As a matter of by-any-means-necessary expediency, Big Labor has long embraced

As a matter of by-any-means-necessary expediency, Big Labor has long embraced "the necessity for coercion"

Jeff Jacoby, a columnist for The Boston Globe, blasts Big Labor's "shameless pretext" for fighting without abandon against Right To Work Freedom: SOON -- PERHAPS AS EARLY AS TODAY -- Gov. Mitch Daniels will sign legislation making Indiana the nation's 23rd right-to-work state. Labor unions angrily oppose the change, but their opposition has no legitimate or principled basis. State right-to-work laws, authorized by the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947, are not anti-union. They are pro-choice: They protect workers from being forced to join or pay fees to a labor union as a condition of keeping a job. In non-right-to-work states, employees who work in a "union shop" are compelled to fork over part of each paycheck to a labor organization -- even if they want nothing to do with unions, let alone to be represented by one. Laws like the one Indiana is poised to enact simply make union support voluntary. Hoosiers can't be required to kick back part of their wages to the Republican Party or the Methodist Church or the Animal Liberation Front; the new measure will ensure that they don't have to give a cut of everything they earn to labor unions, either. Most Americans regard compulsory unionism as unconscionable. In a new Rasmussen survey, 74 percent of likely voters say non-union workers should not have to pay dues against their will. Once upon a time, labor movement giants like Samuel Gompers, a founder of the American Federation of Labor, agreed. "I want to urge devotion to the fundamentals of human liberty -- the principles of voluntarism," declared Gompers in his last speech to the AFL in 1924. "No lasting gain has ever come from compulsion." Those words can be seen chiseled on Gompers's memorial in Washington, DC. So as a matter of by-any-means-necessary expediency, it is easy to understand why Big Labor long ago embraced what liberal scholar Robert Reich (who served as Bill Clinton's secretary of labor) dubbed "the necessity for coercion." In order "to maintain themselves," Reich said in 1985, "unions have got to have some ability to strap their members to the mast." Or, as Don Corleone might have put it, to make them an offer they can't refuse. But is there any ethical reason -- any honorable basis -- for the union shop?

As a matter of by-any-means-necessary expediency, Big Labor has long embraced "the necessity for coercion"

As a matter of by-any-means-necessary expediency, Big Labor has long embraced "the necessity for coercion"

Jeff Jacoby, a columnist for The Boston Globe, blasts Big Labor's "shameless pretext" for fighting without abandon against Right To Work Freedom: SOON -- PERHAPS AS EARLY AS TODAY -- Gov. Mitch Daniels will sign legislation making Indiana the nation's 23rd right-to-work state. Labor unions angrily oppose the change, but their opposition has no legitimate or principled basis. State right-to-work laws, authorized by the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947, are not anti-union. They are pro-choice: They protect workers from being forced to join or pay fees to a labor union as a condition of keeping a job. In non-right-to-work states, employees who work in a "union shop" are compelled to fork over part of each paycheck to a labor organization -- even if they want nothing to do with unions, let alone to be represented by one. Laws like the one Indiana is poised to enact simply make union support voluntary. Hoosiers can't be required to kick back part of their wages to the Republican Party or the Methodist Church or the Animal Liberation Front; the new measure will ensure that they don't have to give a cut of everything they earn to labor unions, either. Most Americans regard compulsory unionism as unconscionable. In a new Rasmussen survey, 74 percent of likely voters say non-union workers should not have to pay dues against their will. Once upon a time, labor movement giants like Samuel Gompers, a founder of the American Federation of Labor, agreed. "I want to urge devotion to the fundamentals of human liberty -- the principles of voluntarism," declared Gompers in his last speech to the AFL in 1924. "No lasting gain has ever come from compulsion." Those words can be seen chiseled on Gompers's memorial in Washington, DC. So as a matter of by-any-means-necessary expediency, it is easy to understand why Big Labor long ago embraced what liberal scholar Robert Reich (who served as Bill Clinton's secretary of labor) dubbed "the necessity for coercion." In order "to maintain themselves," Reich said in 1985, "unions have got to have some ability to strap their members to the mast." Or, as Don Corleone might have put it, to make them an offer they can't refuse. But is there any ethical reason -- any honorable basis -- for the union shop?

