote on Aug 22, 2008 6:58 AM:

" Salazar, why dont you and your Anti-WalMart troops found a rival company, instead of trashing a true business sucess story. If the workers don't like working there, if they feel SO put upon, then let them throw of their shackles of oppression and have the American courage to QUIT and find a job ELSEWHERE, more to their liking!. Your union postering is so typical of the Marxist thought previlant in democrat circles. Instead of whining about Wal-Mart, create the company where YOUR union wouldnt be needed! "

Dwayne wrote on Aug 22, 2008 6:59 AM:

" And unions are not intimidating and unions don't tell members how to vote...??? Overall, unions are bad news, and have a history of being very corrupt. "

Sandra wrote on Aug 22, 2008 7:48 AM:

" “I’m not a stupid person,” one peeved Missouri Wal-Mart employee said. “They were telling us how to vote.”
OK I am not a fan of Wallmart....I go there as a total last resort, after I have looked, and looked for whatever I am buying. So I am maybe a once a year Wallmart shopper at best.
But this whole premise that Wallmart is bullying its employees into voting as Wallmart wishes. PLEEAASE....does Wallmart follow them into the voting booth? Last I heard it is our right to vote IN PRIVATE however we wish, and even Wallmart cannot stop us. "

edwest wrote on Aug 22, 2008 8:05 AM:

" Wow- Corporations who put up the money to create the jobs and take the risk, try and influence their employees towards legislation that they see as a benefit to themselves and their employees. Unions never tell us how to vote? Unions never take positions on political matters? In fact the Corporations use their own money to influence their employees- Unions use MY money to try and tell me and others what legislation and people to support. Who is the bully? "

Cadence wrote on Aug 22, 2008 8:06 AM:

" Revelation! If it's bad for WalMart to suggest to its employees how to vote, then it has to be JUST AS BAD when unions do the same thing.
And if Californians shelled out $80 million for health care for WalMart workers, so what? At least the money was spent for WORKERS and not for unemployable sleazeballs, not for gang-related shootings and stabbings, and not for helicopter rides to top-notch trauma centers for jerks who crash and burn while evading police.
I actually like the novel idea of getting something for my tax dollars. WalMart is one of very few venues where I, a plain old middle class citizen, receive help paying for my own prescriptions and groceries via lower prices. "

freeport56 wrote on Aug 22, 2008 8:09 AM:

" Kevin, glenroy-

Take the "Wal-Mart" out of the story and put in the word "Union". It is so funny when a corporation uses a union tactic how mad everyone gets at them.

Unions=Losers "

shareathought wrote on Aug 22, 2008 8:36 AM:

" Rather then spending the day posting rhetoric anyone counter-attacking here could simply google such little things as Wal-mart and health or retirement benefits, Wal-mart and government or lobbying, Wal-mart and Brazil, Canada, or China.
If you'd GIS to portray the stores (in-use or abandoned) in this country, if not the whole world, you'd almost believe they're the planetary government.
Its reminiscent of High School science fiction and a bit creepy. "

kevin wrote on Aug 22, 2008 8:55 AM:

" This is for all you WalMart haters out there (you know who you are..):

From the Allentown Morning Call

Residents: Plant worse than a Wal-Mart
Dispute: Tensions heat up between neighbors, RPM.

By Matt Assad | Of The Morning Call
August 17, 2008

Walt Neidlinger spent years trying to keep a Wal-Mart-anchored shopping complex from being built near his Wind Gap home.

The traffic would have been suffocating for their little community, neighbors argued, so when the massive retailer and its partners packed up their plans and left Plainfield Township last year, Neidlinger was ecstatic. He figured he'd wait for the next plan to come along and remembers thinking, ''What could be worse than Wal-Mart?''

Over the past year, Neidlinger says, he's gotten an answer: RPM Recycling -- the metal-shredding plant on the same land -- causes daily noise that sounds like a freight train rumbling down the street, and frequent explosions that shake his walls.

Be careful what you wish for...lol "

steph wrote on Aug 22, 2008 9:24 AM:

" Oh, goodie! Salazar is all about choice. So he's in favor of workers choosing to not join any union that takes over Wal-Mart? Or will workers be forced to hand over part of their paychecks to the union bosses?

