A Michigan man appears to have been fired recently from United Way of Saginaw County because he had the audacity to challenge the special legal privileges enjoyed by union bosses.  From Reporting Michigan. 

[Tim] Kelly claims [United Way of Saginaw County CEO Cherrie] Benchley told him during a meeting that his interview had been seen on television by officials with organized labor and they they would pull their funding from the Saginaw United Way if he wasn’t let go. Kelly said that discussion was held in front of another United Way employee.

...

In the interview with the local TV station,  Kelly is quoted as
saying about unions:  "I think they’ve outlived their usefulness, certainly here and across the country. … Unions used to be for the common man. Now we’ve got them set up as this special class that we no longer can afford."

Stifling dissent is standard operating procedure for the union bosses, though usually it's the employees they claim to "represent" who are fired for refusing to toe the union line. They do that using their extraordinary government-granted power to seize dues and fees from the paychecks of hardworking Americans -- one of the many special privileges union bullies rely upon to punish severely those who do nothing more than disagree with them.

Thursday's Detroit News extensively quotes National Right to Work president Mark Mix in an informative piece about why Michigan needs a Right to Work law.

Right to Work protections in 22 states ensure that no worker can be compelled, as a condition or employment, to join or pay dues to an unwanted union.

The militant United Auto Workers (UAW) union, which is notorious for launching intimidating card check organizing campaigns and whose unions bosses frequently whine about Right to Work, is particularly dominant in Michigan, where its forced unionism relationship with the "Big Three" automakers in Detroit has been a major cause in Michigan's economic depression (and yet, the Obama Administration is rewarding UAW union brass with a majority stake in Chrysler).

But as Mix tells the Detroit News, the struggle for employee freedom in Michigan won't be easy even though the forced unionism economic devastion is so patently obvious:

Mix, nonetheless, remains optimistic. He said interest is picking up in all the Rust Belt states because workers are wondering if what they've been promised is really going to happen or if their benefits will even be held intact. The Chrysler bankruptcy and soon to be GM filing has raised some union worker eyebrows, he said.

Of course, Michigan isn't likely to become the 23rd state to change its ways, but that doesn't stop Mix and his colleagues from answering worker phone calls.

"There is hope," Mix said. "Freedom in the workplace always wins -- even in Michigan."

Click here to read the rest of the article.

The Detroit Free Press reports that the Detroit Federation of Teachers union is threatening to have up to 70 teachers fired for not paying forced union dues.  A school district error is mainly responsible for the mix up. 

Yet, because of the clerical error, union official Mark O'Keefe stated that the "fair" thing to do would be to fire the teachers who fail to pay the full union dues.

No, Mark.  The "fair" thing to do is to not require teachers to pay ANY union dues as a condition of teaching Detroit's schoolchildren.

UAW Tries to Block Employee Election to Toss Out Union at JCIM Grand Rapids

Meanwhile, UAW operatives work to pressure employees at Holland JCIM plant into union ranks

Grand Rapids, MI (January 13, 2009) — A majority of Johnson Controls (JCIM) employees at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood have filed a decertification petition seeking an election to oust the United Auto Workers (UAW) union as the JCIM workers’ monopoly bargaining agent, but UAW union lawyers argued in a formal hearing yesterday that the employees should be barred from access to a decertification election.

JCIM worker Dawn Lambert filed the decertification petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking a secret ballot election to determine whether or not a majority of the workforce wants to retain the UAW union as their monopoly bargaining agent. Under federal labor law governing the private sector, when a union hierarchy has been granted monopoly bargaining authority, it is illegal for any present or future employees – whether they are members of the union or not – to negotiate with their employer for themselves unless they can prove that the union hierarchy does not retain majority support.

A clear majority of the employees at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood have now expressed their intent to remove the UAW. National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have also sent a letter to JCIM management demanding that it cease further contract negotiations and also withdraw recognition of what is now a minority union at Talon Court. Under the law, recognizing and negotiating with a union that does not have majority support is an unfair labor practice.

