This well-written episode by Kathryn Drennan, wife of JMS at the time, presents a biased viewpoint of trade unionism and indirectly takes a poke at Rush Limbaugh (the Rush Act), although many viewers may not really understand how naming a law after Limbaugh either lampoons or impugns him. The implied assumption is that Limbaugh is anti-union. Of course Limbaugh idolizes Ronald Reagan who broke the strike by air traffic controllers in 1981, but it's generally forgotten that the public supported the tough actions by the government against those went on strike and endangered the airline industry and the nation's commerce. Rush is not anti-union. He has criticized big unions for spending union dues on political campaigns without the permission of the union members. In reality Rush enjoys strong support from rank and file union members.
There is a lot left out of Drennan's story. The basic issue of contractual obligation is totally ignored. Under the law if you sign a contract you are both responsible and accountable to fulfill the terms of the contract. (JMS has talked at length about some of the contract issues with certain B5 actors.) And, yet, we're supposed to accept that these workers can violate their contract without penalty. We're also never told the salary of the B5 dock workers. You can bet that under terms of their contract pay for overtime would be the same percentage of base pay or better than today. Judging by today's standards they would be rich. I remember back in the 1990's when dock workers in Los Angeles went on strike because they wanted guaranteed benefits. (These were the guys that operate huge cranes to unload ships.) There was some public sympathy until it became common knowledge that their salary was $100,000 per year. Then sympathy dropped like a rock and media attention diminished.
If the B5 dock workers were working too much overtime or double shifts, then it would probably be their own fault, since they voted for it. All the work rules are contained in the union contract with the employer. Of course, someone might claim that B5 couldn't attract sufficient workers, which is implied by Sinclair's promise to hire more workers. Who would want to work in a tin can in outer space? But, the salary would be inordinately high to attract workers. And, if B5 is paying out mega-bucks in time-and-a-half and double time, then they have the money to hire additional workers. And, I believe in the real world there would be a waiting list to get such high paying jobs, even in outer space.
Drennan was successful in painting a picture of the dock-workers as victims. Zento is a stereotype fall guy everyone loves to hate and in no way resembles professional government conciliators. Sinclair is presented as wrestling with a moral dilemma, equitable treatment of employees and maintaining B5 as an available port for inter- galactic trade. The audience naturally loves it when the Commander is decisive and manipulates a built-in ambiguity in the Rush Act to his advantage, thereby sticking it to Zento. However, by shifting money in his budget Sinclair sent a signal to the Senate that he didn't really need as much money that had been allocated against those line items. His action was legal, but not politic, and it will come back later to cause problems for him in the episode "Eyes."
What Drennan also didn't consider is that Sinclair could have fired the human troublemakers and hired alien replacements, just like Sheridan later did for security. But, I doubt her ideology would permit her to employ a solution involving scabs. So, screw contractual obligations, screw the other needs of B5 that would be cut to satisfy these over-paid workers, and screw next year's budget. This is an example of a TV show presenting a simplistic solution to a challenging problem.
Even though Drennan used this episode to present her viewpoint on unionism she did provide a nice counterpoint with the conflict between G'Kar and Londo. It may have been a bit tongue in cheek to create a plant with both pleasure and religious significance to different cultures. In this situation we see Sinclair as a clever mediator, able to craft a solution that appeased both G'Kar and Londo. Too bad he couldn't have achieved something comparable for his operating budget.
There is a lot left out of Drennan's story. The basic issue of contractual obligation is totally ignored. Under the law if you sign a contract you are both responsible and accountable to fulfill the terms of the contract. (JMS has talked at length about some of the contract issues with certain B5 actors.) And, yet, we're supposed to accept that these workers can violate their contract without penalty. We're also never told the salary of the B5 dock workers. You can bet that under terms of their contract pay for overtime would be the same percentage of base pay or better than today. Judging by today's standards they would be rich. I remember back in the 1990's when dock workers in Los Angeles went on strike because they wanted guaranteed benefits. (These were the guys that operate huge cranes to unload ships.) There was some public sympathy until it became common knowledge that their salary was $100,000 per year. Then sympathy dropped like a rock and media attention diminished.
If the B5 dock workers were working too much overtime or double shifts, then it would probably be their own fault, since they voted for it. All the work rules are contained in the union contract with the employer. Of course, someone might claim that B5 couldn't attract sufficient workers, which is implied by Sinclair's promise to hire more workers. Who would want to work in a tin can in outer space? But, the salary would be inordinately high to attract workers. And, if B5 is paying out mega-bucks in time-and-a-half and double time, then they have the money to hire additional workers. And, I believe in the real world there would be a waiting list to get such high paying jobs, even in outer space.
Drennan was successful in painting a picture of the dock-workers as victims. Zento is a stereotype fall guy everyone loves to hate and in no way resembles professional government conciliators. Sinclair is presented as wrestling with a moral dilemma, equitable treatment of employees and maintaining B5 as an available port for inter- galactic trade. The audience naturally loves it when the Commander is decisive and manipulates a built-in ambiguity in the Rush Act to his advantage, thereby sticking it to Zento. However, by shifting money in his budget Sinclair sent a signal to the Senate that he didn't really need as much money that had been allocated against those line items. His action was legal, but not politic, and it will come back later to cause problems for him in the episode "Eyes."
What Drennan also didn't consider is that Sinclair could have fired the human troublemakers and hired alien replacements, just like Sheridan later did for security. But, I doubt her ideology would permit her to employ a solution involving scabs. So, screw contractual obligations, screw the other needs of B5 that would be cut to satisfy these over-paid workers, and screw next year's budget. This is an example of a TV show presenting a simplistic solution to a challenging problem.
Even though Drennan used this episode to present her viewpoint on unionism she did provide a nice counterpoint with the conflict between G'Kar and Londo. It may have been a bit tongue in cheek to create a plant with both pleasure and religious significance to different cultures. In this situation we see Sinclair as a clever mediator, able to craft a solution that appeased both G'Kar and Londo. Too bad he couldn't have achieved something comparable for his operating budget.