N.Y. Target workers say no to union

  • Article by: JIM SPENCER and MARISSA EVANS , Star Tribune staff writers
  • Updated: June 21, 2011 - 12:05 PM

Vote of 137-85 was labor's latest defeat in attempt to organize retail workers. Unions predict that such efforts will continue.

  • 340
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
SLM001Jun. 18, 1112:11 AM

"These are folks trying to be breadwinners, who have lost jobs in manufacturing and are now working retail." Unions killed manufacturing, retail next? Good win for America here!

210
55
rldd36Jun. 18, 1112:17 AM

Wow, people DON'T WANT to be part of a union when given the choice. Nice to see Target hires SMART employees.

200
50
johnsopinionJun. 18, 1112:18 AM

Wow, a pretty overwhelming vote, especially in liberal NY. Unions aren't all they are cracked up to be. Those with the most seniority kick the rest around like trash, the lazy and stupid get all the attention, and the hard-working get screwed. Your pay gets stolen, nobody 'represents' YOU, and you, in the middle, get squeezed out just like the middle class is these days.

169
48
darkelfJun. 18, 1112:27 AM

huzzah!

88
28
kennyrogersJun. 18, 1112:28 AM

I don't see how you can organize a Union for a bunch of store workers that are mostly part timers and kids, but it is wise to keep trying. Also, I can't imagine a scenario where employees are better off working with the company than a union, as Target officials claim.

53
179
raygunrevoltJun. 18, 1112:32 AM

Bravo!!!!!!

137
39
JRBJun. 18, 1112:34 AM

"The union talked about its typical contracts that guaranteed part-time workers 16 to 20 hours a week at a time when some said Target only scheduled them for 10 hours a week." ........ Well duh, assuming the union's claim is true Target would only need to employ about half the workers that they do now. These workers lose their jobs while the union bosses get rich off the remaining employees. No wonder they voted it down...again.

154
29
oglethorpieJun. 18, 1112:52 AM

A labor union should not have the right to tell an employer how many hours an employee will be assigned unless the labor union is prepared to pay the wages for that employee. This is how manufacturing was destroyed in this country. Labor unions were demanding labor costs that forced the company to either move operations or go under.

167
34
geoffcJun. 18, 1112:56 AM

It's not the workers who need Union, but Union needing more paying members. Numbers are declining, and someone has to pay to keep Union in business. Ask how much Union is helping part time stock boy at Unionized grocery store. They work summers, pay their dues, and get zero in return. Part time workers, who'll work few years and move on from retail is Union's cash cow. It's never been about fair pay, better benefits. Stores have more part time workers than full time, and average tenure as part time retail worker is short. It's about the money, not to the workers, but Unions who are running out of money.

143
29
DufferHJun. 18, 11 1:26 AM

Please tell us who are the "several experts" the article cites. Or are they just the union functionaries, whose self-serving interests would negate any basis for referring to them as experts.

106
25

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT