New Union Goes Up Against UAW For Chattanooga VW Plant

Objectively, yes. Of course, in the view of progressives, anyone not publicly pro UAW is clearly suspect and is only pretending to be pro union to hurt the cause. Just in case you haven't realized it yet, you are now persona non grata. Welcome to the Republican Party. :)

@Landcrusher Persona no grata where? Here? In the friendly confines of TTAC? Lousy liberals not welcoming conservative opinions with open arms? Testify! Yes, it was just the other day in which this little supporting gem was posted: "Be clear on this VoGo: This is not the proper forum for you to vent your unwashed lazy liberal nonsense. This is an auto forum. We don’t need people like you here. Go back to HuffingtonPost dot com. You can sip your lukewarm herbal tea while reading liberal bloggers and waiting for your Social Security Disability check. Do you even have a drivers license? I mean besides picking out your clothes, hasn’t your mother gotten tired of driving you around?" Uh, wait, that wasn't it...

@Landcrusher It's irrelevant whether you personally like the UAW. All the arguments put forward have been dispelled by basic research. Hating the UAW is a fruitless endeavor, the reason you're suspect is that you, thornmark, and others have been outspoken against organized labor. So why should we treat your views as anything less than suspect? PS: You do realize the Republican party is dying a slow demographic death? I mean I guess you'll be dead before they cease as a party but in the next decade they'll be irrelevant on the federal stage. Short of complete disenfranchisement the Republican pro-capitalist class agenda is dragging itself off to die in a lonely corner. Be proud in your broken partisan ideals but recognize your agenda has no future. :)

@badtzmaru Huh?

@badtzmaru LC is this your mother?

@challenger2012 My mom is 78 and just got out of the hospital. Perhaps by the time you guys grow a sense of humor, I will once again find mother jokes funny.

@Xeranar You realize you just made an argument that might makes right?

@Xeranar "I mean I guess you’ll be dead before they cease as a party but in the next decade they’ll be irrelevant on the federal stage." Because embracing one party rule has worked out so well throughout the past century.

@Landcrusher No, he made an argument that majorities deserve to govern. Which is very unlike today's gerrymandered House (you do know the Democrats won the aggregate House vote in the last election, right?), rigged Supreme Court and resulting "corporations are people" hegemony of money.

@challenger2012 LC I bet your mother gets SS and Medicare. Are not you against socialistic programs? Do you not see the similarities between you and the Kochs? You both received benefits from socialistic/communistic sources and now rail against such states while enjoying the benefits from them.

@28-Cars-Later But Government is so much more efficent that way! Skull crushingly efficient.

@challenger2012 The greater issue is everyone at the top has their hands in the till to some degree.

@challenger2012 Landcrusher, Best wishes for your mother's recovery.

@danio The beatings will continue until morale improves.

@badtzmaru - one must differentiate between foreigners doing jobs that nobody wants and union pay level jobs that most would want.

@28-Cars-Later One party rule? Those Koch brothers keep popping up ;)

@challenger2012 Challenger, That is one of the most pernicious arguments around. It's wholly a bunch of BS. If you want to make it optional, I might drop out even at my age, but that would be an expensive protest. Especially expensive since Medicare has robbed us all of so much and ruined much of healthcare for seniors. So, I bet I paid more for those programs than you. I do not advocate their abolishment. I want them reformed greatly. I want the government to live up to its promises which seems to be something people on the left don't ever care about when they can change things the way they want. For future reference, why don't you not make any assumptions about what I believe and stick with what I say.

@challenger2012 Thank You, VoGo

@Landcrusher Tony, The elections are indeed rigged. The courts demanded it decades ago. It was a bad idea then, but well intentioned. A better solution should have been found. Most people do not really understand the corporations are people thing, but it's nit the big deal. It's a necessity of having too many laws trying to fix things government cannot fix. Fix the tax code and it can go away.

