Recently, former-SEIU Radio Voice, current-MSNBC Host Rachel Maddow and Indiana State Rep. Scott Pelath appeared eager to see Big Labor’s anticipated disruption of Super Bowl Week in Indianapolis, site of the 2012 event.  Threats of using the Super Bowl to intimidate lawmakers have been increasing over the past weeks.  From the Associate Press:

Facing a legislative vote that would make Indiana a right-to-work state … Labor activists are deciding whether to go ahead with protests that could include Teamsters clogging city streets with trucks and electricians staging a slowdown at the convention center site of the NFL village.

“The last thing the city needs is a black eye,” said Jeff Combs, organizing director for Teamsters Local 135.  [But, apparently Combs is willing to give it one.]

“You can tell them we’ll take the Super Bowl and shove it,” said Combs, the Teamsters organizer. Teamsters gathered at the Statehouse Wednesday wearing T-shirts with the roman numerals 46, referring to the Super Bowl, crossed out on the back.  He said truckers would be willing to risk arrest by causing traffic jams.

Why does Big Labor from across the USA plan to converge on Indianapolis?  Union bosses fear ‘Voluntary Unionism’ and the freedom that Right To Work will bring to Hoosiers.  Without ‘Compulsory Unionism,’ currently imposed in Indiana, union bosses will have to create reasons for employees to join their union; and, that is a lot more work that state-sanctioned compulsion. (more…)

The simple proposition that no one should be forced to pay tributes to labor bosses or they will lose their job, is not a conspiracy.  It is freedom from tyranny.  Using forced dues to finance politicians who vote to force citizens against their will to pay union bosses in order to keep their own jobs, is a conspiracy.

The fact is, until 1935, the United States Government did not force people to pay tributes to union bosses in order to get or keep a job.  If there was a conspiracy, it was between the AFL, CIO, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and a Democrat Congress passed the Wagner Act, selling the concept as “workers rights.”  The Wagner Act foisted union servitude on millions of working Americans overnight.  We see the AFL-CIO, the president, and Congress attempting the same scam today.

The only workers who can escape from Wagner Act compulsion work in the 22-states which chose a Right to Work law to protect their citizens from this tyranny.  This Wagner Act forced-dues tyranny can be clearly blamed on Big Labor Bosses.

Then-A.F.L. president William Green boasted of Big Labor’s role in the Wagner Act in Liberty Magazine: “We helped write it. We thought of it as ‘Our Baby’.”  And at a union convention Green said, “The A.F.L. is wholly and fully responsible for the Wagner Labor Relations Act.”

Mr. Hoffa, freedom is no conspiracy.  Freedom is an ideal that both men and women aspire to obtain.

(more…)

My fellow Americans–and, I suppose, Canadians:

I regret to inform you that you are not the “99 Percent.”

The 99 Percent dislikes big banks, but also dislikes big government–and big messes.

The 99 Percent does not occupy property it does not own, public or private.

The 99 Percent does not steal from local businesses, does not attack police officers, does not storm national museums, and does not defecate in public.

Flyer at #OccupyWallStreet - the address for donations is a small building in Washington, DC shared by Code Pink and other "progressive" organizations

The 99 Percent does not rank people’s views based on their skin color, gender, or socioeconomic status.

(more…)

Big Government has learned that anarchist groups, led by Lisa Fithian and working with Democrats and unions on the ground in Chicago, intend forcibly to disrupt the Mortgage Bankers’ Association meeting at the Hyatt Regency Chicago and other locations this afternoon.

Violence is possible, as local police and security officers seem unprepared for a confrontation with thousands of activists converging on the Hyatt from multiple other staged demonstrations in Chicago.

Fithian, a veteran anarchist organizer who is widely credited with shutting down the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle in 1999, has apparently arrived in Chicago after participating in the #OccupyWallStreet demonstration in New York.

According to Big Government sources, Fithian is currently training union leaders from the Service Employees’ International Union and the Teamsters Union in preparation for today’s demonstration. Her strategy may be to draw law enforcement officers to multiple protest sites, then to shift demonstrations suddenly to one central site.

