Archive for the ‘unions’ Category:
Written on June 15th, 2010 by jo4 shouts
Mike Riggs
President Obama is impeding clean-up efforts in the Gulf by kowtowing to unions and members of the American maritime industry, critics have charged in recent days. At issue is the president’s refusal to waive the Jones Act, a century-old law that effectively bars foreign-owned ships from moving between U.S. ports, a necessary component of participating in the cleanup effort.
When asked why President Obama hasn’t waived the Jones Act — which President Bush put on hold to facilitate Katrina rescue efforts — White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said a suspension wasn’t necessary.
But Sen. Bill Nelson, Florida Democrat, and others say the act is keeping boats from getting on the water to lay boom and skim oil. In a letter to the Coast Guard’s Thad Allen, Nelson wrote:
Admiral, I believe the orange mousse of oil that is now in Florida’s waters is more than enough evidence that we need to take advantage of every appropriate global resource. Please advise as to whether we are taking full advantage of the offers of assistance from other countries.
Members of the American shipping industry, (arguably the sole beneficiary of Jones) are open to waiving the Jones Act in dire circumstances, but insist that as of right now: “American vessels are doing the job.”
“Countless American vessels are already responding in the Gulf. In addition, we know that many other American vessels are standing by ready to help,” reads a statement released Friday by the Maritime Cabotage Task Force, a lobbying group that represents scores of both unionized and nonunionized employees and employers in the American maritime industry.
The presser goes on to say that the maritime industry “has not and will not stand in the way of the use of these well-established waiver procedures to address this crisis,” so long as the Obama administration can prove that there aren’t American vessels willing to help but waiting in the wings.
MTCF spokesman Mark Ruge confirms that his organization, which represents groups as disparate as the AFL-CIO and the Goodtime Cruise Line, has communicated its position to White House officials.
“I think the reason the administration has not waived the Jones act yet is because it’s not a situation where they need to,” Ruge said. “American vessels are doing the job. I’m assuming that we’ll see a point where there might not be any American vessels, and at that point, I’m sure they’ll waive the Jones act.”
Skeptics charge that the maritime industry is behind Obama’s refusal to waive the act. “The unions see it as … protecting jobs,” the Heritage Foundation’s Joseph Carafano told FOX News. ”They hate when the Jones Act gets waived, and they pound on politicians when they do that. So … are we giving in to unions and not doing everything we can, or is there some kind of impediment that we don’t know about?”
When asked by reporters Thursday if the Jones Act was impeding cleanup efforts in the Gulf, Gibbs said, “We are using equipment and vessels from countries like Norway, Canada, the Netherlands. There has not been any problem with this. If there is the need for any type of waiver, that would obviously be granted. But this — we’ve not had that problem thus far in the Gulf.”
“If we have a reason to consider a waiver of the Jones Act, we certainly will do that.” Allen said this week. “ None has been presented to me.
Read the original article TheDailyCaller
Full Story »
Filed under Obama White House, unions
Tags:AFL-CIO, Barack Obama, British Petroleum, Gulf oil spill, Heritage Foundation, Inthrutheoutdoor, Jones Act, Joseph Carafano, Merchant Marine Act, Mike Riggs, Robert Gibbs
Written on April 13th, 2010 by joone shout
The leader of one of the country’s biggest labor unions and a top ally of President Obama is stepping down.
Andy Stern, whose 2.2-million member Service Employees International Union spent about $60 million to help Obama win the presidency, is planning to resign as union president, according to a senior union official.
The news comes weeks after health care reform, one of Stern’s longtime goals, cleared Congress and was signed into law by Obama. Stern, 59, has been a formidable force in Washington since well before the election — aside from the money spent to boost Obama’s candidacy, the SEIU also spent millions more on House and Senate races.
Stern visited the White House more than 20 times in the first six months of Obama’s presidency alone. Obama also had named Stern as a member of his National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform in February.
Confirmation of his resignation came from Diane Sosne, a member of the union’s board and president of an SEIU local based in Seattle.
SEIU spokeswoman Michelle Ringuette said only that Stern plans to address “speculation” that he would leave his post later this week, at the close of the union’s executive committee meeting.
News of his pending resignation surprised many SEIU officials reached late Monday, who had not yet officially been informed of the move. Stern’s current term is scheduled to end in 2012.
Since 1996, when he became president of the SEIU, Stern has led the union to grow faster than any other, adding over 800,000 workers in the last decade.
He famously led his union and several others to break away from the AFL-CIO — the nation’s largest labor federation — to form the rival Change to Win federation. He complained that the older federation focused too much on political campaigns and not enough on recruiting new members.
Stern has swelled his union’s ranks with aggressive, hard-driving tactics, but his topdown management style has rankled many who complain that Stern has ignored the interests of members.