Thought so.

When you gonna go after Target for the same thing? "

mike wrote on Aug 22, 2008 10:51 AM:

" WOW!! I find it hard to go with what I am reading here. I am retired and worked union, retired union. Today my wife and myself are only able to hold our heads above water because of our union retirement and benifits. The wages we received while working was only possiable through strong union negoiations. Fair labor standards through union protection. It is a Americans right to freely choose without intimidation. I would urge Wal Mart workers to take a strng union stand and better your life and working conditions. I worked union,and am proud of it. UNION PROUD. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Aug 22, 2008 10:59 AM:

" The 'Usual Suspects' are making even less sense than usual today.

I can't see to remember the last time a 'Union Boss' arranged to ship his membership jobs overseas... those kinds of things happen because management wants it.

Nor can I remember the last time I read that a 'Union Boss' got a bonus for laying off a few thousand workers and closing plants.

Readers should pay close attention to the 'Blame the Union' bullcorn being pushed here.

Unions are Marxists... ummm-hummm, sure buddy, whatever you saaaay...

~Ruff "

glenroy wrote on Aug 22, 2008 11:07 AM:

" steph....they'd never to that Target is French owned... "

kevin wrote on Aug 22, 2008 11:08 AM:

" At least WalMart doesn't TAKE workers pay and turn around and GIVE it to candidates like the UNIONS do... "

musikluvr wrote on Aug 22, 2008 12:32 PM:

" Unions are great for Americans - but propaganda like this really hurts them. Unfortunately there are people like this guy who take the issues, to the extreme. The comments in this letter, in my opinion,are Anti-American and hurtful to our capitalistic economy. They are divisive and negative and cannot help but foment antagonism. "

John Richards wrote on Aug 22, 2008 12:50 PM:

" If you don't like the wages paid by Wal-Mart then don't work there! There have to be 'starter' type jobs for people with low skills or little education. Wal-Mart fills that bill nicely. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Aug 22, 2008 1:35 PM:

" No... Wahl-Mart is just uses the money they save on thousands of workplace safety and wage violations to buy their congress critters with lobbyist campaign donations. Not to mention all the undocumented workers they've hired. ~Ruff "

russ wrote on Aug 22, 2008 5:56 PM:

" Well, if Obama becomes president, he can just have the federal government take over Wal Mart and get things straightened out back there in Arkansas. They are just a bunch of hicks anyway.

Unionize, raise wages, bring the jobs back to the USA, close down stores in places they aren't wanted, give everyone free healthcare for life, 401k's, 4 weeks paid vacation, and all of the goodies the "Usual Suspects" want. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Aug 22, 2008 6:48 PM:

" russ - Whoda thunk it?

Whaaa? You are an Obama supporter after all? A 'Stealth, Double-Secret, I gotta-kill-ya-if-I-tell-ya' progressive?

Does this mean that you are going to admit that the Scientific American magazine was right when they said we could replace our fossil fuel electrical generation system with solar (and a little wind) in a bit more than 10 years???

The 'Usual Suspects' want corporate welfare, not human welfare. Why children's health is 'socialism' and 'unconstitutional' if we are to believe the 'Usual Suspects' kant.

But you are ever so welcome to leave the 'conservative' darkness and come into the 'progressive' light!

It would be the political equivalent of 'Saul of Tarsus' becoming 'St. Peter', I know... but Jesus did tell the parable of the 'Prodigal Son' !!!

I'll even put an Obama bumpersticker on your car!

~Ruff "

DinoSilver wrote on Aug 22, 2008 8:58 PM:

" One of the biggest hot button issues of this article (that everyone on this board seems to miss) is the Employee Free Choice Act allows employees to form/join a union by just signing a card. NO SECRET BALLOT, not discussion of the pros and cons. NADA.

Yes, unions do help employees with retirement and wage benefits, yes unions do tell workers how to vote, I agree with both sides of that discussion. I am very concerned that employees cannot vote for or against a union with a secret ballot. Just checking off a card is not only open to manipulation and fraud, probably coercion as well if the card is being collected by union officials. "

russ wrote on Aug 22, 2008 10:39 PM:

" Ruff,

I am with ya'.

