In yet another tale of mob influence in modern day unions, Federal prosecutors in New York City have taken control of the heavy-equipment operators local #14 because so many of its officers and operatives have been brought up or convicted on charges of mob influence.
The agreement resolves civil racketeering claims brought from past mob corruption cases, including an indictment that sent reputed acting Colombo family boss Joel Cacace to prison for 20 years.
“This consent decree will help protect the Local 14 membership from the pervasive influence of organized crime that has long plagued the union,” U.S. Attorney Benton Campbell said.
The mob had infiltrated local 14 and created numerous no-show jobs while union officials took kickbacks and bribes to facilitate the practice. Prosecutions netted quite a few union thugs in the process.
The civil racketeering claims followed two prosecutions targeting the Colombo and Genovese crime families, netting 26 convictions on labor racketeering charges of the local’s members and representatives.
Unfortunately, there is nothing at all uncommon about this sort of thing in unions. Just another tale of union status quo here.
The Wall Street Journal today has an interesting little story highlighting a newly adopted change to the constitution of the powerful Service Employees International Union. At issue is whether it is legal for the union to require the locals to “donate” the equivalent of $6 per member to the SEIU political action committee. This new requirement has netted $150 million dollars that the SEIU is going to spend to help Democrats get into office in 2008.
The union adopted a new amendment to its constitution at last month’s SEIU convention, requiring that every local contribute an amount equal to $6 per member per year to the union’s national political action committee. This is in addition to regular union dues. Unions that fail to meet the requirement must contribute an amount in “local union funds” equal to the “deficiency,” plus a 50% penalty. According to an SEIU union representative, this has always been policy, but has now simply been formalized.
The problem is that this requirement placed upon the locals may violate Federal laws stating that contributions to a union PAC has to be voluntary, not mandatory.
SEIU prez Andy Stern is no stranger to campaign fraud, though. In 2004, Stern was instrumental in creating a political action committee called America Coming Together (ACT) that ran afoul of the law.
The Federal Election Commission later imposed a $775,000 penalty on ACT for violating campaign finance laws, the largest ever against a 527. Big as it was, the fine equaled less than one cent on the dollar for the $100 million that ACT improperly used to influence a national election. Mr. Stern was only a founder of ACT. But the political lesson is that the benefit of breaking the rules and potentially winning an election far outweighs a minuscule financial penalty well after the outcome is decided.
And now we have another possible violation in forced “voluntary” donations that the union is extorting from its own members.
You’d be excused if you felt like you fell down Alice’s rabbit hole with this story, only you’d soon discover that this Alice is named Andy, and it is quite real, indeed. Not long ago, Andy Stern, the radical chief of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), tried to sue members of an internal faction of his own union, the United Healthcare Workers (UHC). Stern alleged that the UHC was misappropriating funds. The suit was brought, conveniently enough, just before the SEIU convention held at the beginning of June, so that the worst possible light would be directed upon the insurgent faction of the SEIU just before they all came together to address the issues in dispute.
Well, as of June 222nd, US. District Court Judge John F. Walter threw out the SEIU’s lawsuit saying it was completely without merit.
The court ruled that SEIU had brought no valid legal claim against members of United Healthcare Workers-West (UHW) and the case was dismissed without the need for a hearing. The ruling entitles UHW members to compensation from SEIU for costs incurred as a result of the illegitimate lawsuit. UHW will seek full compensation on behalf of the ten members named in the suit.
According to UHW’s Executive Board Member Rosie Byers, the lawsuit was only “PR stunt” initiated to “to silence reformers within the union.”
“The charges made against local union members had no legal basis. The only purpose of this suit was to harass and discredit members of UHW who had spoken out against Andy Stern’s and Anna Burger’s backroom deals with corporations that hurt healthcare workers and our patients.”
Seems pretty obvious that Mrs. Byers is right on target with her claim. After all, if the suit was so baseless, Andy Stern’s own legal council would have been sure to make him aware of that fact. It is hard not to assume that he launched the lawsuit only in an effort to make the rest of his union membership feel that the UHW faction was illicit just before they arrived at the annual convention. This cloud over the UHW would have been sure to influence other union members that the UHW was untrustworthy and, therefore, would have discredited the UHW’s concerns and actions at that very convention.
