Insight: Shrinking U.S. labor unions see relief in marijuana industry

Comments (43)
Aldo1887 wrote:

Yeah that’s a great idea, trade one set of organized criminals (Mexican Drug Cartels) for another!

Feb 06, 2013 2:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
mixkeyduck wrote:

Well… everyone know illicit drugs and organized crime go together.

Feb 06, 2013 5:11am EST  --  Report as abuse
nptalcott wrote:

Organizing low-skill retail worker makes 0 sense…

Feb 06, 2013 7:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
tougar wrote:

they are desperately trying to hold on to an antiquated labor organization model

Feb 06, 2013 8:00am EST  --  Report as abuse
WhiteRabbitt wrote:

Unions should be outlawed, for today there are simply fronts for Communists and Socialists.

Feb 06, 2013 8:02am EST  --  Report as abuse
dareisay wrote:

These union leaders remind me of those little fish that swim underneath a shark’s jaw!

Feb 06, 2013 8:20am EST  --  Report as abuse
blancojoe wrote:

Unions have been finding relief with marijuana for a long time …. on their lunch breaks at the Chrysler plant.

Feb 06, 2013 9:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
jncarlos007 wrote:

Once again, liberals flock to join unions, governments, and other organizations that label, organize, and restrict their freedoms and choices. Kind of funny considering they are supposed to be against “the man”, but I guess what they really mean ie “rule my life so long as you don’t have an R after your name because democrats are perfect and know better”
Fool and sheep are to kind for them

Feb 06, 2013 9:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
Stymie wrote:

Better to have the mexican cartels running the pot business than the unions.
At least with the cartels you know who you’re dealing with, the unions are every bit as evil but they camoflage their purposes…

Feb 06, 2013 9:47am EST  --  Report as abuse

How fitting the demcorats and their thug union buddies pushing drugs to their ignornat low wage/welfare grabbing followers.
Just wait one day they will be running government crack stands in the inner city.

Feb 06, 2013 9:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
Elz wrote:

A great idea…a real way to defeat the cartels by making their members pay large union dues, giving them lifelong pensions,and then protecting against ever being fired. The cartels will out of business in a few weeks.

Feb 06, 2013 9:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
Ms.Morales wrote:

I wouldn’t place a lot of union value on a seed where I can grow the product in the privacy of my own yard but I defer.

Feb 06, 2013 10:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
uncledirtnap wrote:

It’ll be no different an outcome than any other similar business, the operations organized by the UFCW will have the highest prices, worst service and employees who bend over backwards to treat the customers poorly because they believe they’re protected by the union from consequences and they’ll all eventually be driven out of business by the operations that don’t unionize and offer the customers the best experience purchasing their products.

Feb 06, 2013 10:09am EST  --  Report as abuse
Thane36425 wrote:

That’s a new twist in the war on drugs. If the unions do to the pot industry what they have done to the textile, clothing, appliance and many other industries, it won’t last long.

Feb 06, 2013 10:13am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

lol, we go from ‘illegal’ to sell pot – to being in a Union to sell pot.

Do they allow membership for Crack Dealers and Crack Hoes as well? If anyone needs a union… it’s prostitutes!

Feb 06, 2013 10:22am EST  --  Report as abuse
BucketShop wrote:

fat lazy union workers used to sleeping on the job for hours, getting benefits that bankrupt their employer…don’t think so, bud. take your lazy a$$es somewhere else.

Feb 06, 2013 10:27am EST  --  Report as abuse
terpsez11 wrote:

Unions are already being Financed through Marijuana trade—with all the gratis they get from the Progressives like exclusion from Obamacare—they get the fruits of Fast and Furious—without the scams the pie is smaller

Feb 06, 2013 10:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
Demstruction wrote:

Alright conservatives, if you ever want to hold office again, you better just get behind the legalization. If you don’t, the unions are going to gain power and the republican party will be out of power for a long, long time.

Feb 06, 2013 10:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
Demstruction wrote:

Alright conservatives, if you ever want to hold office again, you better just get behind the legalization. If you don’t, the unions are going to gain power and the republican party will be out of power for a long, long time.

Feb 06, 2013 10:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
jrj906202 wrote:

Don’t you remember those ads on Saturday Night Live,mid 1970′s, for the Pot Growers Union?

Feb 06, 2013 11:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
rickhenk wrote:

well damn, looks like I need to stop smoking weed.

Feb 06, 2013 12:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OdinsAcolyte wrote:

Idiots. No need to share more revenue with anyone. Pay the weed tax and take care of business. Do it the old fashioned way. Sandwich baggies. Dispensaries…wow. Why must folks make something so simple into a complicated matter? I suppose to make it seem as if one is doing something. Add layers of government and the simple exercise of any business becomes a whole big affair. It ain’t nothing. Put the clock back to another time. The government has little business in business. Other people have no business at all in your business.

Feb 06, 2013 12:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
garylee123 wrote:

I’ve always said that if you want to to see expensive drugs, legalize them and get the gov’t to tax them.

Feb 06, 2013 1:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
minfxbg wrote:

When can we expect to to see lawsuits people who have developed some sort of cancer, or caused a horrific accident due to marijuana use?
Or from people claiming addition due to increased THC in the grass they buy?
Perhaps the “grass’ industry should take a lesson from the tobacco industry and start buying billion dollar insurance policies, because sooner or later, there will be a lawsuit.

Feb 06, 2013 1:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
faceofus wrote:

Just great! Both are Obama criminals. Obama supports the drug cartels with assault rifles, and the unions with money and kickbacks.

Feb 06, 2013 1:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Geeezzzzzzzz Who could’ve guessed? Marijuana finally will be legalized — all we needed was the Labor Unions to back the idea!!!!!! If we had thunk harder — coud’ve done it years ago.

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFTTTTTTTTTTT!

Feb 06, 2013 2:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mooser6540 wrote:

Unions are looking for another meal ticket, they smell the money.

Feb 06, 2013 2:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JackedKennedy wrote:

so I need a union puke to pick my plants on the porch …………yea sure, this will help the unions stay alive during the obama depression

Feb 06, 2013 2:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse

SO the weed you buy will be about as good as the American cars that unions make? How soon until growers take their jobs overseas because the union employees want ridiculously high wages and benefits? LOL go for it unions…You’ve been in the pockets of organized crime since your inception, why change now?

Feb 06, 2013 2:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kleb7 wrote:

As a person with MS in constant pain I’d much rather smoke or eat marijuana than the vicodin they have me taking now…. Just saying.

Feb 06, 2013 3:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Whale !!!!!! Oil ………………….. Beef….. Hooked !!!!!

Feb 06, 2013 3:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cristo52 wrote:

If the Unions are for it, there’s no stopping Obama, it’s going to be made legal.

Feb 06, 2013 3:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse

One more reason to let unions die out. Now the drug dealers want collective bargaining.

Feb 06, 2013 4:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MikeWr wrote:

Whats next for the Unions , Prostitution ? That would figure because most union leaders are a bunch of money grubbing immoral whores anyhow.

Feb 06, 2013 5:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Azza9 wrote:

I normally don’t buy in to the hard liner Right wing anti union rhetoric, because sans the corruption Unions are a good idea. But this UFCW’s behaviour seems awfully, how can I say this… parasitic in nature.
Reminds me of an emaciated tick waiting in the grass eyeing up it’s next unwitting host.
If the potheads want their own union they’ll form a new one.

Feb 06, 2013 6:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Aranhas wrote:

He feels safer with the union around. A pot dealer working with a union. Actually, they go together. The unions have been working with organized crime since 1931, when my great-grandparents tied up with Anton Cermak to create the Chicago Machine. They worked with every crooked union in the city. My relatives were precinct captains and ward heelers in the 1st and 5th wards. They are plugged into the University and virtually every civil service job in Indiana, Wisconsin, and Illinois. They are all union. They are all crooks. My grandpa was given the job of overseeing the “water works” for drumming up votes. He owned a bar. He didn’t know where the “water works” was. Probably because there wasn’t any “water works”. The unions and the Machine suck the money out of workers and tap into government funds. There are a lot of millionaires in the Machine families – a lot.

Feb 06, 2013 8:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Mandy123 wrote:

So if we link this to unions it has to be linked to the Democrat Party. That is the way to create jobs, President Obama. Geez.

Feb 06, 2013 8:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Lakini wrote:

This ought to be funny to watch. The potheads are about to get a lesson in real world business with the unions. First the two guys that opened the shop will hire a couple employees to help them out at the shop. Next, they’ll learn that the UFCW workers they hired aren’t allowed to weigh the pot, just bag it and ring it up. So they’ll have to hire somebody to weigh it. Then they’ll have to hire somebody else to clean, because again, the contract doesn’t allow the UFCW workers to do that either. They’ll also need to hire another person to clean when the union cleaner strikes becuase the job doesn’t pay $125k/yr. Then they’ll need an ombudsman to mediate disputes between employees. They’ll have a delegate to mediate between management and labor. They’ll also need a pension and benefit administrator and a couple of no-show union “employees” just because that’s what the unions do. Suddenly, a small 4 person shop can’t afford to pay the light bill because it has to pay salaries and benefits to 19 people (who don’t add any value to the business) and it can’t fire any of them because of the union contracts.

Feb 06, 2013 8:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DigitalBob wrote:

It will hilarious to watch the entire grow operation go up in flames every time the contract is up for negotiation.

Feb 06, 2013 10:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
act1 wrote:

From my experience, years ago, the Retail Clerks Union in San Francisco wasn’t above thuggery, individual harassment, malicious mischief. It’s hard to feel sympathy for a workers union that indulges in criminal acts.

Feb 07, 2013 9:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
nanee23 wrote:

Everyone can keep up the intimidation…….we will not give up! Us “Potheads” have our rights, just like you drunks and pill poppers.

Feb 07, 2013 1:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gregbrew56 wrote:

40 hour work week? Check.
Safe working conditions? Check.
A lunch break? Check.
A thriving middle class? Check.
Health and welfare benefits? Check.

All brought to you by the very same labor unions that are currently being systematically dismantled. The result is that almost all of the above benefits are being lost, with employees once again working at the whim of big business with their quality of life deteriorating.

Keep ranting, you anti-union posters. Drink from the big business kool-aid and continue to assist them in the downfall of the American worker.

Be careful what you wish for.

Feb 07, 2013 2:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
nixonfan wrote:

An offer they can’t refuse.

Feb 07, 2013 10:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.