"another" and "better" career alternative?.....Nope!
kgclg15 at kg.hsanet.net
Tue Jan 16 06:19:28 EST 2001
John Jacobson wrote:
> "DPH" <kgclg15 at kg.hsanet.net> wrote in message
> news:3A63C98F.B7679EDB at kg.hsanet.net...
> > Lawson English wrote:
> > That is just another reason for a union. An IT Professional's union could
> > their position known, and exhort their membership to write and call their
> > congressmen, and suggest to their membership which congressmen would
> > butter their bread (say that 3 times fast... ), etc.
> They can do that now, without a union.
No, they can't. It takes an organization for a group to be able to speak with
one voice. People genearlly don't focus too well, with the same opinions,
without some kind of group.
> > Unions don't have to all be
> > about strikes. If U want to see an effective lobbying association, join
> the NRA
> > and experience the barrage of information concerning gun rights that it
> sends its
> > members. I'm an NRA life member, and could probably paper the walls with
> > correspondence I get from them in a year. A union of, say, 4 million IT
> > would be a formidable political force.
> I don't think you can compare the NRA with a labor union. It doesn't
> exist under the purview of the NLRB, or according to the idea that
> management and workers are necessarily at opposite ends of the battle.
It exists with the idea that the 2nd amendment has many enemies that must be
defeated politically. It didn't start out like that, but has gone there out of
necessity. Without the NRA, our guns would likely be in some government
repository waiting to be dumped into the sea. Its the same sort of adversarial
relationship. I'm not sure how the NLRB is relavent to this, tho.
More information about the Bioforum