Skip to main content

The Organizers

I've been shaking my head over The News-Gazette's editorial from last week regarding the Chicago teacher's strike. It's not that I disagree with their overall negative opinion of the strike (I mean, I do, but it's ok to disagree). No, what upsets me most is that the N-G engages in what has become a national pastime of late: union bashing. It's not that unions aren't without fault, just that their faults are common among other organizations, yet unions are often uniquely on the chopping block because of their issues.

Take, for example, the following passage from the aforementioned editorial:

The Chicago school district is in debt by roughly $1 billion, and now it's agreed to spend another $74 million. How can the city do that? 
It can't, and that's why the Emanuel administration already has leaked stories to the news media that indicate the school board will close more than 100 schools. That, of course, raises a question routinely addressed to union leaders — how are they serving their members' interests when they negotiate salary and benefit increases that result in management having to lay off some union members to pay more to other union members.

I've bolded the portion that sticks in my craw the most. It's not that the question posed is a bad one. It's not necessarily out of line. Simply put, it's a question rarely posed to other organizations. Take, for example, the ongoing list of companies that have used this very same strategy in order to shore-up their finances and survive: Best Buy, Yahoo!, Motorola, HP, Verizon, Johnson & Johnson, American Airlines, Bank of America, etc. The list goes on.

It's not that cutting jobs while also increasing pay & benefits for remaining employees is a particularly great thing. That's certainly a debatable strategy. But it's also a very common business practice. So common, in fact, that I'm surprised to see a newspaper editorial singling it out. Then again, this is an editorial about a union, and so everything's fair game. Unions seem to make good boogeymen of late.

Take, for example, an anti-union argument I've often heard. It goes something like: 'Employees at [x business/organization] don't have a choice. They're put into the union, and that's it.' This is brought up as some sort of hideous infringement upon workers' freedoms. And perhaps it is. But, again, it's common. It's a rule of certain organizations. I suppose that, if you don't like the rule, you can opt not to work there. That's your freedom of choice. Most places of employment have a certain set of rules by which you must abide (health care provider & payroll deductions, pay rates, job responsibilities, etc). At some places, 'being under a union' is a rule like any other.

I dunno. As stated earlier, unions aren't without their faults. I'm not here to argue that unions are perfect, or that they're a fit for every type of organization. I am here to argue that they shouldn't be singled-out when it comes to discussing their pros and cons. Unions do, after all, exist for a reason, and are dismissed often at one's own folly.


Popular posts from this blog

If You Could Read My Mind

Dance clubs are a funny thing. They contain within their walls a life force and vibrancy sometimes unmatched anywhere else. When dusk settles and the lights come on, people will flood the dance floors to gyrate to music with hypnotic beats and songs about love, lust and fun at the disco. At gay bars, this sort of scenario usually increases ten-fold. It isn't for everyone, but for many it is a respite from the harsh realities of the real word. It is a place that isn't just a structure, but a sanctuary where folks -- minorities in their own communities -- can take shelter and unwind with abandon, at least for a few nighttime hours.
As someone who benefited greatly from such an aforementioned gay dance club, you can imagine my dismay at news of the closing of Chester Street Bar. In business for over three decades, gay-owned and operated, there was a time when C-Street (as it was known by most) was the only haven for those in the LGBT community, near and far, to enjoy themselves …

Third Death

My father has had three funerals. The third (though perhaps not final) one, was last night.
In reality, Lewis died in 1997. Cancer. Aged 52. He had a real funeral. I was there. The next two funerals occurred only in my dreams, yet they seemed real at the time, and their impact during the waking hours was keenly felt.
You see, during the intervening nineteen years, Lewis has come back to life in my dreams, many times. It is more than simply having a dream about him. During these nighttime images, it is noted that Lewis shouldn't be there, that he died of cancer and is resting six feet under. How, then, could he be alive and, seemingly, healthy?

Thoughts on an Election

Before I get started on the ruminations of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election, I'll begin by saying I really have no clue as to who our next president will be. I've always fretted over the outcome of elections, regardless of the polls, and this year is no different. Especially this year. A good case can be made as to why Hillary Clinton will become our 45th president. All one has to do is look at the polls. Clinton has a comfortable lead in many states, enough to make one think that she will win handily on November 8th.
Of course, polls can be wrong. 538 gives Clinton's changes of winning in the low-mid 80 percent range. Several polls would seem to agree. Many Republicans are jumping ship from Trump. The race looks over. But of course, humanity isn't as easily predictable as polling would have us believe. Things happen. People can surprise us. And, for better or worse, I think that Donald Trump may very well become our next president.