In response to:

What the Looming Port Strike Is Really About

bachcole Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 2:41 PM
As much as I enjoy reading Michelle Malkin and usually agree with her, I suspect that if we sat down and chatted with the Union bosses that we would get an entirely different story. I also suspect that it would be just as slanted as Ms. Malkin's piece here is.
FletchforFreedom Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 3:55 PM
You fail to note a key difference. Based on all past experience, the union bosses' story would be fictional.
bachcole Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 4:26 PM
You are just as biased as they are.
MadisonWannabe Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 8:42 PM
My experience with the three unions I was forced to join just to have a job is that they do nothing but raise the price of goods and services and confiscate money from others. Why in the world would a high school student have to join a union at a grocery store in order to have a part time job bagging groceries? It was a minimum wage job for a legal minor. All the union did was confiscate my pay while state and federal laws covered what I could and could not do.
FletchforFreedom Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 9:49 PM
The word you're looking for is "informed". It is an economic fact that unions are economically devastating.
bachcole Wrote: Dec 22, 2012 12:05 AM
It's not about jobs. It's not about safety. It's not about improving dockworkers' living standards. The looming, long-planned East and Gulf Coast port strikes are about protecting Big Labor's archaic work practices and corrupt waterfront rackets.

Are you ready for a fiscal cliff? The union bosses of an estimated 14,500 workers at 15 ports are preparing to send the economy plunging back into recession over productivity and efficiency rules changes. You read that right. Much more on that in a moment. But first, here's what's at stake.

The International Longshoremen's Association's (ILA) grip extends from Boston to Texas to Florida and all points...

Related Tags: Labor Unions strike ports