Unions and Immigration Reform

How can a labor union, whose job is supposed to be fighting for Americans workers, justify to their members their support for immigration reform? AFL-CIO, Teamsters, among others have gone on record as supporting immigration reform, but how does giving legal status to millions of illegal workers help hard-working blue collar Americans? I'm asking the liberals on this forum, as I already know the answers I'll get from the right.

 

Because it's not about unions. Unions really aren't a force for change in the US. So instead they team up with other groups, take for example that support increasing the minimuim wage. In turn those groups support other things as well, such as immigration reform. They then in turn, because they met through that one group come to support another one. This does actually happen. Unions for the most part support the Democrats. They in turn like the support of Latino voters. So they come together for the same cause, to elect Democrats to office. Thus in turn the unions and latino voters find themselves on the same side.

 

Well thanks for admitting that unions are nothing but an arm of the Democratic party.

My question though is why would a hard-working American union member want their union leadership calling for immigration reform that gives amnesty to illegals? How is flooding the labor pool with cheap labor in the interest of a blue-collar American worker?

 

The purpose of a labor union is to fight for the interests of its bargaining unit - not necessarily American workers generally.

 

Okay. Great. Kinda ignored the part where I say they're weak but yeah sure.

That's it. It is in their best intereset to support immigration reform. If Latinos support the Democrats who in turn support the Unions, then there will a connection between the two made. This in turn spreads their ideas to each other. So if union ideals reach Latino voters, then they'll support unionization, thus leading to more unions.

 

You're confusing amnesty with open borders.

 

So basically the dues paying American worker is helping finance legislation that goes against their best interests. Bigger labor pool, lower wages, etc.

 

Don't believe I said that. In fact no I didn't.

 

I said it.

 

You responded with an interpetation of the words you twisted.

 

No offense dude, but I'd like to hear from some other people. I don't hold your opinions in very high regard.

 

WARNING: Right-winger approaching thread.

I bark up this tree now and then. Apparently some Democrats think they can get a dozen different ethnicities and languages to all join together into some kind of super-union, thus destroying the right, all they need is even more unskilled laborers entering into a market where there's already an overabundance of unskilled labor.

Obviously what's really going on is the unions sold out a long time ago, they don't expect for there to even be a next generation of blue collar unions so why defend their interests?

 

You asked a question. I responded. You don't like my opinion, stop responding. That being said, if you don't respond it can also mean that you couldn't form an argument to it, thus giving it legitimacy.

 

Well I couldn't have said it better myself. What I don't understand is why dues paying union members across the country aren't pissed off that the leadership that claims to be fighting for their interests is completely selling them out.

 

A unions job is extortion and their goal is for the union and it's officers to get ungodly rich. They have less concern for their members than a farmer has for a herd of dairy cows. Unions and the leftists are accomplices in crime so the government will overlook felonies committed by unions and unions will overlook the government screwing the union members.

 

A large illegal labor force undermines the wage structure. You're approaching it (legalization, of sorts) as if it increases the labor available. It doesn't. It only changes the conditions under which that labor operates.

 

It's a conspiracy!

- - - Updated - - -

Don't mess with his "I read the abridged version of the Wealth of Nations" ego.

 

And your correct . But they ain't gonna admit it.

 

Pardon me for stepping in ( I'm from the side you didn't want to hear from) but the rank and file like middle class America is too busy trying to survive and fed up with their union leaders like the middle class is with our politicians . The modern union leaders are interested only in advancing membership to accumulate dues . It's has become a business and the rank and file is their profit . The rank and file is only interested in surviving ,like all the middle class , and they tend to get taken advantage of , like the middle class , and become a pawn in the survival of the leadership. Yes , if you want to call people who trust leaders dumb ,than that we are .

 

You probably think these things you post make you cool but it's entirely possible for sarcasm to cross the line into intellectual cowardice and no one thinks cowards are cool.

 

I'd rather be intellectually cowardly than intellectually lazy.

 

I'm sure you'll manage both

 

Because its not about American workers, its about political power. Unions are an extension of the "progressive" political machine and will sacrifice their members if it advances the "progressive" agenda. Amnesty of illegals will create a vast surge of illiterate and unskilled voters dependent upon govt welfare, this will give the "progressives" a lock on political power for decades.

"progressives" are a harsh and distrusting master. In every case in which a groups of elites gained control of a nation, the unions were one of the first to be either eliminated - at gun point - or totally co-opted and neutered.

 

hur dur sarcasm u so mean

 

Why do people keep confusing amnesty with open borders?