Andy Stern, who on Friday confirmed his retirement as president of the Services Employee International Union, partakes in a Q&A in today’s Washington Post. Most interesting passage for our manufacturing audience:
EK: It seems like you’re saying that the labor movement itself needs to be less employer-based.
AS: I think the labor movement needs to be more industry-based, more sectoral-based, and more focused on the needs of workers. I don’t think it can be simply as based on work site by work site, work rule by work rule, as opposed to industry by industry.
. . . I do feel like trying to figure out how to partner with employers, appreciating that it takes two to tango, is important. Our work has always been best when we try to make our employers successful and we share in that success.
Eh. In this forum, Stern wants to appear reasonable, but the demands of the government-employee unions have helped bring California to its economic knees. The public-sector unions showed no interest in partnering with the taxpayers, who are, after all, their employees.
And the Employee Free Choice Act represents the antithesis of the “partnering” approach, instead being intended to impose union representation on unwilling employers and employees alike.
Latest posts by Carter Wood (see all)
- Farewell from a Blogger - May 25, 2011
- Activist Ignore Evidence to Back Shakedown Suit Against Chevron - May 25, 2011
- More than a Lawsuit: A Circle of Political Pressure Against Chevron - May 25, 2011