The Clackamas Print Page 2
r, Nov. 2,1994
NEWS/OPINION
Oregon and the Art Center see more rain than ever
V It's raining, it's pouring, the old man Is snoring
by Jeff Kemp
Editing & Design Editor
Last Thursday, Oregon saw its heaviest rain ever. Ac
cording to the National Weather Service, 4.77 inches of
rain fell in Portland in a 48-hour period. Clackamas Com
munity College saw even more than that October has seen
an outstanding 8.41 inches of rain and almost 8 of those
came in the last seven days.
The downpour washed out Thursday's scheduled classes
in the Art Center and closed some pathways in the Envi
ronmental Learning Center.
“We don’t have a drainage system that can accommo
date this kind of rain,” said Carol Patterson, director of
Plant Services.
Patterson had her personnel draining the Art Center
around the clock last Thursday and Friday. Classes in the
Art Center resumed after rigorous cleaning efforts by Plant
Services were completed Friday morning. Sand bags were
also used to ward off future flooding, but Patterson calls the
project “ongoing”.
"At this point there's really nothing we can do,"
Flooding forced the closure of several
The Art Center was forced to cancel classes Patterson explained.
pathways In the ELC.
last Thursday because of the heavy rain.
Lett eriioliOe|Bd||Öif Labor disputes have no winners
English instructor
denounces vandalism
Tb the Editor.
' v
yan^alisrh.hurtsprbperty
and people. Last Tuesday; the:
:bumperstiGkerS,:prdclainiing'
"Noon is*on 6 offices-, to tb&
with equal and opposite force?
I speak put more, vehemently:
•apdpohftderiily/.-.ifg^ep^
w^ts toxfiahge my vote/tfiefr:
English department were
ripped' W between 4^4 5^9
not tty to intimidate me. ’ Mea
sure 13 to'itoelf
attempt
p.m. The week before I called
bpedftny student^
whose car was bombarded with
eggs for no ostensible reason?
Other than die car. H^d a "No on
to silence a group of people, to
deny people their Visibility and
vorce. If the person who thruw
eggs orsirippedlhebutnper
stickers is reading this letter, I
hope that:M or she knowsiO;
he ot she;helped me redodbiig
? 13* sticker.‘. These twbtool*
erance. In a college, freedom
=of speech is especially precious,: right of speech and the rights
and we should respect therighls
of Students .arid facultyto.speak;
of under-represented peoples,
Sincerely»
s/
and show the# opinions.
• • When someone triesfi^fe
Kate Gray
/Z t
.:idhcemy.vqice;Itry toresppnd' •>; English Instructor ..
Ike CCaduuHM P’ uh X StoJi
Editor-in-Chief: Tina Guinn (Ext. 2576)
News Editor: Anjanette Booth (Ext. 2576)
Feature Editor: Jocelyn Gauthier (Ext. 2577)
Sports Editor: Jason Hunter (Ext. 2577)
Photography Editor: Chad Patteson (Ext. 2578)
Copy Editor: Cöri Karget (Ext. 2578)
Business Manager: Zach Kreinheder (Ext. 2578)
Editing and Design Editor: Jeff Kemp (Ext. 2578)
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Staff Writers/Photographers:
Eric Eatherton, Jessica Garcia,
Donny Kemp, Michelle Shipman,
Christi Snavely, Jesse Sowa,
Angela Williams, Josh Kehler
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Secretary: Cheryl Willemse (Ext. 2309)
Advisor : John Knowlton (Ext. 2310)
The Clackamas Print aims to report the news in an honest, unbiased, pro
fessional manner. The opinions expressed in The Clackamas Print do not nec
essarily reflect those of the student body, college administration, its faculty or
The Clackamas Print's advertisers. Products and services advertised in The
Clackamas Print are not necessarily endorsed by anyone associated with The
Clackamas Print. The Clackamas Print is a weekly publication distributed
every Wednesday except for finals week. The advertising rate is $4.50 per col
umn inch.
All letters to the editor will be considered for publication and must be sub
mitted by 1 p.m. the Friday prior to the next issue.
Clackamas Communtiy College, 19600 S. Molalla Avenue, Oregon City,
Oregon, 97045; Barlow 104; (503) 657-6958, ext. 2309.
by Eric Charles
Columnist
You know about the goings-
on in our grocery stores. Need I
remind you about the baseball
strike, pending hockey lockout
and nasty words being spoken in
basketball? Labor disputes. You
know how they get started: the
workers’ (usually represented by
their unions) Cv^'acts expire,
they negotiate for new contracts
which may or may not appeal to
management...and so it goes.
