(Source: March 2011 NRTWC Newsletter)

Committee Calls on U.S. House Leaders to Block Union Power Grab

On February 4, President Barack Obama’s handpicked head of the Transportation Security Administration publicly announced he would help government union bosses grab monopoly-bargaining control over more than 40,000 airport screeners and other TSA employees.

John Pistole, who was sworn in as TSA chief in July 2010, made the move shortly after Republican John Boehner (Ohio) replaced Big Labor Democrat Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) as speaker of the U.S. House.

The changing of the guard at the House made it impossible, in all probability, for union lobbyists to ram through Congress legislation mandating union monopoly bargaining at the TSA.

Therefore, in order for the Obama Administration to hand federal union officials what they wanted, Mr. Pistole had to act administratively.

Agency Would Likely Become ‘Less Efficient and Flexible’

As a consequence of the Pistole edict, the honchos of one of two large government unions, either the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) or the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU), could grab so-called “exclusive” representation power at the TSA within the next few weeks.

If this happens, the already much-reviled federal agency will likely become even “less efficient and flexible,” as National Review Associate Editor Robert Verbruggen pointed out in a February 11 commentary.

Under the Pistole scheme, officers of a recognized union would wield monopoly power to challenge the TSA’s disciplinary actions and negotiate shift bids and transfers.

All front-line employees, including those who don’t want a union and refuse to join, would be forced to rely on union bosses to air their concerns with managers.

Fully understanding that foisting a union monopoly on the TSA, an agency generally viewed as critical for national security, would be controversial and unpopular, the Obama Administration has claimed “security procedures” will not be subject to Big Labor obstruction.

However, matters of discipline, scheduling and overtime at an agency like the TSA obviously do affect managers’ ability to get passengers boarded on planes safely and efficiently. That’s why union “exclusive” representation is banned at national security-related agencies like the FBI, the CIA, and the Secret Service.

One of the few such agencies where monopoly bargaining is already authorized, the Customs and Border Patrol, lost a 2009 arbitration ruling over how it could discipline an employee for literally falling asleep on the job!

Committee Fights For House TSA Reauthorization Barring Union-Boss Takeover

Almost immediately after Mr. Pistole gave the go-ahead to government union organizers, National Right to Work Committee leaders coordinated with likeminded members of Congress a plan to halt the conquest.

On February 15, pro-Right to Work Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) fired a shot across the bow when he forced a floor vote on an amendment to the pending Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Bill (S.223) that would have prohibited union monopoly bargaining at the TSA.

Union-label Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) successfully corralled every Democrat senator present and voting to block the Wicker amendment. The amendment received 47 votes, and therefore was not added to S.223.

However, Mr. Reid’s inability to persuade a single Republican senator to go along with him, even among those who have sided with government union lobbyists in the past, underscored the fact that public sentiment is moving strongly against Big Labor control of the TSA.

Right to Work President Mark Mix and his team of federal legislative staffers are now pressing hard to ensure that an amendment analogous to Mr. Wicker’s is included in the House version of the TSA reauthorization.

Since Speaker Boehner’s GOP majority caucus, unlike Mr. Reid’s Democrat politicians, is not obsequiously committed to expanding union bosses’ privileges, whenever and wherever they can, there is cause for Right to Work optimism.

“If the House does the right thing and passes a TSA reauthorization rescinding the Obama Administration’s gift to the government union brass, then the battle will move to a legislative conference committee,” explained Mr. Mix.

“With American awareness of the harm inflicted by government union excesses on the rise, I think there is a good chance Right to Work advocates can ultimately prevail and send a reauthorization bill to the President that reverses the Pistole edict.

“Then it will be up to Mr. Obama to decide whether he really wants to keep defying public opinion regarding the TSA.”

Rather than deal with many of the fiscal issues brought about by unsustainable congressional gifts to Big Government Union Bosses and their private sector Big Labor counterparts, Nancy Pelosi threatens to join the movement for a federal government shutdown.  A shutdown forces all non-essential federal government employees to go home without pay.  (Of course in the past when these “non-essential” employees returned, congress basically paid them for their time-off without a loss in regularly pay or vacation pay.)

It is time for congress to deal with the problem of forced unionism and its costs to society as well as to the future of the American Dream.

From the Politico:

A high-ranking aide to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told Democratic chiefs of staff that a government shutdown is more likely than not, according to attendees. Speaking at a regular meeting of the top aides to House Democrats, Pelosi’s floor director, Jerry Hartz, offered up his assessment that the odds favor inaction before the government runs out of money, sources said. A shutdown would only happen if the House and Senate can’t reach a deal on the continuing resolution that expires on March 4.

But Big Labor Retains Hold Over U.S. Senate, Key State Assemblies

Not just on November 2, but throughout this past election year, voters across most of the country sent two clear messages to Big Labor politicians on Capitol Hill: They are dismayed by what the politicians have done at union lobbyists’ behest, and determined to stop them from doing more of the same.

