Labor Unions: Latest Strong Arm Tactics
Pension Plans Go Broke as Public Payroll Expands Full article Joe Mysak Bloomberg.Com Full article Mickey Kaus DENVER POST APRIL 26, 2010 Excerpts: Exhibiting quite a lot of gall, General Motors is trying to spin the public with an ad campaign launched last week based on breathtakingly misleading information As partial owners of the company, the American taxpayers who saved it from economic ruin deserve better. Shown strolling down an assembly line, GM's new chief executive brags that the company has repaid its government loans "in full, with interest, five years ahead of the original schedule." Full article DENVER POST Competitive Enterprise Institute What Big Labor Wants As General Motors finally filed for bankruptcy on Monday, some critics of the move have already made the case that Congress, not a White House task force, should have planned the bankruptcy. They are right about one thing: a White House task force should not have planned the bankruptcy. But they are 180 degrees wrong about what the government should have done. The bankruptcy needed much less “public policy” input, not more. If GM were going through a “normal” bankruptcy, here is what would have happened: When it saw it was running out of cash last November, GM would have been forced to put together a plan that immediately stopped its financial haemorrhaging by selectively suspending its obligations and asked for protection from its creditors by filing under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. To keep going through the process without liquidating, it would have had to get a debtor-in-possession loan (a high-priority loan secured by all the company’s assets). As a condition of providing the DIP loan, the government, like a private lender, might have insisted upfront on installing a management committed to a successful bankruptcy. Once in bankruptcy, GM management would have been required to propose a reorganisation plan with a reasonable chance of success. GM would have been able to determine which contracts to reject, giving it the chance to restructure its dealer networks, supply and long-term debt, secured and unsecured. Crucially, using Section 1113 of the bankruptcy code, it would have been able to reform its labour contracts to the extent necessary to achieve a successful reorganisation. If its proposals are rejected by the union without good cause, the court can impose it. During bankruptcy, GM would have been able to sell off divisions, facilities and brands. Finally, if a plan of reorganisation that was likely to get a better outcome than liquidation was proposed, the court would approve it and a “new” GM would emerge. Full article Michael Levine Financial Times Townhall.Com SEIU Fat Cats Behind First Lady's Anti-Obesity Campaign by Michelle Malkin Excerpts: Behind every seemingly good deed in the Obama White House, there's a deep-pocketed, left-wing special interest. Take first lady Michelle Obama's crusade against childhood obesity. Who really benefits from the ostensible push for improved nutrition in the schools? Think purple -- as in the purple-shirted army of the Service Employees International Union. Big Labor bigwigs don't care about slimming your kids' waistlines. They care about beefing up their membership rolls and fattening their coffers. Mrs. Obama earned a State of the Union address shout-out from her hubby for taking on the weighty public policy issue of students' physical fitness. The East Wing is now in full campaign mode -- leaning on the nation's mayors, traveling with the surgeon general and meeting with Congress and cabinet members to reauthorize the Lyndon Johnson-era Child Nutrition Act, which provides government-subsidized meals to more than 30 million children. It's part of the Obama administration's self-proclaimed "cradle-to-career" agenda for America's youth. For decades, school administrators have criticized this Great Society relic for outgrowing its initial conception. The program was originally created to use up post-World War II food surpluses. In the late 1970s, New York principal Lewis Lyman skewered it as a federal "boondoggle" in a seminal essay for the education journal Phi Delta Kappan. But Democrats demagogued the GOP's responsible attempts at financial reform during the Clinton years as "starving the children." While spending on youth nutrition and wellness have ballooned, so have the kids. Nearly one-third of U.S. children are now overweight or obese. The feds spend $15 billion a year on nutrition in schools; the White House wants at least a $1 billion increase this coming fiscal year. Full article Michelle Malkin Townhall.Com Union Greed Has Dismembered Michigan Washington Times Nolan Finley Excerpts: By Nolan Finley Legend has it that during a brutal contract bar -gaining session, Harry Bennett, Hen-ry Ford's enforcer, attempted to break the tension by passing around snapshots taken during a visit to Maxon Lodge, a gorgeous hideaway in the woods of northern Michigan. Walter Reuther, architect of the United Auto Workers' rise, looked over the photographs, tossed them on the table and said to Bennett: "Come the revolution, we'll own that place." It was no idle threat. In 1967, flush with cash from a bulging membership, the UAW purchased the lodge and 1,000 acres on Black Lake. Full article Nolan Finley Washington Times Six charged in town hall disturbance By Patrick M. O'Connell ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH 11/25/2009 Excerpts: ST. LOUIS COUNTY • Six people arrested in August outside a raucous town hall meeting in south St. Louis County have been charged with misdemeanor ordinance violations. The six, including a Post-Dispatch reporter, had attended a demonstration outside an Aug. 6 forum called by U.S. Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-St. Louis, at Bernard Middle School in Mehlville to discuss health care reform. The charges were filed Tuesday by the St. Louis County counselor’s office, which prosecutes misdemeanor ordinance violations in unincorporated areas. All are to appear in court Jan. 21. The maximum penalty upon conviction would be one year in jail and a $1,000 fine. Full article Patrick M. O Connor St. Louis Post-Dispatch AMERICAN THINKER March 11, 2009 More SEIU scandals for union leadership to ignore Ed Lasky Excerpts: The Los Angeles Times deserves praise for its coverage of a hornet's nest of scandals that keep emerging involving one of the nation's most powerful unions, the Service Employees International Union. Today's paper discloses yet another scandal (details below). Meanwhile the New York Times ignores the controversy. Why is this noteworthy? Because the SEIU has become a powerful political force in America. Maybe Andy Stern, leader of the Service Employees International Union (who has become one of the more powerful political players in America because of his control of the SEIU and its fund) should focus more on the corruption that keeps emerging from his "union". Or perhaps he can hand off that chore to Anna Burger, the Secretary-Treasurer of the SEIU. But maybe she too is more interested in playing politics with its members money than ferreting out fraud among its officials. Burger is chairwoman of the Change to Win Federation, a coalition of labor unions formed to promote advocacy. Both Stern and Burger have links to the Democracy Alliance-a group of very wealthy donors and political activists who have joined forces to promote vast policy changes from our government. Burger, Stern and the SEIU have close ties to the Obama administration. Burger was recently appointed to the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. Maybe both of them should work to clean up corruption instead of focusing on advancing their political agenda. Full article Ed Lasky American Thinker REAL CLEAR MARKETS September 3, 2009 Don't Buy Unions' Labor Day Bluster By Diana Furchtgott-Roth Excerpts: Next Monday, Labor Day, is the occasion for labor unions to celebrate the contributions their members have made to American prosperity. With union membership down to 8% of private-sector employees, unions are eager to sign up new members in order to swell their ranks, replenish their treasuries and infuse new contributions into union-sponsored pension plans, many of which are underfunded. In the process of recruiting new members, some labor organizations, such as the AFL-CIO, don't mind twisting and omitting facts. The AFL-CIO's Web site reads, "Because they have a voice at work, union workers have a ‘union advantage' in benefits and are much more likely to have pensions-and good pensions-than nonunion workers." Full article Diana Furchtgott-Roth Real Clear Markets Top Union Thug Andy Stern Discussed Health Care Andy Stern ties in with the crooks of ACORN. Those two entities care more about making a great entity like WalMart look bad. WalMart hasn't been intimidated by Stern's union thuggery to unionize WalMart, because it cares more about satisfying its 127 million customers by giving them lower prices and top quality. Union thuggery never concerns itself with integrity, it has none itself. DAKOTQA VOICE Interview with Kenneth Gladney, Man Assaulted by Union Thugs at Town Hall By Bob Ellis August 7th, 2009 Excerpts: By now you have probably heard about the incident last night in Gadsden, the suburb of St. Louis where a man handing out flags at a health care town hall meeting was assaulted by union thugs from Service Employees International Union SEIU. Yesterday, union bosses called out the dogs to defend socialism against the freedom-loving Americans who have been speaking out against the government health care plan at town hall meetings. It didn’t take long for a pack of them to show up in St. Louis last night and start causing trouble. Gladney said he was giving out the “Don’t Tread on Me” flags when someone walked up to him and asked, “Who in the (expletive) is selling this (expletive) here?” WALL STREET JOURNAL July 25, 2009 The UAW’s Defined Benefactor Another taxpayer donation to GM and the auto workers union. Welcome to the General Motors bailout, part three—or is it four, or five? It’s hard to keep up, but this week the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation took over the pension liabilities of Delphi, the auto-parts spinoff of GM that has been working its way through Chapter 11 since 2005. As with the previous taxpayer rescues, this one includes a special favor for the United Auto Workers. Under the agreement, the PBGC will assume some $6.2 billion in pension liabilities from Delphi, including both hourly and salaried employees. That’s the second biggest pension bailout in PBGC history, and it takes billions of liabilities off the books for GM. As Delphi’s former parent, GM had agreed to take responsibility for billions of dollars of Delphi’s pension obligations to its hourly employees. It will be months before Delphi employees know what percentage of their expected pension they’ll receive, but not all pensioners are created equal in this arrangement. UAW employees will have their pensions made whole by GM, which insists it is merely fulfilling its end of a deal made with the UAW in 1999 (when it spun off Delphi) to cover any future pension shortfall. Few such obligations usually survive bankruptcy, but, nah, we’re sure politics had nothing to do with it. Less fortunate are smaller unions and Delphi’s salaried employees, whose pensions may see drastic reductions and who already lost their health care and life insurance plans on April 1. They would seem to lack the UAW’s clout inside GM and the Obama Administration. In a letter to the House Financial Services and Senate Banking committees, Michigan Democrats Bart Stupak and Dale Kildee and Republicans John Boehner and James Sensenbrenner, among others, have asked for Congressional hearings on the disparity. Pension benefits, the letter warned, “could be cut by as much as 70%, if not eliminated entirely, for 15,000 retirees.” Full article Wall Street Journal Financial Times How Washington blew GM’s bankruptcy By Michael Levine Last updated: June 1 2009 20:33 Excerpts: President Obama, Democrat Party Continue To Be Controlled Unions See the actual law below in article by Elaine Chao former Secretary of Labor Below is what leads to removing any chance to properly keep unions from piling on more of their massive corruption. For a few years they were required to file financial reports, at regular intervals, showing what others had to show for similarly financed organizations. This corrupt party has made unions safe to get back to their former corrupt practices. OLMS News 07-09: Form LM-2 and Form LM-3 Rulemaking: Comment Period Extended Wednesday, May 20, 2009 12:54 PMFrom: "OLMS-News - ESA" May 20, 2009 Form LM-2 and Form LM-3 Rulemaking: Comment Period Extended
The Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) will publish a notice in the Federal Register on May 21, 2009, extending the period for comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) published on April 21, 2009 (74 FR 18172). See http://www.federalregister.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2009-11813_PI.pdf
The April 21, 2009 NPRM proposed to rescind the final rule published on January 21, 2009 (74 FR 3677), which made several revisions to the current Form LM-2, used by the largest labor organizations to file their annual financial reports under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, as amended, and established a procedure by which the Secretary of Labor may revoke, under certain circumstances, a particular labor organization's authorization to file a simplified annual report, Form LM-3. For more background on this rulemaking, please visit here. The comment period for the proposed rescission of the January 21, 2009 final rule, which was to close on May 21, 2009, will now close on June 22, 2009. For additional information, including how to submit comments on the proposal to rescind, please visit the Form LM-2 and Form LM-3 rulemaking page on the OLMS Web site at: http://www.dol.gov/esa/OLMS/regs/compliance/lm2_lm3rule.htm. SEIU Service Employees International Union SEIU A Cancer on America L A Times The SEIU's overreach California may lose $6.8 billion in federal funding as the SEIU takes its wage fight to Washington. May 12, 2009 Excerpts: The budget deal that the Legislature grudgingly approved in February left few Californians unbruised. State programs were slashed and taxes and fees were hiked in an effort to close a $42-billion budget gap, causing many to decry the impact on vulnerable residents and struggling businesses. Some of those voices carried further than others, however. Now, the state could lose $6.8 billion in supplemental Medicaid dollars because of a complaint lodged by the union representing home healthcare workers, many of whom face reductions in their already low wages. Although we don't like the cuts, we don't think the federal government should use its leverage to pressure California on behalf of a well-connected group. Counties negotiate the home healthcare workers' wages and benefits, with the federal government covering half the cost and the state about a third. The state's contribution is capped, however, so it doesn't pay any share of the costs above $12.10 an hour. The budget deal lowers that cap to $10.10 on July 1. Twenty counties exceed the new cap, and some are contractually bound to make up for the loss in state dollars. The Service Employees International Union, whose negotiators won those contracts, is now using them as ammunition against the wage reductions. The economic stimulus package that Congress enacted in mid-February offers billions of dollars to states to help them keep their healthcare programs for the poor from running short of cash. The bill includes a "maintenance of effort" clause to prevent states from using the new federal dollars to lower their spending on healthcare at counties' expense. The SEIU argued that California's cuts violated that clause, and at least one attorney at the federal Department of Health and Human Services has agreed. Full article L A Times WALL STREET JOURNAL Obama Tries to Stop Union Disclosure No more sunshine on how worker dues are spent. Excerpts: By ELAINE L. CHAO Fifty years ago, Congress passed the landmark Landrum-Griffin Act to protect rank-and-file union members from malfeasance by union leaders. Senate hearings had uncovered serious corruption and other unethical practices inside the labor movement, and a bipartisan coalition emerged to shine the light of disclosure on union practices. Nevertheless, Democrats in Congress and in the executive branch have often attempted to undercut that law's financial reporting and