Letter to the Editor in Response to Scot Lehigh Column

11/25/09

To the editor,

It's kind of impressive that Scot Lehigh ("The candidates and the unions," 11/25/09) can find any vehicle to recycle his tired, uninformed anti-union propaganda. Like Thanksgiving, this column comes along annually. With a campaign to replace the late Senator Kennedy going full steam ahead during the worst economic crisis in generations and highest unemployment since the 70's, you'd think he would find plenty of new subjects to write about, especially since his points are roundly disproved every time they're reprinted. Instead, this critic of workers demonstrates his own aversion to real work by reaching into the drawer for a carbon copy of his annual anti-PLA, pro-charter school, self-aggrandizing critique of unions. That Lehigh takes issue with unions seeking to assess candidates' values and levels of support for the most important issues isn't surprising. That he seeks to belittle jobs in the American auto industry, scoff at the Employee Free Choice Act, bash project labor agreements, praise privatization, and make support of unions a blemish on candidates for office is to be expected. What is both surprising and disappointing is that the Globe would allow him to do so without even a hint of evidence, void of any reference to fact, any basis in reality, and without any sign he did any research at all. My phone certainly never rang to get my view about this subject. But why call me? It was only my organization's questionnaire about which he was writing. In his latest column there are too many straw men to knock down and fallacious statements to address here. Most of all, I'm curious how many pro-business groups' questionnaires he examined looking for promises made to the business elite that created the economic crisis he should be covering? Did he ask for questionnaires from the Chambers of Commerce or NFIB or AIM or any of the other business front groups he shills for in his columns? Though Lehigh anoints himself high judge of the public interest and determines that his pet peeves about unions must automatically diverge from those interests, I'd say that lazy, predictable journalism that isn't even blog-worthy diverges farther from the public interest than any of the questions we ask of candidates for office. Shame on the Globe. Maybe his column could be taken seriously had Scot Lehigh actually made the effort to cover the PUBLIC, two-hour, Democratic candidates' forum we hosted on October 29th that discussed at length and in detail the issues in our questionnaire. But then that would have required a little effort, which is the least we should be able to expect from someone who spends his time criticizing workers. In an election to replace labor's greatest champion, since Mr. Lehigh doesn't seem interested, at least labor is asking these candidates if they stand with workers like Senator Kennedy did.

Sincerely,
Robert J. Haynes
President, Massachusetts AFL-CIO
389 Main Street
Malden, MA 02148