AFL-CIO

Quick Hits: 73 Years of Entrenched Federal Forced Unionism Privileges, and the Ugly Reality of Big Labor Racism

Will Collins — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:31:53 -0400

A few Right to Work-related updates from over the holiday weekend:

1.) July 5th marked the 73rd anniversary of the National Labor Relations Act. This legislation, originally enacted in 1935, imposes union officials as middlemen between management and workers. While reformers thought they were curtailing the worst excesses with the Taft-Hartley Amendments in 1947, the NLRA continued to give government backing to Big Labor's monopoly bargaining privileges while actually increasing the government force behind an immoral policy of forcing workers to pay dues for often unwanted union "representation."

Quick Hits - June 30, 2008

Will Collins — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:53:09 -0400

A few Right to Work-related updates from over the weekend:

1.) Does the AFL-CIO owe $14 million in back taxes? Perhaps an IRS audit will reveal other problems with the AFL-CIO's overtly partisan and massive campaign expenditures. The author overstates the good that comes from oversight of union finances by the Office of Labor Management Standards, but he does point out the amusing fact that Democrats are in favor of "smaller government" in this one instance:

Big Labor Unleashes Record Political Activisim

Nick Cote — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:13:55 -0400

Yesterday, the AFL-CIO officially endorsed its candidate for president. The endorsement should come as no surprise, of course, since Big Labor has always used member dues -- and forced dues from nonmembers -- to support its Far Left political agenda. But this year's campaign will apparently be the largest and most expensive yet:

read more

"Change to Win" Brings More of the Same

Patrick Semmens — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:54:20 -0400

An article in The New Republic points to the tens of millions of dollars being spent by union officials on politics and specifically focuses on the massive involvement by the so-called "Change to Win" union coalition in politics.

The article calls Change to Win's decision to endorse Obama an "about-face," citing Change to Win's early declarations that it would not focus on politics but on organizing. Yet, Change to Win's emphasis on politics (led by SEIU top boss Andy Stern) really wasn't that hard to predict.

In fact, back in 2005 when Change to Win union bosses split from the AFL-CIO union hierarchy National Right to Work Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason had this to say:

The Union Boss Mindset

Patrick Semmens — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:46:32 -0400

AFL-CIO top boss John Sweeney and Virginia AFL-CIO chief James Leaman recently had an article in the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star that shows just how union officials view the workers they claim to represent.

The headline of the article rhetorically asks: "Without labor unions, who speaks for the worker?"

The implication is that workers are incapable of representing themselves. This also implies that workers who reject union membership are too stupid to know what is best for them.

That contemptuous view of workers and their ability to look after their own best interests explains why Big Labor is constantly claiming to have employees' best interests in mind while trying to limit the ability of those very employees to exercise free choice when it comes to unionization.

The Union Bosses' Goal: More Forced Dues Dollars

Patrick Semmens — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:28:29 -0400

Carl Horowitz has an article up today at National Review Online about the SEIU union and its top boss, Andy Stern. The article plays up the supposed split in organized labor between the so-called “Change to Win” coalition (led by Stern’s SEIU) and the AFL-CIO over whether to emphasize politics and lobbying or more aggressive organizing through the abusive card check scheme.

More on the ILO

Justin Hakes — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 10:28:15 -0500

Syndicated columnist Doug Bandow has a piece out detailing efforts by the AFL-CIO brass to enlist the help of the United Nations affiliate International Labor Organization (ILO) in attaining more special privileges to corral workers into forced unionism.

Bandow cites that union officials are:

"...no longer are satisfied playing solely by U.S. rules."

How true. The column also addresses the controversy over the forced unionization of TSA screeners, an issue the National Right to Work Foundation has weighed in on during past years.

"Kryptonite for America's Workers"

Justin Hakes — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 10:42:57 -0400

The AFL-CIO hierarchy has taken its latest beef with Right to Work attorneys' victory for employees up with the International Labor Organization (ILO). About the complaint, AFL-CIO chief John Sweeney says:

"The Bush NLRB is kryptonite for America's workers."

This is like Lex Luthor complaining that his kryptonite doesn't work well enough. While the recent Dana victory was an encouraging step forward for employee freedom, the Bush NLRB still has lots of work left to do.

And as we see everyday, compulsory unionism abuse is the real kryptonite for America's workers.

Chiming In

Justin Hakes — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:45:39 -0400

AFL-CIO head honcho John Sweeney and SEIU chief Andy Stern both chimed in about last week's victory on behalf of employees by Right to Work attorneys. Sweeney cites a previous NLRB decision calling coercive card check unionization drives "a favored element of national policy."

What a joke. As previously cited, the Board in this decision cited:

“Card checks are less reliable because they lack secrecy and procedural safeguards… union card-solicitation campaigns have been accompanied by misinformation… workers sometimes sign union authorization cards…to get the person off their back.”

Stern, however, gets one thing right when he says:

"The NLRB has become a caricature of itself, and as a nation, we should be embarrassed by governing bodies that fail to consider even the most basic needs and rights of workers.”

How true. The NLRB has failed America's workers in many other Foundation cases. Here are just a few.

Post Mortem on the UAW Strike

Justin Hakes — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:54:12 -0400

With the strike ordered by UAW officials against GM ending early this morning, it's important to draw a few lessons.

As Patrick noted Monday, the UAW hierarchy was willing to sell out some rank-and-file workers on wages so long as GM promised union officials the ability to organize its nonunion suppliers to bolster compulsory dues revenues.

Second, despite the misconceptions held by some, the fact that union officials can shut down nationwide employers and industries demonstrates that they are clearly still relevant. The widespread impact and attention the strike attracted is proof positive.

Addtionally, because of their ability to compel dues from workers in the 28 states without Right to Work laws, union officials are major players politically. Why just last friday, the AFL-CIO announced plans to deploy 200,000 union operatives and $200 million to influence the 2008 elections.