Videos: Three faces of forced unionism and political contributions

posted at 8:40 am on February 14, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Last week, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held a hearing into forced unionism and the misleading ways in which unions use the dues and other contributions for political purposes.  The committee will release three videos of witnesses who discussed their own experiences with being denied a choice in joining a union in order to highlight the problem.  First up is Terry Bowman, Ford assembly-line worker who wants his First Amendment freedom of association restored — and a way out of contributing to political causes with which he disagrees:

Next is Claire Waites, a teacher from Alabama, who describes how the NEA pulls a bait-and-switch with its “children’s fund,” which is nothing more than a PAC for electing Democrats:

But by far the most heartbreaking story comes from Sally Coomer, who was forced to join the SEIU by the state of Washington because she received Medicaid for caring for her developmentally-disabled daughter. They take $95 a month out of the funds she needs to give care to her daughter, which “is going to causes I do not support,” and which could pay for several hours of care:

I wrote about this last November, when both Michigan and Minnesota tried to extend this forced-unionism into day-care operations as well as home-care situations. There is no reason to force parents who receive Medicaid to care for developmentally-disabled children into unions, except to pick their pockets for the benefit of union bosses and political parties. It’s positively ghoulish, as I wrote at the time, and only the efforts of Republican-controlled legislatures in both states kept them from forcing babysitters into unions.

The Oversight Committee promises more investigations into forced unionism:

On February 8th, the Committee published a report finding that the Obama Administration and recent court cases have directly contributed to the loss of workplace freedom as well as worker rights violations endured by Ms. Coomer, Mr. Bowman and Ms. Waites.  As the federal government aids and abets these violations, union leaders spent more than $1.1 billion on partisan politics during the 2010 election cycle.  The Committee will continue to investigate the growing lack of accountability and transparency in how union leaders take dues money from rank-and-file members and spend that money on political causes many of their own members oppose.

The full report can be found here.


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

Forced unionism = communism. No way around it.

Rohall1215 on February 14, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Santorum is gonna have get these gals back in line. Can’t have any of this rebelliousness.

FlaMurph on February 14, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Don’t liberal scream about choice? No? Not in this case?

hawkdriver on February 14, 2012 at 8:45 AM

I’m in full support of these people’s complaints but, frankly, it bothers me a bit that these were released as products of “Oversight Productions” with a .gov url.

Too much of a political ad to be paid for with taxpayer dollars.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 8:46 AM

Wasn’t Rick Santorum in favor of forced unionism?

Oh yeah, that was only in PA and only before he was running for president.

Priscilla on February 14, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Another hole in the dam. Drip, drip, drip.

Even if Walker goes down, his actions started the ball rolling … the unions are fighting on too many fronts and won’t be able to keep up. RTW will really hit the dems in the pocketbook too.

I’m starting to have hope for the Republic.

Lost in Jersey on February 14, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Don’t liberal scream about choice? No? Not in this case?

hawkdriver on February 14, 2012 at 8:45 AM

No, liberals scream about abortion as a “right.” They use the term choice because few would admit to be in support of the murder of children. It is the same way there are no liberals only progressives. There is no such thing as a tax increase merely revenue enhancements. And, you can propose massive increases in the national debt (to the point of generational theft) and declare it a balanced budget.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Forced unionism = communism. No way around it.

Rohall1215 on February 14, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Forced unionism is more akin totalitarian socialism.

Communism is altruistic. Not at all like forced unionism.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 8:50 AM

(first line deleted by poster, to save his posting priveleges)

After that last video, that’s all I’m left with . . . . . . . . . . .

listens2glenn on February 14, 2012 at 8:51 AM

Wasn’t Rick Santorum in favor of forced unionism?

Oh yeah, that was only in PA and only before he was running for president.

Priscilla on February 14, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Two points. Context matters. No political candidate for either party is going to win in a rust belt state by openly challenging the unions. Scott Walker only took on the public sector unions in WI after winning office. Same holds true for Chris Christie.

Secondly, I’m impressed that you are so perfect in your thought you’ve never ever had to change positions from what you held nearly a decade ago. It takes longer for some of us and we actually have to form our opinions by experience, circumstances, and discernment. I envy you for being so smart that you immediately get to the one and only “correct” position.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 8:54 AM

On February 8th, the Committee published a report

Great, it’s a report…now what?
Do you honestly think that the dems are going to do anything about this?
Do you think all of the Republicans would do anything about this, since it would take them all…even if they win the Senate, they will need Snowe and company to support, and they won’t.
The unions need to be broken by the judicial system, our political system is not strong enough to do it.

right2bright on February 14, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Forced union membership is the ultimate scam. I recall as a kid working at a Red Owl grocery store, earning a pittance, and still having to pay union dues, and all so I could take a stupid 15 minute break when I would rather have just kept working.

