With the Democrat National Committee (DNC) short on funds needed for their national convention this year, Democrat party leaders have turned to Big Labor Bosses to ask that they their union treasuries pay the freight. In 2008, Big Labor…
With the Democrat National Committee (DNC) short on funds needed for their national convention this year, Democrat party leaders have turned to Big Labor Bosses to ask that they their union treasuries pay the freight. In 2008, Big Labor…
From BigGovernment.com: In Knox v SEIU, the illogic of requiring non-union members to provide interest-free loans for Big Labor political activities comes under the Supreme Court’s scrutiny. In this…
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a $1.7 million jury verdict against the Carpenters Union for illegal activities targeted at a non-union contractor. The campaign included union picketers, mostly homeless people paid by the union, were transported in the union’s…
Minnesota Judge Dale Lindman ruled that Gov. Mark Dayton's Executive Order (EO) calling for the unionization of child care providers is unconstitutional. Judge Lindman, an appointee of Gov. Arne Carlson, said that Gov. Dayton's EO is "an unconstitutional usurpation of the Legislature's right to create or amend laws", which "is a violation of the Separation of Powers principle." The Examiner called it s "stinging defeat for Gov. Dayton, AFSCME and the SEIU." Judge Lindman said that the BMS doesn't have statutory authority through Chapter 179 to get involved in this dispute, adding that they only have the authority to mediate in employer-employee disputes. HotAir.com weighs in on the news: Dayton attempted to bypass the state legislature in this effort by declaring through executive order that day-care centers that indirectly receive state aid through their clients are in effect public-sector workplaces — a definition not found in law or in legislative intent. In fact, as Gary Gross points out, it arguably contravenes state law. That way, Dayton could order an election that would allow his union allies to force their way into day-care workplaces, including many independent operations, and start extracting dues on a massive basis. I use the word extreme for a couple of reasons. First, it fits; had Dayton succeeded in his imposition of public-worker status, the precedent established would have been so broad as to threaten the very notion of a private-sector workforce altogether.
Minnesota Judge Dale Lindman ruled that Gov. Mark Dayton's Executive Order (EO) calling for the unionization of child care providers is unconstitutional. Judge Lindman, an appointee of Gov. Arne Carlson, said that Gov. Dayton's EO is "an unconstitutional usurpation of the Legislature's right to create or amend laws", which "is a violation of the Separation of Powers principle." The Examiner called it s "stinging defeat for Gov. Dayton, AFSCME and the SEIU." Judge Lindman said that the BMS doesn't have statutory authority through Chapter 179 to get involved in this dispute, adding that they only have the authority to mediate in employer-employee disputes. HotAir.com weighs in on the news: Dayton attempted to bypass the state legislature in this effort by declaring through executive order that day-care centers that indirectly receive state aid through their clients are in effect public-sector workplaces — a definition not found in law or in legislative intent. In fact, as Gary Gross points out, it arguably contravenes state law. That way, Dayton could order an election that would allow his union allies to force their way into day-care workplaces, including many independent operations, and start extracting dues on a massive basis. I use the word extreme for a couple of reasons. First, it fits; had Dayton succeeded in his imposition of public-worker status, the precedent established would have been so broad as to threaten the very notion of a private-sector workforce altogether.
Right to Work Fights Back Against 'Illegal' NLRB Appointments (source: National Right To Work Committee February 2012 Newsletter) Under Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President has the power to appoint "officers of the United States," but only "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate." The Constitution makes it clear that only in cases when "vacancies . . . happen during recesses of the Senate" may the President make temporary "recess" appointments to offices that normally require confirmation by Congress's upper chamber. Unfortunately, in his eagerness to please union officials Inside the D.C. Beltway, a tiny but crucial constituency for his re-election bid this year, Democratic President Barack Obama is now seeking to render the Constitution's "advice and consent" requirement for executive appointments effectively meaningless. Early this January, the Senate was not in recess. For several weeks starting last December 20, the Senate was instead in a "pro forma" session during which it did not meet every day, but did periodically conduct business under "unanimous consent" agreements. No one can reasonably argue that this "pro forma" session was tantamount to a recess. Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution states that neither the House nor the Senate may over the course of a Congress "adjourn for more than three days" without "the consent of the other." A La Humpty Dumpty, Mr. Obama Insists 'Recess' Means Whatever He Says It Means As syndicated columnist Michael Barone has explained: "The House did not consent to the adjournment of the Senate this year, so there is no recess, and hence no constitutional authority to make recess appointments."
Right to Work Fights Back Against 'Illegal' NLRB Appointments (source: National Right To Work Committee February 2012 Newsletter) Under Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President has the power to appoint "officers of the United States," but only "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate." The Constitution makes it clear that only in cases when "vacancies . . . happen during recesses of the Senate" may the President make temporary "recess" appointments to offices that normally require confirmation by Congress's upper chamber. Unfortunately, in his eagerness to please union officials Inside the D.C. Beltway, a tiny but crucial constituency for his re-election bid this year, Democratic President Barack Obama is now seeking to render the Constitution's "advice and consent" requirement for executive appointments effectively meaningless. Early this January, the Senate was not in recess. For several weeks starting last December 20, the Senate was instead in a "pro forma" session during which it did not meet every day, but did periodically conduct business under "unanimous consent" agreements. No one can reasonably argue that this "pro forma" session was tantamount to a recess. Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution states that neither the House nor the Senate may over the course of a Congress "adjourn for more than three days" without "the consent of the other." A La Humpty Dumpty, Mr. Obama Insists 'Recess' Means Whatever He Says It Means As syndicated columnist Michael Barone has explained: "The House did not consent to the adjournment of the Senate this year, so there is no recess, and hence no constitutional authority to make recess appointments."
National Right To Work Foundation Attorneys' are prepared for Big Labor Bosses and their legal shenanigans. Hoosiers David Bercot, a certified wastewater operator for ITR Concession Company which services Indiana toll road rest stops in the Fort Wayne-area; Joel Tibbetts, a Minteq International assistant manager in Valparaiso; Douglas Richards, an employee with Goshen-based Cequent Towing Products; and Larry Getts, a Dana Holding Corporation tube press technician in Albion are standing up for their Right To Work. From the Foundations release: Workers File Brief Opposing Union Boss Challenge to Indiana Right to Work Law National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys provide free legal aid to workers defending law that ends union boss forced dues powers Hammond, IN (March 2, 2012) – In response to union bosses’ federal lawsuit against Indiana’s popular Right to Work law, a group of Indiana workers from across the state are filing an amicus brief in support of their newly-enacted Right to Work freedoms. With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, the four workers – David Bercot, a certified wastewater operator for ITR Concession Company which services Indiana toll road rest stops in the Fort Wayne-area; Joel Tibbetts, a Minteq International assistant manager in Valparaiso; Douglas Richards, an employee with Goshen-based Cequent Towing Products; and Larry Getts, a Dana Holding Corporation tube press technician in Albion – all joined in the brief defending the law. Union officials publicly floated the idea of challenging Indiana’s Right to Work law before it was enacted. International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 150 headquartered in suburban Chicago, Illinois filed a federal lawsuit late last month challenging the law and requesting an injunction against its implementation. Both Bercot’s and Tibbetts’s workplaces are unionized by the IUOE Local 150 union hierarchy. Both workers have refrained from union membership but are still forced to accept IUOE Local 150 union officials’ so-called “representation” and were required to pay dues to the union as a condition of employment before Indiana’s Right to Work law was enacted.