disclosure requirements. Prior to reforms adopted in the George W. Bush administration, for example, one union could get away with reporting a $62 million expenditure as nothing more than "contributions, gifts, and grants to local affiliates" -- with no further explanation. Unfortunately, the Obama administration is already showing that it wants to return to this nontransparent standard of financial disclosure. Within days of the inauguration, the new leadership at the Labor Department moved to delay implementing a regulation finalized in January that would have shed much needed light on how union managers compensate themselves with union dues. The regulation required disclosure of receipts for expenditures and for the purchase and sale of union assets -- disclosures that would help deter embezzlement. The administration has since moved even more aggressively, initiating proceedings to rescind this rule and others promulgated when I was secretary of labor. Full article Elaine Chao Wall Street Journal WALL STREET JOURNAL The UAW in the Driver's Seat The auto workers get control of Chrysler and GM. Can they make a profit? By PAUL INGRASSIA Full article Paul Ingrassia WALL STREET JOURNAL Excerpts: The latest developments in Washington's restructuring of the auto industry amount to this irony: Having burdened the Detroit companies for decades with restrictive work rules, enormous health-care obligations and generous retiree benefits, the United Auto Workers union will now end up controlling two of them. Specifically, the UAW will own 55% of Chrysler and 39% of General Motors, where only the government will have a larger ownership interest. Assuming that negotiations over the next few days or weeks don't change things, it's hard to know whether this outcome is perversity or poetic justice. The UAW finally will end up having a direct stake in the survival and prosperity of General Motors and Chrysler -- even though the union's shares in the companies will be held by special trust funds instead of by the UAW itself. Whether the union's rank and file will recognize its interest in the companies and act accordingly is another matter. Consider that one of the terms of Chrysler's pending deal with the union is that workers won't receive overtime pay until they work more than 40 hours in any given week. Finance reporting rules deemed too onerous for labor leaders By Jim McElhatton (Contact) Monday, April 27, 2009 Full article Jim McElhatton Washington Times.Com Excerpts: The Obama administration, which has boasted about its efforts to make government more transparent, is rolling back rules requiring labor unions and their leaders to report information about their finances and compensation. The Labor Department noted in a recent disclosure that "it would not be a good use of resources" to bring enforcement actions against union officials who do not comply with conflict of interest reporting rules passed in 2007. Instead, union officials will now be allowed to file older, less detailed conflict reports. The regulation, known as the LM-30 rule, was at the heart of a lawsuit that the AFL-CIO filed against the department last year. One of the union attorneys in the case, Deborah Greenfield, is now a high-ranking deputy at Labor, who also worked on the Obama transition team on labor issues. Nation's 8 Lowest Unemployment States LAS VEGAS BUSINESS PRESS February 23, 2009 Ten things you need to know about the Employee Free Choice Act Full article LAS VEGAS BUSINESS PRESS Excerpts: The Employee Free Choice Act, or "Card Check," is likely to be considered by Congress in the coming weeks. This bill will drastically change the laws governing how your employees unionize, and the rules governing your business. Think the Employee Free Choice Act doesn't affect your business? Think again. Here are 10 things you need to know about this legislation. 1. Small businesses most vulnerable There are no exemptions for small business in the Employee Free Choice Act. In fact, of the 2,649 secret-ballot elections conducted by the National Labor Relations Board in 2005, more than 20 percent involved work forces of fewer than 10 employees and 70 percent involved work forces of fewer than 50 employees. This bill affects every employer. 2. Effectively eliminates secret-ballot elections The main provision of the "card check" bill is the virtual elimination of the secret-ballot process for unionization. This means your employees will not have the right to vote in private. The option to conduct a secret-ballot election will still exist, but would be completely ruled out if a union gathers enough signatures from your employees to have a 50 percent plus one majority. If half of your employees sign a card authorizing union representation -- guess what -- your business is unionized automatically. LOS ANGELES TIMES With a labor-friendly administration in Washington, labor's long-sought legislative goals are finally in reach. But union divisions threaten to derail that agenda. By Evelyn Larrubia February 22, 2009 Full article Evelyn Larrubia Los Angeles Times Excerpts: With a Democratic majority in Congress, an economy in meltdown and what many see as the most labor-friendly White House in generations, unions would seem to be poised for a comeback. Experts say they are at a defining moment to rebuild their forces by putting their strength behind an effort to revamp labor laws. So why are some of the most prominent and progressive labor leaders spending time and energy fighting one another for workers who are already members? Will they squander their big chance?
Feud between SEIU and UHW "No question about it. That's what's at stake," said Marshall Ganz, a legendary community organizer and lecturer at Harvard University. "This is not a setting in which you want to have a Hatfield-and-McCoy struggle on." As political institutions, labor unions are no strangers to controversy. But the current level of conflict is unusual, Ganz and others said, as is the public forum that it has been taking. LABORPAIN.ORG AFL-CIO to Federal Union Watchdog: Drop Dead January 13th, 2009 by J. Justin Wilson Full article Laborpains.org Excerpts: Imagine this: Every CEO in the Fortune 500 signed a letter asking President-elect Obama to defund the Securities Exchange Commission, saying that it creates a lot of “unnecessary paperwork.” No seriously, just think of the outrage. Now consider that the unions are asking Obama to do just that, except they want him to weaken the government watch that oversees them, the Office of Labor-Management Standards. The AFL-CIO is shameless. In addition to trying to eliminated employees’ right to a secret ballot vote, they are also trying weaken the Department of Labor’s Office of Labor-Management Standards, which serves as a watchdog for union members by fighting corruption and embezzlement. In a petition made public by the Obama’s Transition Project–which was oddly filled with typos–the union calls on the incoming administration to issue an emergency interim rule (meaning no public comment period) eliminating “all financial reporting regulations that have not yet gone into effect.” That is their “Priority for Day 1.” US NEWS & World Report Who Is at Fault for the Decline of the Big Three? December 15, 2008 Michael Barone Michael Barone US NEWS & World Report Excerpts: Mickey Kaus, pretty much alone among the commentators I've been reading, indicts "Wagner Act unionism" for the decline and fall of the U.S. auto industry. The problem, he argues, is not just the high level of benefits that the United Auto Workers has secured for its members but the work rules—some 5,000 pages of them—it has imposed on the automakers. As Kaus points out, unionism as established by the Wagner Act is inherently adversarial. The union once certified as bargaining agent has a duty not only to negotiate wages and fringe benefits but also to negotiate work rules and to represent workers in constant disputes about work procedures. The plight of the Detroit Three auto companies raises the question of why people ever thought this was a good idea. The answer, I think, is that unionism was seen as the necessary antidote to Taylorism. That's not a familiar term today, but it was when the Wagner Act was passed in 1935. Frederick Winslow Taylor was a Philadelphia businessman who pioneered time and motion studies. As Robert Kanigal sets out in The One Best Way, his biography of Taylor, he believed that there was "one best way" to do every job. Industrial workers, he believed, should be required to do their job in this one best way, over and over again. He believed workers should be treated like dumb animals and should be allowed no initiative whatever, lest they perform with less than perfect efficiency. Taylor's work was regarded as gospel by many industrial managers in the 1910s, 1920s, and 1930s, a time when many factory workers were recent immigrants, often with a less than perfect command of English. Auto assembly lines were organized on Taylorite principles to squeeze the last bit of efficiency out of low-skill workers. And squeeze some more. If you ask UAW defenders why they have so many work rules, they will tell you horror stories of the "speedup" dating back to the 1930s. Workers who were required to do some operation 20 times an hour were told to do it 30 times an hour, and so forth. Wagnerism was a response to Taylorism. INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Union-Caving Doesn't Merit Taxpayer Help By MARK J. PERRY Tuesday, December 02, 2008 4:30 PM PT Full article INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Excerpts: With the Big Three facing serious financial troubles and General Motors on the verge of bankruptcy, the American taxpayers, via Congress, are being asked for a bailout. Instead, maybe it's time that GM faces reorganization through bankruptcy court, just like the thousands of other failing businesses that seek protection through Chapter 11. The financial troubles of the Big Three have gotten increasingly serious lately, but the underlying problems have been getting worse for decades without being adequately addressed by management or the United Auto Workers. A taxpayer bailout would only reward irresponsible behavior. Swinging '70s Many of today's serious problems can be traced back to the 1970s, when the Big Three sold almost nine out of every 10 cars and the UAW had a monopoly on the labor supply of autoworkers. At that point, neither management nor labor faced any serious competition. WALL STREET JOURNAL America's Other Auto Industry There is such a thing as a profitable car maker in this country. DECEMBER 1, 2008 Full article WALL STREET JOURNAL Excerpts:
The men from Detroit will jet into Washington tomorrow -- presumably going commercial this time -- to make another pitch for a taxpayer rescue. Meanwhile, in the other American auto industry you rarely read about, car makers are gaining market share and adjusting amid the sales slump, without seeking a cent from the government. These are the 12 "foreign," or so-called transplant, producers making cars across America's South and Midwest. Toyota, BMW, Kia and others now make 54% of the cars Americans buy. The internationals also employ some 113,000 Americans, compared with 239,000 at U.S.-owned carmakers, and several times that number indirectly. The international car makers aren't cheering for Detroit's collapse. Their own production would be hit if such large suppliers as the automotive interior maker Lear were to go down with a GM or Chrysler. They fear, as well, a protectionist backlash. But by the same token, a government lifeline for Detroit punishes these other companies and their American employees for making better business decisions WALL STREET JOURNAL NOVEMBER 26, 2008 A Car Wreck Made in Washington Holman Jenkins Can Democrats afford to let Detroit succeed? Full article Holman Jenkins WSJ Excerpts:
The wrong folks were in the witness chairs in last week's congressional hearings on auto doom. A fantastic moment was Massachusetts Rep. Stephen Lynch assailing Rick Wagoner about whether GM was asking China for a bailout too. The implication seemed to be that GM can't afford its inflated UAW pay packages because it's squandering money to build cars in China. Mr. Wagoner mildly answered that GM's China operations are profitable. They actually help to underwrite the massive losses in the U.S. Mr. Lynch showed no sign he was actually listening, having illustrated his disapproval of foreigners. He didn't ask the obvious question: If GM can make cars profitably in China, why doesn't GM import them to the U.S.? NEW YORK TIMES Let Detroit Go Bankrupt By MITT ROMNEY Published: November 18, 2008 Full article MITT ROMNEY NEW YORK TIMES Excerpts: IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed. Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course — the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check. I love cars, American cars. I was born in Detroit, the son of an auto chief executive. In 1954, my dad, George Romney, was tapped to run American Motors when its president suddenly died. The company itself was on life support — banks were threatening to deal it a death blow. The stock collapsed. I watched Dad work to turn the company around — and years later at business school, they were still talking about it. From the lessons of that turnaround, and from my own experiences, I have several prescriptions for Detroit’s automakers. Wednesday, November 12, 2008; Page A18 WASHINGTON POST Full article Washington Post Excerpts: PRESIDENT BUSH denies reports that, in conversations with President-elect Barack Obama, he linked his support for a bigger auto industry bailout, or possibly a fiscal stimulus package, to a demand that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) end her legislative blockade of the Colombia free-trade agreement. The Obama transition team denies it, too. That's just as well, since every legislative proposal should stand or fall on its own merits. Fortunately, the Colombia agreement passes that test. Democrats in Congress, regrettably echoed by Mr. Obama on the campaign trail, frame their objections not in economic but political terms, arguing that Colombia has a dismal record on human rights. This characterization defies all reality. Since President Álvaro Uribe's first election in 2002, murder has declined by 40 percent; kidnappings have fallen by 75 percent. Supported by the United States and by a huge majority of the Colombian people, Mr. Uribe's firm but professional military approach has decimated the Marxist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (known as FARC), which once threatened to render the country ungovernable. Mr. Uribe has also brought right-wing paramilitary groups to heel. When evidence emerged recently that some of his troops had killed innocent people to inflate enemy body counts, Mr. Uribe fired 27 army officers and soldiers, including three generals. Nor do the facts support Democrats' oft-repeated claim that Colombia is a particularly deadly place for trade unionists. Crime statistics for 2007 show that union members in Colombia were actually less likely to be murdered than members of the general population. This is partly due to the overall drop in homicide, but it is also because of special protective measures instituted by the Uribe government, at a cost of $38 million last year. More broadly, the U.S.-Colombia pact contains the same protections for labor rights -- and the environment -- that Congress accepted in a separate deal between the United States and Peru. A steadfast U.S. ally in South America, Colombia deserves the political seal of approval that the free-trade agreement would deliver -- not ostracism. WALL STREET JOURNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008 Nationalizing Detroit Full article WALL STREET JOURNAL Excerpts: In the Washington mind, there are two kinds of private companies. There are successful if "greedy" corporations, which can always afford to pay more taxes and tolerate more regulation. And then there are the corporate supplicants that need a handout. As the Detroit auto makers are proving, you can go from being the first to the second in the blink of an election. For decades, Congress has never had a second thought as it imposed tighter emissions standards on GM, Ford and Chrysler, denouncing them for making evil SUVs. Yet now that the companies are bleeding cash, and may be heading for bankruptcy, suddenly the shrinking Big Three are the latest candidates for a taxpayer bailout. One $25 billion loan facility has already been signed into law, and Senator Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) wants another $25 billion, this time with no strings attached. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid met last week with company and union officials, and they later sent a letter urging Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to bestow cash from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (Tarp) on the companies. Barack Obama implied at his Friday press conference that he too favors some kind of taxpayer rescue of Detroit, though no doubt he'd like to have President Bush's signature on the check so he won't have to take full political responsibility. MODERN ECONOMIC FREEDOM BLOGSPOT Friday, October 31, 2008 Unions, Workers Should Favor Repeal of MA Income Tax Full article MODERN ECONOMIC FREEDOM BLOGSPOT Excerpts: Massachusetts voters have the opportunity to repeal the state income tax in the upcoming election. In the simplest of terms, it is a choice between sending tax dollars to Beacon Hill to spend, or to keep them in a taxpayer’s pocket. More broadly, lowering income taxes by definition increases take-home wages, spurs economic growth, and creates jobs. The loudest opponent of Question 1 is the unions. This vehement opposition could be the most puzzling aspect of the 2008 election. Unions and workers should actually be firmly in favor of Question 1, and eliminating the state income tax. The basic goal of a union is to maximize the compensation of its members. A union provides a means of collective bargaining to enhance the ability of workers to increase their wages and benefits. The mistaken logic in the decision of union leaders to oppose Question 1 is that by limiting the pool of resources of the state government, the amount of money available for compensation will be lower, and jobs will be scarcer. This line of thinking is counter to simple economics. First, and easiest to understand, is the direct increase in compensation which results from eliminating the state income tax. Massachusetts currently taxes income at 5.3%. By eliminating this tax, a worker will receive a raise of more than 5.3%. This is a permanent raise (well, as long as the income tax is not subsequently re-enacted). Most negotiators would be pleased to walk away from the table locking in that level of a permanent raise. Especially given the current economic difficulties, this kind of an increase to take home pay is significant, and cannot be dismissed. Union Heavy Handed End To Secret Ballot Our view on labor laws: No way to form a union Full article USA Today Editorial Board Excerpts: When citizens go to the polls on Nov. 4, they will be free to vote their conscience — regardless of pressure from relatives, friends or co-workers — after having had a chance to weigh the alternatives. Campaigns and secret ballots are sacrosanct elements of American democracy. So it's surprising and disturbing that organized labor wants to do away with both these elements when workers decide whether to form a union. Under the current system, once 30% of a company's workers sign union authorization cards, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) administers a confidential vote, typically 39 days after it receives the cards. The union and employer campaign for votes. The Chicago Tribune reports: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 Chicago's Garbage Crews: No One Works a Full Day Full article Club For Growth BLOG Chicago Tribune Excerpts: Workers on Chicago’s garbage pick-up crews spend about two hours a day loafing on the clock, according to a report released today by the city’s inspector general. Between May and September, investigators for Inspector General David Hoffman spied on 77 garbage truck drivers and 145 laborers in 10 wards. They reported what they called "systemic, pervasive" waste and fraud. In 10 weeks of surveillance, they "did not see a single laborer doing a full day’s work," according to the report. Family Security Matters Exclusive: Unions Should Protect Their Members, Not Illegal Aliens September 2, 2008 Michael Cutler Full article Michael Cutler Family Security Matters Excerpts: In the wake of Labor Day, perhaps it’s important to consider the relationship between illegal immigration and labor. There is a Yiddish word – chutzpah - that describes the tactics of the management of Agriprocessors, the company whose Iowa plant was raided several months ago by special agents of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement). The original example of chutzpah was the kid who kills both parents and then pleads for mercy in court on the basis of being an orphan. I believe that Agriprocessors’ management has demonstrated an even greater example of chutzpah! The management of Agriprocessors is now attempting to block the unionizing of its workforce in court. They want to use the legal system to continue to exploit illegal aliens and, according to this article in the New York Times, hired day laborer illegal aliens to replace aliens they fired who had sought to join a union. What is incredible is that the basis for filing a suit in court to block its workers from joining a union is the fact that they are illegal aliens who should not be working in the United States in the first place!  Custom Search THE STAR LEDGER It's time: Freeze N.J. public workers' pay, change bargaining rules By Star-Ledger Editorial Board/The Star-Led... February 28, 2010, 5:27AM Excerpts: In November, when Marlboro teachers refused to contribute a nickel toward their skyrocketing health care premiums, the board of education stood its ground and was applauded statewide for not buckling. Taxpayers hoped this would be a rare occasion when a school board went nose-to-nose with a union and didn’t get body-slammed. Two months later, the board caved. Marlboro teachers still contribute nothing on health care. They will get 23 percent raises spread out over five years. And now they qualify for family coverage in the first year, ending the previous three-year wait. This, sadly, is typical in New Jersey. Because the collective bargaining system is broken. The rules are tilted in favor of the unions. Full article The Star Ledger Competitive Enterprise Institute What Big Labor Wants As General Motors finally filed for bankruptcy on Monday, some critics of the move have already made the case that Congress, not a White House task force, should have planned the bankruptcy. They are right about one thing: a White House task force should not have planned the bankruptcy. But they are 180 degrees wrong about what the government should have done. The bankruptcy needed much less “public policy” input, not more. If GM were going through a “normal” bankruptcy, here is what would have happened: When it saw it was running out of cash last November, GM would have been forced to put together a plan that immediately stopped its financial haemorrhaging by selectively suspending its obligations and asked for protection from its creditors by filing under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. To keep going through the process without liquidating, it would have had to get a debtor-in-possession loan (a high-priority loan secured by all the company’s assets). As a condition of providing the DIP loan, the government, like a private lender, might have insisted upfront on installing a management committed to a successful bankruptcy. Once in bankruptcy, GM management would have been required to propose a reorganisation plan with a reasonable chance of success. GM would have been able to determine which contracts to reject, giving it the chance to restructure its dealer networks, supply and long-term debt, secured and unsecured. Crucially, using Section 1113 of the bankruptcy code, it would have been able to reform its labour contracts to the extent necessary to achieve a successful reorganisation. If its proposals are rejected by the union without good cause, the court can impose it. During bankruptcy, GM would have been able to sell off divisions, facilities and brands. Finally, if a plan of reorganisation that was likely to get a better outcome than liquidation was proposed, the court would approve it and a “new” GM would emerge. Full article Michael Levine Financial Times by Ivan Osorio full article Competitive Enterprise Competitive Enterprise Institute Excerpts: August 29, 2008 Every four years, pundits look forward to Labor Day as the launch of the "real" election season. This year, it's especially appropriate, since organized labor is going all-out to influence not only the November outcome, but policy into the next president's term. With the Democrats' control of Congress likely to continue, and possibly expand, and the presidential contest a toss-up at this writing, it is worth asking: What does Big Labor want? At the top of the unions' policy agenda is the misleadingly named Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which would mandate an organizing method known as "card check" whenever a union requests it. Facing a decades-old private-sector membership decline, unions have sought other organizing strategies, and card check has been among the most effective. Card check circumvents secret ballot elections by requiring only that a majority of employees sign union cards for a workplace to become unionized. Employees are often urged to sign cards publicly and in the presence of union organizers, which exposes them to high-pressure tactics which the secret ballot is designed to avoid. WALL STREET JOURNAL Big Labor's Comeback August 27, 2008; Page A14 Full article Wall Street Journal Excerpts: Forget for a moment the media fascination with disgruntled Hillary Clinton delegates or Michelle Obama's makeover. One of the most underreported stories at this week's Democratic National Convention is that Big Labor is making a big comeback. Not long ago, the labor movement was in a state of steady, seemingly unstoppable decline. A global economy and the information age made unions less relevant to more workers. The fall of industrial trades cut into existing union ranks, while service workers saw less need to join. Union membership as a share of the American workforce has been falling since the early 1980s, and today stands at 12.1%. In the more dynamic private sector, only 7.5% of workers carry the union label. The paradox is that even as union numbers have declined, union political clout has increased, especially within the Democratic Party. That's in evidence in Denver, where no less than 25% of the 4,200 delegates are active or retired union members or belong to households with union members. More significant for the rest of America, labor has won the intellectual battle for control of the Democratic Party and is reasserting its agenda in a way not seen since the 1970s. WALL STREET JOURNAL Bad Labor Law Is a Path to Economic Ruin By BERNIE MARCUS August 26, 2008; Page A19 Full articles Bernie Marcus Wall Street Journal Excerpts: I recently said that America "would become France" if a certain bill now in Congress -- which would virtually guarantee that every company becomes unionized -- ever became law. Deceptively named the Employee Free Choice Act, this bill would in most cases take away an employee's right to a secret ballot in a union election and give unions the option to have federal arbitrators set the wages, benefits, hours and all other terms and conditions of employment. Countries other than France have suffered the consequences of bad labor laws. When I was CEO of Handy Dan, the precursor to Home Depot, I traveled to England in the 1970s to take a look at a chain of stores we were considering for acquisition. When I arrived in London, the airport workers, bus drivers and garbage collectors were all on strike. The major shareholder of the company asked me to interview three employees. He informed me afterward that he wanted me to hire them at Handy Dan "because the U.K. was finished." He explained that his tax rate was 75% and there were no incentives to grow. When I asked what he and his company were doing about it, he told me that the media would attack the company if it got involved politically. I jumped all over him and the company's CEO for letting this happen without a fight. Needless to say, Handy Dan did not buy these stores. Fortunately for Britain and thanks to the courage of Margaret Thatcher, both tax rates and the power of labor unions were reduced in later years. August 15, 2008 Whose 'Special Interests'? By Thomas Sowell Full article Thomas Sowell RCP Excerpts: We take it for granted that a vote means a secret ballot but it was not always that way. Moreover, it will not remain that way for workers who vote on whether or not they want a labor union, if legislation sponsored by Congressional Democrats and endorsed by Senator Barack Obama becomes law. Before there were secret ballots, voters dared not express their true preferences if those who watched them vote could retaliate-- whether by firing them, beating them up or in other ways. Custom Search The Crazy, Mixed Up World of Al Franken and EFCA July 25th, 2008 by Minnesotans for Employee Freedom In the through-the-looking-glass world of Al Franken, taking away the guarantee of a private ballot to Minnesota workers actually gives them MORE privacy. Huh, you say? Well, according to funny man Franken, in receiving the endorsement of the Minnesota Building and Construction Trades Council, by our count the 22nd union to endorse Franken, worker privacy would be strengthened by allowing union organizers to strong arm workers into signing a card rather than maintain their right to a private ballot in which they can vote their consciences. In his speech, rather than explain how less privacy was actually more privacy, Franken resorted to what he knows best, name calling. He labeled us a “Norm Coleman front group.” This, like his description of EFCA, is obviously false. Franken and his supporters in the Minnesota DFL party have clearly become a bit unglued by our efforts to tell Minnesotans about EFCA and Franken’s support for it. But calling us names and filing frivolous legal complaints won’t stop us from telling the truth. In fact, it will have the opposite effect. THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION June 12, 2008 Giving Employees Free Choice in the Workplace by James Sherk Full article James Sherk Heritage Foundation Excerpts: Workplace relations and the economy have changed substantially since the 1930s, but federal labor law has not evolved with these changes. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) still reflects a top-down, adversarial view of management–labor relations that is foreign to many workers today. Private-sector union membership has fallen over the past generation as many workers have concluded that traditional unions do not meet their needs. In response, the labor movement is pushing the Employee Free Choice Act. Instead of taking away workers' right to vote on joining a union by secret ballot, Congress should restore employers' and employees' right to explore innovative labor–management relations. Most workers want a voice in their workplace even if they do not want a traditional union. Employee involvement (EI) programs enable workers to participate cooperatively in workplace decisions, but the NLRA prohibition on creating "company unions" is so broad that it bans any EI programs that give workers a real voice. The Act forces workers to choose between a traditional union and no formal representation at all. NEW YORK TIMES By LOUIS UCHITELLE Published: June 12, 2008 Full article Louis Uchitelle New York Times Excerpts: Acting quickly after securing his party’s presidential nomination, Barack Obama picked a well-known representative of Bill Clinton’s economic policies as his economic policy director and signaled this week that the major players from the Clinton economics team were now in his camp — starting with Robert E. Rubin.Skip to next paragraphPatrick Andrade for The New York Times Jason Furman is Barack Obama’s economic policy director.Stephen Crowley/The New York Times Robert E. Rubin, right, with President Clinton in 1999 as the president greeted Lawrence H. Summers, the Harvard economist who succeeded Mr. Rubin as Treasury secretary. Senator Obama, Democrat of Illinois, hired Jason Furman, a Harvard-trained economist closely associated with Mr. Rubin, a Wall Street insider who served as President Clinton’s Treasury secretary. Labor union leaders criticized the move, and said that “Rubinomics” focused too much on corporate America and not enough on workers. “For years we’ve expressed strong concerns about corporate influence on the Democratic Party,” John J. Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, said Wednesday in a statement implicitly critical of the symbolism of the appointment, no matter Mr. Furman’s economic skills.
