Big Labor insolvent?
posted at 9:28 am on June 10, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
No wonder the unions have fought so hard to get Card Check passed. The Wall Street Journal reports that the SEIU and the AFL-CIO have all but gone bankrupt after throwing away tens of millions in the last election. The massive unemployment in union-sector jobs may sound their death knell:
‘We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama,” declared Andy Stern last month, and the president of the Service Employees International Union wasn’t exaggerating. The SEIU and AFL-CIO have been spending so much on politics that they’re going deeply into debt.
That news comes courtesy of federal disclosure forms that unions file each year with the Department of Labor. The Bush Administration toughened the enforcement of those disclosure rules, but under pressure from unions the Obama Labor shop is slashing funding for such enforcement. Without such disclosure, workers wouldn’t be able to see how their union chiefs are managing their mandatory dues money.
Obama demanded tighter enforcement of Wall Street for not handling its investments properly. Why is he allowing the unions off the hook for the same problem? At least people invest willingly on Wall Street; unions take their dues whether the employee wants the union or not.
How badly have the unions handled the money?
Alarm is coming even from inside the AFL-CIO — specifically, from Tom Buffenbarger, president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, who sits on the AFL-CIO’s finance committee. Bloomberg News reports that he is circulating a report claiming the AFL-CIO engaged in “creative accounting” to conceal financial difficulties heading into last year’s Presidential election. As recently as 2000, the union consortium of 8.5 million members had a $45 million surplus. By June of last year it had $90.6 million in liabilities, or $2.3 million more than its $88.3 million in assets. “If we are not careful, insolvency may be right around the corner,” Mr. Buffenbarger warned. …
As for the SEIU, as recently as 2002 total SEIU liabilities were about $8 million. According to its 2008 disclosure form, the union owed more than $156 million, a 30% increase over the $120 million it owed in 2007. Its liabilities now equal more than 80% of its $189 million in assets. Net assets fell by nearly half last year, to $34 million, from $64 million in 2007. The debt includes an $80 million loan the SEIU took out in 2003 to purchase a new headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C. But the liabilities also stem from political spending, including at least $67 million last year on political and lobbying expenses, twice what it spent in 2007.
They need Card Check to rope more dues into the coffers. Card Check would allow the unions to intimidate workers into signing cards and eliminate the secret ballot that would give employees one last opportunity to reject intimidation from either side. Once the union gets its closed shop, it can suck dues out of the paychecks and in essence cover up the profligate spending of the union bosses.
Congress needs to reject Card Check and demand greater disclosure from unions on what they do with worker dues. If Obama and the Democrats don’t want that, then Republicans need to inform union workers of these facts and ask them who stands up for the working men and women of this country — and who stands with the union bosses who have thrown away their money.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
They should go file a grievance with their union!
Oh, the irony!
rightside on June 10, 2009 at 9:29 AM
Ding, dong, the witch is…dying?
itsnotaboutme on June 10, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Everybody needs to stop paying the unions today.
Save their jobs for God’s sake.
TheSitRep on June 10, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Obama will take care of them… he hooked the UAW with GM, didn’t he?
Maybe the seiu can get that vegas casino that just went belly up?
BPD on June 10, 2009 at 9:33 AM
I’m sure when those tens of thousands of GM cars get sold oh-so-quickly, the union-thug owners of GM will be flush with cash, hawhawhaw.
jgapinoy on June 10, 2009 at 9:33 AM
Wow, I totally misread the headline at first…I thought it said “Big Labor incontinent.” Actually, I like that headline just as well.
Snowed In on June 10, 2009 at 9:36 AM
Maybe the unions should have took the Uighers.
joeswampy on June 10, 2009 at 9:37 AM
But..THEY ARE TOO BIG TO FAIL!
/Barry in 2 mos.
Joe Caps on June 10, 2009 at 9:38 AM
It’s an Obamanation
bwconq on June 10, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Card check should be exclusive to union executive elections only………
Rovin on June 10, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Bailout.
forest on June 10, 2009 at 9:38 AM
I don’t know, but all of this reads to me like a reminder note to the Democrats in Congress that they owe the unions Card Check, big time …. although I can’t imagine the WSJ would be complicit in that effort.
BigD on June 10, 2009 at 9:39 AM
The working men and women of this country need to stand up for themselves. Neither the government nor organized labor care about them. They care only about the money and the power. Dues or taxes it’s all the same, when someone has so much control over money they haven’t earned – it’s usually wasted and never enough.