The government can do everything better.

It's called socialism. Maybe Marxism. Wouldn't that be great? Have the rich folks and big greedy corporations (employers) pay for you.

When Obama wins, I want my goodies too. "

vocal-de-local wrote on Aug 22, 2008 11:15 PM:

" Wow, you guys missed a really significant point. A lot of money is being redistributed away from middle class and toward the multi million/billionaires. Our middle class is diminishing. We should be concerned about this.

When corporations do not offer descent wages/healthcare benefits, costs are transferred to taxpayers in the form of medicaid, medi-cal, and other types of social services. The wealthy become wealthier at the expense of taxpayers. Follow the money. "

kdbk wrote on Aug 22, 2008 11:30 PM:

" Byron,

Are you kidding? Do you think anyone is forced to work at Wal Mart? What a ridiculous notion it is to suggest that people who chose to work at Wal Mart have a right to force their employer to change their ways. Don't you know that there are all kinds of federal and state laws on the books about the fair treatment of employees who work in the U.S.? Wal Mart has to follow every one of those rules. And if a company does follow those rules, then they should be totally free to proceed. Fortunately, every single employee at Wal Mart, or any other company in America, has the very same freedom to leave on any day they want to from a company that they (THEY, not YOU Byron) think isn't treating them right.

Byron, that's called the free market, emphasis on the word "FREE". The government applies minimal or basic standards, and the people are free to run their businesses from there.

Byron, your article carries a socialist message based on a philosophy that has PROVEN to FAIL in EVERY country its ever been tried in. But you probably don't want to get bogged down in boring facts like that, right? "

Rick wrote on Aug 23, 2008 10:33 AM:

" There is a simple solution to Byron's problem of being 'told how to vote', whether by your union, your boss, your spouse, or your college professor: simply consider it as advice which may or may not have merit, but is worth thinking about. Then, vote however YOU DECIDE to vote. No one will ever know if you don't tell them.
It's a free country. "

Raven wrote on Aug 23, 2008 7:58 PM:

" Okay I have heard this 'fact' that target is owned by the french several times....did a lil research..

Target Corporation (NYSE: TGT) is an American retailing company that was founded in Minneapolis, Minnesota in 1902. The company originally was known as the Dayton Dry Goods Company. In 1962, the first Target store was opened in Roseville, Minnesota. In 2000, the company changed its name from Dayton Hudson to Target. It is the fifth largest retailer by sales revenue in the United States behind Wal-Mart, The Home Depot, Kroger, and Costco. The company is ranked at number 31 on the Fortune 500 as of 2008. Target operates its retailing business exclusively in the United States. It is a rival and competitor of Kmart and Wal-Mart. Target is a component of the Standard and Poor's 500 index.

target is owned by its stockholders, no matter where they happen to be. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 24, 2008 10:31 PM:

" I was in a WalMart today (yes I do go there once in awhile) and the store was full of customers in every department. Had to wait longer than I would like to go through the checkout. So no matter what anyone says, the idea of 'voting with your wallet', in other words voting for WalMart by shopping there, appears to be incredibly popular with a wide range of ethnic and wealth diversity.

So yes, I agree that those of you who think WalMart is evil should band together and pool your capital and start a company that does all the things you want it to do and still has low enough prices to entice folks to shop there. Let me know, I'll shop there too!

Oh wait - the flaw in that idea is that socialists would not want to become capitalists and (swoon) make money and provide jobs! How disgusting! So much easier to whine . . .

I'm still watching San Francisco, voting themselves all kinds of extra benefits and at the same time running businesses out of town. When the last T-shirt vendor leaves, who's going to pay for all those nice benefits? Oh that's right - they will just go to the CA legislature and tell them they have to bail SF out. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Aug 26, 2008 3:57 PM:

" ppf- This might hurt your world-view a bit, but states with higher 'minimum wages', and worker protections have higher standards of living.

San Francisco is doing pretty well (much to 'conservative' chagrin) and...