Bishop on February 14, 2012 at 8:55 AM

I’m starting to have hope for the Republic.

Lost in Jersey on February 14, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Send me a couple pounds of that, would you? I’m running a negative balance lately.

2ndMAW68 on February 14, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Wasn’t Rick Santorum in favor of forced unionism?

Oh yeah, that was only in PA and only before he was running for president.

Priscilla on February 14, 2012 at 8:49 AM

Yet you support a candidate who embraced the death of children as a campaign issue to get elected, against one of the tenets of his faith…so you tell me what is worse, selling out the lives of children (and selling out his faith) to get elected, or supporting unions to get elected?
I would venture, if you were honest, that embracing abortion, supporting abortion, is not even in the same category of unionization…but you won’t be honest.

right2bright on February 14, 2012 at 8:59 AM

1824 has a lot to answer for!

OldEnglish on February 14, 2012 at 8:59 AM

3 Faces of forced unionism and political cobtributions:

Richard Trumpka
Craig Becker
Rick Santorumzr

swamp_yankee on February 14, 2012 at 9:00 AM

Why don’t they just change the call letters from S E I U. to . S T F U !?

KOOLAID2 on February 14, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Forced union membership is the ultimate scam. I recall as a kid working at a Red Owl grocery store, earning a pittance, and still having to pay union dues, and all so I could take a stupid 15 minute break when I would rather have just kept working.

Bishop on February 14, 2012 at 8:55 AM

And I had a different experience…working in a grocery store, getting paid triple time for holidays, hours set at least 5 days before schedule, paid time and 1/2 for anything over your scheduled time…it was great as a kid, top dollar, but I didn’t realize the real impact till later on…oh, and of course the infamous “stuffed” ballot box, that always seemed to mirror what the leadership wanted…

right2bright on February 14, 2012 at 9:02 AM

swamp_yankee on February 14, 2012 at 9:00 AM

If not Rick, who is your choice?

right2bright on February 14, 2012 at 9:03 AM

I didn’t leave my union. My union left me.

Chomsky Dance Recital on February 14, 2012 at 9:05 AM

Communism is altruistic

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 8:50 AM

It is????? Where? When???

No more trips through the transporter until scottie recalibrates the energy signatures ok???

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Also forced, without apparent complaint, to accept union-negotiated wages and fring benefits.

plewis on February 14, 2012 at 9:10 AM

***

Scott Walker only took on the public sector unions in WI after winning office.

***

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Wait, what? I thought Walker expressly campaigned on the notion that he’d challenge the public-employee unions–except he didn’t try to take on the police and firefighters. Walker was no Trojan Horse. He promised something, and then he delivered–and it’s working.

BuckeyeSam on February 14, 2012 at 9:15 AM

Also forced, without apparent complaint, to accept union-negotiated wages and fring benefits.

plewis on February 14, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Must be why they’re now, what, 6% of the private sector workforce.

Unions!!! Doing to america what we did for the auto industry. ummm no, er ……..Airlines! um, no……

They had their place. 100 years ago.

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Wasn’t Rick Santorum in favor of forced unionism?

Oh yeah, that was only in PA and only before he was running for president.

Priscilla on February 14, 2012 at 8:49 AM
Yet you support a candidate who embraced the death of children as a campaign issue to get elected, against one of the tenets of his faith…so you tell me what is worse, selling out the lives of children (and selling out his faith) to get elected, or supporting unions to get elected?
I would venture, if you were honest, that embracing abortion, supporting abortion, is not even in the same category of unionization…but you won’t be honest.

right2bright on February 14, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Three things
1. There are no perfect candidates in existence and the candidates that are running are all flawed.

2. It will be very difficult for Obama to attack Santorum on opposing Right to Work.

3. It is a significant exageration to say that holding the position that one doesn’t have the right to impose one’s religious views on others (Mitt Romney’s previous abortion position) is embracing the death of children. Clearly abortion and unionization are different caliber issues, but religious liberty is also a major issue. Just as the Obama administration should not be able to force their pro-contraception/abortion views on the Catholic church, the Catholic and Mormon churches should not be able to force their anti-contraception/anti-abortion views on those who do not share their belief that life begins at fertilization.

talkingpoints on February 14, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Also forced, without apparent complaint, to accept union-negotiated wages and fring benefits.

plewis on February 14, 2012 at 9:10 AM

At a minimum, can’t membership be limited to collective bargaining rather than support for all the liberal political bullshite?

BuckeyeSam on February 14, 2012 at 9:16 AM

Communism is altruistic.

Yes, and we’ve seen how altruistic it can be in Russia, China, Vietnam, Cuba, North Korea, etc.

jangle12 on February 14, 2012 at 9:17 AM

right2bright on February 14, 2012 at 8:59 AM

Oh, I’m honest – I just won’t bow to your superior opinion. Sorry.

Priscilla on February 14, 2012 at 9:18 AM

I am very much anti-union to begin with, but isn’t the purpose of unions to “protect the workers” from management and unsafe working conditions? If so, how in the world does forcing a woman to join SEIU because she’s caring for her daughter at home square with that reason. Is she being protected from herself? I don’t get it. What possible benefit does she recieve?

Flange on February 14, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Also forced, without apparent complaint, to accept union-negotiated wages and fring benefits.

plewis on February 14, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Mommy doesn’t have to talk for all of us, and take care of us. If you are worth a darn, usually you can take care of yourself. In most cases the company or organization gets what they pay for. You don’t see the top companies in this country with drones!

KOOLAID2 on February 14, 2012 at 9:21 AM

GREEK FIREFIGHTERS. Found one!!!

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 9:22 AM

So Democrats are only in favour of choice when it comes to the murder of unborn children, not when it concerns union membership.

Nice set of priorities they have.

Jay Mac on February 14, 2012 at 9:28 AM

Wasn’t Rick Santorum Mitt Romney in favor of forced unionism?

Oh yeah, that was only in PA Ohio and only before he was reminded, if your’re running for president you have to be severely conservative and come out against forced unions.

batterup on February 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM

Communism is altruistic

War is peace

Freedom is slavery

Ignorance is strength

WhatNot on February 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM

If nothing else, the past several years have amplified the hypocrisy of the party of the left. I believe they are calling themselves progressives now. Union dues? Might be ok if the dues were used for the union members rather than a liberal slush fund to elect Democrats. Choice? Only when it suits their idealogy – the PP/Komen dust up is a good example of their blatant hypocrisy. Feminism? Only liberal women – Sarah Palin is a prime example. Class warfare? Denigrate the wealthy while holding their hand out – Obama comes to mind. Ethical journalism? It died years ago on the left. Charitable giving? Only when they can use other people’s money. The list can go on.

Just remember, when the left proclaims an action by conservatives as corrupt or evil, just remember, they are projecting their own actions and motives on to those they are accusing.

And, when they want to label something that is distasteful or evil, expect it to have a sugar-coated name – Pro Choice rather than abortion or murder. Redistribution of wealth rather than socialism. Fair rather than the opposite term unfair. Journalism rather than propaganda.

iamsaved on February 14, 2012 at 9:32 AM

The fatal flaw with liberalism is that it cannot change three facts of life that will never change in human nature. First, no human or group of humans can acquire, maintain, understand, and deploy all of the information necessary to operate something as complicated as an economy. It’s a knowledge problem that can never be solved by the government no matter how well intentioned the politicans are. This is why individual choice within a free market structure is so effective to generating growth and wealth, while collective decrees from command economies resulted in abject poverty and wealth destruction. Second, government cannot create the balance of competiting interests to produce a dynamic entity that can sustain on its own. For a business operating in a competitive market, it has to innovate to cut costs while trying to provide better products and services that people want. If it fails, it goes away. In contrast, government programs almost never go away no matter how unsustainable they, which results in wasted resources. Third, nothing is ever free no matter how many government officials decree something to be free. The allocation of resources can never escape the reality of supply and demand. When the government attempts to deem something to be “free,” it will generally result in shortages that make the cost of the “free” item to be infinite because no price will be enough to get the free item. Just ask the people who lived under Communism what it was like to get “free” items from the government.

While these aspects of human nature will never change, neither will the fact that the retoric of collective action will be a political winner.

That is the dilema. The retoric helps a person win an election; but the policies destroy the economy.

The answer: we need a politican who uses the retoric but refuses to implement the polcies…

RedSoxNation on February 14, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Walker was no Trojan Horse. He promised something, and then he delivered–and it’s working.

BuckeyeSam on February 14, 2012 at 9:15 AM

So is the recall effort. If Walker is not a Trojan horse, he could well be a sacrificial lamb.

As I’ve posted, I’m in full support of these people and think every state should be right-to-work. I do take exception to idiots who are against Santorum simply because of his record while representing a rust belt pro-union state as if he should have been a champion for anti-unionism a decade ago in a state like Pennsylvania. It was that bit of nonsense from a hate-filled Romney supporter I was responding to.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM

Wait – that Sally has seven children?? One of them 21??

Anyway, what happened to her and parents like her at the hands of the SEIU is an absolute shame. The state of Washington, strutting its progressive peacock feathers over passing gay marriage yesterday, keeps going further left by the minute, which should place them in the middle upper Pacific ocean by the end of the decade.

It’s one of the reasons why I no longer accompany Mrs. Captain Scarlet on trips to see her extended family there. Love the locale, but why take my free time to lounge around the house with some of the same pro-Obama, pro-forced unionization nitwits who see nothing wrong with such measures?

Captain Scarlet on February 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Forced union membership is the ultimate scam. I recall as a kid working at a Red Owl grocery store, earning a pittance, and still having to pay union dues, and all so I could take a stupid 15 minute break when I would rather have just kept working.

Bishop on February 14, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Yeah, hubby worked as a part-time loader/unloader at UPS in college. He got a stern talking to when he finished loading a truck rather than take a 15 break (that he didn’t need). He was told he’d be fired if he did it again.

Fallon on February 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

I am very much anti-union to begin with, but isn’t the purpose of unions to “protect the workers” from management and unsafe working conditions?

Flange on February 14, 2012 at 9:19 AM

Of course not. That may have been the original intent when there was no such thing as minimum wage, OSHA, the EEOC, and a myriad of local, state, and federal regulations. Unions, particularly public sector unions (NEA, SEIU, AFT, etc) exist solely to funnel money to Democrat candidates who ensure that laws favor collective bargaining and pro-union positions. A secondary role for unions is wage negotiation but in strong union states the rules for arbitration all favor the union over the employer.

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:42 AM

Yeah, hubby worked as a part-time loader/unloader at UPS in college. He got a stern talking to when he finished loading a truck rather than take a 15 break (that he didn’t need). He was told he’d be fired if he did it again.

Fallon on February 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Perfect example of the herd mentality that is unionism. All workers must work at the same level of mediocrity so that all are “equal.” Years ago, I had a friend that worked at a job where data requests had an archaic two-week lead time (based largely on a time when such requests involved punch cards). It literally took her minutes to get the data printed out but the product would not be released by her supervisor until the full two weeks had elapsed. Yes, she worked for a government organization (which was run worse than a DMV).

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Also forced, without apparent complaint, to accept union-negotiated wages and fring benefits.

plewis on February 14, 2012 at 9:10 AM

We get French benefits? No way!

Alabama Infidel on February 14, 2012 at 9:52 AM

Tires of these three slashed in 5… 4… 3…

crazy_legs on February 14, 2012 at 9:52 AM

RedSoxNation on February 14, 2012 at 9:37 AM

good job sir

DanMan on February 14, 2012 at 9:53 AM

Happy Nomad on February 14, 2012 at 9:42 AM

I get all that. My point is the stated reason for unions is now a farce. Pro-union people can’t admit to the things you stated. I think the case of people caring for their children at home being forced to join a union illustrates this point very well. She recieves no benefits and is only being used for her money.

Flange on February 14, 2012 at 9:54 AM

Yes, and we’ve seen how altruistic it can be in Russia, China, Vietnam, Cuba, North Korea, etc.

jangle12 on February 14, 2012 at 9:17 AM

It isn’t fair to talk about what Communism has actually done historically. You have to look at what sympathetic authors say it should do in theory. Duh!

Dawnsblood on February 14, 2012 at 9:54 AM

No more trips through the transporter until scottie recalibrates the energy signatures ok???

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 9:06 AM

Yes, and we’ve seen how altruistic it can be in Russia, China, Vietnam, Cuba, North Korea, etc.

jangle12 on February 14, 2012 at 9:17 AM

War is peace

Freedom is slavery

Ignorance is strength

WhatNot on February 14, 2012 at 9:31 AM

And y’all cannot tell the difference between communism and totalitarian regimes.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

The Committee will continue to investigate the growing lack of accountability and transparency in how union leaders take dues money from rank-and-file members and spend that money on political causes many of their own members oppose.

“continue to investigate?” Seriously, this has been a problem for years. Stop the investigating and start filing charges.

redfoxbluestate on February 14, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Yeah, hubby worked as a part-time loader/unloader at UPS in college.
Fallon on February 14, 2012 at 9:40 AM

I had a gig at UPS in college. Completely tricked into joining Teamsters Local 988. To get out I had to have a registered letter requesting to be released from said local arrive at the union address within 2 days of the anniversary of my joining. UPS did not keep those records, Local 988 did.

Talk about having a scab in their ranks…I almost made shop steward until they realized who I was and got the word out to the other shifts. That would have been hoot, eh?

DanMan on February 14, 2012 at 9:59 AM

Unionism is not only organized thuggery, but one of the biggest impediments to economic efficiency. That’s why we need to nominate union shill Rick Santorum for president!

EddieC on February 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM

….and our latest “conservative” front runner supported this…..and I thought Romneycare was bad.

Tater Salad on February 14, 2012 at 10:00 AM

It isn’t fair to talk about what Communism has actually done historically. You have to look at what sympathetic authors say it should do in theory. Duh!

Dawnsblood on February 14, 2012 at 9:54 AM

And you are falling into the same trap that democrats fell into when they believed it when Obama told them he wasn’t a socialist.

Are you smarter than a democrat?

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:01 AM

And y’all cannot tell the difference between communism and totalitarian regimes.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

‘Cause we learn from examples.

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 10:01 AM

And y’all cannot tell the difference between communism and totalitarian regimes.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

We call it a distinction without a difference cozmo. All of the isms run completly counter to how this country was set up. It used to be so simple not having to know every damn thing about how the government operates. And then those that want to destroy it got the upper hand.

DanMan on February 14, 2012 at 10:03 AM

I was once forced to join a union. Wasn’t told that it was in the works when I interviewed and was hired. Company management wasn’t thrilled but it had no choice because it was doing business in IL, which will become the last RTW state if that ever happens. When the “closed” union took over, I had to start punching a time clock. My job was classified such that I was never going to get a raise. I didn’t get any better benefits but suddenly had $70 less a month and every dollar counted. I was kinda angry.

So I resorted to good old American ingenuity and pitched a money-saving idea to the company using these new-fangled things called personal computers that brought an important aspect of their business in-house and I created a new non-union job for myself making more money and with an extra week of vacation. I soon became their first in-house IT person and went on to bigger and better IT jobs. They and their union, however, no longer exist.

As for good old American ingenuity–we could use a lot more of that these days.

stukinIL4now on February 14, 2012 at 10:03 AM

All of the isms run completly counter to how this country was set up. It used to be so simple not having to know every damn thing about how the government operates. And then those that want to destroy it got the upper hand.

DanMan on February 14, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Federalism, libertarianism…yeah, you stick with that.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:08 AM

‘Cause we learn from examples.

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Then you still don’t know communism. Here’s a hint for the thick headed. There has not been a single example of communism ever existing in something the size of a nation state.

Words mean things. Try to use the right one’s.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:11 AM

I wish they would bring up salting, the bogus unfair labor complaints salts file, and the subsequent persecution by the NLRB under their administrative law. They are the judge and prosecution, no jury. It is cheaper to just pay the blackmail the union will ask for to drop the complaint.

gtotracker on February 14, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Then you still don’t know communism. Here’s a hint for the thick headed. There has not been a single example of communism ever existing in something the size of a nation state.

Words mean things. Try to use the right one’s.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Well, seeing as this is a discussion of NATIONAL POLITICAL ISSUES I would suggest to get your mind off of small tribal (mostly genetically related) communes.

Or perhaps you can watch “The Village” again. (Some people need the visual thing)

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 10:15 AM

I would suggest to get your mind off of small tribal (mostly genetically related) communes.

Or perhaps you can watch “The Village” again. (Some people need the visual thing)

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Or maybe you could realize that when you use words that don’t mean what you think they mean, it makes the actual event that is happening less intimidating.

People as more apt to be against Obama’s policies when they know that the USSR was socialist and so are Obama’s policies.

When you call totalitarian socialists communists, it lets the totalitarian socialists off the hook.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:20 AM

I was forced to join the California Nurses Association when I worked at Kaiser Permanente.

CNA launched (and won) an attack on all of our new governor Schwarzenegger’s propositions. One of those props was a parental notification for a TWELVE-YEAR OLD to have an abortion.

I was furious. As community nurses, we were being “represented” by a union that was AGAINST a measure that would alert parents that their daughters were in deep trouble. What cycles are going unbroken? A 12-year old child is having sex, has gotten pregnant, and has had an abortion and no one knows? Where does that child go from there into the rest of her life?

CNA used my forced union dues to fund this evil.

keebs on February 14, 2012 at 10:21 AM

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:20 AM

You can play your semantics game all you want. (and to some extent, technically accurate). Everyone’s response was to “communism is altruistic”. We are still waiting for an example. An yes, it HAS to be larger than a tiny tribe of subsistence hunter/gatherers who all live or die together, since that has NO BEARING ON THIS DISCUSSION.

waiting….

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Don’t liberal scream about choice? No? Not in this case?

hawkdriver on February 14, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Yes, they scream about their choices over other people’s lives, i.e., mandated contraception funding and abortion.

shick on February 14, 2012 at 10:31 AM

(and to some extent, technically accurate).
WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 10:27 AM

No, accurate.

We are still waiting for an example. An yes, it HAS to be larger than a tiny tribe of subsistence hunter/gatherers who all live or die together, since that has NO BEARING ON THIS DISCUSSION.

waiting….

And I already wrote that there has never been one.

When ignorant people describe something that has never existed as what could be right around the corner, they not only make themselves look ignorant, but they also help to defeat their own argument.

Just go back to the original statement and rebuttal:

Forced unionism = communism. No way around it.

Rohall1215 on February 14, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Forced unionism is more akin totalitarian socialism.

Communism is altruistic. Not at all like forced unionism.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 8:50 AM

If y’all would think before making knee-jerk comments, you would see the truth in the rebuttal.

Unionism is not like communism.

Libertarianism and anarchy are like communism, but not forced unionism.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:37 AM

And I already wrote that there has never been one.

When ignorant people describe something that has never existed as what could be right around the corner, they not only make themselves look ignorant, but they also help to defeat their own argument.

Describe? as in calling it altruistic? Even when you concede no examples?

You have fun with the name calling.

I gotta go clear the CO2 molecules off my driveway.

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 10:41 AM

I absolutely hate paying my union dues. My union is a joke.

tom daschle concerned on February 14, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Describe? as in calling it altruistic? Even when you concede no examples?

You have fun with the name calling.

I gotta go clear the CO2 molecules off my driveway.

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Like with democracy and republic, communism is an idea. The idea of communism is the most altruistic of all the forms of governing. That even the examples of communes cannot make it much past the first generation shows that it is unworkable as a governing systems.

Yet, ignorant people continue to blame everything on communism. A form of governing that you yourself admits has never existed.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

For those who were “forced” to join a union – feel free to refuse the union benefits. Feel free to pay for your doctor out of your own pocket. Feel free to pay your salary back to your employer every day you are out on vacation or when you’re sick. Feel free to return any “forced” union raises back to your employer. Feel free to give up any legal rights to protection if you’re hurt or abused on the job, and most importantly, grin and bear it when you’re fired because the boss wants to replace you with his daughter…

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 10:49 AM

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Except that even those of us in RTW states get those things. I don’t see anyone denying that Unions had their purpose in the past. They however have outlived their purpose and have now just become an arm of the Dem party.

Gianni on February 14, 2012 at 11:01 AM

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 10:49 AM

false premise, no care.

tom daschle concerned on February 14, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Gianni: Really? You have all those rights when you work at WalMart? I don’t think so.

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 11:07 AM

The ideals upon which labor unions first came into being in this country were worthy ideals.

Since then, labor unions have devolved into agencies of thuggery, greed, politics, and outright evil.

Whatever happens to labor unions, they need to not exist in their current form any longer. Bust them up, by whatever means necessary.

I’ll help.

IronDioPriest on February 14, 2012 at 11:08 AM

I’m a former union member. I worked in public safety in a non-dangerous job. All our union did was continually try to get more money out of the county, especially for retirees, on the backs of us younger workers who had to pay more for the additional benefit. It was a closed shop. Even though I didn’t want to be part of the union, they took “dues” form our checks anyway “because I was still benefitting from the collective bargaining agreement”. What kind of crap is that?! My mother also works in public safety at a jail, and since they’re all civilians (except the officers), they are forced to join SEIU since her department doesn’t have their own union. My mother refused but they still took money from her check, too. Thank goodness my parents have benefits through my dad’s job.

RadioAngel on February 14, 2012 at 11:10 AM

SO we all agree that unions were created for worthy, necessary reasons. And yet you’re all proposing that we destroy unions. Don’t you think you’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater? Do you really want to bring the country back to 1900?!

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 11:10 AM

SO we all agree that unions were created for worthy, necessary reasons. And yet you’re all proposing that we destroy unions. Don’t you think you’re throwing the baby out with the bathwater? Do you really want to bring the country back to 1900?!

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 11:10 AM

That ship sailed a long time ago. Are you concerned with organized labor’s kinship to global communism?

tom daschle concerned on February 14, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Terry Bowman, the unions didn’t have to force everyone to join so they could steal their money. They chose to. If you believe that they had to, then you’re absolving them of the responsibility for doing it.

kylearane on February 14, 2012 at 11:14 AM

Like with democracy and republic, communism is an idea. The idea of communism is the most altruistic of all the forms of governing. That even the examples of communes cannot make it much past the first generation shows that it is unworkable as a governing systems.

Yet, ignorant people continue to blame everything on communism. A form of governing that you yourself admits has never existed.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

You are just playing infantile games of semantics and you know it.

Totalitarianism is the end result of communism, it is not a far stretch to connect the two and blame communism as the root cause.

By all means, go ahead and keeping arguing semantics, I’m sure you seem really smart, in your own head.

ShadowsPawn on February 14, 2012 at 11:15 AM

An additional problem here is that if say those donations go to a political party the member does not support then if they choose to help the party they do support they have to donate more money to fight the other money already forcibly taken from them.

A reasonable solution is to ensure zero dues or agency fees go for political or group support purposes but are exclusively used for administrative overhead costs.

If a union member desires to contribute they can send donations to their candidates or the union PAC or any fund set up to support non political destinations.

The Dems on that hearing were uniform in their desire not to have their cash cow killed.

CommentGuy on February 14, 2012 at 11:16 AM

My wife is an RN in Oregon. While she is not technically forced to join the union, she still has to pay the same amount in dues to a non-religious charity. We already give to our church and to other religious charities like WorldVision, as well as to our schools.

What would Big Labor do without forced unionization? I would like to find out.

UndeadBeav on February 14, 2012 at 11:17 AM

For all the howling by the Dem side of the hearing and listings of union accomplishments, what they skipped over is that 95% of the traditional reasons for unions are now included in the base of laws in our country so the valid need for a union at all has been reduced by a significant amount.

CommentGuy on February 14, 2012 at 11:24 AM

And y’all cannot tell the difference between communism and totalitarian regimes.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 9:55 AM

Are you stating that altruism is an ideal? Because if you do then that’s the issue we need to argue.

itsspideyman on February 14, 2012 at 11:25 AM

For those who were “forced” to join a union – feel free to refuse the union benefits. Feel free to pay for your doctor out of your own pocket. Feel free to pay your salary back to your employer every day you are out on vacation or when you’re sick. Feel free to return any “forced” union raises back to your employer. Feel free to give up any legal rights to protection if you’re hurt or abused on the job, and most importantly, grin and bear it when you’re fired because the boss wants to replace you with his daughter…

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Funny, I have all those things and I’m NOT part of a union.. thus.. unions obviously aren’t needed anymore. They served their purpose, now they are nothing but political slush funds that force people to pay them.

ShadowsPawn on February 14, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Totalitarianism is the end result of communism, it is not a far stretch to connect the two and blame communism as the root cause.

By all means, go ahead and keeping arguing semantics, I’m sure you seem really smart, in your own head.

ShadowsPawn on February 14, 2012 at 11:15 AM

For cryin’ out loud, no it isn’t. Communism was supposed to be the end result of socialism. That it won’t happen just tells us that it cannot work.

Totalitarianism is what we will get if we follow socialism. The marxists who teach at our schools would love for their students to think communism will be the end result. How do y’all think we ended up with all the OWS nutballs? Call all this stuff communism and a kid will look up what communism is and think “that looks pretty good”. Its very feel good Star Trekkish in its description. Nobody thinks it through and notices that it won’t work. People who keep calling Totalitarianism and socialism communism are not doing those of us fighting against Totalitarianism and socialism any good.

Blaming socialism’s ills on something that hasn’t existed is like blaming Ford for Chevy’s problems.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM

People who keep calling Totalitarianism and socialism communism are not doing those of us fighting against Totalitarianism and socialism any good.

Blaming socialism’s ills on something that hasn’t existed is like blaming Ford for Chevy’s problems.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Then please explain what Communisim is, as you understand it.

itsspideyman on February 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Even a forced member is not required to pay for political donations by the union. My “fair share” dues were $1 less than union dues, so I had $40/month taken from my check. I sued. The union admitted they spent 85% of it on campaigns. The Court ruled that our dues should be one-fifth of that, because that’s what the union spent on union stuff.

Get a RTW law firm to represent you like we did. The union won’t tell you, but they will lose!

Oh, and my fellow state employees told me to “slow down, I would make them look bad” too!

PattyJ on February 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Gianni: Really? You have all those rights when you work at WalMart? I don’t think so.

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 11:07 AM

I live in a RTW state and yes, they do.

Everyone gets 9 paid holidays a year, and if you’ve put in your time, paid vacation. You also have access to insurance and workers comp. If you’re hurt on thejob, the companies insurance covers the costs of medical bills not your own.

If you produce/work as you should, you’re all right. No one is going to get rid of a hard working employee.

MadDogF on February 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Are you stating that altruism is an ideal? Because if you do then that’s the issue we need to argue.

itsspideyman on February 14, 2012 at 11:25 AM

No, I’m stating that the description of communism is the most altruistic form of governing. And in a perfect world with perfect people, it would be. This ain’t a perfect world and y’all ain’t perfect people. I am perfect. That would make me the ideal benevolent dictator.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM

And for the record, pm123, I worked for a company now where I am treated better than when I was a union member. I have the same types of benefits and pay as when I was a union member. There is no need for them to exist anymore.
Like CommentGuy says, we have state and federal employment laws now. Unions have become burdensome and obsolete.

RadioAngel on February 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Hmm… I had vacation pay and sick pay at pizza hut and the gas station I worked at. My Mom gets quite a bit of vacation and sick pay working at the gas station. I’ve got raises at all my jobs I’ve had… The difference is the employer wasn’t forced to give them. As far as getting hurt at work, workers comp provides for that. Even if unions were to go away things aren’t going to go back to the way they were before unions.

Gianni on February 14, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Then please explain what Communisim is, as you understand it.

itsspideyman on February 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM

No need to. Communism was defined, and described, during its inception. It is described in text books and even Wikipedia.

Calling totalitarian socialism communism only makes totalitarian socialism sound better.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM

The fix is move from Washington to any of the right to work states.

TulsAmerican on February 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM

Had identical experience back in early 60′s–yes, I’m that old–the NEA where I was living at the time persuaded the Legislature to pass a law governing agency shops. Simply put that meant that even if you did not join the NEA full dues came out of your pay anyway and tough bananas if you didn’t like it. So the only protection however flimsy was to join the Union and at least vote. Needless to say it was and still is a Dem controlled State with great economic and unemployment problems.

jeanie on February 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 10:49 AM

thanks sucka! keep running on that wheel!

DanMan on February 14, 2012 at 11:37 AM

No, I’m stating that the description of communism is the most altruistic form of governing. And in a perfect world with perfect people, it would be. This ain’t a perfect world and y’all ain’t perfect people. I am perfect. That would make me the ideal benevolent dictator.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Okay, now I understand, thanks.

I would argue that altruism is the worst concept foistered on mankind because of your exact reasoning; it would take perfect people to govern it, and people are not perfect.

Altruism does not recognize the freedom of the individual to pursue his own interests. Our march from monarchies culminated with Locke and Adam Smith in the 1700′s, when it was recognized there was no ‘divine right of kings’, and if kings were not infallible, neither was anyone else. Therefore a system of government that allowed for a fallible man to be able to protect their self-interests. The greatness of our founders is the recognition of this.

Yeah, every once in a while some guy thinks he’s come up with the perfect system. But people have a way of mucking it up. :)

itsspideyman on February 14, 2012 at 11:37 AM

All that needs to be done to correct this is make all states right to work states. The money used for political purposes needs to be separate from dues and not collected by automatic deduction. If the unions are so worried that their members will not send in their money for political purposes then they are admitting this practice is wrong!

harvey1 on February 14, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Wow, it’s cold out. time to warm up.

No, I’m stating that the description of communism is the most altruistic form of governing

Contrary to your previous posting, it is NOT people who confuse socialism and communism who cause a problem, it is people who assume communism is “altruistic” who are easily beguiled into following populist leaders towards socialism.

And there is a difference. While democracy and republic are ideas, they have also been used, to some success (for now) as forms of government.

WryTrvllr on February 14, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Calling totalitarian socialism communism only makes totalitarian socialism sound better.

cozmo on February 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM

after today we’ll do it just to pi$$ you off cozmo, anything else get on your last frayed nerve?

DanMan on February 14, 2012 at 11:39 AM

SO we all agree that unions were created for worthy, necessary reasons.

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 11:10 AM

This book Mobsters, Unions, and Feds: The Mafia and the American Labor Movement by James B Jacobs may help you understand what has happened to unions in the United States after they were created.

Fallon on February 14, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Ok, personal insults mean the end of productive conversation. Adios!

pm123 on February 14, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Comment pages: 1 2