Republican politicians generally overtly hate unions, just read S-1327 for just one example. Sens McCain Lot and and I cant remember the other A-holes name basically wanted to remove risk from the shareholder and make union workers liable to ensure that shareholders (mostly large financial institutions) see an ROI.
In many cases thats true. Many union leaders today have no concept of union history either and obtained their positions by sucking up to other union leaders instead of getting real gains for their coworkers. They lose perspective because they are paid and treated more like executives than workers. They are in it for the money and really have no faith in the cause or the movement, its just the best six figure job they could get with their limited education, you can spot them easily, they are the leaders who blame the members for Labors decline. In fact the members simply followed the direction of their leaders who cut deals with the Bosses to make sure that there were little to no disruptions as the Great Transfer of Wealth that took place from 1930 to 1970 was reversed. What was most refreshing about the recent TA rejection is the fact that the membership refused to continue on the path of decline and sent back a resounding NO to more concessions. That rejection along with the arrival of a possible grass roots alternative has no doubt sent shock waves that go beyond the Union Hall and the Boardrooms of AMR.
Agreed, but Democrats are less hostile to unions and more desperate for the Hispanic vote. Because our leaders are toothless both parties treat Labor with contempt to one degree or another. Labor needs to form a Labor Party, big business owns the other two.
Funny how that number closely corresponds to the number of Yes voters, Robert Tressell wrote of these types of people at the turn of last century England, he called them 'The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists' in a book by the same name. I doubt that you ever read it.
