Can Unions Save The Middle Class?

[pBills]

I'm guessing that in your slams of WalMart, you recognize its roots in very rural Americana. You recognize its mission to bring low priced goods to areas that historically didn't have low price alternatives to people who are/were far below national averages in earnings. You recognize that it brought jobs to areas that never had jobs.

 

Funny is that people who criticize WalMart are the ones who wouldn't work at a WalMart, nor dare shop at one.

 

I don't and wouldn't shop there because they are very anti-union and are known for crushing small communities.

[pBills]

And union tactics are limited to "pretty-please with sugar on it."

 

Intimidation happens on both sides. The Employee Free Choice Act will do nothing but generate more misinformation and threats from both sides.

 

And considering that employees have state and federal legal protections from employer malfeasance, whereas unions are almost completely unregulated, who do you think is going to become proportionally more abusive?

 

(Yeah, I know. You think the employers will. A sane person would realize this opens the door to far more union abuse.)

 

Unregulated? What's that? Oh that's the DOL. Who are CONSTANTLY in the face of unions scrutinizing every little detail. Which is fine with me.

 

When I receive this new study on intimidation tactics (for both sides. I am sure you'll be amazed and not believe the results.

[ExiledInIllinois]

I'm guessing that in your slams of WalMart, you recognize its roots in very rural Americana. You recognize its mission to bring low priced goods to areas that historically didn't have low price alternatives to people who are/were far below national averages in earnings. You recognize that it brought jobs to areas that never had jobs.

 

Funny is that people who criticize WalMart are the ones who wouldn't work at a WalMart, nor dare shop at one.

 

 

The only problem I have with Wal-Mart is that they "low-ball" to the extreme and then their employees are foisted (often times to the suggestion and approval by Wal-Mart) off on the social welfare system.

 

To me that is a problem... A major problem. Why even have Wal-Mart? It seems they are causing most of the problem with dishonorable tactics.

 

Consumers don't need "quantity", they need "quality." I just don't see any good end game outcome... Except a growing underclass (quite the opposite what Wal-Mart believes models their misson statement around). Wal-Mart's spin would make Leopold II of Belgium proud!

[pBills]

The only problem I have with Wal-Mart is that they "low-ball" to the extreme and then their employees are foisted (often times to the suggestion and approval by Wal-Mart) off on the social welfare system.

 

To me that is a problem... A major problem. Why even have Wal-Mart? It seems they are causing most of the problem with dishonorable tactics.

 

Consumers don't need "quantity", they need "quality." I just don't see any good end game outcome... Except a growing underclass (quite the opposite what Wal-Mart believes models their misson statement around). Wal-Mart's spin would make Leopold II of Belgium proud!

 

 

[AlaskaDarin_Has_AIDS]

ACORN and labor unions are going to be the downfall of this country.

[finknottle]

ACORN and labor unions are going to be the downfall of this country.

 

Here is how it works:

 

ACORN is contracted by a union to do a signature drive. The collect signed sheets and turn them in - you know ACORN, they are remarkably good at that. Thanks to card check, the union is automatically formed and considered to be representing the employees as of that moment.

 

You look at the list (don't ask me how you get your hands on it) and see your name there - hey, you didn't sign! Looks like ACORN had another 'oops!' moment. Ok, who do you go to? Your union rep?

 

So maybe you brave the retributions of your new shop steward and complain to management. They file a complaint with the NLB. The NLB considers the accusation and decides whether or not it is worth investigating - it is their decision. If they do, you'll have the national union actively taking up the case against you to preserve their inroad. That can get ugly for you - they know where you live and are permitted to 'lobby' you outside of the workplace. On the other hand, the NLB may implicitely take ACORN's side and set it's sights on management instead, investigating whether they are coercing employees to disavow their signatures.

 

But I'm guessing they will do nothing. Remember, this is organization whose funding was slashed in order to account for all of the Department of Labor's cuts under Obama's line-by-line budget dictum. Their marching orders are clear.

[StupidNation]

The only problem I have with Wal-Mart is that they "low-ball" to the extreme and then their employees are foisted (often times to the suggestion and approval by Wal-Mart) off on the social welfare system.

 

To me that is a problem... A major problem. Why even have Wal-Mart? It seems they are causing most of the problem with dishonorable tactics.

 

Consumers don't need "quantity", they need "quality." I just don't see any good end game outcome... Except a growing underclass (quite the opposite what Wal-Mart believes models their misson statement around). Wal-Mart's spin would make Leopold II of Belgium proud!

 

What this guy said...

 

I would also like to add that they help destroy the dollar as well with "free trade" (managed trade) with a country that purposely devalues its currency to increase the trade imbalance. I'm not a big fan of "free trade", but even if I was and I've heard free-traders think Wal-Mart is great, but how is monetary manipulation part of free-trade? Never understood it.

