|
|
|
|
|
by goatcode
1340 days ago
|
|
It's unfortunate that those who are against unions don't realize that they may, in some cases, be against the current state of a given union, and that they, if they belong to a given union, can change the state of it. I was once in a union local of several thousand people that was directed by the fewer than 20 who showed up to the meetings. I pushed for a campaign of greater publication of upcoming meetings and in a few short months, the meetings filled a decent portion of a 500-person room. The changes that came about prove that the democracy under which many of these unions operate can lead to changes that cause them to better represent their collective body of workers. You can change your union, if you want to, and that's a beautiful thing. Your union shouldn't have a predictable political slant (which is what a lot of anti-union normal people dislike). It should represent the collective views of its whole body -- which was the whole point of unions to begin with: to represent its whole body. |
|