AFL-CIO: enemy of caribou

[Max Sawicky]

. . .
Pitting jobs versus the environment only guarantees the working class 
loses, probably on both counts. Instead of sucking up to corporate 
power Brother Samuel should be pushing for laws, and constitutional 
amendments to provide for a just transition, to create new good jobs 
to replace those lost because of environmental impact. And how about 
fighting for a shorter work week, with no reduction in pay, as has 
been accomplished in many of America's European "competitors?" . . .

I'm all for building alliances between labor and enviro's,
and I'm not defending the deal some unions made w/Bush,
but . . .

We have to recognize that supporting enviro measures that
destroy jobs and provide a "just transition" is asking to
get kicked in the teeth.  The Gov is not very good at
"just transitions" or replacing lost jobs.  The same
things were promised by the Clintonoids around the trade
deals, and what have we got to show for that?  Jackshit.

To reject a tangible (if debatable) offer of good-paying
jobs, drilling for oil or anything else, you better have
something pretty good to offer as an alternative, both
in terms of political feasibility and policy merits.
Otherwise you hand labor support to the Bushies.

As far as I can see, the Democrats are nowhere on
good-paying jobs these days.  So why shouldn't a
worker accept offers to drill for oil, build
nuclear power plants, or a missile defense system?

mbs