(Continue reading this news release...)

In Michigan, Foundation staff attorneys are providing legal aid to Johnson Controls (JCIM) Grand Rapids employees who want the UAW union hierarchy removed as the monopoly bargaining agent. Meanwhile UAW union organizers are attempting to force their way into JCIM’s Holland plant:

Grand Rapids, MI (December 23, 2008) – With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, a Johnson Controls (JCIM) employee at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood has filed a decertification petition seeking an election to oust the United Auto Workers (UAW) union as the JCIM workers’ monopoly bargaining agent.

The development is another blow to the UAW union hierarchy which has taken a major public relations hit in recent months because of its role in driving the Big Three automakers to the brink of bankruptcy.

JCIM worker Dawn Lambert filed the decertification petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which should conduct a secret-ballot election to determine whether or not a majority of the workforce wants to retain the UAW union as their monopoly bargaining agent. Under federal labor law governing the private sector, once the NLRB grants union officials monopoly bargaining status, it is illegal for any present or future employees – whether they are members of the union or not – to negotiate with their employer for themselves unless they can prove that the union hierarchy does not retain majority support.

Because a clear majority of the employees at the Talon Court facility in Kentwood have expressed their intent to remove the UAW, National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys have also sent a letter to JCIM management demanding that they cease further contract negotiations and also withdraw recognition of what is now a minority union. Under the law, recognizing and negotiating with a union that does not have majority support is an unfair labor practice.

Read the rest of the Foundation's press release here.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union is objecting to a plan by Detroit city officials to turn over an abandoned nursery to Greening of Detroit, a nonprofit group. What's the problem, exactly?

Using privately raised funds and volunteers, the group would restore the nursery and use it to provide mature trees to neighborhoods. Greening already plants 2,000 trees a year throughout the city.

But the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees obtained an injunction from Wayne County Circuit Court against the deal, saying it violates the collective bargaining agreement. The union says the bargaining agreement applies to any deals to turn over control of city operations to a third party -- meaning city workers must staff the nursery.

...

Terrence King, director of the city's General Services Department, called the union's position baffling. Not only would no city workers be displaced, but there should be more work for city forestry workers once the trees are grown, he said.

Baffling is an understatement. But if these volunteers were paying forced union dues like Detroit city employees must do, we doubt the union bosses would be objecting.

A few Right to Work-related updates from over the weekend:

1.) A recent survey shows broad, bipartisan support for maintaining secret ballot elections in the workplace. Although the erroneously-titled "Employee Free Choice Act" has gained legislative momentum, 82% of all Democrat voters, 77% of all Republicans, and 79% of Independents oppose replacing secret ballot elections with coercive "card-check" organizing drives.

2.) Both the SEIU and the United Steelworkers unions are considering overseas expansion in concert with unions in Australia, Great Britain, and elsewhere. International efforts at unionization may exacerbate existing tensions within the SEIU over inadequate local representation.

3.) Implictly rebutting the claims advanced by union officials in a recent Detroit News op-ed, community and business leaders in Michigan are speaking out in favor of greater worker freedom. Here are a few choice excerpts (emphasis mine):

Michigan as a whole is at a critical crossroads. West Michigan wants a voice of its own," Jeanne Engelhart, president of the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce, told me in a recent interview . . .

. . . Engelhart doesn't trash the Mackinac conference; she has attended in past years and found it useful. But she does suggest that west Michiganders might be more willing than Detroiters to push hard for government spending cuts and discuss controversial topics like right-to-work legislation, which would ban compulsory labor union membership."

. . . Dick Haworth, chairman of Holland-based Haworth Inc., believes a serious discussion of right-to-work status for Michigan is worth pursuing. "The union environment," he said, "does not allow you to adapt quickly, or at all, to the world we live in."

It's not just about wages and benefits; it's more about flexibility, Haworth said. "In a lot of cases, we're not using world-class methods and processes. We need to be better students of what world-class is."

