The American Spectator : Would You Like a Union With That, Comrade?

Text Size

The Nation's Pulse

Would You Like a Union With That, Comrade?

By F. Vincent Vernuccio on 10.19.10 @ 6:08AM

Fast food could become slower, if a communist union wins an election this Friday.

Workers at some of America’s fast food restaurants could be in for some interesting times soon. The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) is attempting to unionize several Jimmy John’s sandwich stores in the Minneapolis area. The IWW’s campaign against Jimmy John’s could be the start of organizing efforts at several other restaurant chains. (Today, only 1.3 percent of workers in the food service industry are union members.) This should concern not only restaurateurs, but also consumers and young workers.

The IWW is an avowed communist organization that doesn’t mince words about its goals. The preamble to its constitution states that “between [the working class and the employing class] a struggle must go on until the workers of the world organize as a class, take possession of the means of production, abolish the wage system, and live in harmony with the earth…. It is the historic mission of the working class to do away with capitalism.”

IWW claims it has members in several Starbucks locations across the country but has yet to fully organized any of them. Attempts to organize these locations failed so IWW is limited to voluntary dues paying members without any official standing.

The idea that anybody in America would want to join such an organization sounds like a bad joke. And on its website, it claims that it has 75,000 members in 125 affiliated labor unions ready to throw their weight behind the Jimmy John’s organizing campaign.

The IWW is spreading the effort nationally. In September, it hosted a “National Week of Action,” picketing in 32 of the 39 states with Jimmy John’s restaurants. IWW says the main workers’ grievances are low wages and dead-end jobs. Strangely enough, the union admits that “Many Jimmy Johns [sic] workers are either attending college, paying back student loans, or hoping to go back to school for additional job training.”

Slinging sandwiches at a fast food chain eatery may not the best long-term career goal, but most of the workers will graduate from school and go on to jobs with more potential. And some successful entry level workers move up within the company. As Minnesota Jimmy John’s franchise owner Mike Mulligan, whose restaurants are the target of IWW’s campaign, points out; “Every one of our managers and assistant managers was promoted from the ranks of sandwich makers and delivery personnel.”

The IWW has only had limited success in organizing fast-food workers. But if it succeeds in unionizing Jimmy John’s, it could set a precedent for other fast food chains around the country.

First, it would be expensive for consumers. If labor costs go up, so will prices on the menu. Many of the same students asking for higher wages probably enjoy dollar-menu items at other restaurants. If those chains are also forced to pay higher wages and benefits based not on what the market will bear but on how hard a bargain union negotiators can derive, they will not be able to offer the low food prices consumers enjoy.

Youth unemployment is a serious problem. As the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, “July 2010 marks the first time in the history of the series that less than half of all youth 16 to 24 years old were employed in that month.” If employers are reluctant to hire young people now, they will be even more so if young people become more expensive.

But, of course, it would be too much to expect a group that wants to “abolish the wage system” (to be replaced with what, one wonders) to be a stickler for economic logic, or even mere consistency. The IWW cites the poor job market for young people as an argument for higher wages. Yet one reason for high youth unemployment is the recent raise in the minimum wage. When the price for labor increases, employers are less likely to hire new workers, and are more likely to hire more experienced employees whose higher productivity makes the added labor costs economical.

Here is an economics 101 lesson for the students trying to organize: When the price of a product or service goes up, demand for that product or service decreases. Yet, students are cheaper to hire than other workers, but that’s because they do not have the experience, skills, and knowledge of veteran workers. Indeed, by raising the cost of employing workers at Jimmy John’s, some workers may indeed organize themselves out of a job.

Access to cheap and fresh ingredients, innovative production lines, and quick service allow fast-food restaurants to serve large numbers of customers at economical prices. Their successes are due to America’s tradition of free enterprise, which has allowed them to thrive. The IWW’s communist ideology is the antithesis of these qualities. Instead of incentivizing achievement and hard work, the IWW wants to create a world where compensation bears no relation to effort, performance, or achievement.

The election for the Jimmy John’s union is Friday. Workers will have the choice to vote for capitalism or communism.

About the Author

F. Vincent Vernuccio is Labor Policy Counsel at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and Director of Labor Policy for the Mackinac Center.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (98) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Kylie Estwick| 10.19.10 @ 6:52AM

"...vote for capitalism or communism."

