News Story of the Day !!
HR 800 RH
Employee Free Choice Act
This is the bill that Union leaders proclaim will reverse the decline in Union membership. But will it. You decide.
While I find the proposed new regulations creating tougher penalties for companies who try to intimidate and harass workers who would Unionize welcome I am totally against the replacing secret ballot votes with authorization cards. Those that favor the act claim that the authorization cards would curb harassment of employees by business. Those that oppose the provision claim that the card system would open employees to harassment from Union officials. So who is correct. There is plenty of evidence that shows us that management has a history of intimidation, retaliation and other anti union activities. Labor Unions also have a history of the same intimidation and harassment that those opposed to the bill claim. It is my opinion that a secret ballot vote system must stay in place. Organized labor has proven that it cannot be trusted with an authorization card system.
While proponents of Section 2 of the Act claim that a card system will limit the ability to intimidate workers I must disagree. It will only increase it by giving Pro Union organizers and officers the ability to pressure workers to sign. The new catch phrase for labor will be Sign! Sign! Sign! . With a card system workers will be subject to unfair peer pressure and possible retaliation by the pro Union faction for refusal to join. I have been in many situations where a worker will go along with the group just to avoid conflict. It is ONLY with the anoniminity of the secret ballot vote that the workers can express their true desires. While Organized Labor and Business continue the battle to gain advantage for their money making agendas our only concern is for the worker. Organized labor claims to champion workers rights, wages and health care issues. The facts say otherwise. The climate of labor unions today has changed dramatically to the detriment of workers rights. The UBC under the leadership of Douglas McCarron has led the way in the destruction of organized labor. Mr. McCarron and his followers have pursued an agenda which has undermined the democratic rights of Union members, decreased wages, cut health and pension benefits and instituted a form of Corporate Unionism that only cares about its bottom line and not workers rights. Union officers enjoy quarter and half million dollar salaries and multiple pension plans. They have board meetings at Florida Resorts, Yacht Clubs and Vegas Casinos all at the expense of the Unions. At the same time they are cutting Union members wages and health benefits. Union members see declines in their pension benefits while the officers collect multiple pensions. Are these the Champions of Labor we want to entrust with an authorization card system. I think not.
Organized Labor claims that the Employee Free Choice Act will change the steady decrease in Union membership. Although the United Brotherhood of Carpenters has dumped ridiculous sums on organizing they cannot provide figures that show an increase in Union membership to justify the expenditure. In fact the US Bureau of Labor Statistics in January reported a 12% drop in Union membership in 2006. Unions blame the decline on “aggressive tactics by Big business” The UBC, Teamsters and the rest of the Change to Win cohorts like to blame it on the AFL-CIO. Perhaps the Unions need to look within. One of the biggest problems they seem to have is retention. While they can coerce workers to join the Unions they cant seem to keep them. They aggressively pursue workers with promises of better wages, benefits and protection of workers rights. Once in the Union the workers find out that the majority of the propaganda they have been given was indeed lies. They find that the Union is just another rather large leech on their paychecks, the wages and benefits in urban jurisdictions are only slightly better than what they were getting and the protection of workers rights is a joke.
The first thing a new member discovers is fees. Mandatory Monthly dues. A mandatory assessment for every hour they work. Mandatory Annuity deductions. If they are lucky enough to be a victim of the NYC District Council they are faced with a mandatory organizing deduction and have $250 removed from there vacation fund account to see to it that they fulfill the imposed mandatory participation. All these can be increased at the will of the Union even if it is in direct violation of the LMRDA. The second thing a new member finds out is all those Workers rights protections they showed them in the little bylaws books and contract books are a joke. They find that the only rules enforced in those books are the ones that allow the Union to collect the fees and deductions as well as impose fines. The third thing they notice is that although they have a raise negotiated every year the Union at its discretion takes it back and allocates it as they see fit. Again Union members have no rights to wages that they are earning and the Union can make deductions from their paychecks at will which brings us to number four. The last thing a new member learns is that the New Union vision as created by Douglas McCarron of the UBC is called Corporate Unionism and a tiered management system. For this vision to work all members Democratic rights must be removed. That is exactly what has happened to the UBC. The new member discovers that they have no rights to the control of their wages. benefits, health care or any other facet of their Union. They soon discover that their Union Officers insist that they need to think and decide for the members and its to bad if the members do not agree. Now most never stay around long enough to get to number five. The fifth that new members find out is that the Union Officers are doing with all the money they are taking from their hard earned wages. Perhaps HR 800 RH needs to include another Section 5 of the Act which strengthens enforcement against Labor Organizations which mislead workers or misrepresent available conditions or benefits of Union membership in their attempt to coerce workers to join a Union.
