Unions (not) Working for You and your Fa milies

“Conspiracies??

Yeah, like "socialists are infiltrating the country"?

You'll have to speak to the man in charge about that.....Sarge.

Maybe Stover is snortin' that Crystal Lite stuff.

Nigal, you want me to prove that the Repub party is pro-business??

I won't waste my time.”

“Y2 - Take a step back. Take a breath.

I want you to honestly answer this question.

If the vast majority of labor unions took the union dues, and directed them to support Bush and his buddies, would you think that was ok?

What if Bush gave them extra oil and military contracts because of their support?

You'd be for that?”

“MarkO - Same above for you ...”

“"We oppose any national legislation that would restrict or limit the Right-to-work."

--- Texas Republican Party Platform

The National Right-to-Work Act of 2003 --- House Resolution 391 --- was moved January 37 by South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson. To date it has 32 co-sponsors. The bill would prohibit negotiating a union security clause (or union shop language) into collective bargaining agreements. Union security requires all workers who receive benefits of a union contract to share in the cost of union representation. The National Labor Relations Act has a Taft-Hartley Act loophole that allows states to enact their own "right-to-work" laws, whereby workers aren't required to pay dues but are still protected by union contracts. Most right-to-work campaigns are financed by big businesses and business groups bent on destroying the labor movement by crippling it financially.


There ya go MarkO”

“"Nigal, you want me to prove that the Repub party is pro-business??"

No MarkO, that they are anti-labor and anti-working man as you claimed.”

“MarkO - Why do you always talk about the other posters and not the issues?”

““MarkO - Why do you always talk about the other posters and not the issues?”
Sarge
2:16:31 PM
7/25/05

How am I supposed to answer a lie like that?

(with a question)”

“Better watch out Sarge, he might call you a 'queer'.
LOL”

“Sarge - If you read what I've posted I've said I'd like a capping on all political spending by business and unions. Money pollutes American politics. I think politicians should be paid a good wage for what they do, and should not be making money or taking vast campaign sums from anyone, be they unions or businesses.
I have less of a problem with small contributions.

Winning an election shouldn't be about how much airtime you can buy.

the Republicans seem to say that money from trial lawyers is bad, money from unions is bad, but money from the likes of Enron, Ken Lay, Exxon is ok.
I think there needs to be a reversal so politicians actually have the best interests of the voters at stake.”

“Marko - don't waste your breath bro, you need to conserve your health to keep costs down. Consider it a wellness program. OK, I'm off to get a person who was wrongfully terminated in the eyes of the law thier job back. Wish me luck.”

“Nigal, when the Republican party works actively to take from the poor (and middle class) and give to the wealthy, that makes them anti-labor and anti-worker.


Maybe you're just too starry-eyed in your worship and adoration of wealth and power to see.”

“y2 - Businesses are owned by citizens.

Plus, I appreciate the insight, but that is a non sequitur.
last edited: 7/25/05 2:26:56 PM”

“I'll go along with y2.

American politics is polluted with money.

And, good luck Buddha Bear!!
last edited: 7/25/05 2:33:33 PM”

“Political contributions from business to the republican party are nearly 2:1 overall, and as much as 6:1 with some industries.

2004 Campaign Contributions
Real Estate: $16,161,900(R), $8,614,233(D)
Misc. Business: $10,496,359(R), $2,514,961(D)
Misc. Finance: $9,463,731(R), $5,227,830(D)
Health Professionals: $9,453,790(R), $3,571,542(D)
Misc. Manufacturing: $5,263,435(R), $1,361,466(D)
Insurance: $4,846,237(R), $1,766,401(D)
Oil & Gas: $4,756,424(R), Not on the charts(D)
Commercial Banks: $3,371,812(R), $1,682,554(D)
Pharmaceuticals: $2,064,400(R), Not on charts(D)

Totals: $251,113,234(R), $162,948,826(D)



One party is peeing in the water much more than the other (no pun intended Pennsy).”

“You will confuse The Axis with facts, BB.”

““Nigal, when the Republican party works actively to take from the poor (and middle class) and give to the wealthy, that makes them anti-labor and anti-worker."

Backing up one baseless claim with nothing but another baseless claim isn't supporting your view. It's called being an empty suite. Quit while you're behind MarkO. :)”

“Ok Nigal - did the tax cuts give more to the wealthy or to the poor?”

““Ok Nigal - did the tax cuts give more to the wealthy or to the poor?”

Who pays in more?”

