I don't come here to answer your stupid loaded questions. Use your own answers like you always to do. You're not looking for information. You are asking questions that are either trying to make me look bad or make you look good. Anyone with an ounce to sense can see through that.
In case you missed an earlier post from another member. Take another look at this. So the union's position is "if workers choose not to join us, then destroy the workers' company and their jobs"? These are the people that the American worker wants representing them?!?!. I've seen some pretty disgusting things about the unions, but this takes the cake. Basically they are saying, "Hell, if they won't join us, it's WAR, KILL 'EM"
Look at what esteemed union leadership has to say:
"If we can't organize [nonunion supermarkets]" ,says Tom McNutt, president of Local 400 of the UFCW, "fhe best thing to do is to erode their business as much as possible." This is the slash-and-burn theory driving UFCW's political-style PR offensive against Wal-Mart. Because the union has failed to organize workers at the chain, its leaders want to harm the company's bottom line and its employees.
"Organizing is war", according to longtime UFCW leader Joe Crump, and that means harassing nonunion employers and "costing them enough time and energy and money to either eliminate them or get them to surrender to the union". He added that employers must be made to "pay for operating nonunion". In an article titled "The Pressure is On: Organizing Without the NLRB," Crump wrote:
After a three-year struggle, the battle with Family Foods is over. Do we represent the employees? No. The company went out of business ... Perhaps even more important is the message that had been sent to nonunion competitors: There is no "free lunch" in our jurisdiction. Speaking about the same campaign, former UFCW president Doug Dority argued that his union "must either reduce these chains' market share ... or we must put them out of business. There is no other option."
Re: Union?
There is 1 reply to this message
