Top Union Boss Huffs and Puffs, But Cannot Blow the Facts Down

(Source: June 2010 Forced-Unionism Abuses Exposed)

It doesn’t take a Sherlock Holmes or an Hercule Poirot to deduce that state policies promoting “exclusive” union bargaining and forced union dues and fees in the public sector have played a major role in driving multiple states to the verge of insolvency this year.  All it takes is the willingness to look at, and respect, the facts.

In 2009, according to respected labor economists Barry Hirsch and David Macpherson, 41% of public employees nationwide were subject to a contract negotiated by their employer with a union monopoly-bargaining agent.

However, in 22 states, none of which authorize forced union dues for government employees and most of which don’t authorize public-sector union monopoly bargaining, either, fewer than 30% of public servants were unionized.  Not one of these 22 low public-sector-unionization states was to be found on Business Insider’s list, published just last month, of the nine states “most likely to default.”  (more…)

Union Lawyer Admits Forced Unionism is the Goal

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation was in court this week in Michigan defending home-based day care workers from the threat of forced unionism.  During the course of discussion with the judge, a lawyer for big labor admitted the effort was a “slippery slope” for forcing people into unions.  Under the union lawyer’s theory, anyone who takes a subsidy from the state, including Medicare or perhaps even Social Security, could be unionized.  It’s an amazing admission and likely a peek into the future of Big Labor’s union organizing strategy.  As union bosses help drive jobs overseas, they will have to be looking for other areas to coerce people into monopolyt unions.

(Source:  May 2010 Forced-Unionism Abuses Exposed)

Just last summer, the Obama Administration handed over $49.5 billion in federal taxpayers’ money to the Big Labor-controlled, money-hemorrhaging General Motors Corporation (GM). At the time, bankrupt GM was on the verge of being forced into liquidation. Its assets would then have been sold off.

The White House pitched this costly taxpayer-funded bailout as a bid to save American jobs. In reality, GM’s reported U.S. employment has shrunk by nearly 25%, down to 68,500, just since last year’s bailout, and is almost certain to continue falling. More than 80% of U.S. automotive manufacturing jobs are now in union-free firms, and these firms, not bailed-out GM and Chrysler, surely represent the future of domestic auto manufacturing employment.

Rather than workers, the single greatest beneficiary of the GM bailout was the United Autoworkers (UAW) union hierarchy. Along with sympathetic Obama agents, union officials were effectively left in charge of the company. Given that the wasteful work rules that UAW bosses, wielding government-granted monopoly-bargaining power over employees, insisted on for decades were largely what drove the company into bankruptcy, they certainly didn’t deserve kid-gloves treatment. Yet that’s what they got. (more…)

(Source: April 2010 Forced-Unionism Abuses Exposed)

By declaring bankruptcy, an insolvent municipality may avoid paying its bondholders anything near what it owes them.  It may even succeed in cutting public employees’ health benefits.  But it will not succeed in doing one thing that the bankrupt city of Vallejo, California absolutely must do to get back on its feet:  Rescind labor policies that encourage healthy municipal employees to retire when they are 50 or 55 with lavish pensions.

That is what public-sector union bosses are now out to prove in the Golden State.  Two years ago this spring, Vallejo, a seemingly prosperous San Francisco suburb of roughly 120,000 residents, voted to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy.

In 2008, Vallejo’s budget, like those of many other California municipalities, had been driven deep in the red by government union bosses.  Union officials wielding monopoly-bargaining power handed to them by state law had driven up taxpayer costs for compensation of public-safety employees and retirees so high that they consumed 74% of Vallejo’s $80-million general budget.

Public-safety employee wages, though surely generous, were not the reason municipal spending was out of control.  The real culprits were overtime costs, driven by complicated and counterproductive Big Labor work rules, and pension costs, driven primarily by union boss-instigated retirements of employees still in the prime of their lives. (more…)

Forced-Unionism Contracting Scheme Exposed

Donald Lambro looks at President Obama’s scheme to direct union contracts to Big Labor in what amounts to one the biggest kickback schemes in history.

The Becker (Dis)Appointment

The President’s decision to appoint radical Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board has breathed new life into the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill.  No, the bill is still bottled up in the Senate but Becker can now push to have the scam enacted by fiat rather than legislation.  The National Right to Work Committee is at the forefront of protecting workers from a Becker-forced unionism scheme.

The American Spectator’s Jeremy Lott steps up with a column about America’s newest economic wrecking ball — Obama National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) appointee Craig Becker.

Does Barack Obama want to wreck the American economy? That’s one obvious and troubling question raised by his recess appointment of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board.

People who know anything about labor law are extremely worried about this decision. Appointing Becker to the NLRB is a bit like assigning the fox to guard the hen house — if chicken were an endangered species.

The president’s political calculus was simple enough. The union bosses wanted Becker, and Obama wants the unions’ support in the midterm elections. Becker is a lawyer who has represented both the AFL-CIO and the SEIU (and, by extension, ACORN). He is at the leading edge of radical labor opinion.

To wit, Becker helped to pioneer the idea of card check that unions so desperately want to pass. This change in labor law would effectively substitute the public clipboard for the private ballot box, which Becker has disparaged as being “profoundly undemocratic.”

Card check is deeply unpopular and is not likely to be passed by Congress, but Becker may have a way around that. He has hinted that the NLRB may be able to impose changes on the way unionization elections are conducted without Congress legislating any changes in labor law. He has also advocated that companies not be allowed to participate in NLRB hearings or contest election results, and that they not be allowed to have observers at the polls to challenge ballot fraud.

Becker wants this pro-union tilt to labor law because he believes that all Americans should be represented by unions, whether they like it or not. He has written, “Just as U.S. citizens cannot opt against having a congressman, workers should not be able to choose against having a union as their monopoly-bargaining agent.”

Congress saw that Becker on the NLRB would be a one-man card check bill.

(Source: March 2010 Forced-Unionism Abuses Exposed)

Chris Christie, New Jersey’s freshly minted GOP governor, made national news on February 11 in an address to the state Legislature regarding his proposal to balance the Fiscal Year 2010 budget, which is, as he pointed out, “in shambles.” Gov. Christie pushed for $2 billion in spending cuts just for the remaining four-and-a-half months of FY 2010.

Why isn’t he following in the footsteps of previous New Jersey governors in both parties who raised taxes and/or tinkered with fiscal timetables when faced with large budget deficits? “The old ways of doing business have not served the people well,” explained the governor.

Mr. Christie was surely right about that. The Garden State now stands before a fiscal abyss not primarily because of the recent national recession, but because New Jersey’s heavily unionized public sector has for many years been sucking resources and vitality out of the state’s beleaguered private-sector employees and businesses.

For example, during the five years from 2003 to 2008, even as the national economy boomed, New Jersey’s private-sector employment grew by a total of just 1.5%, roughly a quarter of the national average. Meanwhile, state and local government jobs in New Jersey (more than two-thirds of them under union monopoly-bargaining control) soared by 5.9%, nearly four times New Jersey’s private-sector job growth.

And it’s not just the wages, salaries and benefits of active unionized government employees that are growing far more rapidly than those of private-sector employees. A large and rapidly growing share of public-employee compensation costs for New Jersey’s taxpaying individuals and firms come from outsized public pension and retirement-health benefits.

Union negotiators with monopoly-bargaining privileges, as well as Big Labor lobbyists and the politicians who do their bidding, have over the years established policies in New Jersey that encourage a wide array of healthy public employees to retire while they are still in their early fifties with pension and health benefits worth $100,000 or more a year.

No wonder New Jersey’s property taxes in 2009 were an average of nearly $7300, the highest in the nation and more than 70% higher than they had been just a decade earlier. No wonder New Jersey’s business tax climate was the worst in the nation both this year and last year, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. No wonder, in 2009, Chief Executive ranked New Jersey a dismal 48th out of the 50 states for doing business, based on a survey of 543 CEOs.

Unless New Jersey’s elected officials can resolve to curtail sharply the growth in the cost to taxpayers of unionized government employees’ and retirees’ compensation, the state faces a very bleak economic future and possibly even bankruptcy.

The budget reforms announced and recommended by Mr. Christie in his February 11 address to the Legislature, including a freeze on expenditures of over $550 million in unspent funds for the rest of FY2010 and raising public-employee contributions to pension and other benefit funds, together constitute a modest step in the right direction, but no more than that.

And at this writing it is still unclear whether the Big Labor-dominated New Jersey Legislature will adopt even the tentative public spending reforms that are now on the table.

In a February 28 editorial, Newark’s Star-Ledger, New Jersey’s largest local newspaper, glumly but realistically predicted: Union officials “will treat this as a life-and-death fight. They will spend millions on radio and TV ads and bumper stickers. They will mobilize lobbyists. They will activate their fleets [of union militants].”

By all appearances, government union bosses in New Jersey do not care whether or not the state goes under.

Their intransigence makes it more obvious than ever before that all realistic, long-term solutions for New Jersey’s government-spending crisis must involve rolling back public-sector union officials’ special privileges, including, first and foremost, the monopoly privilege to speak for all front-line employees, including those who choose not to join the union and want nothing to do with it, regarding workplace issues.

Despite his evident good intentions, Chris Christie has yet to demonstrate he is prepared to fight to narrow and, ultimately, eliminate government union chiefs’ monopoly-bargaining powers. But unless he does take on that fight, his efforts to bring New Jersey back from the brink are almost certainly doomed to fail.

(Source: February 2010 Forced-Unionism Abuses Exposed)

Were it not for National Education Association (NEA) teacher union chiefs’ ingrained habit of trying to “resolve” disagreements by putting a gag on anyone who challenges their power and prerogatives, the so-called “Choirgate” matter at Churchill County High School (CCHS) in northern Nevada could very likely have blown over within a few days without anyone outside local teachers, parents, students, and school administrators ever hearing about it.

However, as a consequence of the blunderbuss tactics of top bosses of the NEA union affiliate in Churchill County, people all across Nevada and even in other states have been reading about “Choirgate.”

Last month, the bosses of the Churchill County Education Association (CCEA) union, which is part of the Nevada State Education Association (NSEA) union as well as the NEA, went ballistic after learning that the newspaper editor at CCHS was talking to a group of parents who questioned the audition process for Nevada’s Honor Choir.

In the story, Editor-in-Chief Lauren MacLean wrote about how CCHS choir director Kathy Archey had apparently screened out the audition tapes of several of the school’s applicants for Honor Choir and never submitted them to the Nevada Music Educators Association (NMEA), while leaving students and parents with the impression she had submitted all the tapes. Evidently concluding that the students whose tapes were never forwarded had been treated unfairly, the NMEA broke with its normal practices on January 8 and 14 by allowing six CCHS students the opportunity to audition privately with NMEA representatives for Honor Choir.

Before writing her story, Ms. MacLean, a 17-year-old senior, sought the perspective of the CCEA union hierarchy, who under Silver State law wield monopoly power to bargain with school officials over the pay, benefits, and working conditions of all the school district’s teachers, naturally including Ms. Archey.

But CCEA union bosses weren’t interested in giving their perspective. And they instructed Ms. Archey not to give hers, either. Instead, they promptly filed a grievance with CCHS President Kevin Lords and school district Superintendent Carolyn Ross, demanding that they quash publication of Ms. MacLean’s article about “Choirgate.”

Making a logical leap that is surely wild, but not atypical of teacher union bosses nationwide, the CCEA grievance insisted that a student newspaper article written by a high school senior based on what she had heard from dismayed parents and learned from her own research constitutes a “personnel matter” that must remain “confidential”! Both Mr. Lords and Ms. Ross had the good sense to dismiss such a claim and refused to block publication of Ms. MacLean’s article, which ran in The Flash, CCHS’s student newspaper, on January 29.

“This is not a teacher evaluation, this is a student article,” noted Ms. Ross dryly. “Our policy has nothing to do with what a student is writing.”

The CCEA union bosses’ attempt to censor a student newspaper article whose accuracy they never publicly questioned, just because they didn’t like what it said, was considered shocking enough to be covered on the AP wire and by USA Today as well as the Silver State press.

But no one should really be shocked. Teacher union bosses across the country habitually wield their government-granted monopoly-bargaining privileges to suppress “inconvenient” speech. Just a few years ago, for example, top officials of the NEA’s statewide affiliate in Kansas went all the way to the state Supreme Court to prevent public schools from allowing the leaders of nonunion, professional teacher groups to use school districts’ taxpayer-funded internal mail systems for communicating with other teachers.

In this case (Johnson County v. KANAAE and ONEA), union lawyers prevailed. The Kansas Supreme Court ruled that, even though bosses of NEA-affiliated unions have unlimited access to distribute pro-forced unionism propaganda through school districts’ internal mail systems, public schools may bar the distribution of materials by the “wrong” teacher groups.

In Nevada, Kansas and nationwide, the freedom of speech of independent-minded teachers as well as of students and parents needs to be safeguarded from power-crazed teacher union officials. And by far the best way to accomplish this object is to repeal state laws, like those currently on the books in Nevada, Kansas, and more than 30 other states, that empower teacher union bosses to act as the “exclusive” (monopoly) bargaining agents of all the teachers in a district, including those who choose not to join. Once they are stripped of their monopoly-bargaining privileges, teacher union officials will have no choice but to begin treating teachers, school officials, parents and students with more respect, or risk losing member after member.

Tagged with:
Posted in: Forced-Unionism Abuses Exposed

(Source: January 2010 Forced-Unionism Abuses Exposed)

On Christmas Day, Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarded Northwest Airlines Flight 253 to Detroit from Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport, carrying undetected explosives. Abdulmutallab, who subsequently confessed to being an al-Qaeda recruit, had enough explosives with him to bring down the plane and snuff out the lives of all 290 of its passengers and crew members.

He failed only because brave and alert passengers stopped him as he was setting off the explosives shortly before the plane was scheduled to land.

Since the Christmas Day terrorist attack was narrowly averted, there has of course been an intense public debate about exactly what went wrong and how such systemic failures can be prevented in the future.

However, the notion that putting airport baggage screeners in Detroit and other cities across America under union monopoly control could have prevented Abdulmutallab from boarding a plane in Amsterdam has no place in a rational debate. No remotely sensible person would suggest that. But Big Labor U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would.

On December 29, citizens across the country were wondering how Abudmutallab got a visa and boarded Flight 253, with explosives on his person, after his own father had warned American authorities he could pose a terrorist risk. Obviously seeking to exploit public concerns about this grave breach of national security, Reid targeted Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and other pro-Right to Work senators for refusing in the just-concluded legislative session to rubber-stamp the appointment of Errol Southers, President Obama’s Big Labor-endorsed pick to head the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), without even holding a debate first.

Only by giving Southers the green light with no more questions asked can the Senate give the American people “the peace of mind to know their government is doing everything possible to keep them safe,” ludicrously claimed Reid in a December 29 press release. Top union bosses and Big Labor puppet politicians like Reid can’t wait to have Southers installed as TSA chief because, although he refuses to acknowledge it publicly, they are confident he will overturn the agency’s current policy of prohibiting union monopoly bargaining over federal airport screeners. Handing officials of a single union monopoly power to negotiate over how airport screeners do their jobs would, as the respected Wall Street Journal editorial page has pointed out, “make it harder for the executive branch to hire, fire, train and reassign workers to best meet changing terrorist threats.”

In fact, politicians who support imposition of TSA union monopoly bargaining don’t even bother to deny that it will force the agency to abolish its current compensation system, which bases pay largely on employees’ performance.

Top union bosses and union-label politicians want to ensure that baggage screeners get automatic, identical pay raises based solely on how long they’ve been on the job, not how well and efficiently they protect air passengers’ safety. Of course, the vast majority of Americans who understand what Harry Reid and company want don’t like the TSA scheme one bit. And that’s the real reason Reid is so angry with Jim DeMint and other pro-Right to Work senators for resisting the Southers nomination.

Big Labor politicians in Congress could foist a union monopoly on the TSA by approving pending legislation (H.R. 1881) that is explicitly designed to achieve that aim. Or Reid and the pro-forced unionism majority of senators could simply allow pro-Right to Work senators to have their say on the Senate floor about the Southers nomination, and then ram it through. But neither of these scenarios appeals much to Reid, because they both require him to accept accountability for corralling TSA employees into a union, and he knows that’s not popular at all, either with his constituents in Right to Work Nevada, or with Americans as a whole.

So instead, he’s insisting that, for ill-defined reasons, the Senate must rush through the Southers nomination without any discussion almost immediately after the chamber reconvenes this month – or the terrorists will have won!

The fact is, for all its real and perceived flaws, the TSA bears no responsibility connected to the boarding of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, and the atrocity he nearly perpetrated should not prompt the Senate to give a hasty rubber-stamp to the Southers nomination.

On the other hand, union monopoly bargaining at the TSA really would increase the risk of the agency’s failing to prevent terrorists from boarding planes at U.S. airports. And pro-Right to Work senators are absolutely correct to insist on holding a debate on this matter before Erroll Southers is put in charge of the TSA.