“GASP!!!!!!!!!
The Rep party approves of Business!!!!!
LOL”

“As a percentage of "disposable" income?
last edited: 7/25/05 2:42:46 PM”

“LOL @ SS!”

“GASP - the unions might actually share some interests with the Democrats.”

“Y2 - You honestly don't see it do you?

You won't answer the question about what if they supported Bush.

The only reason you're for it, is they support Dems.

They grow government, government grows them.

You don't see a problem with that?

I don't believe it.

You're ignoring the reality, and you know it.”

“Sure Sarge, and captialism, when it works is a wonderful thing. People making money and progressing in the lives is a great thing to behold. But occasionally the rights of a company to make money can lead them to ride roughshod over the rights of individuals, the wider public interest and the rights of workers - so the purpose of a legislature, as well as ensuring a good environment for business to thrive is to pass laws to protect the people who vote for them, and even those who don't.

It's all about balance - I think the balance has gone too much in favor of business, when nearly every piece of legistlation gives businesses exactly what they ask for. Drug costs, proposed energy bill, lifting of pollution controls, car manaufacturers regulations on fuel efficiency, the right to log national forests, the right to drill in anwr, reforming the endangered species laws, changing the bankruptsy laws.... the list goes on - everything seems to go exactly the way the industries involved wanted it to go - coincidence?”

“"Who pays in more?”
Nigal
2:40:00 PM
7/25/05

Where do they get that money?

Do they conjure it up??

They "acquired" that money from all of us.
If "they" are going to play in our pockets "we" should have a fair say so in making the rules of the game.

Nigal, I'm not going to play that "back it up" game.”

“The balance has gone too far in favor of citizens, and not far enough in favor of government?

Laws take care of the problems you listed. And when they don't, you vote somebody in who will make it happen.

Big government is not the solution. Especially in the way unions do it - by taking citizen money and using it to grow government.

I didn't check your state, but in Pennsylvania the teacher's unions get citizen money (via school taxes used to pay teachers used to pay the union) and use it to increase school spending via promoting politicians who support such things.

That is wrong.

How can you defend that?”

“Under that theory, Sarge, every contribution made by any governmental employee is certainly going to piss someone off.”

“"You won't answer the question about what if they supported Bush?"

OK, OK!!

The Repubs are anti-union!!!

"Unions would not shoot themselves in the foot.Big government is not the solution. Especially in the way unions do it - by taking citizen money and using it to grow government."

You've got to be joking???

Dubya and Company have grown government and looted the U.S. Treasury.”

“Sarge - I've answered the freaking question. I'm against both business and unions handing over cash to buy the influence of politicians, be they Republican or Democrat.

So no, I wouldn't be happy about them handing money to Republicans, but what is needed is a reform of the whole matter of political funding - not a partisan attempt to cut off funding for one political party.

Also - now let me put this in simple terms. If you were to cut of cash from big business when the democrats return to power, you should also stop the money coming from unions and look at the money coming from other groups such as trial lawyers. So no, this is not political bias at work.

Sarge - you seem to ask pointless questions framed in your own terms, which are nearly always not applicable, then try to call people for not buying into your cunning trap, which frankly wouldn't fool a moose with a crack problem.”

“Do you think the big boys at Haliburton are going to vote blue any time soon?”

“(SEIU) Coalition representatives say more transparency and accountability from the Washington headquarters is needed. They complain that the political lobbying, particularly in favor of Democrats, has made the AFL-CIO indebted to one party with no visible payback.
"I think that's one of he reasons that many of us, and I'll speak for myself, have voiced a concern that we not be the appendage, if you will, of the Democratic Party, nor be their ATM card," said International Association of Fire Fighters President Harold Schaitberger.

According to Windham, about $36 million of the AFL-CIO's annual budget of $125 million goes to voter mobilization and education efforts, though the political action committees can raise money for specific campaigns.

Greer said that the coalition does not advocate reducing the political budget, but increasing organizing resources by cutting costs at the top.




Dang! .....and I thought they just wanted to Unionize Wal-Mart, has to be true, BB told us!!!!! LOL”

“You want the truth about unions ? You want the truth ?
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

Now, as you were, carry on, etc.....”

“"Nigal, I'm not going to play that "back it up" game."

Of course not. Because ya can't. No need to call in Scooby Doo and the gang for this one. It's obviouse. :)”

“This must be quite a refreshing pause for the Republicans. After daily Iraq bombings, continued Al Qaeda activity, Delaygate, Coingate, Rovegate and freefalling polls, it must be nice to set up the union bowling pins once again and throw that ball down the alley.

Individuals have a right to assemble in this country. They have a right to free speech. People have a right to refuse to work. And people have a right to participate in the political process. This is what unions do.

I do think that unions can be criticized for a lack of forward vision. Unions, mostly, represent current workers. When cutbacks in traditional industries started to happen in the 70s and 80s, many unions were content to protect the interests of the Baby Boomers because they paid dues then. This was good for those already in the unions. It was not good for younger workers. Many unions paid the price.

I agree with Buddha Bear that this split will ultimately make the entire union movement stronger. Those with younger membership like the SEIU will be more flexible in attracting younger members.

But these things tend to run in cycles. There are a lot of people out there who work very hard, but find it difficult to provide health care for their families, education for their kids and savings for retirement.

These things aren't necessarily Democratic issues, or union issues, but unions are a set of tools that a group of workers can use to provide for families. And in my best Charlton Heston, "It's not guns that kill people, it's people that kill people." Same thing with unions. Unions are not inherently good nor bad. It's how effectively the tool is used. And for what purpose.

I think that the Democratic/Republican criticism of unions is valid. Unions support many more Democrats than Republicans. But I spent months this past year helping my local Republican candidate for Congress win election on behalf of the MEA and NEA.

Personally, I think that unions should contribute to both Democrats and Republicans. We should play both sides of the field, just like many other players in Washington do. But you can't support someone who will undercut issues important to working Americans.”

“Sarge - I've answered the freaking question. I'm against both business and unions handing over cash to buy the influence of politicians, be they Republican or Democrat.

So you're against Unions in their current state. Why are you defending them?

So no, I wouldn't be happy about them handing money to Republicans, but what is needed is a reform of the whole matter of political funding - not a partisan attempt to cut off funding for one political party.

RE: Unions, absolutely. That's true.

Also - now let me put this in simple terms. If you were to cut of cash from big business when the democrats return to power, you should also stop the money coming from unions and look at the money coming from other groups such as trial lawyers. So no, this is not political bias at work.

Stopping money from private citizens and their businesses when they attempt to elect politicians is unconstitutional.

Sarge - you seem to ask pointless questions framed in your own terms, which are nearly always not applicable, then try to call people for not buying into your cunning trap, which frankly wouldn't fool a moose with a crack problem.

My question was completely relevant. You have trouble answering because it makes you realize your position is hypocritical. You're against what is happening, yet you support the unions actions nevertheless.

That's hypocritical. You are uneasy with answering because you have a conscience. Listen to your conscience and stop making excuses for your weak stance.”

“RL, I figured you post soon...looks to be a late night for ya.

I dont have the same optomism as you and BB about the good of this split for unions or AFL-CIO. I think that wishfull thinking.

Sweeneys words at the convention yesterday were "insulting" and "makes me very mad (or angry, I forgot)". I heard him speak on NPR today. The AFL_CIO focuses on the dinosaurs of unions, steelworkers and UAW, they are gone, never coming back. The SEIU is smart to leave a sinking ship. Sweeney does have some grudges though, the head of the SEIU was his protege as sweeney came from the SEIU.

The carpenters (followed by laborers in recent years) left a while ago and are better for it. Their pensions smoke the UAW or darn near any others union nationwide. The skilled trades will do much better on their own.”

“I agree and disagree Birch. First, local and national union pensions are a result of each independant local, and the fact that the unions are or are not members of the AFL-CIO really don't matter when it comes to that. However, membership in the AFL-CIO is significant when it comes to the overall strategy of the Labor Movement, and this is where I partially agree with Birch.

Unions need to strategize with two fronts in mind. 1. How do we grow our numbers, and, like Joe said, looking toward the UAW and Steelworkers and trying to revive them to former levels is crazy! However, we need to look at unions like that, and find out how we can retain as many of those high paying jobs as possible, and apply those methods to similar unions (CWA, Teamsters, IBEW, etc). Because these good paying jobs are the ones being "outsourced", a political abbtle is the best way to retain, slightly grow, these jobs, which is Sweeney's position. Stern, on the other hand, wants to unionize the lowest paying jobs of workers who have few if any benefits, and low wages (i.e. Walmart). In a way, it's how unions started. Everything is cyclical. Both strategies, in my opinion, need to be enacted, and in a way, I glad this shake-up has happened. I wish that the split wouldn't have happened, and that both strategies could have been implemented, but either way, things will start to get done.

I've worked with the SEIU folks in Chicago on a membership drive. Those folks are highly motivated, but seemed to lack strategy and efficiency. For example, when our AFSCME folks went out, we spent quality time discussing issues with the potential members, visiting fewer folks, but bringing in more signed commitment cards. The SEIU folks knocked on tons of doors, but didn't take the time to talk, and recieved fewer signed cards. It was a numbers game. Hopefully they'll get trained properly (which is something the AFL-CIO has recently started investing in).

Anyway, I hope in the end it's all good. I know that our organization has supported republicans who were freindly to labor like RL said, and I don't think all AFL-CIO folks are democrats.

BTW - I thought Sweeney came out of AFSCME, but I could be wrong.”

“what a fibber...........


look his lips are moving!”

“growing numbers isnt going to happen IMO. Times have changed, union membership is down from its national high by about 75% (from a high of roughly 33-35% to about 8% today). Honestly and this will sound bad but so be it, I dont really care if the organizations grow as a whole or not. I got involved for local reasons only. I refuse to get involved in anything outside of my local (all of the candidates our local endorsed except school board, I voted against). Someone said all politics are local.

I think we are our own worst enemy though. Our workforce (unskilled portion anyway) is about to price itself outta work. Not that I think they should lose jobs but as a taxpayer and employee I see mucho wasto and lots fo wasted manpower. I work in a culture of minimalists (do as little as I must, nothing more), I had hoped to change that but in my short tenure I realize I cannot reroute the mississippi alone. Too bad too, I can work anywhere lots of "my people" will be screwed...BIG TIME.”

“I think that there is opportunity to broaden the idea of union.

Costco and Sam's Club have been toying with the idea of providing bulk rate health care to club members.

What if one of the big unions offered associate membership to people who were sympathetic to or unable to join the core union? They could provide bulk, wholesale health insurance rates to these people, career counseling, classes, legal advice, travel discounts and liability insurance. The infrastructure is already there, and for the most part, underutilized.

This would create a dialogue with people who might want to unionize. It would give the unions more clout in Washington and in the state capitals. And it would help workers, which is what unions are all about.

One more thing. I think that unions need to get more of a sense of mission. I go to conferences in my state association and they have meetings at nice hotels and meet in nice restaurants. Some people make the valid comment that this is part of the reward for what are largely unpaid jobs. But, I think that union leadership needs to be a little hungry and have a little more zeal. It can't be comfortable. And it needs to be almost a moral calling. We need to eschew the niceties and become lean and mean and proclaim the gospel.”

“Unions are not only obsolete they are a detrement to our society.

Take the teacher's union for example. As the union has become stronger our educational system has become weaker.

Under performing teachers can't be fired and they breed mediocrity through the entire system. The teacher's union has reduced our education system to sham.

Why would a group of college educated men and women need a union? For political payoffs and supporting the union schills. The union certainly has not done anything positive for education.”

“The union protects the teachers from falling into the steel vats.”

“Nooooo! Not the steel vats!

It's impossible to change the minds of a priori union haters. As stated before, unions are not good nor bad. They are simply a tool grounded in fundamental American rights.

I'll give some examples of ways in which my local helps the school district.

1) A few years ago, the district had a budget crunch and needed to lay off some teachers. Our local got together, offered to take a pay cut and kept the teachers on for the rest of the year.

2) This past year, the district offered a bond proposal. The district can't legally spend money on this kind of campaign. Our local and county association gave money and lots of time to support the proposal.

3) My union runs classes for teachers. These help us to become better in the classroom. They also help teachers to improve their credentials.

4) I don't know how many times my local has helped to work through problems that involve an individual teacher or group of teachers. Association meetings give people a forum to discuss these issues. Administrators also have a place to vent their frustrations. The local gives everyone a structured place to solve the problems.

I suppose that there are some unions that protect bad workers. But we've had a couple of bad teachers on our staff. And there are lots of ways to remove them. And, in fact, the union often becomes an objective third-person in that kind of situation. In both cases, we made sure that the teacher had a chance to improve and then encouraged the teacher to evaluate the situation and leave.

Our staff improved and it was clean.”

“1) What caused the budget crunch in the first place? A: The Union

2) Yeah, to keep their business going. How is this helpful?

3) I don't want a politically active organization teaching government teachers how to teach. Do you?

4) The problems originate where? The union.”

“Good points, RL.

There truly is nothing that will persuade those who just plain hate unions.

These are some of the same people who see communists under every rock.
last edited: 7/27/05 12:21:32 PM”

“MarkO - Do you ever have a point, MarkO?”

“Sarge, I could poke you in the butt with a bayonet and you would say the same thing.”

“MarkO - I crown thee King Fallicious.”

“Cool !!!

I've been crowned by a wingnut!

I feel so special.”