Sick of being FORCED to pay for union bosses' politics? Right To Work is the Answer

Terry Bowman, a UAW member,  writes in the The Detroit News that to end forced-dues-funded politics "the best and easiest solution is to pass a Right To Work law."  And, he is right.  The surest way to end compulsory-dues for politics is to end compulsory-dues. From Mr. Bowman's editorial: A worker's constitutional rights seem to take a back seat to the political privileges of the union. Earlier this year, UAW local 898 officials displayed their political views for everyone who drove by the union hall. "Recall Gov. Snyder, sign up here!" was the message glaring from the parking lot sign for all passers-by to see. A recent Harris poll shows that 60 percent of union households say that unions are too involved in politics, and we know that 40 percent or more of union households vote Republican. Unfortunately, union members who disagree with these partisan political attacks are forced, as a condition of employment, to financially support this message. Federal laws are supposed to restrict union officials from using regular dues for political purposes. Regrettably, it still happens all the time. In a 1988 Supreme Court decision called Communication Workers of America vs. Beck, unions were forbidden to collect full union dues from non-members; only those dues that are supposed to reflect the true cost to the union as a collective bargaining agent. In other words, members could choose to resign their union membership and then only pay what is called the "agency fee" to keep their job. Obviously, there are problems with this ruling. Workers who wish to exercise these rights have to jump through hoops, and they are then persecuted and ridiculed on the job for doing so. The agency fee also includes all the educational and subjective political activities that unions engage in. Union newsletters and magazines are full of political propaganda, and union officials travel the country spewing hateful venom and a destructive worldview, yet their salaries are paid for with regular union dues. And there is so much more.

Sick of being FORCED to pay for union bosses' politics? Right To Work is the Answer

Terry Bowman, a UAW member,  writes in the The Detroit News that to end forced-dues-funded politics "the best and easiest solution is to pass a Right To Work law."  And, he is right.  The surest way to end compulsory-dues for politics is to end compulsory-dues. From Mr. Bowman's editorial: A worker's constitutional rights seem to take a back seat to the political privileges of the union. Earlier this year, UAW local 898 officials displayed their political views for everyone who drove by the union hall. "Recall Gov. Snyder, sign up here!" was the message glaring from the parking lot sign for all passers-by to see. A recent Harris poll shows that 60 percent of union households say that unions are too involved in politics, and we know that 40 percent or more of union households vote Republican. Unfortunately, union members who disagree with these partisan political attacks are forced, as a condition of employment, to financially support this message. Federal laws are supposed to restrict union officials from using regular dues for political purposes. Regrettably, it still happens all the time. In a 1988 Supreme Court decision called Communication Workers of America vs. Beck, unions were forbidden to collect full union dues from non-members; only those dues that are supposed to reflect the true cost to the union as a collective bargaining agent. In other words, members could choose to resign their union membership and then only pay what is called the "agency fee" to keep their job. Obviously, there are problems with this ruling. Workers who wish to exercise these rights have to jump through hoops, and they are then persecuted and ridiculed on the job for doing so. The agency fee also includes all the educational and subjective political activities that unions engage in. Union newsletters and magazines are full of political propaganda, and union officials travel the country spewing hateful venom and a destructive worldview, yet their salaries are paid for with regular union dues. And there is so much more.
Maine Fights for Right to Work, Too

Maine Fights for Right to Work, Too

Like New Hampshire, Maine is looking to enact a Right to Work law. Writing for the Bangor Daily News, Matthew Gannon makes the case: Jobs, jobs, jobs. The first, last and often times only things on the mind of voters across the country right now are jobs. Politicians drone on endlessly about “job creation” and attack “job-killing policies” while voters punish those whom they perceive as being uninterested in improving the economy. Despite this, legislatures aren’t holding up their end of the bargain. Some minor things are being done that would help the jobs situation, but let’s be honest, a lot more could be done. Maine has a rather historic opportunity to lead on the issue of job creation, outflanking its more free-market neighbor, New Hampshire. Maine can, and should, pass a right-to-work law. Right-to-work laws exist in roughly half of the states in this country, mostly in the South and West. At their most basic level, these laws prohibit agreements between labor unions and employers which make membership in a union and payment of union dues a condition of employment. In other words, if you want a job but don’t want to join the union, you can’t be forced to as a condition of your employment. Imagine the opportunity that presents. Companies that want to bring their business to a northeastern state would have one option: Maine. That would be an incredible recruiting advantage that could help make Maine one of the most attractive places to do business in New England.Too often our laws have given special favors to unions, because unions play such a big role in elective politics. Unions funnel money into politicians who promise to help make unions more powerful, and in turn those same politicians make unions more powerful. It has always been a very incestuous “you scratch my back, I scratch yours” arrangement, to the detriment of workers.

