Coors beer heir, 28, a strong backer of right-to-work issue
By Joanne Kelley and Chris Barge
Published April 8, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Jonathan Coors
Jonathan Coors
By taking on the controversial "right-to-work" issue, 28-year-old Jonathan Coors follows in the footsteps of a late grandfather who also championed conservative causes and sparred with labor interests.
The executive at CoorsTek, a privately held ceramics company, has emerged as a top proponent of a statewide right-to-work ballot initiative, which is setting off a firestorm in the business and labor communities.
Gov. Bill Ritter, who opposes putting the measure to a vote this fall, met Monday with Coors and other business leaders in a closed-door meeting to seek a compromise on the issue.
The showdown comes decades after the Coors beer empire locked horns with union activists, a dispute that began before Jonathan Coors was born. His grandfather, Joe Coors Sr., led what his opponents described as a relentless campaign to crush the brewery's union.
Coors Sr.'s brother, Bill Coors, now 91, instantly recalls the year the strike ended, with many of the employees returning to work.
"It was 1978. There hasn't been a union there since," Bill Coors said in an interview Monday. "If you want to go into AFL-CIO headquarters in Washington, D.C., and mention my name, you'll get thrown out."
Still, the oldest surviving grandson of brewery founder Adolph Coors said he personally opposes "right-to-work" laws.
"That's an issue between the management and the union," Bill Coors said.
He noted that Colorado's Labor Peace Act, which occupies a middle ground, "has served both the unions and the managements well. I don't think we should tamper with it."
Other members of Colorado's business community have also expressed concern about a looming shift in labor relations.
The ballot initiative would put an end to agreements between employers and workers that require workers to pay for union representation even if they don't belong to the union.
Current law allows workers to vote on such an arrangement. Labor groups contend that all workers who are covered by collective bargaining agreements should share the costs with union members if most employees share that view.
Among those at the hourlong meeting in Ritter's office Monday were former University of Denver Chancellor Dan Ritchie and Chuck Berry, president of the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry.
As they left Ritter's office, Ritchie and Berry, honoring a request by Ritter not to discuss publicly what was said, declined to comment.
Ritter spokesman Evan Dreyer said the leaders are keeping a muzzle on the talks "because they're very important and very sensitive. And it is helpful if these conversations are allowed to occur at their own pace in their own way."
Ritter has not scheduled a meeting with labor interests to discuss the same topic, Dreyer said. "But he has had many conversations with labor over the past week, including today, and over the weekend."
Dreyer declined to discuss Ritter's message to the business leaders specifically. But in general, "Gov. Ritter believes that it would be bad for Colorado if we end up in a ballot-box showdown in November."
Dreyer said Ritter sees Thursday as "definitely an important day" as it's the deadline for the petitioners to file the necessary signatures with the secretary of state to get the right-to-work measure on the November ballot. Coors left the meeting with Ritter out the back door of the governor's first-floor office, heading down the Capitol's west steps to his silver Audi station wagon.
"The contents of the meeting are private," Coors said as he climbed into his car. "But I really appreciate the governor getting all the business interests together."
The fifth-generation member of the Coors beer empire - he's the great-great grandson of Adolph Coors - works at a company with roots in the family business. But he's been actively involved in politics for years.
In 2000, he volunteered for conservative Christian leader Gary Bauer when Bauer was running for the Republican presidential nomination. In a pingpong match with the candidate at a Super Bowl party that year, Coors won so handily that the elder conservative quipped: "You just lost your Cabinet post."
A few years later, he showed up in news reports as an advance man for California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
That position likely put him in the same circles as former Schwarzenegger aide Reed Galen, the consultant hired to handle the strategy in the campaign for securing passage of the right-to-work amendment come November.
Coors is a 2003 graduate of Pepperdine University's Seavers College in Malibu, Calif.
He now serves as government relations director for Golden-based CoorsTek.
His father, John K. Coors, heads the company and also founded a Christian evangelical charity that provides aid for cooking and lighting for households in rural Africa.
kelleyj@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5068
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
April 8, 2008
2:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
gwats writes:
28 years old. Never been cold, hungry, or had to pay a bill or starve a child that was his own blood to pay a mortgage or a light bill. Do you think this punk has anything to say I'd be willing to listen to? Anything @ all?
