>I basically agree with Carrol on this description of why labor criticism on
>this list feels like "bashing" rather than dissent.
Politics truly makes strange bedfellows. Now I'm waiting for Carrol to say that only Democrats should feel free to criticize Hillary Clinton.
>And Labor Notes does not have the repeated references to "this is why people
>feel it's okay to cross picket lines" that appear on this list.
Repeated? Just how many have you counted in the last year?
> And most
>Labor Notes criticisms discuss union reforms as benefitting the members, so
>the self-interest of unions is not a dirty concept.
That's so twisted I barely know where to start. Much of Fitch's critique of labor unions (not sure if former union members are allowed to criticize, or only present union members) is based on how they betray their members - e.g. taking payoffs from the boss to provide low-wage labor, a practice that goes back a century. No one is against unions serving their members. But they're also supposed to be institutions of solidarity, and therefore concerned with things other than pure self-interest.
So, Nathan, read Fitch's book yet? A radio debate awaits you.
Doug