Thursday, July 24, 2008

Blade editorial supports judge in UAW flap

Yes, they do get things right on ocassion:

Standing up to intimidation

"In addition to resisting intimidation, Judge Cubbon is showing good judgment in refusing to be stampeded into accepting a contract with wage increases that could be costly to taxpayers, and which she contends might force her to lay off some workers.

That stance puts her at odds with Commissioner Pete Gerken, who is playing two key roles - one as union advocate and the other as a public official charged with spending taxpayer money wisely. With Mr. Gerken, it is sometimes hard to tell where each of these roles begins and ends, and which side he's on.

In this case, Judge Cubbon cannot be faulted for declining to go along with contract terms she says were agreed to by Mr. Gerken without advance consultation with her.
In these tough economic times, however, more attention must be paid to the burden placed on taxpayers by the ever-increasing demands of public-employee unions.

Toledo may be a "union town," but we are confident that a majority of discerning residents support Judge Cubbon for her thoughtful and courageous stand."


Carol said...

I believe Judge Cubbon is doing the right thing. But you could knock me over with a feather with the news that The Blade actually agrees with her. What's Toledo becoming?

What's that you say? Rational?


skeeter1107 said...

For once the Blade was willing to recognize and state the obvious.

The Union hasn't made a compelling argument of any kind to motivate Judge Cubbon to go further.

Whether the union was responsible for the intimidation tactics are true or not, the financial aspects of the deal make no sense.

Essentially, the union is saying that the pay and benefit package they want will lead to about 2 million dollars in additional expense while at the same time causing the loss of jobs for some of the judge's staff. What is appealing about that? Granted, it is a good deal for the union leadership because they will get additional union dues. But aside from that, I can't find anything good for the workers, the judge and of course the taxpayer.

For the politicians that are encouraging the Judge to reconsider, my question is; Whom do you represent? Do you represent the judge, the law, the taxpayers, or do you represent the Union bosses and what would remain of the workers that were not let go? It was painfully apparent whom you do represent.

While I am neither pro-union or anti-union. To simply assert that being union is "the right thing to do" just isn't not good enough in today's economic environment.

Tim Higgins said...


The Blade on the right side of a government issue that has to do with the unions, did you write down the date as I did? I have visions of blind squirrels and dogs & cats living together dancing in my head. (Does 1 in a row constitute a streak?)

Kudos to the folks on Superior for making the right call.

jrg said...

As if the editorial in support of Judge Cubbon wasn't amazing enough, today there is an editorial that is critical of the Gerken/Skeldon voting record and laments - THUD(head hitting desk again) - one-party rule in Lucas County. This calls for an investigation. Has the GOP or a conservative infiltrated the ranks of the Blade editorial staff?

Google Analytics Alternative