@28-Cars-Later Which assumes that it would remain one party? I mean that seems obnoxious, since throughout our history we've had atleast 2 active major parties that dissolved. Just because you're too young to remember a time before the last party dissolved and was reborn doesn't mean it won't happen again. Though honestly, I highly suspect the name and structure of the Republican Party will simply live on because of our institutionalized system and name recognition. Simply put, the Democrats are more likely to split and go towards the Elizabeth Warren wing and the Andrew Cuomo wing. The Cuomo's will assume control of the Republican Party while the Warren's will retain national leadership in the Democratic Party. Regardless the fascist Tea Party and most of the Koch-type corporatists will be weeded out by age. We're likely looking at a division of parties that stop supporting capitalism without regard for satisfaction which would be a major leap. As for LC, what about might making right? When did the people who like your ideas dying out and being replaced by people who like my ideas become might? It took decades of Jim Crow to weed out the Racists enough to finally overturn it. It took decades of Goldwater Republicans to do the same thing now. Never mind that the whole argument about districts is irrelevant because you're essentially citing a few cases that dictate minority districts be carved out but even then the current system is more based on gerrymandering with intent to keep as many seats safe as possible. I'm actually all for a balanced district system but you do realize that would make Republicans a near-permanent minority in Federal elections, right? The whole reason they've been able to hold seats in the high population states like New York, Florida, Virginia, and Pennsylvania is because they specifically create unbalanced rural districts that if balanced towards a 50/50 split would be viable Democratic seats every election. The system favors my agenda in this day and age, I'm not gloating, I'm pointing out a factual reality.

@Xeranar - I have to agree with a large portion of your assessment. The "far" right is a combination of extremes. We have the very rich on one end and the poor and uneducated on the other with rural populations in the mix. I find it odd that the poor and uneducated support the right since their policies hurt the poor and uneducated the most. Doctrine/belief is an amazing animal that kills logic. I've seen that in my province of BC where the "far right" has died and we have the Liberal Party against the New Democrat Party. Basically slightly right of centre Liberals versus far left socialists.

@28-Cars-Later X, Koch's corporatists? Tea Party Fascists? How, who, what are talking about? The only thing separating you from a fascist is your lack of nationalism, racism (I presume), and and militarism. OTOH, the tea party is on the opposite end of the spectrum on just about everything from the fascists and the Koch's are pro individual more than corporatists. And, your argument above appeared to say that because the people who believe as I do are becoming a minority (which is ridiculous, libertarian leaning types seem to be more numerous) that we were wrong. Since you seem to be saying we are getting crushed by demographics rather than reason, that's might makes right (unless you admit your side is wrong just more numerous I suppose). Like all truly moral and civilized people ever, I prefer to be right and proper than to give up my principles to join a majority of fools. It is made more easy every time I hear you represent your side.

@28-Cars-Later LC - So angry, just so angry. 1.) The right is by definition going to result in extreme cases fascism. The Left will result in anarchy. What happens is that the tea party regardless of their publicly stated views have had continuous issues with people of color and if you refuse to acknowledge that is not my problem. I simply don't care to argue further with you on the matter, you're inconsequential to my teaching career and I refuse to bother with ignorance after a certain point. 2.) How can I be a fascist if I'm not a nationalist, racist, or militarist? It's just a case of deflection in desperation. It's not even cute, it's just tiresome. I'm a left-wing libertarian just as you are a right-wing libertarian. Yet the 'libertarians' that are increasing in the youth generation are on the left, so it isn't as if demographics are changing much in favor of big L Libertarians who are represented by the Paul (Ron & Rand). 3.) Actually you're already a minority, you're just losing more ground in a democracy. Frankly the idea of 'wrong' or 'right' is more an issue of effectiveness at goals. The Right has failed miserably at their stated goals so in effect they're 'wrong' but that's neither here nor there. The fact that you insisted on turning it into an argument of being a martyr for being 'right' is a bit pathetic. Obviously in a democracy if your ideas are good they should rise to the majority. Now of course the social class, race, and sex have a big effect on that. This is best exemplified by white working class workers who vote Republican in the name of keeping down people of color (see #1 and why they're fascists). 4.) By the way you complained about me insulting you earlier, you're a damn hypocrite. Stop insulting me and complaining when I return the favor. I would rather we just trade barbs instead of whining like a petulant little child.

@28-Cars-Later I doubt anyone else is still reading, but I if they were, I still bet you are the only one who thinks I am angry here. 1) nonsense 2) I didn't call you a fascist. I am accusing you of socialism 3) your support of closed shop laws alone precludes you from being any sort of libertarian. Just not liking being told what to do doesn't make you a libertarian. I am also not really a libertarian, I merely have libertarian leanings. 4) you start the insults every thread. Go back and check. And where did I insult you? Not that I deny that I hit back.

@28-Cars-Later Politics, pickups, and religion bring the best out in people. Interesting debate and despite the name calling considerably more civil than having Pch101 disagree with your point of view ;)

@28-Cars-Later It's not a matter of "disagreement." It's a matter of your inability to distinguish between good research and bad research, to perform basic arithmetic and to understand concepts as fundamental as inflation that is tedious. You're the same guy who can't understand that prices that don't keep up with inflation have actually declined in real terms. And that's exactly what happened to your small trucks during the early 80s, when the US inflation rate was in double digits and your dreaded chicken tax came into effect. Your inability to do math should not be the internet's problem.