Perhaps the decline in Union membership is inevitable. We have seen an increase in wages and benefits to skilled tradesman. While they are still not as good as with Union Membership the gap has closed. There are also national figures which show a shortage of skilled tradesman in many areas of the country. This shortage has allowed journeyman to command higher wages. Perhaps Labor Unions should take steps to attract skilled workers instead of creating conditions that make the decision to move to Unionism not worth the effort. It is the actions taken by the Unions themselves that have created the move away from the Unions. I find it hard to believe that HR 800 RH is the magic bullet to cure the decline in Union members. When Organized Labor takes the steps to remove carpetbaggers like Douglas McCarron and others like him from labor. When Organized Labor reverts to Unionism that supports workers rights. When labor again works to increase workers wages and benefits and cleans house on those within labor that are lining their pockets at the expense of the working member. Then perhaps we will see an increase in active Union membership.
SEC. 5. STRENGTHENING ENFORCEMENT.
(a) Injunctions Against Unfair Labor Practices During Organizing Drives-
(1) Whenever it is charged–
` (A) that any Union Officer,Organizer or Salt –
( i) willfully misleads workers in an attempt to coerce them to join a
labor Union
(ii) pressures,harrases, threatens or intimidates workers
(iii) willfully misrepresents benefits,wages ,rights or any other
quarentee for joining said Union
(B)it shall be ruled that the Officer,Organizer or Salt has engaged in
an unfair labor practice
(C) and it further ordered that the preliminary investigation of such
charge shall be made forthwith and given priority over all other cases
except cases of like character in the office where it is filed or to
which it is referred.’
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT
(b) Remedies for Violations-
(1) BACKPAY- Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act (29
U.S.C. 160(c)) is amended by striking `And provided further,’ and
inserting `Provided further, That if the Board finds that an Union
Represenative has discriminated against an employee in violation of
subsection (a)(3) of section 8 while employees of the employer were
seeking representation by a labor organization, or during the period
after a labor organization was recognized as a representative defined in
subsection (a) of section 9 until the first collective bargaining
contract was entered into between the employer and the representative,
the Board in such order shall award the employee back pay and, in
addition, 2 times that amount as liquidated damages: Provided further,’.
(2) CIVIL PENALTIES- Section 12 of the National Labor Relations Act (29
U.S.C. 162) is amended–
(A) by striking `Any’ and inserting `(a) Any’; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
`(b) Any Union Officer,Organizer or Salt who willfully or repeatedly
commits any unfair labor practice subsections
shall, in addition to any make-whole remedy ordered, be subject to a
civil penalty of not to exceed $20,000 for each violation. In
determining the amount of any penalty under this section, the Board
shall consider the gravity of the unfair labor practice and the impact
of the unfair labor practice on the charging party, on other persons
seeking to exercise rights guaranteed by this Act, or on the public
interest.’.
.Chicago Carpenters Fight Back and Win
On May 8, 2006, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, the Department filed a complaint against the Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters (CRC). The complaint seeks new nominations and a new election for CRC officers, including new nominations and election of delegates for all of the forty-two locals within the region. The complaint alleges that there was not a reasonable opportunity to nominate and to be nominated to CRC office because of an unreasonable candidacy qualification which required nominees to serve as a delegate for three successive years prior to nominations. The complaint further alleges that some locals did not elect all of their delegates by secret ballot vote of their members. The complaint follows an investigation by the OLMS Chicago District Office. See case here
On September 29, 2006, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois approved a stipulation of settlement between the Department of Labor and the Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters. The parties stipulated that the Secretary of Labor would supervise new nominations and a new election for all regional council officers. The regional council also agreed to rule changes that served as the basis for the lawsuit which was filed May 8, 2006. The regional council will eliminate a restrictive candidacy qualification and will not consider council officers automatic delegates from their respective locals. New nominations and elections for some local union delegates will be supervised as specified in the stipulation. The court also denied objections filed by an intervening union member, whose election complaint initiated the lawsuit against the union, that the agreement provided inadequate future protections against the types of abuses witnessed during the original election. The stipulation of settlement follows an investigation of the regional council's July 9, 2005 election of officers by the OLMS Chicago District Office.