One major object of voters’ ire was the controversial “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” (ARRA), otherwise known as the “stimulus” package. In early 2009, AFL-CIO and Change to Win union lobbyists twisted arms to secure majorities in both chambers of Congress for this $800 billion legislation.

Since it became law, ARRA has bilked taxpayers of hundreds of billions of dollars to ensure that bloated, unionized government payrolls stay bloated, but furnished no detectable net benefit for America’s private sector.

Another key source of voters’ displeasure was ObamaCare.

More even than President Obama or any other elected official, top union bosses and their arm-twisting union lobbyists are responsible for Congress’s narrow votes to reconstruct America’s enormous health-care system in late 2009 and early 2010.

November 2′s exit polls clearly indicate that voters across the country punished vulnerable U.S. representatives and senators for doing what Big Labor told them to do.

Undoubtedly compounding the woes of many of the politicians who had voted for the government union boss-crafted “stimulus” package and ObamaCare was that they were also on the record in support of forced-unionism initiatives that, due to stiff Right to Work opposition, have yet to be enacted.

Millions of freedom-loving citizens were furious with their incumbent politicians for having backed Big Labor’s now-moribund “card check” forced-unionism bill and its so far-stalled scheme to federalize government union monopoly bargaining over state and local public-safety employees.

Big Labor Appeasers in GOP Were First Casualties Of Voter Backlash

While it was overwhelmingly Democrat politicians who paid the price on November 2 for having kowtowed to union bigwigs, the earlier casualties of the voter backlash against President Obama’s forced-unionism agenda were mostly Republicans.

For example, roughly 18 months ago, Republican Arlen Specter (Pa.) decided he had no choice but to abandon his efforts to obtain the 2010 GOP nomination for the U.S. Senate seat he had held for three decades.

Mr. Specter was no doubt correct in calculating that his long record of appeasing Big Labor, including a 2007 vote to shut down a Right to Work filibuster and ram the “card check” scheme through the Senate and an early 2009 vote for government union bosses’ ARRA, had become unpalatable to primary voters.

With the help of the Obama Administration, Mr. Specter tried unsuccessfully to do a quick pivot and capture the Democrat nod for his seat. Finally, on November 2, former GOP Congressman Pat Toomey, who has pledged to support Right to Work 100% on Capitol Hill, became Pennsylvania’s senator-elect by defeating the Big Labor Democrat who had defeated Mr. Specter in his new party’s primary.

The following spring, a second union boss-”friendly” GOP U.S. Senate primary candidate fell so far behind due to his avowed support for ARRA and his shiftiness on other key issues for Right to Work supporters that he dropped out and declared he would run as an independent.

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist’s maneuver to capture his state’s open U.S. Senate seat was no more successful than Mr. Specter’s. On November 2, 100% pro-Right to Work Florida Republican Marco Rubio was elected to the Senate.

Blanche Lincoln and Russ Feingold Ignored Constituents For Too Long

The fact that several establishment incumbent Republicans like Mr. Specter, and establishment favorites for open GOP seats, like Mr. Crist, went down to defeat in congressional primary contests during the 2009-2010 cycle is clear evidence that issues, not party label, drove November’s results.

On Election Day, union-label incumbent Senate Democrats Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) and Russ Feingold (Wisc.) were ousted not because of their partisan affiliation, but because of their voting records. Both had voted for the “card check” bill in 2007, ARRA in 2009, and ObamaCare in 2010. Both also had repeatedly voted to federalize union monopoly bargaining control over public-safety employees.

As their poll numbers plummeted, Ms. Lincoln and Mr. Feingold adopted contrasting strategies.

Ms. Lincoln tried to backpedal from her past votes for the “card check” measure and other employee-coercing, economy-crushing schemes. Mr. Feingold dug in his heels and lectured voters that mandatory “card checks,” ARRA, and ObamaCare are all actually good policy.

Neither strategy worked. Voters weren’t fooled by Ms. Lincoln’s election-year “conversion,” nor were they persuaded by Mr. Feingold’s harangues. Republicans John Boozman and Ron Johnson, both of whom are pledging to support Right to Work consistently, will be the new senators from Arkansas and Wisconsin, respectively.

Despite significant setbacks for Big Labor in U.S. Senate primary and general elections, and despite steep losses for Big Labor in U.S. House and state-level contests (see pp. 3 and 6 of this Newsletter, respectively, for details), the 2009-2010 election news was not all bad for the union bosses.

Union Bosses’ Forced Dues-Fueled Machine Churns Out A Harry Reid Victory

In Washington State and in Colorado, the union political machine, which runs on dues and “agency” fee money extracted from millions of workers as a condition of employment, helped pro-forced unionism incumbent Democrats fend off strong challenges from candidates who vowed to support Right to Work.

But the biggest federal victory for the union brass was the reelection of their pet Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada. As the head of a 53-member caucus in a 100-member chamber, Mr. Reid will continue to hold the Senate reins in January.