The problem with unions is not the fact they exist, it's the fact that they grew too powerful and demanded too much. I think everyone agrees that people have a right to earn a living, but making 150k a year plus benefits for turning a screw is a bit overboard.
That being said, equating unions with communism is just more ignorant, reactionary bleating. Without unions we'd still have child labor, 7 day work weeks, 12+ hour work days, no health insurance, unsafe working conditions.
Teabaggers whine on and on about a "return to what made America great", well sorry to tell you, unions were a part of it. Like everything else, moderation is the key.
Yes, I blame democratic lawmakers for that and I hope as a country we've learned a lesson. However, espousing extremist views such as likening unions to communism is way too far in the other direction. Maybe you like they idea of a 10 year old making 10 cents an hour polishing surface plates for 12 hours a days, for me, I want more for my children's children. Slave labor is NOT what made America great.

coal carrier| 10.19.10 @ 8:11AM

Spoken like a true union man. You say, don’t equate unions with communism. Well Mr. Union Man, do you know who sponsored the latest rally in Washington DC? Unions, communists and socialists. Everyone looking for a handout.

And we Teabaggers, as you call us, are not whining about bringing back 10 year olds making 10 cents an hour polishing surface plates for 12 hours a days. We want small government, less taxes and some dignity and honor from our elected representatives.

Andy Stern SEIU- “We know their names, we know how they voted, we know where they live.”

That’s your union leadership of 2010. He should be arrested and put in jail along with all the other thugs.

Le Cracquere| 10.19.10 @ 8:26AM

The idea of a union member's 10-year-old doing that makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. Major Pinkerton, where the hell are you when your country needs you?

Ryan| 10.19.10 @ 8:47AM

Did you read the article? SPECIFICALLY the IWW is OPENLY communist. It's not like we're dealing with the Teamsters or AFL-CIO here.

You're generalizing far too much from the article.

David W| 10.19.10 @ 10:12AM

You can tell what kind of a person Kylie is by the use of the tea bagger slur. Just couldn't do without the insult could you. Unions have a place, but they also are responsible for probably as many problems as they cause. How many people don't have jobs because of the way unions behave. How many union workers won't have a future in retirement because the union leaders have frittered away tens of millions trying to fight back the true workers revolt (from the tea partiers). Just pathetic.

Nunya| 10.19.10 @ 10:14AM

Kylie, did you not actually read the article? Specifically, the paragraph about how the IWW is an overtly communist organization that wants to "take possession of the means of production, abolish the wage system, and live in harmony with the earth…. It is the historic mission of the working class to do away with capitalism"???

What about that did you miss?

PolishKnight| 10.19.10 @ 10:19AM

It's useful to keep in mind that the unions and communists support illegal immigration in order to win elections even if they drive down wages and the standard of living. But, then again, so do many capitalists in the republican party who want cheap labor and overlook the negative voter demographic trends...

Regarding the sandwich shops overall: I personally refused to work at such a place. Office work is available and usually pays the same, if better, for more relaxed work conditions. I love the dollar menu but wouldn't mind spending a bit more for decent wages for the workers because I wouldn't be there otherwise.

Eric Cartman| 10.19.10 @ 10:26AM

You have nailed it, Kylie! I want my 10-year old to work on the line at Ford or milk cows! Wait! I'm a genius! How about work the line at Ford AND milk cows?! And when the little grub gets home, I'll have him fluff my pillows and rub my feet! Bwwwaaaaaa bwaaaaahahahha!

Then I'll have him insult a gay black guy while on his way to pour the old oil from my car (after he changes it, the lazy good for nuttin!) into the pristine river! HAHAHAHAH!

But it won't stop there - it's only 6:00 PM! After his bowl of gruel, and 5 minute rest, I say he gets to his night job at the local 7-11! Then, come Friday, he will be forced to give me all his pay for rent, but he will still owe me for the gruel! HA HA HA! Oh the JOY of it! Bwaa, bwaaaaa, bwaaaaaahahahahahaah! Putz.

fran| 10.19.10 @ 9:08PM

eric, I can't stop laughing!!!!!

loulou| 10.19.10 @ 11:22AM

I would boycott any Starbucks that was unionized.
Unions are parasites.

daddio| 10.19.10 @ 11:39AM

More to the point, where unions exist costs go up. Those Starbucks coffees will cost a lot more now...

Senor Mick| 10.19.10 @ 1:21PM

I wouldn't patronize Starbucks for the simple reason that their frappacinos make excellent and effective instant diuretics. Although I'd drink one close to home.

Tom in Michigan| 10.19.10 @ 12:15PM

You almost had me on your side for a moment. Though I am an avowed conservative; I agree with some of your points about the labor movement's successes eliminating abuses such as child labor and unsafe working conditions (I am a former UAW and Transportation Workers Union member and proud of my labor roots) but, then you had to revert to childish name-calling using that dirty little sobriquet for a grass-roots movement that in many ways shares its activisim with the early labor leaders. You leftists just can't seem to grow up, can you?

Doctor Right| 10.19.10 @ 1:03PM

I hate to burst your bubble, but you do NOT have the "right to earn a living".