S. California Carpenters' Effort To Raid IUPAT Lathers
Leads To Backlash
10/14/2006
By Steve Zeltzer
Hundreds of AFL-CIO building trades workers rallied against efforts of the United Brotherhood Of Carpenters UBC in Southern California to raid the painters' drywall finishing work.
A biting flyer with cartoons was posted on the website of the State Building and Construction Trades, Council of California, AFL-CIO, entitled "You Deserve Better Than Being A Carpenter, Carpenter Leaders are SCABS!!!Read the Entire Article
Stories
Coming soon: The House That Graft Built
Did a Local #370 Officer and Empire Council Employee take free or discounted building materials from two local contractors when he built his house. Stay informed as Local370Voice investigates
Is it Illegal????
Michigan Bosses Sentenced for Accepting Illegal Discounts
If only Ralph Mabry had been a little more patient about moving into his dream home. Mabry since 1997 had served as executive secretary-treasurer of the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters and Millwrights. For most of that time he operated under a cloud of suspicion; the FBI and the Labor Department’s Office of Inspector General, starting in 1999, had jointly probed financial irregularities surrounding the construction of Mabry’s $803,000 residence in Grosse Pointe Park. Mabry, along with Council President Anthony Michael, two years ago was indicted for conspiring to obtain a $127,800 discount from contractors under false pretenses. On September 25, standing before U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman, Mabry learned his fate: a two-year prison sentence and a $50,000 fine. Michael received a one-year, one-day sentence and a $3,000 fine. Both men had been convicted by jury in late February for solicitation and receipt of prohibited payments.
Mabry and Michael had been charged in connection with “extraordinary discounts” on building materials, labor and other costs from six Detroit-area contractors. The union, in return, allegedly sought to represent employees of these contractors. Officials of three of the companies – Nelson-Mill, Crudo Brothers and Harris Homes – already have pleaded guilty to making illegal payments and were fined in amounts ranging from $16,100 to $61,356. This wasn’t the only time persons affiliated or associated with the union have been in hot water. In September 2004, Mabry’s executive administrative secretary, Sandra Williamson; her husband, David Williamson; and former Warren (Mich.) City Councilman William Barnwell each received probation following convictions for using union business agents to help build the Williamsons’ $200,000 home in St. Clair County, Mich. in the late 90s.
The newly-convicted defendants, Mabry and Michael, aren’t ready to throw in the towel just yet. Their respective lawyers, James Robinson and Stephen Rabaut, plan to appeal the case. Robinson argues that almost none of the illegal transactions apply, due to a five-year statute of limitations. He added that the federal law preventing labor officials from receiving things of value from union-affiliated companies allows these officials to pay prevailing market prices for goods and services, which Mabry apparently did. In the meantime, Mabry announced upon sentencing that he would step down from his post at the Michigan Regional Council of Carpenters and Millwrights, which represents some 23,000 journeymen and apprentices statewide. (Detroit Free Press, 9/26/06).
Coming Soon: So Much for Free Speech
Local Organizer attempts to coerce others members of Local 370 to "Shutdown" fellow Brothers who attempt to exercise their free speech rights at meetings.
Coming Soon: Old News But Did You Know
In October of 2004 Adirondack Mechanical, Pinchook&Buckley Construction Inc. and DLV Inc requested a decertification election from the NLRB to take their people out of the Union. How odd that these are the same contractors that the Empire Council FORCED by court order to do business with the Empire Council after they had signed with Phil Allens new Local 1. I guess brother Allen was not a deranged LONER after all. More to come
WHY BUSH LOVES THE CARPENTERS.
Drill Sargeant
by John B. Judis
For decades, Republicans have attacked Democrats' alliance with labor, slamming union "bosses" as corrupt and undemocratic. It's more than a touch ironic, then, that as the Bush administration tries to make political inroads with labor, it continues to favor unions whose recent record on these scores has been particularly problematic. The most notorious of these are the Teamsters, who appear to be currying favor with the administration in the hope that it will lift the Independent Review Board that has overseen the union since 1992 (see "Dirty Deal," April 1 & 8). But, fond as George W. Bush may be of Teamster President James P. Hoffa, the president's favorite labor leader is Douglas McCarron, the autocratic and scandal-plagued president of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners (UBC), who in March 2001 took his 520,000-member union out of the AFL-CIO. Bush has joined McCarron at the Carpenters' Labor Day picnics in 2001 and 2002, he has entertained McCarron twice on Air Force One, and he has made McCarron the only labor leader invited to address his Economic Summit in Houston last summer. Last month, hosting McCarron in the White House for the signing of the terrorism insurance bill, Bush singled out the UBC's president. "Appreciate your leadership, Doug," Bush said.