It worked, too. Stern’s top heavy plan of cutting out local union representation in the operations of the union passed handily at the convention in June. And, now that SEIU prez Stern won and the convention is over, the nuisance lawsuit can be safely tossed aside.
Remember folks, this is the major union that backs Barack Obama. If they are this ruthless and anti-democratic in their own union to their own membership, what do you think they have in store for the rest of us?
After seven years of hiding corruption, ACORN has admitted Dale Rathke, brother of founder, Wade Rathke had embezzled nearly $1 million from the company. The embezzlement was only known to a few and was hidden from the remainder of the ACORN board. Unfortunately the wide scale corruption doesn’t even start with the embezzlement. The embezzlement is part of a much longer line of illegal activity.
ACORN is connected to money laundering, misuse of taxpayer funds, voter fraud especially in the Presidential Primaries, Wage and Hour Issues among their employees, and even safety issues in their offices. They are interfering in gubernatorial races especially in the State of Indiana. Their interference in the political arena knows no bounds. ACORN is the umbrella company to at least 75 non-profits all operating out of 1024 Elysian Fields Avenue, New Orleans, LA as verified by the Secretary of State in Louisiana. It is time to examine their fraud and expose it for what it is. So here is their dirty laundry list to date.
Money Laundering
The money laundering that was identified by the Consumer Rights League was released in a report in June 2008. The money laundering happened in 1996 and involved the Teamster’s Union, causing the president’s election to be thrown out by federal Read the rest of this entry »
**Union Label Blog Editor’s Note - David Denholm has a few thought on the insidious nature of card check. We hope you enjoy his thoughts. WTH**
Labor unions as we know them in America’s private sector are dying. It is a natural death. In some respects they are victims of their own success. In a much broader sense, as was so well stated by Michael Wachter, labor unions are “A corporatist institution in a competitive world.”
Unfortunately, for the American public and the vast majority of American workers the unions’ death throes may have some nasty unintended consequences.
The law of unintended consequences may be at work when it comes to organized labor’s drive to replace secret ballots with card checks for certifying unions as representatives of employees.
Does anybody imagine for a moment that taking away the right to a secret ballot vote on union representation and replacing it with an undemocratic process like card checks will make employers any less anxious to avoid the unionization of their employees? All a card check will do is move the battle line.
Let’s assume that you are an employer and that you would rather deal directly with your employees than through a union. Let’s also assume that you know that if a majority of employees sign union authorization cards, for whatever reason, you will be required to recognize the union as the representative of your employees.
To paraphrase Mr. Rogers, “Can you say psychologist?” Almost every job application process involves testing and an interview. Most of the test questions are looking for honesty and character. Some of the questions are very direct. Some of them are subtle. They were designed by psychologists because they know that a job applicant when asked, “Are you a thief?” is going to say, “No.”
Do you imagine for a moment that a good industrial psychologist couldn’t slip in a few questions to determine a prospective employee’s attitudes about organizing a union?
So what happens? A person who tests as likely to want union representation, whether that is accurate or not, doesn’t get a job offer. That’s an injustice but it is an inevitable consequence of going from secret ballots to card checks.
The old adage “be careful what you wish for” may be appropriate to union support for card check certifications. They might get much more than they bargained for.
In a follow up report to our earlier coverage, the Hudson Institute has unveiled its damning study on the largely ubiquitous insolvency of the pensions plans of the nation’s largest unions (download PDF here)
Excerpts:
At a time when unions are intensifying efforts to organize American workers, it’s troubling to see a widespread pattern of relatively poor performance among collectively bargained pension plans. They perform poorly relative to plans sponsored unilaterally by employers for nonunion employees. Equally disturbing, some pension plans for union officers are better funded than the plans for rank-and-file union members. The disparity raises this question: Do collective bargaining contracts lack provisions for the funding necessary to generate the generous retirement income that unions advertise?
