Last scene....

You, like so many Reaganites, apparently believe in the reality of the "free" market, as if there were no such thing as manipulation of the labor market and other factors.

The truth is, when corporations can keep large groups of workers in a state of desperation, it is completely advantageous for them to do so. It really isn't a matter of whether the "magic of the market" (it's hard to believe anybody is naive enough to believe in this anymore) sets a wage at $8 or $18. It's a matter of how corporate execs can manipulate and stonewall and turn the situation to their advantage, as they do in the Hormel story from this film, to the point where "negotiations" consisted of them having all the power and dictating the offer to the workers, take it or leave it. But hey, if you call it "negotiations," it looks like you were reasonable and willing to give. Kind of like all those Republican "naming" acts that actually do the opposite of what the name says.

You did see that the company was posting record profits at the same time it was squeezing worker pay and benefits down as much as it possibly could, right? What a perfect film for the current economic situation. It reads like biblical prophecy now: Corporations making more money than they've ever made, but complaining that the "environment for business" just isn't solid enough to make them comfortable, so they're not going to hire or invest in the community. Instead, they're going to sock all their profits away in offshore accounts and tax shelters, while they b*tch and moan daily about how "high" taxes are just killing them. Meanwhile, with a high unemployment rate, workers will take any terms they can get and work for any salary they can get, benefits or no benefits, just to have any job at all, while the profits roll in for the top 2%.

The whole time I'm watching this film (btw, I saw it initially at Sundance in '91 when it debuted there, and talked to the filmmakers), I'm thinking this is a perfect example of how different the thinking is from a corporation versus how it is from a common person. To the average Joe, this Hormel thing was a terrible situation. To the execs, it couldn't have been better: They got a whole new workforce at a cheaper rate. Same way it is with how the average guy is going to think it's terrible that a health insurer refuses to pay out a claim, while the people in the exec offices see it as a victory, because they didn't take a "loss" on it.

Anyhow: If you think this has anything to do with a "free" market resulting in a natural leveling of wages to their appropriate level, you are too naive and too Fox-News-oriented to be in the discussion at all.