19 minute read
PAGE 9
What do we honor on Labor Day?
Work and workers, not unions, deserving of a holiday
Advertisement
By HUNTER TOWER Excerpted from CENTERSQUARE.com
Sept. 7, 2020
Today, Labor Day is no longer about trade unionists marching down the street asking for safe working conditions and a five-day workweek. The union leaders of today openly support the defunding of police, Medicare for All and other radical ideals that have nothing to do with the pay, benefits or working conditions of their dues-payers and everything to do with advancing a far-Left political agenda.
The goal is to expand government – which means more union dues dollars for their slush funds. Thanks to the government union-backed politicians like
By JASON DUDASH Sept. 7, 2020
Unlike the private sector, where union membership is largely voluntary, government workers at every level for generations had no choice but to join a union or support its activities through so-called “agency fees.” That changed
in 2018, when the U.S. Supreme Court in Janus v. AFSCME
affirmed that mandatory unionization is a violation of the worker’s First Amendment rights.
The decision allowed public employees to opt out of their union without fear of losing their jobs, and tens of thousands have. But the unions aren’t giving up without a fight, and through lawsuits, workplace intimidation and the simple expedient of keeping workers in the dark about their rights, the defection rate has been effectively suppressed in most states.
Not so in Oregon. Like their neighbors in Washington and California, government employee unions the Beaver State have had to contend with the Freedom Foundation, a small but growing public policy organ
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, thousands of businesses and livelihoods of those employed by them are in great peril.
While in no danger of missing out on a paycheck themselves, Tom Wolf and his cabinet have made disastrous decisions affecting the economic, mental and social well-being of our citizens, and they would not be in office without the union bosses’ help. Not coincidentally, government unions donated more than $10 million to his last gubernatorial run. So, this Labor Day we shouldn’t be celebrating government labor unions or the union bosses who take lavish trips and enjoy six-figure salaries. Instead, we should celebrate the workers of this great nation and their constitutional right to leave their public-sector union
Oregon’s example show why unions are failing everywhere
if they so choose without fear of losing their job. ization that makes a point of informing government workers about their rights — and defending them in court when they dare to exercise them.
And the results have been remarkable. SEIU 503, Oregon’s largest public employee union, has lost a full third of its dues-paying members in just the two years since the Janus ruling was issued. The state’s teachers’ unions have seen similar out-out rates.
It’s gotten so bad SEIU has resorted to forging the names of workers on membership cards.
But what choice do they have? For decades, the country’s last remaining pocket of union strength has enjoyed the luxury of a publicly enforced monopoly over the government workforce.
But now government employee unions have been told that, instead of force and connivance, they must attract clients the old-fashioned way — by offering a quality service at a reasonable price.
And competition just isn’t in their vocabulary.
SEIU 503 settles case, issues refund check to worker who waited 12 years for freedom
Money talks — especially money that flows freely from the pockets of guilty union officials. By PARKER HOLLINGSHEAD,
This was the case for Deanna Salvo, Paralegal the woman who received a $1,470 refund from Service Employees InternaFoundation from the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) indicate the state’s count of COVID-19 deaths is overstated in more ways than one. tional Union, Local 503, without even tion, Salvo’s promotion meant that she going to court. would also change collective bargaining
The story goes back to 2008, when units and leave SEIU 503 for another Salvo, who works for the Oregon Youth union. Authority, was represented by SEIU From then on, she would be exclu503. sively represented by the American
By March of that year, Salvo earned Federation of State, County and Munica promotion. She was ecstatic and had ipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 75. no reason to suspect anything but mayIn 2018, however, the U.S. Supreme be a raise. Court ruled in Janus v. AFSCME that
She didn’t know the truth — that mandatory union membership and dues her promotion would ignite a flame and in the public sector were a violation of burn a hole in her wallet for the next 12 the workers’ rights, clearing the way years. for government employees all over the
Along with the change in job descrip country to opt out of union participation
Oregon Update
A closer look at the successes being achieved by the Freedom Foundation’s office in the Beaver State.
and still keep their job.
After learning about the decision, Salvo sent a letter to AFSCME 75 withdrawing authorization for membership in April 2019. But when months passed without any response, Salvo took a closer look at the money coming out of her paycheck and realized something was wrong.
In fact, two monthly union deductions were coming out of her check — one for AFSCME 75 in the amount of $70, and the other a $10 fee for an acronym she didn’t recognize, “OPEU.”