Some of the affinity between the U.S. president and the UBC president appears to be personal. At a Carpenters' meeting in Kaukauna, Wisconsin, in September 2001, Bush praised McCarron as a "plain-spoken fellow" and a "doer" rather than a "talker"--terms he might have used to describe himself. But Bush is also getting something more tangible out of his courtship of McCarron. McCarron contributed more than 15 percent of his union's campaign funds to Republicans this year (up from 6 percent in 2000)--a small fraction but double the average for unions overall. The UBC also endorsed Republican gubernatorial candidates Jeb Bush in Florida and Dick Posthumus in Michigan. And, of all the union leaders, McCarron is the most likely to endorse Bush's reelection in 2004, a move that would split labor's ranks and make it easier for Bush to paint himself as the working person's candidate.
Less clear is what McCarron has gotten, or hopes to get, from Bush in return. Questioned on this point, the UBC's president cites Bush's support for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and a minor provision in the tax-reform bill that would boost carpenters' pensions. But any benefits the UBC might receive from these policies are dwarfed by other administration initiatives, such as overturning the Clinton administration's stronger standards on workplace muscular-skeletal injuries (which disproportionately affect the building trades) and killing an amendment to the homeland security bill that would have guaranteed that construction workers hired with department funds get prevailing wages in their locales, as mandated for other federal construction workers by the Davis-Bacon Act. Overall, the UBC has fared far worse under Bush than under Democratic administrations.
McCarron would deny it, but his real reason for supporting Bush is likely that he needs the administration's help in quashing a challenge from within his own union. Many carpenters were critical of McCarron's decision to withdraw the union from the AFL-CIO partly over a dispute concerning back dues. "It was very unpopular," explains Michael Cranmer, a carpenter from Boston, "because our general belief is that labor has strength in numbers and that you don't give that up without having a darn good reason." This October, McCarron found himself at the center of still more controversy when it was revealed that he and other directors of ULLICO, a union-owned life insurance company, had made out like bandits through insider knowledge of the company's investment in Global Crossing. Facing a possible indictment, McCarron announced on October 29 that he would return the nearly $300,000 he had made.
But most angering to union members has been McCarron's attempt to transfer power away from democratically elected local unions and put it in the hands of newly created regional councils that McCarron and his allies can more easily control. McCarron's assault on the power of the locals led directly to the formation in March 2000 of Carpenters for a Democratic Union and to a challenge to McCarron's reelection at the UBC's convention that year. It has fueled revolts in California, the Pacific Northwest, Illinois, New York, New England, and Georgia, and it has led carpenters in British Columbia to declare themselves independent of McCarron's international union. Most significant, it has inspired a legal challenge from the New England carpenters, who filed suit to force the Labor Department to find McCarron in violation of federal laws governing union elections. If the New England carpenters win their case, they could topple the hierarchical structure that McCarron has erected. And that's where Bush comes in. So far, Bush and Labor Secretary Elaine Chao have sided with McCarron against the reformers. And McCarron is counting on their continued support, even in the face of legal precedents that clearly favor his opponents.
Harrington and the New England dissidents, in other words, have both legal precedent and the Labor Department's internal rules on their side. Unfortunately, national politics are another thing altogether. Unwilling to buck a powerful union leader, President Clinton's secretary of labor, Alexis Herman, ruled against the dissidents and for McCarron, arguing incredibly that there was no "basis in the statute or in legislative history" for defining intermediate bodies by their "functions and powers." The dissidents appealed, and, early this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit heard their case.
In theory, the dissidents might have expected a better reception from the Bush administration. In his 2000 presidential campaign, Bush repeatedly portrayed himself as the champion of workers against "labor bosses." But, once elected, Bush made an early exception for McCarron, who, he explained last Labor Day, "cares deeply, deeply about the members of his union." When the dissidents' appeal was heard, Labor Secretary Chao and her department's attorneys also sided with McCarron. In her brief, Chao went even further than Herman, arguing that challenging the UBC's definition of an intermediate body could "undermine self-government within the labor movement." Asked in oral argument why Chao had failed to cite "the applicable regulation and precedents," the Labor Department's counsel opined idiotically that Chao had wanted to avoid legal terminology and to explain her position in terms that the average union member could understand. Writing for the court in February, Judge Sandra Lynch responded, "To suggest that complainants would be led astray by some discussion of the law insufficiently credits the abilities of union members. They were, after all, motivated to invoke the statute and file the complaint." with that, the court sent Harrington v. Chao back to the Department of Labor with instructions that if the secretary continued to refuse to rule against the UBC, she would be required to file a statement of reasons "which addresses both the application of the functions and purposes test ... and whether her decision is consistent with her precedents." Though a stern rebuke, it has not yet brought action from Chao. The case continues to sit on the desk of her solicitor general, Eugene Scalia.