Democratic activists and leaders, including Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), are expected to address the demonstrators today as part of “Stand Up Chicago,” a broad coalition of community organizing groups coordinated by the SEIU and promoted by left-wing bloggers in the area. (more…)

The Teamsters union has been mired in the mob underworld even before Jimmy Hoffa. Jr.’s dad took over the union. During a congressional hearing, Robert F. Kennedy* said, “I told [Jimmy Hoffa, Sr.] frankly that I did not think he was tough enough to rid his union of the gangsters and hoodlums he had put in power.”

Even today, when any legitimate business interest would have been put out of business by the federal government, the Teamsters remain under federal court ordered oversight for its organized crime connections:

WHEREAS, the International Union entered into a Consent Decree with the United States on March 14, 1989 to resolve a civil lawsuit titled United States v. Teamsters, and WHEREAS, in entering into the Consent Decree, the International Union acknowledged allegations of past problems of organized crime corruption in various elements of the IBT [Teamsters]…

When Hoffa tells his army to take someone out, it is a serious matter. In one particular case, the National Labor Relations Board required the Teamsters union to post a sign to remind Hoffa’s army of what not to do. Here’s a small part of the four-page document:

WE WILL NOT threaten to kill or inflict bodily harm, make throat slashing motions, make gun pointing motions, challenge or threaten to fight or assault employees, threaten to sexually assault non-striking employees or their family members, threaten to follow non-striking employees to their homes, use racial epithets or obscene gestures at non-striking employees or otherwise threaten unspecified reprisals on any non-striking employee of Overnite or any member of his or her family or any employee of a neutral employee doing business with Overnite … (more…)

The Left’s working motto consistently turns out to be “do as I say, not as I do.”  How else could they possibly make bold pronouncements to the media but live the exact opposite?

The day before his declaration of war on the Tea Party movement, Teamsters President James Hoffa appeared on CNN and deemed American companies as “unpatriotic,” according to the Political Ticker.

“I think the president should challenge the patriotism of these American corporations that are sitting on the sidelines,” Hoffa said. “The problem in America isn’t that we don’t have enough money. We’ve got more money than any other country in the world. The problem is American businesses not spending it and not getting it in the game.”

Is Hoffa willing to have his own patriotism challenged?  Because some inconvenient truths emerge from the financial report his Teamsters union filed with the federal government.

According to an LM-2 report filed earlier this year, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which represents truck drivers and some school employees, ended 2010 with $108,608,477 in the bank.  That’s a whopping 24.9% increase in net assets over 2009, when the union reported $86,942,076 in assets.

In contrast, the Teamsters reported $88,371,439 in liabilities.  So if the union could afford to go without any new revenue and still meet its obligations for well over 12 months.

(more…)

Well, the ‘barbarians’ and ’sons of bitches’ are at it again. As wildfires spread across Texas, covering over 100,000 acres so far, tea partiers are once again organizing and mobilizing, this time to help their fellow citizens.

The group Citizen Patriot Response is coordinating efforts. From its website:

Citizen Patriot Response is preparing to begin delivering cold bottles of water to firefighters in the Bastrop area in an effort to do our part. Many other organizations and individuals in Texas are doing the same. We need support, we need more efforts initiated across the state, and we need communication and collaboration between group leaders to ensure that men and women fighting the Texas wildfires have full support.

The group will also provide a shelter for those families whose homes are threatened by the fires.

(more…)

It’s civility week!  Another Twitter montage of #NewTone was just sent our way this afternoon.  Good timing, too, on the heels of Teamster leader Jimmy Hoffa Jr.’s warm remarks yesterday.

Lets not forget the lessons in civility that our dutiful media and President Obama conveyed in the wake of the Tucson tragedy. The vitriol does not seem to have died down.  Perhaps this video will help remind people what’s lurking out there on the Twitter public timeline about all you “Sons of Bitches” and “Hobbits” of Terror.

