By JosephineDoody on 02-06-12
Gee, what a shocker. Just what we needed…a former AFL-CIO man. Joybells.
By Coywolf on 02-07-12
Well, a union leader ought to be comfortable around ethics violations.
By reggie on 02-07-12
Regardless the media created myth of organized labor being more corrupt than most business/government/independent organizations the opposite it true. This is not because
unions are comprised of better people, but because unions were much stricter regulated, even
before the recent deregulation of business/finance that has led to such destruction of our
nation…. and remain so.
Haveing known Jim Murry for decades, I can confidently say: as former leader of the Montana
AFL/CIO, Jim Murry is used to working honorably within precise rules constantly, and will be
very effective and impartial in enforceing the rules of this office.
By Craig moore on 02-07-12
reggie, as to your first paragraph, it is not a contest. But any claim of that unions are morelawful flies in the face of history. Here is a partial list of union officials convicted of
crimes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_labor_union_officials_convicted_of_crimes It
doesn’t even touch acts by the respective memberships. Most recently I rember the Longshoreman
doing all sorts of illegal “protesting” in Washington state:
http://news.yahoo.com/longshoremen-storm-wash-state-port-damage-rr-144921214.html
===quote===
Hundreds of Longshoremen stormed the Port of Longview early Thursday, overpowered and held
security guards, damaged railroad cars, and dumped grain that is the center of a labor dispute,
said Longview Police Chief Jim Duscha.
Six guards were held hostage for a couple of hours after 500 or more Longshoremen broke down
gates about 4:30 a.m. and smashed windows in the guard shack, he said.
No one was hurt, and nobody has been arrested. Most of the protesters returned to their union
hall after cutting brake lines and spilling grain from car at the EGT terminal, Duscha said.
===end quote===
As to Murry, I hope you are right and not a political pay off.
By reggie on 02-07-12
Did policy change, or are my comments getting lost? censored? Rejected?
By ICallB.S. on 02-07-12
In other news, Schwietzer has appointed some rats to look after the State cheese supply…
By RussCrowder on 02-07-12
Are some of your comments missing reggie? Did you mention Al Gore’s butt? The web-master is very sensitive about Al Gore’s butt. As long as you stay away from Al Gore’s butt there is no reason your
comments should be getting lost, censored, or rejected.
By montanaeasy56 on 02-07-12
Murry has been retired for about 15 years, so I don’t necessarily it is some political payback. He has served on other boards within the state of Montana and has conducted himself in a way
not to stir up so much controversy from others, unless you have a prejudice against union, and,
in that case, nothing about this appointment will make you happy.
By RIGHTOFCENTER on 02-07-12
Oh no not another Union Activist. How long will it be before he leads a movement to occupy the Capital in Helena? Look what the Unions did in Wisconsin.
By reggie on 02-08-12
Not just Wisconsin, look what unions have done everywhere they exist. Not only historically in the U.S. but currently in every country in the world. With unions a middle class exists and with it
a market demand that is necessary for all other goods/services beyond life necessities. Setting
up the conditions for advanced civilization. Without unions only two tiered society with a few
owning/controlling everything and the 99% pesaants…. Exactly the direction the U.S. has been
heading as union strength declines here.
Conservatives should look up what the greatest Republican President had to say about
unions…Abraham Lincoln.
By RIGHTOFCENTER on 02-08-12
Yea, just look at what Unions have done in this Country. They have just about bankrupted local and State governments all across this great country. They have exported all our manufacturing
jobs to China and other countries because we can no longer compete because of their artificial
inflation of the cost of labor. They have used thugery to intimidate and occupy across this
country. They almost completely bankrupted two of the big three auto manufacturers GM and
Chysler.
By reggie on 02-09-12
You must be delighted with the direction of our nation under the union busting success of the past three plus decades. And hated the highest standard of liveing ever achieved in world
history we had when unions could somewhat influence government. It is so much better now
that NO ONE has even a tiny fraction of the influence corporations/finance use to direct public
resourcess to themselfes, away from the people.
States are in trouble because they DID NOT fund the contracts they themselfs agreed to in
negotitiations. This is contract fraud.
I agree, look at this country before unions; start working at seven years old, die of industrial
desease at 39; owing the company store more than you are worth after working 6 days 12
hours your entire life.