That’s a major point of labor
management relations. What hap
pens is labor and management ask
something of each other. (To be
gin with, it’s often labor provides
products/services for manage
ment, and in turn management
pays labor reasonable wages.)
Sometimes that’s not enough, so
either side asks for something
more; sometimes the other side
may be reluctant to give it When
that occurs, usually there are a few
steps before there is an actual
strike. The situation may be
settled in one of those steps. If
nothing else works, though, the
union may ask for a strike. Once
the strike goes into effect, look
out. Boycotts, ad campaigns
sometimes as nasty or nastier than
some political ads...you get the
picture.
I wouldn’t bring up the sub
ject of labor disputes given what’s
going on, but I think nobody truly
wins in them. You may get higher
wages, a secure schedule, senior
ity and thus job security, but at
what cost? (This column is about
what I’ve seen about labor dis
putes generally, not about any spe
cific labor dispute.)
Why nobody truly wins: the
old physics law holds here: “For
every action, there’s an equal and
opposite reaction.” Let’s say a
union of workers was striking for
higher wages. If the workers get
higher wages, the prevalent belief
is their standard of living will
improve. Yet what happens,
maybe not pronto but in the long
term, is these new higher wages
will raise a business’ labor, costs
and cut into that business’ profit
margin. In some industries, that
profit margin is already low,
hence a possible loss might result.
So to maintain those profit mar
gins and avoid a loss, the busi
ness may have to raise its prices
to make up for the profits it would
lose to the higher labor costs. The
higher prices would negate what
ever raise in standard of living
striking workers would’ve ex
pected in the long term. Thus, the
real raise would be negligible.
With those higher prices, the cus
tomers lose.
Also, since businesses usu
ally profit by providing goods and
services of reasonable quality at
reasonable prices with excellent
service, if a boycott comes along,
that business may stand to lose
massive amounts of revenue and
customers. (It could be driven out
of business, but that’d represent
an extreme case.) So how will it
make up for all that? Yup - raise
prices. That business won’t be the
same again after getting a bad rap.
Again, the customers lose.
If the pertinent issue is se
niority (i.e. workers who’ve been
with an employer for a longer pe
riod of time are less likely to be
fired), job security is dictated by
your tenure of work in a compa
ny. Don’t get me wrong;
seniority’s worth getting, as it’s a
visible sign of company loyalty.
But if companies are firing work
ers, that means more work to do
for the ones still with jobs, and
perhaps the remaining workers
might suffer from stress. Also,
someone who might’ve been very
loyal to customers could be laid
off and his/her replacement (if
there is one) could be...let’s just
say it won’t be quite the same
again. .
Concerning work hours, full-
time workers usually work the
same amount of hours each week,
or an amount not too much dif
ferent.
Sometimes labor unions ask
that there not be part-time jobs.
The role of the part-time worker,
in my opinion, is to assist the full-
time worker when demand is high
for products/services. Also, part-
time woik can be useful to build
a work ethic and experience, not
to mention pay the bills or pro
vide a little extra pocket money.
(Besides, if employers truly
wanted to cut labor costs, they
would go where labor is less ex
pensive, e.g. the Third World.)
Still on money: the United
States has one of the highest stan
dards of living in the world. And,
from what I’ve seen, Americans
pay less taxes than their European
and Oriental counterparts. Thus,
Americans have more take-home
pay than these same counterparts.
So why ask for more wages when
you’re paid more than a lot of
people around the world already?!
Another point concerning
labor disputes: unions have strike
benefits for their members who
don’t show up for work because
they’re picketing. But the strike
benefits union members receive
for picketing are a fraction of
what the same workers get paid
for the job they usually do. So
what happens? The union mem
bers lose their standard of living.
If more than one union works in
a particular business, and if one
(or more) of these unions either
goes on strike or honors the picket
line and thus convinces its mem
bers to picket, those workers will
receive strike benefits and lose
their standard of living as well,
since the strike benefits are a far
cry from the regular wages.
To summarize: nobody wins
in a labor dispute because higher
wages mean higher labor costs ;
the business gets a bad rap be
cause of boycotts, thus losing rev
enue and customer loy-alty ; job
security can be dictated by quan
tity rather than quality; and since
strike bene-fits are a fraction of
wages, standards of living may
drop.