(more…)

Asks Bill Frezza over at RealClearMarkets:

Things sure turned ugly fast in the recent Verizon strike. The Associated Press reported 70 acts of sabotage in the first week. A New Jersey judge had to issue an injunction banning members of the Communications Workers of America from “Dropping, spreading, throwing, placing or otherwise causing nails, glass, cinder block, spikes, feces, clubs, rocks, screws, or puncture devices of any kind, or other object or debris to be thrown or strewn in, on, or about Verizon’s driveways, parking lots, entrances, exits, vehicles and adjoining roads to any of Verizon’s property or at any work site.” Investigative reporters may be nowhere to be seen, but thanks to cell phone cameras some nasty videos are beginning to pop up on the web.

According to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research there have been 4,400 recorded acts of labor violence since 1991. The Teamsters lead the pack with 454, as one would expect from an organization once infiltrated by organized crime. The Teamsters have plenty of company, yet few offenders are called to account. In the Homestead tradition, law enforcement tends to melt away when a union goes on a rampage. Barely three percent of violent crimes committed by union members lead to an arrest or conviction.

This can only happen due to public acceptance.

(more…)

It is axiomatic—a given, if you will—that unions do not like workers to work overtime. Sure, they’ll do it, but if unions had their druthers, the work week would be limited to 40 hours—in some cases unions prefer 35 hours. The reasoning is simple, the fewer hours worked, the more employees an employer must employ and, in a workplace where unions can require dues, the union makes more money.

How serious are unions about restricting overtime? Consider this:

According to the constitution of the International Association of Machinists, “Members shall discourage the working of overtime, in order to further the opportunities for full employment, a living wage, and a 40-hour workweek [Art. K, Sec. 3].” Translated: More members equals more dues.

Here’s a simple example: Say a company has four employees and each works an average of 10 overtime hours per week and time and one half. If a union has the ability to restrict those four employees from working overtime, the employer has to hire one more employee (at 40 hours).

For the employer, rather than paying the four workers at time and one half, it may be a break even (depending on the other ‘loaded labor costs’ such as benefits and fringe benefits).

For the union, it is a win, as the union suddenly gets a new member, plus his dues and initiation fees (which can run in the hundreds or thousands of dollars).

For the employees who lose their overtime, they get to spend more time with their families…trying to figure out how to pay the bills. (more…)

The election results of last week’s special election in NY-26 were 47%-D 43%-R 9%-Tea and 1%-Green. A disappointment for the GOP, of course, that has made the Left gleeful in their gloating over their victory, even going so far as calling it a ‘political earthquake.’ However, in looking at it from afar, it’s natural to see how Republican Jane Corwin lost the race and her loss has more to do with what the Left did—and what the Republicans did not do—than it was an earthquake, tsunami, or wave.

It is true that the Democrats have out-messaged Republicans on the Medicare issue [it is, apparently, far more effective showing grandma being pushed over a cliff than kids eating cat food because the country is broke--grandmas vote and kids don't, after all]. However, there was more to losing NY 26 than mere messaging.

For example, there was the third-party candidate, faux Tea Party guy Jack Davis, that sucked some of the votes from Jane Corwin. However, beyond the messaging and third-party candidate, as is often the case, it was the Left’s ground game left the Right’s in the dust and, quite frankly, it is the ground game that will make or break 2012 for Republican candidates—if the GOP, or individuals who do not want to see America overrun by Marxist union bosses, can learn from the NY-26 loss. (more…)

Though it is often hidden, covered up, or excused, every now and then, union bosses give the public a glimpse of what they really think about unions when it comes to their own workers being unionized. In fact, it’s really not that uncommon for union bosses to engage in the same so-called “union-busting” activities they like to accuse companies (and Republicans) of doing.

Last year, for example, there was the incident of the longtime employee who tried to unionize the United Federation of Teachers, only to be fired. There was also the incident just a couple of month ago when the staff reps at UFCW Local 400 petitioned to unionize, only to be called ”completely clueless, unappreciative, and incompetent” by a member of the UFCW’s management. Of course, there was incident of the UAW imposing cuts on its own union staff last year, as well as the Teamsters’ Jim Hoffa getting tough when the union staff at the Teamsters headquarters threatened to walk off the job in 2009.

