Phillip K. Howard

The indictment of seven Long Island Rail Road workers for disability fraud last week cast a spotlight on a troubled government agency. Until recently, over 90% of LIRR workers retired with a disability—even those who worked desk jobs—adding about $36,000 to their annual pensions. The cost to New York taxpayers over the past decade was $300 million.

As one investigator put it, fraud of this kind “became a culture of sorts among the LIRR workers, who took to gathering in doctor’s waiting rooms bragging to each [other] about their disabilities while simultaneously talking about their golf game.” How could almost every employee think fraud was the right thing to do?

The LIRR disability epidemic is hardly unique—82% of senior California state troopers are “disabled” in their last year before retirement. Pension abuses are so common—for example, “spiking” pensions with excess overtime in the last year of employment—that they’re taken for granted.

Governors in Wisconsin and Ohio this year have led well-publicized showdowns with public unions. Union leaders argue they are “decimat[ing] the collective bargaining rights of public employees.” What are these so-called “rights”? The dispute has focused on rich benefit packages that are drowning public budgets. Far more important is the lack of productivity.

“I’ve never seen anyone terminated for incompetence,” observed a long-time human relations official in New York City. In Cincinnati, police personnel records must be expunged every few years—making periodic misconduct essentially unaccountable. Over the past decade, Los Angeles succeeded in firing five teachers (out of 33,000), at a cost of $3.5 million.

Collective-bargaining rights have made government virtually unmanageable. Promotions, reassignments and layoffs are dictated by rigid rules, without any opportunity for managerial judgment. In 2010, shortly after receiving an award as best first-year teacher in Wisconsin, Megan Sampson had to be let go under “last in, first out” provisions of the union contract.

Even what task someone should do on a given day is subject to detailed rules. Last year, when a virus disabled two computers in a shared federal office in Washington, D.C., the IT technician fixed one but said he was unable to fix the other because it wasn’t listed on his form.

Making things work better is an affront to union prerogatives. The refuse-collection union in Toledo sued when the city proposed consolidating garbage collection with the surrounding county. (Toledo ended up making a cash settlement.) In Wisconsin, when budget cuts eliminated funding to mow the grass along the roads, the union sued to stop the county executive from giving the job to inmates.

No decision is too small for union micromanagement. Under the New York City union contract, when new equipment is installed the city must reopen collective bargaining “for the sole purpose of negotiating with the union on the practical impact, if any, such equipment has on the affected employees.” Trying to get ideas from public employees can be illegal. A deputy mayor of New York City was “warned not to talk with employees in order to get suggestions” because it might violate the “direct dealing law.”

How inefficient is this system? Ten percent? Thirty percent? Pause on the math here. Over 20 million people work for federal, state and local government, or one in seven workers in America. Their salaries and benefits total roughly $1.5 trillion of taxpayer funds each year (about 10% of GDP). They spend another $2 trillion. If government could be run more efficiently by 30%, that would result in annual savings worth $1 trillion.

What’s amazing is that anything gets done in government. This is a tribute to countless public employees who render public service, against all odds, by their personal pride and willpower, despite having to wrestle daily choices through a slimy bureaucracy.

One huge hurdle stands in the way of making government manageable: public unions. The head of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees recently bragged that the union had contributed $90 million in the 2010 off-year election alone. Where did the unions get all that money? The power is imbedded in an artificial legal construct—a “collective-bargaining right” that deducts union dues from all public employees, whether or not they want to belong to the union.

Some states, such as Indiana, have succeeded in eliminating this requirement. I would go further: America should ban political contributions by public unions, by constitutional amendment if necessary. Government is supposed to serve the public, not public employees.

America must bulldoze the current system and start over. Only then can we balance budgets and restore competence, dignity and purpose to public service.

Time For Politicians in Both Parties to Own Up to Their Mistakes

In late February, many concerned Americans in other states were paying close attention to the fierce, and still unresolved, battle over public-sector union monopoly bargaining in Wisconsin.

Many observing the Madison showdown from their homes inwere undoubtedly amazed by what they saw.

These five states, like roughly a dozen others, have no statutes on the books empowering government union officials to act as state and local public employees’ monopoly-bargaining agents.

When elected officials in such states make a judgment that a reform in public-employee compensation packages and work rules is necessary and can be prudently implemented to give taxpayers a better return on their money, they have the power to proceed.

It is then up to the voting public to judge whether the reform was a good idea or not.

In Wisconsin, however, like in other states which statutorily mandate union monopoly bargaining over public employee pay, benefits, and working conditions, elected officials from the governor on down have far less control over the roughly 50% of public expenditures that go into employee compensation.

In the Badger State, half of state and local government employees are unionized. Elected officials and their appointees cannot make any significant changes in the way these employees are compensated or in how they are instructed to do their jobs without government union bosses’ approval.

Today, millions of Americans whose state and local governments operate free from Big Labor constraints appreciate, after watching the bitter struggle in Wisconsin unfold, better than ever before the importance of keeping union monopolists out of the government workplace.

Only Intense Right to Work Lobbying Blocked Monopoly-Bargaining Bill

What most freedom-loving Virginians, North Carolinians and Texans probably don’t realize is that, just last year, the U.S. Congress came within a hair of taking away their prerogative to decide how their state and local government workplaces are run.

At the outset of the 2009-2010 Congress, the votes were there to pass the so-called “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act” in both the House and the Senate. Furthermore, President Obama was publicly vowing to sign this legislation as soon as it reached his desk.

