Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2011 The Union Label Blog & Grassfire Nation
Vincent Vernuccio of the Competitive Enterprise Institute appeared on Fox Business Channel’s “Follow the Money” show and talked a little bit about where the dues that union members pay goes.
Fox Business only gave a snippet of the video that CEI made so here is the full video.
The Cleveland, Ohio chapter of the AFL-CIO is mad. After Cleveland was chosen as the host city for the 2012 Democrat Party convention some carped that Cleveland was not sufficiently unionized to qualify as the right place for the Democrats to hold their event. Cleveland’s AFL-CIO, however, begs to differ.
The AFL-CIO was so incensed at the accusation that they wrote a letter to the DNC.
“Cleveland and the Cleveland metropolitan area boast a healthy number of union hotels,” the executive secretary of the region’s AFL-CIO federation, Harriet Applegate, wrote in a letter to Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine this week.
In October the union agitation group UNITE HERE sent a letter to the Democratic National Committee demanding that both Cleveland and Charlotte, N.C. be dropped from contention because there isn’t enough union participation in those cities. UNITE HERE insisted that only St. Louis, Missouri and Minneapolis, Minnesota satisfied the favored amount of unionization to suit them.
Of course, this whole claim — at least as far as Cleveland goes — is absurd. But there is one reason why UNITE HERE would lie about Cleveland and it has to do with a rival union.
You see, Cleveland’s hotels are organized by Workers United, a group that split away from UNITE HERE in 2009. So it isn’t that UNITE HERE found no unions in Cleveland, it’s that they found the wrong unions in Cleveland. What we have here is one union trying to torpedo the possibility that its rival union might get some business.
So much for honor among thieves, eh?
But just take a second to think about what this whole controversy is saying. These unions are saying that the Democrats cannot patronize any place that isn’t suffused in unions. In other words, these people are asserting that Democrats do not represent any American that isn’t in a union.
I think that suits me just fine, actually. If Democrats don’t want to let into their party anyone not in a union, well I say that is a great idea. After all, unions are less than 20% of the entire American work force. If Democrats want to limit themselves to such a tiny number of voters, I say they should go for it!
Americans for Tax reform have done a study (download .pdf) that shows a very interesting trend. States that are losing population the fastest are predominantly those that force employees to join unions as a condition for employment while those that are growing are mostly states that feature right to work rules.
Because congressional representation is measured by population, those states whose population has shrunk will lose seats and those that are growing will gain them. ATR looked at those states losing congressional seats in the coming reapportionment and compared them to states that are gaining seats and found some interesting things where it concerns taxes and unions.
The average top personal income tax rate among gainers is 116 percent lower than among losers. The total state and local tax burden is nearly one-third lower, as is per capita government spending. In eight of ten losers, workers can be forced to join a union as a condition of employment. In 7 of the 8 gainers, workers are given a choice whether to join or contribute financially to a union.
As ATR notes, this shows that conservative fiscal policies spurs economic growth, creates jobs, and helps a state grow.
From the Illinois Policy Institute…
Earlier this year, the House and Senate passed HB 5154, a union-backed bill which would permanently take government employee performance evaluations out of the public sphere. Read more about why this matters to watchdogs like you.
Governor Pat Quinn issued an “amendatory veto” that rightly narrowed the scope of the bill (only police performance records would be off limits). However, today the House voted to override his veto.
Our very own Director of Government Reform Kate Piercy notes, “If the Senate agrees, performance reviews will be sealed forever. Goodbye transparency.”
Some unions, including AFSCME, are working overtime keep government employee performance reviews secret. What do they have to hide, especially since they just signed a no-layoff deal with Governor Pat Quinn during the campaign?
If the Governor’s veto is overridden in the Senate, it will erode the ability of citizens and news outlets to expose mismanagement, misconduct, waste and corruption.
Kristina Rasmussen, our Executive Vice President, provides the latest information from the statehouse in this Capitol Update:
If public transparency matters to you, Senators need to hear about it. You can find your state Senator’s contact information here.
Everywhere you turn the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) is getting lambasted. If it isn’t people refusing to abide by TSA directions, it’s stories of a “backlash against body scanners” because of the abusive treatment that TSA employees are doling out to travelers. People are becoming fed up with the whole edifice. But imagine how much worse this situation will get if the TSA is allowed to unionize?
Well, if Obama has his way this is exactly what will happen. Evidence his Federal Labor Relations Authority ruled last Friday that the TSA could, indeed, vote on union representation.
This decision opens the possibilities that the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union could vie to represent the 50,000 employees of the TSA.
Many TSA security officers have already joined one or another of these unions but law prohibits them from collective bargaining at this time. Perhaps early next year this new ruling will allow the TSA officers to choose which of the two unions will exclusively represent them.
So, we have TSA security officers already abusing their positions and as much as molesting travelers under color of authority. Recently a 3-year-old girl was manhandled in a TSA search at an airport. Why were they body searching a three-year-old? The TSA claims it is “the rules” that are at fault. But whether the “rules” are well formulated or not, whether the TSA agents involved were adequately trained or not, the addition of a union will make matter worse.
Imagine trying to confront TSA abuses once a union steps in to prevent any sort of management of employees at all! Plus a unionized TSA would hamper security by taking all flexibility out of the service as union rules settle in to prevent management from making needed changes to reflect a fluid security situation.
