Support President Obama

Democrats need your help to pass President Obama's second term agenda. Sign up and show him you have his back!

Email:


Zip Code:


Thank you for signing:
Support President Obama
Now take more action from our partners!
 

Politics

|

Photo Of The Day: The Protest That Sparked A Recall

June 5th, 2012 12:00 am National Memo

 

This photo taken Feb. 17, 2011 shows protestors of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s bill to eliminate collective bargaining rights for many state workers packing the rotunda at the State Capitol in Madison, Wis. More than a year after the standoff over union rights that rocked Wisconsin and the nation for weeks, the Republican Governor will face Milwaukee’s Democratic Mayor Tom Barrett in Tuesday’s recall election.

(AP Photo/Andy Manis, File)



  • http://profile.yahoo.com/ZJ5BBSQIGTUMERPZFALES6HQNY Bill

    From a Big ten fan “Go Wisconsin, Beat Walker”

  • quasm

    When did a negotiated provision of a labor contract requiring employers to deal with workers collectively through their union instead of individually become a ‘right?’

    Dik Thurston
    Colorado Springs

    • CPANY

      Dear Dik:

      I guess that you’d like to return to the common law principle that workers should have to “negotiate” with their bosses on an individual basis. You are truly a Dik.

      • mpennski

        Sorry placed comment in the wrong place.

    • mpennski

      Definitely a great way to “Divide and conquer”. That way more money can go into his pocket instead of the middle class. Also, a great way to pay women less because of course they don’t need or deserve equal pay.

    • dhhill

      When employers forgot their responsiblities to their workers and then used their power to exploit the workers. That’s when workers, instead of cowering in fear and caving into this abuse, united and organized themselves and forced their employers to come to the table and talk to them as equal partners in enterprise.

      Abusive employers object to unions, it cuts into their ability to abuse their employees without consequence to themselves! Responsible employers who deal fairly with their employees, whether unionized or non-union employess, have no issue with union and no fear of unions, can work cooperatively with their employess for the benefit of all. One of the standard refrains I hear from managers and leaders in my union is that we should never have unions but our employers keep proving the need over and over again.

      Rights are always won through hard fights. They are never “given” to us.

      • quasm

        dhhill;

        A well reasoned and totally fallacious argument. No one is forced to work for an employer they consider abusive. Such an employer would not stay in business long.

        I stick to the Declaration of Independence definition of being endowed (gifted) by my “creator with certain unalienable rights.”

        Dik

        • dhhill

          Quasm,

          No one is forced to work for an employer they consider abusive if there is alternative employment available. Abusive employers are in business and continue to stay in business, finding niche labor markets where labor is not free to move about easily.

          Labor markets where the employers are in a highly profitable business that requires highly skilled labor that is in short supply, then I agree, those businesses would soon find themselves out of business therefore they treat their labor as a highly valued component of their enterprise; I’m thinking high tech or genetic engineering or similar leading edge industries.

          But for most people in most places the employer determines the culture of the workplace and is responsible for providing the means for people to live in their communities. Some employers in those circumstances are responsible employers, typically family owned and local community based, and see to it that the adequately compensate their employees, provide benefits, etc. Others however believe that the best way to compete in their industry is to reduce their costs by decreasing compensation for the employees, often compled with intolerable work conditions. Unfortunately when those employers succeed in undermining the standards of labor in a community other businesses have to follow suit or go out of business.

          Unorganized labor is absolutely powerless, all power rests in the hands of an employer. Whereas this may seem like some kind of natural order absolute power is a formula for the development of abuse. That is why in any power relationship there always needs to be checks and balances, not just a one way dictatorship of terms.

          Am curious, exactly how do you think certain inalienable rights were determined to warrant such consideration in the Declaration of Independence, life, liberty and pursuit of happiness? By some higher power? Pursuit of happiness is rather vague don’t you think? And why are those the only inalienable rights that are enshrined in the constitution? Why are there any inalienable rights at all? People, not “the creator” worked this out over many centuries of struggle as we emerged from imperial tyranny, through medieval periods, the renaissance, the enlightenment, the industrial revolution and so forth. If you study history at all you would know that this concept of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are relatively new concepts in human consciousness, still reverbrating in many cultures around the world that are just now trying to break into the modern era. While I admire the foresight of the writers of the declaration of indepence and our constitution, even they knew it was a living document that would need to be amended and changed as our society grew and changed. It is not wise to worship anything you do not understand.

        • Yappy2

          You are just too naive to know what you are talking about. Not only would the employer stay in business but, he would make a bigger profit at the expense of the employees. That is how the wealthy get richer and we lose our middle class.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/ZYVUAEWXDQFY2VMEUDCPH2JTP4 Mary Anne Orlich

    Just can hardly wait till the Neo-Cons get us back to sweat shops, dangerous job sites and child labor. With Mitt’s help, 1900 here we come again.

  • 1AmericanHoney27

    I remember my father joining Carpenter’s Local 213 in the mid sixties… It was the difference of going to bed with a full tummy or not… It meant security for it’s members with such benefits as decent wages… Some form of insurance… That the little man would be treated more fairly and job sights were safer. Early 70′s northern none union workers came looking for work, willing to work for chump change, in any type of conditions… It’s sad to think that Walker is purposing to start this crap all over again just so the “Fat Cats” can again feast at the perils of the hard working middle-class. I pray Wisconsin’s sends this slime ball packing. God Bless America and remember to Vote Obama/Biden in 2012… Thanks for listening & Have Blessed Day…. ” United we stand, Divided we fall.”

  • ObozoMustGo

    The real photo of the day….

    The Food Stamp President finally get’s his picture immortalized…

  • CPANY

    I agree with Yappy2. Labor unions were formed because workers were being abused by the employers, especially the giant corporations. It was not for nothing that Teddy Roosevelt called the American oligarchs “malefactors of great wealth.”