@28-Cars-Later 1.) Ignorance will be ignored. Ironic, yes? 2.) Socialism isn't a bad word. You do realize that right? I mean socialism has become more liked than capitalism in the last few years. Never mind that I'm barely a socialist by its own standard. I'm more a mixed economist from a practical view but I do support socialism on a full scale endeavor. Seems to work for the Scandinavians. 3.) Closed shop laws? Look up left-wing libertarianism, you'll find I'm still well within the boundaries of it. Never mind that the Right-wing form of libertarianism is the one obsessed with private property which is what causes unions to be despised by them mainly because it challenges their absolute authority in ownership of property which the workers have to use. It creates a complicated relationship to the agency of workers who have to use said property who have agency independently of the owner. 4.) If I do is it your job to play martyr because you can't stand somebody half your age calling you out? You know who are my worst students? The returning students who look at me and realize I'm younger or the same age and they try to bully me or demand their life experience supersede my academic research and readings. It gets tiresome, not because I don't want to challenged, it's because I want you to challenge me with your than suppositions and anecdotal views. Build reasonable arguments that don't contradict evidence easily available and I will listen. The problem is when I keep hearing the 'Hostess' argument brought up as fact when we know it was the management looting the pension funds and draining excess value when they should have been saving up for downturns. It's a prime example of WHY I don't care to hear it anymore. It's truly tiring because I don't feel like hearing the same broken arguments every time something happens that involves unions. If you could bring factual research I'll gladly parse it out myself and reply back with something thoughtful. Otherwise it's just babble that goes in one ear and out the other anymore.

@28-Cars-Later "The returning students who look at me and realize I’m younger or the same age and they try to bully me or demand their life experience supersede my academic research and readings." It's no fun when they know about life outside the classroom, is it? I can't really tell if you were trying to be funny or not, but you succeeded. I suspect the worst thing anyone could ever do to you would be to grant you self awareness. How is it that your education didn't involve learning the definition and function of company unions? It isn't just that your returning students know more about your field of study than you do, it is that you can't even regurgitate the propaganda you've been indoctrinated with without ending up talking out of both sides of your mouth like Obama saying that Lois Lerner pleaded the fifth without committing a crime. You've got the ideological rigour part down, but you're just not that able.

@28-Cars-Later X, If you would try respecting the students and their experience, not acting like a know it all jerk, and learning to listen to what people actually say, you would have an easier time with students who actually know something. Even when you have the facts, and I no longer trust your facts, you persuade no one who doesn't want to listen. First thing you need to do in the classroom is to stop telling people they are wrong. Just don't bother. Address what they said, not what they think. Help them express themselves as well as possible, then show them the RELEVANT information that addresses their belief. Let them make their own conclusions. Much of what you teach is going to be opinion so try to only grade on the facts.

@Pch101 - ha ha. Try boxer shorts, speedo's must be cutting off circulation.

@28-Cars-Later "Simply put, the Democrats are more likely to split and go towards the Elizabeth Warren wing and the Andrew Cuomo wing." Oh ok so like the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks? Yeah those won't be the same thing at all. Wake up.

@28-Cars-Later 28 - So you prefer the debate between Goldwater small government republicans and the other two Democratic wings? It sounds like a matter of being marginalized which is traditionally what happens in Democracies. In fact outside of the US, Britain, and Canada there are pretty much no small government parties that have any success. Note that those three countries have had medium recoveries because of those parties compared to excellent recoveries elsewhere.

"Stepping back from this a bit,.." So glad someone has. The enforced proliferation of 300lb substance abusing schlubs throughout the American workforce may be a holy crusade for some here, but the foreign companies that matter needn't and won't play along.

@petezeiss You are also calling your local police officers, firefighters, and your kid's teacher 300lb substance abusing schlubs. Was that your intention? People who hate unions make no sense to me. Get your butt to work this Sunday (and this Monday for that matter) for a good 14 hours if you hate unions so much.

@Kevin "Was that your intention?" Not firefighters, no.