When Bill Clinton defied 'conservative' orthodoxy and raised taxes at the beginning of his first term WITHOUT ANY REPUBLICAN VOTES AT ALL... the country was placed on a path towards balanced budgets that resulted in a $150 billion dollar surplus... until a Bushite-Republican came in and well flushed it down the drain and brought his special brand of economic mismanagement and deficits back.

Sensible people have no reason to believe that a McBush third term will be any better than the first two.

~Ruff "

kevin wrote on Aug 26, 2008 7:54 PM:

" LMAO. Good one Ruff! SF "doing pretty well".

What a filty, disgusting sewer! Have you been there? People lying in the streets in their own waste. Homeless drug addicts wandering the streets like a real life "Night of the Living Dead". Teenage prostitutes on every corner.

Yeah. Their doing great... "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 27, 2008 7:39 AM:

" Ruff -
SF is going down the financial sewer as more and more businesses flee the city.

Clinton was the beneficiary of the internet dot com boom of the 90's. He had nothing to do with it, unless you believe that his buddy Al Gore invented the internet. That's why tax revenues were up. Huge amounts of $$$ were bet and eventually lost as people and businesses learned what the internet could and could not do.

Bill Clinton was lucky. His policies had nothing to do with the economics in his terms. He basks in the glow of undeserved economic praise. In fact, the era was one of ever diminishing jobs in the US as the acceleration of sending jobs to Asia increased dramatically.

Get it right Ruff. "

kevin wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:58 PM:

" PPF, don't forget his term ended in the Clinton recession of 2000.

Also, Clinton decimated the military budget, the so called "peace dividend" that directly led to 9/11.

No wonder B.O. refuses to mention the Clinton presidency in good terms... "

Dr. Faustus wrote on Aug 29, 2008 1:36 AM:

" Say what you like about unions:

I never earned a living wage, had health insurance, or was able to enjoy a greater amount of prosperity before I belonged to a union.

Yes, some don't play fair. Neither do most companies. Yes, corruption has occurred. No more than many, many corporations.

Unions did not destroy the auto industry. Ford and GM simply make terrible cars.

Unions did not destroy manufacturing in America. We were simply outdone. Our focus changed to a high-tech knowledge-based economy - the bleeding edge of new innovation.

Insisting that American workers remain competitive with third world sweat shops is asking Americans to become sweat shop workers.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Would you recommend American workers become competitive with slave labor by becoming slaves?

It's expensive to do business in America because American's won't settle for a can of beans and a mud roof.

If unions have driven any business outside our borders, it’s because the company found it easier to treat non-Americans like garbage. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 29, 2008 8:20 AM:

" dr faustus says: "Unions did not destroy the auto industry. Ford and GM simply make terrible cars."

Uh, doctor? Who exactly do you think built those terrible cars? Why are the workers so poorly motivated when they are getting more pay and benefits than any other auto workers, except maybe those in Germany? Could it be because the union chiefs constantly promotes discord with management because it is the only way they can hold on to their cushy union jobs?

I do agree - I won't settle for a can of beans and a mud roof. So what's your point there? Nobody else wants to, either?

What's so difficult to understand? "

Dr. Faustus wrote on Aug 29, 2008 10:11 AM:

" PPF

uh...who exactly built those terrible cars?

uh, robots and machine operators.

As a Union member I received more pay and benefits entry level than any other non-unionized industry I've ever worked for. I labored alongside some of the hardest working men I've ever met - 12, 15, 18 hour shifts.

I pulled a 24 hour shift once.

The only reason I did was because I knew I was going to be paid justly for my work.

I'd like to see you tell these men they're lazy to their face - you wouldn't have one for long.

I do agree

My point with the bean/roof comment was that companies often go to foreign shores for cheaper labor.

Why are they cheaper?

Beans and mud.

When one argues that American workers have to remain competitive with third-world workers, we're asking American labor be happy with a can of beans and a mud roof.

This is the "problem" with rising standards of living. Very few will passively go back. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 29, 2008 12:37 PM:

" doctor, doctor - says: "uh, robots and machine operators."

And why do you think GM & Ford are using robots? They avoid the effects of subversive attitudes of the union bosses on the employees. Not to mention that the robots usually have fewer defects per car than humans, and replace the repetitive, boring jobs that workers complained about and didn't want to do ever since Henry's first production line came into being. Yes, there was always somebody ready to take the job, but as soon as they had a few hours of boring repetitive work they became disgruntled (as opposed to being gruntled, I guess).

