Skip to main content

Longshoremen wildcat strike

Apparently a 1,000 Longshoremen in Seattle held a wildcat strike and shut down the Port of Longview, detaining security guards in the process and dumping grain from railway cars in protest.

According to an article the police went to make arrests but had to back down when the protestors stood up to them.

At one point, police tried to arrest a small number of the union activists on railroad tracks in Longview, but the crowd surged forward. The sheriff's office said just three arrests were made "before it became too dangerous for officers and they withdrew." The police retreated about 150 feet.

What I find interesting about this story, aside from it being a sign of what's actually going on out there in the real world, is that it highlights the importance of PR.

PR can be, and should be, a force for non-violence in society. It's when people feel they don't have a voice, that no one is listening, that they then turn to more extreme measures. And while peaceful protests can be (and should be) used as a PR tactic, detaining security guards and damaging property is a really bad way to promote your cause.

And for those who wonder why organizations have policies that prohibit employees from speaking to the media unless they have been approved to do so by the PR department, watch the video below of a Longshoreman who decides to engage the media (warning: excessive swearing contained in the video).




You have to laugh when the camera guy says "You aren't with the PR staff are you?'

Ironically, PR may be the cause of this mess. It may not be a coincidence that we are seeing this kind of extreme protest just days after James Hoffa, Teamster President, used pretty antagonistic language in his speech to a crowd prior to Obama giving a speech. Calling union workers 'Obama's army' and using a rally cry of "Let's take these SOB's out."




It's unfortunate to watch this trend of grand standing and playing to populous anger unfolding. As I discussed in my previous post, class warfare won't help anyone this time around.I just hope someone comes forward on the PR front with a measure of reason (at this point I don't think that will be Obama or the Republicans).

Oh well, at least I'm sure the times we are living in will make for an interesting movie some day. The movie Hoffa is actually one of my favourite movies (Jack Nicholson at his best) - great drama, but not something I'd want to see happen in modern society.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Featured Post: Where Can You Buy My Books?

Interested in purchasing one of my books? Below are the links that will take you to the right place on Amazon. A Manufactured Mind On Amazon On Kobo On Barnes and Noble On iTunes Obey On Amazon On Kobo  On B&N  On iTunes  The Fall of Man Trilogy Days of Judgment (Book One) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes System Crash (Book Two) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes A Fool's Requiem (Book Three) On Amazon On Kobo On B&N On iTunes

E-cigarettes: A PR battle Health Canada cannot win?

So I've now been using an e-cigarette (e-cig) for two months and thought I'd talk a bit about how I see the upcoming battle between Health Canada and e-cigs going. First though, let's do a quick overview of what exactly an e-cig is. Basically an e-cig vaporizes liquid that contains nicotine. The vapor is then inhaled. People who use e-cigs are called vapers (not smokers). Because the liquid is atomized (ie. vaporized), not burned the way tobacco is, vapers do not consider themselves 'smokers' in anyway. An e-cig is comprised of basically three components: The tank - this is the component that holds the juice (sometimes referred to as e-juice or e-liquid). The atomizer - this a coil and wick unit that atomizes the juice. When the coil is heated (from the battery) it atomizes the juice that has soaked into the wick. The battery - batteries for e-cigs come in various capacities (some last 8 hours, others 40+ hours, depending on their size).  The ba...

More evidence of the Internet Revolution

Bell ushers in new era with CTV deal  So Bell has purchased CTV.  Not really that big a deal under normal circumstances, except when you realize why they did it... Driving convergence this time, the Internet-enabled mobile devices such as smart phones and computer tablets are threatening home television’s lock on viewers. Bell, like its rivals, wants to offer more content to its subscribers, however they receive the signal. Viewers are increasingly interested in watching their favourite shows on their phones while they ride the bus or sit in the park, and the cable and phone companies that have served as middle men between viewers and broadcasters were in danger of being marginalized. You know what sort of worries me about this kind of acquisition? It's clearly an attempt to own (control) content. When they say marginalized what they really mean is service providers being nothing more than dumb pipes - providing connectivity to the internet and nothing more. As ...