9 Oct 2007

MD Child Care Providers Wary of Compulsory Unionism

Posted in Blog

With the specter of forced union dues looming over child care providers in Maryland, some providers worry it could hurt those at the very bottom.

"My understanding of the union is that they would automatically take out of our Purchase of Care vouchers as union dues," Sarecia Powers, child care provider in the Cresaptown area, said. "Having to pay what might be an astronomical amount of dues might make providers consider signing on families based upon being paid privately, where the provider gets everything they are being paid. You could have providers turning down Purchase of Care families, and they are the families that need it most. If they can’t find care, it will have a domino effect."

While Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley proclaimed Friday that "no one should be forced to join a union," his is one of 28 states without a Right to Work law where employees can be fired if they refuse to pay union dues.

9 Oct 2007

Public-Safety Officers at Risk from Monopoly Bargaining

Posted in Blog

Currently in Congress, Big Labor politicians are pushing a bill that would strip thousands of police, firefighters and other public-safety employees of their right to negotiate contracts with their local city and state governments for themselves. The bill would federally impose monopoly bargaining onto the state and local government employees, instead of the current system under which each city determines whether or not to impose monopoly bargaining.

But in addition to eliminating the public-safety officers’ right to negotiate for themselves, the bill also helps put these employees’ lives at greater risk, as evidenced by a recent incident in Boston where such monopoly bargaining is already law:

There are a lot of troubling questions regarding the reported autopsy results showing alcohol and cocaine in the blood of two Boston firefighters killed in August…

The results of the autopsies, which are not considered public documents, reportedly show that Cahill, a father of three, had a blood alcohol content of .27, more than three times the legal limit for driving.

Payne’s autopsy showed traces of cocaine in his blood, but it is unclear what the amounts were or how long before his death he ingested the drug.

Boston, like many other fire departments, does not have mandatory random drug testing because of collective bargaining agreements. That’s not to say that the tests would have found the men impaired, but the threat of testing would be a way to reduce the possibility.

[Emphasis added.]

8 Oct 2007

Rat Attack!

Posted in Blog

LIUNA Local 91 RatsLaborers International Union of North America (LIUNA) Local 91 is no stranger when it comes to using threats, coercion and intimidation on the picket line.

But despite court appearances, federal investigations and even beatings throughout the 1990s, Local 91 union officials have brought out their newest scare-tactic weapon…a 10-ft inflatable rat, paid for in full with $4,000 of union dues, much of which is taken from workers as a condition of employment.

LIUNA Local 91 Rats

(Photo by Charles Lewis/Buffalo News)

The rat, union officials claim, is a peaceful message to workers who choose not to toe the union line.

According to The Buffalo News, most agree that the giant rat planted outside a Holiday Inn at a Niagara Falls construction site is a not-so-subtle sign of some of this LIUNA Local’s violent past. The giant rat is inflated for about four hours every morning, and during that time, Local 91 picketers intimidate truck drivers entering the site.

In fact, one Local 91 operative, Michael Godzisz, even tried to justify the intimidation:

The picketing laborers also stop construction vehicles as they enter the site but do so for only three of five minutes at a time, he said.

And the union local’s business manager supported the bullying tactic:

“We can’t hold them up, and if we keep walking they can’t run us over,” said Rob Connolly, Local 91’s business manager. “After about five minutes, we let them go out of courtesy.” [Emphasis added]

Despite LIUNA Local 91’s claim to reform and anger management control, the use of the giant rat is just another type of terror used to intimidate those employees who refuse to walk off the job. In fact, other locals have used the rat trap up and down the east coast.

But giving truckers a “courtesy” to get through the picket line leaves you questioning: what exactly happens after the five minute window is up»

8 Oct 2007

Jaw-Dropping Stat

Posted in Blog

And while union officials bemoan recent NLRB decisions, consider this:

According to an analysis by Jones Day attorney G. Roger King, prepared for the American Bar Association, from 1994 to 2001 the Clinton NLRB overturned 60 long-standing cases, throwing a jaw-dropping 1,181 years of combined precedent out the window.

The NLRB hasn’t even come close to this during the Bush years. And with three vacancies at the five member Board at the end of this year, the window of opportunity for the agency to make further strides for employee rights is rapidly closing.

8 Oct 2007

Chiming In

Posted in Blog

AFL-CIO head honcho John Sweeney and SEIU chief Andy Stern both chimed in about last week’s victory on behalf of employees by Right to Work attorneys. Sweeney cites a previous NLRB decision calling coercive card check unionization drives "a favored element of national policy."

What a joke. As previously cited, the Board in this decision cited:

“Card checks are less reliable because they lack secrecy and procedural safeguards… union card-solicitation campaigns have been accompanied by misinformation… workers sometimes sign union authorization cards…to get the person off their back.”

Stern, however, gets one thing right when he says:

"The NLRB has become a caricature of itself, and as a nation, we should be embarrassed by governing bodies that fail to consider even the most basic needs and rights of workers.”

How true. The NLRB has failed America’s workers in many other Foundation cases. Here are just a few.

5 Oct 2007

An Interactive Look at the Employees Standing Up to Compulsory Unionism

Posted in Blog

If you haven’t already, take a look at this site that shows a unique take on the employees that the National Right to Work Foundation helps.

This page, called “Employee Profiles” highlights just a few of the courageous employees who have stood up against compulsory unionism abuse with the Foundation’s help. The interactive site gives a brief look at their stories and experiences, along with personal quotes, pictures and news.

You may find 16-Year-Old Danielle Cookson’s story inspiring, as she stood up against union bosses who were threatening her job. Or, former history teacher Gary Davenport’s Supreme Court fight might provide some insight on your First Amendment rights and union officials using forced dues for politics.

The 10 brave individuals featured on the site, who have boldly stood up to defend their rights in the face of union coercion, have provided hope for those workers throughout the nation who believe in the principle that no American should be forced to join or pay dues to a union.

More profiles will be added to this site soon.

5 Oct 2007

Bullying of Nurses Not Unnoticed?

Posted in Blog

As is normally the case when union officials fear losing a secret ballot election, the UAW walked away from an election at Toledo Hospital.

Perhaps hospital employees have been paying attention to the uphill battle that nurses at St. Vincent Mercy Medical Center in Toledo have faced in ridding their workplace of the unwanted union.

In the run up to that election, in charges that were settled after Right to Work attorneys came to the nurses’ aid, the NLRB agreed to prosecute the UAW union for bullying dissenting nurses including “following, surrounding, and impeding access to employees." The complaint also cited that in one instance a union operative physically “struck a clipboard containing the petition” from one of the nurse’s hands.

Adding insult to injury, these same nurses must still pay dues to the UAW union as a condition of employment since Ohio is not a Right to Work state.

4 Oct 2007

Forced Dues, Not Higher Wages

Posted in Blog

As more details emerge about the proposed deal between GM and the UAW hierarchy, which involves a two-tiered wage structure, this sentence jumped off the page:

In a side-letter to the contract, GM and the UAW also identified 3,126 jobs now outsourced to non-union companies that could be transferred to UAW-represented companies at the lower wage rates.

In other words, UAW officials are willing to sell out these employees on wages so long as they can count them within UAW ranks, and force employees in non-Right to Work states to pay dues or be fired. Some deal.

4 Oct 2007

The Silence is Deafening

Posted in Blog

In the wake of Tuesday’s long-awaited ruling at the NLRB won by Right to Work attorneys, union officials are remaining mum. This silence is deafening.

Perhaps union officials are embarrassed to have to fought to prevent rank-and-file workers from the chance to vote out an unwanted union for up to four years after a coercive "card check" drive. Maybe they took a look at this 2007 McLaughlin & Associates poll showing that just shy of 80 percent of likely voters oppose mandating this coercive organizing method.

In either case, despite a cascade of crocodile tears shed by the union elite over decisions by this NLRB, it has generally crashed and burned in reversing the damage done to employee free choice by the agency during the Clinton years.

 

3 Oct 2007

Whose Rights Are They Anyway?

Posted in Blog

While the majority’s decision in yesterday’s Dana/Metaldyne National Labor Relations Board case was a meaningful step forward for employees who have been forced into a union through the abusive “card check” process, the two-member dissent by Democrat NLRB members Liebman and Walsh should terrify anyone who thinks that the choice to unionize should be one solely made by employees.

In their dissent they write: “An employer has little incentive to recognize a union voluntarily if it knows that its decision is subject to second-guessing through a decertification petition.

That single sentence reveals at least three biases against employee free choice held by Liebman, Walsh and the union officials who support them:

  • First, it implies that employers should have an “incentive” to push employees into unions through card check.
  • Second, it implies that employers (cooperating with union organizers) should be able to make a “decision” on when and how employees join a union.
  • And third, it assumes that once an employer and union decide that workers should be unionized, the very employees whose rights are at stake should not even be able to weigh in on that “decision” through a secret-ballot decertification election. (Liebman and Walsh call this “second-guessing” but since many employees sign cards because they are misled or pressured by union organizers, really this is often the first chance employees have to freely express their view on unionization.)