This measure, more accurately labeled the “Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill,” would have foisted Wisconsin-style labor relations on state and local public-safety departments in all 50 states.

When the House first voted on this legislation in 2007, nearly 99% of the Democrats voting sided with Big Labor, and 98 GOP congressmen also voted for it.

Naturally, many Washington insiders considered approval of federally mandated union monopoly bargaining a sure thing after Barack Obama became President.

But an intense, two-year-long lobbying and public mobilization campaign by the National Right to Work Committee kept this power grab from ever reaching Mr. Obama’s desk in 2009 or 2010.

Recent Past Should Not Be Forgotten

Fortunes change swiftly in politics, and today the momentum is on the side of proponents of rolling back compulsory unionism in government, not expanding it. (See, e.g., this month’s Newsletter cover story.)

But in fighting for a brighter future, pro-Right to Work citizens should not forget the recent past.

Politicians in both parties who recently supported federalizing monopolistic government unionism should be held accountable for what they almost succeeded in doing.

As a start, Right to Work members (especially constituents) are urged now to contact the U.S. representatives listed below.

Labels Proposed Rollback of Union Monopoly Powers As an ‘Assault’

As the cover story of this Right to Work Newsletter edition reports, last month Wisconsin teacher union bosses encouraged educators in Madison, Milwaukee, and other school districts to strike illegally in order to participate in protests against GOP Gov. Scott Walker’s monopoly-bargaining rollback proposal.

Most teachers rejected union bosses’ exhortations and reported for their jobs. However, the number of teachers who heeded the siren call of union militancy was sufficient to force multiple school districts, including Milwaukee’s, to cancel classes. Madison’s schools were closed for a total of four days.

Many of the striking union militants, convinced that they should be paid for protesting rather than carrying out their assigned duties, collected phony “sick notes” from pro-forced unionism doctors. Wisconsin taxpayers may have to furnish these outlaw teachers with up to $6 million in “sick pay” for work they were perfectly capable of performing, but chose not to.

Wisconsites quoted in media reports, including some who are normally sympathetic to Big Labor, are outraged by the actions of a relatively small share of Badger State teachers (in Milwaukee, for example, just a few more than 600 out of 5,400 teachers joined in the union-instigated “sickout”).

Former Union Czar Andy Stern: President’s Statement ‘Helped Enormously’

Even as they were losing the good will of the people of Wisconsin, however, teacher union zealots and thousands of other government union radicals who joined in their wildcat strikes got a “thumbs up” from the White House.

On February 17, the second day of illegal teacher strikes, President Obama took the extraordinary step of inviting a reporter and camera crew from a Milwaukee TV station to sit down with him at the White House for an interview.

Mr. Obama suggested he was okay with the portions of Gov. Walker’s reform package that authorize public agencies to divert a significantly higher share of employees’ wages and salaries into their health care and pension plans, and thus reduce taxpayers’ total compensation liabilities.

At the same time, the President blasted the provision that would, for the first time in decades, restore for most Wisconsin public employees the Right to Work without being fired for refusal to pay dues or fees to an unwanted union.

He also lambasted provisions that would permanently strip most government union bosses of the monopoly power to negotiate benefits and work rules for employees who don’t want a union and choose not to join as well as for union members.

The President suggested the Right to Work and monopoly bargaining-rollback provisions in the Walker package “seem[] like . . . an assault on unions.”

Former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) czar and Obama crony Andy Stern quickly applauded the President’s statement. “It helps enormously” Wisconsin government union bosses’ bid to block any long-term reduction of their monopoly privileges, gushed Mr. Stern.

Obama Political Machine Reportedly Furnished Material Support to Union Outlaws

News reports in Politico, the Washington Post, and other major media outlets indicate the President furnished government union agents with material support.

Mr. Obama’s political machine, Organizing For America, allegedly provided buses to transport illegal strikers to protest rallies, deployed phone banks to organize protests, and transported protesters from other states.

“As of yet, it’s not clear whether the President’s unprecedented and appalling intervention in support of wildcat strikes designed to perpetuate wide-ranging union monopoly bargaining in the public sector will succeed,” commented National Right to Work Committee Vice President Matthew Leen.

“But the very fact that the current U.S. President is so beholden to Big Labor that he evidently felt he had to do this, regardless of the ultimate outcome, is sad news for America.”

Committee Defeats Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Legislation

With the long-anticipated conclusion of the 111th Congress a few weeks ago, National Right to Work Committee members and supporters achieved a major legislative victory that had seemed a near impossibility at the Congress’s inception in 2009.

Just before Christmas, Congress adjourned without having rubber-stamped Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) so-called “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act” (S.3991).

This was government union bosses’ “top legislative priority” in the 111th Congress, as International Firefighters (IAFF/AFL-CIO) union czar Harold Schaitberger admitted mournfully after the adjournment.

Seasoned Capitol Hill observers had confidently predicted the Reid legislation would pass into law before the end of 2010, and with good reason.

At the outset of the 2009-2010 Congress, the votes were there to pass the bill in both chambers of Congress. Furthermore, President Obama was publicly vowing to sign it as soon as it reached his desk.

The only possible hope of blocking the government union power grab was a Senate filibuster — and mustering the 41 votes needed to sustain one seemed to be a long shot at best.

Nevertheless, from the beginning, Committee members and supporters were ready to fight to the hilt, because the stakes were so high.