Another positive for the union hierarchy is its retention, despite experiencing very substantial losses in state races overall, of complete control over the legislatures and the governorships in California and Illinois, and possibly (pending recount results) in New York as well.

With the ample executive power of the Obama Administration (see p. 4 for more information), the Senate, and the governments of some of the largest states in the country still at their disposal, the union bosses are already plotting their comeback. Right to Work supporters must also prepare for the coming battles.

Survey Presses Candidates to Pledge to Roll Back Forced Unionism

(Source: October 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

If respected Inside-the-Beltway political prognosticators like Charles Cook and Stuart Rothenberg are correct, there is a significant possibility that, come January, union-label Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) will no longer be speaker of the U.S. House.

As of mid-September, Mr. Cook and Mr. Rothenberg were both reporting there was at least a 50-50 chance that Republicans would pick up, at a minimum, the 39 House seats they need to hold a majority in the chamber and, presumably, to elect a GOP speaker.

Since virtually all Democratic politicians in Washington, D.C., rely on forced union dues-funded support from Big Labor to get elected and reelected, and few GOP politicians are similarly beholden to the union brass, a partisan House switchover would affect the climate for Right to Work-related legislation.

For example, in all likelihood, the arrival of a GOP House would derail, for the time being, Big Labor’s years-long campaign to mandate “card checks” or in some other way rig union organizing campaigns, and thus make it even harder for independent-minded employees to avoid being corralled into a union.

However, if history is any indication, Republican House leaders are unlikely even to try to reverse federal policies that currently force millions of workers to accept monopoly union “representation,” like it or not, and pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment.

Unlikely, that is, unless pro-Right to Work citizens nationwide are mobilized in unprecedented numbers to put the heat on GOP politicians to act.

Right to Work Movement Hasn’t Forgotten About GOP’s 1995-2007 Record

“From 1995 through 2007, Republican politicians like Newt Gingrich [Ga.], Tom DeLay [Texas], Dennis Hastert [Ill.], and John Boehner [Ohio] were calling the shots in the U.S. House,” recalled Doug Stafford, vice president of the National Right to Work Committee.

“For more than 10 of those 12 years, GOP solons were also in charge of the U.S. Senate. And for six of the 12, Republican President George W. Bush sat in the White House.

“Unlike Speaker Pelosi, Speakers Gingrich and Hastert weren’t products of the Big Labor political machine. But very much like Speaker Pelosi, they kept measures to repeal federally-imposed forced union dues and fees bottled up in committee throughout all the years they were in power.

“Committee leaders, members and supporters haven’t forgotten. And our goal now isn’t merely to help forge a House and Senate that will refuse to hand union officials even more special privileges.

“Rather, our goal is a Congress with the fortitude to move to take away, even over the objections of a Big Labor President, the forced-unionism powers that union bosses have already.

“The Committee’s Survey 2010 is critical for this long-term objective.”

Committee Survey 2010 Now in High Gear

Throughout the year, Right to Work leaders have been pouring the Committee’s resources into its Survey 2010 program, which informs freedom-loving Americans about where their candidates stand on compulsory unionism.

Through the federal survey program, hundreds of thousands of pro-Right to Work citizens are now contacting candidates in targeted close races, urging them to pledge opposition to union-boss power grabs and support for forced-dues repeal. (For more information about key U.S. Senate races targeted by the Survey 2010, see this Newsletter’s cover story.)

“Now’s the time when politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, are paying most attention to what the people in their home districts and states have to say,” commented Mr. Stafford.

“That’s why the Committee must do everything possible now to get candidates to go on the record as 100% Right to Work supporters. Our success will greatly enhance the effectiveness of our future efforts to advance the Right to Work principle.

“Mobilizing huge numbers of forced-unionism opponents through the mail and TV and newspaper advertising, as well as the Internet, isn’t cheap. But it is incredibly important. In fact, the survey is the lynchpin of the Committee’s entire lobbying program.”

(Source: September 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Over the past two years, Big Labor bosses have repeatedly succeeded in getting their favored federal politicians in competitive U.S. House districts and states to cast “politically difficult” votes.

Early in 2009, for example, union lobbyists twisted arms to secure majorities in both chambers of Congress for controversial “stimulus” legislation. Since it became law, the “stimulus” has bilked taxpayers of hundreds of billions of dollars to ensure that bloated, unionized government payrolls stay bloated, but furnished no detectable help for America’s private sector.

And, more even than President Obama or any other elected official, top union officials are responsible for Congress’s narrow votes to reconstruct America’s enormous health-care system in late 2009 and early 2010.

As the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reported March 22, 2010, “in the final push before the vote,” many union bosses and union operatives “displayed their clout through threats to withhold endorsements from lawmakers who failed to back the bill. They also vowed to support primary challenges or third-party bids against incumbents who opposed” ObamaCare.

Now polls indicate that voters across the country are poised to punish vulnerable U.S. representatives and senators for doing what Big Labor told them to do.