Thousands of members of an SEIU local in California broke away last year and Stern spent millions in a bitter and ultimately unsuccessful legal fight to stop it.
Though he saw through the passage of health care reform, he failed to win legislation making it easier to organize unions.
Stern’s plans to resign were first reported by Politico.com.
Read the original article on FOXNews
Full Story »
Filed under unions
Tags:aggressive, Diane Sosne, hard-driving tactics, health care reform, labor federation, Labor unions, Michelle Ringuette, National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, Obama, Obama's candidacy, organize unions, Seattle, SEIU, Service Employees International Union
Written on April 11th, 2010 by joone shout
By Katie Packer
Even as Congress is away for the Easter recess, the Obama administration and Congressional allies are busy working to reward union bosses at the expense of working families and small businesses.
The silent but economically devastating agenda of organized labor is attended to daily at the highest levels within the White House. Turning to their friends for help with under-funded and mismanaged pension plans, government contracting policies, and initiatives that weaken workers’ rights and force unionization on small businesses, Big Labor’s looking for payback and they are receiving it.
Just last week, Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania introduced a bill that would dump the burden of union pension plans, which are going bankrupt, on the federal government; therefore, placing the costs at the feet of taxpayers. The Create Jobs & Save Benefits Act of 2010 is designed to address the funding problems faced by union-administered, multi-employer pension plans by shifting the costs to the federal government, which starts at $10 billion dollars in the initial outlay, but the obligation could expand as these plans are underfunded by hundreds of billions of dollars.
A reasonable person might ask, why is the federal government or in reality, the taxpayer, footing the bill for union-run pension plans?
Because labor bosses have chosen to either keep funds to line their own pockets, dump hundreds of millions into political spending or treat themselves to luxurious and lavish conferences, adequate resources have not been allocated to workers’ pension plans. And as a result, Congress is advocating for working families and small businesses to eat the bill.
Consider for a moment, that union bosses spent half a billion dollars getting President Obama and the current leadership on Capitol Hill elected and now they expect an historic and massive return on that investment.
The reality is that unions are pay and benefit experts, it’s one of their sole reasons to exist. They promise workers retirement and pension packages as workplaces are unionized and contracts are voted and signed on. These union heads cannot claim ignorance of the fact that the pension plans promised workers have been going bankrupt, as many were already in crisis well before the current economic downturn.
Furthermore, labor bosses have continued to unionize workers—in many cases forcibly—as they continue to make pension promises they know to be untrue.
But those making the promises—bosses like Andy Stern and Richard Trumka—have nothing to worry about as their own pension plans are fully funded, while those of their members aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.
Introducing legislation to place the burden of Big Labor’s poor—and some might argue criminal—mismanagement of these pension programs onto citizens is not only damaging to Americans’ tax rates, but will contribute to the bankrupting of small businesses. Yet the Washington establishment’s free spending and job-killing agenda doesn’t stop with bailing out pension funds at our expense.
Also high on the list of priorities for unions is a new attempt at contracting favoritism. Called “High Road” Contracting, this policy would enforce an evaluation of wages and benefits in relation to government contracting, which would give clear advantages to unions, while cutting out businesses. Small businesses would not be able to compete for contracts and larger employers would be at a significant disadvantage as they already struggling to meet payroll, and keep the lights on and doors open. The advantage would lie squarely in the hands of union bosses with their government-subsidized and taxpayer-funded bankrolls.
And as Congress works to bail out union pensions which have been recklessly and incompetently handled by Big Labor and the Obama Administration works to issue an executive order placing billions of dollars in government contracts in the hands of union bosses, the Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act (EFCA) waits in the wings.
EFCA would remove workers’ rights to a private ballot in union organizing votes meaning that intimidation and coercion in the workplace would increase dramatically as would union membership. With additional members, even more money would flow into the hands of bosses as the increased dues would allow them to reward lawmakers with millions of additional dollars in political contributions and activities.
Going further, the forced unionization of workers in EFCA would result in the government writing labor contracts addressing wages, benefits and workplace conditions that would force small businesses into insolvent pension programs without the consent of the employee or employer.
Whether workers pay additional taxes as a result of Casey’s legislation or small businesses are forced into bankrupt pension plans to cover the costs of Big Labor’s mismanagement, the result is always the same, union bosses win and the public at large loses.
The current leadership in Washington should spare workers and small businesses the soaring rhetoric and lofty aspirations concerning job growth and economic development and simply tell us the truth, jobs be damned, the payoffs to union bosses will continue.
Read the original article Daily Caller
Full Story »
Filed under unions
Tags:bail out union pensions, Big Labor, Capitol Hill, Daily Caller, economic downturn, EFCA, Employee ‘Forced’ Choice Act, federal government, forced unionization, free spending, insolvent pension programs, Inthrutheoutdoor, job-killing, Obama administration, pay and benefit experts, payroll, pension plans, political contributions, President Obama, retirement and pension packages, small businesses, taxpayer-funded bankrolls, union bosses, union membership, union-run pension plans, WASHINGTON, working families
Written on February 11th, 2010 by joone shout
Gautham Nagesh – The Daily Caller
Republicans are up in arms over a pro-union contracting policy currently under consideration by the White House, arguing the measures will significantly increase the cost of government contracts and are part of the Obama administration’s efforts to implement policies that favor organized labor while circumventing Congress.
The Daily Caller reported last week that senior administration officials are considering a series of proposals known as “High Road Contracting Policy” that would give preference to companies bidding on federal contracts that pay hourly workers a “living wage” (typically a mandated, above-market wage) and provide additional benefits above and beyond existing labor laws.
Critics say the proposals would heavily favor unionized companies and significantly increase the cost and amount of time needed to award contracts. Estimates have the potential cost increase at 20 percent, adding about $100 billion a year to the federal budget.
“Making contracting decisions based on political or ideological litmus tests will waste taxpayer dollars and limit economic growth at a time when we can least afford to do so. The administration’s new rules amount to a backdoor attempt at card check. The last thing our small businesses need is to be saddled with new rules that effectively say ‘unionize or die,’” said John Hart, communications director for Senator Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican. Coburn and four other Senate Republicans sent a letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag last week asking for a briefing on the proposals; they have yet to receive a response.
The proposals are among the measures the administration is considering in order to give a boost to unions following a series of setbacks. Many liberals have conceded the Employee Free Choice Act, also known as card check, is dead for the time being and organized labor was dealt another blow yesterday when the Senate blocked the nomination of labor lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board.
Now the administration is facing increasing pressure to go around Congress and implement pro-labor policies via executive order. The Service Employees International Union, one of the groups lobbying the White House to adopt the new labor policies, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
“There’s a tremendous amount of fervor in this area related to the Obama administration taking some action to boost organized labor and I think one of the things this illustrates is that their are numerous avenues that could potentially be explored,” said Michael Fox, a labor and employment lawyer with Ogletree Deakins in Austin, Texas. Fox added that Obama could also consider a recess appointment for Becker, “if the administration has decided to burn their bridges and go all out.”
But sources told The Daily Caller that Vice President Biden’s office has already floated the idea of implementing the new labor policies by executive order and was rebuffed by OMB’s general counsel, who claimed such drastic changes to contracting laws would require legislative action. When asked for comment on the talks, an OMB official provided the following: “We are aware of the proposals and are currently in the process of reviewing them.”
David Madland, director at the Center for American Progress testified in front of the House Armed Services Committee in August on labor standards in federal contracting and said his organization supports the changes and has discussed them with the administration and lawmakers. He disagreed that the changes would increase costs, pointing to studies at the state and local levels showing similar policies have increased competition for contracts.
“If we’re talking basically a wash on the overall direct bid costs and then you factor in the savings from reduced spending on Medicaid and food stamps, it’s increasingly likely [this policy] wouldn’t cost the government anything,” Madland said. “It would be great if Congress took action, and great if the administration took action. Everything does not necessarily need legislative action.”
One of the most contentious proposals is to centralize the evaluation and scoring of companies’ labor records, likely in the Department of Labor. Republicans are concerned that the process could undermine the autonomy of contracting officers, who are currently supposed to award contracts based solely on cost to the taxpayer, technical merit and a company’s past performance.
Madland said adding one additional criteria should not excessively complicate the bidding process, pointing out that the Labor Department already evaluates contractors based on their labor policies.
A Senate staff member who asked not to be identified argued otherwise, saying the new labor evaluations would become a de facto screening process that favors unionized companies.
“You will see protests right and left,” the staff member said. “This will grind federal contracting to a halt.”
Read the original article Daily Caller
Full Story »
Filed under unions
Tags:Barack Obama, Center for American Progress, Craig Becker, Department of Labor, Inthrutheoutdoor, Joe Biden, Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, SEIU, Service Employees International Union, Tom Coburn
Written on February 2nd, 2010 by JoStepno shouts
Alex Pappas
Organized labor may be putting their dollars behind an online effort to take down Tea Party groups and their “radical ideas.”
A new Web site, TheTeaPartyIsOver.org, has connections to unions, including the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
The American Public Policy Committee pays for the site, whose self-declared mission is to “prevent the Tea Party’s dangerous ideas from gaining legislative traction.”
According to Opensecrets.org, the top two financial backers of the American Public Policy Committee this year are Patriot Majority West and Patriot Majority, largely funded by union dollars.
During the 2008 election cycle, the AFSCME contributed $5.8 million and the SEIU donated $770,000 to Patriot Majority. Teamsters Union also donated $250,000, United Food & Commercial Workers Union gave $125,000 and the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO donated $6,500 to the group.
Attempts to contact the American Public Policy Committee and Patriot Majority were not successful.
The site encourages visitors to call Republicans Randy Hultgren, Arie Friedman and David McAloon — all running for the U.S. House in Illinois — to “reject the dangerous ideas of the Tea Party.”
“This movement is a fad,” the Web site reads, whose “ideas include undermining the legitimacy of the federal government in favor of a radical right-wing form of state’s rights.”
See video and read original article The Daily Caller
Full Story »
Filed under unions
Tags:AFL-CIO, Alex Pappas, America, American Federation of State, American Public Policy Committee, Arie Friedman, County and Municipal Employees, David McAloon, Economy of the United States, federal government, Illinois, National Security, online effort, Pennsylvania AFL-CIO, politics, Randy Hultgren, Tea, tea party, Teamsters, Teamsters Union, U.S. House, United Food & Commercial Workers Union, United States, USA PATRIOT Act, USD
Written on February 1st, 2010 by jono shouts
By Michael O’Brien
Congress will move to pass controversial “card check” legislation this year, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka predicted Sunday.
Trumka said that lawmakers would pass the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) as well as healthcare reform this year, despite Republicans having picked up enough votes in the Senate to sustain a filibuster.
“I think we’ll get health care done and I think we’ll get labor law reform done before the year’s up,” Trumka said during an appearance on CNN.
EFCA has been a top priority for labor groups during this Congress, during which Democrats’ control of the House and Senate seems to be at its apex.
But business groups and congressional Republicans have mounted a strong opposition to the bill, which they say would unfairly bias labor organizing votes in favor of unions.
That opposition, combined with some centrist Democrats’ unwillingness to sign onto supporting the bill, had forced the legislation to the backburners for lawmakers in recent months.
“The Employee Free Choice Act, John, is not just good for unions; it’s good for the economy because it will bring more money into people’s pockets across the board, so that everybody can spend a little more and create an economy that really does work for everybody,” Trumka said. “And that’s where we’re going to go to.”
Senate Democrats had reportedly been working on crafting a compromise version of the “card check” bill in order to get 60 votes in the upper chamber. But with Republicans’ 41-vote bloc and a competitive election cycle for Democrats expected this fall, it’s not clear what path EFCA faces going forward.
Read the original article on TheHill
Full Story »
Filed under unions
Tags:AFL-CIO, card check, CNN, Democrats, EFCA, Employee Free Choice Act, house, Inthrutheoutdoor, labor law, Richard Trumka, Senate, The Employee Free Choice Act, unions
Written on January 5th, 2010 by JoStepone shout
David Freddoso
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., makes the case on Redstate that unionization of Transportation Security Administration employees would be damaging to national security. He answers with some detail the counterargument that unionization has worked fine for Customs and Border Protection, so why not the TSA as well? DeMint writes:
CBP has had numerous problems with collective bargaining. Take these four recent examples of the agency being forced to negotiate with unions that took months to resolve:
- Arbitration with unions over how and whether CBP can discipline employees who fall asleep on the job. (CBP lost)
- Arbitration with unions over whether CBP has to negotiate with the union on how much training an officer who fails the firearm exam needs. (CBP lost)
- Arbitration [with] unions over whether CBP can investigate (just investigate, not discipline) officers who get into an off-duty fight. (CBP eventually won)
- Arbitration over whether CBP has to negotiate with Unions on the re-assignment of personnel, an issue that would likely arise as TSA as well. (CBP lost)
Consider, for a moment, the TSA employee who was supposed to be guarding the breached security exit in Newark, whose apparent neglect resulted in the entire airport being cleared out. Would you like to see a public-sector union fighting before a review board right now to prevent disciplinary action or even an investigation? Perhaps not so much.
DeMint has placed a hold on President Obama’s nomination of Erroll Southers to head the TSA because Southers refused to say whether he would support TSA unionization. As we have noted, Southers has deeper problems that should disqualify him from such a position of authority. The mere fact that as an FBI agent he once used a government database to spy on his wife’s boyfriend should be enough to prevent the promotion of Southers. That he also lied about the decades-old incident recently before Congress only adds to the problems with his nomination.
Surely Obama can at least find a more trustworthy nominee without a history of abusing access to Americans’ personal data, even if it has to be a liberal.
Read the original article on Washington Examiner
Full Story »
Filed under unions
Tags:Border Patrol, CBP, Congress, DeMInt, Erroll Southers, FBI, Inthrutheoutdoor, Obama, Red State, TSA, unions
Recent Comments