‘Already Strong Lobby’ Sought Even More Power

S.3991, referred to unofficially, but accurately, as the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, would have empowered Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) bureaucrats to survey all 50 states and identify which had failed to meet the legislation’s “core standards.”

And the key “core standard” was mandatory union monopoly bargaining. Localities in all 50 states would have been denied the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who didn’t want to join.

Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as “exclusive representation,” would have been foisted on police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide. And in most states that already authorize public-safety monopoly bargaining, this legislation would have widened its scope.

As Wall Street Journal reporter Kris Maher noted late last spring, under legislation like S.3991, if any state had refused to institute monopoly bargaining and comply with other mandates, FLRA bureaucrats would have implemented them themselves.

Sen. Reid personally introduced two different versions of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill. In April 2010, Mr. Reid sponsored S.3194, a bill he could bring to the floor at any time, without any preliminary committee action.

And during the “lame-duck” Senate session late last year, he introduced S.3991, a modest variation on his earlier measure crafted to garner more support through its exemption of sheriffs’ departments from the federal monopoly-bargaining mandate.

Yet another Senate version of the Police Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill was sponsored as S.1611 by Big Labor appeaser Judd Gregg (R-N.H.). In the House, union-label Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.) introduced companion legislation as H.R.413.

In all its guises, the police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation was a budget-busting power grab. In an astute editorial last June, the Washington Post summed up why this scheme was so dangerous:

“What this bill would do is impose a permanent, one-size-fits-all federal solution in an area — public-sector labor relations — that has traditionally been left to the states, and where state flexibility is probably more necessary than ever.

“. . . The bill further empowers an already strong lobby . . . .”

Harry Reid Nearly Succeeded Because of GOP Collaborators

Of course, Mr. Reid wasn’t troubled by the intense damage S.3194 and S.3991 would do to taxpayers or by how they would ravage state sovereignty.

The bottom line for him was that this legislation would empower and enrich union officials who are one the Democratic Party’s “most important constituencies,” as the editors of the New York-based biweekly National Review put it.

However, Democratic politicians, despite controlling the White House and substantial majorities in both chambers of Congress, were never expected last year to make the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, in any of its versions, the law of the land all on their own.

Since GOP Sen. Scott Brown (Mass.) took office last February, there were never more than 59 senators in Mr. Reid’s majority caucus. But it takes 60 to bring up a piece of legislation for a final vote if opponents seek to block it by launching an extended debate.

The reason Mr. Reid nearly succeeded last summer in making his pet scheme the law of the land was because six out of the 41 GOP senators were sponsoring S.1611, monopoly-bargaining legislation virtually identical to the Reid bill.

Last July 1, the House monopoly-bargaining legislation sailed through the lower chamber as an amendment to H.R.4899, a massive, unrelated defense spending bill. Union strategists eagerly anticipated the Senate passing the whole measure later that month.

All-Out Right to Work Mobilization Stalled Union Lobbying Blitz

But then, for several weeks in July, freedom-loving Americans mobilized by the National Right to Work Committee contacted their senators again and again, urging them to oppose H.R.4899 on all votes unless and until the public-safety union monopoly-bargaining amendment was removed.

Firefighters union boss Schaitberger personally expressed alarm in an e-mail to union operatives that the “National Right to Work Committee” was “working the phones.”

Several organizations representing the interests of local governments and public-safety departments, such as the National Sheriffs’ Association, joined with the Committee in lobbying against the forced-unionism sneak play.

The message clearly got through to a number of senators who normally vote with Big Labor, but were getting antsier and antsier about their next election.

On the evening of July 22, the Senate voted down the House-passed version of H.R.4899, and then approved a war-spending bill without the monopoly-bargaining provision. Finally, on July 27, a chastened House acquiesced to the Senate’s action, and sent a stripped-down war supplemental to President Obama’s desk.

Of course, Harry Reid didn’t give up at that point, or even after voters ousted two Senate proponents of federally mandated public-safety union monopoly bargaining, Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.), replacing them with 100% Right to Work supporters, in the November 2 general elections.

Right to Work Supporters Continued Turning up the Pressure on ‘Lame Ducks’

On December 8, the “lame-duck” Senate voted on Mr. Reid’s cloture motion to cut off debate by Right to Work proponents so that S.3991, his latest version of the police/fire union power grab, could get the Senate green light, then race through the House and go to President Obama’s desk.

But, thanks once again to intense grass-roots lobbying efforts by Right to Work supporters, Mr. Reid came up five votes short of the 60 he needed to achieve cloture, with three Senate Democrats and half-a-dozen Republicans who had previously supported the legislation voting “No.”

“Right to Work members and supporters nationwide never let down their guard until the 111th Congress adjourned for good on December 22,” observed Committee President Mark Mix. “That is how they pulled off a remarkable victory for independent-minded public servants and taxpayers.”

Alabama’s News 13: “A new era for state corruption reforms”

Governor Bob Riley signed what he called, some of the strongest anti-corruption laws in the country.

The legal departments at both unions are rechecking Senate Bill two.

Take a look at what some them will do: Ban the practice of secretly funneling money to political candidates, through political action committees, called “pac to pac transfers.” They also limit what lobbyists can spend on public officials and requires them to register and file disclosures.

Now a week old, Senate Bill 2 is being double and triple-checked by the legal departments of the state’s teacher unions. SB2 ends the practice of deducting union dues from paychecks. The unions say it’s political payback. Governor Riley calls it an end to financing political activity by special interest groups.