Undoubtedly compounding the woes of many of the endangered politicians who backed the government union boss-friendly “stimulus” package and ObamaCare is that they are also on the record in support of forced-unionism initiatives that, due to stiff Right to Work opposition, have yet to be enacted.

Most of all, millions of freedom-loving citizens are furious with their incumbent politicians for having backed Big Labor’s now-stalled “card check” forced-unionism bill and its still-pending scheme to federalize government union monopoly bargaining over state and local public-safety employees.

National Union Boss Vows ‘Massive Incumbent Protection Program’

But despite poll after poll showing the public thinks little of the forced-unionism agenda and the politicians who have helped implement major parts of it, AFL-CIO chief Richard Trumka clearly believes he can build on the “achievements” of the 2009 “stimulus” and ObamaCare.

This fall, Mr. Trumka and his cohorts are expected to spend well over a billion dollars, mostly derived from union dues and fees employees are forced to pay as a condition of employment, on electioneering efforts designed to benefit their puppet politicians.

Union kingpins calculate that their forced dues-funded phone banks, get-out-the-vote drives, and propaganda mailings, mostly conducted under the radar, can help dozens of Big Labor politicians who would otherwise go down to defeat this year secure reelection.

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME/AFL-CIO) union President Gerald McEntee has frankly called what he and other union bosses are up to a “massive incumbent protection program.”

Mr. Trumka and Mr. McEntee know that, if they can show this November that backing Big Labor’s agenda on vote after vote has relatively little political downside, despite that agenda’s unpopularity in the polls, it will be much easier for them to ram through “card check” and more in the 2011-2012 Congress.

But the National Right to Work Committee and its members (now 2.6 million, and growing) are now fighting to ensure that congressmen and senators who have carried water for Big Labor time and again are held accountable this fall.

Right to Work Survey 2010 Can Help Ensure Politicians Are Held Accountable

The principal Committee program for holding politicians’ feet to the fire is the federal candidate Survey 2010.

The ongoing Survey 2010 consists of three phases.

In the first phase, candidates receive questionnaires asking them how they intend to vote on a number of forced unionism-related issues, including mandatory “card checks,” federalized public-safety union monopoly bargaining, and national Right to Work legislation.

“The Committee’s goal is not just to secure enough support to block enactment of forced-unionism schemes like ‘card check’ legislation, but also to forge pro-Right to Work majorities in the House and Senate,” explained Committee President Mark Mix.

“That’s why the Right to Work survey raises the pressure on candidates to oppose the expansion of Big Labor’s forced-unionism privileges, and also to support rolling those privileges back.”

In the second phase of the Survey 2010, Committee members call and write the candidates, asking them to answer their questionnaires 100% in favor of Right to Work.

In the final phase, the Committee, through TV and newspaper ads, e-mails and the postal service, reports back to members and friends at the local level on how their candidates responded. That keeps the heat on non-responsive candidates to take a clear stand on the Right to Work issue.

“The aim of Big Labor’s billion-dollar, forced dues-funded electioneering program is to divert public attention from the damage that union-label politicians have wrought on America over the past two years and the even more severe damage they will do over the next two if they can,” said Mr. Mix.

Public Doesn’t Support Compulsory Unionism

“Big Labor has far more money at its disposal than do Right to Work supporters, but the union bosses have one major problem: The general public, and even the workers they claim to represent, don’t support what they are selling,” Mr. Mix continued.

“Poll after poll shows that nearly 80% of Americans agree that no one should be forced to join or pay dues to a union, simply in order to keep his or her job.

“The Committee survey program works simply by ensuring that the Right to Work issue, which already has overwhelming public support, remains in the spotlight throughout the campaign season.

“With members’ generous support, I’m confident that this fall the federal survey will force candidate after candidate either to pledge to stop attacking employees’ Right to Work, or face serious repercussions at the polls.”

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.

President Obama (D-IL), House Speaker Pelosi (D-CA), and Senate Leader Reid (D-NV) are risking the nation’s fiscal health to payback Big Labor Bosses for forced-union-dues financed political campaign operations.  Michael Barone in the Washington Examiner:

Starting around 1980, the country began to revive. Big Government lowered taxes and deregulated transportation and communications. Entrepreneurs and investors replaced stodgy corporate management with new companies and new products.

The conformist “organization man” Americans of the 1950s were replaced by nonconformist innovators, risk-takers and creators who created a new economy that central planners could never have envisioned. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs didn’t wait for those at the top of Big Units to tell them what to do.

Big Business changed: The Fortune 500 list of 2010 doesn’t look anything like that of 1970.  … Most union members today are public employees.

The Obama Democrats, faced with a grave economic crisis, responded with policies appropriate to the Big Unit America that was disappearing during the president’s childhood.

Their financial policy has been to freeze the big banks into place. Their industrial policy was to preserve as much as they could of General Motors and Chrysler for the benefit of the United Auto Workers. Their health care policy was designed to benefit Big Pharma and other big players. Their housing policy has been to try to maintain existing prices. Their macroeconomic economic policy was to increase the size and scope of existing government agencies to what looks to be the bursting point.