@Kevin Basically the reason people hate unions is because they've been taught a social understanding of resentment. That a person's job security is bad and we're 'uncompetitive' because the management class has beat it into their heads that they're only worth as much as they can do and without that job they're really not worth anything. They're more like sad lost souls, hell bent on punching babies and kicking puppies in the name of their self-worth. I'm absolutely sure I'll hear anecdotal responses that have no measure on the total institutional actions of the idea but merely are manifestations of their own self-loathing designed to propel them as the super human who holds society together.

@Xeranar - there are pro's and cons to unions just like any organization. The UAW gets singled out because they are seen as being a parasite feeding off of the auto industry. There is truth to that argument since pensions and wages advanced much faster than what the industry could hope to sustain. Unions have also stifled flexibility of the workforce through rigid trade lines. We've seen clawbacks of wages and benefits which were necessary. Workers at companies like Wallmart would benefit from trade unions since a large percentage of that workforce needs food stamps to survive. The problem is the extra cost. Big corporations do not want the decreased profits and consumers do not want to pay more. I'd rather pay more to buy stuff at Wallmart knowing that its workers are self-sufficient than pay more taxes to a government that needs to issue food stamps.

Don't blame the unions, blame the free trade agreements. And who do they benefit?

@petezeiss And what makes a firefighter better than a police officer or a teacher? I doubt the firefighter would agree with you, btw. I hope that whatever profession you have chosen to dedicate yourself to is more valued than the noble professions that continually get vilified in today's society by the Faux News watching, brainwashed masses that start foaming at the mouth at the mention of the "U" word.

@petezeiss http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/02/05/272144424/police-officer-arrests-firefighter-at-accident-scene-in-california I didn't know whether to go with this story or the one about the cop that ran down a cyclist and was revealed to be above trivial laws like manslaughter. http://www.scribd.com/doc/237940150/Official-document-Deputy-won-t-be-charged-in-death-of-Calabasas-bicyclist-Milton-Olin

@petezeiss "And what makes a firefighter better than a police officer or a teacher?" Firefighters can't be 300lb substance abusing schlubs or they'd die of heart attacks before reaching 30.

Xeranar, Your every comment reveals such an adolescent certitude and 3rd rate articulation of the few injection-molded ideas you possess, yet you persist in thinking you're tenure track o_O You're silly and you really cheer up this site.

@Xeranar Petezeiss - I'm already on tenure track, I took the federal contract while I wrote and worked but my home university is keeping tabs on my accomplishments as I continue to publish. By the time I return I'll most likely face the committee and be awarded a permanent position. But no doubt you'll keep scoffing, I don't mind. Small minded children who claim life experiences supersede data and analysis don't really bother me. Never mind your base argument is 'You're childish and you don't speak so good!' which is hilarious considering the level of articulation I've long displayed. But hey, if it gets you off to insult me, be my guest, friend.

Don't take what I wrote above as anti union, as I'm not. I'm against anything that will produce a negative outcome, as this is against my human instincts for progress.

@Big Al from Oz Al, It is all about balance. Yes unions with too much power are bad. In Canada we see it in the public service unions. But what else has the ability to counter the power of the 21st Century Robber Barons? For every action, there is a reaction (hopefully equal). The pendulum continually swings.

@Arthur, One of my best friends used to be a shop steward and believe it or not we see many issue the same, politically that is. At the lower levels of any large organisation irrespective of what the day to day activities are for that organization empathy towards each other diminishes. I do think this is a problem. Unions end up being more about the perception of the union rather than making good an logical decisions. If these union leaders are that good at organising, leading, managing do you think they would be in a union? They would be working for some large corporation working their way up the ladder for power and glory. I do think changes are needed to curb the influence of any large organization or institution, left, right, centre or whatever. Self interest creates corruption. Unions are full of people with self interest, no different than the Catholic Church, Dems, GOP, etc. But if both sides are affected by change that will curb their influence do you really think this will occur? No. I'm for the individual, the consumer.

@Arthur Dailey - we do see swings from left to right both politically and economically. There does need to be a balance but unfortunately it all boils down to one tribe battling against another tribe. Tribal culture and societal/group structure is replaced by 200 page contracts and 400 page contact interpretation manuals. Instead of clubs to the head we have grievances and disciplinary reviews.

@Arthur Dailey First off, the so called Robber Barons were neither Robbers or Barons. The continued use of that term without pointing out how misleading it is tells you it's propaganda. I think unionization lost the plot years ago. There is so much more competition and information sharing now that I have to wonder if some serious rethinking of the whole system is way overdue.

