Blackmail or Greenmail

@speakeasy (4215)
United States
June 20, 2009 7:24pm CST
With all the pressure that is being put on energy producers to use renewable resources to generate energy; there are a large number of projects being proposed across the country and across the globe. Solar energy projects make up a large part of the proposed projects. But, a major stumbling block is sabotaging many of the projects before they can even get started. Union lawyers are approaching the builders and are trying to get them to sign agreements to ONLY use union workers on their projects. The cost of using union workers compared to non-union workers means an across the board increase in total project costs of 20%. Obviously, the increased project costs mean a higher energy cost that is passed on to the public. If the company refuses to agree to only accept union employees; they are suddenly deluged in environmental demands, inquiries, and lawsuits which can skyrocket costs or completely shut down the project. These environmental demands, inquiries, and lawsuits are being filed by the same lawyers that approached the company about using union workers. Companies that agree to union demands have ZERO environmental demands, inquiries, and lawsuits filed against them and the unions use their power to help expedite the projects approval! So, either give in to union demands or else. Sounds like blackmail to me; but, a new term has been coined - greenmail. Here is a link about the current goings-on in California http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/business/energy-environment/19unions.html?pagewanted=1&th&emc=th and I had already heard simular reports of union activity in wind farms in New York. I, personally, find it sickening that unions are holding clean energy hostage to line their own purses (every union employee HAS to pay union dues - subtract the union dues from their salary and they really are not taking home any more than the non-union workers). What do you think?
1 person likes this
1 response
• United States
9 Jul 09
It's not just unions. It's the way of the world. Iraq and Iran hold us hostage and throw darts at a phone book and the numbers the darts hit is what they want to charge us for a barrel of oil. Car companies and oil executives have bought and paid for patents for cars that get 200 or more MPG on the highways. Why? Oil companies know if we got a hold of a car that can get that high of gas mileage, the demand for oil and gas would fall, thereby cutting into their bottom line. Same thing with pretty much every aspect of the economy. The rich and powerful control what the poor and meager get to play with, buy and how much we pay for it.
@speakeasy (4215)
• United States
9 Jul 09
When Iraq and Iran and the other countries in the Middle East do this - it doesn't hurt THEIR people. Car companies give their employees major discount on the cars they make; so, if they pay more per gallon for gas - it doesn't REALLY hurt THEIR employees. But, union officials are supposed to be elected from the working ranks; and while ensuring they will have a job will benefit them short term, the cost of the electricity they will be paying for in the future as a result, is not just for the life a car that they will trade-in in a couple of years. The drain on their paychecks from higher utility bills will continue for their entire lifetime; so, these tactics are actually hurting the union members and their families. Down with unions!!!