And serving shi**y food in Africa doesn't cut it for me. You've paid no dues and I despise phonies. Take your Limbaugh views and go jump off a cliff.
April 8, 2008
2:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Domino writes:
Right wing scum
April 8, 2008
5:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
vudumom writes:
What about federal government contracts? If a union has some of the building contract and some non-union company has some, the non-union employees have to get paid union wages plus benefits. Which means for example say the hourly wage is $21.00 and the benefits bring the actual wage up to $26.00,non-union companies on that federal job have to pay union wages plus scale, (the cost of the benefit package) That is why you saw so many illegals at the federal job at Lowry. They were taking good paying wages away from people who would do the work and I'll bet you the company that hired them was not paying full wages plus scale.Non-union members should not be allowed to get paid the same amount as union members and not pay their dues like everyone else. There are some things I don't like about the unions.The same can be said by people who work anyplace. You may not like your boss or co-worker or the benefits.Everyone has some problem with their employers.
I'll tell you this though.My husband has been in a union for 29 years.We have never been without healthcare a day in our lives.Never.You all may complain about the union but at the same time everyone is griping about not having healthcare or being dropped for a pre-existing condition or not being able to get coverage because of a pre-existing condition. We have never been without healthcare. He was only out of work for a month in his entire career. It was when Reagan had just come into office. We still had healthcare. In the union you can bank hours . He usually has enough healthcare banked for 9 months after that he can pay at a reduced cost. With healthcare being such a wanted perk that people expect my husbands and mine taxes to pay for. How many of you can say you have never been without healthcare?How many non-union employees have a pension,an annuity,healthcare until medicare kicks in? You can say all you want about the union but it has been good for our family even with all it's flaws. No job is perfect.
April 8, 2008
8:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
timeandagain writes:
Ritter is pathetic. He is pandering to a dead constituency and is making a big political mistake. The days of the unions are OVER...
April 8, 2008
8:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
Monument to Priviledge
April 8, 2008
8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
kirbysfriend22 writes:
You anti-worker, anti-labor fools make me laugh every time. Step on all the little guys.
And you right wingers always are the first to explain how the government has no business getting involved with labor or fixing the economy or that the problem with schools is that they aren't privatized. But you are in FAVOR of a law establishing right to work? I see how it works with you.
The elder Coors had a good point.
"Still, the oldest surviving grandson of brewery founder Adolph Coors said he personally opposes "right-to-work" laws.
"That's an issue between the management and the union," Bill Coors said.
April 8, 2008
9:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
EastVail writes:
Coors is an underachieving fortunate son.
April 8, 2008
9:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
BMat writes:
Posted by gwats on April 8, 2008 at 2:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
28 years old. Never been cold, hungry, or had to pay a bill or starve a child that was his own blood to pay a mortgage or a light bill. Do you think this punk has anything to say I'd be willing to listen to? Anything @ all?
And serving shi**y food in Africa doesn't cut it for me. You've paid no dues and I despise phonies. Take your Limbaugh views and go jump off a cliff.
____________________
Gwats - you got that right!
If Jonathan's last name wasn't Coors nobody would pay attention to him. Ditto his uncle Petey that wants the drinking age lowered to 18 to get even richer on the backs of drunken teens.
This creep is exactly why George Washington supported a heavy estate tax. He worried about "American Nobility" whose voice in the political realm is made louder by a fat stack of cash he did nothing to earn and couldn't possibly spend through.
Jonathan Coors: If you really want to help the workers of Colorado then go make some beer that doesn't taste like watered down bovine urine. I'll drink it when I get home from my union meeting - promise!
Thanks in advance Jonny-boy.
April 8, 2008
9:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
DougH writes:
It is disgraceful that a 28 YO, wet behind the ears trust-funder, has nothing better to do than spend his trust fund on undermining the average worker in Colorado.
It appears that his day job at daddies factory of handing out checks to lobbyists does not give him enough to do..
The more we weaken Union representation and power, the more everyone is weakened in their jobs and employment security. The Mountain States Employers Council calls this having a “Compliant” workforce.