She asked around and learned that OPEU was an alternative acronym for SEIU 503.
Both unions were still taking her money.
Immediately, Salvo contacted SEIU and demanded the dues deductions stop and that she be refunded for 12 years’ worth of unauthorized payments to the union.
SEIU 503 agreed to eventually stop taking her money — but on the subject of a refund, they were silent.
With SEIU hesitant to pay her back and AFSCME not even acknowledging her opt-out request, Salvo knew she needed help. That’s when she called Freedom Foundation.
The organization’s attorneys advised Salvo to send a second opt-out request to AFSCME 75 through certified mail and offered to send a demand letter on her behalf to SEIU 503. In the letter, attorneys asked SEIU 503 to explain why Salvo was forced to pay dues for an associate membership, to provide copies of any membership agreements they might have on file and to refund any money taken from Salvo without her consent.
Rather than explain its actions, SEIU 503 sent a check to Salvo for the full amount. As of this month, AFSCME 75 has also stopped deducting dues from Salvo’s paycheck.
At the Freedom Foundation, we help people exercise their right to opt-out of union membership ever day. In the process, we hear countless stories of unions rigging the game and playing by their own set of rules, but they seldom own up to their misconduct.
But a check like this? It may as well
Freedom Foundation email forces SEIU to backpeddle
Emails obtained by the Freedom be a confession.
Last month SEIU 503 was once again forced to attempt to justify its radical stances to the hardworking Oregonians the union represents.
Over the past few weeks, the Freedom Foundation has been educating state employees represented by SEIU 503 about their union’s role in defunding the police as part of an email campaign.
Every year, SEIU sends hundreds of thousands of dues dollars to Our Oregon, a group currently under investigation by the Department of Justice for what would be the largest violation of election law in Oregon’s history.
Our Oregon is well known for being behind most of the progressive ideas pushed in the Beaver State, primarily through ballot initiatives.
However, its latest email instructed supporters directly to “defund local police,” specifically advocating for Portland Police Bureau’s budget to be cut by $50 million.
Polls show the notion of defunding the police is wildly unpopular with the vast majority of Americans, apparently including those represented by SEIU 503.
By JASON DUDASH, Oregon Director
To be more precise, nearly 300 public employees represented by SEIU have resigned from their union since we informed them their dues dollars were being used to make their communities less safe.
Such a dramatic loss rightfully alarmed union leaders, who only see dollar signs leaving their pockets, and prompted them to send an email out to all SEIU members in an attempt to justify their stance.
Their email however may have done them more harm than good.
Despite their naïve attempts to defame our organization and intent, overall their justification was that it was only “one email.”
They did not deny giving over $3 million worth of dues money to an outside radical group. They did not deny that outside group is now fighting to defund the police.
They only said, probably with deep regret, that these calls for defunding police were only from a single email.
A pretty lame excuse, you’ll no doubt agree.
This is just another example from an ever-growing list of government unions being out of touch with those they supposedly represent.
SEIU 503
Califiornia’s Asembly Bill 5 still a job-killer
At the end of August, the California State Legislature ended its scheduled nine-month session by sending a slew of bad bills to the governor’s desk for signature.
Among the worst of the worst was AB-5.
Known informally as the “California Job Killer,” the measure was highly sought after by unions for one simple reason: It’s exceptionally difficult to unionize independent contractors and removing that classification from the state employment code would make their lives much easier.
AB-5 applies an ABC test to decide whether a private company can hire an independent contractor. In this test, the company must show: n the hiring entity does not control or direct the worker in performing the work in fact or under the terms of a contract;
Due to events in the past few months, American liberals had a moment of clarity when they realized that police unions act a whole lot like unions in general. In this shocking revelation, there was almost an anti-labor movement developing among those who typically endorsed all labor unions regardless of their individual worth or whether they provide a worthwhile product.
This lead to hilarious headlines such as “Police unions become target of labor activists who see them as blocking reform,” which is objectively funny, given that all unions, especially teachers unions, are far more guilty of blocking needed reform.
Another headline read, “Why do police unions talk and act like the Mafia? How can we stop them?” which seemingly ignored the fact that the International Brotherhood of Teamsters is most famous for being infiltrated by the mafia in New York.
By BOB WICKERS, California Director
n the work performed is outside the “usual course” of the hiring entity’s business; and; n the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed.
