Talk:Labor spying in the United States

This article is still "under construction" but is mature enough to move out of user space. Richard Myers 01:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV and dubious statements

It certainly cannot be claimed that all workers' organizations are inclusionist in character. Even the Knights of Labor, often cited as an example for labor inclusionism, not only excluded Chinese, but even participated in pogroms against them. What about the long history of women being excluded from trade unions? What about Nazi, Fascist, and neo-Fascist trade unions? Though the second half of the statement, which claims that all corporations are hierarchically structured, is truer than the first, there are also exceptions here.--Carabinieri 18:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Historically unions have, by far, been the much more frequent targets of orchestrated spying campaigns, which are, appropriately, the subject of this article." You can hardly prove that.--Carabinieri 18:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the observations, and i have attempted changes which, i hope, will go some distance toward addressing the concerns. Please take another look, and let me know what you think. Richard Myers 20:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That does look a lot better, thanks for addressing my concerns so quickly. Yet you are still going to have to cite sources with "statistics cited by researchers" to back that claim up. Anyways, the article looks good all in all, the main problem is that it covers almost exclusively the situation in the US. I wouldn't be disinclined to re-scoping this article to something like Labor espionage in the United States.--Carabinieri 20:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On worldwide relevance

The article includes this:

Geographic region — If this topic seems somewhat U.S.-centric, that may be appropriate. Only in the United States has the struggle between management and labor resulted in such a contingent of mercenaries who specialize in breaking strikes.<Reference>From Blackjacks To Briefcases — A History of Commercialized Strikebreaking and Unionbusting in the United States, Robert Michael Smith, 2003, page xiv.<End Reference>

The observation that this situation has occurred "only in the United States" comes from a legitimate source. However, the situation may be a bit less clear. For example, i have noted that Pinkertons have worked in Canada. While that doesn't invalidate the point, it certainly suggests there were reasons (financial incentives?) for such agencies to exist elsewhere.

I have ordered several additional sources, so this observation may stand or fall.

In the meantime, if anyone can shed additional light on the annotated statement, please do so here. Richard Myers 20:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see if I can find anything on the situation in Europe, but I have to admit, when I read the word "labor spy", the United States and especially Pinkerton do come to my mind.--Carabinieri 12:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible need for consolidation

Need to explore references to Frank Steunenberg and Harry Orchard, etc., to see if these can be consolidated... Richard Myers 11:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move to delete / merge with "Union busting"

This article is linked to by few other articles, is titled with a nebulous jargon word, contains unverified and uncited claims or original research, and generally duplicates material covered better and more comprehensively elsewhere.

Therefore, I move that this article be either deleted or else merged with "Union busting". Tommythegun 18:19, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]