Unions harass teacher who dared to speak up in support of Scott Walker

posted at 12:15 pm on December 15, 2011 by Tina Korbe

The obnoxiousness continues. Not content to picket the Capitol and petition for the recall of any and every state leader who had a hand in the passage of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s budget repair bill, union leaders are now harassing a teacher who appeared in an ad in support of Walker.

In a basic black-back-dropped ad, Kristi Lacroix said she wasn’t in favor of a recall.

“I’m not big on recalls and I think, at this point, in my opinion, and I’m only speaking from the ‘I,’ it feels a little like sour grapes,” she says in the spot. “It’s ‘oh, we didn’t get our way,’ and now we’re going to change the outcome.”

But she didn’t stop with a simple indictment of recalls. She also voiced a positive opinion of Walker himself — also known to the unions as “Hosni Mubarak” or “Adolf Hitler.”

“Scott Walker said from the beginning: ‘I’m going to do what’s right for Wisconsin,’” Lacroix continued. “And he did. He did.”

That ad didn’t make union leaders too happy — and you know what union leaders do when they’re not happy. Can you say “retaliation” much?

“She’s facing typical Saul Alinsky tactics,” Education Action group founder Kyle Walker said this morning on a Fox and Friends segment. “There is a ‘Fire Kristi’ movement that is forming where pro-union members are threatening her with her job. They’re threatening to throw all of this trash on her in order to marginalize her and get her to quit.”

Lacroix herself is likely surprised by the treatment she’s received, the education expert continued.

“We work with a lot of teachers around the country and they’re by and large apolitical people,” he said. “They just want to do their job. … So, when somebody like Kristi stands up and says what she believes, they’re surprised to have this vitriolic reaction. But it’s not surprising.”

Sadly — but also not surprisingly — the tactics seem to be working. According to the Fox and Friends TV segment, Lacroix might quit. And while the NLRB might go out of its way to ensure Boeing doesn’t retaliate against its workers, you can bet the Board won’t go out of its way to ensure the unions don’t retaliate against their members. Lacroix likely has little recourse.

This news underscores Scott Walker’s correct perception of the need to break the power of public employee unions, which ought never to have acquired the collective bargaining rights they presently enjoy in the first place. Even formidable labor leaders of the past, like former AFL-CIO president George Meany, said collective bargaining between the government and public employee unions made no sense.

“It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government,” Meany said.

That’s because politicians and unions alike bargain with taxpayer money. The incentive then becomes to extort as much money from the taxpayer as possible. But don’t you dare try to reverse that trend or you’ll face the Scott Walker/Kristi Lacroix treatment. Only one word for it: Unfair.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Two Walker demonstrators, holding their Repeal signs, in a parking lot, asked us to sign the petition. It made my day to tell them that we are proud of our Governor! YEA!

moonlighter on December 15, 2011 at 2:28 PM

(First-ever post here. Partly making it just to get the moderation-of-initial-comment bit done with.)

Grommet on December 15, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Well, now it’s impossible to respond, since you’ve trivialized it :)

Welcome.

Axe on December 15, 2011 at 2:34 PM

“She’s facing typical Saul Alinsky tactics,” Education Action group founder Kyle Walker said this morning on a Fox and Friends segment. “There is a ‘Fire Kristi’ movement that is forming where pro-union members are threatening her with her job. They’re threatening to throw all of this trash on her in order to marginalize her and get her to quit.”

What does this mean? How are union members threatening her job unless they have the authority to fire her? What specifically does “throw all this trash on her” mean? When you are alleging harassment at least have one specific example of harassment.Short on facts long on name calling.

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Dept. of Labor:
Public School Teachers Are Highest Paid State Workers

mrt721 on December 15, 2011 at 2:40 PM

But there is much wrong including a very deep one that may involve some serious introspection on the left. . .
anuts on December 15, 2011 at 1:41 PM

LOL! Yeah, that’s going to happen.

Remember: you’re dealing with the slimy, morally bankrupt left here.

MisterElephant on December 15, 2011 at 2:41 PM

If this does not prove that unions are filled with nothing but thugs I do not know what does. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure this out.

logicman_1998 on December 15, 2011 at 2:42 PM

In 2009, after 41 years as the nations top education lawyer for the National Education Association, Bob Chanin gave his farewell address in which he said it’s not about kids, but about power.