Colorado’s UFCW Admit 50% of Membership Wants Out But Are Forced to Pay Dues Full article LaborPains.Org Denver Post columnist Al Lewis reports on something the union bosses really don’t like to talk about; the huge percentage of workers they “represent” who want nothing to do with a union. Unfortunately, far too many workers are trapped in a union and forced to pay dues just because some workers, at some point, wanted to join. Workers may come and go, but unions can keep their stranglehold long after a majority of workers have decided it’s not worth the price. And that’s why union boss Ernest Duran is terrified of a Colorado amendment on the ballot that would give workers some measure of freedom: Union Facts.Com Full article Union Facts.Com After the 2006 union-funded campaign that spent an estimated $100 million of members’ dues to successfully recapture Congress for Democrats, the headlines blared: “US unions want election success payback,” “Labor sees opening to reverse declines,” “Labor to push agenda in Congress it helped elect.” Union officials’ top priority? Ending the secret ballot elections process and the associated protections for employees choosing whether to join a union. In March 2007, House Democrats quickly approved the so-called Employee Free Choice Act. Facing declining membership, union officials have turned to the highly questionable practice of organizing new members through a process called “card check.” With card checks, paid union organizers seek to pressure workers to sign cards saying that they support union representation. This persuasion has been documented as frequently including deception, coercion, and harassing visits to workers’ homes. Current law dictates that an employer can either choose to recognize a union when the employer believes there is significant support from employeesor call for an election to make certain that the employees’ true feelingsare recognized.
Union Facts.Com Full article Union Facts.com Unfair Labor Practices The National Labor Relations Board investigates instances of union violations of the National Labor Relations Act and other labor laws. Unfair Labor Practices include instances of bad faith bargaining, excessive dues, violence, threats and many other violations.Please note: We have observed some irregularities in the National Labor Relations Board's assignment of ULPs to a specific union. Alleged Charge Allegations Filed Other Allegations 476 Actions of Picketers 269 Duty of Fair Representation 262 Statements 162 Hiring Halls 105 Reserved Gate Issues 100 Time/Place of Picketing 86 Handbilling 72 Hiring Hall Related 70 Picketing/Strike Actions 64 Language on Picket Sign/Handbill 56 Union Security Related (including Beck) 53 Union Security Related 50 Threatening Statements 43 Coercive Statements 39 Violence/Assaults 33 Resignation of Membership (Patternmakers) 21 Refusal to Bargain (Succeeding Contract) 16 All Allegations against a Labor Organization 15 Harassment 13 Bad Faith/Surface Bargaining (Succeeding Contract) 12 Denial of Access 12 Bad Faith/Surface Bargaining (Initial Contract) 10 Surveillance 10 Refusal to Furnish Information 8 Repudiation/Modification of Contract 8 Unilateral Changes [not Sec. 8(d)] 8 Lawsuits/Grievances 8 Discipline (including charges/fines) 7 All Allegations 7 Unknown 7 Requiring Payments other than dues 7 Discharge 6 Lawsuits 6 Disparagement of Employee 5 Fees Excessive 5 Failure to Sign Agreement 4 All Allegations against an Employer 4 Interrogation 4 Statements/Threats 4 Refusal to Bargain (Initial Contract) 4 Repudiation/Modification of Contract [Sec. 8(d)] 3 Rules: No-Solicitation/No-Distribution Rules 3 Alter Ego or Disguised Continuance 3 Coercive Statements, including Threats 3 Layoff 3 Concerted Activities: Discharge 2 Benefits Altered 2 Rules: Coercive 2 Refusal to Bargain (Succeeding or mid Contract) 2 Union Security Related Actions 2 Violence 1 Wages Altered 1 Refusal to Consider/Hire Applicant (Not Salting) 1 Refusal to Consider/Hire Applicant (Salting) 1 Changes in Conditions of Employment [not 8a3] 1 Bad Faith Bargaining (Initial Contract) 1 Concerted Activities: Union Security Related 1 Direct Dealing/Bypassing Union 1 Notification requirements [Sec. 8(d)] 1 Onerous Assignments/Conditions 1 Interference 1 Interference, (Weingarten) 1 Source: National Labor Relations Board's Case Activity Tracking (CATS) database since 2000UnionFacts.com is committed to 100% accuracy. Please contact us with factual corrections & comments. Unfair Labor Practices The National Labor Relations Board investigates instances of union violations of the National Labor Relations Act and other labor laws. Unfair Labor Practices include instances of bad faith bargaining, excessive dues, violence, threats and many other violations. Allegations Filed Other Allegations 476 Actions of Picketers 269 Duty of Fair Representation 262 Statements 162 Hiring Halls 105 Reserved Gate Issues 100 Time/Place of Picketing 86 Handbilling 72 Hiring Hall Related 70 Picketing/Strike Actions 64 [show all ULP violations] Visit: Center For Union Facts Carpenters (CJA) National Headquarters 101 CONSTITUTION AVENUE NW WASHINGTON, DC 20001 The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America is the largest building trades union in the United States. One of the unions that formed the American Federation of Labor in 1886, it left the AFL-CIO in 2001. This description above uses material from the Wikipedia.com and is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. Leadership Top 10 International CJA Leaders & Staff (by Salary) Name Title Total Compensation Douglas Mccarron General President $ 411,949 Andris Silins General Sec/treas $ 351,734 Douglas Banes General Vice President $ 337,551 Randy Sowell Director Of Real Estate $ 326,242 Charles Maples District Vice President $ 257,806 Michael Draper District Vice President $ 256,436 Bobby Yeggy District Vice President $ 252,684 Stanley Solaas Assistant To President 248,859 James Slebiska District Vice President $ 238,843 Rodney Ogle Organizing Director $ 238,516 United Auto Workers (UAW) Part 5
Unions often employ lobbyists to influence legislation in their favor. The amount below represents total lobbying expenditures reported to the Senate. It does not represent the total amount spent lobbying federal, state, and local officials. Total Senate Lobbying Expenditures: $ 14,892,880 (from 1998 to 2005) United Auto Workers (UAW) Part 4 UAW’s Multimillion Dollar Resort Union dues have subsidized the construction of an extraordinarily expensive resort and golf club retreat. The Black Lake Resort and Golf club is luxurious, to say the least. This lakeside resort has 241 guest rooms, 2 full-sized basketball courts, an Olympic size swimming pool, a full gym and exercise room with a sauna, and a golf course designed by Rees Jones, a pricey and well-known golf course architect. While UAW union members are permitted to visit the resort their dues have paid for, they cannot do so at any significant discount—they only receive $18 off the regular price. United Auto Workers (UAW) Part 3 Strike Fund The United Auto Workers have used $1 billion of their worker’s dues to fill an enormous strike fund. No other union finds it necessary to funnel money from their workers pockets to fill such a large and unused strike fund. The next largest strike fund, that of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, is not even half as large. Thirty percent of each UAW member’s dues go towards filling this rarely used pot of money. The interest alone from the UAW’s strike fund has been enough to pay workers on strike in the past. Furthermore, the vast majority of unions other than the UAW are able to effectively negotiate for their members without the use of such huge strike funds. United Auto Workers (UAW) Part 2 Job Banks: Paid Not to Work Thousands of UAW members are being paid between $70,000 to $85,000 per year not to work. (By some accounts, the expense is even larger, costing the “Big Three” up to $130,000 for each job banker). For 4,200 of these union members, their 8 hour “work day” consists of “filling out crossword puzzles, watching World War II movies and even taking naps.” These job bankers “have drawn nearly full pay and all benefits, often for years, no matter the companies’ health.” As shown by the $4.5 billion the “Big Three” earmarked to fund job banks, this practice is costing the companies billions of dollars at a time that they are losing billions. Health Insurance: UAW’s unsustainable spending Negotiating for overly generous health benefits for union members has aided and abetted the decline of the auto industry. The “Big Three” collectively spent almost $10 billion on health insurance in 2002 and the UAW has heedlessly continued to waste money. Some numbers for perspective: $1,500 of the cost of each car pays for health insurance. For each car, more money is spent for health insurance than on steel for its construction. Toyota has far lower health care costs in comparison to the UAW. While healthcare costs contributed to a combined loss of $15 billion for the “Big Three,” Toyota posted a profit of $14 billion. Strike Fund Visit: Center For Union Facts United Auto Workers (UAW) National Headquarters 8000 E JEFFERSON DETROIT, MI 48214 Founded in 1935, the United Auto Workers Union has just under 600,000 members and represents workers from the “Big Three” automotive companies—General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, as well as workers in the aerospace and agricultural industries. Over a 50% Decline in Membership The United Auto Workers Union membership has crashed from its previous high of 1.5 million in the 1970s, to its current total of under 600,000 members. Some Local branches have suffered an even more dramatic hemorrhaging of members: Local 599 in Flint, Michigan has seen its membership atrophy from a peak of 28,000 to a mere 2,500 members today. In an effort to bolster their waning membership, the UAW is scrambling to unionize other sectors as well, such as gaming industries. They have allocated $60 million dollars from their bloated strike fund to aid in collecting new members. From: Center For Union Facts Some facts you should know about the AFL-CIO: Richard Trumka, Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO and second in command under President John Sweeney, has held his office for more than a decade despite multiple ethical clouds swirling above his head. Trumka was implicated in an illegal scheme to fund Teamsters President Ron Carey's reelection campaign with union dues. Rather than give an accounting of his involvement, Trumka repeatedly pled the Fifth. When he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights to avoid appearing at a Congressional hearing in 1998, the Congressional report noted: "Trumka remains the second highest ranking official at the AFL-CIO despite an AFL-CIO Ethical Code provision holding that officials who assert their Fifth Amendment rights are deemed 'unfit to hold union office.'" The New York Times editorialized: "Refusing to testify on grounds of self-incrimination may be acceptable in a criminal trial, but it hardly instills confidence in his leadership of the AFL-CIO." Prior to becoming Secretary-Treasurer of the AFL-CIO, Trumka served as International President of the United Mine Workers of America from 1982 to 1995. In 1993, while Trumka was president, a man named Eddie York was shot and killed by a striking mineworker when he tried to drive past a picket line. A little over two months later Trumka demonstrated his remorse when he told the Associated Press: "[I]f you strike a match and you put your finger in it, you're likely to get burned." It seems that any time a major company announces layoffs, the AFL-CIO issues a comment condemning the move. Companies, the AFL-CIO insists, should have a greater commitment to job security -- regardless of competitive challenges. So it was ironic when the AFL-CIO announced in May 2005 that more than a third of its own staff positions were being eliminated to make the organization more competitive and increase its chances of survival. And despite its customary calls for businesses to avoid buying any new plants or equipment when faced with tough times, the union acknowledged that a steep decline in its assets during recent years was due to a $25 million mortgage it took out to upgrade its headquarters overlooking the White House. Visit Center For Union Facts Workers' families, pets threatened because they didn't want the union Scott Barnes did not want to be represented by the California Nurses Association, which sought to impose itself on the nurses at the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in 2002. To express his opinion, he posted these words on a website: "If the CNA is voted in, membership will NOT be voluntary, and YOU WILL have to give them $80 per month whether you like it or not. If the CNA really cared about any of us, they would let their reputation speak for itself, but they have no reputation and they have to force you to join." Subsequently, Barnes began to receive anonymous threatening calls saying that he should stop "f***ing with the union" and that his pet dogs might come to harm if he didn't. Threatening calls were also made to Christine Foxon, another nurse with whom Barnes had co-founded an independent nurses' group. One caller said he knew she "had two young daughters" and she needed to "think about her family and her girls and back off." After one of these calls, Foxon dialed *69 and discovered that she had been called from an office of the CNA. After reviewing the evidence, the National Labor Relations Board found that the union's menacing behavior had made a fair election impossible and overturned the narrow election win by the union. U.S.-Colombia Deal Faces Labor Deceit By MONICA SHOWALTER INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY April 07, 2008 Full article Investors Business Daily Excerpts: Jairo Giraldo Rey's murder near Cali last November gave big labor a seemingly textbook case for why Congress should reject the Colombia free-trade pact, which President Bush sent to Congress Monday, forcing a vote on the contentious deal within 90 days. The 35-year-old union leader's death showed why "the AFL-CIO remains unalterably opposed to passage of the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement," wrote AFL-CIO President John Sweeney in a Nov. 8 letter to House and Senate members. The only problem is, Giraldo supported free trade. From: National Legal and Policy Center UNION CORRUPTION UPDATE Monday, March 24, 2008 -- Vol. 11, Issue 6 Full article National Legal and Policy Center Excerpts: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (NLRB) NLRB Issues Proposal to Allow Quickie Union Elections Some might call it Sudden Election Syndrome. Others might call it the Stealth Employee Free Choice Act. But a new proposal that effectively would bypass standard National Labor Relations Board-supervised elections could revolutionize labor relations in this country. If nothing else, unions could make out like bandits in their organizing drives and corporate campaigns. The source of this initiative: the National Labor Relations Board. On February 26, the NLRB published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register that would allow a union and an employer to file a joint petition for a board-supervised election to be held on an agreed-upon date within 28 days. This document, to be called an “RJ petition,” may have a good many dissenting workers crying foul.
