(Close Window)
Topic: Labor Day! Not such a great holiday for everyone
Message: Posted by: GlenD (Aug 30, 2011 10:33AM)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/29/republicans-banned-labor-day-parade-wisconsin_n_939879.html

So what are Republicans, non-union workers and the unemployed supposed to do this Monday???
Message: Posted by: Marlin1894 (Aug 30, 2011 11:24AM)
Well, it's sundown on the union
And what's made in the USA
Sure was a good idea
'Til greed got in the way.
Message: Posted by: tommy (Aug 30, 2011 11:33AM)
Get a job.
Message: Posted by: thorndyke (Aug 30, 2011 07:41PM)
I for one have chosen to work that day at double time and a half. This will put my hourly wage almost up to the non holiday level of said union workers who are banning the republicans from being in the parade.
On this labor day, those of you who are getting an extra day off and are going to places were people are working to serve you, please be kind.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Aug 30, 2011 07:56PM)
And in other shocking news, The Three Little Pigs decided not to invite The Big Bad Wolf to dinner.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Aug 30, 2011 08:04PM)
Guilt By Association: It's OK When It's Not One of Us. Catchy.
Message: Posted by: critter (Aug 30, 2011 08:11PM)
Tough call. On the one hand, I agree with Lobo that it's never right to lump everyone in an entire group together as "the enemy." On the other hand, I kind of think the sponsors shouldn't be forced to include someone they don't want to.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Aug 30, 2011 08:23PM)
[quote]
On 2011-08-30 21:11, critter wrote:
On the other hand, I kind of think the sponsors shouldn't be forced to include someone they don't want to.
[/quote]

Oh, I agree. That's not necessarily the other hand.
Message: Posted by: critter (Aug 30, 2011 08:30PM)
I should amend my "never" statement when it comes to groups as "the enemy." After all, I can think of a few groups I wouldn't want any members of at my bar-b-q. It's MOSTLY wrong to lump everyone in a group, etc., etc.
Message: Posted by: Josh Chaikin (Aug 30, 2011 09:49PM)
I'm one of them. I'm a contract worker and am a few hundred hours short of being able to receive holiday pay. So I'll be at work.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Aug 30, 2011 10:18PM)
[quote]
On 2011-08-30 21:04, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Guilt By Association: It's OK When It's Not One of Us. Catchy.
[/quote]
From the article: "Council President Randy Radtke said in a statement on the group's website that politicians are only welcome at the festivities if they have demonstrated support for workers' rights."

So clearly, the issue was not guilt by association, but guilt. And last I looked, it was called Labor Day, not Anti-Labor Day.

Perhaps, folks can look up the origins of Labor Day--and why in the US, unlike the rest of the world, it's held in September.

Looking forward to the roast pork the National Butchers Association serves at the next Vegan Society dinner.
Message: Posted by: balducci (Aug 30, 2011 11:03PM)
[quote]
On 2011-08-30 23:18, landmark wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-08-30 21:04, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Guilt By Association: It's OK When It's Not One of Us. Catchy.
[/quote]

So clearly, the issue was not guilt by association, but guilt. And last I looked, it was called Labor Day, not Anti-Labor Day.

Perhaps, folks can look up the origins of Labor Day--and why in the US, unlike the rest of the world, it's held in September.
[/quote]
Well, Canada does the same. And Labour Day is celebrated in October in New Zealand and parts of Australia. And so on.

Historically, Labour (or Labor) Day in the U.S. and Canada actually predates the creation of the International Workers' Day (i.e. May 1 holiday).
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Aug 30, 2011 11:15PM)
[quote]
On 2011-08-30 23:18, landmark wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-08-30 21:04, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Guilt By Association: It's OK When It's Not One of Us. Catchy.
[/quote]
From the article: "Council President Randy Radtke said in a statement on the group's website that politicians are only welcome at the festivities if they have demonstrated support for workers' rights."
[/quote]

The group that was specifically not invited was "the Republicans." Amusingly, almost the next statement says, "It is not a political event."

Of course, you certainly might take the position that all Democrats demonstrate support for workers' rights and all Republicans oppose it, so it's a perfect correspondence.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Aug 31, 2011 06:25AM)
The group that was specifically not invited was "Republican politicians," not "Republicans." The positions of the politicians are a matter of public record. I don't think they are checking other people's parties at the entrance of the parade.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Aug 31, 2011 08:40AM)
[quote]
On 2011-08-31 07:25, landmark wrote:
The group that was specifically not invited was "Republican politicians," not "Republicans."
[/quote]

I was just quoting the guy's statement.
Message: Posted by: Marlin1894 (Aug 31, 2011 09:18AM)
No big deal. These guys just keep making things worse for themselves. One of these days when Congress does away with Labor Day alltogether it will be because of things like this.

