Schram: A bit of pettiness in state liquor worker union?

I didn't vote yes on Initiative 1183 because Costco spent $22 million promoting it.

I voted yes because the state will make more money by not selling liquor and I will save money when buying it.

For me, the fly in the ointment is that more than 900 people connected to the state liquor business will be laid off next June.

I like the people at the liquor store where I shop.

Over the years, I've gotten to know them and it bothers me that those nice folks will be cut loose.

So I was happy to hear that Costco is offering any state liquor worker who loses their job the chance to apply for work at any of its retail locations.

However, the union that represents most of those people was less than impressed.

One union official was quoted as saying that "...It seems insensitive to spend $22 million to kick someone of their job and then offer them an interview."

Do I detect a note of pettiness in that remark?

Might the union have its nose out of joint at the prospect of losing several hundred members and perhaps diminishing the cushy jobs that some of those union officials currently enjoy?

I think Costco has come up with a decent offer.

And I think the union is more interested in maintaining its own bureaucracy at the expense of those who just might have a job waiting for them.

Have something to say to Ken? Login or signup below to post a comment. Just be sure to read the rules and keep things civil. You can also e-mail him at kenschram@komo4news.com. You can also hook up with Ken on Facebook.