Tommy_G on June 10, 2009 at 9:39 AM
Bill Bennett interviewed an economic specialist who referenced the fact that when GWB first took office from WJC, Bush inherited the exact same proportioned national economic downturn (BEFORE 9/11) that Obama walked into. The obvious difference, the handling.
The informative discussion with one Democrat caller dealt with the GM foreign operations (prior to bail-outs) and the best face scenario for Obama’s obsession for government ownership of (all) American business/industry. Bennett’s other callers pointed out that China (India) subsidize their GM production re: low price for high sales abroad. But Bennett’s guest had a lot to say regarding the Obama Fed-involved fall-out that hasn’t even begun to shed, though people’s eyes are beginning to notice something’s not right.
maverick muse on June 10, 2009 at 9:40 AM
Unions today are nothing more than giant corporate clubs where only the top level bosses get any benefits. There is almost no difference between them and the real Mob. The rank and file are total dupes when it comes to supporting their respective unions. Years ago, they were a necessary evil to protect laborers and children from companies whose processes were unsafe, working conditions were deplorable. Today, most of that has been outsourced to third-world countries. I hope they go under soon. They deserve it. Unions serve no purpose any more, which is why they only represent 12% of the total workforce….
HomeoftheBrave on June 10, 2009 at 9:41 AM
So, if there is a silver lining to the economic mes we are in right now, it’s that the Unions could go bust?
That’s a fair trade.
todler on June 10, 2009 at 9:41 AM
Don’t bailout the Unions. Bailout the pensioners.
kingsjester on June 10, 2009 at 9:41 AM
If Big Union finally falls apart, maybe this country will have a ghost of a chance of re-entering the automotive industry competitively. Let it fall, so that new life may rise from the ashes.
MadisonConservative on June 10, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Fox and Friends ran a story about the Supreme Court decision regarding the Chrysler sale this morning. A light haired distraught woman who got the short end of the stick (pension?/dealership?) was asking “where is the hope? This is not the change we voted for”.
heh.
heroyalwhyness on June 10, 2009 at 9:42 AM
A number of public employee unions are affiliates of SEIU. In most cases, they’re agency shops, so you pay a “negotiation fee” whether or not you belong to the union. I wonder how long it will be before they try working it that way if the federal government won’t pay up.
Mr. Grump on June 10, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Bail out the unions. They’re too big to fail.
[Translation: They gave me money to get elected, so pay them back.]
Daggett on June 10, 2009 at 9:43 AM
As a former member to two different unions and the son of a union member of thirty-five years, I can say the union leadership has failed miserably it’s responsibility to the rank and file. Unfortunately the rank and file will be the losers.
sheriff246 on June 10, 2009 at 9:44 AM
What do you think Porkulus and the GM/Chrysler bankruptcies were?
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on June 10, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Next up: Everyone home school your children so the teachers’ unions will fail.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on June 10, 2009 at 9:45 AM
Obama will take care of them… he hooked the UAW with GM, didn’t he? Maybe the seiu can get that vegas casino that just went belly up?
BPD on June 10, 2009 at 9:50 AM
It was a good investment. Look what it bought them. Favored status in the creditor line on auto bankruptcy, leading to partial ownership, leading to a mechanism for continually absorbing taxpayer dollars into UAW coffers. Pretty good return on investment and we haven’t even hit the 6 month interval.
a capella on June 10, 2009 at 9:50 AM
Maybe they should raise their dues. Its not like they are raising their taxes.
ctmom on June 10, 2009 at 9:50 AM
News flash: Socialist entities that have no understanding of business or capitalism make poor financial decisions :)
wildcat84 on June 10, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Unions should form a union to protect them from the union…
right2bright on June 10, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Here comes the Union Czar..The administration will not let the unions go down. There corrupt leadership in the unions do more harm than good for their organizations. They had their place once. But, now it is just a few robbing from many. The stink of it is that the union bosses really do not care about their members. They, like politicians, just want power. The memberships need to wake up.
HoustonRight on June 10, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Music to my ears. Few things in the the political world would give me greater joy than the collapse of several large unions. AFL-CIO, SEIU, and the UAW would be a great start.
Then those mobster M-Fers at the Teamsters. Woohooo!
Jaibones on June 10, 2009 at 9:54 AM
I seems to me that a tidy little amendment to Sarbanes Oxley is in order – make union officials sign off under penalty of criminal punishment on audited financial statements and fraud free certificates. Aren’t the union rank and file entitled to the same protections as stock investors?