According to Alan Hyde, who wrote the Association for Union Democracy's brief, the lawyers for the dissidents are threatening to call for the Labor Department to be held in contempt. There is also grumbling about the decision from lawyers within the Labor Department, who believe that fidelity to the law would dictate supporting the dissidents against McCarron. The department is even being pressured to act by House Republicans on the Committee on Education and the Workforce. Unlike Bush, who has aligned his administration with the most autocratic union leaders, GOP Representatives such as Charlie Norwood and Sam Johnson have been vocal champions of rank-and-file democracy. Last May, partly in response to Harrington v. Chao, Norwood and Johnson introduced a bill that would require the officers of "intermediate bodies" that "engage in the negotiation, administration, or enforcement of collective agreements" to be elected directly by the membership. (The bill died in committee because House leaders feared a protracted battle over amendments.)
Meanwhile, don't look for Bush, Chao, and Scalia to rule against the UBC and for union democracy. If they did so, they would threaten McCarron's hold over his union and quite possibly deprive the administration of its staunchest ally in the labor movement. Indeed, on November 26, the day after Bush signed a homeland security bill likely to depress carpenters' wage levels, McCarron was back at the White House again, hobnobbing with a president who appreciates his leadership.
John B. Judis is a senior editor at The New Republic and a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
OLD NEWS BUT WHO supported Bush who supports $3 at the pump for the working man. Who supported Bush who actively works to destroy Labor rights????
Jimmy
Endorsey
Although John Kerry can depend on the endorsement of nearly every
national union, including the Teamsters, there’s one unpredictable
holdout.
By
Harold Meyerson
Web Exclusive: 07.26.04
Print Friendly |
Email Article
For the past several years, one of the ongoing mysteries of a not overly
mysterious labor movement is what the Carpenters Union will do in any
given election season. Since the maverick Doug McCarron became
Carpenters president in 1995, the union has left the AFL-CIO, linked
itself to such organizing-intensive and progressive unions as the
Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the Union of
Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees (UNITE) in the New Unity
Partnership, and, since 2001, hosted Labor Day picnics at which the
guest of honor was George W. Bush.
That may prove a trickier position this year, given Bush’s opposition to virtually all things labor. Still, Bush’s Labor Department has sided with the Carpenters’ leadership over a number of locals complaining about the absence of internal democracy, so it’s not as if McCarron has been left totally empty-handed. A Bush endorsement, certainly, would cause a far bigger revolt among the union’s members (and secondary leaders) than anything to date. Some McCarron associates in attendance at labor events today said that they thought the union might stay neutral in the presidential race, and that it was less likely than in previous years that McCarron would actually invite Bush to a Labor Day bash.
With the exception of the Carpenters and the Operating Engineers, every national union is actively supporting the Kerry-Edwards ticket. The list of endorsers includes the Teamsters, which the Bush administration once had visions of winning over. That hope was shattered some time ago -- probably at the AFL-CIO Executive Council meeting where Labor Secretary Elaine Chao showed up toting a book that she said contained records of every union impropriety her department could document.
Besides, the Teamsters are a real union that endeavors to organize, and President James P. Hoffa made very clear at Sunday afternoon’s caucus of AFL-CIO delegates to the convention (the federation says that more than 900 of the delegates and alternates are union members) that, as he put it, “workers’ freedom to join unions has been destroyed by George Bush.” Citing polls showing that more than 40 percent of workers would join unions if they could, Hoffa complained that the Bush administration “gives aid and comfort to renegade corporations” that routinely violate the National Labor Relations Act in order to thwart unionization drives. Both Hoffa and AFL-CIO President John Sweeney told the caucus, to considerable applause, that John Kerry would sign the Employee Free Choice Act, which would require employers to recognize unions when a majority of their workers had signed cards. It would also require them to submit to binding arbitration if they failed to agree to a first contract.
Harold Meyerson is the Prospect’s editor-at-large.
- E