It is a disgrace to the Coors family heritage in Colorado that young Jonathan would so blatantly promote the Right To Work for Less initiative that will cause harm to working families all over Colorado
April 8, 2008
9:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
urnfndbag writes:
Check out wages for surrounding states with right to work laws. pretty much sums it up. proponents act like people are being forced into unions and have no options, it's bull intended to lower worker's wages.
No more coors for me.
April 8, 2008
9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
Coors makes the worst beer.
April 8, 2008
9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
nowhearthis writes:
Welcoming everyone back to the real world, its obvious that GM and Ford (another fortunate son working for the family company) are failing because they have been producing inferior products for thirty years, and not because of the unions. And the fact that Detroit is not the greatest place to be is the direct result of the failings of the American auto industry, and not because of the unions. The foreign auto companies have primarily built their plants in the south, where the unions are not strong. Also, Detroit does not have the highest murder rate in the country. Although, conservative talking points never really got tripped up by facts though, did they?
April 8, 2008
9:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Keno33 writes:
Union employees are the worst in the world. Over paid and talentless. If this state forces more labor down my throat I will just close my doors here and take my company somewhere else. Go ahead liberal labor, force me to move down to Costa Rica! Where the weather is fine, beachs are nice, and the workers want to work.
April 8, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
DougH writes:
Memo to Keno 33,
Please close your doors and leave the state. No one is, will or has been forcing more labor down your throat. If you just treat your employees as chattel to be paid as cheaply as possible, then don't let the door hit you ...
April 8, 2008
10:01 a.m.
BMat writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
April 8, 2008
10:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
uncledave writes:
Well, I respectfully disagree with the senior Mr. Coors when he says that these issues are best resolved between unions and management. Call me crazy but I think maybe the workers should have some say in the matter of whether or not to join a union and whether or not to pay dues regardless of that decision.
April 8, 2008
10:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
"...that kid would never survive if he should have to actually work for money." - froward69
Notice how so many on the left and who support unions 100% always accuse management, ownership, and executives of "not working"???? These same idiots think that companies and wealth spring from nothing and they they do not have to be invented, financed, managed, or planned at all. They think jobs for all and 100% employment are the natural state that nature provides and that if the GOP and those "greedy businessmen would just stay out of it all we would all have great jobs and health insurance too!!
I would bet - without ever having met Jonathan Coors - that you could drop this "kid" anywhere and he would not only survive, but he would own a large chunk of wherever he was dropped in a short time - without help from his family or trust fund.
April 8, 2008
11:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Contempt_for_Texas writes:
Good for Jonathan Coors. This kid probably has a trust fund and doesn't have to work, but does. The alternative is Paris Hilton. The Coors family could have sold out a long time ago, but has maintained control, worked hard, and maintained a huge presense in Colorado for Coloradoans, or is it Coloradans?
April 8, 2008
11:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
jdm8794 writes:
AMEN Michael..totally agree.
April 8, 2008
11:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
MikeaLoeb writes:
Jonathan Coors has nothing to apologize for. Nor does the Coors family. Nor am I going to apologize for working hard and becoming part of management.
Unions need to go away. They are organized crime syndicates that survive by racketeering legitimate companies. Not only are these organized crime syndicates accepted by the democrats. They take marching orders from them. I wish more republican politicans had the guts to speak out against them.
Oh, and ask Michigan where pandering to unions got them. Unions have no place in 2008 America.
April 8, 2008
11:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
MikeaLoeb writes:
checkout unionfacts.com
April 8, 2008
11:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay045 writes:
I'm actually on the left and disagree with the politics of Jonathan Coors, but I dislike the personal attacks being lobbed on this guy. We don't know his past, though certainly he has plenty of advantages in life. Lots of us do, regardless of income levels. He might be a hard working, ambitious guy who puts in long hours (I hope he isn't, because I would like his efforts to fail).
I will agree that the news media would pay no attention to him if he was a 28 year old with a different last name. Yet this guy probably is the next high profile Coors to take the helm, so they can't ignore him.
April 8, 2008
11:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
MikeaLoeb writes:
Unions don't solve crimes nor do they put out fires. That irrelevant conclusion as to the benefit unions are to society.
