Unions hiring people to protest?

[MadMoney]

I know this is the Daily Show... but can someone explain this (http://reason.tv/roughcut/show/daily-show-hits-unions-for-hig-1)?

Is this real? (As real as anything else they do it seems...)

Does this bother you? (It obviously bothers me for completely different reasons)

[Dean]

I know this is the Daily Show... but can someone explain this (http://reason.tv/roughcut/show/daily-show-hits-unions-for-hig-1)?
Unions are in the business of utilizing economic leverage to improve employee compensation and reduce the exploitation of their clients. They use what means are available in a capitalist market - just like the tea party and any other lobbyist/activist/public-relations system.


Is this real? (As real as anything else they do it seems...)
I trust the Daily Show generally but these kinds of things have happened anyways.


Does this bother you? (It obviously bothers me for completely different reasons)
Why would it bother you? Aren't you a pro-capitalist? What is wrong with unions acting in their self interest? The relations are voluntary, according to the propertarian definition.

[Revolutionair]

Haha, that shit cracked me up.

[#FF0000]

I don't really care about this.

[¿Que?]

I find the Daily Show to be shallow and banal sometimes. This could actually have been hilarious, had even one writer any perspective on the class struggle.

I did find it kind of amusing that the union's signs were waaaaaaay nicer than the Daily Show's.

[Bud Struggle]

That, of course, was hilarious!

And it just goes to show: meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[Robert]

This could actually have been hilarious, had even one writer any perspective on the class struggle.

Yeah, funny as a crutch. :rolleyes:

[#FF0000]

And it just goes to show: meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

What are you talking about?

[The Hong Se Sun]

Where do i fill out an application

[RGacky3]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bud Struggle http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1895167#post1895167)
And it just goes to show: meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
What are you talking about?


Its one of his meaningless catch phrases.

But Yeah, some Unions do things that arn't good.

But what i find funny, is people will go way out of their way to find something that a union does that is just buisiness as usual for corporations and say "AHA" Union bosses get paid twice as good as the rank and file, yeah, look at CEOs.

At least unions are more democratic, and the good unions do way way outwiegh the couple negative things, and the negative things are considered normal for corporations.

Saying Meet the new boss same as the old boss when it comes to unions vrs corporations, is like saying that democracies and dictatorships are the same because some democracies have corporal punishment, its rediculous.

[Fabrizio]

What are you talking about?

My guess: Bureaucrats.

[¿Que?]

But what i find funny, is people will go way out of their way to find something that a union does that is just buisiness as usual for corporations and say "AHA" Union bosses get paid twice as good as the rank and file, yeah, look at CEOs.

This. And if the idiots at Comedy Central weren't beholden to the latter (corps) by pretending to support the former (unions), that is, maybe if they would have made this argument central to the bit, as opposed to dustin' off the old "corrupt unions" trope, it would have actually been a lot funnier.

[Ele'ill]

This is a great example of John Stewart doing the 'I'm not taking sides with anyone- I'm here to point out 'corruption' at all levels' bullshit-

RGackY summed it up pretty well- when unions engage in clever tactics to make life better they're ridiculed up and down and held to this imaginary set of standards but when corporations engage in activity that lowers the quality of life it's considered normal and 'just making money' - 'business as usual' - 'it's a game- you have to learn to play it' so on and so forth. Fuck that shit.




"I'm going to super trendy and not stand behind anyone while all my liberal followers stand behind me but they don't because our motto is not to stand behind anyone"

"We're not left or right we're just here"

Of course it's ironic that someone in a top income bracket that's supposed to be 'liberal' would ridicule attempts at worker's rights- it's the same as rich privileged peace activists getting on the case of those that support a diversity of tactics and who may support violent actions.

I hate to say it at times and it isn't always appropriate but here for this example- Class matters.

[Havet]

This is a great example of John Stewart doing the 'I'm not taking sides with anyone- I'm here to point out 'corruption' at all levels' bullshit-

RGackY summed it up pretty well- when unions engage in clever tactics to make life better they're ridiculed up and down and held to this imaginary set of standards but when corporations engage in activity that lowers the quality of life it's considered normal and 'just making money' - 'business as usual' - 'it's a game- you have to learn to play it' so on and so forth. Fuck that shit.

err...stewart does actually criticize the clever tactics of corporations, as well as some of the INSANE bonuses CEOs give themselves when thinking only of short-term profit.

[RGacky3]

Jon Stewart is a fantastic comedian, but his politics is like Obamas, down the middle, no matter how rediculous one side is, compromising-to-no-end liberal, "well we criticised the insane right wing, we HAVE to find something on the left or else, oh no, we might be .... partisan!!!!!" It gets tiring.

That being said, he's a fantastic comedian.

[Ele'ill]

I have never laughed at any of his jokes. Not once.


I like Bill Maher though- in small doses. I find Bill to be a little bit more cutting and less 'goo goo gaga baby talk'

[¿Que?]

Stewart may be somewhat on the left, but there are reallimits to that leftism that are defined and managed by Comedy Central (MTV/Viacom). They tolerate Stewart, but they don't have to. He gets out of line, and he can kiss his 4 day week goodbye. That's the difference between real freedom of speech and fake freedom of speech. If it's real, you (CC) have to accept it...tough shit...

Stewart (and the DS team) sometimes betray an attitude of being all too content with the status quo (fake speech freedom).

[Fabrizio]

I find John Stewart very funny. To point out that he is not a communist is kind of redundant.

[Bud Struggle]

Its one of his meaningless catch phrases.

But Yeah, some Unions do things that arn't good. Or rather they haven't done much good since 1934 (or thereabouts.)


But what i find funny, is people will go way out of their way to find something that a union does that is just buisiness as usual for corporations and say "AHA" Union bosses get paid twice as good as the rank and file, yeah, look at CEOs. I could care less about that--but it's interesting that they seek the lowest common denominator for hiring people as does the Bourgeois. What is interesting is that they can't get actual union workers to protest for something that they believe in--they have to HIRE people. What is interesting is that union organizing --is a freakin' business just like any other business. And this protest against WalMart is business as usual. The actual worker gets screwed either way.


At least unions are more democratic, and the good unions do way way outwiegh the couple negative things, and the negative things are considered normal for corporations. Did you write that yourself or just copy some union propaganda?


Saying Meet the new boss same as the old boss when it comes to unions vrs corporations, is like saying that democracies and dictatorships are the same because some democracies have corporal punishment, its rediculous. Not at all--it is saying that unions are another corporation looking to maximize profits by expoliting workers.

And make no mistake about it--the union here is exploiting workers. When companies have unions--the workers have TWO exploiters instead of just one.

[Nolan]

Bud just call it quits. Unions get a horrible rap, but its obvious who the greater evil is.

[¿Que?]

I find John Stewart very funny. To point out that he is not a communist is kind of redundant.
Did anyone here do that?

[Bud Struggle]

Bud just call it quits. Unions get a horrible rap, but its obvious who the greater evil is.

I've a ways said that the best thing in the world would be for WalMart to become unionized. Good for workers and good for the United States.

I just don't think unions like those in the video are worth the time of day.

[#FF0000]

Yeah I actually agree with Bud here. Too many unions have too many bureaucrats who are too friendly with bosses.

[RGacky3]

Or rather they haven't done much good since 1934 (or thereabouts.)


Yes they have ...


What is interesting is that they can't get actual union workers to protest for something that they believe in--they have to HIRE people. What is interesting is that union organizing --is a freakin' business just like any other business. And this protest against WalMart is business as usual. The actual worker gets screwed either way.


I agree, but this is the exception, for unions this is rare and dispicable, when it comes to corporations, its the rule.

I'm not defending them, but this as an argument against unions is rediculous.


Did you write that yourself or just copy some union propaganda?


Wrote it myself. Its the truth Bud.


Not at all--it is saying that unions are another corporation looking to maximize profits by expoliting workers.

And make no mistake about it--the union here is exploiting workers. When companies have unions--the workers have TWO exploiters instead of just one.

Unions are NON-PROFIT.

The Union here is exploiting workers yeah, but not for profit, when comapnies have unions they have a voice, if you don't believe me look at statistics between workplaces with unions and without.

[RGacky3]

Yeah I actually agree with Bud here. Too many unions have too many bureaucrats who are too friendly with bosses.


Fine, but imagen a world without unions, I'm all for holding unions feet to the fire to be fully democratic and representative of workers, but the argue that some fall short, and thus they should'nt exist (i.e. ehhh, just let the rulling class have all the say) is insane.

[#FF0000]

Fine, but imagen a world without unions, I'm all for holding unions feet to the fire to be fully democratic and representative of workers, but the argue that some fall short, and thus they should'nt exist (i.e. ehhh, just let the rulling class have all the say) is insane.

Oh, yeah, absolutely, but some Unions are absolutely awful.

[Ocean Seal]

Oh, yeah, absolutely, but some Unions are absolutely awful.
That's true but unions at least in the United States are meant to reflect the desires of the worker, and in the United States the worker tends to be very reactionary and the unions are only used for the immediate goals of the worker. Changing the workers will change the unions, the workers will soon demand more democracy and less inactive unions. This will change the union hierarchy and will lead to inter-profession cooperation against the bosses hopefully to the extent that there will be mass strikes. I know this outlook seems a bit naive, but its something that we have to hope for because at the moment if we take an anti-union stance and workers leave unions then they will have no defence from the bosses.