…
Our analysis finds that pension plans for the officers and staffs of union were much better funded than those for the rank-and-file. On average, the 21 largest union pension plans had less than 70 percent of the finds that they would need to cover their total obligations, and none were filly funded. Seven were less than 65 percent funded. Yet 23 officer and staff funds from the same union had 88.2 percent of the funding they would need to pay promised pensions, including seven fully funded plans and another 13 with at least 80 percent of their required funds. Excluding the seven plans strictly for union office employees, staff funds had 98.4 percent of their required funds.
Unions have also been caught using their funds to achieve their political ends. In 2005, the Department of Labor wrote the AFL-CIO a letter telling it to reconsider such practices. Theoretically, pension funds are not permitted to make investment decisions based on politics or public policy. Using pensions as a political tool hurts union members because it may push their retirement funds into lower yielding investments. That diminishes investment returns and thus reduces resources available to pay promised benefits.
….
(My emphasis above)
This is a very interesting report that reveals how little unions really care about their own membership, the “little guys” that unions are supposed to be protecting. Unions have seen the draw of political power and found that bright, shiny object of far more interest then merely protecting the interests of their own members.
We have been reporting a bit on the Association of Community Organizations for Reform (ACORN) this week on the Union Label Blog and ACORN is an organization that bears close watch. It was reported that ACORN made $2.9 million from organized labor last year and a lot of this money seems to be slipping past Federal regulators raising significant questions of ACORN ties to big labor.
This money paid to ACORN supposedly covered the expenses for a number of shadowy union activities.
Training organizers to devise and implement anti-corporate campaigns
Providing “strike support”
Conducting campaign research and providing staffing
“Protecting market share”
Some of these services ware also paid on retainer and not just after services rendered.
ACORN has developed very close ties to the labor movement becoming a sort of “one-stop shop for unions looking to contract out labor activities,” according to Maverick Strategies. ACORN’s efforts have thus far flown under the radar for Federal regulatory agencies that act as watchdogs and regulators over union activities.
ACORN has, for instance, worked closely with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW). Most notably ACORN served to train SEIU staffers in the anti-Wal-Mart efforts the SIEU launched in the last few years.
Some of ACORN’s recent activities are as follows:
SEIU paid ACORN founder and chief of anti-Wal-Mart strategies Wade Rathke $21,885 in salary and $5,233 in expenses for the role of “campaign project organizer.”
SEIU gave $50,000 contribution to “Walmart Associations” in the care of Wade Rathke
SEIU paid a $126,000 “subsidy” to Wal-Mart Alliance for Reform Now, operated by ACORN
Change to Win paid ACORN $30,000 for a “public awareness campaign.”
SEIU twice awarded ACORN a $40,000 “monthly retainer.”
SEIU paid more than $970,000 to ACORN’s ACLOC program for “training.”
SEIU Local 5 paid ACLOC $58,487 for an internship phase and for an “organizing partnership.”
UFCW hired ACLOC as a “consultant for organizing program” at a cost of $429,431
UFCW Local 876 paid $131,089 for a “community standards program.”
ACORN is also on record as providing direct staffing for various labor union efforts and programs as opposed to mere training and consultancy work, as well.
This close relationship raises questions as to whether ACORN should fall under Federal regulations as a labor organization.
This video just came in via BlockersRus.com. The video shows ACORN employees admitting they are on the payroll, and admitting they haven’t even read the language of the petition they are blocking. It’s a shame that ACORN ignores the basic principles of free speech by sending paid bully’s to intimidate voters.
Keep an eye on our new ACORN Section as we’ll be bringing you a lot more info in the coming months.
As we all know… unions are some of the most corrupt organizations in the country. Union thugs work to limit free speech by blocking the initiative process, they scam union members by using dues for fraud type transactions and political activism, and they corrupt the American political process on all fronts.
This is why we at the Union Label Blog have worked hard to keep the union news flowing, and our stats are showing that people are indeed interested to hear what we have to say.
Because of this growth in traffic and attention, we’ve decided to add a section documenting election fraud via ACORN, an organization that is doing everything possible to cheat the American voters out of fair elections.