“Despite what some among us would like to believe it is not because of our creative ideas. It is not because of the merit of our positions. It is not because we care about children and it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child. NEA and its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power…….”

jb34461 on December 15, 2011 at 2:45 PM

Sounds like a RICO prosecution may be in order.

slickwillie2001 on December 15, 2011 at 2:47 PM

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 2:39 PM

You can’t be serious. You’re joking, right? Please use the /sarc tag in the future so we will know you are a bleeding heart, bunnie humping liberal troll.

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM

Meant “are not”…

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 3:06 PM

Can you imagine if these people were unrestrained by any competing ideology? If they ever get close to that, get ready for a constitution with the clause, “The free expression of approved speech is encouraged by the State.” Doesn’t quite have the same ring.

Don Michael Bitsconi on December 15, 2011 at 3:09 PM

I took the comment as her Current work environment, since the ad aired.

herm2416 on December 15, 2011 at 2:01 PM

From what I gather from the story, her current work place, the school or school system, is not her problem. Ironically, I do think that either could pull her aside and say “Careful here”
No, the environment I am thinking about is union membership.
If she is part of a union, either paying or not, they have an obligation to her status as a teacher. She has said NOTHING which would wrrent termination, yet it would appear that union activity is threatening to push out of her job and the union. If successful, this would severely inhibit any member from speaking negatively of the union. That is bullying, pure and simple and at my business is hostile.
My “re-define” meant the environment of union membership. I have never considered this before.

Jabberwock on December 15, 2011 at 3:13 PM

There should be more standing with her! How many of them would have lost their job if Walker didn’t pass his bill?

conservativeinindy on December 15, 2011 at 3:16 PM

“…They’re threatening to throw all of this trash on her in order to marginalize her and get her to quit.”

Can you be more specific? While I have no doubt whatsoever that the unions aren’t above retaliating, it’s hard to get worked up over allegations this vague. And it isn’t even a representative of Ms. Lacroix’s who’s making the allegation – it’s the founder of a group that likely has its own agenda to advance. Ms. Lacroix is “likely” to be surprised? That tells me he’s had no direct contact with her.

So… facts and specifics, please?

fwwatson on December 15, 2011 at 3:20 PM

Kristi Lacroix is to the teachers union

as

Sarah Palin is to the beltway and will now face the same type of gubmint lynchmob

stay strong Kristi

Sonosam on December 15, 2011 at 3:20 PM

WEAC = Wisconsin Extortion Association Council.

pdigaudio on December 15, 2011 at 3:23 PM

What does this mean? How are union members threatening her job unless they have the authority to fire her? What specifically does “throw all this trash on her” mean?

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Never spent much time around a big union, have you? Some one such as you would be shocked to know what actually goes on in the background by selected avid union members who act as “enforcers”. They know how to get the message across.

Yoop on December 15, 2011 at 3:35 PM

The unions spread fear of reprisals for the exercise of free speech which contradicts the union’s mandates. And the reprisals won’t come in the form of broken noses and knees. It will come in the form of shunning. Kristi will be ostacized and watched by her former teacher friends. And as they watch her every move she will make a mistake that would have been overlooked when she was one of them but now will be used to get her to quit. And the union thought thugs will win.

Hang in there Kristi.

Vote Obama and his citizen/union army out in 2012.

tlea on December 15, 2011 at 3:38 PM

Even formidable labor leaders of the past, like former AFL-CIO president George Meany, said collective bargaining between the government and public employee unions made no sense.

“It is impossible to bargain collectively with the government,” Meany said.

And yet Mr. Meany did it anyway. So herein lies the gist of the problem: Unions and their negotiators have scarce ethics, if any. They are the same as offenders or enablers, like those who molest children or those who allow it to go on while they look the other way. I think it’s time for all public union negotiations to be exactly that–public–with agreements subject to the public’s approval, not just between the unethical union bosses and politicians who stand to profit from the agreements.

It gets more disgusting by the minute what these leftistproglibtard union punk crook hooligan crybaby whiners get away with–while the lameblameshamestream media enablers look the other way.

stukinIL4now on December 15, 2011 at 3:39 PM

Unions are the death of this country!

Krammer on December 15, 2011 at 3:42 PM

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM

I’m about as far from a left-wing troll as they come , but I kind of agree with plewis. plewis may be a left-wing troll, but the comments are apropos. I expected to find something definitive in the report rather than generalizations. It’s not that I’m unsympathetic to Ms. Lacroix’s plight. I’d just like to know more specifics as to what tactics the union members are taking.

RedinPDRM on December 15, 2011 at 4:05 PM

I’m about as far from a left-wing troll as they come , but I kind of agree with plewis. plewis may be a left-wing troll, but the comments are apropos. I expected to find something definitive in the report rather than generalizations. It’s not that I’m unsympathetic to Ms. Lacroix’s plight. I’d just like to know more specifics as to what tactics the union members are taking.

RedinPDRM

Stupid is as stupid does. I cannot believe someone who knows the legacy of Jimmy Hoffa and his ilk does not know what tactics the union members would be using.

logicman_1998 on December 15, 2011 at 4:20 PM

RedinPDRM on December 15, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Do not know about the Badger State, but here in NY the NYSDHR advises as follows : If you THINK you have been harrassed or discriminated against, then chances are you have been.
That is it and that is all
Simply put, if you think it, you can sue. INSANE.

Jabberwock on December 15, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Tina:

Only one word for it: Unfair.

No, the correct word is “criminal”. Oh yeah, it might be legal, but it is still criminal, and if you think that isn’t logical; it doesn’t matter, because plenty of us think the same thing I do. We are tired of this crap.

woodNfish on December 15, 2011 at 4:33 PM

RedinPDRM on December 15, 2011 at 4:05 PM

I cannot cite any specifics regarding the so-called “alleged” mis-treatment of Ms. Lacroix.

However, by merely thumbing through the pages of recent Wisconsin history it would seem apparent, judging by the widely reported agregious and quite possibly illegal behavior exhibited by the union thugs and/or their willing accomplices/sympathizers, that the mis-treatment of a perceived “enemy” would not be out of the realm of possibility.

As such, it would not be a hereculean stretch to assume the same thugish tactics are currently being used to “silence” Ms. Lacroix as she is not toeing the union line – am I way off base here?

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 4:34 PM

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 4:34 PM

So I was right, you have no facts. By the way your mother didn’t tell me her name was Bunny. Nice lady. Real friendly.

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 4:42 PM

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 4:42 PM

Typical libturd. Note to Hot Gas…open registration has been a complete troll-fest.

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 4:47 PM

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 4:42 PM

By the way pee-louis – my mother is more of a man than you’ll ever be. Now get back down in the basement before your mom makes you wash the dishes or take out the trash to earn your computer time…don’t you have an OWS meeting – oh, that’s right, nevermind.

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 4:50 PM

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 4:34 PM

So I was right, you have no facts. By the way your mother didn’t tell me her name was Bunny. Nice lady. Real friendly.

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 4:42 PM

I’d be careful here. The teacher is not reacting as she is because she lives in a vaccum. We just have not heard the facts.
Besides, who was it that said ” The facts do not matter. It is the seriousness of the charge” Or something to that effect.
Given the recent history in Wisc. I have no doubts.

Jabberwock on December 15, 2011 at 4:59 PM

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Man, no way can I compete with your comedy chops. Who would think to take the word “liberal” and combine it with the word “turd” – voila, “libturd”. That is pure comedy gold. Then, to top it off you took my first initial “P” and made it “pee”, like urine.Whoa, never saw that coming. Do you write professionally? You should.

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 5:04 PM

logicman_1998 on December 15, 2011 at 4:20 PM

That’s about as dumb of a statement as I’ve ever seen on Hotair and certainly contradicts your monicker. What do Jimmy Hoffa’s tactics have to do with this discussion?

I’m not saying that Ms. Lacroix has not been intimidated. I’m sure she has. Loyal union members have a mob mentality and when people act as a mob they lose their sense of humanity. Unions have been associated with all sorts of illegal acts of intimidation in the past. However, I want to be able to judge their actions on facts, not innuendos.

RedinPDRM on December 15, 2011 at 5:09 PM

Jabberwock on December 15, 2011 at 4:59 PM

Opine now. Gather facts later.

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 5:10 PM

This story is a little light on specifics, as others have noted. I have no doubt that the union/mob punks have made life miserable for her, but the story would be a little more powerful if someone actually put … I don’t know … a single fact in it?

Jaibones on December 15, 2011 at 5:10 PM

It really comes down to freedom. I glean, from yet another example of union sway, is that if your a union member you give up freedom of speech. And this coming from a “public union”. Doesn’t sound like the type of America values that made this country strong.

bubbafromkc on December 15, 2011 at 5:11 PM

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 5:04 PM

You’re grounded. No more arugula, chickpeas or granola for you mister…now get back to your chores or your computer time will be limited to right before or right after your therepy sessions.

ontheright on December 15, 2011 at 5:12 PM

I don’t like hippies…too much. But the idea that the 60s protest movement ended when the union Plumbers took lead pipes to them bewilders and disquiets me.

How could the brutality of waylaying people with different civil and political views with lead pipes vanish down the memory hole of history? How is it that this isn’t our Night of Broken Glass? And how could both union thugs and ex-hippies have found their way together under the umbrella of the same party?

Because we know which party that would reflect upon, don’t we?

And now the unions want “card check”. The American principle of “One Man, One Vote” is supported largely by the secret ballot. It’s harder to have influence on who you vote for if they are kept from knowing who you voted for. Obama said early on that we shouldn’t let our policies go against our ideals. OMOV is about as central an idea as exists, and then he proposed card check, like there is nothing wrong with the vanishing of the protection of the secret ballot.

We don’t want bullying in our schools–even if it means the honest profession of a difference in faith can be counted as “bullying”–unless the unions bully teachers.

With liberals exceptions are the rule.

Axeman on December 15, 2011 at 5:17 PM

The Left only believes in free speech for themselves.

Chip on December 15, 2011 at 12:18 PM

“Freeish” speech.

Axe on December 15, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Just not free free.

Axeman on December 15, 2011 at 5:23 PM

logicman_1998 on December 15, 2011 at 4:20 PM

That’s about as dumb of a statement as I’ve ever seen on Hotair and certainly contradicts your monicker. What do Jimmy Hoffa’s tactics have to do with this discussion?

I’m not saying that Ms. Lacroix has not been intimidated. I’m sure she has. Loyal union members have a mob mentality and when people act as a mob they lose their sense of humanity. Unions have been associated with all sorts of illegal acts of intimidation in the past. However, I want to be able to judge their actions on facts, not innuendos.

RedinPDRM

It appears that intelligence is sadly lacking here in your case. You remind me of the mayor in the movie Jaws. Hooper told him…You would not believe there is a shark even if he swam up on the beach and bit you on the ass. So much for your sharp intellect.

logicman_1998 on December 15, 2011 at 5:31 PM

17 years in the UFCW, and when a strike vote came up,.. the talk among employees was, how long could it last? I have a family to feed, if it goes on too long, I’ll cross the picket line,.. it was a real talk among people with ten to twenty years on the job, not that we didn’t want a better contract, but that we’d seen other national unions strike for as long as two years, and in the end, they padlocked and shut down factories when their union would not deal.

So folks were talkning what can we do if??? … the union toads among us would have none of it..

They looked their coworkers in the eye and threatened to burn down their house with them and their family in it. I was there, I saw, I heard what threats were made.. One I had thought was a regular human before that,. and I and a couple of others who happened to be vets,.. told him who we would go hunting for, if so much as a hair were harmed of any of us.. Then more spoke up,.. and more.. he was shocked, and spittle was flying when he started to try and bully us all.. but he was sullen andpouting by the end. The fact is.. unions have their thugs, their bully boys,.and only a child would think they don’t.

Too many of us have experience with unionistas, and their love of death threats..

They bully the rank and file, and I ran afoul the union several times,.. they do retaliate, do get folks fired, been there, seen that.

mark81150 on December 15, 2011 at 5:39 PM

I too was intimidated by a union organizer. I worked at a small car dealership in NY. It was a small family owned business with four mechanics and 2 “make ready” guys. A union organizer tried to unionize the shop. I was the one person parts department and as a one man department I had vote in election.. It was apparent that the vote was evenly split even though we were paid higher than the competition and had a generous bonus plan based on department profits.
The organizers approached me they quizzed me on my vote and I said no union. They spent the next two weeks accosting me at home, at work, and even at my Mom’s house mentioning they knew everyplace I went. I was 23 years old and actually scared. I still voted against and the next day my car was trashed outside my apartment.

Unions play tough but the shop did remain union free.

Unions had their place and maybe somewhere still do, but I don’t know where anymore.

Southern Yankee on December 15, 2011 at 7:43 PM

You may not see any illegal doing…yet. But there is much wrong including a very deep one that may involve some serious introspection on the left. It starts with the question: is there any idea born from the left that is free of coercion, intimidation, and/or force where implementation of that idea is possible?

anuts on December 15, 2011 at 1:41 PM You hit the nail on the head with your comment. It is always that way with the left, even on facebook which is suppose to be a social outlet. They are beyond obnoxious.

wi farmgirl on December 15, 2011 at 8:20 PM

Ha, I hit hit the wrong tab. I struck out my own comment. Never mind. :D

wi farmgirl on December 15, 2011 at 8:21 PM

Hottie.

Corporal Tunnel on December 16, 2011 at 1:13 AM

Opine now. Gather facts later.

plewis on December 15, 2011 at 5:10 PM

Something like that.
Facts are cold and hard, ” Opines” are, well, Hot Air.

I have a very low expectation of the contemporary goonuion movement. If it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, well…
They rarely disappoint.

Jabberwock on December 16, 2011 at 6:18 AM

Ha, I hit hit the wrong tab. I struck out my own comment. Never mind. :D

wi farmgirl on December 15, 2011 at 8:21 PM

Have a seat on the couch.

*** opens pad ***

To get to the bottom of your self-sabotage, let’s start at the beginning.

Your first pet was a homosexual, yes? And, how long have you hated your parents?

:) Everybody does that. Well, not that. Something though.

Axe on December 16, 2011 at 6:56 AM

It gets more disgusting by the minute what these leftistproglibtard union punk crook hooligan crybaby whiners get away with–while the lameblameshamestream media enablers look the other way.

stukinIL4now on December 15, 2011 at 3:39 PM

Quite possibly my favorite sentence of all time!

TugboatPhil on December 16, 2011 at 8:23 AM

I’d wear the unionistas hatred as a badge of honor and smile in their faces and plead with them to seek anger management counseling and professional therapy, because it is obvious they are certifiably insane and pose a risk to themselves and the public at large.

insidiator on December 16, 2011 at 8:32 AM

I’d wear the unionistas hatred as a badge of honor and smile in their faces and plead with them to seek anger management counseling and professional therapy, because it is obvious they are certifiably insane and pose a risk to themselves and the public at large.

insidiator on December 16, 2011 at 8:32 AM

They’d reply that such insanity is a “human right”

Jabberwock on December 16, 2011 at 9:12 AM

In the last fifty years the role of the unions has changed. Their function in the beginning was to be a bargaining tool for the worker. Today the worker is a pawn of the union, to be used or thrown away. In this case the union is showing it’s Gestapo side.

savage24 on December 16, 2011 at 9:41 AM

Let’s see if we can find and easier way of differentiating between lib and conservative educators. Tic Tock, Tic Tock, Tic Tock, Tic Tock, times up.

Conservatives serve the public. While on the other hand (that’s why liberal lawyers have two hands – with out them whey cannot speak at all) they actually believe the pubic lickes exist to serve them.

MSGTAS on December 16, 2011 at 9:56 AM

As if she didn’t know this was coming. The way I see it is, don’t make the advertisement if you can’t handle the blowback. She knew who she was dealing with and what their reactions would be, Ms. Lacroix.

Major Infidel on December 16, 2011 at 10:00 AM

As if she didn’t know this was coming. The way I see it is, don’t make the advertisement if you can’t handle the blowback. She knew who she was dealing with and what their reactions would be, Ms. Lacroix.

Major Infidel on December 16, 2011 at 10:00 AM

What ??
Aside from he “sour grapes” comment, which would rate an E on my kids Wii, she said nothing negative about the union.

If such blowback is common knowledge and to be expected, why is it allowed to persist? Down this road be demons.
No, Ms. Lacroix should be allowed to say what she said without fear of retribution.Especially from the unions and their mantra of “Human Rights” In fact, she should EXPECT to do so.

Jabberwock on December 16, 2011 at 11:00 AM

Whatever happened to being able to agree to disagree? It seems with liberals it’s “Do it our way, or else!” I’ll be praying for Ms. Lacroix.

1ConcernedMom on December 16, 2011 at 11:15 AM

:) Everybody does that. Well, not that. Something though.

Axe on December 16, 2011 at 6:56 AM

I am a natural blonde. heh heh

wi farmgirl on December 16, 2011 at 11:47 AM

Well don’t come to Ohio Kristi, the ppl voted out issue 5. Now their eather laying off or privatizing. Ppl are so stupid here they didn’t realize a 8 million dollar hole is a 8 million dollar hole. Now many are getting buyers remorse.

angrymike on December 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Angrymike, I am one of those who did NOT vote to repeal SB5. Yes, in the words of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, “the chickensssssss are commin home to roooossssssssssst! Layoffs, cuts, etc are happening, but the unions remain unbowed, they protected THEIRS.

MJScanlonOH on December 16, 2011 at 6:21 PM

Comment pages: 1 2