WE THE PEOPLE AND SPECIAL INTERESTS

[Gordon Becker]

The Founding Fathers tried to establish a political system that would not be dominated by the special interests of labor unions or corporations; organizations that did not even exist in colonial times. Lawyers probably constitute the most powerful faction today, making the rules and laws of every business, educational entity, government body, and even social clubs. The even are and choose all the judges in our courts. The values of lawyers dominate and the rights of "we the people" have been lost. The Constitutional Convention offers "we the people" ann opportunity to regain lost rights. For example we could place more weight on selecting judges who are more concerned with justice than playing the courtroom lawyer game. What are your ideas?

[Gordon Becker]

The labor laws you refer to have not averted the decline of the middle class and the change to the present bimodal distribution of wealth. Unfortunately the general public has less influence on the legislature than the rich lobbies ... and unions are still necessary to counteract that.

[Dan L.]

If the right to organize unions were abrogated, it would not take the business community more than a few months to undo all the pro-labor legislation which has accumulated over the last 70 years. The laws you mention are the result of union efforts, and they will evaporate like a puddle in the sun just as soon as the unions are out of the way.

If this is a constitutional issue at all (which I doubt), it would be foolhardy in the extreme to limit the right of employees to form unions, or to limit the range of subjects on which unions can negotiate.

If you doubt the efficacy or the necessity of unions, look at the non-union plants in the South, particularly in the meatpacking industry. The “chicken factories” of Arkansas, Georgia, etc., are little better than the sweatshops of the Mariannas -- or of New York in the 1840s.

It was less than 10 years ago that several people burned to death in a fire in a non-union chicken-processing plant in the South, because all the fire escapes had been locked, because management feared their employees would steal chicken parts. This was, of course, against the law, and the employees had complained frequently. But management fired the complainers, which silenced the rest; and the state regulators were comfortably in the pocket of the bosses. You can bet if there had been a union there, the fire escapes would have been open, as the law required. But there was no union, and so people died from management's illegal actions. Those people should have been tried for murder, under the "depraved indifference to human life" rule. But in fact, nothing whatever was done. It's very likely that the fire escapes are once again locked, because there is no union to watch out for the welfare of the workers.

[Tracy Stice]

Gordon,

You are entirely correct that lawyers dominate Hawaii business.

The Hawaii Association of Realtors ( a special interest group indeed ), is presently fighting an attempt by Hawaii lawyers to insert themselves in the middle of not only our business dealing, but every licensed professional in the state who may be advising clients in their particular specialty, i.e. , Engineers, CPAs, Doctors, Iinsurance agents,Etc.

By attemping to change the definition of the practice of law by way of a State Supreme Court rule change, the lawyers hope to increase their revenues by sitting on the fence of every real estate transaction, tax advice from your CPA, living will questions from your Doctor, type and benefits of life insurance. This list goes on and on.

Only by a concerted effort by a coalition of the Realtors, CPA, and insurance groups have we been able to open a dialogue with the Hawaii Bar Association. They need to understand that we are licensed professionals with education requirements and a code of ethics that we must abide by. Many other licensed professionals have huge education requirements and professional associations that educate them . Certainly none of us want to practice law and we would not hesitate to call a lawyer to assist a client at the appropriate time.

Perhaps a little Tort reform would be a great topic for a Con Con ? What do you think ? I bet some of our Hawaii Doctors wouldn't mind capping their liability and lowering their professional insurance costs. It is no wonder that so many are fleeing the state for other areas. I can guaranty you a tort reform bill would never it make it past first reading in either the House or Senate with our present super majority with lots of lawyers who are also legislators.

[Gordon Becker]

Tracy:

Good luck on your efforts. As you state, it will take peopleto curtail the power of lawyers (and government). The founding fathers tried to limit the power of factions, never dreaming that the independent lawyers of their time would eventually start law schools and bar associations that would be the basis for the most powerful faction in the country.

The ConCon is the only way the people can stop them

[Willy]

I think we should outlaw lawyers being in congress and thge State Legislature. We not only lost our rights but good has been done. We are worse off than ever. Shakespear had a good idea and remember it is not mine.

[Rick M.]

1. Break the hold of the unions. Make Hawaii a right to work state
2. Make it so environmentalists and Hawaiian activists can's sue the state if they don't like what the state is doing. These whiners are holding up progress.

[Peter Kay]

Willy & Rick M: after reading these comments, I was compelled to post "Think before you Write".

[Dan L.]

Amen, Peter! Thank you.

[cashpoor]

Thanks guys, obviously this is a tough debate.

Labor unions in the purest form are very good for the people that are raised to be an employee. The problem is Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is what happened. Like so many other issues in the USA people banded together with good intentions to protect their fellow brothers and sisters of humanity. Then to be more effective they hired lawyers to help them stay in bounds of the existing laws, then as a typical lawyer does, they say. Don't give this power to the people, give it to us! (you can replace "power" with "money" and get the same result).

So labor unions WERE a good thing, but because many business people have a very hard time getting actuall progress from their employees (especially in Hawaii), the business owners need a union too. It is very hard as an employer to start your business, get to profitability, and then let a mob of people that you are trying to get to work for you to tell you how to run things. Noones job is more challenging as a small business persons. So letting labor unions run away with the money and power is why big businesses can stick around and destroy small businesses.

If you look at companies such as Google, whom isn't threatened by labor unions. Why?
Because, they take care of their employees. They have designed the working environment to be the most productive as possible by feeding the employees healthy meals, having "bring your pet to work day", and an hour after lunch to play game of volleyball with your team mates, and social events for employee appreciation and stock sharing programs that boost the ownership awareness of the team.

Now which business owner would rather pay for an 8 hour day plus pay time and a half, if they need someone to come an do a 20 minute task on their day off, a responsibility the employee should have taken care of as a "team player" gesture. Google gets that because the employees are proud of their job, and work. So they put forth more effort that is productive for the company and not against the companies best interest like a union would make it. The way of a union is to make your employer and actuall company progress the enemy, where as it is obviously supposed to be the opposite.

This is the truly out of the box approach to many of these issues. If you ask me, there is a lot we can learn by the way Google has shaped their existance. The right way.

Of course, there is the corrupt business person who would rather have slave labor from their staff. Remember China the new world super power still uses slave labor. And that is why we have the department of labor, and a democracy governance. There is no need for unions.

Ever look at unions on a bigger scale? How about our worlds biggest nightmare, the CFR (check out CFR.org and what they are organizing behind the scenes) the supremely powerful union that is trying to turn our American democracy into a facist one world government, whos top members include Bush and Cheney, all three potential candidates, the big banks, oil, and 90% of all media. That is the thing we should be really aware and afraid of. The smoke screen that people are using as their main information source is more corrupt then all labor unions and slave driver employers combined. And noone even cares to examine it. If they did we would be here debating these much more important issues, and we would seek immediate transparency to the hidden objectives in the powers that be today and tomorrow.

It is a scary, scary society. Its your choice what you do about it. But ignorance deserves the harsh outcomes.

Before you disregard my post and opinion, please watch this video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1131942400352901009

[Rick M.]

This is what I have been saying will be the single thing that gets our economic engine restarted, bring prosperity, solve our pathetic school system.

Delete Article XIII that protects unions.

Unions are dragging us down, getting in the way of business.

Get rid of them.

The ConCon is the perfect opportunity. Throw a few bones to special interest groups, package the whole thing as a yes-no on the package of changes and we can get enough votes to get this through.

[Gordon Becker]

Cashpoor raises many valid points especially the point that power corrupts. Many owners believe that it is good business to treat employees fairly and take pride in having loyal workers, but there are also many owners who emulate Scrooge and slave owners. If all businesses operated like Google (or IBM in the 50's) we would not need labor unions. But, unfortunately there are busnesses (like Wal-Mart in their foreign operations and possibly the hotels and health-care companies) that take advantage of their employees, and the only way for the employees to get fair treatment is to organize and demand better benefits. On the other side, there are examples of selfish greedy labor unions who have raised the salaries of many service workers such as dock workers and pilots that take advantage of the owners and the public. Since both owners and labor unions can each be corrupted by power, it is necessary to have labor unions and it is necessary to limit the power of the unions
.
I am troubled by those who want to eliminate the right of workers to organize and I am equally troubled by those who want unlimited power for unions including closed shops in government and private organizations. It seems to me that both of these are extreme positions that will result in damages to most of us and profit only a minority. Kenneth Arrow who won a Noble Prize in economics showed that democracy works best when people vote for what is best for the group rather than what is best for themself. I hope that when it is time to vote on these questions that you will put aside your selfish interests and vote for the public good.

[Gordon Becker]

Rick
Please see my answer to Cashpoor