Some ACORN allies will preach about the organization being there for the low income families who need help, but they refuse to include anything about ACORN’s massive election fraud campaigns, attacks on free speech, and internal fraud/corruption.
Which brings us back to the perfect timing of taking this new section live… and this is extremely important for those of you who might think ACORN is looking out for your best interest.
Wade Rathke, who founded ACORN in 1970, left his position as the organization’s chief organizer after an embezzlement scandal that occurred eight years ago surfaced last month involving his brother and the group’s finances. ACORN’s national board asked Rathke to step down from his position about a week ago. Rathke’s brother, Dale, embezzled almost $1 million from the community group but the crime was handled internally and not reported to the police, allegedly at the behest of Wade Rathke.
The founder of ACORN and his brother were scamming members of the organization for years!
According to the New York Times column on the story, the organization hid the fraud from the board as well as its members because it was afraid of giving groups who might feel this is unacceptable, you know… as in… MOST AMERICANS, ammunition to fire at ACORN.
He said the decision to keep the matter secret was not made to protect his brother but because word of the embezzlement would have put a “weapon” into the hands of enemies of Acorn, a liberal group that is a frequent target of conservatives who object to its often strident advocacy on behalf of low- and moderate-income families and workers.
And apparently a lot of the staffers who were either aware of the rip off eight years ago when it started, or were actually a part of it, are still working at ACORN.
But the fact that most of the handful of people who did not disclose the fraud when they learned of it eight years ago still work for Acorn or its affiliates concerns many of the group’s financial supporters.
Have no doubt folks, ACORN is a big scam, an insult to Americans, a hindrance to the American voting process, and this sort of thing will only continue to get worse moving forward.
If you want to keep up to date with union corruption, as well as the ACORN scam of America, please sign up for e-mail updates and RSS feeds on our site.
One of the branches of the Department of Labor that provides a real services to all Americans is the Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS). These are the guys who make sure that labor unions are being transparent about their finances. Or they try, when the Democrats don’t cut their budget. But, for now, you get to see how unions spend their money. Read the rest of this entry »
Unions have been decrying outsourcing for years. The word “outsourcing” has been used as a boogieman to blame declining union jobs upon for the last decade. Unions, for their part, claim to desire to stand up against outsourcing — especially that of outsourcing jobs overseas — and wish to push the home grown alternatives to outsourcing jobs, namely keeping them in the country and under the control of the union.
Yet what have we discovered here on the blog? Why that the nation’s largest union, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has outsourced the design of one of their own web pages to someone in Slovakia, that’s what.
We’ve waited to report this story because the webpage in question presented a time sensitive situation. The SEIU was trying to create what they were calling the “Take Back the Economy Day” and that day was to be July 17th. The SEIU hoped to spur people to “take aim at the special perks and tax loopholes that buyout firms depend on to get rich,” and get people involved to protest the success of “buyout firms” such as Kohlberg, Kravis and Roberts.
Well, July 17th has passed us by and we here on the blog are not in danger of accidentally advertising their event in time to assist anyone in joining their July 17th effort.
That being said, here is what we found not long ago. The original SEIU webpage looked quite a bit different than the one that graced the web during the several days before their July 17th kick off day. The major overhaul was interesting in the respect of where the design of the page had come from.
It appears that the original page was designed by a fellow named Milan Kohut who’s business of web design is based in Slovakia, a small Eastern European nation (Near Ukraine, Poland and the Czech Republic).
But, on July 6th, only a short time before the July 17th event deadline, the SEIU suddenly undertook a major overhaul of the webpage design. Gone was the outsourced work and in was one hosted from here in the USA.
The constant griping about outsourcing by unions is common, as mentioned. But here we had one of the largest unions in the nation outsourcing their web design? Was it so hard to find an American web designer to have created their pages? And why the sudden overhaul eliminating the Slovakian designer’s work?
Randi Weingarten has delusions of grandeur. She thinks she should be given the power of a dictator instead of those of a teachers union president. Instead of just teaching kids, Weingarten imagines that she should become doctor, nanny, nutritionist, psychologist, and mother to every kid in America. She imagines that she should be given the care and feeding of all the nation’s kids.