Locally, many union leaders have criminal backgrounds. The local leader of the UFCW has done time for money laundering and extortion. Why would any legitimate business want to negotiate with this dirtbag?
April 8, 2008
11:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
MikeaLoeb, a/k/a pimp for Rick Berman, the hired PR scumbag for big business, and owner of the "Union Facts" website. Another sham astroturf website that is anti-worker and anti-labor.
Thanks, I prefer to get my facts from legitimate sources.
April 8, 2008
11:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
BMat writes:
Posted by BMat on April 8, 2008 at 10:01 a.m.
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
____________
Censorship is cowardice RMN - go read the first ammendment!
Your paper works better in the bottom of my bird cage than it does as a medium for the free exchange of ideas anyway.
April 8, 2008
11:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
MikeaLoeb writes:
What's wrong with big business? Rick Berman is a good guy.
April 8, 2008
11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
TheVentilator writes:
The extremist policies of the last 8 years should be clear evidence to all that the type of zealotry that this "Boy Blunder" advocates will result in miserable failure.
April 8, 2008
11:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
gethoht writes:
I'll admit that there is a downside to unions. I've gone to trade shows in NYC where the convention center is union run, and you're not even allowed to bring in a dolly or any kind of wheeled carrier of your own in order to setup a booth. I improvised and used large pieces of cardboard to drag my booth's contents across the smooth cement surface while the union guys gave me scowls because I couldn't afford to pay them but was smart enough to figure a way around their stupid rules. I think this kind of bullying is nonsense, but I do think that workers need a voice and some kind of representation in order to not be exploited. People forget that it was not long ago where 7 day work weeks were the norm, wages were low, worker safety wasn't a concern, and children worked in factories. That is Coors and every other industrialists dream come true. Actually this all still happens, just in other non-unionized countries. Most of those things you buy in wal-mart that come from china are a product of human exploitation. Honestly I think with or without unions, american companies such as Ford would open factories in low-wage countries anyways, just because it's cheaper. You have to remember that a corporation is responsible to it's shareholders first and foremost. Profit is king, it doesn't care about it's workers... it really doesn't matter if they're unionized or not. The downfall of the american auto-maker isn't because of unions, it's because of mis-management and crappy products. They didn't know how to build fuel efficient cars when the gas crisis hit. On top of that, 95% of american cars made between the years 1975 and 1992 are underpowered, gas guzzling pieces of junk.(I think trucks might be the exception, my 78 ford f250 was pretty reliable). I will concede that there is corruption in american unions, and that how alot of american unions work is counter-productive, but it's too easy to forget the struggle the american working class has gone through to get what it deserves. The people at the top of the food chain in corporations get paid ridiculously well regardless of how well they do, look at all the CEO salaries of Bear Stearns and companies of that ilk. They've lost $billions and still get paid $millions/year. All the while it's the people at the bottom that get the shaft when the company has to save a few pennies next year. This is the kind of nonsense that shows that the american worker is thought of as disposable as ever, and that's why I still see a need for some kind of unionization.
April 8, 2008
11:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
jay045 - You are the exception to the rule. I wanted to say "Thank You" from a conservative Republican for a civil post. Though you disagree with Jonathan Coors you do not attack him personally and cast no aspersions about his "not working". The "kid" probably puts in 60 - 80 hour work weeks. Rich kids who do work, especially in their family business, usually have something to prove. They are held to a higher standard as well. More is expected from he who has so much - as it should be.
April 8, 2008
noon
Suggest removal
RD writes:
In 1 Peter 2:17-18 it is written that we should honor all men and Servants be subject to your Masters.
In Colossians 4:1 it is written that Masters should pay their Servants a just and equal amount.
I would say most rich people enjoy their money, but I say most of them would not have been able to accumulate all their riches on their labor alone but needed the labor of others to get their riches. And, most people for whatever reason do not and can not have a business on their own, so they depend on the business owners for a job.
The owners and the laborers should respect each other. The owner pay a wage that people can live on and the worker should do a good job for his boss.
However, we have seen it repeated over and over again, that too many owners are far too greedy and do not pay a living wage. That is why workers have joined together in Unions to secure that living wage.