NLRB Reverses Let's Employees Speak, well sort of

NLRB Reverses Let's Employees Speak, well sort of

From the National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation: Worker Advocate Blasts Labor Board Ruling to Allow Charleston Workers Minimal Say in Boeing Case  Big Labor watchdog slams ruling as insufficient; ploy to quietly sweep workers’ stories under the rug Washington, DC (June 20, 2011) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Washington, D.C. has ruled three Charleston-area Boeing Company (NYSE: BA) employees are allowed to intervene, albeit minimally, in the NLRB’s high-profile case against Boeing. With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, North Charleston Boeing employees Dennis Murray, Cynthia Ramaker, and Meredith Going, Sr. filed a motion earlier this month to intervene in the NLRB’s unprecedented case targeting the company for locating production of some of its 787 Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina, in part due to its popular Right to Work law. An NLRB Administrative Law Judge in San Francisco denied the workers’ request and the workers were forced to file an emergency appeal with the national Board in Washington, D.C. The Board in D.C. has ruled that the employees can only file a brief in the case once the hearings, occurring in Seattle, Washington, are concluded.

NLRB Reverses Let's Employees Speak, well sort of

NLRB Reverses Let's Employees Speak, well sort of

From the National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation: Worker Advocate Blasts Labor Board Ruling to Allow Charleston Workers Minimal Say in Boeing Case  Big Labor watchdog slams ruling as insufficient; ploy to quietly sweep workers’ stories under the rug Washington, DC (June 20, 2011) – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Washington, D.C. has ruled three Charleston-area Boeing Company (NYSE: BA) employees are allowed to intervene, albeit minimally, in the NLRB’s high-profile case against Boeing. With free legal assistance from the National Right to Work Foundation, North Charleston Boeing employees Dennis Murray, Cynthia Ramaker, and Meredith Going, Sr. filed a motion earlier this month to intervene in the NLRB’s unprecedented case targeting the company for locating production of some of its 787 Dreamliner airplanes in South Carolina, in part due to its popular Right to Work law. An NLRB Administrative Law Judge in San Francisco denied the workers’ request and the workers were forced to file an emergency appeal with the national Board in Washington, D.C. The Board in D.C. has ruled that the employees can only file a brief in the case once the hearings, occurring in Seattle, Washington, are concluded.

Union Workers Beaten by Union Bosses Who Enriched Themselves on a Forced Dues Feast

Union Workers Beaten by Union Bosses Who Enriched Themselves on a Forced Dues Feast

  “They were warning me that if I continue to complain about their finances, they would have me killed," a New York union member, who caught the union bosses with their hands in the union member coffers, told the New York Daily News: Unionized phone company employees say they were beaten or threatened after they accused their labor bosses of looting their coffers through various scams. One member of Communications Workers of America Local 1101 said that after he reported a time-sheet padding scheme, a thug beat him so badly his spine was injured. Another says he found a dead rat in his locker, while a third said a union officer warned that suspected informants should be brought off company property and "taken care of." The threats come to light as the U.S. Labor Department is probing charges that union bosses lined their pockets at the rank-and-file's expense. Accusations include an unauthorized 401(k) plan union officers gave themselves funded with members' dues, along with hefty weekly allowances, lavish expense accounts and six-figure salaries, union documents show. The feds are also looking into allegations that double-dipping union bosses illegally received pay from Verizon and the local for the same hours, sources said. "This was union greed and that's worse than corporate greed," said Kevin Condy, a reform movement leader of the 6,700-member local that represents mostly Verizon workers in Manhattan and the Bronx. "These guys acted like they felt they were entitled." And, some members charge, the bosses retaliated when threatened with exposure. In August, business agent Patrick Gibbons said he received death threats and his office was vandalized after he complained that union bosses were misappropriating cash. "They were warning me that if I continue to complain about their finances, they would have me killed," Gibbons wrote in an open letter to union members. Six months earlier, Verizon heavy equipment operators Salvatore DiStefano and Sebastian Taravella sued the local in Brooklyn Federal Court. They said they were harassed after telling Verizon security officials a manager allowed workers to leave early but claim a full day's pay - as long as they completed a quota of assigned jobs. DiStefano told the Daily News he was "attacked by a union thug" as he started the morning shift at a Verizon garage in the Bronx in April 2009. "He pounded me with his fists, he spit on me, he choked me and threw me down to the floor," he said. DiStefano said he suffered two herniated discs and had knee problems that required surgery. He got workers' compensation as a result, records show.