Am I a bad liberal?

The backstory: There have been "Share the Success" signs popping up in the neighborhood, sponsored by the UFCW, calling on the local big-box store (not Wal-Mart)and local groceries to "give back to the community." I thought that the UFCW was trying to organize a union at these stores, and was behind them 100%.

Last night, they knocked on my door. I was all ready to sign their petition when he told me that, in fact, they are already Union stores, and the campaign is about the fact that they are negotiating their new contract and the negotiations aren't going well, so they're trying to put community pressure on management.

I told him to hit the bricks. I think that if the Union is doing a shit job negotiating a new contract, then they aren't worth the dues their members are paying. That's the Union's job, isn't it, to negotiate a good contract for the members? If the Union is crap at the negotiating table, that's the Union's fault, not management's.

After he left, MrsCoffee called me "a bad liberal". Now it's your turn.

Edited to add the link to their campaign, in the interest of fairness:
http://www.sharethesuccess.org/

no matter how good the union is.

personally, i think this is a case of the union sucking.

can you explain why it is the union's "shit job negotiating" that is at at fault? if you assumed the failures were the union's fault with out any facts to back that up then yea, you are a bad liberal.

I've negotiated a couple of contracts at different job. I've been on the union and management sides at different times. the worst group I encountered was a group of very liberal and highly active "progressive" business owners.

but the fact that they are negotiating implies to me that management hasn't walked away from the bargaining table. and the guy at my door made it clear that they are negotiating.

i don't know, i read the situation as the Union crying because it's not getting concessions where it wants them, and instead of taking care of business at the table, they're taking it to the streets.

it's the taking it to the streets business that i disagree with. i think it's a sneaky way to influence the contract negotiations.

it sounds like the local union is trying stir up some community support. Probably in anticipation of management's best and final offer. Did the rep mention if they'd had a strike vote? Did he mention if both sides had discussed "take aways"? lots of issues in negotiations, most people aren't adequately trained to explain them all.

We have a local grocery store that, according to all reports, is fighting unionization while pleading fair labor practices. I've read negative reports about labor organizers activities and negative reports about management's bargaining in bad faith. so far management is winning the war of words. I have no idea exactly who is acting in bad faith but it's clear who had better access to local media.
You may had a similar case stumble on your front door.

by the way if you were really a bad liberal would you have responded to my first post the way you did?

good liberal, good good liberal, have a cuppa joe on me.

You said it was my turn. :P

Hard to tell for sure; the union page you linked to doesn't show what the union wants in its new contract. Or at least I didn't find it quickly, and don't really want to spend hours searching for that information.

I did read the part where it talks about what shareholders are getting in returns. That's the part of corporations I dislike, that they are so focused on shareholder returns-on-investment. I think business profits should go to the workers first, investment in sustaining or growing the business (tied for first with paying workers) and enriching shareholders after that.

I do think, if the union is looking for concessions that would benefit the workers in the union (which they should be doing), then the community should be supporting the union, and pressuring the company management.

ipso facto

could very well be against making any deal. You don't know unless you are involved.