What we see is Big Government colluding with Big Business and trying to breathe life into Big Labor.

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.”

(Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Last month, the Big Labor Congress gave final approval to, and President Barack Obama signed into law, what is surely the greatest expansion of federal government power over consumers, employees and businesses since last century’s Great Depression.

And, even more than Mr. Obama, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), or any other elected official, top Big Labor bosses are responsible for Congress’s reconstruction of America’s enormous health-care system.

On March 22, the day after the House rubber-stamped both H.R.3590, the version of ObamaCare Mr. Reid had rammed through the Senate early Christmas Eve morning, 2009, and a “fixer” bill (H.R.4872) amending the Senate measure, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) demonstrated how it all happened.

“Supporters of both measures received out-sized support from labor unions,” concluded the CRP’s Michael Beckel in his legislative wrap-up.

He went on to specify that, since 1989: “Members who voted for both bills received an average of about $917,500″ in reported contributions alone from labor union bosses.

Furthermore, in “the final push for a vote,” many union bosses and union operatives “also displayed their clout through threats to withhold endorsements from lawmakers who failed to back the bill. They also vowed to support primary challenges or third-party bids against incumbents who opposed the bills.”

National Right to Work Committee Vice President Doug Stafford commented: “Since 1989, Big Labor has contributed a total of $160 million more, in cash alone, to ObamaCare proponents than to ObamaCare opponents.

“In contrast, health-focused industries gave roughly $100 million to ObamaCare proponents and roughly $110 million to opponents — a difference of just $10 million.

“And this 16-to-1 edge for pro-ObamaCare politicians doesn’t even take into account their even wider advantage in union bosses’ hidden, forced dues-funded ‘in-kind’ contributions. Organized Labor bosses can truly be said to ‘own’ ObamaCare.”

Verizon Retiree, Right to Work Chairman: ObamaCare Is Already Hurting Me

Why did union bigwigs spend so much of their PAC and forced-dues money, and twist so many politicians’ arms, to get ObamaCare enacted?

Certainly not because most unionized workers will benefit.

As has been widely reported, under ObamaCare as ultimately enacted, a disproportionately large share of unionized employees will see their premiums jump up, or their benefits cut back, as a result of the law’s large new excise tax on so-called “Cadillac” health insurance plans.

And unionized firms such as AT&T, Verizon and Caterpillar have already signaled they will very likely drop their prescription-drug coverage for retirees once ObamaCare slashes the tax incentive federal policy has offered them up to now to retain it.

Retirees from such companies will then have no choice but to apply for Medicare drug benefits, which are meager compared to those the retirees currently receive, but far more expensive for taxpayers who will carry the whole freight.

Right to Work Chairman and Verizon retiree Chuck Serio commented: “It appears that the Communications Workers of America union hierarchy to which I paid thousands of dollars in dues and compulsory fees during my 37 years has been instrumental in my coming loss of drug coverage by my former employer.

“Thanks a lot, CWA bosses.” Union Bosses Will Rake In Bailout Money

In reality, union bosses supported ObamaCare both because of their ideological commitment to bigger and bigger government, and because it remained, in all its various incarnations, full of special-interest handouts to Organized Labor.

For example, one little-discussed provision in the ObamaCare law would either exacerbate the horrendous national debt or foist an additional burden on taxpayers by furnishing $10 billion in bailout money for mismanaged union health-benefit funds.

“Union bosses will rake in billions and billions of dollars in bailouts thanks to ObamaCare, but most forced dues-paying workers will get hurt,” said Mr. Stafford. “It’s a horrifying, but instructive illustration of the evils of compulsory unionism.”

(Source: January 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

Neither the “Card-Check” Forced Unionism Bill’s extreme unpopularity with the public nor the obvious reluctance of several members of his own caucus on Capitol Hill to vote for this legislation can excuse Majority Leader Harry Reid from his obligation to ram it through the U.S. Senate. 

That’s the message Big Labor is sending to Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) as the second session of the 111th U.S. Congress gets underway this month.

Last year, Mr. Reid tried early in the session to move the “card-check” bill, but, after Americans opposed to the measure inundated Senate offices with phone calls and mail, he backed off.

Mr. Reid then vowed the Senate would take up the “card-check” bill, S.560, as soon as it had fulfilled President Obama’s request of adopting legislation reworking America’s $2.5 trillion-a-year health-care system.

And on Christmas Eve, the Senate rubber-stamped H.R. 3590, Mr. Reid’s version of ObamaCare, in a straight party-line vote.

Furthermore, Mr. Reid’s U.S. House counterpart, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), has made it clear she expects the Senate to act on S.560 before the House votes on H.R.1409, the lower chamber’s version of the “card-check” scheme.

Therefore, top union bosses contend, this winter Mr. Reid has no choice but to schedule a vote on S.560 or a very similar bill. And he also needs to find a way, as he did with the highly unpopular H.R.3590, to get a gussied-up S.560 adopted through legislative arm-twisting and horse-trading.