Jefferson County AFT President, Vi Parramore said, “I think hurrying an ethics bill through has been a disaster.”

Both unions agree, Hyche with the regional Alabama Education Association and Vi Parramore, President of the Jefferson County American Federation of Teachers, that senate bill two – ending the practice of deducting union dues from paychecks – was an attack on the AEA.

Parramore said, “But I think the bill is mean-spirited…”

Hyche said, “…the governor and Bradley Byrne hijacked the legislative process for political gain and for political payback.”

Where were these concerned union officials to be found when Harry Reid tried to ram through federally mandated monopoly bargaining on states during the Lame Duck?

Obviously, a bailout would do nothing but kill efforts to reform the system. It would allow union bosses to continue to press for higher salaries and benefits for government workers and the politicians who they elected would have no reason to say no.

Keep an eye out on this issue. It is the next big labor bailout on the horizon.

December’s issue contains the following headlines:

Voters Give Forced Unionism a ‘Shellacking’ – But Big Labor Retains Hold Over U.S. Senate, Key State Assemblies

Federal Candidate Survey Mobilizes Millions – Program Maximizes Right to Work Gains in ‘Year of Opportunity’

Obama NLRB to Ignore Mid-Term Election Results – Independent Workers, Firms Face ‘Card-Check Lite’ Implementation

Workers Forced to Bankroll Agenda They Oppose – New Nationwide Poll Shows Union Members Support Right to Work

Iowans Repudiate Pro-Forced Unionism Governor – Right to Work Makes Major Gains in State Legislative Contests

Right to Work: Rx For Job-Losing States – Legislators Look at ‘Oklahoma Model’ For Stronger Economic Growth

The Senate may soon consider a bill that would force states to allow for the unionization of public employees. In addition to the extraordinary amount of mandates imposed under President Obama, Congress has been attempting to extend the burden of collective bargaining imposed upon every state and local government. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) recently reintroduced the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act in an attempt to rush it through Congress before Republicans take control of the House in January. This legislation would mandate collective bargaining for police, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel—even in states that have passed laws to ensure this can’t happen.

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty made headlines today with his editorial against government unions. It is no secret that unions have increasingly resorted to government employees to boost membership. Minnesota has362,000 union members, and Governor Pawlenty has had his fair share of battles to keep taxpayers from footing the bill.

Government is the easy way to avoid pesky things like efficiency and competition. In September, Heritage expert James Sherk exposed the fact that since last year, most union workers now collect a check paid for by taxpayers. Some of that money is automatically deposited into union coffers to pay for their dues. This is made possible through a taxpayer-funded payroll system.

The rise of government unions has had many troubling effects.

            • Federal workers already receive up to 22 percent more than their private counterparts, resulting in $47 billion in additional taxes.

            • Many states force government employees to join a union or lose their job.

            • Since the beginning of the recession, private sector employment has fallen while federal employment has risen. Government employees have not faced the same hard decisions that many Americans have confronted during the recent economic decline.

            • Unions are able to take the money they receive from their members and lobby for increased wages in the form of more taxes.

Congress should let each state decide whether it wants to force its taxpayers to fund overpaid union employees.

Since forced-unionism cheerleader Barack Obama became President in January 2009, Big Labor bosses and their yes-men in the U.S. Congress have helped him inflict a lot of damage on employees, businesses, and taxpayers across America.

To take just the latest example, last month union puppet politicians in the Senate and House rubber-stamped a special-interest measure (H.R.1586) that will ultimately extract an additional $10 billion from beleaguered private-sector employees and businesses to maintain and expand wasteful unionized government payrolls.

From 1998 to 2007, the number of instructional employees at K-12 public schools nationwide soared by 15.9% — an increase 3.5 times greater than the 4.5% growth in school enrollment over the same period.

The rapid-fire expansion of school payrolls, roughly 70% of which are unionized, produced no measurable improvement in educational outcomes, but cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.

And the terms on which H.R.1586 piles on another $10 billion are expressly designed to ensure that currently strapped states do not pare back the past decade of teacher union boss-driven growth in K-12 payrolls in order to avoid increasing the burden on taxpaying individuals and businesses.

On August 11, just one day after the House had okayed H.R.1586, President Obama signed it into law.

Big Labor Bosses Still Far From Satisfied

But despite having received a host of handouts like H.R.1586 during the past two years, top union bosses remain far from satisfied. They are making no secret about the fact that they think they are still owed at least a few more juicy legislative plums before the end of this Congress.

After all, as union dons never hesitate to remind the Democratic President and congressional leaders, they, more than any other special-interest group, are responsible for giving one political party control of the White House and lopsided Senate and House majorities at the same time.

It’s estimated that, in 2007 and 2008, the union political machine pumped well over a billion dollars, mostly siphoned off from workers’ forced union dues and fees, into efforts to put Big Labor Democrats in firm control of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government.

Consequently, union barons expected to see enacted in the current Congress legislation that would help them sharply increase the share of all private-sector workers who are under union monopoly-bargaining control.

Their original vehicle for achieving this objective was S.560/H.R.1409, the so-called “Employee Free Choice Act.”

Sponsored by Big Labor Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Congressman George Miller (D-Calif.), S.560/H.R.1409 would grease the skids for union-boss workplace takeovers in several ways. Most famously, it would effectively end secret-ballot elections in union organizing drives, replacing them with so-called “card checks.”

That means, if S.560/H.R.1409 became law, union organizers would have far more opportunities than they currently do to intimidate individual workers into signing not just themselves, but all of their nonunion fellow employees, over to Big Labor control.

