Now that Obama has, via political arm-twisting and bullying using Alinsky’s Rules and Cloward-Piven crisis theory for radicals with a dash of Chicago machine tactics thrown in, there may be a big problem. Not sure whose lap the problem is going to land in yet, but if the folks who are about to get hammered decide to really lawyer up, there could be a whole lot of fireworks going down.
Another Union Question [Jonah Goldberg]
From a reader:
Now that the UAW has an ownership stake in GM and looking good to have an even bigger position in Chrysler, how is this market power going to be addressed. While the obvious question is the role of ownership in two competitors, there is a more significant question. How can the UAW continue to be certified to conduct collective bargaining with Ford? You would have an instance of them being in a position to negatively impact a major competitor. There are all sorts of anti-trust concerns raised by this.
The history is that the UAW uses one car company as the point person (in the military, this is the person leading a squad on a patrol – think "most in danger"). Certainly, with the UAW (with Obama as sidekick) pretty much controlling GM and Chrysler, that puts Ford at a big risk. How would the courts deal with a union that effectively owns two car companies that is supposed to deal with a third? Given the history, they could make really good "deals" for the UAW at GM and Chrysler and expect Ford to follow suit….