April 8, 2008
12:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Awal writes:
Listen, I'm not a big fan of union labor, and I think it's a pretty easy argument that their unrealistic demands have crippled a lot of previously competitive industries in America, but I don't have a whole lot of time to listen to what Jonathon Coors has to say. He's 28 years old and works in government relations. He doesn't have any clue what the management implications of right-to-work, or non-right-to-work, are. He just repeats verbatim what he's heard from his grandfather, father and uncles.
I like my policy decisions made by people who are a little more impartial and less beholden to special interests (that includes you too, Bill Ritter).
April 8, 2008
12:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
d1234 writes:
Must respond to this. I am a conservative person. I would classify myself as a fiscal conservative and a social libertarian. Now that you know where I stand, let me ask a question. Is anyone bothered that these meetings were held in secret? Is the liberal press giving Ritter a free pass on this? If it were Bill Owens, a conservative, would the press not be a screaming banshee about open meetings laws?
But I suppose I'm just a stupid neocon.
April 8, 2008
12:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
oneworker writes:
"That's an issue between the management and the union," Bill Coors said.
So it is.
Nothing I read about the young Mr. Coors leads me to believe he has any agenda other than the corporate agenda of keeping unions too weak to stand up to any corporation. After all, his next paycheck is covered.
April 8, 2008
12:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
USA_Pride writes:
Big business doesn't care about anything but big profits for the corporate raiders. Look at the working environment today, you can outsource EVERY job. Maybe when those people lose there job they will actually have to do something besides pushing there pens. Without a product there is no company for the corporate criminals and they lose site of that.
April 8, 2008
12:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
EdArcuri writes:
In my view, this controversy is not about Mr. Coors, the quality of Coors beer, or the relative merits of labor unions. I believe each working person has the inherent right to associate, or not, as they choose with any organization. We don't even have a military draft anymore.
My boss cannot make me become a Baptist nor can he insist that I join the Elks Lodge to keep my job. He should never have the authority to force me to join or pay dues to any organization, no matter how popular in my workplace, at the cost of termination.
That's is what the right to work means.
Cheers.
April 8, 2008
12:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
junglegymco writes:
Gethoht has it right. Like your weekend? Thank the unions. Like not working 70 hours a week? Thank a union.
Earl misses the point completely and as is often the case, uses a specious "argument" (if you can call it that; it's really just an ad hominem attempt to deflect from the real debate).
The question isn't how many "jobs" are created by a Capitalist trying to make as much money as possible (nothing wrong with that, just acknowledge it for what it is). The larger quesstion is why is corporate America attempting to destroy unions? The same reason they wanted to destroy them 100 years ago - profit. Look at the obscene increase in salaries at the very top of any publically-traded company and you'll see how the everyday worker is getting scr*wed and why they need the unions to disappear; it's too pay MILLIONS to the execs at the top. People are tired of working longer days, with less real income, simply to see the CEO's salary increase more than 50-times in 20 years, while the average worker's salary has actually lost real buying power.
When the Coors of the worlds have to hit their piggy banks to put food on their table, then they can say they "know what it's like." Then, and only then, should they feel justified in attempting to destroy the organizations that work to give everday Joes a livable wage.
April 8, 2008
12:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
"He doesn't have any clue what the management implications of right-to-work, or non-right-to-work, are. He just repeats verbatim what he's heard from his grandfather, father and uncles." - Awal
Do you know Jonathan Coors? What possesses you to be so arrogant as to make this claim about what he knows and how he thinks? How would you feel if Jonathan Coors made such an assumption or assertion about your knowledge or thought process? You're an idiot.
April 8, 2008
1:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
There is a reason that only 11% (+/-) of the American workforce is union. Out of 155 million workers, that is about 17 million workers - and many are government workers. The reason is NOT that people like Jonathan Coors (or corporate America) are out to "destroy" unions. That claim is ludicrous. Union membership is like any other service offered in the marketplace. If the benefits offered were worth the price and needed, there would be more people in unions. I thank the unions for the accomplishments that have benefitted all of us. That was then, this is now. Most unions today reward mediocre workers with seniority or tenure so that getting rid of bad workers (teachers) is next to impossible. And you can't reward exeptional workers (teachers) either, or the bad ones get pissed off! They demand that bad workers be paid the same as good and exceptional workers - talk about a page from the communist manifesto!!! As a sales executive I would be very pissed off if I sold $1 million and a colleague sold $100K and we were both paid the same. Or in sports, should Tiger Woods be paid the same as the guy who comes in 17th? That is the UNION WAY and that is the way of FAILURE and collapse in the new 21st century global economy.
