Posted By Walter Hudson On September 22, 2010 @ 10:00 am
You have to hand it to the crew over at The Daily Show. When it comes to leftist political philosophy, they are true believers. On occasion, when confronted with ideological hypocrisy, they will call their left-leaning brethren to the carpet. Such was the case Monday night when “correspondent” Aasif Mandvi confronted a union representative regarding the “exploitation” of the union’s own work force.
Though it was unlikely The Daily Show’s intention, this segment demonstrated the folly of the socialist economic philosophy which undergirds the union mentality. No matter their professed ideals, unions cannot alter economic realities, and inevitably must behave as any other actor in the market.
Mandvi’s report begins as he interviews Mike Gittings, representative for the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 711, regarding their efforts to pressure Wal-Mart into accepting unionization.
Our union members have shown great solidarity in our fight against Wal-Mart, and in our efforts to let people know that companies like Wal-Mart don’t want their workers demanding fair treatment and fair wages.
For example… many employees, even many long-term employees make barely more than minimum wage. And, if an employee working without a union contract gets their hours cut, than [they] don’t have a lot of recourse. It comes down to greed.
From there, Mandvi takes to the streets, chatting with protestors braving Nevada’s 107° heat to march outside Wal-Mart on behalf of the union. Among them is beleaguered picketer Jon Emal.
I was down the sidewalk, and a guy threw a water bottle at me out of a car. We get other people that come by and they’ll yell, “Get a job!” Well, this is our job.
As it turns out, he means that literally. Mandvi reveals that Emal and his compatriots are non-union workers hired through a temp agency to protest on the union’s behalf, under strangely familiar conditions.
I’m working temp. I make minimum wage. I make $8.25 an hour… no benefits. I make $35 after taxes.
Emal goes on to explain to Mandvi that he only works three days a week after a recent cut in hours. Yet, Emal continues to show up for those three days, because he has no recourse.
Mandvi returns to union rep Gittings for an explanation:
You have to realize our union members are working. We don’t have any union members that our able to go down there on a daily basis. The alternative to the way that we do it would be to not do it.
Behold the thickness of a union skull. Without any sense of irony whatsoever, Gittings is articulating the case for a free market in labor. He is demonstrating that, when an individual or group is not disposed to complete a task on their own, they seek out others to do it for them, compensating in a manner most beneficial to themselves. Yet, when Wal-Mart does the exact same thing, they call it “greed.”
Despite Mandvi’s exposé, Gittings cannot see the forest for the trees.
Like I said, we’re doing the best we can with our limited resources. If Wal-Mart were doing the right thing, we wouldn’t need picketers.
In Gitting’s world, only his union deals with limited resources. Wal-Mart, meanwhile, is built atop a perpetual wealth machine.
Mandvi’s report for The Daily Show demonstrates, perhaps unwittingly, the folly of the free market oppressor myth. Just as no one forces Jon Emal to accept $8.25 an hour to picket on behalf of a union whose membership is affluent enough to pay him, no one is forcing Wal-Mart employees to don their vests each day. In both cases, whether their compensation is “fair” is an esoteric matter of little value next to whether they are willing to accept it.
Were Wal-Mart to unionize, perhaps the resulting displaced workers could find employment (at least temporarily, and at least part-time) in the UFCW’s next attempt to foist bad economics upon a company. That is unless, as Mandvi suggests, they form a union picketers union.
Article printed from NewsReal Blog: http://www.newsrealblog.com
URL to article: http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/09/22/the-daily-show-exposes-labor-union-hypocrisy/
No comments:
Post a Comment