Right to Work Resistance Has Stalled Power Grab

Unfortunately for union bigwigs, since early 2009 the National Right to Work Committee and its allies have mobilized massive public opposition to S.560/H.R.1409, greatly lowering its prospects for passage in its current form.

In response, for many months now Big Labor lobbyists and politicians have huddled together with the intent of concocting new, passable legislation that would accomplish the same objective through somewhat different means.

Now it seems that their “Plan B” might well emerge in the 2009-2010 Congress — but not until after Election Day!

On August 12, union-label Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) publicly confirmed what freedom-loving Americans have suspected for some time: that he will reconvene the Senate soon after Election Day on November 2. Under his plan, the “lame duck” chamber could remain in session until well into December, with only a brief Thanksgiving recess.

Reid lieutenant Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) has confirmed that the Senate will be considering major policy initiatives, and not just “must-pass” budget bills, after Election Day.

“It may well be we have to wait until a lame-duck session to pass whatever we’re able to pass,” Mr. Bingaman admitted to the Capitol Hill newspaper Politico in mid-August.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has also made it clear she intends to hold a “lame duck” session in her chamber, though she has yet to publicly announce a schedule

“Union bosses from AFL-CIO czar Richard Trumka on down are now reiterating their demand that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi bring up the ‘card check’ bill, or its near equivalent, before the 2009-2010 Congress is over,” noted Right to Work President Mark Mix.

“Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi are desperate to satisfy their Big Labor patrons. But at the same time they want to minimize the electoral damage that voting for this power grab would do to vulnerable union-label politicians in their caucuses. That’s why the Big Labor Democrat leaders lean to the ‘lame duck’ strategy.”

Public-Safety Union-Monopoly Bill Could Also Be on ‘Lame Duck’ Agenda

“And ‘card-check’ forced unionism isn’t the only major rewrite of federal labor policy that may come up in the Big Labor Congress after November 2,” Mr. Mix continued.

“Another strong possibility is H.R.413/S.3194, legislation cynically mislabeled as the ‘Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act.’

“This measure would, at a time when government budget deficits are already sky high, hobble the ability of states and localities to keep their expenditures of taxpayer dollars under control.

“H.R.413/S.3194 would empower Federal Labor Relations Authority bureaucrats to survey all 50 states and identify which have failed to meet ‘core standards.’ And the key ‘core standard’ is mandatory union monopoly bargaining.

“Localities in all 50 states would be denied the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

“Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as ‘exclusive representation,’ would be foisted on police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide. And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, H.R.413/S.3194 would widen its scope.”

Right to Work Supporters Must Not Let Their Guard Down — Even After Election Day

Mr. Mix pointed out that, up to now, the Right to Work Committee and its members have led a successful campaign to block the union brass from ramming police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation through Congress.

However, he added, large majorities of both chambers of Congress, including a number of Republicans as well as practically every Democrat, are on the record in favor of H.R.413/S.3194. Now is certainly not the time to declare victory.

“Right to Work members and supporters nationwide must be prepared to keep turning up the heat on their senators and congressmen, even after Election Day, to ensure that neither a gussied-up version of ‘card check’ nor police/fire monopoly bargaining is enacted late this year,” said Mr. Mix.

“It might be hard for some people to believe that even Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and President Obama would be audacious enough to try to grant enormously consequential new special privileges to Big Labor during a ‘lame duck’ congressional session.

“But the grim determination of these politicians to help union bosses corral workers into unions, by hook or crook, cannot be overestimated.

“Forced-unionism opponents can’t afford to let their guard down for one moment. Not now, with crucial elections just a few weeks away. But not after Election Day, either.”

If freedom-loving citizens don’t keep turning up the heat on their senators and congressmen late this fall, a looming “lame duck” session of Congress could end up doing severe damage to the Right to Work.

Today, Big Government, not the private sector, is Big Labor’s bread and butter. That’s why union officials push relentlessly for higher taxes and bigger government and seem completely unconcerned that the policies they advocate will slash overall private-sector job growth in future years.

Just three decades ago, less than a third of all employees subject to “exclusive” union bargaining worked for the government. Earlier this year, the U.S. Labor Department reported that for the first time ever, a majority of unionized workers across America are now government employees.

The outsized power and privileges of government union bosses clearly are a major force behind the unsustainable growth of government payrolls. According to data furnished by respected labor economists Barry T. Hirsch and David A. Macpherson, nonunion government employment nationwide actually fell by 2 percent, but Big Labor-controlled government employment grew by nearly 4 percent from 2007 to 2009.

Incredibly, nearly all Democrats and many Republicans on Capitol Hill appear eager to make matters even worse by rubber-stamping legislation (H.R. 413 and S. 3194) that would federally grant public-safety union officials monopoly bargaining privileges over state and local public employees nationwide.

In states that don’t already authorize public-safety monopoly bargaining, this legislation would impose it federally, denying localities the option to refuse to grant a union hierarchy the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join. In most states that already authorize public safety union monopolies, H.R. 413 and S. 3194 would widen their scope.

This legislation also would, as former Service Employees International Union second-in-command Anna Burger has boasted, “create a national collective [i.e. monopoly] bargaining standard for all public workers.”

Federalizing “exclusive” union bargaining over public safety employees would be ill advised under any circumstances, but at a time when taxes already are poised to skyrocket and cities and towns across America already are trying to deal with the worst fiscal crisis in decades, Congress would have to be incredibly reckless to enact this bill. By tipping the scales even further in favor of government-employment growth over business job growth, this legislation could kill hopes of reviving America’s private-sector economy for a long, long time.

