Stephen, J. Cabot blog

December 11, 2009

ORGANIZED LABOR’S CIVIL WAR

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 5:50 pm

One of the most aggressive unions in the country, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) will now face a challenge to its dominant role representing healthcare workers in California. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has called for an election to determine if SEIU or the National Union of Healthcare Workers (NUHW) will represent 2,300 Kaiser healthcare workers in California.

 

The decision of the NLRB came as a blow to SEIU in its ongoing battle with the breakaway healthcare union, NUHW. SEIU had hoped to stop NUHW’s ongoing march to win the allegiance of thousands of healthcare workers in a wide array of states. As part of its PR war, the two sides have exchanged charges of various acts of wrong doing, including financial mismanagement. Perhaps the most hilarious charge leveled by the unions is union-busting. It’s usually the paladins of Corporate America who are accused of being union busters. If the labor movement has ever evidenced its true agenda, the bitter battle between these two unions indicates that power and money are as important to unions as they are to other institutions.

Determined to preserve its power, the SEIU says it will appeal the NLRB decision. If, however, the SEIU appeal fails, balloting is expected to take place in January.

The fight between SEIU and NUHW amounts to a civil war within the labor movement. The unintended victor will be Corporate America, and the millions of workers who will regard unionization with a richly deserved sense of skepticism, if not disgust.  



November 6, 2009

UNIONS LOSE!

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 5:06 pm

One thing that Tuesday’s elections proved is that union money is not going to win elections this year. In 2008, the Service Employees International Union spent $60-million to help elect President Obama and Democratic candidates to both houses of congress. Altogether, organized labor gave Democratic candidates $400-million in 2008. That money may have been well spent then, but look at the outcome in 2009!

 

Governor John Corzine’s various and well-publicized relationships with unions hurt both him and the unions in New Jersey. In Virginia, Governor-elect Bob McDonnell won by large margin after vigorously campaigning against the Employee Free Choice Act. In both states, conservative Republicans triumphed over union supported candidates.

 

And now many Democrats, having analyzed the election results, are against the so-called “card check” provision of the Employee Free Choice Act. Unions have invested their members’ money with, what some would consider, Quixotic abandon. And what has been the return on that investment? The defeat of two pro-union candidates and the likely demise of “card checks.” Union members should demand refunds!

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

          

 

May 21, 2009

Less Transparency from Unions

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 2:25 pm

 

 

In 1959, Congress realized that unionized workers needed protection from union officials who indulged in unethical behavior. As a result, the Landrum-Griffin Act was passed and signed into law. It was specifically designed to curtail the opportunities for embezzlement and other forms of fraud.

 

Now, it looks as if a Democratic Congress will attempt to vitiate the 50-year old Act.  For example, shortly after President Obama took office, the Labor Department delayed the implementation of a regulation that would have demonstrated how union dues are tied to the compensation of union officials.  The regulation would have called for full and complete documentation of all purchases and asset sales by unions. In addition, the Labor Department has recently announced that it will not enforce compliance with a newly revised conflict of interest disclosure rule. (There was a brilliant editorial about this by former Labor Secretary Elaine Cho on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal).

 

 On a regular basis, since January 20, the Labor Department and the Democratic Congress have made it abundantly apparent that they will do the bidding of organized labor, which spent tens of millions of dollars to make sure that their own advocates were firmly installed in pivotal government offices.