Now I like to see our manufacturing workers make good money, so I don't have a gripe about that. While the unions may have done good in the past, they eventually were infiltrated by mob and other unsavory characters more interested in trouble and taking money than in uplifting their members. They kept their smoke and mirrors going by causing friction between the workers and the companies. Meanwhile they continue their corruption and greed, hidden behind the friction.

I've been in the auto industry too, both in the plants and in retail so I know whereof I speak.

Finally, I DID NOT say the workers were lazy - YOU just said that. Don't be putting words in my posts that aren't there. "

Dr. Faustus wrote on Aug 29, 2008 3:53 PM:

" PPF

"Finally, I did not say..."

No, indeed you did not. I suppose I interpreted the line "poorly motivated" to mean "lazy."

Although the word "motivated" tends to be a business euphemism for "afraid of homelessness and starvation."

GM and Ford are using robots exactly for most of the reasons you just cited. However, automated manufacturing would develop regardless of union activity in the plants. That is simply the natural course of business and technology in general.

Such events have serious implications about the future of work, unemployment, and how we as a society are going to deal with those challenges.

What happens when one automated system can do the work of a thousand people? That day is coming – but that’s a different conversation.

If we're going to decided that unions aren't worth it because some become corrupt, are we to disavow capitalism because some corporations become the same?

"Causing friction," seems to be just what Wal-Mart is doing when they pull workers in one-on-one.

What I was really hoping for was an explanation on how American workers can remain competitive with sweat-shops without resorting to mud and beans. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 29, 2008 4:26 PM:

" What I was really hoping for was an explanation on how American workers can remain competitive with sweat-shops without resorting to mud and beans."

Yes, that's the real meat of the issue. First, I would revoke most favored nation status for China. While we don't want to be telling them what to do, that doesn't mean we have to reward their behavior with our money.

Short term? Big problems, all the cheap goods filling WalMart all of a sudden gone. Prices go up. Capitalists see opportunities, open plants here, jobs become available. Even the unions, if they are smart, can be part of it.

Downside - the short term disruption is politically unacceptable to either side, especially now. And they are so afraid China will get mad. So they get mad - so what? China doesn't want our opinion and we don't want theirs.

The other issue is going to be environmental - how do we manufacture again without damaging the environment? Again, a whole new industry is born, but it takes time.

So more jobs available, pool of available workers dries up, wages go up. Only a few decades ago, we had manufacturing in the US and we can again. Other trading partners will help fill the gap, for instance, Mexico.

With only 300 words there is not room for more than a simple but incomplete discussion. I realize this is going to be bitterly attacked by some as being unreasonable, blah blah. Yes, the short term upset will not be pleasant. But when have Americans turned away from a challenge? Especially when they know what to do about it.

The only permanently unhappy ones will be the socialists. Too bad, the rest of us will eventually be better off. "

glenroy wrote on Aug 30, 2008 10:49 AM:

" PPF....I like it....though would add the solution is not even complex…albeit completely inconceivable to the libs…to remain competitive in a world economy is to reduce inefficiencies….the fact is, at some point short of bankruptcy taxation becomes the unmanageable burden in an increasingly competitive market.

Our corporate tax rate is higher than Germany, Korea, Great Britain, China and Japan….our primary competitors. We’re the only developed country on this planet that has to budget for frivolous litigation and employ armies of staff attorneys…. Industry advocates have long pleaded to a deaf eared congress to ’do something before it was too late‘….they did something alright….they continued to squeeze the life out of one company after another…until survival became the driving force. This is simplistic wedge jingoism convincing enough mentally challenged voters government will provide for free…just vote for me…and dumping the cost on the easiest target.

American workers can compete and do in many highly competitive markets, but in the many areas of manufacturing that moved off shore congress simply played lip service unwilling to share the burden, to them it had more value as a campaign issue… Another example Unwilling even to allow a vote to tap into our 100 billion plus known reserves of crude….Pelosi prefers blaming Bush rather than allowing a solution….