In a free, capitalist society, you have the "right" to get off of your ass and market your skills to potential employers with the goal of landing a job for which you will receive compensation that is in accord with market conditions (in other words, you get paid what you're worth).

It is this compensation that will enable you to earn a living.

That may sound like nit-picking, but it's not: It is a CRITICAL DISTINCTION.

If you are allowed to posit the notion that you have a "right to earn a living", then one could extrapolate that such a "right" supersedes your obligation to find a job, thus meaning that ultimately, someone else ("society", of course - meaning people who work) is on-the-hook for your daily sustenance.

And, of course, that is exactly how Marxist Labor Unions (and they are ALL Marxist by nature if not by design) operate.

Mr. Vernuccio says it best:

" [Unions] want to create a world where compensation bears no relation to effort, performance, or achievement."

Yes...Unions form a part of America's history - a BAD part. Despite all the romantic clap-trap and nostalgia, unions have been corrupt since their inception and are corrupt today. They are destroying American industries...In fact, tey are killing the Golden Goose of capitalism that sustains them - and they MUST be crushed.

MassInsurrection| 10.19.10 @ 10:54PM

Doctor Right...you nailed the point (on right to earn a living) exactly.

@Unions. I work 2 jobs. (You have to in this economy). My weekend gig, the SEIU is attempting to organize us there. For what the work is..I question why a union is even necessary. I did not fill out the card, and nor will I.

I'm in my 30's and my main job is one which unions like to get into (when a shop opens up)

I've dealt with union "work" before (in my main line of work) and I can say with certainty, I could do the job of 3-4 union sheep, at lower cost (of 4 people), faster, and it would probably better quality...followed with a follow-up questioning if the requester/client was satisfied with the results. (Because I actually care what goes out the door, esp if I had a hand in it)

As a matter of fact, how I got the job I have M-F, I got my pay HIGHER than a friend of mine's. Doing the same work..by leveraging my ability to produce consistently (and at a minimal base) satisfactory results, opting out of the bene's package (I take care of myself on that one), and informing the management that I will never join a Union, and should one try to get in here, I could be "counted on to cross a picket line", because I reserve the right to collectively bargain for myself.

I've earned the reputation as being a bit of a reliable competent work-horse. So as a reward I get more hours. (The reward for doing good work, is the opportunity to do more)

To my weekend Job: I told that management, that if it flips union, I will not join, and I can be counted on to cross a picket line. I then reminded them that I interviewed with them (for the job) and not the union.

I am hostile to unions, because they are hostile to me. They only benefit the lazy, stupid, and dishonest. (all of which are qualities I think any business owner would rather not have in their shops) They reward mostly upon tenure, and little upon merit, thusly eroding away any work ethic (from a embedded safety net) They also sap away any sense of individual pride in your trade.

I've gone as far as to contact other shops (in the line of work I am in), shops which are Union...and inform the owners that should they "have a strike and you have some deadlines...here is my rate, here is my number, feel free to call me, I'll happily cross any picket line".

I hate unions.

MacAoidh | 10.19.10 @ 5:23PM

So there's no connection between unions and communism?

Really?

Alan Brooks| 10.19.10 @ 10:14PM

Workers World Party (WWP) has a paw in this.
The WWP website is comical, WWP is a gay Stalino-Trotskyite (!) party:
Rock Hudson meets Felix Dzerzhinsky.

Dave M. (now in S. Korea)| 10.19.10 @ 6:58AM

If the IWW organizes Jimmy Johns, I will never darken the door of one of its establishments. Additionally, this is all going on in the land that gave us the Senate circus clown, Al Franken, so my boycott of Minnesota will keep me away anyway.

paul| 10.19.10 @ 7:14AM

Kylie, Did you not read what the IWW's constitution said. The writer was on the mark calling THIS union a communist organization. And yes, you are correct about unions being part of what made america great...ask GM or Chrysler.

Appleby| 10.19.10 @ 7:31AM

Considering the fact that nearly all the *fast food* places around here are staffed by Chinese immigrants who could not possibly move more slowly, I dont think we have to worry much.

But since the USA has brought up its Kid Generation to believe that DEMANDS are the way to get what they want, that they are ENTITLED to everything they want, and that kicking and screaming should always accompany demands, they are ripe for the union plucking. Watch for a DEMAND for time to tweet and update their facebook pages during working hours. Its coming to every office in the world, and fast food places will not be far behind.