“Anything short of that,” warned Washington Post columnist and union-boss confidante Harold Meyerson in a column late last month, and Big Labor’s “anger will take a toll on the Democrats’ electoral prospects” in 2010.

‘Plan B’ Would Advance S.560’s Pro-Forced Unionism Ends Through Alternative Means

The undisguised aim of S.560 is to help Big Labor force millions of additional workers, union members and nonmembers alike, to accept a union as their “exclusive” (monopoly) bargaining agent in their dealings with their employer.

A major provision in this legislation, cynically mislabeled by proponents as the “Employee Free Choice Act,” would accomplish this goal by effectively ending secret-ballot elections in union organizing campaigns.

However, this “card-check” provision is so flagrantly anti-worker and unpopular with the public that S.560 lead sponsor Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) has apparently concluded that the bill in its current form may be too difficult to get through the Senate.

That’s why Mr. Harkin and other Big Labor senators have worked behind the scenes to concoct a less obviously sinister “Plan B” that would accomplish the same forced-unionism objectives of S.560 through somewhat different means.

This Is No Time For Right to Work Supporters To Let Their Guard Down

Top union bosses are reluctantly supportive of “Plan B” because they understand it will promote forced unionism, to virtually the same extent as S.560, by rewriting workplace election rules to tilt them even more steeply in union organizers’ favor.

“When Big Labor bosses who collectively pour well over a billion dollars, mostly forced-dues money, into federal election campaigns every two years demand something, Harry Reid will do everything he can to give it to them,” warned National Right to Work Committee Vice President Matthew Leen.

“This winter will be very dangerous for freedom-loving citizens. 

“Andy Stern, chief of the Service Employees International Union and probably the most powerful union boss in America today, is openly cooperating with Harry Reid and Tom Harkin in their efforts to concoct a ‘Plan B’ that can get through the Senate.

“Only ever-intensifying heat from pro-Right to Work senators can convince the same Senate fence sitters who ultimately helped Mr. Reid ram through ObamaCare, senators like Blanche Lincoln [D-Ark.] and Byron Dorgan [D-N.D.], not to follow the same routine with S.560 or ‘Plan B.’

“I urge Right to Work members and supporters in all 50 states, especially constituents of ‘swing’ votes like Ms. Lincoln and Mr. Dorgan, to keep contacting their senators through the Capitol Hill switchboard, 202-224-3121.

“Let them know you want and expect them to oppose S.560 and any similar pro-forced unionism legislation on all votes.”

(Source: January 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

It is growing very clear that Big Labor politicians know the American people do not support their 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. Jus t be fore the U.S. House adjourned last month, forced-unionism cheerleader Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her cohorts plotted to sneak this legislation through their chamber while attracting as little public attention as possible.

Behind the scenes, Ms. Pelosi, Big Labor Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.), and others worked on a plan to tack Mr. Kildee’s House version of the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill (H.R.413) onto H.R.3326, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill.

And Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Kildee et al probably would have succeeded in securing a House rubber-stamp for a huge expansion of union bosses’ monopoly privileges without facing major resistance – but for the efforts of the National Right to Work Committee and its allies on Capitol Hill.

Committee Staff Alerted Leaders of Allied Groups

On December 14, within just hours of learning from a key Capitol Hill source that Big Labor House leaders were preparing to bring up H.R.413 as an amendment to H.R.3326, Committee legislative officers began sending faxes and e-mails and making personal visits to key Capitol Hill offices.

Right to Work staff also alerted leaders of several organizations representing the interests of local governments and public-safety departments, such as the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA), that is also opposed to H.R.413 and its U.S. Senate counterpart, S.1611.

House members from key swing districts who were already edgy as a result of the intense public controversy over ObamaCare thus began receiving calls and e-mails from an array of groups urging them to resist all efforts to attach the monopoly-bargaining bill to the defense spending measure.

Moreover, congressmen and their staff members certainly knew from previous showdowns over forced unionism legislation that, if H.R.3326 emerged with a monopoly-bargaining amendment, their offices would quickly be flooded with calls from Right to Work members mobilized by the Committee’s phone operation.

And on Wednesday, December 16, it became clear that Speaker Pelosi and co. had decided to heed, for the moment, concerned congressmen when H.R.3326 was formally introduced without the public-safety monopoly bargaining provision.

Vast Majority of Americans Reject Monopoly Bargaining

Of course, Big Labor House leaders are virtually certain to try again early this year to smuggle H.R.413 through their chamber. And there are still several pending FY 2010 appropriations bills to which this destructive measure could be attached. H.R.413 and the nearly identical S.1611 would force countless policemen, firefighters and EMT’s to accept as their monopoly-bargaining agent a union they personally never voted for, and want nothing to do with.

Moreover, H.R.413 and S.1611 do NOT protect the Right To Work without being forced to pay union dues or fees either of the public-safety employees upon whom Congress is imposing a union monopoly, or of the public-safety employees who are already subject to one.

“Americans overwhelmingly oppose monopoly bargaining, 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.”