Despite all of these examples (and more), it is somewhat unusual, though, for union bosses to get caught so blatantly seeming to act in concert to bust a union within their union as the Amalgamated Transit Union bosses have been accused of doing: (more…)

When Nancy Reagan launched her “Just Say No to Drugs” campaign in the early 1980s, Bill Clinton may (or may not) have still been inhaling, while Barack Obama almost certainly was.  Nevertheless, politicians in the 1980s might not have known that they were embarking on a campaign that has cost nearly $50 billion per year, caused millions of arrests and hundreds of thousands to be jailed and, after all of that, has arguably failed.

It’s too bad the political leaders who were responsible for launching and financing the war on drugs so many years ago didn’t spend some more time reflecting on other, more simple solutions—like unionizing the industry.

As Californians head to the polls on November 2nd, among the other decisions voters will be deciding on (like choosing whether or not to recycle ex-governor Jerry “California Über Alles” Brown), they will be voting on whether or not  pass Proposition 19—that is whether or not to legalize pot in California.  More specifically, whether or not to legalize “various marijuana-related activities, allow local governments to regulate these activities, permit local governments (but not the state government) to impose and collect marijuana-related fees and taxes, and authorize various criminal and civil penalties.”

Like any budding new industry, Prop. 19 has not escaped unnoticed by union bosses.  In fact, over the past few months, unions have taken a keener-than-usual interest in the pot industry and its workers.

First, the United Food & Commercial Workers unionized some medical marijuana workers in May as part of an effort to bring “legitimacy to a once-hidden sector of the state’s economy” and boost the marijuana-legalization initiative.

Shortly afterward, the UFCW endorsed Proposition 19, stating:

(more…)

With their pension plans about ready to implode (no wonder they’re clamoring for a union pension bailout), a union boss who was just dumped by his top running mate, and with hundreds of members out on strike, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters can now add one more thing to their pot of bad luck:  The union just won the 2010 Most Decertified Union Award.

Every year for the past five years, Union Free America (one of a handful of websites that is committed to helping employees maintain their independence) gives out its Most Decertified Union Award and this year’s award winner (or loser, as the case may be) is the International Brotherhood of Teamsters:

Teamsters Union Wins 2010 Most Decertified Union Award

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters is the winner of Union Free America’s 5th Annual “Most Decertified Union Award.”  This honor is awarded to the labor union that lost the most decertification elections during the preceding 12 months.

The judging was based on an analysis of the reports of election results on the National Labor Relations Board’s web site for the period August 2009 through July 2010.  During that time the NLRB conducted 251 decertification elections.  Employees seeking to rid themselves of a union won 157 or 63 percent of them.

The Teamsters union won the “Most Decertified Union Award” by being decertified 48 times during that period.  The Teamsters were involved in a total of 64 decertification elections of which they lost 75 percent.

The United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) came in a distant second by being decertified in 9 out of 15 elections, or 60 percent.

The International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) won honorable mention by being decertified 8 times. This may seem paltry compared to the Teamsters, but IUOE deserves recognition for being decertified in 8 out of 8 elections.

(more…)

The question in the title of this post is more rhetorical because, in answer to the question, we are all (to varying degrees) helping to fund the demise of America and, for most of us, we are doing it every day.  In so many ways, we do it every time a decision is made to purchase something—anything—be it groceries, appliances, and even bigger ticket items like vehicles.

For example, the new Chevy Camaro is a hot looking car.  By all accounts, in addition to its looks, the Camaro fast and affordable.  But, despite all of its cool accouterments, I won’t buy one.

Moreover, despite owning two trucks that are American made (read: union-made), a significant principle was breached over these past two years that, for the foreseeable future, will not be undone. You see, it was bad enough when the UAW banned the marines from using the union parking lot (before the union quickly retracted it) a few years ago, but when the UAW’s new boss, Bob King, recently reiterated the UAW’s ban on nonunion-made vehicles in the union’s parking lot (even if made by Americans in American plants), that cinched it.