 

The Detroit News has just published a remarkably fact-free op-ed on the economics of the Right to Work issue. Given the author makes his living from Big Labor's forced dues gravy train (he's a treasurer with the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters & Millwrights) which is partly responsible for Michigan's ongoing economic nightmare, it's no wonder he would be alarmed by the talk of cancelling union bosses' compulsory union dues privileges in Michigan.

The author starts out with this mind-boggling passage:

"Undeniably, having Michigan become a "right-to-work" state would be bad for workers, helping dismantle freely negotiated wage standards and benefits, as well as worker protections, in many industries. In right-to-work states, nonunion members can opt out of paying union dues, even though they receive all the guarantees and protections of the existing union contract under which they work." [Emphasis added]

Freely negotiated wage standards? Really? Is that what they are calling the system of mandatory bargain-or-be-prosecuted federal labor policy? Warehousing employees into collective bargaining units doesn't result in "free" anything, and to suggest otherwise is Orwellian double-talk.

The article continues:

"The reality is that "right-to-work" is not just a union issue. Our modern Michigan economy is in many ways "indivisible." For example, the strength and quality of our outstanding Michigan health care sector relies on the earned health care benefits of workers across many employment sectors, union or nonunion, skilled trade or service worker, blue collar or white.

Similarly, pension funds (whether defined benefit programs negotiated by labor unions in both the public and private sectors, 401(k) and similar plans provided by private employers or individual retirement accounts) are invested directly in our community, while their management supports the financial services sector of our Michigan economy."

Union officials' corrupt history of pension fund management should immediately give Michiganders pause. And the union record on health insurance is hardly better. Take the Michigan Education Association, for example. The Association's health insurance plan forces Michigan taxpayers to subsidize a bloated, uncompetitive payment scheme whose shady accounting procedures have been linked to union political activism.

The article concludes by citing some bogus report issued by Jeff Vincent, research director of the Indiana University Division of Labor Studies' Institute for the Study of Labor in Society.

Vincent's study conveniently ignores Right to Work states' comparative advantages in both higher real earnings and lower average costs of living. In other words, workers' paychecks go a lot further in economically dynamic Right to Work states because the goods they purchase are significantly cheaper.

At this juncture, it's worth noting that the moral case for Right to Work principles is entirely separate from the issue of material prosperity. Here at Freedom@Work, we believe that employees everywhere have an inalienable right to choose whether or not to associate with a union, regardless of anyone's feelings or the perceived economic benefits of collective bargaining. But it's also nice to know that study after study has validated the significant economic, job-creating advantages of Right to Work policies.

As we've said before in this space, defending the rights of employees' not to be forced to pay dues to get or keep a job is the right thing to do no matter the economic ramifications. Fortunately though, there are economic benefits to protecting employees' Right to Work, as many studies by the National Institute for Labor Relations Research have found.

And a new paper released yesterday by the Michigan-based Mackinac Center, again confirms the Right to Work economic advantage:

In the key metrics of economic growth, Right to Work states have a distinct advantage when it comes to unemployment rates, income growth, population increases and jobs.

You can read the Mackinac paper in its entirety here. The paper also looks at the devastating economic impact that forced unionism has had on Michigan.

The Foundation's sister organization, the National Right to Work Committee, reports that it is increasingly gaining traction in efforts to pass a Right to Work law through the Michigan legislature.

Over at the Times Herald’s opinion section, another union boss whined about the growing Right to Work movement in Michigan. The ex construction union chief had this to say:

“If Michigan becomes a right-to-work state, you might as well pack your bags and leave it.”

The problem is (as we have repeatedly reported here) Michiganders are already leaving the state – precisely because of Big Labor’s forced unionism stranglehold. The lack of a Right to Work law has not only deprived employees of their freedom of association, but it has also contributed to Michigan’s skyrocketing unemployment levels and heavy taxes.

Right to Work laws guarantee that no person can be compelled, as a condition of employment, to join or not to join, nor to pay dues to a labor union. It’s no wonder Michiganders are packing their bags for Right to Work states.

Let’s hope that this situation changes before the state’s economy collapses.