JP| 10.19.10 @ 7:35AM

The unions must be desperate. The last place they'd want to unionize is the fast food industry. They may think there are riches in them that hills, but in reality fast food is a luxury that depends upon (a) disposable income, (b) low prices, and (c) convienence. Yes, low income people may enjoy a cheap burger in lieu of spending thier meager cash on real food. And yes, it is a multi-billion dollar industry. However, the reason Fast Food does so well is thier business model. Most of these places depend upon cheap labor (usually teens or college students who do not mind working for minimum wage, and who are just entering the work force). Once labor prices go up, Fast Food will have to pass on those costs to the consumer. Once the drive through becomes a continuous traffic jam, consumers will take thier business elsewhere.

The consumers are not total dolts. If it costs $6 dollar for a Big Mac, and if one must wait 20 minutes to get it, the benefit disappears.

Spike| 10.19.10 @ 10:38AM

JP,

My poor foolish friend, you are attempting to use Logic and market principles to arrive at an understanding as to why Unionize Fast Food. You are mistakenly attempting to understand this from the perspective of the newly Unionized employee. The Unions' and their Political benefactors are approaching this from a perspective of POWER. Elected power. Unionize the workers. Tie the workers interests to the politicians interests, and you've established significant gains FOR THE SHORT TERM. Unfortunately, as we see playing out in France, the Unionized workers don't give a rip about the broader economic limitations of their demands. Only that they get theirs.

Once you look at this "collectivization" from a political perspective, it makes it easier to comprehend.

daddio| 10.19.10 @ 11:49AM

Market forces have a disturbing way of entering into this fantasy land. When costs go up sales go down. You can stand and curse the wind all you want, but it won't stop it from blowing.

Howard| 10.19.10 @ 7:45AM

Of course if the union does succeed in organizing that chain, it may result in Obama having to provide a subsidy to keep the company going. Or perhaps a direct federal takeover to preserve jobs.

Maddox| 10.19.10 @ 7:48AM

I wonder what my burger is going to cost when the union guy at the window is making $85 an hour.

fran| 10.19.10 @ 9:10PM

ever watch Soylent Green? The burger will cost $350 and hope it's real beef!

J Kelley| 10.19.10 @ 7:54AM

With unions there are the work rules. One worker to put mustard on the bun, and nobody else can do that. If that worker goes to the rest room, then the line shuts down until they get back. This would require one to put the burger in the cooker, one to remove it. One to put the pickles on, one to do the onions etc etc. Then there would be the breaks. The drive thru lines would be miles long. In other words this would end the fast food business.

Alice Moore| 10.19.10 @ 8:22AM

I think this the goal of IWW and this administration. That is, to end the fast food business.

The goal of Soviet collectivization was not only to seize the means of production but also to engineer a mass famine. They succeeded and they had 70 years of compliance from the populace.

The goals unionization and Cap and Trade are no different from the Soviet aims of old.

Kylie, yes the unions of old did organize for better working conditions. When labor and management did negotiate everybody won. I have no dispute with that. Unions, though, like many other causes and movements were hijacked by the Left. Right now, they are a cash cow/enforcement arm of the Democrat party.

GreyLion| 10.19.10 @ 12:17PM

The iww and fast food - now there is a nascent oxymoron.

Mel Torme| 10.19.10 @ 5:14PM

Too true, J Kelley. Your post made me laugh, as I can see that too. I'll add to it:

"Major traffic jam on Martin Luther today, as the In-And-Out (B)urge(r)'s drive-thru backed up traffic during rush hour to 1/2 mile. The problem seems to be that most of the traffic had already paid hours back at the first window and didn't want to lose out on their $12 eighth-pounders.

" In other news, a major grievance has been filed today, about 4 PM, by the IWW associated mustard squirter-outers local 212. Apparently, there were numerous blatant incidents of onion/pickle-layer union menbers amalgamated picking up mustard and ketchup containers to speed up service after an irate customer, named Michael Douglas, shot up the joint on his way to see his ex-wife at the Santa Monica pier.

Film at 11.

"Otherwise, soylent green is still people, and the southbound 405 is backed up from Irvine to the Mulholland Pass."

Texas Mom 2012| 10.19.10 @ 8:56AM

The minimum wage of $7.25 is ridiculous. My 19 year old son is autistic and we just wanted him to have a job to work on social skills and personal responsibility. We finally found him a job sacking groceries part time on the weekends while he is taking classes at our community college. We couldn't care less if he got paid and I find it ridiculous that Krogers is forced to pay him this wage while he trained as well. He is high functioning (drives himself to work and classes plus with a Garmin he can drive anywhere) so they got a good deal if he is subsidized by the Texas Rehabilitation commission but I am not sure if this is the case. Can you imagine if the place where he works was unionized? He would have never gotten a job. He would have been stuck with the volunteer work he has been doing for years and not gotten the satisfaction of a paycheck. He was so thrilled one weekend when he made enough in tips to buy a gallon of vanilla Blue Bell ice cream...