Nevertheless, the current congressional majorities and the president are so beholden to Big Labor that they are very likely to make police and fire monopoly-bargaining legislation the law of the land soon, unless freedom-loving citizens nationwide contact their congressmen and senators, urging them to oppose H.R. 413 and S. 3194 in massive numbers.

Public-Safety Union Monopoly Undercuts California Law Enforcement

On Tuesday, July 13, Oakland, Calif., became a friendlier place for burglars, embezzlers, car thieves, bad-check passers, extortionists, and an array of other criminals.

That afternoon, Oakland, a major West Coast port city with roughly 400,000 residents, laid off 80 police officers, or 10% of its force, to help eliminate a budget deficit of over $30 million. In response, the city police department implemented a new policy in which officers aren’t being dispatched to take reports for 44 “lower priority” crimes.

Oaklanders whose homes or vehicles are burglarized must now go online or visit a police station to file reports. However, the police department warns them that, even if they do: “There will be no follow-up investigation, and the primary reason for filing the report is for insurance purposes.”

Why is the city recently reported to have the fourth highest violent crime rate in the country slashing the number of cops it employs? Some observers are blaming the recent national recession, which hit California especially hard.

But despite the recession-induced decline in Oakland’s tax revenues over the past couple of years, city officials could still have avoided laying off police this summer — if their hands weren’t tied by California labor policies that promote monopolistic unionism in the public sector.

Decades ago, Big Labor California politicians rubber-stamped legislation forcing local police departments to allow the agents of a single union to speak for all the police on their force, including those who haven’t joined the union and want nothing to do with it, on matters of pay, benefits, and work rules.

Government Union Bosses Prefer Service Cutbacks To Other Alternatives

The same union monopoly-bargaining system was foisted on California fire departments, school districts, prisons, and other government agencies.

As a consequence of government union bosses’ special privileges, California elected officials who face fiscal crises must get Big Labor’s permission before they can attempt to get their budgets back in order by changing the way employees are compensated.

For example, in Oakland, like in many other California jurisdictions, government union-promoted work rules make it almost impossible for police supervisors to schedule officers to work when and where they are needed during their regular eight-hour shifts.

Consequently, local taxpayers rack up enormous overtime costs.

Changing Big Labor scheduling restrictions and other work rules could easily have reduced the Oakland police department’s compensation expenses by as much as laying off 10% of the force does.

However, police union bosses rejected all proposals that would have resulted in a significant net reduction in taxpayers’ compensation costs, making layoffs unavoidable.

“When times are bad, government union bosses generally prefer layoffs that reduce services to other alternatives, partly because they know the layoffs will, very likely, only be temporary,” commented National Right to Work Committee Vice President Matthew Leen. “Consequently, structural problems never get resolved.”

Will U.S. Congress Make Matters Worse?

“That Californians have to deal with this is bad enough,” Mr. Leen continued.

“But incredibly, just as Golden State Congressman Brad Sherman [D] wants to foist private-sector forced union dues on all 50 states [see p. 5 for details], other Big Labor politicians are eager to federalize the public-sector union monopolies that are dragging California cities down.

“Their vehicle is S.3194/H.R.413, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-Nev.] and union-label Congressman Dale Kildee [D-Mich.]. Unless it is stopped, this legislation could bring Oakland’s woes to other cities across America.”

For more information on S.3194/H.R.413, the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, see pp. 1-2.

Public-Safety Forced Unionism Still High on Capitol Hill Agenda

The American people do not support Big Labor’s legislative scheme to establish a new federal mandate imposing union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) over state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

And powerful union-label politicians like U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) know this public-safety scheme (H.R.413/S.3194) is unpopular. That’s why they have repeatedly tried to sneak it through Congress.

Most recently, in June, Ms. Pelosi and her top lieutenants cut a deal with AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and other union bigwigs to attach H.R.413, the House version of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill, to a massive spending bill that provides funding for U.S. troops.

International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) union boss Harold Schaitberger openly admitted to helping concoct the scheme to tack H.R.413 on to H.R.4899, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act, in a June 30 message to officers of his union subsidiaries. Early last month, the National Right to Work Committee obtained a copy of Mr. Schaitberger’s communication.

Firefighters Union Chief ‘Argued Strongly’ For War Supplemental Strategy

Mr. Schaitberger reported that he had “argued strongly” for attaching H.R.413 “to the War Supplemental funding proposal for our troops in Afghanistan.”

The backroom deal between House leaders and the union hierarchy allowed the public-safety forced-unionism measure to come to the floor so quickly that Right to Work members and their allies had virtually no time to mobilize for the vote.

On July 1, the House rubber-stamped H.R.413 as a provision of H.R.4899. With very few exceptions, the national media overlooked the fact that a pro-forced unionism federal takeover of state and local labor-management relations had been approved as part of an unrelated spending bill.

However, despite the media’s cluelessness, millions of Right to Work members and supporters around the country were well aware of what was going on because the Committee was informing and mobilizing them through e-mails, phone calls, and “snail” mail.

For several weeks in July, freedom-loving Americans mobilized by the Committee campaign contacted their senators again and again, urging them to oppose H.R.4899 on all votes unless and until the public-safety union monopoly-bargaining amendment was removed.

Several organizations representing the interests of local governments and public-safety departments, such as the National Sheriffs’ Association, joined with the Committee in lobbying against the forced-unionism sneak play.

The message clearly got through to a number of senators who normally vote with Big Labor, but are getting antsier and antsier about their next election, regardless of whether they have to face the voters this year, or not until 2012 or 2014.

On the evening of July 22, the Senate voted down the House-passed version of H.R.4899, and then approved a war spending bill without the monopoly-bargaining provision. Finally, on July 27, a chastened House acquiesced to the Senate’s action, and sent a stripped-down war supplemental to President Obama’s desk.

Vast Majority of Americans Reject Monopoly Bargaining

H.R.413 and its Senate companion, S.3194, would force countless police officers, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they never voted for, and want nothing to do with.

Moreover, H.R.413 and S.3194 would, in practice, force tens of thousands of first responders to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs — despite Big Labor claims to the contrary.

“Americans overwhelmingly oppose monopoly bargaining and forced union dues, period,” noted Committee President Mark Mix.

“The public certainly has no interest in backing legislation designed to help Big Labor grab monopoly-bargaining privileges over hundreds of thousands of additional employees.”

Decades of polling confirm this point. Mr. Mix cited one recent scientific nationwide survey.

This poll found that 81% of Americans who regularly vote in statewide elections believe that employees in unionized businesses should retain the right to bargain for themselves. Just 17% of regular voters believe employees should not have that right, while 2% are unsure.

“Forcing union nonmembers to accept public-safety union officials as their monopoly-bargaining agent is what H.R.413 and S.3194 are all about,” explained Mr. Mix.

“Any state law or local ordinance authorizing public-safety union bosses to bargain on behalf of their members only would get tossed in the scrapheap if either measure became law.

“And, as Service Employees International Union second-in-command Anna Burger recently boasted, H.R.413/S.3194 would ‘create a national collective,’ i.e. monopoly, ‘bargaining standard for all public workers.’

“H.R.413/S.3194 simply can’t withstand public scrutiny. And Big Labor congressional leaders know it.”

Right to Work Committee And Its Members Will Keep Turning up the Heat

“Enactment of H.R.413 or S.3194 would be disastrous, not just for independent-minded public-safety officers and Right to Work advocates, but also for taxpayers and citizens who depend on their local police and fire departments,” Mr. Mix continued.

“That’s why the National Right to Work Committee and its members can’t afford to rest on our laurels for a minute. We will keep turning up the heat in preparation for the next Capitol Hill showdown over this legislation.

“Despite their recent setback, Harold Schaitberger, Richard Trumka, and the rest of the union hierarchy are far from ready to give up on their bid to federalize public-safety union monopoly bargaining.

“A number of the senators who helped defeat the public-safety scheme last month, when they were facing intense pressure from pro-Right to Work constituents, are current or previous cosponsors of this power grab.

“Right to Work supporters shouldn’t, and won’t, make the mistake of assuming such senators will be with us if, as is likely, Congress takes up H.R.413/S.3194 again this fall.

“Freedom-loving Americans must even be prepared for a possible showdown on this legislation during a ‘lame duck’ congressional session in November or December, after the elections, but before the new House and Senate are seated.

“Enactment of H.R.413/S.3194 would deal a harsh blow to the Right to Work cause.

“I know Committee members and supporters across the country understand that fact, and will do all they can to stop this legislation.”

Congress should let states handle their own labor relations

ALL ACROSS America, state and local governments are struggling with recession-induced budget crises as revenue has plummeted and demand for services has remained high. But the issue is not only cyclical. Many public employees have been promised pay, pensions and health benefits that tax bases cannot sustain even in good times. As a result, voters and political leaders of both parties are rethinking the costs and benefits of public-sector unionism.

Except in Congress, it seems. Senate Majority Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) is pushing to federalize labor relations between state and local governments and some public-sector unions. The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act would require all states to give police and fire unions “adequate” collective bargaining rights — as determined by the Federal Labor Relations Authority. States deemed “inadequate” could wind up in federal court. Long sought by public-safety unions, the bill is supported not only by Mr. Reid but also by Republicans, including the soon-to-retire Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.). It has a good chance of passing if the Senate can fit it on its busy calendar.

What this bill would do is impose a permanent, one-size-fits-all federal solution in an area — public-sector labor relations — that has traditionally been left to the states, and where state flexibility is probably more necessary than ever. The imposition on Virginia would be dramatic, of course, but even union-friendly Maryland, which lets each county decide whether and how to bargain with its employees, might find itself in costly, time-consuming contention with the feds. Farther afield, Colorado’s “fire protection districts,” special units of government dedicated to providing that service, would face costly collective bargaining even where firefighters and management are working harmoniously without it.

Refusal to Respond to Right to Work Survey ‘Raised Concerns’

Just a few months ago, Kentucky Secretary of State Trey Grayson was widely considered the favorite to win the GOP nomination this year for the U.S. Senate seat now held by pro-Right to Work Republican Jim Bunning, who is retiring after two terms.

A number of pundits contended that the strong support of Mitch McConnell, Kentucky’s senior U.S. senator and the head of the GOP minority in the upper chamber of Congress, would practically guarantee Mr. Grayson’s nomination.

However, the Grayson campaign made serious misjudgments during the final weeks before Kentucky’s May 18 primaries.

Most important to pro-Right to Work Kentuckians, Mr. Grayson refused to pledge to oppose several of the top power grabs now being advanced on Capitol Hill by Organized Labor, the #1 pro-Big Government special-interest group in America today.

