That was sure short-lived; UMWA backpedals on MTR
Posted on April 21, 2008 | By Shirley Stewart Burns | 12 Comments
Well, after the hopeful comments issued at the ASA Conference by Phil Smith, communications director of the UMWA, Cecil Roberts reigned his man in. In an April 13 editorial to the Charleston Gazette, he verified that the UMWA was still staunchly behind MTR workers in their Union. Granted, it is counterintuitive to alienate members of your own Union; however, it is more nonsensical to have made such an alliance in the first place…an alliance that is often antithetical to its core members’ interest. Afterall, surface mining in general takes far fewer workers than underground mining. Mechanization, such as that encompassed in the MTR draglines, has always cost mining jobs. Each step in mechanization has brought with it increased efficiency, increased tonnage, increased profits, and decreased employment. The real winners here are apparent. The losers are all too obvious and just as apparent — the residents of these communties and the tarnished legacy of the Union.
Our remnants of wilderness will yield bigger values to the nation’s character and health than they will to its pocketbook, and to destroy them will be to admit that the latter are the only values that interest us. – Aldo Leopold
Comments
12 Responses to “That was sure short-lived; UMWA backpedals on MTR”
Search This Site
Archives
You Can Help…
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Featured Posts
Popular Posts
Endmtr.com Forum
- Mountaintop removal in Tennessee December 18, 2011
- Michigan coal-fired plants to close; wind and air to step up December 17, 2011
- Energy Company Abandons Plan For Georgia Coal Plant December 17, 2011
- GOP’s Coal Poison Pill Risks White House Veto Of Payroll Tax Cut Bill December 17, 2011
- New study documents cumulative impact of mountaintop mining December 12, 2011
The Latest Google News – MTR & Climate Change
- INFLUENCE GAME: Big donors and what they want - Ventura County Star - 06 Feb 12
- INFLUENCE GAME: Big donors and what they want - Atlanta Journal Constitution - 03 Feb 12
- INFLUENCE GAME: Big donors and what they want - Fox News - 03 Feb 12
- If We Can Stop the Keystone Pipeline, We Can Stop Mountaintop Removal. Right? - Huffington Post - 02 Feb 12
- Asheville Green Drinks initiative promotes sustainability, green movement - The Blue Banner - 01 Feb 12
Information / Hotline
Contributing Authors – Past & Present
Gallery
EPA
Admin
Last searched terms
Visitors Online
- 05 visitor(s) online
- powered by WassUp
April 21st, 2008 @ 8:55 pm
I have to comment – I would hate to be in the situation the UMWA finds itself in at the moment. On the one hand they have a duty to their members and on the other hand mountaintop removal in it’s very essence depletes the ranks of the UMWA – they are supporting the very thing that will ultimately lead to their demise. In my opinion…
April 21st, 2008 @ 9:01 pm
Yep, they sure are. I couldn’t agree with you more, Denny. The UMWA has found itself in such conundrums in the past when mechanizing the industry; however, this is so counterintuitive it is ridiculous.
April 21st, 2008 @ 9:52 pm
I do not agree with their decision. I would have to do some research, but what percentage of the total membership works in an MTR setting? Banning mountaintop removal is not a move against those working on an MTR site, it is a move for the rank and file and if those members attend meetings, they should also know that. Just a humble opinion from a former CWA steward
April 21st, 2008 @ 10:21 pm
Brian the sum is somewhere in the neighborhood of 700 workers. Don’t know what their total member base is.
It is actually irrelevant what their reason would be for supporting a ban on MTR because the coal industry would paint it as a picture against those 700 workers and completely cover the fact it is because of the mining. That is one reason the UMWA is in a damned if they do damned if they don’t situation.
April 22nd, 2008 @ 10:23 am
I don’t mean to throw in a blatant plug here, but the UMWA chapter of the book “Bringing Down The Mountains” by Dr. Shirley Stewart Burns can answer most/all of your questions and give you much insight on the multi-faceted conundrum of the UMWA & MTR.
April 22nd, 2008 @ 4:20 pm
A bit of clarification please: Phil Smith did NOT offer any change in UMWA policy at the ASA conference. What he did do was take considerable risk in joining in a discussion that he had every reason to fear might be less than receptive to his position. Cecil Roberts did not chastize Mr. Smith, he simply clarified and re-stated long time Union policy. Each and every Union worker is deserving of protection by the Union and by each Union member–that is the oath we take when joining.
