"Stan de SD" > wrote in message
.net...
>
> "Alex Russell" > wrote in message
> news
rQxc.12808$Dr.11373@edtnps84...
> > "Stan de SD" > wrote in message
> > news
> > >
> > > "Dan Clore" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
> > > >
> > > > Starbucks Obstructing First US Union Vote
> > > > posted by IU/660 on Tuesday June 01 2004 @ 11:44AM PDT
> > > > June 1, 2004
> > > > Contact:
> > > > Starbucks Obstructing First US Union Vote
> > > >
> > > > Workers to Schultz: What are you so scared of?
> > > >
> > > > New York, NY--The Starbucks Baristas Union and community
> > > > members across the country have condemned repeated attempts
> > > > by the company to deny workers a fair vote on the Union.
> > > > While paying lip-service to respecting the choice of
> > > > employees, Starbucks has deployed a variety of crude tactics
> > > > in an effort to defeat the IWW IU/660, which would be the
> > > > first union certified in the United States at the mammoth chain.
> > > >
> > > > Supporters around the country and internationally are
> > > > contacting Starbucks demanding they live up to their
> > > > rhetoric. If Starbucks really is a bastion of worker
> > > > benefits, what is Chairman Howard Schultz, who raked in over
> > > > $17 million last year, so scared of? The truth is Starbucks,
> > > > with its poverty wages and rampant repetitive-stress
> > > > dangers, resembles a sweatshop more than it does a decent
> > > > place to work.
> > >
> > > Yeah, and all those 20-something college-age Americans are being
forced
> to
> > > work there against their will, right? I guess YOU would think it's a
> > > sweatshop, given that you strike me as the type of feminized, spoiled
> > > cry-baby who has never held a real job one day in his life.
> > >
> > > Tell us, Dan Clore, self-appointed "voice" of the workers -
> > > what in the hell do YOU do for a living?
> > >
> > Can't come up with a real argument so you want to shoot the messenger?
>
> Came up with an argument that when right over your little head. Nobody is
> being forced to work at Starbucks, McDonalds, Wal-Mart, or whatever
> corporate villian du juor that grabs the attention of Clore & Co. on a
given
> day. If you think the company sucks, quit and work somewhere else. If you
> think that all companies suck, start your OWN business and exploit
yourself.
>
> All the people whining and crying about the afforementioned companies act
> like the people who work there are being deprived of alternatives
somewhere
> else, when they aren't. If they aren't pulling down $100K/year with
> benefits, it's not because some retail/fast-food chain is holding them
> hostage and keeping them from working at Microsoft - it's because they
> simply lack the job skills to do better. Given that education is free
until
> 12th grade, and community colleges are ubiquitous and still relatively
> cheap, whose damn fault is it when somebody refuses to take advantage of
the
> educational opportunities available in this country and can't do better
than
> flipping burgers and working a computerized cash register?
>
>
So you think unions should be outlawed? Why shouldn't employees be allowed
to unionize?
The only problem I have with unions are the "closed shop" rules, but of
course the unions wouldn't have much power without those rules.
I don't like the closed shop rules as they infringe a lot on a person's
right to enter into contracts. I also don't like having unions use members
dues to promote policies that many members disagree with, eg political
contributions.
And I still fail to see how insulting Dan furthers your own arguments. It is
possible for people to hold different opinions, and yet respect each other.
--
Alex Russell