While Kenneth Hurst may think that Gallo workers, or the entire labor movement for that matter, are unjustified in their claims for higher wages or a contract (“Wine workers’ demands irrational, unproductive,” May 31), the claims he made in his submission are realistically the only claims that are completely irrational and contradict the humanistic values of life, freedom and worth.
To assume that Gallo workers’ labor consists merely of “repetitive tasks that require little thinking” and thus are not worth a higher salary is a disgusting claim.
It’s obvious that he and others with his point of view have never actually looked at the labor conditions or current market analysis of these workers, much less had compassion for the human value of their lives or labor.
Does he even know the reason for the boycott on Gallo wine? It certainly appears not, as his article implies workers want higher wages merely for “unsubstantiated, fallacious and immoral” reasons, and are thus “destroying the entire concept of earning and effectively putting Gallo’s resources at the disposal of people who do not own them.”
Again, I wonder, has he looked at labor issues more realistically than a paper-and-pen economic analysis? Has he considered the truth of the violations against these workers by Gallo and the validity in workers’ attempts to right those wrongs?
Only by generalizing, not looking at facts, and adopting the same self-serving and greedy mind-set as those whose “productive genius” runs Gallo could he possibly support the notion that their work is not worth the basic human right to freedom.
Gallo workers do not have freedom – they do not have the option to “accept or reject the (Gallo employment) offer,” as he claims. Rather, most have no say in the negotiation of unlivable wages appropriated by big business. And many cannot afford to live on their current wages.
Gallo workers are fighting not just for wages, but for a fair union contract that can guarantee their rights to such items as potable water in the fields, wages high enough to pay living costs, and the right to gather and negotiate without having their residency, jobs or livelihoods threatened.
Somehow, it’s always those on top (making the most money) and those who don’t seem to realize the intensely harsh conditions for these workers who think they have the right to judge whose labor deserves these basic necessities in the workplace and whose does not.
Labor, no matter the type, deserves adequate livable wages and workplaces that promote rather than destroy the well-being of employees – two standards that Gallo has failed to give its workers for over 30 years.
Some of us, like myself, have compassion for those who physically suffer in ways that most corporate thinkers, university students and non-immigrant families cannot even imagine – and we support the notion that they do in fact deserve more pay.
Younger is a third-year Latin American studies and Chicana/o studies student.