Certainly many difficulties face our Union and our region during these difficult times. One can only hope that folks with strong environmental interests will behave in a manner to build coalitions and understanding wherever possible–rather than follow the lead of the local media and present misleading information and half truths. If you make comments that one might reasonably conclude were made by someone on the payroll of Big Coal hoping to divide potential allies, perhaps it is time to re-phrase.
No organization is perfect and any large organization that has been around longer than a week will have many built in contradictions.(not to mention the occaisional uncontrollable member) That said, when taking shots at the Union, please ask how you feel about the 8 hour day, pensions, health care, week-ends, annual vacations, and holidays. Ask yourself how many Union folks died providing them for you. Visit a Union burying ground…
Solidarity,
Wess
April 22nd, 2008 @ 5:56 pm
Wess – first of all let me apologize, your comment was caught by this sites spam control. As far as your comment – clarification from you please. Is your comment directed at this post or the comments to this post or both?
Fair notice – statements like this one will not be tolerated on this website. “One can only hope that folks with strong environmental interests…” Authors to this website are not environmentalists and one would only need to read a little to realize that fact. I have control over comments that are published. Painting us as environmentalist will get you banned from commenting here. Believe me, I have no problem with doing that either.
I’m all for open discussion – not cheap shots.
Adding to this comment for clarification.
I don’t have issue with environmentalist. My issue is with the fact that anybody against MTR is automatically dubbed and environmental extremist by the coal industry and in most cases that couldn’t be further from the truth. Regardless of the views of each author – putting us all under the umbrella of environmentalists only serves to further the purpose of the friends of coal and that will not be tolerated.
April 22nd, 2008 @ 6:55 pm
Wess, I’m sure your comment was directed at myself. If so, be aware that I am not in West Virginia and that my comment was just a quick thought one. Also, I have never worked in the coal fields/mines nor help a union card for that union. My comment was based on my own opinion looking from the outside in. I do know the history of the battle of employees against big coal. In fact I just received “The Battle of Blair Mountain” from Amazon. Sadly, it looks like it may be awhile till I have time to read it.
Also, my comment wasn’t aimed at the rank and file of the union, I have bad opinions of the leadership of the remnants of America’s unions. It is nothing but political BS and I hope you don’t follow your leaders blindly like the majority of the sheep in my local in the CWA. The leadership of the UMWA failed years ago when they let the companies off way too easy. How many jobs has surface mining cost you?
As for being an environmentalist, I’m far from that. I’m actually a conservative republican and the union helped to turn me into that also. But how many conservatives do you know that will stand up for a union worker? How many are environmentalists?
The point is that MTR is just plain wrong. You are welcome here to voice your opinion. We have forums so providing the rules are followed I have no problem discussing this with you further.
Maybe we can all learn something new from it.
April 22nd, 2008 @ 8:23 pm
For what it is worth, the administration at wvu labelled me as having a “problem” way back in the 70s. They thought I was an environmentalist or something…. I lost MY deep mine job to the surface mines more than 30 years ago. My entire local, 1555, was put on the street. 93 of us as I recall.
Brian, full disclosure: I published WHEN MINERS MARCH by William C. Blizzard–Bill’s son. A suggestion: don’t waste your time on THE BATTLE OF BLAIR MOUNTAIN.(a cut and paste job) I’ll send you a “loaner” of WMM if you want to read the real deal.
Be Well,
Wess
April 22nd, 2008 @ 8:40 pm
For my part thanks for replying Wess – and I hate to hear what you describe. It is a big issue I have with MTR – it puts coal miners out of work. My dad was a coal miner all of his life and was forced into an early retirement when Massey came to town – because of his beliefs in the union.
April 22nd, 2008 @ 9:46 pm
I got “the Battle of Blair Mountain” because I remember at how shocked I was after seeing a series on PBS. I think it was “The Appalachians”? I was appalled that the govt. sent planes to drop bombs on its own citizens.
April 23rd, 2008 @ 10:18 am
Comments to this post are closed. We would like to keep the focus on mountaintop removal on the main page of this site. To continue a discussion about the union please do so in the forum. Thanks.