St. Louis CofCC Blog

Communications Workers of America presser from last Friday, dateline St. Louis:

The Communications Workers of America is condemning Western Union Financial Services Inc., for its plans to close three union-represented facilities in Missouri and Texas and shift that work to non-union and overseas operations.

Some 640 workers in Dallas, Texas, and Bridgeton and St. Charles, Missouri, were told they will lose their jobs over the next five months.

Its apparent to me that Western Union has determined that it would prefer to operate as a union-free enterprise, said Andy Milburn, CWA Vice President for District 6, which covers Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Kansas and Oklahoma.

CWA will do everything legally possible to stop these centers from closing and stop Western Union from moving our work to non-union operations, both in the United States and overseas, said CWA Staff Representative Mike Neumann, who heads the Western Union bargaining team.

Western Union said it will transfer the work of employees in the three customer service centers and financial operations to locations including Denver, Costa Rica, Manila, Mexico City and Mexicali, Mexico.

Last month, CWA Local 6377 filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board against Western Union, charging that company managers have tried to coerce union members and subvert the bargaining process. The local also charged that earlier layoffs announced by Western Union - of 150 workers in Bridgeton and Dallas — were an act of retaliation against the workers and the union.

Western Union is an American icon. Today, it has turned its back on the very employees who built the company into a multinational enterprise, said Earline Jones, president of CWA Local 6377.

Olivia Espinosa, president of CWA Local 6178 in Dallas, said Western Union is a greedy, profitable company that doesnt seem to care about the excellent customer service our CWA members now provide. And thats bad news for customers.

Yet, the CWA will endorse a free-trade globalist for President.  Make no mistake about it — Both Hillary and Obama are, the only difference between them is that the former was married to a free-trade globalist, and wants us to think that she was opposed to his leanings while she was First Lady, and the other pretends to be an economic nationalist while crossing his fingers behind his back with his back turned toward foreign capitals.

RP, writing in WND:

While some in Washington criticize the war in Iraq, very few are criticizing the interventionist mindset that got us into the war in the first place. Many so-called “Iraq war critics” criticize this administration rather than truly oppose the decades-old policies that led to war. They claim they will eventually get the troops out of Iraq, but the danger is that they simply plan to move them around to other countries, not bring them home. The American people want peace. Minding our own business is the best way to achieve it. Not only is it also a whole lot cheaper, but free trade and friendship with other countries benefits all involved.

Could he be thinking about a certain Junior Hope-Purveyor from Illinois?

As an aside, this blogmeister disagrees on the second half of the last sentence.  The interventionist and free trade mentalities (not to mention open borders and mass immigration) seem to go hand-in-hand-in-hand, as the history of the mid-to-late 20th and early 21st Centuries demonstrate.  All three items are tentacles of the octopus of globalism and universalism.  Repudiating interventionism won’t bolster free trade, as RP thinks.  The philosophical verve to do the former (as we should) will serve to restrict foreign trade (also, as we should).