Unions have no control of corporate decisions regarding production facility placement, or any
other management authority, like gas guzzelers being pushed when public demands fuel
mileage. The outsourceing of our production is based on greed and exploits foreign slave like
conditions that unions dramaticly reduced in the U.S. We must lower our wages to their level if
we want our jobs back?! Average wages in Chins are, what, 68 cents per hour?, $1.68? If this
business model is so successfull our unpatriototic corporations should sell their production
there. But, of course, they can’t as the producers of these goods cannot afford anything more
than basic necessities. So the worship of greed requires that this foreign produce be sold
where unions have raised purchasing power of producers enough to create a middle class;
exploiting labor on both ends of civilization destroying trade, whial enriching the 1% with
unearned wealth. The problem is we have reached the point where our consumers cannot buy
at former levels, due to low wages and few jobs.
Don’t you understand that consumers are just workers with disposable income?
By RIGHTOFCENTER on 02-09-12
Information from research by Dr. Mark Perry, Professor of Economics, University of Michigan: From 2000-2007, 8 million jobs created in Right to Work States and 6 Million jobs created in forced
Union States. Even though forced Union states outnumber Right to Work states in number with 28
forced union states to 22 Right to Work States. In addition forced labor states population
outnumber Right to Work State population by 65%. FYI the number of forced union states is now
27 and Right to Work states 23, with Indiana just passing Right to Work laws.
This speaks volumes to the job killing tactics of Labor Unions.
By reggie on 02-09-12
If “right to work” policy is so great, why don’t we use it in other situations where benifits are provided by funds from dues paying members? I am sure that the Cattlemens association,
Chamber of Commerce, Republican national committe, Wheat growers association, etc. would
just love to send out the results of their poleing, studies, research, and other member funded
work to nonmembers for free, right?
If this is good, how about the option of not paying taxes? All the benifits to freeloaders, all the
funding from those who chose to pay? This is so unrealistic as to be transparent. Just another
corporate/wealthy attack on workers.
Of course, employers want to keep every dime they can, so squeezing wages is natural, and
logical for them. Like every other cost saveing act is attractive. Moveing jobs to low wage areas
is what resulted in our jobs going overseas. The few dollars saved by moveing production
to “right to work” freeloader states is small potatos compaired to what can be saved by
outsourceing to slave wage countries, are you in favor of that too?
You do understand that only jobs with union employers have this requirement, and everyone is
free to negotiate their own compensation on all other jobs (the vast majority) in all states right?
That “forced union states” is just propaganda gined up by some rightwing think tank to sway
opinion with language tricks.
The corporate race to the bottom has only one destination….plutocracy, if you are not rich, why
would you support such unfair destruction of producer lifestyle for the temporary gain for the
1%? And we know it cannot last, as we already can’t purchase goods/services at former levels
due to falling wages and few jobs.
By RIGHTOFCENTER on 02-10-12
Labor Unions and forced Union membership and dues are headed for the same destiny as the Soviet Union. The will be thrown on the ‘TRASH HEAP” of history along with all other destructive
leftist political agendas.
By reggie on 02-10-12
Do you have any input that is not just repeating rightwing talking points?.... Facts, logic, reasoned deductions, historical references, etc.
So far it is hard not to view you as a hired troll, paid by the number of entries, not substance.
By JosephineDoody on 02-10-12
RightOfCenter;
Isn’t it funny how the lefty loons always accuse the right of things they themselves are most
guilty of?
By RIGHTOFCENTER on 02-10-12
Funny how when “leftwingnuts” lose on the arguments, they always resort to attacking the messenger.
By RussCrowder on 02-10-12
Through my association with the organization American Dream Montana, during the last election cycle our organization was accused by a Property Rights are “Silly” liberal Democrat running a
losing campaign for re-election, of misinforming the public about this characters record. This was
done in a complaint filed by the same to the Office of Political Practices being run by Dave Gallik,
also a Democrat. I personally found Mr. Gallik to be reasonable, responsible and conscientious in
his investigation of the complaint filed by Property Rights are “Silly”, which explains why our
organization was exonerated in the matter.
Lets hope that this new appointee will take his position as seriously and professionally as Mr.
Gallik.
By mooseberryinn on 02-10-12
oh yea, oh yea, a man pure as the driven snow appointed to see about “ethics”! (puke).
By thinker on 02-11-12
Wages in other countries are never stated in the context of “the cost of living” in that country. Do you really think the cost of living in China or Africa, for workers, comes anywhere close to that of
American workers? That income should also be stated “per household” and not just “per worker.”
That does not condone slave labor conditions anywhere. It just means giving only part of the facts
always results in a lopsided and faulty argument. And a waste of everone’s time. Failure to
recognize wages vs cost of living is due simply to the general igorance of the American public in
matters of economics and finance. Do you really think that anyone who is desperate to survive is
going to begin a job by arguing they should be paid more? In many cases it’s a case of sheer
survival vs living well. No one in America lives in conditions as bad as those in the poorest
countries in the world, although some are pretty bad.
