The Teamsters president is conflating Democratic refusal to support a blanket national right to strike with continued Republican support for union busting efforts that take away worker’s rights and fund unions under the guise of an illusory “right to work,” and does not actually guarantee a job or anything or the sort.
It’s a tortured, strange, apples to oranges comparison so he can “both sides” the issue even though only one side is an existential threat to worker’s rights and the concept of unions. It’s a helluva position to take as the president of a union.
I assume the union voted for him, and can correct that vote (or non-vote) in due time. O’Brien seems content in driving a wedge between the only political party that supports them, for his own political gain. Much like T****, accidents happen and can be corrected, but the consequences and damages incurred may be expensive and long lasting. Vote carefully.
While I still think he’s a dumb coward for not taking a side, I feel he’s also playing a lot of internal political games too.
On a whole, Harris will be miles better for unions than the orange rapist, for sure. I guarantee he knows that. But far too many blue collar union members have either A. Bought the propaganda that Trump is the “working man’s candidate” (lol), or B. Have internally made the decision that being racist against immigrants is more important than the very organization that allows them to maintain a living wage. So he finds himself stuck in the ugly position of needing to do the right then for the union, but also not wanting to lose support of the members and undermining the union’s entire power structure in the future (and probably getting himself canned). The only winning move is not to play.
Let’s also not forget this guy spoke at the RNC… which looks good to said members above but does not really commit to their side.
Meh. Guess the local chapters will have to pick up the slack, and I think they will.
The Teamsters president is conflating Democratic refusal to support a blanket national right to strike with continued Republican support for union busting efforts that take away worker’s rights and fund unions under the guise of an illusory “right to work,” and does not actually guarantee a job or anything or the sort.
It’s a tortured, strange, apples to oranges comparison so he can “both sides” the issue even though only one side is an existential threat to worker’s rights and the concept of unions. It’s a helluva position to take as the president of a union.
I assume the union voted for him, and can correct that vote (or non-vote) in due time. O’Brien seems content in driving a wedge between the only political party that supports them, for his own political gain. Much like T****, accidents happen and can be corrected, but the consequences and damages incurred may be expensive and long lasting. Vote carefully.
While I still think he’s a dumb coward for not taking a side, I feel he’s also playing a lot of internal political games too.
On a whole, Harris will be miles better for unions than the orange rapist, for sure. I guarantee he knows that. But far too many blue collar union members have either A. Bought the propaganda that Trump is the “working man’s candidate” (lol), or B. Have internally made the decision that being racist against immigrants is more important than the very organization that allows them to maintain a living wage. So he finds himself stuck in the ugly position of needing to do the right then for the union, but also not wanting to lose support of the members and undermining the union’s entire power structure in the future (and probably getting himself canned). The only winning move is not to play.
Let’s also not forget this guy spoke at the RNC… which looks good to said members above but does not really commit to their side.
Meh. Guess the local chapters will have to pick up the slack, and I think they will.
Agreed and well said. Kinda hard to endorse Harris when 60% of your members are MAGA. Amazing the congnative dissonance of these people…