Today's Unions: Stirring the Kool-Aid and Causing Collateral Damage

As former union leaders, there was a time when we admired unions and what they allegedly stood for. However, like many, the deeper we dug, the more we saw, and the more we experienced the betrayal of workers, the more disgusted we became with the union leaders of today. Like many people who are duped into believing in something, only to find out it is based on a false premise, a collectivist creed, and, in the end, causing more harm than good, we left in order to oppose that which we once preached.

There are several stories circulating in the media that offer prime examples of just what is meant by the above paragraph.

The first, of course, is the sordid battle going on between the SEIU and the CNA. There are enough stories floating around the internet for one to research on their own, so we won't spend any more time on it, except to offer you our opinion on What's Really Behind the SEIU vs. CNA Fight, which we posted on Friday.

The second story comes by way of the Detroit News and discusses a United Auto Workers' (UAW) strike against General Motors at one of its plants and several others that the UAW has threatened with strikes. The title of the piece is aptly titled: Motive in UAW threats unclear.

In the piece, the writer quotes a UAW striker, Michael Shrubbe, as saying: "None of us know why we're here."

Mr. Shrubbe, the article states, has been walking a picket line in Delta Township, where workers have been off the job since April 17 at the factory that builds GM's popular crossovers.

The article goes on to say:

GM believes the UAW threats, all against factories that either make critical models for the automaker or supply the parts to build them, are a tactic being used to draw the company into the strike against American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings Inc., according to several sources familiar with negotiations. Labor law prohibits the union from striking because of a dispute elsewhere; many think the union is using local negotiations to apply indirect pressure.

"There's a feeling among workers that their jobs are being jeopardized by things beyond their control," Gary Chaison, a labor specialist at Clark University in Worcester, Mass. "Their expectations were when everything was tied up nationally everything would fall into place. Now it appears to be unraveling so fast."

The American Axle strike, in its ninth week, has created a parts shortage that has forced GM to idle or cut production at more than two dozen North American factories. But GM's bottom line has been relatively unscathed since the affected factories produce slow-selling large trucks and SUV that were backing up on dealer lots.

Now, besides strikers not knowing why they're unemployed and on the picket lines (that, by itself, is condemning enough of the union's leadership), the fact of the matter is, if GM's assumptions are correct and the UAW is trying to use local strikes as leverage to draw the car maker into the American Axle strike, then the UAW has become woefully inept at flexing its own muscle.

As every unionist (former or otherwise) knows, the strike is a union's only weapon and for a union to pull the trigger without making sure its gun is fully loaded and correctly aimed is not only irresponsible, but borders on a negligent dereliction of a union leader's duty--to care for his membership first.

In this case though, it would appear GM workers and their families are being sacrificed because of Ron Gettlefinger's poor calculations in dealing with American Axle and, if true, that is both reprehensible and inexcusable.

Our third and final story comes from the Los Angeles Times and deals with the aftermath of the 100-day writer's strike.

In the LA Times article, the reporter discusses at length the many hardship cases of the "collateral damage" caused by the strike. Namely, the crew members and other talent (mostly union members) that are facing financial ruin from the economic fallout from the writer's strike.

As the article states: Some are at risk of losing their homes. Some can't afford groceries. Others have filed for bankruptcy. Still others struggle to work enough hours to hold on to their health insurance.

Although hard figures are not available, union officials say that thousands of crew members who normally would be busy at this time of year are still idled because of the sharp contraction in television production. Some union locals report a quarter of their members are sitting at home.

Karen Hartjen is one. She can't bring herself to open the utility bills lying on her
kitchen table in Simi Valley.

The 53-year-old assistant prop master has been out of work since early November,
when a string of jobs on TV shows such as "CSI: New York" and "Medium" came to a halt after the writers walked out.Although Hartjen is accustomed to earning $100,000 a year, she is now $10,000 in debt and her home is threatened with
foreclosure. She has turned to her church and the Salvation Army for help with
groceries.

To add insult to injury, these workers who stood behind their union "brothers" and "sisters" are getting the shaft from their own unions who administer their health care...

Many crew members are in a race against the clock to keep their health insurance.
Union rules require that members work at least 300 hours every six months to
maintain their benefits.

After a four-month hiatus, foley artist Dominique Tabach of Valencia recently returned to work part-time on the CBS drama "Numb3rs." But she has nothing else lined up.

Without additional work, Tabach, 43, is concerned that she won't accumulate enough hours to keep her union health insurance beyond September. The insurance covers Tabach, her 8-year-old daughter and her husband, a former TV executive who recently lost his job.

Yet, in the face of an actors' strike that is certain to bring financial devastation to those teetering on the edge right now, NONE of these "victims" seem to question whether their "union solidarity" was worth it. None seem to wonder if "Hollywood is a Union Town" is really a good thing, or perhaps it is a bad thing.

Last December, we received a comment from a rather irate wife of a man who was unemployed due to the writer's strike (which is posted here). In her comment, she called she and her husband "collateral damage," to which we took her to task. In sum, if you place yourself in harm's way, then you cannot call yourself "collateral damage."

In closing, as was stated at the beginning of this post, when people realize that today's unions are based on a false premise, a collectivist creed and, in the end, causing more harm than good, perhaps they will stop allowing themselves to become the "collateral damage" to half-witted union leaders of today who only know how to lead people down a one-way path to self-destruction.

WHAT'S REALLY BEHIND THE SEIU VS. CNA FIGHT...

Nichole Lucht from the Las Vegas Sun writes about the current war between the SEIU & the California Nurses Association:

On the surface it appears as a fight between the Service Employees International Union and the California Nurses Association.

But the torn history between the service workers' union and the AFL-CIO (which the nurses' association is affiliated with) could be the real reason behind the current rift, as well as the steady decline in union membership across the country.

Ms. Lucht is sort of close to hitting the nail on the head with her piece. However, she doesn't take it where it needs to go...back to basics. And, perhaps because she's not a dude, she's over-thinking it...(no offense, Ms. Lucht.)

You see, this is nothing more than a grudge match between two guys who used to be friends....Except they're letting CHICKS DO THEIR FIGHTING FOR THEM.

Like two old pervs going down to the neighborhood Hooters to check out the Tuesday night mud-wrestling match, the dudes in DC are just hanging back (plausible deniability), checking out the chicks ripping each other apart, hoping the one he's betting on won't lose her top before the other does.

These two three-pieced pimps of power are letting CHICKS do their fighting for them, placing their bets, and each are hoping they don't get too covered in the dirt themselves.

THAT'S IT. IT IS REALLY THAT SIMPLE. HERE'S WHY:

Like most street fights over who controls the corner, Andy Stern, the former student, picked a fight with his old boss John Sweeney a few years ago over money. (Stern wanted to spend the cash on getting more Johns to visit the bordello, while Sweeney wanted the money to go to the politicians for protection).

Stern called his old boss out in front of the whole neighborhood and, while Boss Sweeney showed remarkable restraint, he didn't give in.

It should be noted that Boss Sweeney could have squashed Stern then and there (and, in hind sight, he may be wishing he did), but he let the little traitor shoot his mouth off for months and months.

As the Spring of 2005 went on, like a drunk at the bar, Stern's ramblings got louder, his insults more insulting and Boss Sweeney showed remarkable tolerance and restraint as his former friend slapped him in the face. As a result, Stern got even more upset and decided to try to burn the House of Labor down. By Summer, Stern split the K Street Crew, and almost half the gang went with Stern.

Well, as it turns out, barely a year later, the 2006 elections proved Old Boss Sweeney was right.

Now, Stern's got egg on his face. His gang hasn't grown much and he's back to backing politicians with millions of dollars.

Over the last couple of years, as though having taken a lesson from The Godfather, Boss Sweeney's been patiently lining up his new crew, the California Nurses Association, and waiting for the right time to strike back.

That day came a few weeks ago, when the CNA went to Ohio and snatched 8,000 workers from the SEIU in an SEIU-staged election.

Predictably, like Sonny Corleone whose temper always got the best of him, the younger Stern struck back by sending SEIU thugs to the Labor Notes conference to disrupt in typical SEIU fashion, but it backfired...A woman went to the hospital, an SEIU member died, and its been a PR war ever since.

Unfortunately for Stern, Boss Sweeney's got the upper hand in this war, his moral authority ratings are slightly higher in the world of labor opinion (not that that really matters).

However, until Andy Stern grows up and offers his old boss an apology and kisses Boss Sweeney's ring, it appears that the mud-slinging will continue between the SEIU and AFL-CIO's CNA.

In the meantime, although we wish we had some buttery popcorn, we are having fun watching the melee and reading the dueling press releases. Everyday more mud is thrown and more flesh exposed by this hypocritical internecine war, the more the public sees today's unions for what they are: Parasites living off the blood of America's productive workers.

Union Infighting Exposes Union Hypocrisy and Reasons Why Employee Free Choice Act Should Be Opposed

April 21, 2008, West Caldwell, NJ—For several years, Big Labor has spent millions of dollars of their members’ dues money waging an offensive and often misleading PR war. Union efforts are being made in order to lure politicians into supporting a draconian bill entitled the Employee Free Choice Act. It is estimated that labor union spending on the November elections may exceed $1 billion in order to target and unionize millions of America’s union-free workers through this Orwellian law.

Yet, it is a very public fight between unions that has taken place over the last two months, leading to allegations of union-led violence at a union conference on Saturday, April 12th, that demonstrates exactly why the Employee Free Choice Act should be opposed, says EmployerReport.com Editor and Chief Blogger Peter A. List, a noted labor relations consultant.

List is referring to the current clash going on right now between the Service Employees International Union, the National Nurses Organizing Committee, an offshoot of the California Nurses Association (an AFL-CIO affiliate), and the AFL-CIO. All three have been locked in a heated battle over which union gets representational and monetary control over the nation’s registered nurses.

This inter-union war has led to dueling press releases, allegations of harassment, stalking, violence, and even a union member’s death that occurred at a labor conference in Dearborn, Michigan on April 12th. In California, a judge has issued a temporary restraining order against the SEIU over allegations of stalking and harassing CNA executive board members at their homes and workplaces. Last week, AFL-CIO boss John Sweeney issued a press release stating (in part), “Violence in attacking freedom of speech must be strongly condemned.”

“For these union bosses to complain about the union tactics they’re using on each another is both ironic and smacks of union hypocrisy,” List (himself a former union activist) states, “since these are the very tactics these unions deploy on employers and their employees all-too-often during union organizing campaigns throughout the country.”

“Many Americans are, perhaps for the first time, seeing the type of common tactics that union bosses have used against employers and employees for years, only this time unions are doing it to themselves,” List says. “By their own actions against each other, unions are shedding light on exactly why EFCA should be exposed for the fraud that it is.”

“If enacted, EFCA would strip workers of the right to vote on unionization by secret-ballot, causing the unionization of workers based purely on trained union organizers’ ability to obtain signed union authorization cards through harassment and deception, as well as leaving workers exposed to the very tactics these unions are accusing each other of right now,” says List.

An additional component of EFCA is the binding arbitration provision that mandates that a government-appointed arbitrator will impose a contract on a newly-unionized employer if the union and company representatives cannot reach agreement within 120 days of unionization.

“In a global economy, EFCA is the ultimate American job killer,” says List, himself a former union activist whose union job was outsourced pre-NAFTA. “Both forced unionization and binding arbitration will further destroy countless American jobs and cause the destruction of a huge number of small businesses as their ability to compete will be damaged beyond repair.”

“Politicians should not allow themselves to become the political pawns of union bosses in exchange for union support in November,” states List. “Unfortunately, certain politicians are allowing themselves to be used by this special interest group in exchange for union money and union ‘get-out-the-vote’ efforts. However, these same politicians run the risk of becoming the paid-political puppets of union bosses in an effort that may, ultimately, lead to more American
job losses.”
_________________