National Right to Work Act continues to add sponsors the most recent: Reps Garrett (NJ-5) Conaway (TX-11) Southerland (FL-2) Roby (AL-2), and Scott (GA-8

The National Right to Work Act has been introduced in both the U.S. Senate (S. 504) and House of Representatives (H.R. 2040). What's next is up to Right to Work supporters like you. If you haven't done so already, please send your senators an e-mail expressing your support for freedom and the National Right To Work Act. Then, please forward this message to friends, family, and other like-minded citizens and ask them to sign the petition as well. It's absolutely vital we turn up the heat on every member of Congress. As you know, this legislation would enshrine the common-sense principle – already enforced in 22 states – that no worker should be compelled to join or pay dues to a union just to get or keep a job. In an age of legislative overreach, this is one of the shortest bills ever introduced. A National Right to Work Act does not add a single word to federal law. It simply removes language in the National Labor Relations Act that gives union bosses the power to extract dues and fees from nonunion workers. And as we've seen in Wisconsin, Indiana, and elsewhere so far this year, the union bosses will do anything to protect their government-granted forced-dues powers. That's why your actions are vital. Please Act Today! 21 U.S. Senate Sponsors of National Right To Work Act (S. 504):
Union Bosses, Enemies of the 99%

Union Bosses, Enemies of the 99%

Gary Beckner argues that the union bosses and Big Labor are enemies of the 99%: Since the class-warfare message of the Occupy Wall Street protests started nearly two months ago, the two largest teachers unions, the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), have taken every chance possible to stand in solidarity with the group of mostly underemployed college students and left-leaning activists. With AFT President Randi Weingarten joining in protests and state affiliates taking part and organizing protests of their own, the teachers unions are quick to point out that “public education, teachers and unions have increasingly come under attack from the one percent,” as Leo Casey, spokesman for the AFT’s New York City local put it. The union support is pouring in state after state. For example, in the union stronghold of California, California NEA affiliate President Dean Vogel called on the rich to pay more taxes. “It’s time to put Main Street before Wall Street, and for corporations to pay their fair share of taxes,” he said. Meanwhile, the union rank and file are resorting to taking the fight into the classroom with lesson plans titled “Who are the 99 percent? Ways to teach about Occupy Wall Street.” As the protests continue and the union rhetoric becomes more radical, one can’t help but find the situation ironic. While the teachers unions claim they are being persecuted by the wealthiest Americans, clearly it is the unions and union bosses themselves that have benefited from a system that takes advantage of taxpayers at the expense of our students. An examination of the staggering amount of money accumulated by the teachers unions puts the situation into perspective. The AFT collected $211 million in dues in 2010, while the even larger NEA pulled in $397 million. Taking into consideration affiliated state groups, the unions collectively take in about $1 billion, more than half of which is taken by force in states with compulsory unionism. If you take into account their vast budgets and revenue streams forcibly collected from teachers, the NEA and AFT numbers align nicely with those of the corporations they so vehemently criticize. In terms of salaries, union executives rake in nearly 10 times the average household income. AFT President Weingarten collected nearly half a million dollars in 2010, a 15 percent increase from the previous year. Are teachers or anyone in the private sector experiencing those increases in times of financial hardship? Clearly, the teachers laid off in 2010 were not made aware of  Weingarten’s impressive haul. Then again, when nearly 600 staffers at the NEA and AFT are raking in more than six figures, the interests of the rank and file seem far off.