Last year, unions swallowed a bitter pill when Senate Republicans successfully blocked passage of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), a bill already passed by the House in March that would have forced employers to recognize as binding card checks that win a simple majority. In other words, if a union manages to convince at least 50 percent of the employees who are part of a potential collective bargaining unit to sign a card indicating an intention to join, the result would preclude any possibility of holding a secret-ballot election, for decades the template for American union democracy. The RJ Petition would appear to be the NLRB’s way of breaking the EFCA impasse. How workable the plan would be in practice is another story.
Under the proposed rule, no show of interest in joining a union would be required. A union conceivably could set up an NLRB-monitored election without the support of a single worker. That’s quite a comedown from the current minimum threshold of 30 percent. The petition would be filed jointly by the employer and the union. A board-supervised election then would be held no more than 28 days later. Within three days of docketing, the NLRB regional director would notify the parties of its decision to approve the election petition. The board then would send the employer a notice to be posted in the workplace at least three working days in advance of the election. All election and post-election issues would be resolved by the regional director; there would be no chance to appeal a ruling to board headquarters in Washington. Any adjudication would occur after union certification. Finally, the proposal would limit to seven days the period during which employees could file an unfair labor practice charge. On the whole, this looks like a winner of a deal – for organized labor. From: Center For Union Facts Against Members' Politics CNN exit polls showed that 38 percent of union members voted for President Bush in the 2004 election, but more than 95 percent of union funds went to support Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry. A 1999 Zogby poll found a majority of union members—nearly 55 percent—thought people should be given a choice of investing their Social Security taxes in some form of personal retirement accounts. But union officials spent millions of dollars to oppose private accounts in the Social Security system. The San Francisco Chronicle reported: "California unions spent $88,000 (public employee unions' share was $68,000) in opposing Proposition 22, a 2000 ballot initiative that defined marriage as between a man and a woman"; a Los Angeles Times exit poll found that 58 percent of union households had voted yes on the measure. The Chronicle added: "California unions spent $32.7 million (public employee unions' share was $25.7 million) to oppose the recall of former Gov. Gray Davis, yet exit polls found half of union members voted for the recall and 56 percent voted for a Republican candidate to replace him—43 percent for Schwarzenegger and 13 percent for Tom McClintock." FROM; RA REPUBLICAN AMERICAN Full article Republican American One of Al Gore's funniest lies was "Look for the Union Label" being his childhood lullaby, even though he was 27 when it was penned. One of the lines from the song — "We work hard, but who's complaining?" — always gives us a double chuckle because unions are all about work avoidance and whining about minutiae. Examples abound, but the latest comes from Montana. To help its Child Support Enforcement Division do its job better, the state shelled out thousands for new computers. Within minutes, unionized employees discovered the computers were not equipped with solitaire, hearts, minesweeper, etc. Unfair, they complained, because other state employees with older computers have the games. But rather than installing the games on the new computers, their bosses wisely removed all games from all computers. Said one administrator: "We're at work to work. ... Who has time to play games?" Answer: Union members. But with the games gone, they'll have to work a lot harder to make it seem as if they're working hard. Complaints also may be heard from the bumper crop of union bosses convicted or accused of crimes since Oct. 1. They include 49 labor leaders going to prison for embezzling more than $1 million, and 57 others under indictment. Union bigwigs want Congress to pass a bill to reduce the U.S. Office of Labor Management Standards' budget so they can rob the rank and file with impunity LaborPains.org At TeachersUnionExposed.com, the nominations keep rolling in for our “Ten Worst Union-Protected Teachers” contest. Here is this week’s highlighted nomination, sent in by a concerned parent: Two years ago [nominee] was caught in an internet chatroom, sitting at her desk, while the children were left to do whatever they wanted. The only punishment for this offense was to be moved from teaching one grade to a lower grade. One year ago angry parents paid a surprise to [nominee’s] class; she was playing solitaire on a laptop while the students were wandering around the classroom with no guidance. Her punishment was to be moved again into a lower grade. This year, [nominee’s] students began telling their parents that all they had to study for their tests was THE ANSWER KEY that [nominee] gave them!! Instead of teaching the kid anything about the questions and what the correct answers to the question are she was making them memorize the answer key (A,D,D,B,A,C… etc). The Truth About Improper Firings and Union Intimidation by James Sherk UNIONS MAKE RIDICULOUS CLAIMS Full article James Sherk The Heritage Foundation Excerpts: Labor activists argue that Congress should pass the Employee Free Choice Act because employers routinely intimidate and fire workers who try to unionize. Employers, they claim, have retaliated against pro-union workers in one-quarter of organizing elections, discriminating against or firing more than 31,000 workers who wanted to join a union in 2005. This compares, they contend, to just 42 cases of union intimidation of workers in the past 60 years. All these claims are false. Union Allegations Unions allege that employers systematically violate the law by threatening and firing workers who want to join a union. Their proposed solution is the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA, H.R. 800), which would replace secret-ballot organizing elections with "card checks" in which workers join a union by publicly signing a card. Card check could expose workers to pressure from both employers and union organizers. Labor activists contend, however, that such union intimidation is exceedingly rare. Nancy Schiffer, the AFL-CIO's Associate General Counsel, presents the unions' case: ###
Ohio Employees File Intimidation Charges Against Union By Randy Hall CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor March 28, 2007 (CNSNews.com) - Two employees at a manufacturing plant in Ohio have filed federal charges against their former labor union after going through what one right-to-work organization called "a pattern of ugly union intimidation." Mark Bedenik, a bench hand at the Alcoa Company's factory in Cleveland, told Cybercast News Service on Tuesday that he believes the International Union of Machinists and Aerospace Workers is "using us to set an example" to other IAM members - "basically saying that 'if you don't do what we tell you to do, you're going to pay.'" According to documents submitted to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Bedenik and colleague Matthew Slatten accuse IAM officials of throwing them out of the union illegally and then continuing to take union dues from their paychecks. Stefan Gleason, vice president of the National Right to Work Foundation, said the workers filed the charges "to protect themselves from a pattern of ugly union intimidation at the company." Bedenik said that the situation began last fall, when the contracts of the three unions represented at the plant expired and members of one - the United Auto Workers - went on strike. Members of the IAM and the third, small union went out in sympathy. "We honored their strike for one week" before the company and the IAM reached a tentative agreement that was approved by the vast majority of the union's members, Bedenik noted. At that time, "all of the elected IAM officials said: 'If you want to go to work, you can. There'll be no repercussions, no harassment, no penalties, no hard feelings. If you want to stay out, you can do that, too.'" "Six of us came back the following day" and worked for the next two months, Bedenik said. Eventually, "the UAW agreed to a new contract at the end of December, so everyone came back to work at the start of January." "That's when it all started," he noted. Bedenik said that union officials then placed the six employees' names up on a board "so everybody could see who came in to work during the strike." In addition, the relationships among the IAM members grew noticeably colder. "It's nothing like it was before the strike," he said. "People used to say more to me than just 'hi' and 'bye.'" However, the biggest impact Bedenik felt was a financial one. "According to our contracts, the plant tells the union that they need a certain number of people to work overtime, and the union picks the people for that." The union members with the lowest number of hours are usually selected first. Because the IAM officials counted the hours the six workers put in before January, those employees were regularly passed over when overtime assignments were made, which Bedenik called "unfair and unjust." 'Go fly a kite' After the workers complained, a meeting was scheduled for Feb. 11 to address the situation. "The six of us came in, and other people came in, even union bosses from Cincinnati," Bedenik noted, but "nothing came of it." Once the meeting adjourned, the six employees asked the IAM officials in attendance about their rights to refrain from formal union membership. The officials told them that full membership is a mandatory condition of employment and that resigning from the union would result in their termination from the company. "They basically told us to go fly a kite," Bedenik said. Soon after, Slatten contacted the foundation in hopes of obtaining assistance with the matter. With help from the foundation's attorneys, the six employees filed unfair labor practice charges against the IAM with the NLRB on Feb. 26. The situation worsened earlier this month, when union officials ordered Bedenik and Slatten to attend another meeting. The employees chose not to attend what they perceived as a "trial." "I felt pretty much scared to go," Bedenik said. On March 11, the IAM pulled the two employees' union cards, though both Bedenik and Slatten continue to work at the Alcoa plant and still have union dues taken out of their paychecks. "Union officials want workers to shut up and pay up," said Gleason. "These are just a few of many types of abuse faced by employees in states like Ohio with no right-to-work law to ensure that the payment of union dues is strictly voluntary. "Under the Foundation-won Communication Workers of America v. Beck decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that employees laboring under compulsory unionism contracts are entitled to resign from formal union membership and withhold forced dues for everything except the documented cost of monopoly bargaining," Gleason noted. "However, if union officials expel a union member for any reason other than a failure to pay dues, they are not entitled to collect any dues whatsoever from such persons," he added. T. Dean Wright, president of IAM District Lodge 54 in Ohio, told Cybercast News Service that his union is "more than willing to work with the NLRB to come to some kind of resolution" regarding the situation. Wright said he wished the employees had "let our internal process follow through. We weren't even done with our investigation, and they ran and contacted this group and filed charges against us." Bedenik said that he doesn't regret taking legal action against the union. "They should be held accountable when they say 'we're not going harass you, hold hard feelings against you or come after you.' Their word should mean something, especially when they're supposed to be representing you," he added. March 12, 2007 From: CFIF-Center For Individual Freedom SEIU's Dirty Tricks Threaten American Prosperity and Jobs Full article CFIF Excerpts: Private equity investment in the United States has recently come under attack from the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The motives for these attacks are bizarre, though not out of character. And like so many of the hit jobs advanced by unions in the recent past — seemingly more out of desperation than for the benefit of workers — the SEIU's latest broadsides are misleading and, frankly, hypocritical. Few could argue the fact that capital investment is precisely what creates new jobs and the kind of growth that directly benefits service employees and other workers over the long haul. That fact is not even lost on the SEIU itself, which manages pension funds for its membership that, on average, invest five to ten percent of their assets in private equity funds. So why are the SEIU and its zealous leader, Andy Stern, obsessed with launching frivolous attacks, which are focused not on the real issues that typically concern union members such as wages or working conditions, but rather on extraneous criticisms designed to smear individual companies supported by private equity? For the sake of pointing out the obvious, the short answer is this: The SEIU isn't interested in the behavior of the specific companies it is targeting at all. Nor is it interested in the capital gains tax treatment of private equity investors that has been the misguided focus of revenue-hungry politicians in Washington of late. No, the SEIU is most interested in strengthening its own power by bullying the owners of these companies into permitting restrictions on the freedoms of individual workers, such as compulsory dues, card-check agreements and monopoly bargaining privileges. From: LaborPains.Org NEA Rings the Dinner Bell Today the National Education Association issued a press release that displayed remarkable candor about the union’s institutional tilt to the left, urging Democratic presidential contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to take the union’s electoral clout more seriously while expressing no interest in appealing to Republicans. According to the teachers union’s release, “[w]ith both [Democratic] candidates scrambling to gather enough delegates to win the nomination, NEA is uniquely poised to play a major role in either campaign.” The NEA’s latest Democrats-only summons is just the latest example of a lengthy trend: between 1990 and 2006, more than 93 percent of donations made by National Education Association political action committees and individual officers went to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That’s not to say that anywhere close to 93 percent of NEA members are Democrats, however; the NEA’s own “Status of the American Public School Teacher 2000-2001” [PDF] indicates that only 45 percent of public school teachers are Democrats. Excerpts: Vikki Reyes has had it with Locke High, the school her daughters attend in the Watts neighborhood of Los Angeles. She walked in on class one day and recalls “the place was just like a zoo!” Students had taken control, while the teacher sat quietly with a book. Frank Wells has also had it with Locke High. When he became principal he says gangs ruled the campus. He tried to turn things around but ran into a “brick wall” of resistance from the school district and teachers union. Locke seemed destined to languish in high crime and low test scores until Wells, Reyes, and many reform-minded teachers joined with a maverick named Steve Barr in an attempt to break free from the status quo. Their battle is just one example of the charter school education revolt that’s erupting across the nation. Big Labor Ignores Free Trade Proponents From: The Heritage Foundation February 19, 2008 Big Labor Can't Handle the Truth About Colombia by James M. Roberts Full article To James M. Roberts The Heritage Foundation Excerpts: Members of Congress who oppose the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA) are hurting the very people they claim to be protecting--workers and their families in the United States and Colombia. Not surprisingly, Big Labor is the driving force behind the opposition to freer trade. To counter the Bush Administration's push for a floor vote on the TPA by April, AFL-CIO Executive Linda Chávez-Thompson led a "fact-finding" mission to Colombia in mid-February, which included Communications Workers of America President Larry Cohen and United Steelworkers counsel Dan Kovalik, to "gather information to inform the debate over the proposed trade agreement."[1] Contrary to the propaganda of special interests, the U.S.-Colombia TPA would help the economies of both countries. Failure to ratify would damage the United States' reputation in the region, would hinder progress in the war on drugs, and could push Colombia toward the embrace of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. Congress should put national security ahead of partisan politics and ratify the U.S.