Think about it. Does anyone recognize that WalMart is not much different from the “company
store” concept? They are screwing over contractors, (they are customers too), driving other
businesses out, providing low paying jobs, (most of which aren’t rocket science), and providing low
prices, (at the expense of slave labor, mostly in China), while they are busily sucking up consumer
discretionary income they paid their employees. 90% of what they sell comes from China. The
Walton family is worth what? 7 Billion dollars? The vision of Sam Walton has been badly distorted.
No, I don’t think children should work in coal mines at the age of 14, although members of my
family did, one dying at the age of 17 in the mines. I also don’t think it’s useful to keep kids in
school to an age limit, rather than providing them useful job skills. We spend more time developing
their attitude than their self sufficiency.
By reggie on 02-11-12
So, the answer to my last unanswered question is; no….. as expected.
By RIGHTOFCENTER on 02-11-12
Ten posts up, here’s what I posted, this shows the job destruction record of forced Union States:
Information from research by Dr. Mark Perry, Professor of Economics, University of Michigan:
From 2000-2007, 8 million jobs created in Right to Work States and 6 Million jobs created in forced
Union States. Even though forced Union states outnumber Right to Work states in number with 28
forced union states to 22 Right to Work States. In addition forced labor states population
outnumber Right to Work State population by 65%. FYI the number of forced union states is now
27 and Right to Work states 23, with Indiana just passing Right to Work laws.
By reggie on 02-11-12
Many issues effect production facility placement; corporate taxes, property taxes, access to resourcess, local schools and data infrastructure, workforce education and availability, etc. As I
pointed out in my first response to this info you provided, if low wages were the only reason for
these job numbers, they would have gone overseas to slave wage countries for much greater
labor saveings.
For example, Oklahoma manufacturing jobs peaked in 2000 at 177,000-the year before the
state passed it’s RtoW law. BLS data show that manufacturing jobs declined every year after
2001, except an 8% increase in 2011. And Texas and Alaska both had 11% employment
incresaes in the past decade, but only Texas has a RtoW law. Statewide statistics, whatever
they are can’t possibly be driven by the right to work issue alone.
You are trying to present correlation as causation, any average high school senior should know
better.
By RIGHTOFCENTER on 02-11-12
If number of jobs produced in non-right to work states kicking the you know what out of forced Union states doesn’t show the job killing disaster of Labor Unions, I don’t know what does.
Any average grade school student would know that!!!!!
By RIGHTOFCENTER on 02-11-12
Heres some more facts, logic historical records for the disaster of Labor Unions:
From data provided by the federal Bureau of Economic Statistics, the NILRR looked at the ten
years ending in 2010 to see whether right-to-work or “forced-unionism” states performed better
economically. Not only did RTW states show more job growth (RTW: 0.3 percent; forced unionism
states: -5.5 percent; national average: 3.3 percent), real compensation grew by 11.3 percent. In
states with closed shops, real compensation only grew 0.7 percent over those ten years while real
compensation grew nationally at a 4.3 percent pace.
How did that impact the economic structure of these states? Manufacturing grew in forced-
unionism states by 8.3 percent during that decade – but it grew by 18.6 percent in right-to-work
states. As far as standards of living, the data disputes Dayton and other opponents of right-to-work
laws. By 2010, income adjusted for the cost of living by the BEA was slightly higher in right-to-
work states, as was cost-of-living adjusted real disposable income.
Nor was the NIRLL the only one to check those figures. Dr. Mark Perry, professor of economics
and finance at the University of Michigan, checked the BEA’s figures and reported his findings on
his personal blog, Carpe Diem. Perry confirmed the NIRLL’s findings on private-sector
compensation growth, and found a few more nuggets as well. Private sector employment grew by
10 percent in the same decade in RTW states, while the rate in forced-unionism states was only
1.9 percent.
Perry also specifically looked at the 2000-7 period for employment and found this stunning
result: “In the period between 2000 and 2007 — before the recession started — almost 8 million
jobs were created in right-to-work states compared to fewer than 6 million new jobs in forced union
states, even though forced union states outnumber right-to-work states 28 to 22 and have
populations and labor forces that are 65 percent greater than right-to-work states.”
Clearly, right-to-work states outperformed their counterparts across a wide range of economic
measures. Why, then, are Democrats like Governor Dayton so opposed to right-to-work laws?
Survival. Democrats rely heavily on union support, both in organization and fundraising. Both
depend on the collection of dues from millions of members locked in closed shops, who have their
paychecks picked by their employers no matter what they think of their union. Since Democrats in
Indiana get a third of their donations from these forced contributions to unions, the rights of workers
and the economic vitality of their states take a back seat to keeping their own coffers filled.
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.