Washington D.C.- Right to Work Sweat Shops.. 2 million at risk!!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Trajan, Feb 25, 2011.

  1. Trajan
    Offline

    Trajan conscientia mille testes

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2010
    Messages:
    29,048
    Thanks Received:
    4,751
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    The Bay Area Soviet
    Ratings:
    +4,756
    Gee, you mean like aside from 24 other states the Federal work force is...right to work to? :eusa_hand:
    as my jersey buddy would say; geddafugouttaheaar...

    the article captures it nicely I think.

    * FEBRUARY 25, 2011
    Union Power for Thee, But Not for Me
    If the president is so upset with Wisconsin's labor law reforms, why won't he allow federal workers to bargain collectively?


    snip-
    It will no doubt surprise you to learn that President Obama, the great patron of the working man, also happens to be the great CEO of one of the least union-friendly shop floors in the nation.

    snip-
    Fact: President Obama is the boss of a civil work force that numbers up to two million (excluding postal workers and uniformed military). Fact: Those federal workers cannot bargain for wages or benefits. Fact: Washington, D.C. is, in the purest sense, a "right to work zone." Federal employees are not compelled to join a union, nor to pay union dues. Fact: Neither Mr. Obama, nor the prior Democratic majority, ever acted to give their union chums a better federal deal.

    snip-
    For this enormous flexibility in managing his work force, Mr. Obama can thank his own party. In 1978, Democratic President Jimmy Carter, backed by a Democratic Congress, passed the Civil Service Reform Act. Washington had already established its General Schedule (GS) classification and pay system for workers. The 1978 bill went further, focused as it was on worker accountability and performance. It severely proscribed the issues over which employees could bargain, as well as prohibited compulsory union support.

    Democrats weren't then (and aren't now) about to let their federal employees dictate pay. The GS system, as well as the president and Congress, sees to that. Nor were they about to let workers touch health-care or retirement plans. Unions are instead limited to bargaining over personnel employment practices such as whether employees are allowed to wear beards, or whether the government must pay to clean uniforms. These demands matter, though they are hardly the sort to break the federal bank.

    snip-
    Innocent Americans assume that unions use collective bargaining solely to obtain better pay and benefits. Not exactly. The real game is to insist that the dough runs through the union—giving it power over the state.

    In Wisconsin, for instance, the teachers union doesn't just bargain for more health dollars. It also bargains to require that local school districts buy health insurance for their teachers through the union-affiliated health-insurance plan, called WEA Trust. That requirement gives the union (not the state) ultimate say over health benefits. It also costs the state at least $68 million more annually than it would if schools could buy the state-employee health plan—money that goes to a union outfit.

    and...

    The other risk: The spotlight turns back to D.C. If the president is so worried about Wisconsin's "assault," why has he never taken up federal bargaining rights? If the Badger State's current system is the gold standard, why has he not replicated it? If it is so important that all parties "sit at the table"—as White House Press Secretary Jay Carney recently lectured Wisconsin—how dare Mr. Obama unilaterally declare a federal pay freeze? (Honestly, the union-busting gall!)

    mooooorrree at-

    Strassel: Union Power for Thee, But Not for Me - WSJ.com
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2011
  2. bucs90
    Offline

    bucs90 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    26,548
    Thanks Received:
    5,995
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +19,210
    You have to understand the mind of a liberal, which took me a long time. Liberals truly believe in liberal ideals, but often don't practice those ideals themselves. At first, I thought "What hypocrites!"

    But then I had an awakening. I realized liberals are the kindest, most unselfish people on Earth. Then I understood:

    They don't practice liberal ideals, because.....they are SO unselfish, that they'll leave all the goody liberalism for others to enjoy!!!

    So when a liberal in Hollywood (George Clooney) produces a movie, and they film it in non-union Idaho, South Carolina, or outside the country in Canada (Brokeback Mountain).............it's not that they are being hypocritical by seeking out the cheaper, worse non-union labor........it's just that they are SO UNSELFISH they they want to leave as much of the great, awesome, efficient union labor as possible for all the other people!!!! How considerate of them!!!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Tea Bag Partier
    Offline

    Tea Bag Partier Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Messages:
    69
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +15
    If you're going to cite a piece of legislation, perhaps you should actually read the law, instead of cutting and pasting someone's opinion about it from a tea bagger website?

    The vast, overwhelming majority of conservatives on this website are on record saying that unions shouldn't exist at all in the civil service.

    Are you backtracking now, and supporting their right to exist, but with limitations??

    Make up your freaking mind, man!
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2011

Share This Page