April 8, 2008
1:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
CalebTGL writes:
I find the idea of holding the talks in secret offensive. Why is there a debate about whether or not this should be on the ballot in Nov.? It is up to the electorate to decide whether or not Colorado should be a Right-To-Work state. Why are people so up in arms about whether it should be on the ballot or not? Probably because they have a pretty good idea of what the people of this state will decide, and it frightens them.
April 8, 2008
1:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
BMat writes:
Posted by SASQUATCH on April 8, 2008 at 1:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
UAW BENEDICT ARNOLD-TURNCOATS, ANTI-MARINES:
UAW: Marines (and the First Amendment) Not Welcome Here
In a fairly jaw-dropping move, the UAW has decided to deny the use of its parking lot to local Marine reservists who drive a "foreign" car (a quaint notion abandoned by all but the UAW at least 3 decades ago) or who display a bumper sticker supporting President Bush.
In a Detroit News story by Eric Mayne, he reports that apparently the UAW has long allowed a nearby Marine reserve unit to use its parking lot on weekends, but no more. The UAW has notified the head of the Marine unit that as of now, certain Marines will no longer be welcome. This includes those who don't drive "American-made" cars and those who display pro-Bush bumper stickers. In one sweeping gesture, the UAW has managed to thumb its nose at 21st Century concepts of trade, the First Amendment and the US Marines all at once.
-----
With the UAW openly hostile to American Marines during a time of war, you have to wonder whose side these unpatriotic and Benedict Arnold unionista turncoats are on. I say TAKE NO PRISONERS--VOTE RIGHT TO WORK!
_________________
So if little Jonny Coors can do whatever he wants with his grampy's factory in Golden, then why can't the UAW do whatever it wants with it's own parking lot in Michigan?
Typical double standard. Only the billionaire boys club gets to call it's own shots. If you have callouses on your hands or sweat on your collar you can just shut up and stay down.
Don't worry - little Jonny Coors just wants what's good for Colorado. It doesn't have anything to do with making more billions on top of the billions he inherited due to birth right.
For heaven sakes, what could possibly go wrong?
April 8, 2008
2:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
To those of you making negative comments directed towards Mr. Coors based on his being born into a position of relative wealth: This is the same way many people in the rest of the world view you, dismiss your opinion and your humanity. Yup, just by being born here in the USA, you are richer than most people, and therefore spoiled and arrogant.
So what you say about Mr. Coors applies to you as well, from a global perspective. Baby you're a rich man too.
April 8, 2008
3:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Marshdale writes:
Once again SASQUACH. Take a hike. Unions are not the problem. The industries you speak of were profitable for many years with unions. It is the American business model that is failing today, because short term capital gains is all they think about. For decades they had the opportunity to reinvest in thier industries in order to promote long term success. I ask you SASQUACH now that cheaper labor abroad has replaced more expensive labor here, has the cost of such goods gone down? You know the answer so I won't spell it out for you. Those industries failed to do so therefore makeing the US less competetive in the world market. They were warned by conservative and liberal economists alike back in the 50's and 60's what the failure to reinvest would bring to thier industries. Obviously SASQUACH what little drive you might have to achieve the greater good in society is stonewalled by your greed.
April 8, 2008
3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ztliano writes:
Not cute.
April 8, 2008
3:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
Marshdale writes:
Um, Will people quit drinking beer? I don't think so. Sorry to state the obvious. Union Yes.
April 8, 2008
3:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
"I ask you... now that cheaper labor abroad has replaced more expensive labor here, has the cost of such goods gone down?"
Are you kidding me? The unarguable truth is in many cases HEAVENS YES. You can buy a better TV now than you could 30 years ago for the same price, when the minimum wage was $1.80.