[#FF0000]

I never said people should leave unions. They should push for better ones.

[RGacky3]

That's true but unions at least in the United States are meant to reflect the desires of the worker, and in the United States the worker tends to be very reactionary and the unions are only used for the immediate goals of the worker

The American worker tends to be very reactionary? You know this how? Fox News?

The difference between the American worker and say ... European workers is American workers are up against the top economic power in the world, unions work in those circumstances, and many of them are corrupt because of that, but to poopoo the American worker is just ignorant, look at the polls, they are just as progressive as European workers, the difference is the Capitalists in America are way way stronger.


I never said people should leave unions. They should push for better ones.

This is what needs to happen.

[Ele'ill]

That push would perhaps involve a more militant approach- even in dialogue- and would likely get the pacifist drones buzzing and scaring people away from fighting for their life.


We all know that movement building of this type requires leverage- leverage implies that as workers we have something that we can take away or keep from the bosses and 'business' that hurts them/it. Let's stop kidding ourselves for a minute here- most of the union actions in the States are relatively symbolic but not really even that- where does it go from here?

What kind of prospects are there?

Is it that people are happy?

Do they not have guidance?

Are there too many workers trying to win good with their bosses by putting down their coworkers who are fighting for everyone's sake?

[RGacky3]

That push would perhaps involve a more militant approach- even in dialogue- and would likely get the pacifist drones buzzing and scaring people away from fighting for their life.


I doubt it, history shows that strength, when it comes to principled strength, attracts people. Thats why Eugene Debs was so popular, and why the more synical 'pragmatic' socialists were not.

[Ele'ill]

I doubt it, history shows that strength, when it comes to principled strength, attracts people. Thats why Eugene Debs was so popular, and why the more synical 'pragmatic' socialists were not.

In regards to social struggles in the US- in what I'll vaguely label 'current times'- we have seen pacifists side with their political opposites in order to uphold their personal beliefs of nonviolence. This can be seen at any demonstration- anti imperialist 'peace activists' will snitch to law enforcement in regards to those supporing diversity of tactics.

There is a general buzz in the liberal progressive movement that only state violence is acceptable. Police beating picketers is ok- picketers fighting back is not ok. Police gassing demonstrators or brutalizing an 'occupied space' (such as a factory) is widely tolerated and accepted as normal and even suggested appropriate by those (not necessarily the ones being beaten and gassed and brutalize) but those at the opposite end of the political spectrum from the police and the state etc..

If we're going to break this dance cycle where unions essentially work under the authority and within the guidelines set by corporations or workplaces in general then it's going to take a genuine workers struggle- it's not going to be the workers and then the union and then the corporation or whatever.

Most people don't actually think they have to or can sacrifice anything to get what they want- I think it's going to take a lot of sacrifice and a bold first couple moves.


Edit- I would certainly never say this during organizing attempts lol

I do think it's true though- too many people believe the systems they're fighting are the systems they have to work through.

[Ele'ill]

So ultimately what can be done?


What does the left in the States think needs to happen regarding labor?

[RGacky3]

In regards to social struggles in the US- in what I'll vaguely label 'current times'- we have seen pacifists side with their political opposites in order to uphold their personal beliefs of nonviolence. This can be seen at any demonstration- anti imperialist 'peace activists' will snitch to law enforcement in regards to those supporing diversity of tactics.

There is a general buzz in the liberal progressive movement that only state violence is acceptable. Police beating picketers is ok- picketers fighting back is not ok. Police gassing demonstrators or brutalizing an 'occupied space' (such as a factory) is widely tolerated and accepted as normal and even suggested appropriate by those (not necessarily the ones being beaten and gassed and brutalize) but those at the opposite end of the political spectrum from the police and the state etc..

If we're going to break this dance cycle where unions essentially work under the authority and within the guidelines set by corporations or workplaces in general then it's going to take a genuine workers struggle- it's not going to be the workers and then the union and then the corporation or whatever.


I agree, it has to do with lots of liberals being scared to death of the corporate media, who obviously support the ruling classes rules of engagement, so they want to fight the ruling class on their terms.

However the real problem is'nt with the ruling class having a monopoly on violence, in my opinion the problem has been in the past the idea of compromise and being yielding to people that have no intention of yielding anything, unions are told to "be reasonable" and to "not hurt US industry" and they listen, while corporations and the rulling class walk all over them.

But I think thats changing, Unions have started becoming more militant and more outspoken, on the soft left the Obama doctrine and the "New Democrat" philosophy is giving way to the old ALF-CIO/FDR ways, while on the hard left they are abandoning the "new left" and going back to more class struggle politics.

