My letter runs in the letters to the editor section tomorrow (6-27)

This is the reduced to 200 word (the limit allowed) version of my earlier draft. First the 2 letters I'm replying to.

Union impact declines
In response to Al Mumm’s June 16 letter on corporate greed, there is
enough greed to go around for all, and today there is more than just the
corporate hand in the candy jar.
I believe unions may have been a benefit to the work force a long
time ago. But for some time now, unions have lost their way.
Unions once could deliver high wages and benefits to workers and make
strong demands on employers. But times have changed, and the status quo
does not work in a global economy with competition and accountability.
Unions must remember that their members are employees, not the
employer. Unions can’t blame corporations alone. Both unions and
corporations have had candy for years.
Unions should just be happy they still have government candy
handouts. There soon may be a day when consumers, taxpayers and
competition take that candy from the baby.
And that’s OK, because too much candy is not good for anyone.
Brian M. Cupps, Omaha


Unions don’t lobby?
Al Mumm again tilts at windmills in his June 16 letter. This time, he
actually made me chortle, accusing “corporate America” of lobbying for
its interests.
Ha! So unions don’t do this?
Before Mr. Mumm points his accusing finger at corporate America,
let’s discuss the closed shop that forces workers to pay union dues and
political contributions despite the will of its members. Don’t forget
the corrupt union leaders, the strong-arm organizing tactics and the
resulting collapse of the labor movement. Remember the old adage,
“People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”
Additionally, if illegal immigration is such a job problem, perhaps
unions should use their lobbying dollars to support curbs on illegal
immigration. But I suspect they don’t know how to contribute to
conservative political campaigns. As an alternative, why not convince
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to reverse her stand on illegal- immigration
issues?
And tax dollars to support the underemployed? While Republicans
recently have wantonly spent money like drunken sailors, at least they
haven’t increased taxes, as the Democrats have proposed.
Peter Lahti, Omaha



My response to two letters in 200 words.



In response to Brian M. Cupps and Peter Lahti.

Let me use two publicly traded competitors. UPS is union and making a
profit. Fed Ex pays a union wage and benefits to keep the unions
out, but it is losing money. Take a bow, my brothers and sisters in
the Teamsters.

The percentage of workers who belong to unions increased last year.

Yes unions lobby on all working family issues. *AFL-CIO's first-quarter
lobbying reached $540,000 on issues from executive pay to mortgages.

The chief executive of a Standard & Poor's 500 company made, on average,
$14.2 million in total compensation in 2007. What does an average Joe
get at these companies?

On corruption. Union leaders are elected. Did you forget already about
Ken Lay (elected by the Enron board) or perhaps Tom Delay(elected by the
public)?

The 2009 budget spends more to watch unions (12.1% of the work force)
than it does on all worker safety per capita.

On immigration, unless your FULL BLOODED Native Indian by birth, you are
kind of a hypocrite.

About the underemployed. Why not repeal the tax breaks given to the
ultra rich by President Bush? Restoration of a tax on them doesn't
effect 94% of us.


Happy Labor Day.

Steven L Dawes
Plant Steward Mo River