@Big Al from Oz You have to be joking. You wrote that rambling stream of consciousness above and you expect us to believe you DON'T have an axe to grind with unions? People deserve to be paid for their efforts. The only part of your argument I agree with is that unions shouldn't be able to contribute to elections. But then neither should SuperPACs or wealthy individuals. Make elections publicly funded to be completely fair. Until that happens, I support unions making political donations.

@Landcrusher Unfortunately the term Robber Baron is very apt. They lived higher than Barons and engaged in illegal activities such as collusion. They ignored or prevented the implementation of legislation protecting workers. How exactly did unions lose the plot? The whole idea behind unionism is that there is an imbalance of power and that workers only have the ability to redress this imbalance through collective action. Individually a worker has very little power, collectively they can 'fight' unilateral actions by management. What disrupted this is the implementation of free trade with 3rd world nations. Now workers in North America must compete with 3rd world workers. Due to the cost of living, taxes and environmental controls this is an impossibility in most situations. Thus unions/workers are demonized rather than identifying the root cause of the problem. Al, some unionists do join management. Others stay in the union because at the top levels the salaries are fairly munificent. And in Canada a surprising number become politicians.

@Landcrusher AD, They were no more robbers than they were pedophiles (well, we don't really know). The point is that they were not robbers. Conspirators in cases? Fine, go with that. Barons were born into the ruling class and had military and police powers which the industrialists did not. I'm not saying they were saints, nor denying their transgressions. Many were very bad, even evil, men. They are called Robber Barons to hide the guilt of the politicians who were instrumental in their successes and excesses. Unionism lost the plot when it became less about empowering the worker and more about empowering and glorifying the union itself. When it became less about improving the workers lives and more about improving the union and hurting management just for the sake of it. When the unions cared more about party politics than their workers well being. I can't give you a date on it. Lastly, nobody is demonizing the workers except for the fact they empower the unions.

@Kevin I do apologise for the apparent tardiness in my response. But my job is quite demanding at times. I do believe that you could be incorrect in your assumptions. I do believe people should be paid for their efforts. I do believe in a liveable minimum wage, public health and education up until the end of high school. Anything after highschool is career driven. What you don't seem to understand is the left supports a regime of standards set to the lowest common denominator. I don't support that view. I support that the best should be given an advantage before anyone else, irrespective of creed, colour, nationality or whatever. If you do look at my above comments you will see that this will give EVERYONE in our society a 'fair go'. Unions only look at themselves and quite often at the expense of an industry or country. Just look at Detroit.

@Big Al from Oz Unfortunately much like democracy, unionism as it stands is not great. However it is better than the existing alternatives for the majority of workers.

Of course the real issue is that the workers are being told they'll have a union, come hell or high water. Was there ever any doubt that it would turn out otherwise? But even if they form their own local union, the UAW will strong-arm them into becoming a limp limb of the UAW. This agenda is existential for the UAW because of declining membership. There's even a movement afoot to sue for refunding union dues in a state that recently became Right-To-Work, a worst case nightmare for the UAW and other unions. How are they going to rebate those dues? Give them back as Wal-Mart Gift Cards?

Come on CJ, I told you to read the book....Do I need to repost the title for you? I'll start posting exerts from the book if you're that lazy and want to keep discussing how unions are criminals. Union Democracy is your friend and the UAW is actually very union democratic.

@Xeranar They took off their democracy mask when they lost the election and said they'd set up shop anyway. Sorry to inject reality into your life, but you still can't tell me to do anything. If your side does win in our lifetimes, the prize is nothing for people like you. The avaricious few holding your strings will get to enjoy the royal lifestyle stolen from them by the American Revolution. Serfs make less noise at resorts than the middle class does. Marinas are nicer when it's the right crowd and no crowding. Some day you may learn what sustainable really means. Enjoy. When it's all over, if you're lucky you won't be accountable for eternity.

@CJinSD Your rhetoric is hilarious if a bit superficial in any way of understanding. I always wanted to understand this 'us' you keep speaking of? I mean who do you think is getting excluded if the left is pressing for higher wages and an expanded middle class? We have documented evidence to support that the right-wing policies pushed in the 1990s and 2000s shrunk the middle-class substantially and that left-wing policies prior to that in the 30-70's expanded it. Never mind that Union Democracy is the power to elect people within the union, hence why we call it Union Democracy which makes any kind of mob control extremely hard which is what you were implying with your 'organized crime' routine. Suffice to say I don't care if you read the book, you've proven yourself an ignorant fool on more occasions than I care to remember. I just enjoy trying to educate the people, most are flexible but it's people like you who remain stubbornly obstinate in your opposition to any kind of education.