Thank the Lord that Texas is a right to work state! I am sure that along with no state income taxes, the lack of a union stranglehold is why Texas has added over 800K jobs during this recession. In spite of Obama's assault on the oil and gas industry!!!!

JKS| 10.19.10 @ 1:15PM

We are a right to work state - for now. Wait until the lame duck session of congress when they take away that right. This 'wonderful' little gift has already been put up.

Leslie Fish| 10.20.10 @ 1:29PM

Actually, JK, "right-to-work" would mean nothing to any competent union. When the labor movement started, *all* states were "right-to-work" states, and in fact the govt. could be counted on to come and shoot any group of workers who went on strike. The unions survived and grew, nonetheless. In fact, making all states "right-to-work" again just might clean the fat out of the labor movement, obliging the unions to become lean, mean and efficient again.

Kelsey| 10.19.10 @ 1:35PM

Wow, way to have a positive attitude about your own son. Since he's high functioning, why do you state: "I find it ridiculous that Krogers is forced to pay him this wage while he trained as well." Because, well, Krogers is investing in a worker... and corporations shell out money all the time for these investments.
Your response's tone evidences a sad undertone of disbelief in the abilities of your son and perhaps in American workers in general. Corporations profit wildly off of workers like your son. Paying for training is just plain RIGHT. Did you volunteer the first day you reported to work? No. You were paid and expected to be. So why would someone with a disability be any different? Doesn't look like $7.25 an hour deterred Krogers from hiring your son. Which means what? They're profiting from him. Because it's a corporation, and one thing corporations don't do is charitable hires.
Imagine your son in 20 years -- perhaps he again finds himself in an entry-level job, making what is then the minimum wage. Now he doesn't have you to not care less about his wages... ahem, I mean, to help with living expenses, medical bills, groceries, etc. Instead, he makes the equivalent of $7.25 an hour, probably won't be full time (ahh! benefits!), so he grosses approximately $13,000/year (today's money). That'll go pretty far...
You, of all people, should understand the reason why social safety nets exist in the first place. Not everyone has an IQ of 180 and the ability to design gas turbine engines. Some people just want to work hard, eat, and not lose their job when they're sick or a family member dies. This isn't revolutionary. It's necessary.

Sundevil| 10.19.10 @ 5:04PM

By this perverted logic, why shouldn't the minimum wage be $20/hr. How about $50/hr? The answer is that if it were, there would be few, if any, jobs available because the business owners would just do it all themselves to save on wages.

The fact that Texas Mom's son was hired for $7.25 doesn't necessarily justify $7.25 as his worth. He may be worth $5.00/hr, but Kroger has no choice but to pay him $7.25. How many more people could Kroger employ if min. wage was $5.00? Those people could then gain experience and move up in position and wages if they work hard and show up on time (which is essentially all you need to do at that level). Min. wage advocates seem to think that people will be stuck with that wage forever, which is a fallacy. However, quality people are less likely to receive their true worth in wages when a company is forced to overpay all of it's entry level workers.

Joe112 | 10.21.10 @ 3:46PM

If you are correct that capitalism is incapable of providing everyone with decent pay (either giving everyone low pay or some people decent pay but others unemployed) then it is just further proof that the capitalist system should be abolished. Everyone deserves a decent standard of living, and if capitalism can't provide that then we need a revolution.

Joe112 | 10.21.10 @ 3:43PM

You are a bad parent.

AB| 10.22.10 @ 4:26PM

What a nasty person you are, all couched in false righteousness and nonexistent economic knowledge. I hope you're not a parent. Poor child.

Bill| 10.19.10 @ 9:23AM

So, they're still "forming the structure of the new society within the shell of the old," eh? Thirty-five years ago it was the Roy Rogers hamburger joints. They're still trying to organize the fast food workers decades later, my my. I never thought of the IWW as communist, though; they were anarchists, anathema to the commies. But they WERE Marxists.

Steve A| 10.19.10 @ 9:38AM

You can mess with my taxes, you can destroy the healthcare system, but if you mess with my dog or french fries, its over!

Cromulent| 10.19.10 @ 10:01AM

I'm looking for a list of the unionized Starbucks, so that I can make sure never to patronize one. But that website doesn't seem to have a list. Anyone?

Ishkotay| 10.19.10 @ 10:57AM

There is no unionized Starbucks. The IWW filed only one petition for an election in New York and then withdrew it. The IWW claims to have a Starbucks union, but actually it does not exist it is just propaganda. Accordingly they only have 1500 dues paying members worldwide.

Joe112 | 10.21.10 @ 3:49PM

Just because they have decided not to become a *state sponsored* union via the NLRB election process doesn't mean they're not a union. There were unions before the NLRB existed.

