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.
New NLRB Made to Order For Big Labor

New NLRB Made to Order For Big Labor

'Recess' Appointee: Workers Shouldn't Be Allowed to Reject Unions (Source: April 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) On February 9, union lawyer Craig Becker, nominated by President Obama to fill one of three vacancies on the powerful National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), turned out to be too radical even for a number of normally pro-Big Labor U.S. senators. Because of several union-label senators' defections, union lobbyists and the White House fell eight Senate votes short that day of the 60 they needed to cut off Right to Work debate and bring the Becker nomination up for final consideration. This vote was a significant victory for National Right to Work Committee members and supporters, who had led the fight against Mr. Becker since his selection was first announced last spring, and their allies. However, top union bosses were furious that, because of well-mobilized Right to Work opposition, Big Labor Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) had failed to ram through the Becker nomination. Almost immediately, Richard Trumka, chief of the AFL-CIO union conglomerate, publicly demanded that the President circumvent the Senate and install Craig Becker on the NLRB temporarily through a "recess" appointment. Other union bigwigs like Andy Stern, czar of the massive Service Employees International Union (SEIU), were also cheerleading for Mr. Becker. For years, Mr. Becker has served as counsel for both the SEIU union and the AFL-CIO. Craig Becker: Union Monopoly Should Be Mandated, Even if Most Workers Don't Want It And on Saturday, March 27, President Obama did the bidding of the union hierarchy by recess appointing Mr. Becker, along with the other union lawyer he has nominated to the NLRB, New Yorker Mark Pearce.