There are other dangers that a unionized TSA would present the traveling public. Every time new security rules are needed, for instance, sensitive security intelligence would have to be shared with the union possibly damaging national security.
Additionally, hundreds of those same security agents would be removed from their security positions and turned into union reps and contract negotiators taking experienced officers from the necessary work of security. Once a union is formed these union staff positions will be filled by TSA employees.
Also, TSA managers would no longer be able to reward screeners and security officers for high performance on the job as union rules would prevent merit raises and recognition. This will bring down the level of competence in the TSA just when complaints that the service is already performing badly are growing.
TSA employees should not be allowed to unionize. Collective bargaining will make our airports less responsive to a changing security situation, less safe, and far less friendly to travelers.
111 companies and organizations were granted waivers by Obama’s Dept. of Health and Human Services so that they could get out of having to comply with Obamacare and unions were particularly well rewarded by the HHS with these waivers.
Interestingly, there was no great announcement of these waivers issued to the press. The HHS buried the waiver announcement six layers deep on its webpage and posted them on Friday when they imagined no one would notice. It’s a typical Friday evening document dump so common when an administration wants to avoid the prying eyes of the people. So much for the “most transparent administration in history,” eh?
One thing is sure about these waivers. Obama rewarded his union pals quite well. Some 15 unions and union healthcare or financial fund and insurance providers fill the list of companies and groups that will not have to operate under Obamacare’s destructive rules.
- The Service Employees Benefit Fund
- United Food and Commercial Workers Allied Trade Health & Welfare Trust Fund
- International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Union No. 195
- Asbestos Workers Local 53 Welfare Fund
- Employees Security Funds
- Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 123 Welfare Fund
- United Food and Commercial Workers Local 227
- United Food and Commercial Workers Maximus Local 455
- Service Employees International Union Local 25
- United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1262
- Musicians Health Fund Local 802
- Hospitality Benefit Fund Local 17
- Transport Workers Union
- United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund
- International Union of Painters and Allied Trades (AFL-CIO)
Interestingly enough, Obama has waived the onerous Obamacare rules for quite a few healthcare providers, too. One wonders how good Obamacare could be if the rules are waived for actual healthcare providers?
In any case, this list shows that HHS realizes how bad Obamacare is for the healthcare plans on a wide range of industries, so bad that the new rules had to be waived.
Here is the full list of those that received waivers:
- Protocol Marketing Group
- Sasnak
- Star Tek
- Adventist Care Centers
- B.E.S.T of NY
- Boskovich Farms, Inc
- Gallegos Corp
- Jeffords Steel and Engineering
- O.K. Industries
- Service Employees Benefit Fund
- Sun Pacific Farming Coop
- UFCW Allied Trade Health & Welfare Trust
- HCR Manor Care
- IBEW No.915
- Integra BMS for Culp, Inc.
- New England Health Care
- Aegis Insurance
- Alliance One Tobacco
- Asbestos Workers Local 53 Welfare Fund
- Assurant Health (2nd Application)
- Captain Elliot’s Party Boats
- Carlson Restaurants
- CH Guenther & Son
- CKM Industries dba Miller Environmental
- CWVEBA
- Darden Restaurants
- Duarte Nursery
- Employees Security Fund
- Florida Trowel Trades
- Ingles Markets
- Meijer
- O’Reilly Auto Parts
- Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 123 Welfare Fund
- Sun Belt
- UFCW Local 227
- Uncle Julio’s
- United Group
- US Imaging
- Vino Farms
- Advanta
- Agricare
- Alaska Seafood
- American Fidelity
- Convergys
- Darensberries
- Gowan Company
- Greystar
- Macayo Restaurants
- Periodical Services
- UniFirst
- Universal Forest Products
- UFCW Maximus Local 455
- AHS
- GuideStone Financial Resources
- Local 25 SEIU
- MAUSER Corp.
- Preferred Care, Inc.
- Ruby Tuesday
- The Dixie Group, Inc.
- UFCW Local 1262
- Whelan Security Company
- AMF Bowling Worldwide
- Assisted Living Concepts
- Case & Associates
- GPM Investments
- Grace Living Centers
- Mountaire
- Swift Spinning
- Belmont Village
- Caliber Services
- Cracker Barrel
- DISH Network
- Groendyke Transport, Inc
- Pocono Medical Center
- Regis Corporation
- The Pictsweet Co.
- Diversified Interiors
- Local 802 Musicians Health Fund
- Medical Card System
- The Buccaneer
- CIGNA
- Greater Metropolitan Hotel
- Local 17 Hospitality Benefit Fund
- GS-ILA
- Allied
- Harden Healthcare
- Health and Welfare Benefit System
- Health Connector
- I.U.P.A.T
- Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.
- Transport Workers
- UFT Welfare Fund
- Aegis
- Aetna
- Allflex
- Baptist Retirement
- BCS Insurance
- Cryogenic
- Fowler Packing Co.
- Guy C. Lee Mfg.
- HealthPort
- Jack in the Box
- Maritime Association
- Maverick County
- Metro Paving Fund
- PMPS-ILA
- PS-ILA
- QK/DRD (Denny’s)
- Reliance Standard
- Tri-Pak
- UABT
Eric Odom (Media Director)
Warner Todd Huston