Are you kidding me?!?!?
April 8, 2008
4:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
The article mentioned that the grandfather helped people in Africa. Do you ever get the feeling that Corporations like Coors and Microsoft helping third world people are trying to create cheap labor more than anything else?
April 8, 2008
4:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
BMat writes:
I think he's laying eggs in Golden. Not laying golden eggs.
April 8, 2008
5:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Civility writes:
I'm not a big fan of unions, but they came about because of abuses by corporate management. Go see the memorial in Ludlow, Colorado. People like Joe Nacchio are another reason. I think that Governor Ritter is trying to achieve a balance which looks like the case as he is criticized by both sides.
It looks like young Mr. Coors is continung the family tradition by working for conservative causes. His great great grandfather hosted KKK meetings.
April 8, 2008
5:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
happymike44 writes:
I hate to say this but it seems we are under seige by a group of vain and spoiled rotten overprivelidged little brats.I work with these kids everyday,my mommy said I don't have to do that.And guess what they don't why because these people have become the new ruling class.They can spend their money on bringing down the american standard of living.If you don't agree then they ship our jobs overseas and then still get a tax break for doing it.I have worked both union and non union and let me tell there really is not difference.One group claims they are for the working class and helping to protect your job.Let me tell you when I belonged to the union. I was more of a slave then when I did not work for the union.I can tell you this not the country my ancestors fought the war of 1776 to free from tyranny.It has been overtaken by the vain and shallow overprivelidged children of trust fund millionaires.
April 8, 2008
6:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Civility writes:
Oh and I don't drink Coors beer because of their sexist commercials. Did anyone notice that they were pulled during Pete's senate campaign?
April 8, 2008
7:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
mtnrunner2 writes:
Government should not be intervening on behalf of labor OR business, it should simply be holding both parties to any agreements they have made between themselves.
It's entirely up to an employer and employee -- or members of a voluntary employee organization -- what terms to agree to, according to their own judgment. No type of agreement should be declared illegal provided it does not involve violence, any more than I should be told who I can agree to go to lunch with. It's nobody's business but the 2 parties to the agreement.
If an employer wants to require employees to join a union as condition of employment, they should be allowed to do so. If they want to require wearing of blue shirts and daisy-pattern shoes, they should be allowed to do so. If they want to pay zero benefits or pay $1 million per minute, they should be allowed to do so. And employees should be allowed to agree, or not agree, to these and any other terms as they see fit.
April 8, 2008
9:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
"That's an issue between the management and the union," Bill Coors said.
Those who use the logic of the senior Mr. Coors subscribe to the philosopy that business and unions can work together all in the name of an easier way.
Yes they get it done easier by cheating the employee, by taking their choice and self-determination.
Thank you RMN for cracking the powdered Cool-Aid. Add water and mix, it's time to start chuggin'!
April 8, 2008
9:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
How would you like to be an employee, forced into the union and mandated to auto deduct 'dues' from your hard earned paycheck? No big deal huh?
Wrong. By paying their "dues" you forego the opportunity to buy a better car, better shelter, better food, better medication, and maybe a trip back to see your family. Maybe you choose to forego health insurance, car insurance, or a savings plan.
You lose options and possibly cost the American economy via forced economic spending.
Then management treats you horribly. So you ask the union shop 'master' for help, but get nothing but the political "don't rock the boat" garbage. You know, "hey kid, we don't do it like that, only so many jobs per day."
You are being controlled by unnatural forces; you hurt and hate; you start to focus on the wrong things. You fail to attain your full potential.
That is not self-determination, it is un-American, and warps the moral compass.
It is shameful.
April 8, 2008
9:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
At least Governor Bill Ritter had the moral compass to include "Right to Work" in his executive order. Yes sportsfans, he excluded the "union security clause" from his executive order.
The Governor gave all state workers the "Right to Work".
Don't you agree with the Governor. Colorado should have the right to work.
Where is your moral compass, what values to you hold?
April 8, 2008
10:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
Attention Sportsfans. The next story line coming from the conspirators will focus on this story line.
