Free Choice Act is good for workers

Free Choice Act is good for workers

There are 8 comments on the Berkshire Eagle story from Jan 13, 2009, titled Free Choice Act is good for workers. In it, Berkshire Eagle reports that:

Matt Kinnaman's column on the Dec. 31 op-ed page was, as he acknowledged, based on Richard Ebeling's article published by the American Institute for Economic Research.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Berkshire Eagle.

Sanity

Albany, NY

#1 Jan 13, 2009
Wow.

Terrific piece of Propaganda, Mr. Croghan.

All magagement a just a bunch of liars, but you are not the union boss, you are just 'Bob'.

Terrific piece of Propaganda, Mr. Croghan, I will definitely give you that. The Berkshire Eagle crowd will undoubtedly eat it up, ask for seconds, and then demand thirds.

Feel the Hatred. Spread the Hatred.

It's Union 'yes', or else.

Don't tolerate dissent.

Worker's of the world, Unite.

Sieg Obama.

Have a good day.
sally

New York, NY

#2 Jan 13, 2009
There is a resaon why unions are needed in this country. Too many employers take advantage of their employees, giving them low pay, with few benefits while they live high on the hog. The employees who work hard to make you all that money should receieve a bigger portion of the profits than most employers willingly give up.
This only breads hate and disrespect.
I though this letters we terrific!
Maybe if employers dont want unions to come into their business, they can start taking better care of the employees.
Brian in MA - not MN

Minneapolis, MN

#3 Jan 13, 2009
Of course Matt Kinnaman and the conservative think tank AIER(located in Great Barrington, of all places! Does Bill O'Reilly know that?!?!) are opposed to worker's rights and unionization. They are republicans, and the GOP has a long antagonistic history with the labor movement. Is anyone surprised?

At least their views were given a forum in the Berkshire Eagle, so please remember that, all you conservatives out there who regularly bash the supposedly "liberal" viewpoint of the Eagle's editorial pages.
DDermyer

South Hadley, MA

#4 Jan 13, 2009
Somehow Mr. Croghan misses the point. The idea isn't to make unionization easier but to maintain fairness. If the reports about the ill named bill and that it will do away with secret ballots, then the bill is a scam and so is Mr. Croghan. I'm all for fairness and if a group wants to unionize so be it (It will parobably be to their long term determinate but oh well). But the votes must be by secret ballot.

I saw union activites where the 'fix' was in. Two hundred union memebers crowded into a venue where only about 120 could be seated. When the time can to vote to authorize a strke, the Union President call for all who wanted to strike to stand up!!! Surprise, surpirse. There were already almost 80 people standing so how do you think the vote went. Five months later, the stike ended with the same offer that was on the table when that meeting took place was agreed to. Secret ballot is an important safeguard for all.

If other parts of the process need to be revised, they should be discussed without the secret ballot proposal.
Sarah C

Northville, NY

#5 Jan 13, 2009
sally wrote:
There is a resaon why unions are needed in this country. Too many employers take advantage of their employees, giving them low pay, with few benefits while they live high on the hog. The employees who work hard to make you all that money should receieve a bigger portion of the profits than most employers willingly give up.
This only breads hate and disrespect.
I though this letters we terrific!
Maybe if employers dont want unions to come into their business, they can start taking better care of the employees.
Baseless class warfare on your part sally.

Obama's promise for $3000 for each new job created? Dead. So much for "union loving" Democrats. The party of the people doesn't care about the workers, just their votes when they need them.
Cincinnatus

Northampton, MA

#6 Jan 15, 2009
Job killer. Use your Soviet style methods well.
Charlie

Columbia, SC

#7 Jan 15, 2009
I can't understand what is wrong with a secret ballot?
sally

Gansevoort, NY

#8 Jan 15, 2009
Sarah C wrote:
<quoted text>
Baseless class warfare on your part sally.
Obama's promise for $3000 for each new job created? Dead. So much for "union loving" Democrats. The party of the people doesn't care about the workers, just their votes when they need them.
We know what the "c" stands for in your name!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chatham Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Monster Head Kambrich says Good Attempts om 10g... Sep 18 Mellow 1
News GE cuts salaried workers in Schenectady Sep 17 old engineer 3
Frank Coppola breaks favorite in third race for... Sep 15 Chalk Stiff 2
Andrea Leonardo (Sep '16) Sep 5 Assntitties 2
News No longer on a pedestal: New York debates Chris... Sep 5 KcBayside 3
blow me (Apr '16) Sep 1 homo 2
Sharon Mesick (May '09) Feb '15 Frank 34

Chatham Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chatham Mortgages