While the bill was intended as a way to give unions direct access to Uber and Lyft drivers, it generated collateral damage, as well. Among the biggest losers were freelance writers working for newspapers or online publications who suddenly lost their jobs or a significant portion of their yearly wages.
This led to headlines like, “California Will Soon Learn Assembly Bill 5 By SAMUEL COLEMAN, Outreach Director and wish to distance themand tries to maintain the status quo, the issue is the way these unions use their political clout to influence decisions that have nothing to do with the well-being of their members.
If all these unions did was try to get a better wage for their employees, very few Was a Historic Mistake”.
So, was AB-5 fixed by the end of the legislative session? Only partially.
If you’re a newspaper, you got a pretty sweet deal. Not only are you now exempted from AB-5 (pending a signature from Gov. Newsom) for an entire year, but many job classifications for freelance writers were also exempted in a separate bill (also pending Newsom’s approval).
But if you’re a regular person trying to find work during a time when California is experiencing a historic 15 percent unemployment rate, the legislative “fix” didn’t do anything for you.
Maybe next session.
In the meantime, we can all celebrate that the newspapers reporting favorably on AB-5 are no longer being hurt by it. Nor are the political consultants who pushed the bill in the first
When the going gets tough, unions quick to throw their police brethren under the bus
Teamsters
Union Thugs!
Many of our checks and balances on private sector unions exist today because the Teamsters Spotlight on under Jimmy Hoffa starting in the 1950s were so thoroughly corrupt. Even now, many unions are coming together in their call to defund the police California selves from the perceived A closer look at wrongs of police officers unions. the successes Believe it or not, the problems aren’t just confined to one union. Whether it’s a police union, a teachers union or any other public employee union that blocks reform being achieved by the Freedom Foundation’s office in the Golden State.
place. would actively call for their removal. to accom
In California, there have been several plish the same attempts to limit the outsized influence objective as its public employee unions have in political predecessors. circles. In 1998, for example, Proposition This time, a 226 — dubbed the “paycheck protection” coalition of labor initiative — attempted to cease the pracunions and their tice of unions using dues dollars for politsupporters raised ical spending. more than $73 million to defeat it.
While the committee to enact the The California Teachers Association proposition raised $6.4 million, a coadonated more than $21 million, while lition of labor groups raised more than SEIU donated $13.4 million. $24.8 million, no doubt from their own None of these propositions would have members pockets, to make sure it never made it illegal for unions to spend money became law. on politics, they would just have to ask
Again in 2005, Proposition 75 would their members for permission first. have required permission to withhold But when you have access to millions union dues for political purposes. While of dollars to influence California politics, those in favor raised nearly $5.8 million why would you willingly give that up? for the initiative, another coalition of laUltimately, everything negative bor groups raised $54.1 million to defeat that has been said about police officers’ it, which they did. unions could be said about any public
Outspending their opponents nearly employee union in California. 10 to 1, it was destined to fail. The CalMassive unions like SEIU and the ifornia Teachers Association and SEIU California Teachers Association love raised more than $22.1 million alone to spending their members’ money to tell defeat it, with the California Democratic others how to behave, but perhaps they Party kicking in $3.2 million of its own to should look in the mirror before pretenddefend its largest funder. ing that they own the ideological high Finally in 2012, Proposition 32 aimed ground.
FREEDOM in ACTION
Emails:
– EARL H., Washington
n n n
DAVID L., Oregon
n n n
– RICHARD S., California
n n n
– TRISHA P. , Washington
n n n “Keep up the great work. Thanks for all you do ... and all you endure.”
– TRACEY H. Washington
n n n I am so fed up with this nonsense and this dictator taking over this craphole of a state I live and work in ( or at least try to work in!!!). I am a believer, and this is complete and utter nonsense about we as Christians who want to worship and exercise our rights as citizens of the USA. Thank you for all you do.”
– CAROL O. California
n n n I’m donating to help the Oregon face mask lawsuit.”
For California Gov. Gavin Newsom, it’s, ‘All for one ... and more for me’
By SAM COLEMAN Reprinted from REDSTATE.com
Sept. 9, 2020
California has been through a lot lately. Between wildfires forcing tens of thousands of residents from their homes, a recent spike in COVID-19 cases, rolling blackouts affecting hundreds of thousands, and millions of Californians searching for work, our state needs a break.
