Big Labor's Congress vs. State, Local Taxpayers

Big Labor's Congress vs. State, Local Taxpayers

Monopoly-Bargaining Mandate Would Bust Budgets Across Nation (Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Over the course of the past few decades, public servants, especially state and local government employees, have become Big Labor's bread and butter. By 2009, union officials wielded monopoly-bargaining power over 7.5 million state and local employees, nearly 43% of all such employees nationwide, compared to just 8% of private-sector workers. Moreover, for many years now, Big Labor featherbedding and counterproductive work rules have sharply increased real taxpayer costs for compensation of state and local government employees. In fact, from 1998 to 2008 alone, taxpayers' aggregate real costs for compensation of state and local government employees soared at a rate nearly 50% faster than the total real growth of private-sector employee compensation! And now, incredibly, the Big Labor Congress is poised to sock it to taxpayers again. This spring, the U.S. House and Senate are on the verge of rubber-stamping a new federal mandate ensuring that public-sector union bosses get monopoly-bargaining privileges over additional hundreds of thousands of state and local public-safety employees. Kildee-Gregg Would Pave Way For Dragooning All State, Local Employees Into Unions This federal mandate (H.R.413 and S.1611), respectively introduced in the House and Senate by Big Labor Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.) and Big Labor-appeasing Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), goes by an innocent-sounding moniker, the "Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act." But this label mocks the reality that the legislation would incite conflict between government agencies and employees and hurt taxpayers. H.R.413/S.1611 would institute a federal mandate foisting union "exclusive representation" (monopoly bargaining) on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.
Big Labor's Congress vs. State, Local Taxpayers

Big Labor's Congress vs. State, Local Taxpayers

Monopoly-Bargaining Mandate Would Bust Budgets Across Nation (Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Over the course of the past few decades, public servants, especially state and local government employees, have become Big Labor's bread and butter. By 2009, union officials wielded monopoly-bargaining power over 7.5 million state and local employees, nearly 43% of all such employees nationwide, compared to just 8% of private-sector workers. Moreover, for many years now, Big Labor featherbedding and counterproductive work rules have sharply increased real taxpayer costs for compensation of state and local government employees. In fact, from 1998 to 2008 alone, taxpayers' aggregate real costs for compensation of state and local government employees soared at a rate nearly 50% faster than the total real growth of private-sector employee compensation! And now, incredibly, the Big Labor Congress is poised to sock it to taxpayers again. This spring, the U.S. House and Senate are on the verge of rubber-stamping a new federal mandate ensuring that public-sector union bosses get monopoly-bargaining privileges over additional hundreds of thousands of state and local public-safety employees. Kildee-Gregg Would Pave Way For Dragooning All State, Local Employees Into Unions This federal mandate (H.R.413 and S.1611), respectively introduced in the House and Senate by Big Labor Congressman Dale Kildee (D-Mich.) and Big Labor-appeasing Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), goes by an innocent-sounding moniker, the "Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act." But this label mocks the reality that the legislation would incite conflict between government agencies and employees and hurt taxpayers. H.R.413/S.1611 would institute a federal mandate foisting union "exclusive representation" (monopoly bargaining) on state and local police, firefighters, and other public-safety employees nationwide.
Organized Labor Bosses 'Own' ObamaCare

Organized Labor Bosses 'Own' ObamaCare

Scheme Injurious For Millions of Unionized Workers, Retirees (Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Last month, the Big Labor Congress gave final approval to, and President Barack Obama signed into law, what is surely the greatest expansion of federal government power over consumers, employees and businesses since last century's Great Depression. And, even more than Mr. Obama, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), or any other elected official, top Big Labor bosses are responsible for Congress's reconstruction of America's enormous health-care system. On March 22, the day after the House rubber-stamped both H.R.3590, the version of ObamaCare Mr. Reid had rammed through the Senate early Christmas Eve morning, 2009, and a "fixer" bill (H.R.4872) amending the Senate measure, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) demonstrated how it all happened. "Supporters of both measures received out-sized support from labor unions," concluded the CRP's Michael Beckel in his legislative wrap-up. He went on to specify that, since 1989: "Members who voted for both bills received an average of about $917,500" in reported contributions alone from labor union bosses. Furthermore, in "the final push for a vote," many union bosses and union operatives "also displayed their clout through threats to withhold endorsements from lawmakers who failed to back the bill. They also vowed to support primary challenges or third-party bids against incumbents who opposed the bills."
Organized Labor Bosses 'Own' ObamaCare

Organized Labor Bosses 'Own' ObamaCare

Scheme Injurious For Millions of Unionized Workers, Retirees (Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Last month, the Big Labor Congress gave final approval to, and President Barack Obama signed into law, what is surely the greatest expansion of federal government power over consumers, employees and businesses since last century's Great Depression. And, even more than Mr. Obama, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), or any other elected official, top Big Labor bosses are responsible for Congress's reconstruction of America's enormous health-care system. On March 22, the day after the House rubber-stamped both H.R.3590, the version of ObamaCare Mr. Reid had rammed through the Senate early Christmas Eve morning, 2009, and a "fixer" bill (H.R.4872) amending the Senate measure, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) demonstrated how it all happened. "Supporters of both measures received out-sized support from labor unions," concluded the CRP's Michael Beckel in his legislative wrap-up. He went on to specify that, since 1989: "Members who voted for both bills received an average of about $917,500" in reported contributions alone from labor union bosses. Furthermore, in "the final push for a vote," many union bosses and union operatives "also displayed their clout through threats to withhold endorsements from lawmakers who failed to back the bill. They also vowed to support primary challenges or third-party bids against incumbents who opposed the bills."
Right to Work Revving Up Survey 2010

Right to Work Revving Up Survey 2010

Pro-Forced Unionism Federal Candidates Will Have Nowhere to Hide (Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Federal reports show that, in 2007 and 2008, Big Labor PACs directly contributed $73 million to federal candidates. And Big Labor-operated Section 527 groups spent an additional $57 million on an array of get-out-the-vote efforts for pro-forced unionism candidates. These two types of political spending officially acknowledged by union bosses add up to $130 million in the 2007-2008 campaign cycle. That's no mean sum. But Big Labor's officially acknowledged campaign expenditures represent only the tip of the iceberg of union electioneering, as union insiders like Jon Tasini, a former union official who now heads the New York-based Labor Research Association, have acknowledged again and again. In a February 20, 2005 op-ed for the Los Angeles Times, Mr. Tasini reported that several "union political experts" had admitted to him that "unions spend seven to 10 times what they give candidates and [campaign organizations] on internal political mobilization." "Following Jon Tasini's formula, in the 2007-2008 campaign cycle, Organized Labor spent between $900 million and $1.3 billion, mostly forced-dues money, on 'internal political mobilization,'" noted Matthew Leen, vice president of the National Right to Work Committee. Candidate Survey Is 'One of the Committee's Most Effective Tools' "Forced-dues money pays for political phone banks, propaganda mailings, and the salaries and benefits for tens of thousands of campaign 'volunteers,'" Mr. Leen continued. "And the Wall Street Journal reported last month that the AFL-CIO hierarchy 'plans to roll out its biggest political campaign ever' in 2010." To meet union bigwigs' challenge, the National Right to Work Committee has launched its federal candidate Survey 2010.