"Business leaders" say Right to Work bad for economic development - could cost Colorado economy
Oh yeah, they'll have the business conspirators, union boss consirators and government conspirators saying such things as:
1) New companies won't want to come here because of right to work,
2) Right to work will cost the economy in lower GDP,
3) The labor peace act has balance that delivers better funding and services like education, transportation, healthcare...,
4) Rise in un-insured ahead with right to work,
5) School funding and performance to drop with right to work and,
6) Dire economic consequences lie ahead with right to work
Oh yes, it feels good and looks impressive.
Now you start to buy into into the flawed logic that without labor unions and labor peace the economy will turn bad, economic develop will falter, that unions actually strengthen the economy and that without them we will have a downturn in GDP?
If you do, you must agree that the natural process of business is to destroy growth and economic development.
If you do, you buy into a communist or facist logic-set that central planning and control lead to better outcomes.
Where is your self-determination and moral compass. What values to you hold?
Recognize the opportunity --- avoid buying into the business-union conspiracy to control your free will.
Rise up! Change in '08! Avoid the collective Soviet farm!
April 9, 2008
12:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
Civility writes:
I'm not taking anything back. The KKK was very powerful in Colorado in the 1920's and Adolf Coors was very well known for his views. My sources have been dead for a long time, but some fifty years later I also read an article in the Rocky Mountain News on how Bill Coors spoke at the Urban League and told them that they should be happy that their ancestors were brought over in chains and were made slaves. Why do you think that Coors has been boycotted by Hispanics and Blacks in the past? It wasn't just because of the unions. Hopefully we're past all that and young Mr. Coors can come up with a solution with the Governor. Also hopefully as part of a younger generation he can make progress like Rockefeller and his family did after the Ludlow Massacre.
April 9, 2008
6:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Matadore writes:
Right to work for less!
April 9, 2008
8:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
Matadore, We don't you go out and organize a new company. I support your right to organize. Why don't you support the peoples right to choose: affiliation, dues paying, etc....
You are a shameful business-union conspirator.
April 9, 2008
9:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
kathyM writes:
Sorry nowhearthis, but unions DID contribute to the demise of the auto industry. For years they dictated work rules and hiring practices. But did you know they also dictated product development and parts supply?
Unions served a noble purpose in the past. My dad was in a steelworkers' union, and my uncle founded a shipmasters' union. But when employers have to pay employees to NOT work (GM "jobs bank"), there is something very wrong. When employers can't change a manufacturing process or a product line until the next contract negotiations--to hell with market demand--there's something very wrong.
I lived in Michigan for 20 years and watched its economy go to hell in a union handbasket. You can't convince me that unions want to contribute to a competitive economy.
April 9, 2008
9:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
Civility writes:
My sources are not urban legend, but old some old Denverites. They were not into politics, but they told me what they saw and why they didn't drink Coors beer.
The article that I referred to is pretty well documented. It was about a speech that Bill Coors gave in 1984 to African American and Mexican American business owners in 1984. The other thing that Bill Coors did, that I have a hard time dealing with, is that he campaigned hard against the Civil Rights Act in 1964.
So lets hope indeed that Jonathan Coors is not a chip off the old block.
April 9, 2008
9:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
happymike44 writes:
All I know is these people have been selling liver destruction in a can.They have prospered while destroying many families with alcholism and liver disease.They have become rich beyond all belief.But what really bothers me is how some spoiled little rich kid thinks he has given back by feeding the poor in a foreign country.So why not do that here in your home country,where many fathers drink up their paychecks and let their kids go hungry.How about helping the homeless and hungry of this country.What has become of charity beginning at home.Why because they want to pander to the brad and angelina's of the world who go around collcting foreign kids like teacups.I have a kid from every country collection.We need to start taking care of our own country first and stop allowing our politicians to move us to one world government.They made their money here let them help the people who would benefit the most from it us.
April 9, 2008
4:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
corayme writes:
To all those who seem to think they can badmouth Jonathan Coors without knowing him - Shame on you.
Jonathon Coors may not share your political views, but he would be willing to listen to them with an open mind. He is hard-working, honest, kind and lives his life with an integrity I challenge you to try to achieve.
So argue against his political views all you want, but next time you decide to pick on the man you better make sure you measure up.