Just when I think Michael Moore's doucherie quotient could not be ratcheted up another micron, he goes and kicks it up a huge notch. You may or may not want to watch him have a doo-doo hissy, but the comments are rather delicious.
People talk about belt-tightening, but no one wants to be the one who has to take a pay cut. Well, m'dears, your unions are screwing you right out of a job entirely, and that'll fix your little red wagons, right? You'll show them, right? Baby, if the money is not there, then someone's going to have to compromise. Union pensions effectively scuttled the ability of most of the American automotive manufacturing industry to be competitive with cars produced in places where folks were grateful for a steady job. I think the AFL-CIO is in large part to blame for the coming failure of the US Postal Service, and I think that's a damned shame.
Here's a novel concept: management and union bosses meet and face the budget realities and seek a compromise in which the workforce is simply reduced by attrition and wherein any future hires come in under a different framework of pay and benefits? I'll tell you why they won't: unions would never agree to this because they are like our federal government-- they exist only to ensure their own future existence, no matter who else is damaged in that process. They are on the teat as much as any crack-addict welfare woman with 12 Trojan poster-children. Time for some weaning. A little potty training, too, perhaps.
I know whereof I speak. About 25 years ago, I accepted a job here in Texas-- an open-shop state-- where there was immense pressure to join the Postal Worker's Union. In fact, at orientation, all the management and trainers left us alone for a while with the union goons, and we were made to understand that it would be foolish for us to not sign on and fork over an hour equivalent of every paycheck to support the cause. Our union dollars at work meant that at election time, I received very pointed propaganda (which I ignored) telling me for whom to vote. Certain people in the workplace got big support from the union, and others, not so much. From what I saw, the union people were every bit as licentious and corrupt and exploitative as the worst of the management.
I know I'm not the only one who feels personally burned by a union. Why aren't more people describing them as the thugs they are? Maybe they are afraid? Unions have had their day. I don't think they are entirely bad, just pig-headed like a greedy child with no maturity or foresight. It is abhorrent to have absolute job security no matter how poorly you perform. What good is winning the current golden egg when you've killed the goose? You may not have noticed, but that goose is a rare bird, and getting rarer still.