-Colombia TPA. ### From: LaborPains.org Full article Go to Labor Pains.Org Excerpts: In its rush to collect money from people not yet unionized, Working America, the AFL-CIO’s “community affiliate,” employs some shady characters. As a report from The Independent in Ohio indicates, the group appears to flagrantly disregard laws designed to protect public safety. Wayne C. Christopher, 48, was arrested in Canal Fulton in eastern Ohio for soliciting Working America memberships in a residential area without a permit, having apparently violated a law “meant to protect residents from criminals who may be casing homes and neighborhoods.” So what threat did this Working America canvasser present? Well, he faces two open arrest warrants in Cleveland, “has convictions for rape, felonious sexual penetration and pandering obscenity and is a tier-three registered sex offender.” Full article To Center For Union Facts Excerpts: Clintonites Allege Union Dirty Tricks Hillary Clinton’s campaign is crying foul over alleged voter intimidation in Nevada, after two workers reported that the Culinary Workers Union — one of the most powerful unions in the state and a division of UNITE HERE — intimidated them to vote for Obama. That got former National Economic Council Director Larry Lindsey thinking that maybe Clinton would come to terms with her endorsement of the terribly misnamed Employee Free Choice Act. Lindsey wrote in this morning’s Washington Post: I wonder if, having seen such voter intimidation, the Clinton campaign will change its position on doing away with government-supervised secret-ballot elections for union representation. Under the Orwellian-named Employee Free Choice Act, secret-ballot elections to decide whether a plant is unionized would be replaced with a public “card check” system, under which both employers and union organizers would know how each worker voted. Sen. Hillary Clinton, Obama and former senator John Edwards all support this bill. From: Club For Growth Blog To Club For Growth January 31, 2008 News Alert! Press Release NEWS ALERT: Left-Wing Labor Union Attempts to Rescue Wayne Gilchrest Washington – On the off chance that you had any doubt about Wayne Gilchrest’s liberal record, all doubts can be safely put to rest. Wayne Gilchrest is so liberal—and so desperate to get reelected—the extreme left-wing labor Union, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), is funding a television ad on his behalf. A press release yesterday states that Republicans Who Care, a sham group fronting for the SEIU, is running an ad attacking Rep. Gilchrest’s conservative challenger, State Senator Andy Harris. But a recent FEC filing shows that the entire $180,000 ad buy was funded by the left-wing Service Employees International Union—the same union that tried to help John Kerry win the 2004 presidential election. In addition to John Kerry, the SEIU has supported the campaigns of such liberal Democrats as: Presidential candidate Howard Dean; Senators Ben Cardin; Tom Daschle; Harry Reid; Chuck Schumer; Barbara Mikulski; and Russ Feingold; Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi; Rep. Dennis Kucinich; Rep. Steny Hoyer; Rep. Charles Rangel; and self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders. “In other words,” said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey, “Wayne Gilchrest has more in common with John Kerry, Tom Daschle, and Nancy Pelosi than Republicans in Maryland’s First Congressional District.” To make matters worse, the ad is completely disingenuous, attacking Andy Harris’s spending record , when Wayne Gilchrest has been a reliable and notorious supporter of pork in the U.S. Congress. This year alone, Gilchrest voted to fund such outrageous pork projects as California’s Mule and Packer Museum; a Texas zoo; a South Carolina aquarium; a jazz museum; and Maine’s Lobster Institute. In contrast, Harris is a true fiscal conservative who voted against 6 out of 9 state budgets because they spent too much of taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars. “On the campaign trail, Wayne Gilchrest claims that he is a conservative, but it is clear that he doesn’t even come close,” Mr. Toomey continued. “Wayne Gilchrest is not a conservative, and one has to wonder how Rep. Gilchrest can even call himself a Republican when the same labor union that supported John Kerry and Howard Dean is funding his reelection effort.” From CapitalResearch.Org Press Release Hands in the Cookie Jar
December 20, 2007 Contact: Larry Farnsworth (202) 232-6574 lfarnsworth@crosbyvolmer.com Union Leaders Caught with their Hands in the Cookie Jar Today’s Convictions Show the Need for More Union Accountability Full article To Capital Research.Org Excerpts Washington, DC – The Department of Labor’s union watchdog office, the Office of Labor and Management Standards (OLMS), today announced the conviction of nine union members found guilty of embezzling union funds and the courts have ordered restitutions totaling over $488 thousand dollars.
The Capital Research Center (CRC) which tracks labor union activity recently held a roundtable summit in Washington with conservative thought leaders from around the country. All in attendance agreed on one thing: Labor Unions cannot be given a free pass, particularly when sitting on billions of dollars of their member’s dues.
One of CRC’s monthly publications, Labor Watch, covers this very topic in its upcoming January 2008 edition. Author Michael Reitz accounts for the efforts of the Labor Secretary Elaine Chao to maintain the current structure of the OLMS. However she has been challenged by liberals in Congress who, fresh off of their victory in the 2006 elections which was made possible with substantial donations from labor unions; have worked to cut the funding of the very agency that is supposed to be making sure labor unions are accountable. From LaborPains.Org Unions’ Next Corporate Campaign: Sadistic Santa’s SweatshopCongress & Labor’s 2007 Hijinks: A Review In his syndicated column summarizing Congress’s “achievements” in 2007, writer George Will includes this round-up of what was done on behalf of organized labor: Bruce Raynor, president of the union Unite Here, expressed organized labor’s compassionate liberalism when he urged sparing workers the burden of democracy: “There’s no reason to subject workers to an election.” The House agreed, voting for “card check” organizing that strips workers of their right to a secret ballot when deciding for or against unionization of their workplace. Senate Republicans blocked this, but the Senate Democrats voted to cripple the Department of Labor agency that requires union bosses to explain how they spend their members’ money. From: National Legal and Policy Center GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES (AFGE) Arizona Former Local President Sentenced for Embezzlement On December 14, Josefina Suarez Gonzalez, ex-president of AFGE Local 1662, was sentenced in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona to five years probation and ordered to pay $27,405 to her union. Gonzalez had pleaded guilty back in June to one count of embezzling union funds following an indictment back in October 2004. The union represents employees at the Brown & Root Logistics facility at Fort Huachuca Army Base, not far from Tucson. The sentencing follows an investigation by the Labor Department’s Office of Labor-Management Standards. (OLMS, 12/23/06). To Visit that site go to: National Legal and Policy Center National Legal and Policy Center December 4, 2007 ALLIED-INDUSTRIAL WORKERS (PACE) To Visit That Site Go To: National Legal and Policy Center Local President in Tennessee Pleads Guilty to Embezzlement On October 29, Ron Schweitzer, former president of Local 1967 of the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union (PACE), pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee to one count of embezzling $58,305 in union funds. He had been indicted in April. PACE merged with the United Steelworkers of America in 2005. The union is now known as Local 05-1967, and at the time of the theft had been based in Ohio. (OLMS, 11/10/07). From Center For Union Facts Don’t give thanks for trying to end workers’ secret ballots Sticking With It To SEIU? In New Hampshire, they’re wondering what they get for all the money they send to SEIU headquarters in Washington, D.C.: The SEA pays $1.6 million a year to be in the SEIU, according to the resolution passed to create the committee. At the same time, the resolution says, the SEIU’s 2005 split from the AFL-CIO has sparked a “loss of solidarity” with other unions in New Hampshire. “The real question is why are we spending that much money and what are we getting out of it,” said former SEA president Tim Decker, a co-sponsor of the resolution. After the split with the AFL-CIO, Decker said, the competition for fragments of the SEA grew fierce. “That means they can’t really protect us from other unions raiding us, other AFL-CIO unions,” he said.
LaborPains.org is power Unions Thursday, November 21, 2007 From Center For Union Facts http://laborpains.org/?p=690">Labor Pains.Org Hillary’s Uniform Support for Teachers Unions The Associated Press reports that yesterday Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton told an assemblage of Iowa teachers that paying them according to their performance “could be demeaning and discouraging.” Clinton also fretted about “who would decide” which teachers would receive merit bonuses. This is leadership? Paying teachers more for teaching well is a pretty clear way to improve teacher quality, which pretty clearly affects the quality of a kid’s learning. Teachers unions don’t like the idea for a variety of reasons (and Clinton needs their political machines to keep her “inevitability” up), including the reason that teachers paid like professionals (i.e., according to individual performance) might see less need for a union to bargain on their collective behalf. Fortunately for schoolkids suffering from a lack of quality teachers, however, Clinton did boldly propose a way out of America’s educational morass: school uniforms. As my fellow blogger Bret puts it, you can dress up Clinton’s plans for reform however you like, but it is a naked attempt to protect entrenched union power. Unions Thursday, November 18, 2007 Berkeley Business Sees the Light You don’t hear about many business-minded folks operating out of Berkeley, California, but there are indeed some. One couple that makes lighting fixtures there, though, has been blinded by a thuggish union organizing drive by the honest-to-badness Socialists from the IWW (aka the Wobblies). Here are the details of the ongoing picket, according to an opinion piece in the Daily Planet: And the accusations from the picketers? Union busting, lockouts, ageism, toxic waste exposure, unsafe working conditions, unfair wages… you will see that these were all fabricated to support a plot which brings new meaning to the words “hostile takeover.” So, union busting. What would you do if several of your workers walked into a staff meeting one morning with a representative from the Industrial Workers of the World and announced that your store was now under their aegis? No discussion, no election, no communication with the National Labor Relations Board, no card check, no indication that the other employees wanted to join? What if they demanded a 100 percent wage increase? How about if they demanded that employment be unconditional—no performance requirements whatsoever? Amazingly, each of these things really happened. That’s bad enough, but the author offers an important reminder that the very purpose of the IWW is to “organize as a class, take possession of the means of production, (and) abolish the wage system…” Like many modern organizing campaigns, the Planet article’s author realizes: “Yes, the true intention of the pickets is not to improve their working situation; it is to take over Metro Lighting, or to drive them out of business trying.” This entry posted on Friday, November 16th, 2007 at 4:12 pm by Bret Jacobson and tagged as Anti-Corporate Campaigns.Digg this post! Unions Thursday, November 15, 2007 by Bret Jacobson Understanding RICO 2.0 Thursday, November 8th, 2007 by Bret Jacobson This morning, the Washington Times carries an op-ed from the Center for Union Facts. In our piece, we explain the burgeoning trend of employers fighting back against union’s allegedly extortionate tactics. Here’s a bit: … as times have changed, so has the style of union extortion. These days, it’s less about how a company unloads goods at a port than it is about how the company is perceived in the world of the Internet. With competitors and customers just a click away, billion-dollar brands can be shattered overnight. As older and slower union officials stalked their prey in mature heavy industries, their younger counterparts began devising ways to use leverage in the new world of business by exposing companies to new electronic-harassment campaigns. Union officials have set up Web sites mocking company names, and blogs regurgitate any blip of bad news. They use social-networking sites and text messages to coordinate demonstrations. They plaster YouTube with one-sided, and often misleading, videos of their protests and complaints. The latest RICO cases, filed recently by the Wackenhut Corporation and Smithfield Foods, allege that union bosses have used new media tools to carry out a new style of attack: multiyear, multimillion-dollar campaigns targeting company brands and causing a steady stream of trouble for employees and shareholders alike. The threat has been building for years, but the response is just underway now. Employers and policymakers alike will need to keep a close eye on these lawsuits. UPDATE: More evidence that execs are increasingly fed up with this style of reputational warfare. Reuters reports that a top private equity official is calling SEIU’s rhetoric for what it is: A large union’s efforts at criticizing Carlyle Group and its purchase of nursing home Manor Care is aimed at unionizing employees and not improving patients’ health care, Carlyle Co-Founder David Rubenstein said on Wednesday. Rubenstein’s comments will likely fan the flames between the private equity giant and the workers union, which have grown in recent weeks as the union steps up its protest of the firm and the entire private equity industry. “The SEIU is not happy that 60,000 workers at the company aren’t unionized. They’re campaigning and saying the health care will not be adequate. That isn’t true, in my view,” Rubenstein said, speaking at The Deal’s 2008 M&A Outlook conference in New York. “It’s really an effort to increase unionization, and not so much to worry about patients’ health care.” Tagged as Crime & Corruption, SEIU, UFCW | Digg this post! | Del.ici.ous this post! Dues Money - Accountability = Long Beach Teachers Union Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007 by Jon Berry The Teachers Association of Long Beach (TALB) is having problems. A majority of the teachers union’s board members allege that the union’s President and its Executive Director have engaged in a variety of misdeeds, such as: * Refusing to hand over financial documents for board scrutiny — TALB Executive Director Scott McVarish allegedly agreed to let a board-hired copier technician photocopy the union’s financial records, but kicked him out of the union office before he could finish * The president’s refusing “to acknowledge nine directors on the board … to consider their properly made motions, their votes and even their presence” * Presenting a TALB-hired attorney’s legal opinion on changing the union constitution (to give the president more power) as if it were an opinion from the California Teachers Association, TALB’s parent union * Using tens of thousands of dues dollars to pay for vote recounts for TALB employees who were running for political office in Long Beach (the expenditures were counted as “bargaining” expenses by the union so that teachers who had chosen not to support the union’s politicking were forced to pay for it anyway) * Filing inaccurate financial reports to cover deficit spending that may leave the union as much as $100,000 in the hole No indictments yet, but we won’t be surprised when/if it happens. SEIU’s Quid Pro Ohio Service Employees International Union (SEIU) The Associated Press has unearthed troubling political goings-on in Ohio, where Governor ted Strickland apparently bent over backwards to accommodate his political backers from the Service Employees International Union. The AP reports: SEIU donated $90,000 to Strickland’s gubernatorial campaign last year, a portion of the $2 million it has given statewide to Democratic party committees and [more...] Full Article: Do you know any former prisoners of war (POW'S) or their family members? If so, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) needs your help. VA is once again reaching out to former prisoners of war not currently using VA benefits and services, urging them to contact the Department to find out if they are eligible for health care, disability compensation and other services. #### In Washington State, another reminder that the union-funded group known as ACORN keeps bumping up against legal trouble during elections. A man will get 30 days of detention for submitting false voter registrations, and: Olson was one of seven workers for a 2006 voter-registration drive conducted by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, who were indicted in July on charges that they made up names of voters, forged signatures and turned in bogus registrations to elections officials in Seattle … Two other ACORN workers — Tina Johnson of Tacoma and Jayson Woods of Elkridge, Md. — have pleaded guilty and await sentencing. The cases against the