Featured Posts

The Latest

Big Labor Propagandists Refute Themselves

Big Labor Propagandists Refute Themselves

Union-Label Academics Inadvertently Scrub Excuse For Forced Dues Union bosses like AFL-CIO czar Richard Trumka and Service Employees International Union czarina Mary Kay Henry have long cited a bogus rationale for forced union dues. Now even Big Labor admits it's phony. (Source: July 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Under both federal and state law, union officials have always had the option to negotiate "members-only" contracts with employers that do not affect the terms of employment of workers who do not wish to join or pay dues to a union. But from the early 1960's until recently, Big Labor rarely if ever tried to exercise its members-only option. Current Law Authorizes Monopolistic Unionism Instead, union organizers have focused their efforts on imposing monopoly bargaining on all the employees in a so-called "bargaining unit." (The National Labor Relations Board, or NLRB, vaguely defines a "bargaining unit" as "a group of two or more employees who share a 'community of interest' and may reasonably be grouped together for collective bargaining purposes.") Monopoly bargaining in the private sector is authorized and promoted by both the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the Railway Labor Act (RLA), and in the public sector by numerous state laws. Under monopoly bargaining, employees lose the individual right to bargain for themselves
Obama Labor Bureaucrats to Bypass Congress?

Obama Labor Bureaucrats to Bypass Congress?

'Electronic' Voting Would Facilitate 'Card Check'-Style Abuses Three of the four current NLRB members who were appointed or reappointed by President Obama are veteran union lawyers. All three are expected to vote in lock-step to expand Big Labor's forced-unionism privileges. (Source: July 2010 NRTWC Newsletter) Since the beginning of 2009, Big Labor has had a cheerleader in the Oval Office. At the same time, ample majorities of both chambers of the U.S. Congress have been willing to vote for virtually any power grab sought by union officials, as long as they could do so without running into intense, across-the-board constituent opposition. Consequently, top union bosses have expected to see enacted in the current Congress legislation that would help them sharply increase the share of all private-sector workers who are under union monopoly-bargaining control. Their original vehicle for achieving this objective was S.560/H.R.1409, the so-called "Employee Free Choice Act." Sponsored by union-label Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Congressman George Miller (D-Calif.), S.560/H.R.1409 would grease the skids for Big Labor workplace takeovers in several ways. Most famously, it would effectively end secret-ballot elections in union organizing drives, replacing them with so-called "card checks." That means, if S.560/H.R.1409 became law, union organizers would have far more

Big Labor White House Insider Flouts Financial Disclosure Rules

BigGovernment.com reports that Big Labor White House insider Patrick Gaspard (SEIU-ACORN) has failed to accurately report his financials on at least two occasions.  Administration officials continue to mock President Obama’s proclaimed high ethical standards: Has Congressman Darrell Issa’s request that White House Political Director Patrick Gaspard explain his failure to report a $37,000 payment from his previous employer SEIU Local 1199 evolved into a cover-up?    It’s beginning to smell like it!  Rep. Issa’s request refers to the same Patrick Gaspard who while working for a Soros-SEIU political committee employed convicted felons to go door-to-door.  In fact, that same Soros-SEIU committee received one of the steepest fines in Federal Election Commission history ($750,000) because its leadership, in Machiavellian fashion, chose to ignore federal laws and take the risk of paying fines if caught.  So, ignoring a few pesky public disclosure laws is not as unlikely as it may sound.  Questions: How did Gaspard work six days in January for SEIU 1199 h while simultaneously working for the “office of the President-Elect” during “January 1-16” of 2009? How did Gaspard earn, in those six days of work for SEIU 1199, “$17,238.56 [of] carried over leave & vacation,” in particular, after apparently having already been paid 2.5 to 4 months vacation pay in 2008? How did Gaspard earn a 9 week severance payout from an employer (SEIU 1199)? According to available SEIU 1199 financial reports (2000-2009), Gaspard was not paid by SEIU 1199 in years 2000, 2002, 2003, and 2004. For the year 2001, SEIU 1199 paid Gaspard only $3,723.  It appears that in at least 5 of the 9 years Gaspard was not on the payroll or worked only a week or two.  An investigation by the House Oversight Committee is warranted.  Unfortunately with