Mr. Mix cited a recent scientific nationwide survey conducted by veteran pollster Del Ali and his firm Research 2000. The 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.1611 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 government union bosses actually see this legislation as just a first step toward enactment of a federal mandate corralling state and local employees of all kinds into unions. “H.R.413 simply can’t withstand public scrutiny. And Nancy Pelosi knows it.”

Big Labor-Appeasing West Virginia GOP Congresswoman ‘Should Heed Her Own Mayor’

Mr. Mix continued: “Federalizing union monopoly control over public safety employees would be ill-advised at any time, but at a time when taxes are already poised to skyrocket and cities and towns across America are already facing their worst fiscal crisis in decades, enactment of H.R.413 would be incredibly reckless.”

Pervasive public-sector union monopoly bargaining helps government union bosses build up giant political machines, which in most cases are fueled by workers’ compulsory union dues and fees. “

Government union officials use their electoral machines to bankroll Tax-and-Spend state legislative and executive politicians. And the onerous taxes such politicians foist on families and businesses sharply suppress job and income growth.

“Responsible local elected officials across the country have recognized the danger and are urging Congress to defeat H.R.413 and S.1611.”

For example, just this past November, Danny Jones, the mayor of Charleston, W.Va., publicly expressed his concern that this legislation could “bankrupt” his city. In an interview with Charleston’s Daily Mail, Mr. Jones starkly predicted of H.R.413/S.1611: “It’s going to change things. The relationship [between the city and the police union] will become adversarial. “. . . If you look around the states, the most unionized states are the ones that are most broke.”

“Unfortunately,” noted Mr. Mix, virtually every Democrat in Congress and dozens of Republicans are choosing to back the Police/Fire Monopoly- Bargaining Bill in spite of what concerned mayors, city council members, and public-safety officials have to say. “For example, West Virginia GOP Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito, who resides in Charleston when she isn’t in Washington, is a cosponsor of the very bill her hometown mayor charges could bankrupt their city.”

Ms. Capito should heed her own mayor and withdraw her support for H.R.413 immediately.”

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

“Enactment of H.R.413 or S.1611 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 H.R.413/S.1611.

“I urge all Right to Work members to maintain and expand their support, both lobbying and financial, for our campaign. Working together, we can stop the federalization of public-safety monopoly bargaining in 2010.”

The Wall Street Journal’s Kris Maher reports:

The AFL-CIO is planning its biggest political campaign ever this year, surpassing the $53 million spent in 2008 to help elect President Barack Obama

Trying to avert a Republican takeover of both the House and Senate in the November midterm elections, the labor federation is focusing on a “firewall” of six states with key congressional elections and relatively high numbers of union households: California, New York, Illinois, Nevada, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Sue Lowden (R-NV) is the leading challenger to forced unionism loving Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid and that makes her a target for the union bosses that will do anything to keep Reid at the helm of the Senate. The Las Vegas Review Journal reports “The AFL-CIO also is gearing up to help Reid and hit Lowden.”

(Source: February 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

This winter, state and local elected officials around the country are expressing their serious concerns about a proposed new federal mandate foisting union “exclusive representation” (monopoly bargaining) on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.

The legislation pending in the U.S. Congress, H.R.413/S.1611, is cynically mislabeled by proponents as the “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act,” but in reality it would incite conflict between government agencies and employees and hurt taxpayers, many local officials charge.

For example, just last month, the supervisors of Yavapai County in central Arizona wrote to their U.S. representative, Democrat Ann Kilpatrick, and GOP Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl to warn them the legislation would “place restrictions on counties that prohibit managing employees efficiently . . . .”

“I don’t think it’s the federal government’s business what we’re doing with our local government,” supervisors Chairman Chip Davis told his local newspaper. “It also hamstrings us.”

Late last year, Charleston, W.Va., Mayor Danny Jones was even more blunt in a newspaper interview, starkly predicting the legislation could “bankrupt” his city and adding:

“It’s going to change things. The relationship [between the city and the police union] will become adversarial. . . . If you look around the states, the most unionized states are the ones that are most broke.”

Dozens of Republicans in Congress Greasing Skids For Government Union Kingpins

One key reason why some observers regard H.R.413/S.1611 as nearly a fait accompli, despite intense grass-roots opposition, is that dozens of Capitol Hill Republicans like Buck McKeon (Calif.) and John Kline (Minn.) have pushed such legislation in the past.

Mr. McKeon was previously ranking minority member of the House Education and Labor Committee, and Mr. Kline now holds that position.

But despite the wrongheaded and futile efforts by Mr. McKeon, Mr. Kline, and many other GOP politicians to appease Big Labor by going along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and the Obama Administration on this issue, the battle is not over yet.

Thanks to the ongoing financial and moral support of the 2.5 million National Right to Work Committee members and supporters, Committee staff have since late 2008 succeeded in getting more and more groups and individuals actively involved in the fight against federal police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation.

