Majority of large union supports candidate who has been clearly against unions.
Makes sense.
“Neither major candidate was able to make serious commitments to our union to ensure the interests of working people are always put before Big Business,” Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien said in a statement.
He added, “We sought commitments from both [former president Donald] Trump and [Vice President Kamala] Harris not to interfere in critical union campaigns or core Teamsters industries—and to honor our members’ right to strike—but were unable to secure those pledges.”
If you don’t withhold your vote if you don’t get the concessions you need, you’re not doing democracy right. Candidates are supposed to compete for your interests, not take your vote for granted while getting donations from big business.
Not remotely related to what they said.
“Neither major candidate was able to make serious commitments to our union to ensure the interests of working people are always put before Big Business,” Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien said in a statement.
If you don’t get concessions, why endorse? They’ll take the votes and the corporate money and keep starving the NLRB of resources.
If you’re not going to make a point related to the comment you responded to, why comment?
Always worth mentioning amid the Teamsters dialogue: Kamala Harris was the Senate’s tie-breaking vote on an $86 billion pension rescue that benefited the Teamsters more than any other union.
(via the linked poll data in article)
Biden signed a law that ended their strike. Why is Harris polling lower with them? Did she break a tie to get it through the senate?
She’s female. It’s probably that simple for many of them sadly.
NBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for NBC News:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