More broadly, many voters who were deeply concerned about the rapid growth in federal spending under the George W. Bush Administration as well as under the current one became convinced Mr. Grayson lacked the intestinal fortitude to fight to reduce spending from its current stratospheric level.

‘Any Genuine Opponent of Big Government Would Eagerly Oppose’ Police/Fire Scheme

“One of the top items on Congress’s agenda this year is an intrusive federal mandate that would impair the ability of states and localities to keep their expenditures of taxpayer dollars under control,” noted National Right to Work Committee President Mark Mix.

“Any genuine opponent of Big Government would eagerly oppose this scheme, union bosses’ Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill [S.3194/H.R.413].

“Yet Trey Grayson refused to say a word against this destructive legislation, despite the fact that thousands and thousands of Committee members and supporters in Kentucky asked him to do so, time and time again.

“And his silence was especially disturbing because a handful of Senate Republicans are already publicly supporting the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill. Even one more could potentially make the difference.

“Fortunately, in this election Kentucky primary voters had several other candidates to choose from who pledged to oppose public-safety union monopoly bargaining and support Right to Work 100%. And one of them, opthamologist Rand Paul, was a top-tier candidate.”

In the end, Mr. Paul, who had started out the primary campaign as the distinct underdog, soundly defeated Mr. Grayson by a whopping 59% to 35% margin.

Big Government Is Big Labor’s ‘Bread and Butter’

By handing Mr. Paul a decisive victory, Kentucky primary voters sent a clear message to Capitol Hill Republicans that they want candidates who really will fight against the expansion of forced unionism and the increased cost of Big Government it brings, and not just mouth “feel good” rhetoric about this serious and rapidly growing problem.

“Trey Grayson’s refusal to respond to his Right to Work candidate survey this year, especially to the questions concerning public-sector forced unionism, clearly raised concerns that he was going to be just another ‘Big Government Republican,’” observed Mr. Mix.

“Kentucky voters were right to be concerned.

“Over the course of the past few decades, public servants, especially state and local public employees, have become Big Labor’s bread and butter.

“By 2009, union officials wielded monopoly-bargaining power over 7.5 million state and local employees, nearly 43% of all such employees nationwide, compared to just 8% of private-sector workers.

“Moreover, for many years now, Big Labor featherbedding and counterproductive work rules have sharply increased real taxpayer costs for compensation of state and local government employees.

“In fact, from 1998 to 2008 alone, taxpayers’ aggregate real costs for compensation of state and local government employees soared at a rate nearly 50% faster than the total real growth of private-sector employee compensation!”

Mr. Mix continued: “S.3194 and H.R.413, sponsored, respectively, by Big Labor Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and union-label Michigan Democratic Congressman Dale Kildee, would sock it to taxpayers again.

“This legislation would impose a new federal mandate ensuring that government union bosses get monopoly-bargaining privileges over additional hundreds of thousands of state and local public-safety employees.

“And the reason it is now on the verge of passage is that a handful of Senate Republicans are siding with Mr. Reid. In the House as well, a minority of Republicans, along with practically all Democrats, are in favor of the monopoly-bargaining bill.

“But scientific polls and multiple election results show that citizens across America overwhelmingly oppose public-sector union monopoly bargaining.

“The stinging defeat Trey Grayson suffered in Kentucky, after the Committee had notified hundreds of thousands of citizens through the mail and the Internet about his pointed refusal to oppose Reid/Kildee, is only the latest example.

“I’m cautiously optimistic the Kentucky election results will serve as a wake-up call for the D.C. establishment regarding just how deeply unpopular the Reid/Kildee legislation is.”

System That Congress Wants To Expand Is Currently Bankrupting Los Angeles

Reid-Kildee would federally impose union monopoly bargaining by denying localities the option to refuse to grant a single public-safety union the power to speak for all front-line employees, including those who don’t want to join.

Monopoly bargaining, euphemistically labeled as “exclusive representation,” would be foisted on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

And in most states that already authorize public-safety union monopoly bargaining, S.3194/H.R.413 would widen its scope.

“In every political jurisdiction, public spending tends to grow faster than taxpayers’ incomes, rendering government costs more and more burdensome over time. But decades of experience shows public-sector monopoly bargaining greatly exacerbates this problem,” Mr. Mix commented.

“For example, this summer the skyrocketing costs of public-safety monopoly bargaining are frighteningly close to driving the once-great city of Los Angeles into insolvency. L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa [D], himself a former union organizer, has acknowledged the real possibility.

“Congress must not federalize the very system that is now bankrupting Los Angeles. It’s just that simple.”

In an outrageous display of intimidation, SEIU activists violated private property and stormed the home of Bank of America executive Greg Baer. When Rockville, MD police arrived they discovered two DC police cars — police cars that  escorted the law breakers to the protest. (Note: please read the Washington Examiner article for updated denials).

This is an another example of why the Police-Fire Union Monopoly Bargaining Bill is so dangerous to our security.

As you know, the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill is designed to FORCE every firefighter and police officer in the country under union boss control — and is just the first step toward forcing ALL state and local public employees under Big Labor’s thumb. (Push Triangle to Play Video) 

The player will show in this paragraph

(The Strategy Room is FoxNews.com’s live web based video programming from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET  that provides: “always entertaining discussion of the day’s top stories, plus a variety of hour-long shows on topics like business, health, technology, and entertainment.”)

(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.