Petronius| 10.19.10 @ 10:02AM

There are two basic problems with unions, mine being no exception: their values, and lack of values.
In this era when the inflated union paycheck for the minimal pursuit of the mindless occupation is gone, union officials wonder why and respond in typical Luddite fashion with picketing, sabotage, and the old repertoire of harassment du jour.
Case#1: Equality
The commie union member believes he has a right to the same standard of living as the Chairman of the Board. What he wants is for the big boss to pay him the way he pays himself which is not possible. He will then demand salary caps on management as close to parity with what he gets. He must bust the chops of everybody who is "better than me." When he is employed, he takes his job to be his personal possession.
Case#2 the hourly wage
Most people who decide to make a living that way are base creatures. They hate to have to think about anything except that which they find amusing. They concentrate on the acquisition of things. All in all, the way they choose to live is self destructive. The hourly employee sells his labor that way. Yet he never realizes that whatever the rate he gets paid, straight time, overtime, double premium, or hazardous; he can only sell that hour once. Should the costs of his life style coincide with the amount of take home pay, he is in a tightly structured skilled trade or else he exercises the necessary frugality to attain his goals. Those who don't control spending or have circumstances that pull them under need to get a clue.
Case#3 The nature of business
The hourly employee does not understand it or care. His tunnel vision has brought down more enterprises than Carter made pills. There are only two components of any business which have value, innovation and marketing. Everything else is cost. A friend who was a contractor used to employ between 50 and 60 men hired from the union halls. most of them goofed off, drank or did drugs while doing mostly shoddy work which then had to be done over. After struggling for four years my contractor closed the books and mailed the financial statement along with final checks and pink slips to most of his men with a note thanking them for ruining these years of his life as the profits for that last year was under $2000 and his working capital was exhausted.
Case fin The powers that be:
The present leadership of the government of this country have and express the same sandbox mentality and resentment of those who elected them. And they revel at the destruction they cause. But they blame the "free market" and never examine themselves. The union employee's contempt for his customers is exceeded only by that which the "ruling class" possesses towards the voters. The politicians want to subjugate us and the union members want patches of turf in a captive market. And in the end, nobody will be allowed to get ahead of anybody else. To all and singular who want to know what happens to such a country, look at France right now!!
We can all have better standards of living. But that will never happen unless and until the people accept the fact that this world is an arena, not a nursery school sandbox where everybody gets a level pail full and pays the price of rejecting their current infantile attitudes towards life.
That is all.

Irish22| 10.19.10 @ 12:23PM

Excellent comments! Made me realize that the union worker must hate his customer: after all, the customer can afford whatever the worker is producing! How "fair" is that? The "capitalist" on the other hand loves his customer: for only by meeting that customer's needs can the capitalist become wealthy!

NavyBrat | 10.19.10 @ 10:25AM

Unionizing food workers will be the death of the industry. I can't speak to fast food, but in the fine dinning world, to move up you must be worth a shat. It's got nothing to do with how long you've been there, its how well you perform. According to Anthony Bourdain, the kitchen is the last true meritocracy left in the world.

These old school chefs like Bourdain, Ramsay, Ripert, & the guy who trained me came up in a time where apprentices were BEATEN. I, myself, have been grabbed by the colar, mother f-ed up & down, had overcooked fillets thrown at my head, you name it. Yet I persevered. And became a hell of a sous chef before I got an office job in a sane enviornment.

I'll always look back with fondness at my time in kitchens due to my many accomplishments. I did it on my own, despite the hardships, & I'm proud of it. I shudder to think of the havor that unions would wreak on the last true meritocracy in business.

Paul from SA| 10.19.10 @ 10:29AM

The gov't should not dictate minimum or maximum wages.

We need to raise taxes to pay for union benefits. I have a great idea: let's raise taxes on union members to pay for their lavish union benefits.

Nunya| 10.19.10 @ 10:30AM

I have some experience with unions, both from the side of family members working through the UAW, and as a businessman doing labor negotiations with various unions across the country.

I believe unions are the reason we have a 40-hour workweek, health insurance, etc. As mentioned above, they are the reason we as a people enjoy much of what we have. Unfortunately, what people forgot over time was that the Union is a business unto itself, and as they gained more power, they started demanding more things. I remember the UAW going on strike every 3 years in the late 70's, regardless of what was happening, to demand more concessions of the company (John Deere). At one point they were demanding health insurance for their PETS. I recognize that this was a "throw-away" for them, but it's still beyond the pale. Instead of working FOR the union members, the union bosses became power hungry and started to over-reach. Keep in mind most union bosses make well into 6-figures, while they espouse their anti-capitalist rhetoric. In addition, I remember in the mid-90's Churchill trucking was trying to negotiate a deal with the Teamsters, stating that they couldn't afford to pay any more, and the union struck. The company declared bankruptcy, and 1600 drivers lost their jobs. There's a reason the unions have been in decline--most have lost their original vision.