other defendants are pending Union Facts: Affleck Gets Panned center>From: Center For Union Facts The folks at the Boston Herald were kind enough to publish our letter to the editor regarding Ben Affleck’s foray into union activism. In part, we said: Affleck as union front-man is not just another ridiculous role; his script is a dangerous one as it undermines employee rights. Whenever Affleck makes his quixotic attempt for elected office, he will expect (I’d hope) that the voters would choose or reject him based on a secret ballot vote. Hospital workers deserve the same opportunity, without union - or celebrity - coercion. More California Dreamin: A Card Check Win! Congratulations are due California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, as well as all farm workers, after the Termination of SB 180, which would have ended secret ballot elections for the state’s farm workers. It’s the first step in the national fight over securing workplace democracy and defeating the Orwellian named “Employee Free Choice Act.” UPDATE: From NAM’s blog: Congratulations to the Governor for vetoing that last bill, which would have deprived farmworkers of their right to determine their association via secret ballot. Cesar Chavez fought long and hard for the secret ballot, but organized labor now finds it inconvenient. This entry posted on Monday, October 15th, 2007 at 11:26 am by Bret Jacobson and tagged as Ending Secret Ballots.Digg this post! “Somebody’s got to stand up and represent the kids of this country” Towards the end of an appearance on the Hugh Hewitt show, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney had a few words to say about what a teachers union endorsement means these days: Hugh Hewitt: [Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton] picked up the endorsement of a teachers’ union today. I’m not sure if it’s the NTEU or the American Federation of Teachers. Your reaction to that, Governor Romney? What’s it tell you about what the teacher unions think about politics at the national level? Mitt Romney: Well, no surprise, of course, that the teachers unions are going to get behind the Democrats in this regard, and I have no beef with unions generally. But there are good unions and bad unions. And the teachers unions at the national level are so focused on their members that they’re forgetting that the first responsibility of an elected official is to be caring about the kids. And somebody’s got to stand up and represent the kids of this country, not just the teachers unions… Dues Money - Accountability = Long Beach Teachers Union The Teachers Association of Long Beach (TALB) is having problems. A majority of the teachers union’s board members allege that the union’s President and its Executive Director have engaged in a variety of misdeeds, such as: * Refusing to hand over financial documents for board scrutiny — TALB Executive Director Scott McVarish allegedly agreed to let a board-hired copier technician photocopy the union’s financial records, but kicked him out of the union office before he could finish * The president’s refusing “to acknowledge nine directors on the board … to consider their properly made motions, their votes and even their presence” * Presenting a TALB-hired attorney’s legal opinion on changing the union constitution (to give the president more power) as if it were an opinion from the California Teachers Association, TALB’s parent union * Using tens of thousands of dues dollars to pay for vote recounts for TALB employees who were running for political office in Long Beach (the expenditures were counted as “bargaining” expenses by the union so that teachers who had chosen not to support the union’s politicking were forced to pay for it anyway) * Filing inaccurate financial reports to cover deficit spending that may leave the union as much as $100,000 in the hole Paying Good Teachers Well At first blush, examination of a new survey by the Center on Reinventing Public Education at the University of Washington doesn’t bode well for the idea of paying teachers according to how their students perform: 60 percent of Washington State public school teachers “strongly oppose” merit pay, and another 22 percent “somewhat oppose it.” Among the study’s findings, however, was this interesting result: “to the degree that teachers have confidence in their principal, they appear more willing to support merit pay.” It’s simple: Trustworthy principals can be relied upon to make fair assessments of who is and who isn’t stepping up to give kids the education they need. And it’s lack of trust in school administrators that teachers unions cite when defending laws that keep principals’ hands tied on critical personnel issues like hiring, firing, and compensation. Improve the quality of principals, then, and you’ll see more teachers open to merit pay (which will in turn improve teacher quality). The only sticking point is that the very same union-supported policies (tenure, seniority-based pay) that insulate teachers from bad administrators also protect those bad administrators from getting fired! Click here for an unfortunate story along these lines. It’s true that there are many bad administrators in schools. The teachers unions will tell you that the solution is to strip them of managerial discretion in determining teachers’ salaries and to make it practically impossible to fire teachers, even the bad ones. That kind of stalemate is no solution at all. We’ve yet to hear of a union leader proposing that it might be better to drop these ridiculous “protections” (which only advance the interests of bad teachers and bad administrators, never schoolkids) and let school districts start acting like every other workplace in the country. THIS WOULDN'T BE CALLED UNION THUGGERY WOULD IT? UFCW to Members: “we can and will retaliate” Wednesday, May 30th, 2007 by Bret Jacobson Call it what you like: clear, concise … maniacal. We just came across a letter (predating the Center for Union Facts’ existence) illustrating how UFCW officials view their members. Described by labor reformers this Sunday as “recent,” it carries the signature of UFCW 324 president Greg Conger, who has been mentioned on our blog before for his dubious representation of members. UFCW’s message to members considering their rights to distance themselves from the union ahead of potentially destructive strikes: “we can and will retaliate.” The whole thing is worth reading, but here’s the heart(lessness) of the letter: While we have not yet established any picket lines, you can rest assured that if you, or any other employee, should cross a Local 324 picket line at any struck or locked out store, we can and will retaliate. You have our guarantee that Local 324 will retaliate and discriminate against any of our members (including “dues paying only” members) who scab in the following ways: 1. This Union will fine you for crossing the picket line and, if you do not pay, this Union will sue you in State Court to collect the fine and our attorney’s fees; 2. This Union will put you on trial for your misconduct before a special Trial Board, consisting of your fellow members, that will be established to punish scabs; 3. This union will publicize what you are doing by publishing your name, and the fact that you are a scab, on the front page of its newspaper, which is mailed to all of our members; 4. This Union will send a letter informing all of our members that you are a scab; and/or 5. This union will place your name on an “Official Scab List” and will post that list on every Union bulletin board in our jurisdiction. From: National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation, Inc. 16 Year-Old Girl Hits Union Officials with Federal Charges After Illegal Threats Against Her Albertsons Job Union officials demand grocery employee’s termination after misinforming her that formal union membership was a job requirement Excerpts and Video Below San Diego, CA (August 7, 2007) – A local employee of Albertsons, Inc. filed federal charges against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 135 union after union officials unlawfully demanded she be fired from her job unless she joined the union and paid full dues. Sixteen year-old high-school student, Danielle Cookson, a front courtesy clerk for the grocery giant, obtained free legal assistance from attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The federal charges highlight that UFCW Local 135 union officials are failing to respect employees legal rights and requiring them to join and pay dues to the union as a job condition. In late July, UFCW Local 135 union officials sent a “termination notification” letter to Albertsons requesting Cookson be fired from her position. In their demand, union officials ordered Cookson to pay the forced dues within seven days of the notification, or else she would be removed from the schedule and terminated. From The Center For Union Facts Final Scorecard: No Union, 1,036 - UFCW, 2 Remember the recent story we mentioned about some nurses who weren’t happy with the idea of being represented by either SEIU or UFCW? There are new details today, and we think it’s worth noting. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports: St. John’s nurses had three choices. They could vote for continued representation by their current union, the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 655, or switch to Service Employees International Union, a union supported by the UFCW, or for “neither,” meaning they would have no union representation. A total of 1,036 of St. John’s nurses voted for neither, 685 voted for SEIU and two voted for UFCW. The vote was ratified this week by the National Labor Relations Board. That’s 1,036 people who were unhappy with their current union and two — 2! — who were happy. That’s not all, though. There is a powerful story about the power of union officials to compel their members to pay for “services.” As the Post-Dispatch reports: The results were not a complete surprise. St. John’s nurses accepted an “open shop” clause in their contract in 2005, which means they could opt out of paying union dues. Only about a fifth of the nurses continued paying dues, though the union represented them all. From: Labor Pains.Org Teamsters, Ten Years On … August 22nd, 2007 by Bret Jacobson Ten years ago today: A federal official threw out the contentious Teamsters election because of alleged campaign fund-raising abuses, forcing union President Ron Carey into another race against James P. Hoffa. Most people don’t remember how this scheme worked. The short answer: Carey’s team sent union member money out to “get out the vote” groups for the country’s presidential campaign, which then laundered money back to his internal union re-election campaign. Bonus: one of the groups involved is the ACORN-run “Project Vote,” which continues to run into alleged voter registration fraud all over the map. Double bonus, from Wikipedia: “In 2007, Ron Carey was researching and writing a book based on his experiences. He is critical of the policies of his successor, Hoffa, particulary centralization of authority, business-model organizing, and the restoration of multiple salaries for IBT officials.” From: National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation Federal Board to Prosecute Butte-Based Union for Illegal Threats and Dues Seizures at Local Safeway Union officials unlawfully threatened termination and rejected employee resignations from formal union membership Excerpt: Butte, MT (August 6, 2007) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has agreed to prosecute the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 4 union for illegally seizing forced union dues from multiple Safeway employees’ paychecks, unlawfully threatening termination, and rejecting requests to resign from formal union membership. With help from attorneys at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Safeway Inc. (NYSE: SWY) employees Gerald Rasmussen and Carla Crandall originally filed federal charges against the UFCW Local 4 union in April and May, respectively. After an initial investigation, the NLRB combined the complaints into one case and scheduled a hearing for September 2007 to prosecute the union. The employees’ original charges cite that UFCW Local 4 union officials are attempting to enforce a compulsory unionism clause requiring employees to join or pay dues to the union or be fired from their jobs, despite a formal employee election recently stripping the union bosses of their forced unionism privileges. Full Article National Right To Work Legal Foundation Inc. The International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers (IAM) union Local 2424 officials backed down and settled federal labor charges pending against them, following challenges by employees unlawfully unionized by “card check,” Federal investigators found that union officials had violated the employees’ rights during card check organizing drive which bypassed the secret-ballot election process. The National Right to Work Foundation attorneys filed charges at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB charges detailed multiple union violations of the employees’ rights, including "unionizing employees who did not support the union, unlawfully transferring these employees into a union bargaining unit, and threatening employees with termination if they did not join the union." National Right To Work Legal Foundation Inc. Labor Secretary Chao Opposes Cuts to Union Oversight The Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) is the one government program Democrats want to cut. U.S. Labor Department, Secretary Elaine Chao is opposed to this cut. Unions are guilty of dozens of crimes and thousands of unfair labor practices including stealing millions of dollars of the dues of union members. Secretary Chao said" “Less than one-tenth of one percent of the department’s budget goes to OLMS, the one federal entity charged with protecting union members from union corruption, and it is the one singled out for budget cuts,” Charges of violating labor law from 1998 to 2004 Below are the number of Unfair Labor Practices filed against Just Four Well Known Unions Teamsters (IBT) -----------------------------6909 Service Employees International Union (SEIU)--3910 United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW)--2161 Steelworkers (USWA)-------------------------1912 ### Unions: Latest Report Democrats Join With Corrupt Union Officials The Department of Labor for the last several years has had the Office of Labor Management Standards (OLMS) The work of the OLMS is to process and investigate financial disclosure reports required to be filed under the law byOrganized Labor. The work of this office in protecting dues paying union members has been excellent. The office posts all required reports from the union on line. Apparently because of the work of this office union compliance with reporting has improved 775 union thugs have been convicted of fraud, theft and various crimes and $70 million dollars of members' dues have been recovered. Now the House Democratic leadership is trying to undermine this office possibly even do away with it. The staff of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, headed by Senator Susan Colling (R) Maine discussed the looting of ULLICO by top union bosses. The scandal became known publicly over two years ago, yet no one has been prosecuted and no one knows why. ULLICO, formerly known as Unions Labor Life Insurance Company, is governed by 28 directors, almost all of whom are current or former union officials. Many of these directors were involved in a scheme in which $10.6 million was missing. It appears as though illegal stock trades were part of the scheme. The stock took a nosedive in 2000 and 2001. It is believed that seventeen of the twenty eight directors took part in the scheme. Carpenters president Douglas McCarron is accused of receiving $418,888, Plumbers president Marty Maddaloni $234,680, and Communications Workers president Morton Bahr $35,202. Previously the AFL-CIO had promoted its "No More Enrons" campaign, so the news of this scandal did not help that cause. ### Intimidation of workers, by unions, is a serious problem in America. The statistics citing union violations, criminal acts, embezzlement, and racketeering are shocking and revealing. There have been hundreds and hundreds of indictments and millions of dollars in fines. At the center of these investigations, findings and outcomes is the Department of Labor. UnionFacts.com reports the following among union leaders: Indictments FY 2001-98, FY 2002-166, FY 2003-132, FY 2004-109, FY 2005-114. Convictions FY 2001-102, FY 2002-90, FY 2003-152, FY 200-111, FY 2005-97. In 2005, unions were ordered by the courts to pay $23 million dollars plus for “victimizing union members and others.” It is the job of the INSPECTOR GENERAL of the Department of Labor, to oversee, among his other duties, cases of labor racketeering. The IG of that department has been kept quite busy with the task of dealing with union officials who have shown that greed, corruption and mismanagement of union dues is part of their modus operandi. Information from the FBI, states that of the last eight Teamsters presidents, four have been criminally indicted. Now the Democratic Party-beholden to union bosses and union contributions has just voted in favor of removing the secret ballot from workers. Not all news on unions is bad news, we will try to find positive news about unions that serve their workers and America in a positive fashion. Stay Tuned.