[pBills]

Here is how it works:

 

ACORN is contracted by a union to do a signature drive. The collect signed sheets and turn them in - you know ACORN, they are remarkably good at that. Thanks to card check, the union is automatically formed and considered to be representing the employees as of that moment.

 

You look at the list (don't ask me how you get your hands on it) and see your name there - hey, you didn't sign! Looks like ACORN had another 'oops!' moment. Ok, who do you go to? Your union rep?

 

So maybe you brave the retributions of your new shop steward and complain to management. They file a complaint with the NLB. The NLB considers the accusation and decides whether or not it is worth investigating - it is their decision. If they do, you'll have the national union actively taking up the case against you to preserve their inroad. That can get ugly for you - they know where you live and are permitted to 'lobby' you outside of the workplace. On the other hand, the NLB may implicitely take ACORN's side and set it's sights on management instead, investigating whether they are coercing employees to disavow their signatures.

 

But I'm guessing they will do nothing. Remember, this is organization whose funding was slashed in order to account for all of the Department of Labor's cuts under Obama's line-by-line budget dictum. Their marching orders are clear.

 

 

Wow, you know a lot about unions.

[IDBillzFan]

So I'm watching the local news last night as California's propositions got their assses kicked from Tulake to Calexico. It was pretty much determined that they wouldn't pass when word was released that Arnold left the state yesterday to stand by our president's side as they announced that in 8 years everyone will be driving clown cars.

 

At the end of the report from Washington, the newscaster commented that Arnold would be staying in Washington to meet with Obama this morning in hopes of getting his stimulus money freed up. For those who need a refresher course, one of Arnold's budget cuts was a salary decrease of $2/hour for California union workers; specifically SEIU. Naturally, SEIU cried about this to Obama, who took millions from SEIU for his campaign, and in return, Obama put a gun to Arnold's head and told him "Give SEIU their money back or you won't get your $6.8 billion in stimulus money."

 

I suspect we're about to find out who has the nutsack. I am hoping Arnold tells Obama and SEIU to kiss his ass, but any one who follows California politics knows that Arnold is no more a Republican than Arlen Specter, so I suspect we will see SEIU get its way, forcing Arnold to find another way to cut $74 million from the budget. Or maybe Obama will just give California an extra $74 million for this year to make the issue go away.

 

Either way, I expect it to be a particularly interesting decision. Stay tuned.

[GG]

I don't and wouldn't shop there because they are very anti-union and are known for crushing small communities.

 

I'm sure you have a bevvy of evidence backing this up.

[pBills]

I'm sure you have a bevvy of evidence backing this up.

 

 

Dude it's well known that Walmart goes into small towns and gobbles up the hometown businesses who can't beat their pricing. Importing in such high volumes from China has it's benefits.

[pBills]

SUPPORT THE FREE CHOICE ACT

[GG]

Dude it's well known that Walmart goes into small towns and gobbles up the hometown businesses who can't beat their pricing. Importing in such high volumes from China has it's benefits.

 

Again, how is WalMart crushing small communities?

[pBills]

Again, how is WalMart crushing small communities?

 

 

Crushing hometown businesses

Low wages - usually below poverty line. Which of course means less money within the community

Gaining of ridiculous subsidies - small local governments told that they would not come to the area unless the city/town pays for all alterations with infrastructure (streets, parking lots, etc.)

Many cases of breaking environmental laws

Many buildings left vacant upon deciding to create a superstore. Often buying larger buildings across or down the street instead converting the existing store.

[erynthered]

I DO NOT SUPPORT THE FREE CHOICE ACT

 

Good for you!

[GG]

Crushing hometown businesses

Low wages - usually below poverty line. Which of course means less money within the community

Gaining of ridiculous subsidies - small local governments told that they would not come to the area unless the city/town pays for all alterations with infrastructure (streets, parking lots, etc.)

Many cases of breaking environmental laws

Many buildings left vacant upon deciding to create a superstore. Often buying larger buildings across or down the street instead converting the existing store.

 

Now, instead of copying scare tactics from your local steward, how about real life examples of these crumbling communities? Links? Pictures? Cause & Effect?

[IDBillzFan]

Crushing hometown businesses

Low wages - usually below poverty line. Which of course means less money within the community

Gaining of ridiculous subsidies - small local governments told that they would not come to the area unless the city/town pays for all alterations with infrastructure (streets, parking lots, etc.)

Many cases of breaking environmental laws

Many buildings left vacant upon deciding to create a superstore. Often buying larger buildings across or down the street instead converting the existing store.

You know what would fix that? If Wal-Mart employees belonged to a union.

[pBills]

Good for you!

 

 

Wow, someone is cool.

[pBills]

Now, instead of copying scare tactics from your local steward, how about real life examples of these crumbling communities? Links? Pictures? Cause & Effect?

