In Tuesday’s Indy Star, Ed Fuelner hits the nail on the head with an article on Congress’s efforts to slash the budget of the OLMS (the Department of Labor office that investigates union fraud corruption and the misspending of union dues):

Unions control some $22 billion, a staggering amount of money. All of it comes from their members. These workers deserve to know what union leaders spend their hard-earned money on -- whether it's the $65 million the National Education Association gave Jesse Jackson's liberal pressure group in 2005 or the $130,000 salaries earned by 49 union leaders at AFL-CIO headquarters last year.

OLMS is clearly doing a job that needs to be done. Its hundreds of criminal convictions prove that.

16 year-old Danielle Cookson took a job at an Albertsons grocery store so she could save money for college. She soon saw the ugly face of forced unionism when UFCW union bosses sent her a letter saying she had to pay up or be fired: More information on this case here.

Yesterday there were articles in both the DC Examiner and Washington Post about efforts by a group of union lawyers to force employers to bargain with unions that have not even been chosen by a bare majority of employees. In the Post, Bloomberg columnist Cindy Skrzycki writes:

The United Steelworkers, United Auto Workers and five other unions petitioned the National Labor Relations Board on Aug. 14 to require employers to bargain with small groups of union members, even if the union doesn't represent a majority of those in the workplace… The petition would force employers to recognize unions that would bargain only for their dues-paying members -- so-called members-only unions.

What is most striking about this rulemaking petition is that union officials have conceded the falsity of their flimsy justification for compulsory unionism. National Right to Work Foundation vice president Stefan Gleason addressed this when the petition was originally filed last month:

Filing of this NLRB rule-making petition may be one of the biggest political mistakes union officials have ever made. The Steelworkers and its coalition of other unions have conceded that they are not actually forced by law to represent employees who are not union members and who do not want their "representation."

Through their rule-making petition, union officials have totally undercut their justification for compulsory dues privileges. Big Labor's opposition to Right to Work laws (which ban compulsory unionism) has been predicated upon union complaints about the so-called "burden" of representing nonunion members. Today's filing demonstrates that this common union argument is disingenuous at best, and a fraud at worst.

In the Sacramento Bee, Daniel Weintraub observes the legislative efforts of United Farm Workers union officials to eliminate the secret ballot elections for California’s farm workers:

Thirty years ago, legendary union organizer Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers made history by winning the right to a secret ballot for migrant field hands in California who wanted to join a union. Today, in an odd twist, the UFW is trying to take that right away.

The article echoes a 2001 letter written by George Miller (D-CA) and a group of other Congressmen urging Mexico to adopt the secret ballot for its unionization elections. In it Miller wrote:

[W]e feel that the secret ballot election is absolutely necessary in order to ensure that workers are not intimidated into voting for a union they might not otherwise choose.

Now Miller is the sponsor and lead advocate of Big Labor’s “card check” bill that would eliminate the secret ballot election for unionization here in America.

Sure the hypocrisy is overwhelming, but upon further review it is not so surprising.

Unions were granted powers under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) that remain unparalleled for a private organization. Among other unique special legal privileges, unions can forcibly represent people and then force those already coerced workers to pay, under threat of termination, for the unwanted “representation.”

Back when the New Deal-era NLRA passed, unions shrouded their extraordinary powers over individual workers with a secret ballot election in attempt to legitimize their ability to coerce employees.

Now, having used the forced dues collected with their extraordinary powers to amass the political influence necessary, union officials are scrapping the secret ballot altogether in an effort to further expand their power to coerce individual employees.

It’s a move Tony Soprano would be proud of.

Fall is the time of year when car companies release their new model automobiles. It also is the time of year when United Auto Worker union bosses release their list of so-called “union made” cars – with the hope that the label will attract consumers.

Of course, the UAW International union officials aren’t actually making anything. Rather by “union-made” they mean that the rank-and-file workers who make the cars are forced to affiliate with the union and those in non-Right to Work states are forced to pay dues.

For many, such a list has the opposite effect, as nearly 80 percent of Americans oppose the injustice of forced union dues and compulsory unionism.

So for those who want to support American workers who are not forced to affiliate with or pay dues to a union, here is a list of cars assembled at compulsory unionism-free auto plants here in America:*

• Acura: TL
• BMW: X5, Z4 Roadster
• Honda: Accord, Civic, Element, Odyssey, Pilot
• Hyundai: Sante Fe, Sonata
• Infiniti: QX56
• Mercedes: GL-Class, M-Class, R-Class
• Nissan: Altima, Armada, Frontier, Maxima, Pathfinder, Quest, Titan, Xterra
• Subaru: B9 Tribeca, Baja, Legacy, Outback
• Toyota: Avalon,Camry, Sequoia, Sienna, Solara, Tundra

*Note: Determining the suppliers of parts of every car is very difficult. The above list is of cars assembled at facilities where our research indicates that a union does not have a monopoly bargaining power over individual employees. If you want to ensure that the parts of your car are not produced by employees forced to affiliate with a union, we encourage you to do your own research and let us know your results.

The National Taxpayers Union’s blog (they’re a voluntary “union”) picks up on a Senate vote today to repeal Davis-Bacon wage mandates for bridges classified as “structurally deficient” or “functionally obsolete.”

Like “Project Labor Agreements,” Davis-Bacon effectively discriminates against nonunion workers and contractors, effectively blackballing them from working on government projects.

Not surprisingly, Big Labor’s allies in the Senate blocked the amendment that would have eliminated the onerous David-Bacon requirements… meaning that taxpayer dollars will continue to be diverted into bridge construction projects under union boss monopoly control.

The resulting featherbedding, extortionate work stoppages, and wasteful work rules will run up the costs. Meanwhile, union officials will rake in millions in forced union dues.

But that isn’t where the story ends. This map shows the Percentage of Bridges in each State that is classified as “Functionally Obsolete” or “Structurally Unsound” (the same classifications used in the blocked Senate Amendment):

It turns out that bridges in Right to Work States are far safer than those in states that allow union officials to force workers to pay union dues or be fired.

In fact bridges are 31% more likely to be functionally obsolete or structurally unsound in forced-unionism states (29.68% in Forced-Unionism States vs. 22.71% in Right to Work States).

Yesterday, longtime number-two union boss at the AFL-CIO, Linda Chavez-Thompson announced she would be retiring later this month. Amazingly, in a 1999 interview Chavez revealed that she had no idea what Right to Work means:

Of course, Right to Work protections have nothing to do with at-will employment. Rather, Right to Work laws – like the one in Texas – simply guarantee that employees cannot be required to pay dues to a union to get or keep a job.

Perhaps that ignorance of the concept of employee freedom of choice made it easier for Chavez to collect her salary of over $240,000 funded by individual workers who would fired if they refused to pay.

Set to replace Chavez is another longtime union official Alrene Holt-Baker who came over to the AFL-CIO with Chavez-Thompson from the AFSCME union in 1995. Holt-Baker, who already collects over $100,000 a year, can expect a sizable raise for her new position – funded, naturally, with forced union dues taken from workers under threat of termination.

Last week’s New York Times report of another case of mobbed up union bosses is certainly nothing new, but it is a good example of how union corruption and compulsory unionism go hand in hand:

An independent counsel appointed to investigate the union representing 15,000 New York City school bus drivers has concluded that there is substantial evidence that “organized crime has infiltrated and controlled” it.

The counsel’s report, written in January and made public yesterday by dissident union members, said that top officers of the union, Local 1181 of the Amalgamated Transit Union, were involved in what it called racketeering activity that included extortion, kickbacks and bribes.

Salvatore Battaglia, the local’s former president, is facing trial on federal charges accusing him of extortion, receiving bribes and hiding Mafia involvement in the union. He has pleaded not guilty. The local’s secretary-treasurer, Julius Bernstein, was forced to resign by federal prosecutors and has pleaded guilty to obstructing justice.

According to reports, employees in a group called “Members for Change” had been since calling for the ouster of the mobbed-up union bosses since 2005. Now with the former two top union officials on trial or having pleaded guilty, employees forced to pay dues as condition of their job are questioning the new union bosses installed by officials from the Transit Union’s International:

At a news conference yesterday, a dozen bus drivers complained that the two trustees whom the parent union had named to oversee the local had hired 11 of the local’s executive board members who had worked under Mr. Battaglia.

The drivers said those people had helped perpetuate an intimidating atmosphere that discourages criticism of union leaders. They also complained that not enough was being done to recoup the more than $2.7 million that federal officials say Mr. Battaglia obtained improperly.

“The international didn’t bring in any new faces,” said Simon Jean-Baptiste, who belongs to a dissident faction called Members for Change. “The same people are there who stopped people from talking. It’s a bad situation.”

Another bus driver, Clifford Magloire, said that in May, when he was distributing leaflets criticizing the local’s leaders, one union official pushed him against a fence and started screaming at him as others surrounded him.

Of course, if corrupt union bosses couldn’t depend on rank-and-file employees being forced to pay dues and associate with the union as a job condition, it would be far harder for them to get away with treating employees like patsies who can be taken for a ride.