Much like those who refuse to buy British Petroleum because of the gulf oil spill, a personal decision was made to, whenever possible, not spend money on companies whose employees’ union dues are being used to help bankrupt America, whose union bosses shamelessly and egregiously are currying special favors from political puppets, transforming the nation to to a quasi-socialist state, all the while demonizing people who believe in freedom.  It’s that simple.

(more…)

It’s truly fascinating, and not the least bit ironic, when union bosses treat their own workers as bad or worse than the employers they attack.

As union bosses clamor for enactment of so-called “card check,” (otherwise known as Employee Free Choice Act), it seems that when confronted with union issues among their own employees, they act every bit as barbaric as the robber barons of yore.

In a move of stunning hypocrisy, the United Federation of Teachers axed one of its longtime employees — for trying to unionize the powerful labor organization’s own workers, it was charged yesterday.

Jim Callaghan, a veteran writer for the teachers union, told The Post he was booted from his $100,000-a-year job just two months after he informed UFT President Michael Mulgrew that he was trying to unionize some of his co-workers.

“I was fired for trying to start a union at the UFT,” said a dumbfounded Callaghan, who worked for the union’s newsletter and as a speechwriter for union leaders for the past 13 years.

[snip]

Callaghan said that yesterday morning, he was hauled into a meeting with UFT officials, including CFO David Hickey, and told only that he was being fired from his job and had a half-hour to clear out of the office.

“They gave me no reason, no letter, no cause at all,” said Callaghan, who insisted that he has received no reprimands or notices about problems with his work. He noted that he wrote six stories in the most recent newsletter for teachers.

Callaghan said the union-busting bullying continued after he was told he was fired, when UFT leaders called in a detail of six uniformed cops to remove him from his office because he wasn’t leaving fast enough.

Callaghan said he decided to unionize the 12 UFT writers after a colleague was fired last year without cause.

“We have no protections and no disciplinary process,” he said.

While the UFT is an example of the hypocrisy that permeates the union movement, it is only one case out of many over the years.

(more…)

Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) has trouble remembering his roots as Pennsylvania’s state treasurer and auditor general. During his Senate campaign, he claimed to be a fiscal hawk and to have saved Pennsylvanians $1 billion of taxpayer money.  Casey is and always has been a big government progressive and will finally no longer be able to use the conservative, fiscal hawk meme with the introduction of the $165 billion union pension bailout bill, coupled with his rubber stamp approval of every plank of Obama’s agenda, Casey is now fully exposed.

Let’s review some of Casey’s recent steps.  Casey met with the Teamsters union back in March 2010 and the “Create Jobs and Save Benefits Act of 2010” bill’s branding became apparent:

Casey, a Pennsylvania Democrat, explained that his legislation is important to protecting pensions and saving jobs. It’s also important to keep promises made to retirees, he said.

“We have to fulfill our obligations,” Casey said. “Pensions are a basic commitment to workers and their families that they will be there for them.”

The bill will strengthen the trucking and other industries. It will change the pension funding rules so employers won’t have to make payments that could force them into bankruptcy. Employers can use their savings to hire and retain workers.

In addition, according to the press release, Teamsters Local 776 shop steward Dave Wolf added:

“It was fraud and corruption on Wall Street that caused the crash,” Wolf said. “Now working people are losing their jobs and their pensions because of it.

John B. Taylor, professor of economics at Stanford and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution would disagree with Wolf on the cause of the crash citing the federal government as the leading cause of the crash.  There are many others who would agree with Taylor as well.

(more…)

When it formed in 2005, the Change to Win coalition was heralded as a dynamic organizing force that would rejuvenate the labor movement and swell membership rolls for constituent unions.  However, U.S. Department of Labor figures show that only one union organization has benefitted from its affiliation with Change to Win while the others have lost out.