Parents? Who need ‘em when we’ve got Mother Weingarten to trot them off to re-education camps where they will be fed and cared for on a daily basis?
Catch the arrogance, see this nanny-state despot lining up her dream state in her tiny, anti-family mind.
“Can you imagine a federal law that promoted community schools — schools that serve the neediest children by bringing together under one roof all the services and activities they and their families need?” Ms. Weingarten is expected to ask in the speech, a copy of which was provided by the union to The New York Times.
“Imagine schools that are open all day and offer after-school and evening recreational activities, child care and preschool, tutoring and homework assistance,” the speech reads. “Schools that include dental, medical and counseling clinics.”
Yes, imagine it. Imagine the billions of dollars needed to bring all these services from government to kids. Imagine the further destruction of the family as it happens, too.
This arrogant woman’s ideas are no less a usurpation of the role of the family, an abrogation of supreme power over our kids unto herself, and an amazing expansion of government power including the bloated budget to do so.
This is a dangerous, anti-American game this woman is playing. But, it reveals the oppressive idea of the role of government indicative of Democrats. They are nothing if not pure Stalinists.
A few days ago I posted a story on a recent article in the New York Sun by Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Senior Fellow at The Hudson Institute, that focused on how the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) had not fully funded the pension plan of their rank and file members while they had over funded the pension plan of the Union’s chief officers.
Well, today at noon (CT) I was included as part of a conference call on the pending release of the full study upon which that earlier article in the Sun was based, written by by Diana Furchtgott-Roth. This study reviews 21 — the SEIU included — of the largest unions in the country to see where pension solvency stood in general. The results are shocking.
The Hudson study found that by 2005, the last full year of reports filed, 21 of the nation’s biggest unions show that their rank and file members’ pensions are only funded at an appalling 67.7%. Conversely, the pension funds of the union bosses are funded at a much better 88.3%. So, the union bosses — all of who have a separate pension fund than their own rank and file members — have made sure THEIR pensions are funded at a much higher rate than that of their own members. Needless to say, the union bosses administer both their own and the rank and file members’ funds.
The SEIU is particularly egregious in that the union bosses have a pension funded at 103% while to poor rank and file members are only at a paltry 75% funded.
For their part, the SEIU in particular claims that the Hudson Institute numbers are off and that the 2005 numbers no longer apply. The SEIU claims that they have improved their pension status since then and fault the study from Hudson as old news. They also said that those 2005 numbers weren’t correct in any case.
In reply to that criticism during the conference call, Diana Furchtgott-Roth said that the 2005 numbers are the most current numbers on file with the Federal government and that the various unions have not fulfilled their reporting requirements for any more up to date information. (On that note, I have to say this is a situation that is intolerable. These unions are dragging their feet in the reporting duties to the Gov’t, duties that are mandated by law. Also, these reporting requirements are something that Barack Obama has pledged to try to eliminate for his union supporters should he become president. If it were up to Obama the unions wouldn’t have to disclose anything!)
Diana Furchtgott-Roth did ask a pertinent question about the SEIU’s reported 2005 pension numbers. The SEIU claims the numbers did not reflect the pension fund status even in 2005, as mentioned. This caused Furchtgott-Roth to wonder why the SEIU reported fraudulent numbers on their required report to the Feds? It seems unlikely that they would have violated Federal law and supplied false numbers. We can but take their report at face value.
In any case, the Hudson Institute will unveil the full report tomorrow so that we might all take a look at their stats.
One thing that the study does show, however, is that the unions care a lot about the pensions of their own high officers but not very much about that of the poor rank and file membership.
After seven years of hiding corruption, ACORN has admitted Dale Rathke, brother of founder, Wade Rathke had embezzled nearly $1 million from the company. The embezzlement was only known to a few and was hidden from the remainder of the ACORN board. Unfortunately the wide scale corruption doesn’t even start with the embezzlement. The embezzlement is part of a much longer line of illegal activity. 