Unions have since Reagen been fighting for survival, and the strategy has been for many years, don't piss off the ruling class, as is by diong that the ruling class will yield to them, it does'nt work, its been proven, and the last nails are being driven in the coffin of that line of thought, what works, what has always worked, and what will work is going on the offensive, don't play the game according to the ruling classes rules, make your own rules, that includes wild cat strikes, taking back forclosed properties, squatting, occupations and so on, it means making DEMANDS, it means taking the fight TO the corporations.

Its not there yet, but its going in that direction.

[Ele'ill]

Any examples in the last few years regarding the shift would be neat too when ever you get a chance.

Perhaps the situation with that fastfood chain is a good example-

What can be done and what is being done in the retail field?

[Revolution starts with U]

Unions become a problem the same way businesses become a problem... when they have bosses.

Dictatorship is bad any time it's tried.

[B0LSHEVIK]

If unions hire people to protest for the workers, then the workers dont deserve to have a union. What kind of shit is that? Hire others to protest, lol, what are they tea-partiers?

American unions are very bourgeois, if not reactionary.

[Bud Struggle]

Yes they have ...[quote] And to the extent they have they've ruined American business. GM was as they say be fore it went bankrupt--a pension plan that made cars on the side. The rust belt is a direct result of both greedy besinessmen AND greedy unions.

[quote]I agree, but this is the exception, for unions this is rare and dispicable, when it comes to corporations, its the rule.

I'm not defending them, but this as an argument against unions is rediculous. OK.


Wrote it myself. Its the truth Bud. :thumbup1:


Unions are NON-PROFIT. You know...that really means nothing.


The Union here is exploiting workers yeah, but not for profit, when comapnies have unions they have a voice, if you don't believe me look at statistics between workplaces with unions and without. It seems to me that Unions are about "workers" as much as the Soviet Union was about "workers."

Unions--at least most of them in the US--have nothing to do with workers getting together and making things better for themselves. Unions are nothing more than talent agents for skilled and unskilled workers. They get they workers a bit more of this and that from management, to be sure, but for the most part they are in business to get their lemos and lunches and to be big power brokers giving piles of money to the Democratic Party.

The union in the video like most unions aren't in it to help the workers--because if they wanted to do that THEY WOULD HELP THE WORKERS. Nope, they are in it to expand their power base.

[RGacky3]

And to the extent they have they've ruined American business. GM was as they say be fore it went bankrupt--a pension plan that made cars on the side. The rust belt is a direct result of both greedy besinessmen AND greedy unions.



How was it a result of greedy unions??? Most people agree that what made GM collapse was a bad buisiness plan, not that workers had it too good. People did'nt buy GM cars because they were too expensive (which would have been the result if it was the unions driving down profits), they did'nt buy them because other cars were better.



You know...that really means nothing.



It means they are non profit, meaning .... no profit.


It seems to me that Unions are about "workers" as much as the Soviet Union was about "workers."


Except in the soviet Union the workers had no direct control over the state, Unions are directly accountable to the workers, and apart for a few of them, most of them live up to that.

Unions are way way more democratic than the United States government.


but for the most part they are in business to get their lemos and lunches and to be big power brokers giving piles of money to the Democratic Party.


How many Union Bosses are there in the FOrtune 500???


Unions--at least most of them in the US--have nothing to do with workers getting together and making things better for themselves. Unions are nothing more than talent agents for skilled and unskilled workers. They get they workers a bit more of this and that from management, to be sure

For Unions that are fully democratic, there is no distinction between the workers and the unions, what the union does is what the workers want it to do.


The union in the video like most unions aren't in it to help the workers--because if they wanted to do that THEY WOULD HELP THE WORKERS. Nope, they are in it to expand their power base.

THe workers they represent ARE their power base. The Unions power base IS the workers power base.

Remember the union in the video is protesting Walmarts union busting, its a good cause, they are using shitty tactics yeah, but what they are doing is positive.


Unions become a problem the same way businesses become a problem... when they have bosses.

Dictatorship is bad any time it's tried.

EXACTLY, Most Unions, even in the US are still way more democratic than most institutions including the state.


Any examples in the last few years regarding the shift would be neat too when ever you get a chance.



Examples would be the AFL-CIO braking with the mainstream democrats, growth of the UNITE and IWW unions, and other more radical unions, groups like the SEIU taking more principled stances rather than pragmatic ones (i.e. fighting corporate AMerica as a whole rather than just one off fights).

You have Unions organizing the Unemployed.

All of these things show a shift, a small one, but noticable.

[Lt. Ferret]

did the hired protestors get the full value of their labor, and did they democratically get to decide how the protest would go, or even how they would be treated within the union's parameters while working?