The Service Employees International Union’s (SEIU) membership has risen from about 1.5 million to more than 1.8 million and its annual receipts are up to about $75 million since 2005, according to government records. SEIU has in turn contributed $5.7 million to support the coalition, which is far more than any other coalition member. By contrast, the other six unions that split off from the AFL-CIO to form Change to Win have either flatlined or declined.

In 2006, the first year Change to Win filed Labor Department financial disclosure forms, the coalition claimed over 5.3 million members but its most recent filing in 2008 shows it had less than 4.8 million members; that’s a decline of almost 11 percent. In 2006, Change to Win listed $11.7 million in assets, a figure that dropped to $8.8 million in 2008. During that time, liabilities spike by more than 130 percent from about $550,000 in 2006 to more than just $1.25 million in 2008.

Annual receipts have also plummeted, falling from $18.7 million in 2006 to just $6.5 million in 2008. In 2006, revenues far exceeded expenditures, but this ratio was turned upside down in 2008 with Change to Win’s spending outpacing its revenues.

“Despite being a coalition of several unions, Change to Win has been of material benefit to one union only, and that is the SEIU,” Glenn Spencer, the executive director of the Workforce Freedom Initiative with the Chamber of Commerce has observed.   “The coalition started with great fanfare and was meant to be an alternative to the AFL-CIO – the new front of labor organizing, but it just hasn’t worked out that way.  It’s now an organization struggling to justify its existence.”

(more…)

Union violence is often talked about anecdotally but seldom addressed.  Even though one 25-year study found nearly 9,000 reported incidents of union violence, union-controlled Democrats often try to sweep it under the rug and, when they can’t, they’ll feign shock while seeming to relish it when it happens.

On Wednesday, in Upper Merion, PA (outside of Philadelphia) another act of union brutality took place when several (presumably) union thugs used baseball bats to beat some construction workers who, in the union’s eyes, were guilty of being non-union.

Police say the incident began Wednesday morning when non-union construction workers attempted to gain access to the new Toys R Us site, but were blocked by protesting union workers.

When the victims were unable to gain access to the construction site, they drove to the area of the Transportation Center in the King of Prussia Plaza lot to wait for police assistance.

Authorities say while waiting for police to arrive, a black sedan pulled up and several white males exited with baseball bats and shattered both rear windows of the two work trucks. As the victims exited the trucks in fear, police say at least two were physically assaulted with the baseball bats. One of the victims was taken to the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania for treatment.

According to Upper Merion Twp. Police Lt. James Early, even though there had been other incidents at the site, this is the first time it has gotten violent.

So, here we have workers who were were doing nothing more than going to work to earn a paycheck to feed their families.  Their “crime?”  They didn’t belong to the gang union.   As they were confronted by the union thugs, they left and called police.  While they were awaiting the police, they were followed and beaten.

(more…)

Last year, when Tea Party activists almost derailed ObamaCare, the White House and its comrades in the House of Labor knew they had to somehow neutralize Americans who voiced opposition to their agenda. Ever since President Obama dispatched his soldiers to take on concerned Americans at townhall meetings last year, unions have tried to downplay their culpability in targeting tea party activists. But the targeting has not stopped. In fact, it seems like a new assault takes place every month.

In February, the union campaign against the Tea Party movement was publicly exposed.  In fact, the union-backed website TheTeaPartyisOver.org openly states  that “Patriot Majority is also putting together a tracking program of Tea Party activity nationwide to monitor outbreaks of actual violence, threats of violence or other types of extremism.” [Emphasis added.]

In March, Teamster boss James P. Hoffa took aim at Tea Party activists accusing them of being ‘manipulated’ and ‘misdirected.’

In April, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced a bill that eviscerates the First Amendment called the DISCLOSE Act.  The DISCLOSE Act is another attempt by the union-controlled Democrat Party to shill for its big union bosses.

As Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) noted here on Big Government, ”the White House and their allies on Capitol Hill see honest criticism as a threat to forcing their big government, liberal agenda through Congress.”  While the DISCLOSE Act provides exemptions for traditional news media, Reason’s Bradley Smith and Jeffrey Patch point out:

(more…)