According to a recent article in WARD'S Auto World that is just exactly what they have in mind and the game plan has to do with the foreign car makers in the U.S. who are not as yet unionized, but the workers have now reached an average age of 43 which gives the UAW the idea that they can be tempted to unionize given the bait of pension and retirement benefits.
For the last 25 years this has been an impenetrable goal because the Japanese have worked very hard to make the benefits available to employees without going through a strike process. However, with the Obama administration having made the National Labor Relations Board much more friendly to the unions, one never knows what avenues they will travel to make inroads.
Bob King, the new president of the UAW "has Toyota in his cross hairs." Since that company has had more than their share of bad press along with recalls he apparently figures they are in a weakened position and it may be time to "strike" while the iron is hot. Rumor has it that the UAW is organizing protests at the dealerships which are targeted toward putting pressure to the point of driving away business.
The writer, John McElroy, is guessing at a 50-50 chance of success. I'm thinking on a personal level as we have discussed before that those of us who were stung by GM and/or Chrysler via the payback to unions by the Obama administration, that it is time to change the effort just a little.
My first impulse was to either buy Ford or any foreign car that is actually Made in America. At the first sign of a demonstration by the UAW at a Toyota or other foreign car maker, I will probably have to take Ford off the top of my list. If the minority which is composed of auto workers thinks they can change the face of the automotive business I am wary that this would be one more example of the minority winning out over the majority. We have watched this happen in so many different venues of late that I can only pray that folks who have watched their own freedoms being lost will rise up and fight back against this kind of thuggery.
Michigan cannot afford to lose any contests for the good will of potential customers of their product at this point. If they are depending on unemployed auto workers to do the protesting I would hope they see the futility of such a move and we could all benefit from some common sense. If they "rent mobs" on the other hand, we probably don't stand a chance. It's a sorry state of affairs when the rank and file faithfully pay their dues so their leadership can not only take home six figure salaries but can put the remainder of their jobs in jeopardy.
Next, I'd like to put out the word on Ann Rice, an author who has had great success in the past, but obviously she needed a new way to pad her bank account. Maybe her latest vampire books (I started to read one once, but my 50 page rule--if it doesn't grab my attention in 50 pages I don't spend any more time on it--) weren't selling as well as earlier stories, but she has spent about 7-8 years recently saying she had gone back to her roots in the Catholic church, wrote a few books, had reviewers, clergy, and the public eating it up. She milked that market and just a short time ago she dumped her Christianity, turned back to atheism and made the announcement on Facebook. How shallow can you get?
Can you spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-s-y and g-r-e-e-d? Can you see any logic or anything other than grasping at straws for reasons in the following rant? "In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refer to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen."
For anyone with a triple digit IQ there is no credibility in the above cry baby effort. She makes assumptions that can only be called diametrically opposed to each other and her final conclusion. How in the world can she equate saying "in the name of Christ" I am no longer Christian. Go figure.
And finally, maybe we should call this the "Quote of the Week" we tell the story of Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn) who proposed that borrowers be required to make a minimum 5% down payment in order to qualify for Fannie or Freddy loans. The proposal was rejected 57-42 on a party-line vote because, as Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn) put it, "passage of such a requirement would restrict home ownership to only those who can afford it." And we still haven't had an investigation into Fanny and Freddy and their effect on the country's meltdown. And we sent these people to Washington.
Have a good week-looks like it will be cooling off a bit-