March 7, 2014 11:13:08 AM
Unions, labor laws and Democrats
Unions have gotten a reputation as mafia-type organizations. Heavy-handed tactics and arm-twisting (literally) methods to force reluctant employees to vote union are legendary.
Not all unions are bad, but they, by and large, do not look out for the welfare of their members. To do so, they would have to look out for the companies that employ them first. If a company goes out of business because it can't afford to pay union demands, how does that benefit employees/union members?
Any company that does not want to be unionized (all of them?) should make sure that their employees are satisfied: good pay, good working conditions, good benefits, etc. It's a "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" type situation.
Unions move in and their members' pay goes up. Then other businesses have to increase wages to keep good employees. Then the unions want higher pay because they're unions and others aren't. It's a vicious, ever-tightening circle that feeds on itself until it's consumed itself and nothing is left.
Businesses move overseas or south of the border because they want to stay in business. Lower labor costs means they can sell their products cheaper and still make a profit. But, if Americans don't have jobs with incomes, it doesn't matter how cheap that product is.
Congress needs to lower the corporate income tax to entice businesses back to the USA. Labor unions need to quit biting the hand that feeds them. Companies need to respect the people who make their businesses profitable. Greed is probably the big killer here considering jobs in America. People want too much money for their labor and businesses don't want to pay more than they just have to in order to maximize profits for the owners/shareholders.
I had another thought when I read the title "Less-intrusive when it suits them" in Thursday's OUR VIEW. Liberal Democrats control the Senate in Congress right now. They just voted to change the rules to allow confirmation of Federal appointees on a simple majority vote instead of the long-accepted 3/4 majority. The reason was that Republicans were stifling the "people's will" by filibustering Obama's picks. The same liberals who championed the change were singing a different tune when the Republicans were the majority. In other words, it's OK when we're the majority but not when you're the majority.
Our federal government is fast becoming a dictatorship with a rubber-stamp Congress. Hopefully in the mid-term elections, control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives will return to the Republicans so a screeching halt will come to the terrible misuse of power in Washington these days. Our public servants should look at life from both sides now before they act. Every law applies equally both ways, and they can come back to bite them in the rear.
1. Lynn Spruill: A city Halloween policy? LOCAL COLUMNS
2. Froma Harrop: Canada can be tough on immigration NATIONAL COLUMNS
3. Our View: Ben Bradlee's enduring legacy DISPATCH EDITORIALS
4. Voice of the people: Gerald and Alice Scallions LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (VOICE@CDISPATCH.COM)
5. Thomas Sowell: Predatory journalism NATIONAL COLUMNS