Unions: An Anachronism in Search of a Purpose.

 "If union adversaries can pass a right-to-work law in the home of the once-powerful United Auto Workers, they can pretty much do it anywhere."

I say GOOD.

For centuries, Unionism once had a prominent place in Western commerce for a good reason: strength in numbers to improve working conditions (safety, benefits, etc.).  During the previous century, many of those improvements were enshrined into law at the federal and state level (osha, work comp, wage & hour, eeoc, etc).

Nowadays, hordes of personal injury attorneys get rich suing employers for infractions and damages. As such, automation is preferred to apprenticeship; a company's HR dept. is a defensive strategy; university degrees are vetting agents; and contract lawyers are built into the cost of products.

*** 

And that's the trouble with unionism today: it's an anachronism in search of a purpose. To a lot of the public, a union's main function is to undermine private property rights of owners and stockholders in order to enrich themselves, even if it means the economic ruin of their employer!
(Hostess Bakeries is the latest example of that union madness).

This parasitic unionism is even more malignant in the public sector because it involves collective bargaining with the ability to strike, which in effect holds citizens hostage to work stoppages of vital services, coupled to a devious money laundering scheme, paid for with your tax $$.

Here's how it works: Complicit democrat politicians enlarge government (paid for with your tax $$); this requires more union workers (paid for with your tax $$); the unions then funnel deep pocket campaign contributions back to complicit democrat politicians, who subsequently increase union wages & benefits (paid for with your tax $$); which are then donated back to democrat politicians via campaign contributions... Paid for with your tax dollars.

But as Ed Morrissey at The Week explains, 'right to work' for private unions is a distinct issue from collective bargaining of public unions, and require seperate diliberation and solutions.

Yet, whether public or private, the unions disagree with restrictions to collective bargaining, or implementing 'right to work,' and prefer violence, vandalism and intimidation to maintain their hold on power, as witnessed by riots from public sector unions in Wisconsin earlier last year, and yesterday in Michigan when union workers rioted outside the Lansing capital building, assaulting a reporter and attacking staffers of a 'Right to Work' information tent, which the vandals then tore down.



Yesterday, a Democrat legislator in Michigan promised that there would be “blood” if 'RtW' was enacted, and Teamster president Jimmy Hoffa threatened 'civil war' after the Republican controlled Michigan legislature enacted 'right to work' into law (insert obligatory '24/7 spittle flecked outrage from MSM if any 'intolerant' Conservative organiation had threatened 'civil war' or 'blood' against democrats' here). As it stands, crickets chirp.

The White House has refused to condemn their Michigan comrades' violence. That's not surprising considering Barack Obama embraced OWS in 2011.

Joshua Treviño @jstrevino had an accurate summation of this leftist violence when he said, "Between Occupy and the unions, the left is the major purveyor of political violence in America today."

Indeed. This repugnant violence from the Left is all too common in America history.

Bottom line: It's time for all good citizens to stand tall, and require all states to embrace freedom of choice (because all good liberals love choice), and implement 'Right to Work.' 

graphic: TS