As to the IWW, I hope that their efforts fail, and the union goes bankrupt trying.

Sundevil| 10.19.10 @ 5:10PM

Unions have clearly outlived their usefulness to society. Laws have caught up and the unions provide little in terms of benefits to society as a whole. Teachers unions have done nothing to improve the quality of education. Auto unions have done nothing to improve the quality of American automobiles, and the list goes on and on. Workers certainly deserve some rights, but there are few if any that the unions provide and those that they do come at an unjustifiably high price.

IBTnot4me| 10.19.10 @ 11:02AM

You can have a debate all day about what unions have and have not done for our country. However, this is not that debate. This union is conning these kids into joining a union by making all sorts of promises, when in fact they're joining an organization that practices anarchy, sabotage, and the abolishment of the wage system. Probably not good resume material for youths who wish to move on and sink or swim in our capitalist environment.

dnha14| 10.19.10 @ 11:15AM

Thank you for the enlightenment. I have visited my last Starbucks. I will also keep an eye on the link to the IWW site and make sure I do not patronize any businesses that they unionize.

Richard| 10.19.10 @ 11:45AM

When I saw "IWW" I had visions of Big Bill Haywood and thought this piece a historical one. Then I saw as part of its manifesto "live in harmony with the earth" and realized that this IWW is a counterfeit modern reincarnation. This IWW is a product of some twisted entrepeneur drawn to extortion instead of production and who wants to muscle in on the Obama Thug racket. But the end is still the same: criminal extortion but this time aided by Obama's cohorts on the NLRB.

Kelsey| 10.19.10 @ 1:56PM

I love how everyone takes what this author says and treats it as a fact:
"The IWW is an avowed communist organization that doesn't mince words about its goals. " Really? An avowed communist organization? Where does it state that? In that selection from the preamble? Nah, that can't be from where Mr. Vernuccio draws this broad conclusion ... can it?
Then, everyone clings on to that unsubstantiated commentary like it's the word of your lord. Truth. Nothing but the truth.
Last time I checked, a little simple research (hey, you could even try wikipedia!) would show that the IWW is not communist, it's anti-capitalist. While, granted, a correlation between the two exists, to broadly label and lump together all people who want equality and the disintegration of the bourgeois class as the Big "C" word negatively connotes the IWW with the RED SCARE! State Communism can be just as oppressive as Capitalism.
Maybe we should go on a witch hunt. Or just not patronize the unionized Starbucks. Modern times are so lame. I could watch a good burning at the stake.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 1:59PM

The Wobblies are and always have been anarchist, not communist. Anyone who thinks there's no difference between the two hasn't read Orwell's "Homage to Catalonia" or anything about the Spanish Civil War.

Interested Conservative| 10.19.10 @ 3:11PM

How about if we agree to call them all totalitarian leftists, and avoid the semantics of socialist inside baseball.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 4:24PM

Only if you let me call you a fascist.

Eric Cartman| 10.19.10 @ 6:56PM

That's Obama and the half of the Democrat Party that isn't Communist, silly.

Interested Conservative| 10.19.10 @ 10:14PM

Yep - amusing how one set of totalitarians can't recognize another - must be a forest/trees thing.

RCV| 10.19.10 @ 10:35PM

Yes, it is amusing.

Bill| 10.19.10 @ 4:33PM

The IWW believed in decentralized, more or less anarchic, control, with workers' soviets making the decisions for a given locality. In that regard they were nothing like theUSSR, the PRC, or any other totalitarian group. What their government practice would actually have been if some bizarre chain of events ever (God forbid!) put them in power is unknown, but they believed in anarchic, decentralized control by the industrial workers of the world.

And yes, as one poster has noted, their most prominent leaders were pretty much killers of one kind or another.

Interested Conservtive| 10.19.10 @ 10:19PM

Correct Bill, but let's keep your qualifier in mind - that's how they differed from other totalitarians.

The problem, of course, is history shows how quickly totalitarians "centralize" power. That's what makes them totalitarians.

Of course, "soviet" is a pretty obvious dog whistle as well.

Seamus| 10.22.10 @ 1:32PM

I'm fascinated that you think a democratically run organization that's in favor of decentralizing power structures is "totalitarian"

Rachelle| 10.19.10 @ 2:14PM

The IWW, the Wobblies, are a murderous outgrowth of the old Western Federation of Miners, and they have been avowedly Communist from the beginning. Their founder, after all, exiled himself in the Soviet Union to avoid prosecution in America.

They are scum.

tedh754| 10.19.10 @ 3:23PM

Every commie I've ever met gave me the same answer when I asked him or her what they were going to do after their revolution. 'Oh, I am the one who understands how it works so I am going to be part of the government.
They are all losers.

Bill| 10.19.10 @ 4:36PM

You mean like Kirov or Bukharin? Or maybe like Trotsky or Yagoda? The revolutionaries are the first ones to be purged once a totalitarian system comes to power. They can't allow any wild cards to be in the system; it disturbs the allocation of the loot.

Bob Miller| 10.19.10 @ 3:47PM

If the new work rules led to slower service and higher prices, the customers would quickly find a better alternative. This is not a monopoly like the government agencies organized by leftist unions.

Bill| 10.19.10 @ 4:23PM

To the extent that the IWW was avowedly anything other than a Marxist labor organization, they were anarchosyndicalists. The Bolsheviks killed of all the anarchosyndicalists after the Bolshevik Revolution. It's true that Big Bill Haywood went to the USSR to avoid further trouble with the U.S. government after the Stauffenberg murder trial and the 1919-1920 Red Scare, but Haywood was a member of the U.S. Socialist Party, not the Communist Party. Hell, there wasn't even a Communist Party to speak of in the U.S.A. before the Bolshevik Revolution, and Haywood was headed for Russia a couple of years after that.

You would think the IWW had learned about "organizing the unorganized" after their failure working with the lumbermen of the Pacific Northwest in the first few years of the 20th Century. I suspect that they haven't learned that lesson because most or all of the IWW membership is probably 21-year-olds who want to be like Wesley Everest and Joe Hill (without the getting killed part).

Redstateboy| 10.19.10 @ 4:47PM

Youth unemployment is a serious problem. As the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, "July 2010 marks the first time in the history of the series that less than half of all youth 16 to 24 years old were employed in that month." If employers are reluctant to hire young people now, they will be even more so if young people become more expensive.

You know the Crime here... When Nazi Pelosi and her self-serving Rats clamored for an increase in the Minimum Wage - they were warned... it'll decrease the Youth employment and now look.. Unemployment for those 18-24 is 27% and unemployment for Blacks 18-24, 40%!!!

The very same age group coming out for Hussien the Muslim King.

Does anyone in their right mind believe Nazi Pelosi and Slave Party give a Rats Ass about the Youth??!! All they want to do is manipulate their young minds of mush for a Vote... it's disgusting.

Richard Baker| 10.19.10 @ 6:20PM

Sat Cong.

A. Wob | 10.19.10 @ 9:19PM

The workers of the world should abolish the "American Spectator." Someone, unlike this author, who actually had a basic understanding of economics would also realize that just because labor costs may rise does not mean that prices automatically follow. And as union density increases, other employers would not be at a disadvantage. Perhaps there are a few less dollars in the hands of the owners, but paying low-wage workers more (among other important issues) would also result in them having more money to spend.

Interested Conservtive| 10.19.10 @ 10:29PM

Or perhaps the "owners" keep their dollars, or perhaps other employers have other advantages, or perhaps other "owners" have other policies, or perhaps other workers have different compensation arrangements, or perhaps . . .

Here's an article that nicely summarizes it:

http://freemarketmojo.com/?p=11280

Mel Torme| 10.19.10 @ 10:26PM

"The workers of the world should abolish the "American Spectator." " That'd be a shame. That would mean no more comments too. How could we believe in stupidity anymore if we couldn't read crap from the gallery of stupid - you being the chief curator, apparently.

Mel Torme| 10.19.10 @ 10:27PM

Sorry guys... that last comment of mine (@ 22:26 ) was meant for one Mr. A Wob, but that was probably obvious to most of us.

Christopher Budden| 10.19.10 @ 10:31PM

From above: "Maybe you like they idea of a 10 year old making 10 cents an hour polishing surface plates for 12 hours a days, for me, I want more for my children's children. Slave labor is NOT what made America great."

I've heard this argument before in defense of keeping unions around...and it's a ridiculous argument. Restoring laissez-fair capitalism would NOT result in going back to child labor! I think we've progressed, small "p," enough over the last few centuries to prevent any possibility from falling back into that bad habit. I swear...some of the crap that people write just amazes me...LOL!

Yosemeti Sam| 10.20.10 @ 1:41AM

" ... The election for the Jimmy John's union is Friday. Workers will have the choice to vote for capitalism or communism."

Oh, the humanity of - IWW workers' union collective paradise siren songs.

"Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the communist party?"

Yes, yes, oh, yes, yes, oh, oh , yes, oh , ah, ah,ahhhhhhhh, nirvana - Black Book of Communism notwithstanding.