 

 

Sorry, I do not have a Shop Steward. I work for an International. Some facts:

 

 

* The most comprehensive study of Wal-Mart's impact showed that the stores reduced earnings per person by 5 percent. This 2005 study by an economist from the National Bureau of Economic Research used Wal-Mart's own store data and government data for all counties where Wal-Mart has operated for 30 years, It found that the average Wal-Mart store reduces earnings per person by 5 percent in the county in which it operates. [David Neumark, The Effects of Wal-Mart on Local Labor Markets 2005]

 

* According to a 2003 estimate, the influx of big-box stores into San Diego would result in an annual decline in wages and benefits which could cost the area up to $221 million [san Diego Taxpayers Association (SDCTA), 2003]

 

* When an employer pays low wages to its employees, the employees have less money to spend on goods and services in the community, which in turn reduces the income and spending of others in the community. In other words a reduction in wages has a multiplier impact in the surrounding area.

 

* For instance, in 1999, Southern California municipalities estimated that for every dollar decrease in wages in the southern California economy, $2.08 in spending was lost-- the $1 decrease plus another $1.08 in indirect multiplier impacts. ["The Impact of Big Box Grocers in Southern California" Dr. Marlon Boarnet and Dr. Randall Crane, 1999.]

 

* In Maine, existing businesses lost over 10 percent of their market in 80 percent of the towns where Wal-Mart opened stores. [Georgeanne Artz And James McConnon, The Impact of Wal-Mart on Host Towns and Surrounding Communities in Maine, 2001]

 

* Food stores in Mississippi lost 17 percent of their sales by the fifth year after a Wal-Mart Supercenter had come into their county, and retail stores lost 9 percent of their sales [Kenneth Stone and Georgeanne Artz, The Economic Impact of a Wal-Mart Supercenter on Existing Businesses in Mississippi, 2002]

 

* Over the course of [a few years after Wal-Mart entered a community], retailers' sales of apparel dropped 28% on average, hardware sales fell by 20%, and sales of specialty stores fell by 17%. [Kenneth Stone at Iowa State University, "Impact of the Wal-Mart Phenomenon on Rural Communities," 1997]

 

* In towns without Wal-Marts that are close to towns with Wal-Marts, sales in general merchandise declined immediately after Wal-Mart stores opened. After ten years, sales declined by a cumulative 34%. [Kenneth Stone at Iowa State University, "Impact of the Wal-Mart Phenomenon on Rural Communities," 1997]

 

* Between 2003 and 2005, state and federal environmental agencies fined Wal-Mart $5 million.

 

* In 2005, Wal-Mart reached a $1.15 million settlement with the State of Connecticut for allowing improperly stored pesticides and other pollutants to pollute streams. This was the largest such settlement in state history. [Hartford Courant, 8/16/05]

 

* In May 2004, Wal-Mart agreed to pay the largest settlement for stormwater violations in EPA history. The United States sued Wal-mart for violating the Clean Water Act in 9 states, calling for penalties of over $3.1 million and changes to Wal-Mart's building practices. [u.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 12, 2004, U.S. v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., 2004 WL 2370700]

 

* In 2004, Wal-Mart was fined $765,000 for violating Florida's petroleum storage tank laws at its automobile service centers. Wal-Mart failed to register its fuel tanks, failed to install devices that prevent overflow, did not perform monthly monitoring, lacked current technologies, and blocked state inspectors. [Associated Press, 11/18/04]

 

* In Georgia, Wal-Mart was fined about $150,000 in 2004 for water contamination. [Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 2/10/05]

 

* Wal-Mart's rapid expansion of Supercenters and Sam's Clubs has contributed to hundreds of vacant stores across the country. ["Wal Mart site: Use as is or rebuild?", Dallas Morning News, 2/20/02]

 

* When Wal-Mart decides to convert a discount store into a larger Supercenter, it is often cheaper or easier simply to relocate entirely. David Brennan, associate professor of marketing at the University of St. Thomas, in St. Paul, Minn, noted that Wal-Mart stores relocate so regularly that, "it is not uncommon to relocate right across the street." ["Home Depot to Move from Old to New Store Next Door," Providence News-Journal, 8/17/03]

 

* Also Wal-Mart often resists other large retail stores moving in. A president of a major real estate developer in Dallas said in 2002, "They're not going to be very receptive to any retailer going into it and even if they sell it, they might put a non- compete clause in there." As one Wal-Mart spokesperson said in 2004, "There are times when it's in our interest to get the property moving faster, but we're certainly not going to give a competitor an advantage." [Dallas Morning News 2/20/02, Wall Street Journal, 9/15/04]

 

* Wal-Mart planned to build another 60 million square feet of store space in 2006, or roughly the equivalent of 1,040 football fields or 16 Pentagon buildings. [Wal-Mart Stores, Twelfth Annual Analysts' Meeting, FD (Fair Disclosure) Wire October 25, 2005]

[IDBillzFan]

Obama gets it right. Backs off gun-to-the-head to take care of his union and will give CA its stimulus money.