Big Labor and the NY Times Hate Recall Elections (Sometimes)

Big Labor and the NY Times Hate Recall Elections (Sometimes)

If finding inconsistencies on the New York Times editorial page were a boxing match, the fight would have to be stopped especially when it comes to recall elections and big labor. Writing for The Blaze, Chris Field discovered amazing contradictions in logic by the Times when it comes to recalling governors:  The New York Times and the labor unions — led by the AFL-CIO — announced their rabid opposition to the recall of a democratically elected governor. They even went so far as to label the recall effort “an unwise move with potentially damaging ramifications” being led by “wealthy, opportunistic politicians”; a plan that could create “instability”; a “rendezvous with potential political chaos”; a “hijacking of an election”; a “tangent of mischievous politicking”; a “sorry indulgence”; and a source of “mischief” — among other descriptions. Of course, their cries of woe have nothing to do with the efforts to recall Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker, whose efforts have saved the state millions of dollars and increased the protection of personal freedoms for those who don’t want to join labor unions. Their state of outrageously outrageous outrage was over the efforts to recall unpopular and failed California Democratic Gov. Gray Davis back in 2003. The New York Times editorial board believed that the recall effort was the “Wrong Remedy in California” (as the editorial headline read): Recalling Governor Davis, however, is not the answer. It is an unwise move with potentially damaging ramifications. The California Labor Federation sent a letter on Monday to the state’s Democratic elected officials alerting them to the “unequivocal position of the labor movement” on the recall.

Hands Off -- Judge rules Wisconsin public union members must opt in on dues

Hands Off -- Judge rules Wisconsin public union members must opt in on dues

In a blow to Big Labor's continual push to make forced unionism the default position, unions will now have to ask people to sign up rather than require employees to figure out how to protect their paychecks from unwanted union confiscation. From Pioneer Press' Patrick Marley MADISON, Wisconsin -- State unions were dealt a setback Friday when a federal judge said they would have to get their members to opt in, rather than opt out, to having the state deduct union dues from their paychecks. What's more, the judge did not rule on dues deductions for unions that he earlier found the state improperly decertified. The state's largest unions were decertified, and the ruling -- at least for now -- will make it harder for them to get money from dues. But U.S. District Court Judge William Conley gave unions one beneficial ruling by saying that members who sign up to have their dues deducted from their paychecks can be required to make a yearlong commitment.

Will Big Labor Get Its Revenge in Wisconsin?

Will Big Labor Get Its Revenge in Wisconsin?

Union Bosses Plot to Recover All of Their Forced-Dues Privileges (source: National Right To Work Committee April 2012 Newsletter) Early last year, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) infuriated the union hierarchy, in his own state and nationwide, when he introduced legislation (S.B.11) that would abolish forced union dues for teachers and many other public employees and also sharply limit the scope of government union monopoly bargaining. In response, teacher union bosses in Madison, Milwaukee, and other cities called teachers out on illegal strikes so they could stage angry protests at the state capitol and at legislators' residences. Government union militants issued dozens of death threats against Mr. Walker, his administration, and their families. Fourteen Big Labor-backed state senators, all Democrats, temporarily fled the state to deny the pro-S.B.11 Senate majority a quorum to pass the bill. But thanks in part to public support mobilized by the National Right to Work Committee's e-mail and telecommunications activities, pro-Right to Work legislators were able to withstand the Big Labor fury. Ultimately, S.B.11 was sent to Gov. Walker's desk, and on March 11, 2011, he signed into law the measure now known as Act 10. '[T]o Get Things Out of the Contract and Make Needed Changes Was Impossible'