While residents of the Golden State are no strangers to wildfires and struggling to get good service from a seemingly inept PG&E, many still look to our political leadership to provide guidance and reassurance in difficult times.
“We’re all in this together” has been the unofficial catchphrase of Gov. Gavin Newsom during the months-long COVID-19 lockdowns. When state employees effectively took a 10 percent salary reduction, the Governor promised parity within his administration.
If state workers had to lose money, Newsom promised he would willingly accept a commensurate pay cut of his own.
Except he didn’t.
Thanks to some investigative journalism at The Sacramento Bee, we now know that Newsom did not take a pay cut and instead collected his entire salary — more than $17,000 a month — for nearly three months after promising to do so.
It was only after the Bee broke the story that Newsom sent a letter to the Controller’s Office asking for his pay to be cut — retroactive to July 1. He also used the opportunity to urge other elected state officers to make the same sacrifice.
But the governor isn’t the only one looking to exempt himself from the pain they’re asking everyone else to endure. Every single union leader representing government employees dealing with pay cuts and furlough days of their own has refused to reduce the amount of union dues taken from union member paychecks.
The dues calculations for many of these unions work as follows: Public employee union members pay a percentage of their annual salary to the union, usually between
1.2-1.7 percent. Most employees hit the cap, usually around $800, before the end of the fiscal year.
In March, the Freedom Foundation suggested a common-sense solution for public employees facing potential loss of income — adopt a three-month moratorium on union dues collections from their paychecks, allowing nearly $250 million to remain in the pockets of those who earned it and permitting them to spend the money instead on bills, medicine, food, fuel, etc.
We reached out to the governor about the proposal, but it was never even acknowledged. This is hardly surprising, given that labor unions donated more than $4 million to his campaign during the previous election cycle.
It’s unfortunate that Gov. Newsom would reject out of hand an effective way to provide much-needed assistance to struggling families across the state, while infusing the California economy with $250 million, all without raising a single dollar in taxes.
But this isn’t the first time he’s failed to show his solidarity with the working people of California. Recently, we learned the governor’s $3.7 million mansion was gifted to him in violation of the gift limit set at $500 annually.
The LLC that gifted him his mansion was registered in the name of Newsom’s cousin and longtime business partner, who also happened to be the co-president of PlumpJack Wines
You may remember that while 80 percent of wineries across California were forced to close due to COVID-19 regulations, this winery was able to keep their doors open. By a happy coincidence, Gov. Newsom and his wife own a combined $600,000 worth of shares in PlumpJack.
But don’t pay attention to any of Gavin Newsom’s shady dealings and personal enrichment. Just remember — we’re all in this together.
Sam Coleman is the California outreach director for the Freedom Foundation.
BIDEN Continued from page 1 workers to make up their own minds about unions.
Among other things, the law would require employers to allow their internal communications systems to be used for union organizing and force them to turn over employees’ personal information — including home addresses, cell phone numbers and personal emails — to union organizers.
At the same time, the bill would restrict employers’ ability to speak with employees about the implications of unionization.
Perhaps most concerning, the PRO Act would ban rightto-work laws, which have so far been adopted by 28 states and which protect the rights of workers to choose for themselves whether to surrender part of their paychecks to unions.
Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in Janus v. AFSCME recognized that unionized public employees have a constitutionally protected right to refrain from union payments without losing their job.
But under the PRO Act, millions of private-sector American workers would be stripped of similar protections.
In several respects, Biden promises to go even further than the brave new world envisioned by the PRO Act.
Whereas the PRO Act would sharply increase civil and monetary penalties for employers found to violate employees’ union rights, Biden proposes “(holding) company executives…criminally liable” for such violations.
Recall that, under the Obama-Biden administration, the National Labor Relations Board’s expansive view of labor rights encompassed allowing employees to use abusive language and racial slurs when engaged in union activity.
Additionally, as president Biden would go further than the PRO Act in seeking to deprive employees of the ability to vote on unionization in a fair, secret-ballot election, instead requiring union recognition if organizers can pressure most employees in a workplace to sign union authorization cards.
Biden justifies these sweeping changes — and many, many others — by pointing out that most Americans generally approve of unions, according to Gallup.
But the same polling shows that as many as 80 percent of Americans oppose mandatory unionization.
As it turns out, Americans don’t much like being told what to do and are inclined to expect a government not overly beholden to special interests.
But if even a fraction of the union policies touted by Biden’s campaign become law, they should expect a lot more of both.
