2008 Woodie Awards
Shame on 'Shame On'
Staff editorial
Issue date: 9/26/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
Many of us have seen the "Shame On" signs around business areas in Bakersfield, but what's odd is that according to reports and a Rip staff member, the people holding these huge white signs with red lettering are being paid by a union.
A Rip staffer was actually offered a job with the Shame On campaign and was told the pay rate was $10 per hour. Sad but true, these protesters aren't even protesters. They don't care whether or not there is a union for any particular company. They are claiming a labor dispute.
The real irony is that it has been alleged that the union paying these protesters have not set up a union for these workers protesting businesses and contractors that are not affiliated with the union.
According to a report by 29 Eyewitness News, real estate developer Greg Bynum, who was targeted by the "Shame On" campaign, said that he sees these workers as victims, considering they're not provided with facilities and are forced to use parking lot bathrooms.
Most of these people have no idea what they are protesting and when approached by the media to answer questions are quick to say "no comment." For them, it's just a job that is paying the bills. These "Shame On" workers are not even informed of what they are holding protest signs up for. If they are asked, they are told to refer those implying to the a phone number provided by their employer.
This labor union is presenting themselves as two-faced and is setting forth a contradictory morale. Most organizations, credible or not, like to think of themselves as such, it's unfortunate that the union has already discredited itself and is paying people to protest for them.
The people working for the companies and businesses being targeted go about their daily business even though the "Shame On" campaign makes it appear as though there is a labor dispute, making everyone really angry.
The first amendment may not even apply to this situation. Do they really have the right to peaceably assemble and petition even if they are being paid to protest?
These workers are probably in a position that could build a pretty legit case with the labor board against the labor union, although protest workers wouldn't even think of filing a lawsuit. They're getting paid to stand for the alleged amount of $10 per hour. Lots of people would take on this job, especially now, since finding a job is pretty hard and minimum wage is $7.50.
Instead of the labor union targeting businesses and companies for not being a part of the union, perhaps they should realize that people, regardless of whether or not their employer is affiliated with a union, can make their own personal decisions on whether or not they would like to work for a company or business affiliated with a labor union.
The labor union obviously isn't making an impact on the Bakersfield community by paying these protesters, so they should stop wasting their money.
A Rip staffer was actually offered a job with the Shame On campaign and was told the pay rate was $10 per hour. Sad but true, these protesters aren't even protesters. They don't care whether or not there is a union for any particular company. They are claiming a labor dispute.
The real irony is that it has been alleged that the union paying these protesters have not set up a union for these workers protesting businesses and contractors that are not affiliated with the union.
According to a report by 29 Eyewitness News, real estate developer Greg Bynum, who was targeted by the "Shame On" campaign, said that he sees these workers as victims, considering they're not provided with facilities and are forced to use parking lot bathrooms.
Most of these people have no idea what they are protesting and when approached by the media to answer questions are quick to say "no comment." For them, it's just a job that is paying the bills. These "Shame On" workers are not even informed of what they are holding protest signs up for. If they are asked, they are told to refer those implying to the a phone number provided by their employer.
This labor union is presenting themselves as two-faced and is setting forth a contradictory morale. Most organizations, credible or not, like to think of themselves as such, it's unfortunate that the union has already discredited itself and is paying people to protest for them.
The people working for the companies and businesses being targeted go about their daily business even though the "Shame On" campaign makes it appear as though there is a labor dispute, making everyone really angry.
The first amendment may not even apply to this situation. Do they really have the right to peaceably assemble and petition even if they are being paid to protest?
These workers are probably in a position that could build a pretty legit case with the labor board against the labor union, although protest workers wouldn't even think of filing a lawsuit. They're getting paid to stand for the alleged amount of $10 per hour. Lots of people would take on this job, especially now, since finding a job is pretty hard and minimum wage is $7.50.
Instead of the labor union targeting businesses and companies for not being a part of the union, perhaps they should realize that people, regardless of whether or not their employer is affiliated with a union, can make their own personal decisions on whether or not they would like to work for a company or business affiliated with a labor union.
The labor union obviously isn't making an impact on the Bakersfield community by paying these protesters, so they should stop wasting their money.
Be the first to comment on this story