Unions are good; business is bad.
April 21, 2011 - 9:30 am
Thus spake the Obama Administration.
The Boeing [Aircraft] Company, having experienced a number of disruptive strikes at its assembly plant in the Puget Sound area, decided to open a new, non-union, facility in South Carolina rather than a new unionized facility at Puget Sound. Boeing had made its intentions known to the relevant unions. By an order issued on April 20, the National Labor Relations Board directed Boeing Aircraft to show cause why it should not be ordered
to have the Unit operate its second line of 787 Dreamliner aircraft assembly production in the State of Washington, utilizing supply lines maintained by the Unit in the Seattle, Washington, and Portland, Oregon, area facilities.
That’s cool; it what the National Librul Reinforcement Board is for under the Obama Administration. Labor unions are Democrat Party supporters good and those selfish fat cat business goons are just horrid Republican meanies, trying to gouge the poor, hardworking but still hungry labor union members. Want proof? Just ask any beneficent labor union thug leader. That’s why private sector unions have grown so well in recent years.
Union density (or the “unionization rate”), the number of workers who are members of unions as a percentage of total employment, has been declining in the United States for over half a century. The share of U.S. workers in unions peaked in 1954, at just over one fourth of employed workers. For nonagricultural workers, the high-water mark—at more than one third of employed workers—came even earlier, in 1945. It would reach nearly the same percentage again in the early 1950s, before beginning a long and virtually uninterrupted decline.By 2010, the unionization rate for employed workers was less than 12%. The percentage would be even lower were it not for increasing unionization among public-sector workers since the 1960s. For employed private-sector workers, the unionization rate is now less than 7%.
As noted in the disgustingly conservative New York Times,
It is highly unusual for the federal government to seek to reverse a corporate decision as important as the location of plant.But ever since a Democratic majority took control of the five-member board after Mr. Obama’s election, the board has signaled that it would seek to adopt a more liberal, pro-union tilt after years of pro-employer decisions under President Bush.
Hey dude, President Won Obama won the presidential election and now he’s the boss. Elections have consequences except when they shouldn’t.
However, the selfish fat cats at Boeing
criticized the timing of the N.L.R.B.’s complaint, saying it came when construction of the factory in North Charleston, S.C., was nearly complete and after 1,000 employees had already been hired there.Boeing said on Wednesday that none of the production jobs in South Carolina had come at the expense of jobs in Washington. It noted that its unionized employment in the Puget Sound area had increased by 2,000 since it announced its decision to expand in South Carolina.
The company also said it had decided to expand in South Carolina in part to protect business continuity and to reduce the damage to its finances and reputation from future work stoppages.
It’s only meet and proper that Boeing should be forced to provide additional opportunities for more strikes by opening a new plant and hiring additional union employees. That’s what unions are for. Since the one thousand workers already hired by Boeing in South Carolina aren’t union members, tough luck for them. They had better learn some things, fast.
And now for some shameless promotion, here’s a great choice for President. Grumpy the Clown will deal with these and other problems far better than the incumbent.