Here are two news stories that happen to be headlines in the same paper on the same day. I haven’t quite decided how I want to connect them together so I decided to let you the reader do so.
The first is http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110731/NEWS0201/307310092/GM-collected-17-million-from-TN-jobs-then-left?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE
The one thing that comes to mind with this is that if it was a grant, if it wasn’t used based on how they were supposed to use it, then shouldn’t the money be returned to the state?
The question that comes to mind regarding the union is that if a plant decides to unionize does that mean that the union can decide to support other union members with more seniority that want to transfer to this plant, thus causing current employees to be laid off to make room for union members with more seniority? It has been years since I studied unions so I don’t know the answer to it. However, you have to wonder how much the union will look after the current employees when they have union members who live in Tennessee and other states who are no longer employed. Also, I know that in right to work states, you don’t have to join an union but how does that work at an automotive plant if some are union members and some are not. It seems like it will cause more problems than it will solve, especially when it doesn’t seem like the employees are the ones who are looking for the union to help them…more like the union needs more members to help their pyramid structure, as in need more dues to feed the top echelon.