wjcandee

I say this respectfully: There's a difference between being opposed to self-destructive, pointless union activity that does nothing but entrench the spoiled leaders and pay big $$ to lawyers for years of delay and basically no results that truly benefit the rank and file, and being "anti-union".

I applaud what I think are smart, effective tactics, and criticize ones that are not. That we may disagree about the likely effectiveness and probable outcome doesn't make me an adversary.

You guys are locked in pointless, low probability of success litigation that the company loves because it puts off ever really getting to a contract. Again, it's not strategically-beneficial, it's a result of trying to show who has the bigger set, which isn't a clean route to a result for members.

The way to get Atlas to focus on the legitimate beef of low quality candidates and training is to do what I suggested. Good stuff will result, but of course leaders won't get obvious credit for it, so they would rather follow a different strategy.