Reversing this ‘counter world trend’ must to be done, but it will take a plutonic economic shift away from government as solutions…. returning to the simple and fair formula of entry level employment being the starting point of career development, and from that if one wishes more, improve individual skills helping efficiencies and productivity…then share in the gain. "

Raven wrote on Aug 30, 2008 7:36 PM:

" glenroy it doesn't really matter what our corporate tax rate is when, as the GAO reports, two-thirds of all US corporations paid no taxes. "

John Richards wrote on Aug 30, 2008 8:02 PM:

" "Unions did not destroy the auto industry. Ford and GM simply make terrible cars."
That's not the case. Read any survey about car quality and you'll find that that where Ford and GM fall down is in fit and finish, and number of defects, when compared to Nissan, Honda and Toyota. The defects and sloppy assembly are directly attributable to the workers. "

kevin wrote on Aug 30, 2008 10:27 PM:

" I would like to see my union dues be used to help organize those workers in foreign contries that are working for "beans and a mud hut" (instead of being given to the Democrat Party). "

Raven wrote on Aug 30, 2008 11:15 PM:

" so it is all the workers fault for making cars designed poorly, for a market that didn't want them...... "

Raven wrote on Sep 1, 2008 10:40 AM:

" so lil factoid for this Labor day...seems union membership in the US has made a slight increase over the past year "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Sep 2, 2008 11:19 AM:

" Raven, you haven't got a clue about the auto business. "

Raven wrote on Sep 2, 2008 1:10 PM:

" ppf, enlighten me....please..... "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Sep 2, 2008 1:31 PM:

" Re: "so it is all the workers fault for making cars designed poorly, for a market that didn't want them"

Doesn't make any sense if you follow the thread, no one said that or anything like it. Twisting the reality again.

What would you like to know about the auto business? (40 years mfr. and retailer experience). They have made plenty of mistakes (including Toyota) and I will be happy to discuss them fairly. That's something the moron Michael Moore can't do. "

Raven wrote on Sep 2, 2008 3:56 PM:

" ppf, you didnt say this?

"Who exactly do you think built those terrible cars? Why are the workers so poorly motivated when they are getting more pay and benefits than any other auto workers, except maybe those in Germany?" "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Sep 3, 2008 8:22 AM:

" The point was that the unions foment the adversarial relationship among union members against the auto companies in order to hold on to their membership and give them think about something else besides their corrupt leadership, are largely creating the unhappy employee who in turn does not do as good a job as we know the American worker is capable of. It's the fault of the union leadership. "

Raven wrote on Sep 3, 2008 5:34 PM:

" well ppf, and the company leadership has absolutely no part in creating the adversarial relationship....? Because we know that management always works in the best interest of the employee...the biggest recruiting tool unions have the bosses. "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Sep 3, 2008 11:28 PM:

" well raven, I did not claim company leadership was blameless. They have made many serious blunders that have cost the auto industry in the US. But the point of the adversarial relationship lies solely with the union and the company leadership is stuck in the position of having to deal with it. If you have an employee who is conditioned to always be adversarial, then no matter what you do you will have an adversarial relationship. Why do you think the Japanese automakers (Honda, Subaru, Nissan etc all have plants here in the US) have worked so hard to keep the unions out, and yet their employees don't seem to be suffering for it. They know that no matter how much it costs to keep their employees satisfied, it is still cheaper than having to do daily battle with union reps. They have learned from Detroit's errors.

Speaking of adversarial relationships, I'm starting to get the picture that we don't have a discussion here, you just twist something to ask an adversarial question and when my Whack-A-Mole hammer is done with that you find something else to twist. That really doesn't accomplish anything for anyone. Why don't you add something to the conversation? Myself and others have put forth positions and statements, all we get from you are one-liners that are baited to compel a response. I'll bet you can do better than that. "

Raven wrote on Sep 4, 2008 8:06 PM:

" ppf,.....you make it so easy.....why shouldn't I question some of the outlandish statements and premises you have made...if you don't like that i am sorry but .....when you or anyone here says something I find hard to believe, know it false or disagree with I will question it whether it comes from you or anyone else...and if doing it in one line instead of a whole treatise works for me..so be it....brevity is a virtue I was always taught "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: