The NEW Democrats' Oath of Loyalty

A variant of the following is making its way through the vast e-mail cyber-chain, so we thought we'd make it a little more poignant...

The NEW Democrats' Oath of Party Loyalty:

"As a party loyalist, I do solemnly swear to blind obedience to the following beliefs:

1. I am against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.

2. I believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity;
2 1/2. I believe that the AFL-CIO created the middle class, not the employers who created the jobs.

3. I believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. Nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.

4. I believe that there was no art before Federal funding.

5. I believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical documented changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV's.

6. I believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual is natural.

7. I believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.

8. I believe that the same teacher who can't teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

9. I believe that hunters don't care about nature, but loony activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.

10. I believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

11. I believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make "The Passion of the Christ" for financial gain only.

12. I believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.

13. I believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.

14. I believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, and A.G. Bell.

15. I believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.

16. I believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person.

17. I believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge.

18. I believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and a sex offender belonged in the White House.

19. I believe that homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites, and bestiality should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.

20. I believe that illegal Democrat Party funding by the Chinese Government is somehow in the best interest to the United States .

21. I believe that this message is a part of a vast, right wing conspiracy.

22. I believe that it's okay to give Federal workers the day off on Christmas Day but it's not okay to say "Merry Christmas."

Stay tuned for the Republican Oath of Loyalty...

Labor's Lost Love for Democratic Leadership

At EmployerReport.com, we are please to have friends and acquaintances who provide additional food for our collectively independent minds to digest. As such, the following was submitted by our old friend and accomplished writer, Mr. David Denholm:

Brother Saul Alinsky, who trained union organizers through the Industrial Areas Foundation, reminds us in his Fifth Rule of Power Tactics, that "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." It is, therefore, a shame to pass up an opportunity to ridicule union officialdom.

Here's a story with some potential. The "Hall of Fame Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO" (Stark County, Ohio) has informed the Democratic Party Executive Committee that it will no longer support Democratic political candidates in Stark County. "Labor's love lost for Democratic leadership"

This move seems to have been instigated by Mike McElfresh, President of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 540 and the Labor Council's second vice president, who is upset because he lost a vote in the Democratic Executive Committee for a seat on the county election board.

This may not just be a case of "hell hath no fury like a Union Boss scorned." Another story, "Labor cuts support for county Dems," says that the vote for the election board seat may have been the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back.

It is worth noting that earlier this month - "Project Labor proposal downsized" - a Democrat on the Massillon, Ohio (in Stark County) City Council offended the building trades unions by indicating a willingness to water down a proposal for a Project Labor Agreement.

It is also interesting to note that, according to Union Stats dot com, in 2006 private sector union density in the Canton-Massillon Metropolitan Statistical Area (Stark County) was 14.9 percent, down only 1.1 percent from 16.0 percent in 1986. This compares very favorably, at least from the unions' point of view, to the drop of almost 10 points from 19.2 to 9.3 percent for private sector union density in Ohio and a decline nationally from 14.0 to 7.4 percent.

It’s not clear who needs whom the most, the Democratic Party or the labor unions. In this case, however, the unions seem to be abusing their constitutional right to be stupid by withdrawing support for the Party over a fit of peak.

David Denholm

LABOR DAY ANNIVERSARY

Dear readers:

This Labor Day weekend marks EmployerReport.com's one year anniversary of providing almost continuous news coverage of issues that impact America's workplace, from labor union issues to the political issues that hurt American companies and their workers. As this Labor Day weekend approaches, we approach our 12,000th visitor to EmployerReport.com.

What a year it's been. What started out as a part-time adventure to draw attention to Big Labor's attempt to strip workers of their right to vote on the matter of unionization through the Orwellian-named Employee Free Choice Act, has quickly turned into a second unpaid vocation. As most of our work is done in differing cites, from the airport terminal to the hotel room at night, our work is an after-hours dedication of exposing the truth about unions and their destruction in America today.

In January, we launched the EmployerReport.com blog to enable us to comment on some of the news items we post on. Although, we don't post as often as we'd like on as many topics as we care about (we do have our clients to consider afterall), we have been able post on some serious (and not-so-serious) issues affecting our nation.

Along the way, we've made many new friends while flustering more than a few of our enemies by exposing their shenanigans. Yes, one could say that we have become a small part of Hillary's imagined 'vast-right-wing conspiracy.'

In June, we started the Pathetic Union Department (PUD) to feature specific issues related to unions' poor treatment of their members. However, the reality quickly sank in that the PU department was just too vast to cite all of the union instances of (pardon the expression) pulling PUDs, so we tossed our PU Department to the trash-heap of tried ideas. If you follow EmployerReport.com long enough, you'll find that all the stories we cover belong in the PU Department anyway.

This week, be sure to check out EmployerReport.com, as there will be a plethora of union news, as there is every Labor Day.

In the meantime, as this Labor Day weekend approaches, we encourage you to read a fantastic op-ed by Federic Hamber entitled On Labor Day, We Should Honor Man's Mind, Not Men's Muscles, as the Real Source of Wealth and Progress. It's a great read and puts thing in perspective as Big Labor ties up the media with their stories about union labor.

In the coming year, our goal is to continue to improve EmployerReport.com, continue to add to our growing list of e-mail subscribers, as well as bring new features to our site.

As the Democrats continue to push Big Labor's agenda, their reach is only beginning to expand (with more in store for 2008). We know our fight is just beginning and we appreciate you coming along for the ride.

Thank you again for continuing to make EmployerReport.com a success.

Best wishes for a safe Labor Day Weekend.

Peter A. List
Editor & Chief Blogger
EmployerReport.com

"I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes." - Thomas Paine

Union Organizers are 'Salespeople,' says UNITE-HERE

What may seem to be obvious to some, a major union has confirmed for all: Union organizers are salespeople. Their job is to "sell" workers on becoming unionized.

This now-undisputable affirmation was the topic of a recent lawsuit filed by union organizers against their employer, UNITE-HERE, for overtime pay.

Trenette Savage, a union organizer with UNITE-HERE, along with seven other organizers (who either withdrew or had their suits dimissed) sued her employer for overtime pay.

According to Savage's attorney Gregory Lisi (as reported through Portfolio Media), people in Savage's position, who sometimes work 80-hour weeks, are exactly the type of employees that the FLSA is meant to protec.

“Their job is to go around and do the grunt work for the union,” said Lisi. “They don't make any policy decision for the unions or anything like that.”

“It's a funny case, in that the unions are supposed to be protecting their workers,” Lisi added. “But in this case, they're not.”

However, according to UNITE-HERE's motion for summary judgment (view here) Savage is an exempt outside sales person.

“Although union organizers are not usually thought of as salespeople in the conventional sense of for-profit retail sales, the essential duties of the position are functionally equivalent to those making outside sales people exempt from overtime,” according to UNITE HERE.

TELL US SOMETHING WE DIDN'T ALREADY KNOW...

MAYBE MS. SAVAGE AND HER FELLOW ORGANIZERS SHOULD HAVE JOINED A UNION INSTEAD OF WORKED FOR ONE.

If bloggers of the world unite into a union, does this mean I have to be a scab?

If you've been reading the news on the net lately about unions (see EmployerReport.com), you may have seen where some whackos (there's just no other word for it) on the blogoshpere want to form a union. (If you don't believe us, go here and check it out.)

According to Leslie Robinson, a writer at ColoradoConfidential.com who seems really detached from reality: "Maybe we could get more jobs, bona fide jobs."

Here's the problem(s)...

Since blogging is primarily a voluntary spewing of one's creative juices on subjects of a vast array with no particular employers (in most cases), who (or what) is this bloggers' union going to be negotiating with?

And since most (like us) work for free and often for our own amusement, who (or what) is this blogging union going to be negotiating against at what bargaining table??

And, if there is no agreement, do the bloggers strike?

If so, who (or what)?...Themselves???

More importantly, does anyone really care???

Lastly, if the bloggers' union strikes and we keep writing, doesn't that mean we're scabs?

Oh...This is too rich!

Of Glass Houses & Septic Tanks: AFL-CIO Negotiates Less-than-Living Wage Increase with its Unionized Staff

You know the old adage about living in glass houses and throwing stones, right? Or, what about the one that says something to the effect of the grass is always being greener over the septic tank?

Well, see if you can answer this riddle:

What do you call an employer who switches health care providers on its unionized employees, stalls negotiations well beyond the expired contract, has multiple tiers of employees (many without grievance protections, even though they pay unions dues), and negotiates paltry increases of 2.75% in the first year of the contract, 2.85% in the second year of the contract, and 2.75% in the third and final year of the contract?

If your answer is the AFL-CIO, that Big Kahuna of the two labor federations here in the U.S., you're right!

Well, here's another one from the Pathetic Union Department (PUD)...

It seems the AFL-CIO, has recently negotiated a renewal contract with the union representing its "professional staff," the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild (a division of the Communications Workers of America)...and what a contract it is!

According to a fluff piece (see note below) put out by the Bureau of National Affairs (subscription required), the AFL-CIO's previous contract with the Guild expired last October 1st but talks were 'postponed' until January 2007 due to the the mid-term elections.

Note: As the BNA normally doesn't do 'fluff pieces', we thought the piece was a bit too fluffy, so we did some research and found that the WBNG also represents numerous classifications of workers at the BNA, including its writers.

According to the BNA report, Amy Lampkin, the union's unit chair at the AFL-CIO, stated that once negotiations resumed in January, following the mid-term elections, the federation and the union quickly reached a tentative agreement on Feb. 6. The contract, however, was not put up for ratification until now because the parties had to work out details of health care coverage under a new provider.

Lampkin said that the AFL-CIO bargaining unit employees had received their health insurance through ULLICO (click here and here for a brief synopsis of the scandal-ridden, union-owned insurance carrier), but the insurance company got out of the health insurance business last year. She said that the parties agreed to a new carrier--United Healthcare--but had to work out details of "make-whole" language that was negotiated. [Apparently, this was necessary because the new health benefits are inferior to the the previous ULLICO benefits.]

The contract also contains a modicum of job security language for workers with more than 10 years with the federation, but nothing mentioned for workers with less than ten years who would be subject to being laid off if union funding to the AFL-CIO is cut again. This was apparently negotiated following the hypocritical way the Sweeney administration handled the 2005 lay offs at the AFL-CIO, angering some within the House of Labor. (See AFL-CIO layoff articles here and here.)

In terms of wages, the AFL-CIO agreed to a paltry 2.75 percent retroactive to Oct. 1, 2006, when the prior contract expired, followed by increases of 2.85 percent Oct. 1, 2007, and 2.75 percent Oct. 1, 2008. Which, given that the AFL-CIO is located in Washington, D.C., where the cost of living should be considered inhumane, the AFL-CIO's increase is less than a 'living wage' increase! [Perhaps the Carpenter's union could loan the WBNG some of their homeless protestors!]

And, last but not least, the AFL-CIO apparently agreed to continue the WBNG's "union security" provision (withholding union dues from all employees after 30 days of employment, or causing them to be terminated), even though the AFL-CIO has the "unlimited right to discharge" (aka fire) employees within six (6) months of their start date.

This, of course, means that those employees are (gasp!) "at will" employees and can be fired by the AFL-CIO for cause, little cause, or no cause at all!

Say what?!?...Yep! Here it is in their own words (er...writing):

ARTICLE IV - JOB SECURITY

1. The Employer shall have the unlimited right to discharge a new employee who has not concluded a probationary period of six (6) months, beginning from the date that the employee begins work, provided that on or before the two (2) month anniversary date and on or before the four (4) month anniversary date the progress of the new employee will be evaluated and the Guild will be notified in writing if any problem or problems appear to be developing. After one (1) month on the payroll, if an employee is discharged during the probationary period, he or she shall be given at least one (1) week's notice, or one (1) week's pay in lieu of notice. The probationary period shall end on the last working day before the six (6) month anniversary of the employee. An employee's probationary period may be extended by agreement of the Employer and the Guild.
2. Employees with more than six (6) months of service shall not be subject to discharge except for just and sufficient cause.
3. Employees with more than six (6) months of service shall be given two (2) weeks' notice, or two (2) weeks' pay in lieu of notice, of any discharge.
4. The Guild shall be notified in writing, simultaneously with the employee, of any discharge.

The union has also bargained that the employer (the AFL-CIO) can have multiple tiers of employees--namley, temporary, fund and project employees (aka "casual workers"), as well as part-time employees, consultants, and affiliate staff.

To be fair to the labor behemoth and its staff union, there are some very rich provisions of the labor agreement that provide for 35-hours of work per week, a large amount of paid-time off, a semi-rich life insurance plan, as well as a host of other asundry items that are not found in too many other collective bargaining agreements.

Of special note: However rich the perks appear to be though, it should be realized that all of them are funded through the (in many cases, forced) union dues of union members paid to their unions, then given to the AFL-CIO through its per capita tax scheme.

In the (paraphrased) words of the immortal Erma Bombeck: The grass is always greener over the septic tank...

But, then again, the stink is also stronger too!

UFCW: Do they ever run out of hypocrisy??

by Rian Wathen

It takes a lot to be the most hypocritical labor union but the UFCW always seems to lead the way. Of course everyone knows that UFCW represents some of the lowest paid workers in the United States but their officers still take the dues to fund some of the highest salaries and lavish lifestyles of any union.

Let’s ignore that for a minute and take a look at the recent grocery contract settlement in Southern California. If you can wade through all the media hype and UFCW propaganda you may notice a slight mention of Health Savings Accounts in some of the articles.

Yes, UFCW is now congratulating itself on the recent contract calling it “a huge victory for grocery workers” as they negotiated all of the Southern California members into a HSA program.

So, before this contract settlement what was UFCW saying about Health Savings Accounts?

On the international union’s webpage you can read a news release entitled “Why HSAs are not the solution.”

Here are a few quotes:

• “The bottom line is that HSAs will end up costing consumers more money while providing less health care”


• “HSA plans will discourage preventive care, ultimately increasing the cost of health care in the United States”


• “Racial and ethnic minorities suffer disproportionately from chronic conditions and are so less likely to benefit from HSAs”


• “HSA plan actually could increase the number of Americans without health insurance”


• “HSAs would undermine employer-sponsored group insurance”
  

Next, let’s look at what UFCW said on their wakeupwalmart.com page where they routinely bash everything Wal-Mart does. When Wal-Mart implemented HSAs, here is what the UFCW said about it:

• “Health Savings Accounts Won't Save Health Care”


• “HSAs are a backdoor for large profitable companies, like Wal-Mart, to further reduce or even eliminate health benefits for hard-working Americans. By shifting health care costs away from employers and on to workers, HSAs will not only undermine employer-based health plans, where two-thirds of Americans get coverage, but will force even more workers and their families to go without health care.”


• “HSAs are a huge step backward for working families and do nothing to solve our nation's health care crisis.”

There is even a web based petition you can sign to support the wakeupwalmart.com position by saying “no to the Wal-Mart/Bush-backed HSAs and yes to corporations paying their fair share for health care.”

To be clear, I’m not repeating all this to say HSAs are bad (I have one myself and like it) or the UFCW should not have negotiated HSAs in Southern California (although the devil is in the details, a subject for another post). It is simply to reinforce how two-faced the UFCW international union officials are even with their own members.

Prior to this contract, UFCW made it sound like HSAs were a tool of the devil. But when they decide to negotiate them, it is a “huge victory for grocery workers”.

Unbelievable !!!!!

Rian Wathen is a former 15-year UFCW officer who was banished from the kingdom when he pointed out the emperor had no clothes.