FY 2001 Indictments 161 Convictions 92 FY 2002 Indictments 218 Convictions 154 FY 2002 Indictments 181 Convictions 120 FY 2002 Indictments 260 Convictions 143 FY 2002 Indictments 322 Convictions 196 Fines, restitutions, forfeitures, & civil monetary actions FY 2001 $42.5 million FY 2002 $105.9 million FY 2003 $27.9 million FY 2004 $36.5 million FY 2005 $187.9 million Source: Department of Labor Office of Inspector General On July 22, 1993, Eddie York was shot in the back of the head. Eddie York's sin was that he happened to be driving past militant UMW strikers in the area of a work site. He died instantly. Would -be resuers were pummeled with stones by workers from the United Mine Workers. Richard Trumka,President of the UMW reacted by what seemed to be a suggestion that employees deserve what they get, if they work during a strike. Mr. Trumka's quote was "I'm saying if you strike a match and put your finger in, common sense tells you you're going to burn your finger." The following is information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act relates to abuse by labor leaders. Since 2000, the complaints against labor unions numbers 13,815 relating to discrimination Some listed below include: 4,248 complaints of race discrimination 3,386 complaints of age discrimination 1,820 complaints of sex discrimination 1,642 complaints of disability discrimination 297 complaints of religious discrimination Other Information On Union Crime and Fraud The following headline appeared on the site LaborPains.org Newark Teachers Union Threatens to “Smash Your F***ing Head in” Workers from LaborPains.org recently visited the headquarters of the Newark [New Jersey] Teachers Union Headquarters. The workers were there to pick up copies of the most recent tax documents. The Internal Revenue service has a requirement that labor unions must turn over their tax documents for public inspection upon “request” Anyone who goes in person and asks for the forms is entitled to receive copies the same business day. Near the top of the form on the right side, sitting boldly and prominently are the words “open to public inspection.” According to the person from LaborPains.org, he politely asked for a copy of the NTU’s form and was told ““If I smash your f***ing head in with this toolbox, nothing would happen to me. I’d have a blanket and a cup of coffee, and be out [of jail] in half an hour.” Barbara Bullock was president of the Washington Teachers Union from 1994 to 2003. She was forced out after it became known that she had embezzled millions from the Washington Teachers Union. She apparently spent $1.8 million using unauthorized credit cards and hundreds of thousands in other illegal payments. Ms. Bullock's aide, Gwendolyn Hemphill, spent $492,000 in unauthorized credit card charges and checks. United Food and Commercial Workers-----2161 Teamsters -----6909 Service Employees International Union--3910 Steelworkers --1912 UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ECONOMISTS TO FOCUS THEIR PIONEERING RESEARCH IN NEW INSTITUTE HONORING THE MEMORY OF MILTON FRIEDMAN Understanding the economic crisis from a variety of points of view: University of Chicago faculty provide their perspectives In The News James J. Heckman, The Henry Schultz Distinguished Service Professor in Economics and the College, was awarded the Gold Medal of the President of the Italian Republic by the Scientific Committee of the Pio Manzu Centre. In their citation, the committee states that Jim is "Famous above all for introducing the concept of 'selection bias' in modern econometrics, he has subjected the theories of economic and social change to profound critical reappraisal." And that, "His is the merit of understanding, before others, the importance of diversity, flexibility and heterogeneity and the value of local skills..." To Visit The Site: ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO On September 30, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) Group and the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute (MSRI) announced that Professor Lars Peter Hansen, The Homer J. Livingston Distinguished Service Professor in the Departments of Economics and Statistics at the University of Chicago, is the 2008 recipient of the CME Group-MSRI Prize in Innovative Quantitative Applications. In their award citation, the award committee identifies Lars as "...the leading contributor to the development and application of rigorous estimation and testing methods for financial data. His 1982 paper on Generalized Methods of Moments fundamentally altered the way that empirical research is done in finance and macroeconomics." Previous recipients of this distinguished prize include David Kreps, Stephen Ross, and Franco Modigliani. The full press release can be found at: [details] Roger B. Myerson, the Glen A. Lloyd Distinguished Service Professor in Economics and the College, was awarded the 2007 Nobel Prize in Economic Science "for having laid the foundations of mechanism design theory." Myerson earned one-third of the prize along with colleagues Leonid Hurwicz of the University of Minnesota and Eric S. Maskin of the Institute for Advanced Study. Myerson is the author of Game Theory: Analysis of Conflict (1991) and Probability Models for Economic Decisions (2005). Myerson has published computer software programs related to his work and more than 70 papers on game theory and other topics concerning his research. He has been both a Guggenheim fellow and a Sloan Foundation research fellow. Color Myerson * Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences's announcement of the 2007 Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel. * Official release and full media coverage from the University of Chicago's Press Office. Press Contact: William Harms , (773) 702-8356 A reception was held at the Quad Club on Wednesday, October 24, 2007 from 5:30 - 7:00 p.m. in honor of Roger Myerson. October 10, 2008 : The fifth meeting of the Chicago Workshop on Black-White Inequality will meet in the Divinity School's Swift Hall for a program discussing race and crime.[Full schedule] Open to the public, but please RSVP if possible (smaras@uchicago.edu). May 13, 2008: Derek Neal is elected President of the Midwest Economics Association, and a Fellow of the Society of Labor Economists. April 24, 2008: Gary S. Becker to receive 2008 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Achievement. The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation's selection committee chose Professor Becker for his "pioneering work in the fields of economics and human behavior [that] has revolutionized those fields of study and inspired a generation of economists." Professor Becker will be honored June 4th at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. [Bradley Foundation's press release at the University's News Office]Professor David Galenson, University of Chicago's Experts Page April 3, 2008: David Galenson (right) receives 2008 Guggenheim Fellowship: "Why is 20th century art so distinctively different from the art of its predecessors?" Professor Galenson will use his fellowship to explore this question as part of an upcoming book that will offer a "unified explanation of how and why artists created this work and behaved in these novel ways." [Guggenheim Foundation's Press Release; Article from the University of Chicago Chronicle; David Galenson's Experts Page from the University of Chicago's News Office]Professor Becker receives Medal of Freedom, November 5, 2007 Gary S. Becker awarded the 2007 Presidential Medal of Freedom. Professor Becker received the nation's highest civilian honor November 5th at the White House for his lifetime of work analyzing the "interaction between economics and topics such as education, demography, and family organization" helping to "improve the standard of living for people around the world" [White House Announcement]. This is the latest honor for Professor Becker, recipient of the 1992 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences and the National Medal of Science in 2000. He currently holds appointments and teaches in the departments of Economics, Sociology, and the Graduate School of Business.[Additional information on his life and work] Other 2007-2008 Announcements, Events, and Honors Fifth Annual T.W. Schultz Lecture, Monday June 2nd, presented by Yuliy Sannikov of NYU The Department of Economics and the Division of the Social Sciences present the Fifth Annual T.W. Schultz Lecture Monday, June 4th at 3:30 pm in Swift Hall's Third Floor Lecture Hall. Professor Yuliy Sannikov of NYU's Stern School of Business delivered a talk entitled 'Learning in Dynamic Incentive Contracts.' He discussed his paper of the same name, based on joint work with Perter DeMarzo of Stanford ['Learning in Dynamic Incentive Contracts']. December 14, 2007: The fourth meeting of the Chicago Workshop on Black-White Inequality will meet in Classics 110 for a program discussing race and health outcomes.[Full schedule] Please email Stephanie Maras for additional information on future events. November 15, 2007: Professor Robert Lucas delivers the annual World Bank Development Economics Lecture from 11 am to 1 pm EST. [details, webcast] November 11, 2007 Washington Post: Professor David Galenson details "5 Myths About Artists." He also offered an editorial in the November 7 issue of USA Today:World shouldn't look past 'the wisdom of the elders.' Professor Galenson studies the economics of creativity and is author of Old Masters and Young Geniuses: The Two Life Cycles of Artistic Creativity. D. Gale Johnson Memorial Lecture, Monday October 29: Professor William Easterly of New York University, author of The White Man's Burden and The Elusive Quest for Growth, gave the 2007 D. Gale Johnson Memorial Lecture in Swift Hall's third floor Lecture Hall Monday, October 29 at 3:30 pm. His lecture was entitled 'Markets vs. Experts in Discovering Development Success.' A reception followed in Swift Hall's Commons Room on the first floor. Easterly is Professor of Economics at NYU (joint with Africa House) and Co-Director of the Development Research Institute. He is currently a Visiting Fellow of the Brookings Institution's Global Economy and Development Program. Lars Peter Hansen, the Homer J. Livingston Distinguished Service Professor of Economics and the College at the University of Chicago delivered the Erwin Plein Nemmers Prize Lecture in Economics entitled "Toward a Term Structure of Macroeconomic Risk: Pricing Unexpected Growth Fluctuations" at Northwestern University's McCormick Tribune Center, 1870 Campus Drive, Evanston, IL on Thursday, October 25, 2007 at 3:30 p.m. The 2007 Nemmers Prize Conference entitled "Topics in Macroeconomics" took place on Friday, October 26, 2007 from 9:00 a.m. - 5:45 p.m. and Saturday, October 27, 2007 from 9:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. in the James L. Allen Center of the Tribune Auditorium. [details] September 19, 2007 Wall Street Journal Op-Ed by Professor Robert Lucas: Mortgages and Monetary Policy: Our economy is strong. There's no need to panic. Professor Robert Lucas, Jr. is the John Dewey Distinguished Service Professor in Economics and the College and Co-Director of Graduate Placement (at Chicago since 1974). Nobel Prize in Economics, 1995. The Department of Economics welcomes new faculty members: The Department of Economics is pleased to welcome Professor Harald Uhlig, Assistant Professor Emily Oster, and Assistant Professor Azeem Shaikh for the 2007-2008 academic year. [details] Unions: Washington Teachers Crime
|