Mark30339 on June 10, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Nice thought, but it’ll never happen. I say that as a non-union public school teacher.
splink on June 10, 2009 at 9:56 AM
Almost sounds like they broke the bank because they knew that if they were “good little soldiers”, Uncle Sam would refill their piggybank.
pjean on June 10, 2009 at 9:56 AM
Serves them right. This gross mismanagement by union leaders has been going on for decades and the rank and file didn’t say anything as long as it resulted in better benefits and higher salaries. I can’t tell you the number of decent conservative union members I know who don’t think twice about voting for whatever liberal scumbag the union tells them to support. Now, the chickens have come home to roost and union members have nobody but themselves to blame for the plight of their organizations.
highhopes on June 10, 2009 at 9:56 AM
OT (maybe some of you already knew)
This should get the left raging…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8093066.stm
(Ah… feel safe with Eric Holder in charge…)
and
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/10/antiabortion-group-intere_n_213637.html
Upstater85 on June 10, 2009 at 9:56 AM
‘We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama,”
Does all of that money come from dues?
“Voluntary” contributions?
VibrioCocci on June 10, 2009 at 9:58 AM
In a nutshell, no, because like real tort reform, the Democrat party will not tolerate restrictions on their big contributors that might reduce their contributions.
Indeed, the unions aren’t actually ALLOWED by virtue of a SCOTUS ruling to do what they did (ie use up all their money to get Dear Leader elected) without consent from their members. The Democrats won’t allow that decision to be codified in such a way that an individual member can (as they were granted the right to) deny their dues to political activity they don’t agree with.
wildcat84 on June 10, 2009 at 9:58 AM
Sounds like the makings of a BAILOUT !
RUReadingthis on June 10, 2009 at 9:59 AM
Here in Delaware, I think it is safe to say that the state teacher’s union pretty much currently runs the government.
BigD on June 10, 2009 at 10:00 AM
Obama’s payoffs to SEIU, UAW, AFL-CIO and ACORN: Returning wealth to its rightful owners.
petefrt on June 10, 2009 at 10:01 AM
I don’t want the teachers’ unions to fail, I want them to to be bitch-slapped into their rightful place in the equation- as the contract bargaining entity for the teachers. I get sick and tired of union thugs calling themselves educators and claiming that demands for excessive health care plans and salaries are really for the good of the children! Anyone with the slightest understanding of business can see that education is well-funded in most districts but that the overhead from personnel costs is grossly out of synch as a percentage of the per capita cost.
Put another way, DC public schools would save money if they just shut down and gave all the children vouchers for what it costs to educate them. Of course that will never happen with Democrats in power. They need an illiterate and unquestioning public for their schemes.
highhopes on June 10, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Unfortuantely, this is not good news. All this means is that the unions will get a bailout of some sort like the UAW. BHO will find a way to repay the union thugs.
jeffn21 on June 10, 2009 at 10:03 AM
No Worries.
I’ts not like Unions they are going to be running a company or anything crazy like that.
WichoFawkes on June 10, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Obama setting up a precedent to go after former administrations actions might just come back to haunt ALL of them.
truetexan on June 10, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Cry me a river.
tru2tx on June 10, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Spending your way out of existance: priceless.
Message to AFL-CIO management and employees: GET A JOB!
They are now holding up signs: “Need you to work so I can have food.”
shick on June 10, 2009 at 10:08 AM
From Wikipedia: A
pimpDemocrat (pronounced /pɪmp/), finds and manages clients forprostitutesunions and engages them in prostitution(in brothels and on the streets)in factories across the nation in order to profit from their earnings.txhsmom on June 10, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Remember, the main job of a union is to maximize its dues. The best way to do that is NOT to increase workers’ wages or implement work safety rules or whatnot; it’s to increase the number of unionized workers. The old trick is the union thugs would make their workers work more slowly, thus lowering their productivity and requiring more workers to be hired. Apparently the unions have evolved and are now leveraging nationalization and Card Checks to increase union membership.
Outlander on June 10, 2009 at 10:09 AM
The unions are going broke??!! What will the mafia do then?
I guess they’ll need to bring prohibition back if there’s no money in labor racketeering.
Jeff from WI on June 10, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Hilarious! The us vs. them mentality of the big unions over the last 50 years has now turned into, “we have seen the enemy and they are us”. It’s gonna be fun watching this serpent eat its own tail.
G-man on June 10, 2009 at 10:10 AM
No way BHO lets unions die on his watch. They’ll “find” funds fairly quickly (with plenty of strings firmly attached), but there will be some pain for the union worker on the floor (who never mattered much to the union bosses anyway).
Sean and Mark… don’t ease the pain… DROP GM FROM YOUR SPONSOR LIST! Let ‘em waste money advertising to nobody on Alan Colmes radio show or on MSNBC. We need to turn some of the blue-collar Reagan Democrats back to our side.
mankai on June 10, 2009 at 10:10 AM
sniff. . . sniff. . . smell that? Smells like a bailout!
King of the Britons on June 10, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Obama and his Marxist regime are the antithesis of everything America has ever stood for. It’s hard to believe this is happening and even harder to believe that the gutless politicians are cowering in passive compliance.
rplat on June 10, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Heh… Hiring Black Panthers to patrol voting locations doesn’t come cheap…
BPD on June 10, 2009 at 10:12 AM
You’re so cynical. Just because the government spent $83 billion to prop up and take control ov a company that has never been worth more than $56 billion doesn’t mean it was all about rewarding the UAW.
Daggett on June 10, 2009 at 10:14 AM
The slap they need might be “failure.” At the very least, we can hope they fail in their current ambitions. You yourself say that DC public schools should shut down. Many educators outside of the public schools are not part of unions.
Upstater85 on June 10, 2009 at 10:14 AM
I saw that piece. She was a car dealer with 3 dealerships. The gentleman being interviewed was also a car dealer. Both are successful, i.e., not underwater. They were not saying “where is the hope”, they were making allegations that the dealer closings were political in nature. They didn’t actually say so but the inference was that they were not Obama supporters. The franchises that they paid for will be reassigned to someone else. These are dealers, not union people, and its another example of legitimate businesses being illegally screwed. This is like Russia where businesses were just taken from some and give away to the party loyalists.
mph on June 10, 2009 at 10:15 AM
Hero….I too saw the rotund, bleached, hopey changey voter this a.m. on Fox.
Actually I had a tingle up my leg……she probably thought that her hollywood pals voted for Hussein, and therefore she should too….cool you know?
Once a hillbilly (megan fox) always a hill billy…ha
nondhimmie on June 10, 2009 at 10:16 AM
Remember also, along with card check and the suggestion that 97% of unions could not pass a financial audit, Obama is reducing funding to the agency responsible for union oversite.
From The American Spectator via the Washington Post:
“The media noted that about half of the reductions came out of the defense budget, but lost in most reports is the fact that the administration also slashed funding for the only entity in government tasked with policing unions.”
maninthemiddle on June 10, 2009 at 10:16 AM
I hope the unions go under, they are killing one industry after another. Labor monopolies are a terrible idea.
echosyst on June 10, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Based on the The Organizer’s actions on behalf of the UAW so far, we can expect him to work on muddying up the disclosure rules and beef up the unions’ coffers, if just for his own re-election. Clearly this bears watching.
Hopefully the WSJ and FT will monitor the unions’ finances closely until the next
election.
We are at a critical point in a lot areas. If Obama can sustain the unions, capitalism will remain on the ropes. If the unions go under, one of the Left’s
most critical and stealthy tools will be be history.
ontherocks on June 10, 2009 at 10:20 AM
just like everything with socialistic tendencies….everybody is equal…except for the big wigs, who are MORE equal.
End result, big guy gets rich while the dues-paying little guy gets screwed. Unions suck.
search4truth on June 10, 2009 at 10:23 AM
I’m sure the UAW is pointing out the benefits of union labor to their members right now. Until no one buys their ‘new’ cars.
GarandFan on June 10, 2009 at 10:23 AM
The saddest part for the UAW members is that the Union is now going to be in charge of their health care and pensions. The VEBA program was meant to take that bargaining chip off of the table in negotiations.
The VEBA health plan is a 100 billion dollar cash account meant to pay for medical expenses for their members. When that is gone, they’ll not have any medical benefits (employees or retirees). that’s why they need Nationalized Health Care.
They KNOW they are going to squander the VEBA money. Unions couldn’t run it even with the best of intentions. Their best deal was making the auto companies pay for their outrageous demands on super expensive medical benefits.
Once Ford gets finished funding their portion of the VEBA at the end of this year, they’ll finally be able to start working on their other debt. Ford owes about another 12 billion (that they can raise by issuing more stock one more time). Half of that money can come in the form of a stock offering.
Basically this is a boring comment from me, but it is about the unions finally getting control over money that they’ll squander, they’ll only have themselves to blame, and the union members won’t have any medical benefits to show for it.
ThackerAgency on June 10, 2009 at 10:23 AM
They went way too far and ruined it for all of us. Some of the unions also played a role in minority hiring. That was a point that many fought for and won during the civil rights battles back in the 50s.
mph on June 10, 2009 at 10:28 AM
What do you think he’s been doing thus far?
It’s all about the unions.
lorien1973 on June 10, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Inside public ed, too.
Though in D.C. and similar places, I’d guess that number to be very, very low.
splink on June 10, 2009 at 10:30 AM
There is a great source of empowerment when spending someone else’s money…
Ltlgeneral64 on June 10, 2009 at 10:31 AM
ALF-CIO has announced plans to get tough on kids with non-unionized Kool-Aid stands this summer.
Guido will pay them a visit. They’ll ante up I’m guessing.
Jeff from WI on June 10, 2009 at 10:32 AM
We had the SEIU move into Houston a couple of years ago and they have managed to organize the office cleaners downtown and I think they are making a very strong push to organize city, school district and county employees. They even got caught completely violating campaign finance laws to get a city councilwoman elected to an at-large position but no one is interested in following up on that issue.
OTH the town still laughs at the Teamsters local 988 that refused to hire union trades because the cost was too high. I got railroaded into that bunch several years ago and talk about wankers, man o man getting out of that deal was about like having a wisdom tooth pulled.
DanMan on June 10, 2009 at 10:34 AM
The legacy of the Marxist murderer “Big Bill” Haywood lives.
Labor unions are scum.
PimFortuynsGhost on June 10, 2009 at 10:35 AM
It couldn’t have happened to nicer people……
Hawkins1701 on June 10, 2009 at 10:36 AM
no this will not do!!!! the workers rights and benefits and livelihood must be protected. I urge the AFL-CIO and SEIU union members to unionize against their union bosses. A second-order unionization would ensure good structure and retension of workers rights. In the case of further corruption and mismanagement, the options of 3rd and 4th order unionization are also options.
atinga on June 10, 2009 at 10:37 AM
ThackerAgency on June 10, 2009 at 10:23 AM
Well, thank you. I’ve been trying to figure out who benefits from nationalized health care, not believing that it was just a means of government control, as so many say. I can’t believe I was so dense – of course its the union label. Its just so hard to believe that the unions bought and paid for the Democrats and now we are all going to pay for it for generations.
mph on June 10, 2009 at 10:38 AM
http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/year9links/nazigermany/work.pdf
Change ‘Jews and women’ to ‘capable management and responsible employees’, ‘compulsory military service’ to ‘compulsory Obama service’, ignore the dates and change a few names, throw out the part about making the country strong, and the above schoolhistory post sounds a lot like the plans that the antichrist has in store for the United States.
maryo on June 10, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Sorry Ed, that’s an oxymoron in America today. Nothing is insolvent anymore. An entity is either deserving in the eyes of the gov’t, or it isn’t. If it is, it’s “solvent.” Organized labor has a blank check under Obama, and this statement from labor is the same as my daughter telling me that her lunch account at school is empty– both will be remedied in the same fashion.
JiangxiDad on June 10, 2009 at 10:38 AM
my thoughts exactly….CZAR #123 in this administration
UGH
cmsinaz on June 10, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Unions are just (Joe) biding their time before Obama gives them a reach-around. No need to worry about dem Unions.
cyclown on June 10, 2009 at 10:51 AM
More reasons not to buy a GM car. My vote at the ballot box didn’t hurt them but my vote with my wallet is something they are going to feel.
Cindy Munford on June 10, 2009 at 10:54 AM
Unions=Organized Crime=The Democratic Party=Unions=Organized Crime=The Democratic Party=Unions=Organized Crime=The Democratic Party
Get it?
Jeff from WI on June 10, 2009 at 10:56 AM
I thought it was little-old grannies and poor minorities that financed the One’s campaign, not powerful special interest groups.
Who knew?
(oh, right, we knew)
29Victor on June 10, 2009 at 10:57 AM
This is a great issue I would love to see the GOP latch onto and embrace wholeheartedly.
Scopper on June 10, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Closed shops force workers to pay dues, but workers still have rights under the Constitution.
If you feel your dues are going to PACs and not employee services, contact these guys: National Right to Work Group
A group of us filed suit years ago against our union and won.
PattyJ on June 10, 2009 at 11:00 AM
GOOD!
titus_pullo on June 10, 2009 at 11:04 AM
I have absolutely no question that this administration will come to their help. And it will be just a drop in the bucket of the most corrupt administration in the US history.
The only thing that keeps me positive is that this too shall pass, and eventually the truth will come out, and people will remember these times for what they are: when people were duped by charisma and let their hearts be melted while the charming thief stole their wallets.
ChristianRock on June 10, 2009 at 11:09 AM
… which would be turned into
“Rethuglicans hate unions because they take care of the little man. RepubliKKKans only like big business.”
or some other talking point.
VibrioCocci on June 10, 2009 at 11:09 AM
Ed questions why the unions won’t be subject to the same tighter enforcement of investments applied by Obama to Wall Street. It’s actually much more egregious in reality. The rules Obama effectively undermined have little to do with how unions can spend or handle members’ dues. That’s still subject to little, if any, regulation. Instead, Obama gutted enforcement of the rules that require unions to regularly file detailed public disclosures of their finances. This has two related effects. First, without stringent public disclosure rules the Union’s have little reason for fiscal restraint. As a result,I expect that union management salaries and perks will go through the roof. Second, employers lose a valuable resource in fending off union organizing activity. I’ve handled numerous anti-organizing campaigns for management and can say without question that detailed union financials are one of the most effective tools for turning workers away from the union (“They want to do WHAT with my money?”). It looks like we’re going back to the days when the unions typically filed annual disclosures that were years behind schedule and filled with inaccurate, incomplete and incomprehensible information.
Texas Cheesehead on June 10, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Wait until blog sites are forced to unionize. First any typing on the site done by someone must be retyped and entered by a member of the new:
Brothhood Of Blog Typers, Local 105,
Then, anything that might be considered “Graphics” must be entered by the Associated Blog Graphics Workers, Local 202, and finally, at least 20% of the blog site must contain some form of art. Here we have the Amalgamated Blog Artists Association, Local 11634.
Just imagine how much “better” these sites will be with UNION HELP
Jeff from WI on June 10, 2009 at 11:17 AM
This is the biggest problem throughout labor history with Unions. The people at the top frequently mis-manage the funds and pensions or turn corrupt, leaving the rank and file hanging out to dry. The rank and file often do not have the time or expertise to keep an eye on their union bosses, and all that ready cash goes to the leader’s heads in many cases. Not much differerent from Wall Stree when you come right down to it.
jeanie on June 10, 2009 at 11:19 AM
Once they unionize the Japanese and German auto manufacturing plants in the right to work states via card check, they should be fine. The rest of us won’t be, though.
Vashta.Nerada on June 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Once upon a time, the mafia seized control of the labor unions because they realized that they could make a killing by using average, blue collar workers as their cannon fodder in their war to rake in cash via illegal tactics, whilst building up a formidable “legit” front from which to operate.
I don’t doubt that the mob still has investments and influence in the labor unions, but today it seems to me that the labor unions have grown into a self-sustaining beast that not even the mobsters have been able to keep under control.
Now, with the anxious assistance of the democrats, the unchained beast with a ravenous appetite has become the modern-day mafia… only with government support. The corruption consumes in a pyroclastic flow everything it touches.
Check out this editorial on how FedEx is their next target.
LeperKhan on June 10, 2009 at 11:22 AM
Looks like my link didn’t take:
Kneecapping FedEx
LeperKhan on June 10, 2009 at 11:29 AM
Not to worry, Big Gov will step in with a bailout.
Kissmygrits on June 10, 2009 at 11:33 AM
You have bought into the standard union myth.
Were working conditions tougher years ago? Yes, they were. But they were tougher because that is all that the technology of the day afforded.
As technology improved, so did the working conditions for most workers.
If you plot the safety record for workers going back as far as they have records, you will find that you cannot pick out when unions formed, or when govt got involved in safety.
There is a record of continuous improvement.
The reason for this is simple. Despite the myths put forth by various lefty organizations, business owners and managers are not monsters. They do care about the people who work for them.
MarkTheGreat on June 10, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Teacher Unions don’t need to fail. They will fail on their own if teachers were allowed to not join. It should be a choice. It isn’t. The majority of teachers are not active in their unions and only are a member because it is mandated.
In my state, teachers can have none of their dues used for political reasons. All they need to do is notify the union. A lot of teachers have done that. They can ask that their dues go to humanitarian reasons much like United Way does so they can pick the organization.
Voter from WA State on June 10, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »