Card check isn't a secret process

As the owner of a "small" business that has grown from two owners to 650 employees, I feel compelled to respond to Dorsey Roland's Compass article "Corporations are not the workers' friend" (May 11) and Rachel Moore's letter to the editor saying "Card Check isn't new; it has a long history among unions" (May 13).

Let us be clear, unions are corporations and they are big business. This fight is over who controls the money earned by workers, not about the workers themselves.

The present system uses card signatures to express interest in unionizing and if that interest is shown, the National Labor Relations Board, not the company, uses a secret ballot. This is the "American Way," as we all know it in our voting system. With the proposed card check system, employees can be influenced to sign a card because the ballot process is not secret; therefore, undue pressure could and would be applied to the workers. Under the proposed system, the card check could unionize a company with a large percentage of employees not even being aware of the movement.

If card check passes, it will be bad for employees, bad for business and bad for the country.

-- Harry McDonald

Anchorage

Send bears across the Inlet

The answer to Anchorage's bear "problem" is simple. We can send them all over to Charlie Vandergaw's for dinner. I am sure Charlie will be a great host and let them stay the summer so ours can be "problem" free.

-- Michael Gustafson

Eagle River

City can leave bigotry to the past

We all struggle with our internal conflicts: racism, sexism, ageism, etc. Policies are important tools to challenge our weaknesses, fears, and misunderstandings of other people.

To oppose efforts to reduce and eliminate the insidious and sometimes blatant oppression and discrimination imposed on a group or class of people for the simple reason that they are different makes one a bigot no better than the most sinister and foul bigots to have stained the world's history books. The atrocities of Adolf Hitler still bleed today. This is not the proud legacy that I am sure most Germans would prefer, nor is this the type of legacy that Anchorage desires to support.

We owe it to our citizens, to our leaders, and to our children to prepare our community for all people regardless or race, gender, ethnicity and yes, sexual orientation. It is time to put these days of bigotry behind and support a universal ban on discrimination in Anchorage. Let us not be the dysfunctional outpost of the north, rather, a shining example to the world.

-- Michael R. Powell

Anchorage

Money would bring bureaucracy

Stimulus money for energy-saving projects is seductive, but I fear the price tag for $28 million rejected by Gov. Palin is adoption of a rigid national energy code and our agreement to comply with future changes made by outsiders.

Will a national energy code force us to save energy? The answer is unclear; Alaskans already are extremely energy conscious. As a professional engineer in the business of designing efficient energy systems, I can attest to the excellent progress Alaskans have made since the 1970s. Alaskan buildings are more efficient because the marketplace demands more efficiency.

One thing is certain: An energy code will bring more bureaucracy and higher administrative costs to prove compliance. A federally mandated energy standard could result in millions of dollars in new compliance costs for Alaskans each year. In less than 10 years, even a small increase in code compliance expenses could cost us twice as much as the stimulus money offered today.

Before we jump into the pond, let's check the depth of the water.

-- Boyd Morgenthaler, P.E.

Anchorage

Tell legislators to end gas gouging

Price-gouging legislation is essential for a state like Alaska, where an oligopoly exists in the marketplace for gasoline and consumers continue to pay a premium at the pump.

The percentage marked up from the refineries' cost to the price we pay to fill our gas tanks is skewed in favor of the refineries because of limited competition.

Historically Alaskans have paid 10 to 20 cents more per gallon than the rest of the U.S., but today refineries charge anywhere from 70 cents to $1 more than average rates.

Rep. Ramras deserved praise for hearings examining the issue, but put forth no legislation. Reps. Pete Peterson and Les Gara, as well as Sens. Bill Wielechowski and Johnny Ellis, sponsored legislation that would put the onus of proof on refineries to justify their prices.

Protecting consumers should not be a partisan issue, so ask the Legislature to put posturing aside and help all Alaskans at the gas pump.

-- Gabe Aceves

executive director, Alaska Public Interest Research Group

Anchorage

Unions also help protect workers

I urge Sen. Murkowski to support the Employee Free Choice Act. The act would give employees a clear path to unionization without the fear of being fired and toughen penalties against corporations that violate workers' rights.

The benefits of unionization are not limited to higher wages and better benefits. The voice afforded to union workers on job safety, security and pay can also benefit the environment, especially when it comes to green jobs for Alaska. Workers with job protection are more likely to call attention to corporate malpractice and environmental degradation. We've seen it before. Unionized steelworkers on separate occasions in California and New Jersey held their employers accountable for toxic effluent that harmed the workers and their communities.

For the sake of our workers and our pristine state, we should ensure that these are not isolated incidents. As we work to green our economy we need to allow employees the democratic right to unionize by passing the Employee Free Choice Act.

-- Kelcie Ralph

Anchorage

Carbon dioxide is a necessary gas

As I traveled around Alaska attending many "Climate Commission" hearings, it became apparent that there was very little technical understanding of basic facts.

When asked "What are the two most important gases for the existence of life?" Most people guessed one -- that being oxygen.

Air at sea level is composed of three main gases -- nitrogen, 78.08 percent; oxygen, 20.95 percent and argon, 0.93 percent -- totaling 99.96 percent.

Where is carbon dioxide, the gas of concern for those wishing to sell "carbon credits" or control people in various ways?

Carbon dioxide is commonly reported at over 300 parts per million or 300,000 parts per billion -- scary numbers. But it is just over 0.03 percent -- hardly significant in a common sense sort of way even if it varies slightly.

What was the other most important gas for life on earth?

You've guessed it -- carbon dioxide.

The sun's energy, water and carbon dioxide photosynthesize to form food for most life on Earth. I fear that carbon dioxide levels could fall and negatively impact life, while a rise in these levels would increase plant life and is positive in many respects.

Since our greatest source of energy, the sun, historically varies along with a host of other variables, we can expect the climate to change and there is little that can be done by mere mortals. However, conservation of resources, including energy, and positive development along those lines is something that we all can do.

-- Dennis Nottingham, P.E.

Anchorage

ADVERTISEMENT