Stephen, J. Cabot blog

April 29, 2010

DEMS DO UNION BIDDING

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 5:21 pm

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

United Parcel Service is waging a full-strength campaign to get the U S Congress to make sure that FedEx will be subject to the same onerous union rules as itself.
According to an article in The Wall Street Journal, “House Transportation Chairman James Oberstar (D. Big Labor) last year slipped 230 words into a spending bill that would make it easier for the Teamsters to unionize FedEx. This ambush was included at the urging of UPS, which has been saddled with the Teamsters for decades and wants FedEx to feel its pain.”
While UPS operates under the rules of the National Labor Relations Act, which makes the company vulnerable to strikes (e.g. a 15 day strike in1997), FedEx operates under the rules of the Railway Labor Act, which discourages strikes so that there will not be any “interruptions to commerce”

FedEx delivers most of its time-sensitive packages via air, and its customers choose its services because they expected rapid uninterrupted deliveries. UPS, by other means, delivers most of its packages by truck and customers understand that delivery may take a few days.

Having failed to have itself re-classified under the Railway Labor Act, UPS would now like to have FedEx made subject to the National Labor Relations Act, which would open the doors to Teamster organizers. And that’s a potentially large dues paying number of workers for the Union: there are 125,000 FedEx workers.

Imagine, for a moment, if FedEx were to be unionized and then experience slow downs or walk outs by Teamster-organized workers. Its business model would be utterly destroyed. And so UPS is intent on lobbying Congress to make FedEx subject to National Railway Act, thus opening the door to union organizers.

Congress should ignore the lobbying of UPS and adhere to the principles of a free market economy, and UPS should work to decertify its union rather than impose restrictions on its competition. The American economy works best when companies are free to engage in unhindered competition. The answer is not to shackle one’s competition; rather, the answer is to throw off one’s own shackles and engage in a free, open, and vibrant economy.

September 25, 2009

WHAT’S HAPPENING TO UNION PENSIONS?

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 5:27 pm

According to an editorial in a recent edition of The Wall Street Journal, a number of union pensions are in the red. That bad news must be causing unionized workers a great deal of anxiety, especially during the current economic recession, when so many workers are losing their jobs.

 

The SEIU’s National Industry Pension Fund, covering more than 100,000 members, is now in  “critical status,” which means that it lacks the necessary capital to pay 100% of benefits. Federal government officials have stated that the Fund has only 74.4% of the necessary assets to meet its obligation to pay those benefits.

 

And the list goes on: Thirteen plans operated by the Teamsters have a mere 59.3%. The Journal states that seven locals at the United Brotherhood of Carpenters …are at 67%.

 

While all of that is bad news for rank and file members of those and other similarly afflicted unions, union officers have nothing to worry about. The pension plan for officers and employees at the SEIU, for example, was funded at 102.2% as of 2007. In addition, the officers and employees get an annual 3% cost of living increase, while its members do not. There are many such disparities.

 

The dramatic reduction in union pension funds is just one reason why unions are aggressively attempting to organize new members and collect their dues.  And it is why the unions are putting pressure on congress to pass the Employee Free Choice Act as soon as possible.

 

Increased union membership will mean increased labor costs, increased unemployment, and a worsening recession. But the pensions for union officers will, no doubt, remain intact.

September 18, 2009

ON THE WATERFRONT: THE SEQUEL

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 4:40 pm

Waterfronts, from New York to California, have a long history of union difficulties. And now, according to an editorial in The Wall Street Journal, the Mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa (a former union organizer), is urging congress and the Obama administration to change federal law so that the Teamsters Union will be able to organize independent truckers who work in the Port of Los Angeles.

 

The mayor wants the federal law changed so that harbor trucking companies will be banned from contracting with independent drivers. Instead, he wants the Port to permit “employee drivers” to operate in the Port, because those drivers are eligible for membership in the Teamsters.

Federal law, however, does not now permit state and local authorities to make their own laws regarding ports, for that would defeat the purpose of having uniform regulations throughout the land. If the mayor’s proposal became law, truckers in one port would not be allowed into another port. The resulting chaos would ruin interstate commerce.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has found that the mayor’s intended change would violate the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, and so an injunction was issued. As a result, the mayor wants Washington to change the law.

Should that happen, the Teamsters would have incredible leverage to affect wages, benefits, and the price of shipped goods. No doubt, the result would be a huge spike in labor and consumer costs. In such an environment, if the Teamsters did not get what they want, they could call strikes and shut down one port after another.

This is another example of how the Democrats are working to increase the power of unions at the expense of everyone else.

 

 

 

 

 

 

          

 

June 19, 2009

Congress Keeps On Truckin’

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 12:42 pm

Congress is determined to promote the unionization of FedEx Express drivers by passing a bill that would change the labor status of those drivers. Rather than operating under the Railway Labor Act, FedEx Express would have to operate under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Under the rules of the Railway Labor Act, drivers can only join a union if there is national vote. Under the rules of the NLRA, however, drivers could vote to join unions in individual geographical areas.

Once the bill is passed by the Senate, union organizers will encourage drivers to vote for union representation, and it is likely that the majority of workers will do so. Should that occur, the labor costs for FedEx (where many drivers are independent contractors who own their routes) would skyrocket. In addition, the competitive edge that FedEx enjoys vis-à-vis UPS would vanish, for all UPS drivers operate under the NLRA.

It’s not surprising that UPS has been lobbying Congress to get FedEx Express classified under the NLRA.

FedEx is fighting back by accusing UPS on its website BrownBailout.com, that the federal government, in effect, is giving UPS a government bailout by supporting a change of rules for FedEx drivers. U.P.S. and the Teamsters union, however, have denied the accusations of FedEx and are planning a PR campaign to the present their point of view. The Teamsters represent about 240,000 UPS workers.

 

This is just another example of a Democratic congress doing the bidding of organized labor, and it portends bad times for Corporate America.