Unions have out lived their purpose. They have become a dinosaur just begging for a new ice age. Which is sure to come if they continue to operate with their current mind set. Have you noticed how they seem to always go on strike at the most opportune moment when the industry they operate in is the most vulnerable? The idiots need their butts kicked. If the old Professional Air Traffic Controller's Organization (PATCO) had still existed they would probably have gone on strike the day after September 11th. But because they misjudged the political sentiment of the nation in 1981, the Reagon Administration kicked their butts and fired over 11,000 federal employees. The ILWU represents 10,500 dockworkers at 29 major Pacific ports and are depriving many more than that number from doing their jobs because of the lock-out. The attacks of 9/11 on the twin towers was an effort to not only destroy lives but also to disrupt our financial infrastructure and bring our economy to its knees. This is a part of the terrorist agenda for which all of us are now paying. If in fact the ILWU lockout is costing a billion dollars a day in loses to our economy then can this not also be considered a terrorist act? As Bush put it, "If they are not with us then they are for the terrorists." I, along with thousands of others, have been out of work for over a year now. The going salaries for many hi-tech positions, if you can find one, are down by 50% or more from the year 2000. Now the ILWU wants to oppose hi-tech job creation because they fear some may lose their jobs. With the current sentiment in this country all 10,500 of them stand to lose their jobs. It's time we took away their union crutch and make them compete for jobs in the open market like the rest of us. May the best man win? -Lyle sugahara@private wrote: > > First off, thanks for everyone's feedback and discussion on the issue > of technology in the state. It was a great discussion and it was great > to see some new posters out here. > > This is a little off topic in terms of crime, but it does have specific > implications for the technology industry. > > It seems to me that the entire problem with the lockout hinges with the > potential elimination of union jobs (data entry) through the use of > technology. The issue is for the union is the loss of those jobs. > However, they want to ensure that any technology jobs that are created > are included in the union. This brings up the question: would a union > be good and/or necessary for jobs in the technology field?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 03:18:49 PDT