The Mayor of Wausau has told the organizers of the parade that they can pick up the tab for insurance, setting up the stages, police etc. I'm sure they will, it's a pretty small parade. I think the said the whole cost would be a couple of thousand bucks.
Message: Posted by: GlenD (Aug 31, 2011 10:35AM)
I think we should have a retirement party for the big unions, say thanks and move on.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Aug 31, 2011 03:06PM)
Unbelievable, but believable.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Aug 31, 2011 06:10PM)
It wasn't (isn't) my intention to knock organized labor as an institution. Or to suggest that a lot of important things haven't come out of the labor movement. At just about all these sorts of holiday events, though, groups put aside their political differences and invite their local representatives. As a journalist, I've covered many groups and special events; some of those groups were very anti-Democrat, and some of which were very anti-Republican. I don't think I've never been involved with one where the idea of not inviting one's political opponents to a community event was seriously considered. Even with vehement opposition to their views on organized labor, some of those uninvited officials no doubt better represent some of the union workers' views better than their Democratic counterparts on a variety of other issues, be it abortion, gun ownership, or any of a number of other issues. I think it's a classless decision. And I do think that the statement that it's not a political statement is laughable.
Message: Posted by: balducci (Aug 31, 2011 06:49PM)
[url]http://www.wlsam.com/Article.asp?id=2274627&spid=[/url]

WAUSAU, Wis. (WLS) - The Marathon County Labor Council has reversed a decision that excluded Republican politicians from participating in the Labor Day parade in Wausau.
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Aug 31, 2011 06:51PM)
If really doesn't matter if the representatives reflect some union members' views about non-labor issues. The purpose of the holiday is to honor labor.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Aug 31, 2011 07:05PM)
[quote]
On 2011-08-31 00:03, balducci wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-08-30 23:18, landmark wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-08-30 21:04, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Guilt By Association: It's OK When It's Not One of Us. Catchy.
[/quote]

So clearly, the issue was not guilt by association, but guilt. And last I looked, it was called Labor Day, not Anti-Labor Day.

Perhaps, folks can look up the origins of Labor Day--and why in the US, unlike the rest of the world, it's held in September.
[/quote]
Well, Canada does the same. And Labour Day is celebrated in October in New Zealand and parts of Australia. And so on.

Historically, Labour (or Labor) Day in the U.S. and Canada actually predates the creation of the International Workers' Day (i.e. May 1 holiday).
[/quote]
From Human Events, which I think even DannyDoyle would call a far right website:

"Across the globe, many other countries celebrate a form of Labor Day on May 1, known as May Day, or International Workers' Day. A common workers holiday since the 1800s, Americans might likewise have officially observed May Day, but for the May anniversary of the traumatic 1886 Haymarket riots (and deaths). This unpleasant association prompted an already chastened Cleveland to select a date less freighted with memory, preferably at the opposite end of the calendar."
Message: Posted by: tommy (Aug 31, 2011 07:23PM)
We don't need all those laboring types with the low IQs any more do we?
Message: Posted by: balducci (Aug 31, 2011 07:24PM)
Landmark, that's well and good, but (from what I've read) Labor Day was celebrated in the U.S. in September already in 1882. And became a national holiday in 1884. And this all preceded the 1886 Haymarket riot.

So I think Human Events is misstating things, if it is trying to imply that Labor Day was set in September from the start. Grover Cleveland did not support changing the date from September to May. But neither did several pro-labor groups:

"In the United States and Canada, however, the official holiday for workers is Labor Day in September. This day was promoted by the Central Labor Union and the Knights of Labor, who organized the first parade in New York City. After the Haymarket Square riot in May, 1886, US President Grover Cleveland feared that commemorating Labor Day on May 1 could become an opportunity to commemorate the riots. Thus he moved in 1887 to support the Labor Day that the Knights supported."

("The Knights of Labor (K of L) (officially "Noble and Holy Order of the Knights of Labor") was the largest and one of the most important American labor organizations of the 1880s.")

Again, it had already been celebrated in September in the U.S. since 1882. And pro-labor groups of the day supported the choice of September.

