Why don’t Republicans court unions…
The latest presidential campaign news is how Democratic candidates are courting unions, but what about Republicans?
I could see Mitt Romney and John McCain getting chummy with John Sweeney, the head of the AFL-CIO. Well, I’m sort of kidding about that. I met Sweeney and he never stuck me as a guy you could chummy up with.
Anyway, why is it always left to the Democrats to toot labor’s horn. And I mean not just when it comes to organized unions. Why don’t Republicans stand up and yell for more worker rights?
Is it all about the almighty dollar. Any support of an employee is a lack of support for corporations, the free market?
I don’t see it that way. There has to be a balance between bolstering capitalistic ideals and the good of the working stiff.
Come on Elephants get to a picket line pronto!!
June 20th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
Hey, Eve, I think some of this is nearly a subliminal hatred of unions. The idea of a union, of banding together, speaks to some people of weakness and of not being able to stand on your own two feet. Factor in the impact it has on employers (let’s face it, if an employer could get away with paying workers nothing, he or she would) and it’s a slam dunk.
June 20th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
There might be something to that. But people banding together, to me, is a sign of strength.
July 26th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
Why don’t Republicans court unions? The answer is simple, unions would say no thanks. Labor is not forgetful of the past nor ignorant of the present. Spin it any way you like, Republicans have been no friend to the working man/woman. Just my take on things as a 3rd generation union man. Peace
March 4th, 2008 at 12:08 am
There is no spin in this Republican’s adroit point of view. Without a healthy bottom line, the rank and file are unemployed. You cannot run a business on a deficit. I once thought..’your company owes you more than just a paycheck’. As a redical member of the USW, I was extreme and vicious. I was also a Republican who saw President Reagan apply a tarif to foriegn steel coming into this country at twice the tonnage rate and it still had little to no effect on the price of steel we produced. A quick flashback to your labor President Carter, during the ‘77 miner’s strike, you saw our government intervene. I recall the reaction of my truck driving father..’$100 a day to dig coal, I’m in the wrong field’. At that time it represented a 40% pay raise for the men in the earth. Of course everyone had this vision of coal to heat your home without realizing that more than 80@ of the coal went toward industries like steel and electricity production. Good for labor..way to go, and in the end over half the steel producers in this country lost 2/3 its production capacity. Check out this fact…US STEEL CORP. in the little town of Pittsburgh, this nation’s first billion dollar corporation. This huge corporation recieved no bail out or intervention because it’s labor force including me would not allow the corporation anything. The company said cut back and we negotiated higher. We lost. There was no fault of government here because other steel companies outside of here flourished. Ronald Reagan was considered a culprit because he would not intervene with the exception of placing heavy tariffs on foreign steel. Reagan even lifted trade embargos that were placed on exporting steel to several nations. This helped however in the end it did very little. There is not a politician in the world who would not like to be endorsed by a majority of rank and file than a handful of company officers. Labor may endorse a Democratic candidate because they feel they would more likely uncheck the balance of what is earned and what is spent. Democrats are business idiots……