While organizations representing the interests of local governments and public-safety departments, such as the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA), have opposed this scheme for years, members of Congress are now hearing much more from local public officials, thanks largely to Committee staffers’ leadership.

And the Committee ranks available to fight H.R.413/S.1611 grew dramatically in 2009 as a result of mounting public concern about the “Card-Check” Forced-Unionism Bill (H.R.1409/S.560) and other higher-profile Big Labor power grabs before Congress.

Firefighters Union Czar: ‘In Spite of Our Best Efforts,’ Measure Hasn’t Passed Yet

The fact that H.R.413/S.1611 is facing unexpectedly stiff grass-roots resistance was recently confirmed by none other than Harold Schaitberger, czar of the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF/AFL-CIO) and the acknowledged leader of Big Labor efforts to get this legislation enacted.

In a late December letter to IAFF District vice presidents and other IAFF union officials, Mr. Schaitberger conceded that the union’s lobbying machine had just tried without success to get H.R.413 attached onto H.R.3326, the “must-pass” Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill.

According to Mr. Schaitberger, this did not happen, “in spite of our best efforts,” because a number of senators who have up to now supported police/fire monopoly-bargaining legislation vowed to oppose attaching it to H.R.3326.

“While Mr. Schaitberger and his cohorts are sure to try again soon to sneak the Police/Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Bill through Congress, their failure to do so up to now is encouraging,” commented Committee President Mark Mix.

“Right to Work supporters still face an uphill battle against this power grab. But the battle is winnable.”

(Source: February 2010 NRTWC Newsletter)

President Obama, Big Labor U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and union-label House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) are all eager to help government union bosses grab monopoly-bargaining privileges over more than 45,000 airport screeners employed at the Transport Security Administration.

At the same time, however, neither the President nor the two congressional leaders seem to want to accept accountability for corralling TSA employees into a union. Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid, and Ms. Pelosi know that foisting a union monopoly on a federal agency that is critical for national security would be very unpopular.

That’s why, until very recently, they planned to let Erroll Southers do their dirty work.

Last September, the President named Mr. Southers, a former FBI agent, as his choice to head the TSA.

Had the Senate confirmed him as assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security for the TSA, Mr. Southers would have had the discretion to rescind administratively the prohibition on union monopoly bargaining over federal airport screeners imposed in 2003.

Unionization Would ‘Make It Harder’ For TSA to ‘Meet Changing Terrorist Threats’

And, even though Mr. Southers refused to say publicly whether or not he intended to hand government union bosses monopoly power to bargain over airport screeners’ working conditions once the Senate had confirmed him, Big Labor was obviously confident he would do just that.

On September 10, 2009, even before the President had officially nominated Mr. Southers, top bosses of the American Federation of Government Employees union (AFGE/AFL-CIO), who expect to be the principal beneficiaries of TSA monopoly bargaining, issued a press release applauding the choice.

The release quoted AFGE union President John Gage: “The question of [monopoly] bargaining . . . at TSA is not a matter of ‘if,’ but ‘when.’ We are confident that the appointment of Mr. Southers as administrator will help put that matter to bed.”

By late November, the AFGE hierarchy appeared to be on the verge of having its way. Two Senate committees had already rubber-stamped the nomination in lopsided votes.

But the National Right to Work Committee and its 2.5 million members weren’t ready to let AFGE union kingpins coercively collectivize TSA airport screeners without a fight.

Working closely with key pro-Right to Work senators, the Committee moved late last fall to block the confirmation of Erroll Southers, and thus prevent union bosses from obtaining monopoly power to negotiate over how airport screeners do their jobs.

Handing Big Labor this power 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.”

Pro-Right to Work South Carolina Senator Placed ‘Hold’ on Nomination

On November 29, pro-Right to Work Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) placed a “hold” on the Southers nomination, indicating his intent to prevent the nomination from moving forward until Mr. Southers had stated publicly and plainly whether or not he intended to unionize the TSA, and explained the reasons for his stance.

Subsequently, several other pro-Right to Work senators, including Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), declared that they also had “serious concerns” about Mr. Southers.

Nevertheless, Senate Majority Leader Reid vowed he would push aside all objections and ram through the nomination, without any additional debate, shortly after the Senate reconvened on January 19.

However, on January 20, beset by questions not just about whether he would impose union monopoly bargaining at the TSA, but also about his improper handling of confidential FBI files while employed there and his false testimony regarding the latter matter, Mr. Southers pulled out his nomination.

Battle Over TSA Employees’ Right to Work Goes On

“Thanks largely to the diligence of Right to Work legislative staff and the principled stance of Sen. DeMint, the AFGE union bosses’ scheme to seize monopoly-bargaining power over federal airport baggage screeners has been temporarily derailed,” said Committee President Mark Mix.

“Unfortunately, it is almost inevitable that President Obama’s next nominee to head the TSA, whoever that is, will wear a union label.”

“Once again, it will be up to Right to Work allies in the Senate to make sure the nominee provides clear answers on the monopoly-bargaining question before he or she is confirmed.”