(Quotes above from Wikipedia and sources mentioned there.)
Message: Posted by: tommy (Aug 31, 2011 07:40PM)
Is it true that they gave them labor day as an holiday because it was an holiday anyway?
Message: Posted by: landmark (Aug 31, 2011 09:57PM)
The Knights of Labor and the American Federation of Labor, two supporters of the September date, were very conservative unions, and were afraid of being "tainted" with the Socialist or Communist label, unlike some other unions such as the IWW. What I was pointing out in my original post was the history of American unionism which became less and less radical over time, and thus less and less effective as well. And so now we are at the point where the pig has to apologize to the wolf for not inviting him to dinner, a dinner where the pig himself is the meal.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Aug 31, 2011 10:35PM)
Come out to California...everyone fawns over the pigs, especially the politicians errrrrrrr wolves.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Sep 1, 2011 05:09AM)
What a tragedy that "everyone" tries to improve wages, conditions, and lives of workers! What are people thinking? How dare politicians try to improve the lot of the majority of their constituents!
Sarcasm off etc. But really . . .
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Sep 1, 2011 08:27AM)
It's amazing how fast your cynicism about politicians shuts off when it's the right guys buying the votes.
Message: Posted by: ed rhodes (Sep 1, 2011 10:23AM)
[quote]
On 2011-08-31 19:10, LobowolfXXX wrote:
It wasn't (isn't) my intention to knock organized labor as an institution. Or to suggest that a lot of important things haven't come out of the labor movement. At just about all these sorts of holiday events, though, groups put aside their political differences and invite their local representatives.
[/quote]

It's one thing to "put aside their political differences" and another totally to invite the people who tried to hamstring you and drive you out of business to march in your parade and bask in the favorable publicity.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Sep 1, 2011 10:30AM)
It's a community event. I've known Veterans groups that were vehemently anti-Democrat (as a whole), and would not have dreamed of not inviting their local political representatives.
Message: Posted by: critter (Sep 1, 2011 10:44AM)
Nobody complained when the KKK parade over in Idaho didn't invite the blacks and jews to march in their parade.
Message: Posted by: Magnus Eisengrim (Sep 1, 2011 10:47AM)
[quote]
On 2011-09-01 11:44, critter wrote:
Nobody complained when the KKK parade over in Idaho didn't invite the blacks and jews to march in their parade.
[/quote]

But did they tell them to stay away?
Message: Posted by: critter (Sep 1, 2011 10:53AM)
I'm pretty sure the seperation clause is in their manifesto, so... Yeah, kinda'. ;)
Message: Posted by: Marlin1894 (Sep 1, 2011 11:07AM)
[img]http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/9123/klanid.jpg[/img]
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Sep 1, 2011 12:30PM)
[quote]
On 2011-09-01 11:30, LobowolfXXX wrote:
It's a community event. I've known Veterans groups that were vehemently anti-Democrat (as a whole), and would not have dreamed of not inviting their local political representatives.
[/quote]

Yes- it's a community event, but its specific purpose is TO HONOR LABOR! Your comparison is really apples and oranges.

Good thoughts,

Bob
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Sep 1, 2011 12:32PM)
[quote]
On 2011-09-01 13:30, mastermindreader wrote:
[quote]
On 2011-09-01 11:30, LobowolfXXX wrote:
It's a community event. I've known Veterans groups that were vehemently anti-Democrat (as a whole), and would not have dreamed of not inviting their local political representatives.
[/quote]

Yes- it's a community event, but its specific purpose is TO HONOR LABOR! Your comparison is really apples and oranges.

Good thoughts,

Bob
[/quote]

It's actually not. You can't really judge the soundness of the analogy without knowing the basis for their political position(s).
Message: Posted by: balducci (Sep 1, 2011 12:59PM)
What defines a "community event"?

I wouldn't think that privately sponsored parades necessarily automatically qualify as such. Do they?

(E.g., I'm pretty sure I've heard of cities issuing licenses for parades to groups because they legally had to, even though the community did not support it.)
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Sep 1, 2011 01:19PM)
By community event, I meant held on public property and/or open to the public. I may be assuming too much about the parade. That is, it's not on company grounds, or at a rented site, and if you don't have your union card, you can't come check it out.
Message: Posted by: landmark (Sep 1, 2011 09:37PM)
[quote]
On 2011-09-01 09:27, LobowolfXXX wrote:
It's amazing how fast your cynicism about politicians shuts off when it's the right guys buying the votes.
[/quote]
Politicians are always corrupt--we all know that. But in the old days, Tammany at least used to throw the newly arrived immigrants a few dollars their way if they voted for them. That was the deal. Kind of like the old Mafia. They took care of the people on their street while they plundered.

Nowadays, though, the politicians want to see your checkbook before they send any money your way. And you're supposed to be grateful for that. It's all pay to play, and the more you pay, the more they let you play. So all I'm saying is, let the majority of Americans play rather than the elite few.