LaborPains.org

In New York, the head of the Elmira’s teachers’ union has admitted to plagiarism. The Star-Gazette reports that Ric Lombardini’s opinion piece “Teachers are held to unrealistic standards,” which was published in the Star-Gazette, was plagiarized nearly word for word. Students in the district found guilty of plagiarism could be suspended, but Lombardini will face no disciplinary action from the district since, according to the superintendent, the issue is a union matter. The irony of the headline shouldn’t go unnoticed, and it’s worth asking to what standards if any this sixth-grade teacher and union president will be held.

In another example of union leadership run amuck, last week the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) leadership endorsed Kathleen Falk as the Democratic challenger to Gov. Scott Walker (R). Should a recall election take place, the WEAC endorsed Falk on the condition that she promises to veto the budget reforms instituted by Gov. Scott Walker. Just hours after the endorsement was announced a petition on change.org was posted demanding that the union rescind its endorsement. Liberty News Network reported WEAC members were not pleased with the endorsement, because Falk has previously lost two statewide elections, finishing dead last in one and telling blatant lies about her opponent in the other. According to petition comments WEAC members also were upset that a candidate was endorsed so early and that they did not have a voice in the decision.

Members of the Hartford County Education Association (HCEA) in Maryland also have a good reason to be upset with their union leaders. According to The Baltimore Sun, County Executive David R. Craig offered a $1,250 bonus to each county employee after finding a surplus in the FY12 budget. Eight of the county’s employee unions quickly accepted the offer, but the HCEA rejected the offer because Craig did not run it by the union first, undermining the union’s collective bargaining rights according to the HCEA’s president. Craig said he is willing to negotiate the bonus with HCEA, but that if an agreement is not reached by March 1 the money will be returned to the general fund and the teachers’ union members will not receive their bonuses. In a union-free environment an employee would be happy to receive a bonus. The same is probably true in a unionized job as well, but at the end of the day it’s the union’s, not the employee’s or employer’s decision.

If you’re planning to attend Conservative Political Action Conference this weekend, you might have some unpleasant company. The local AFL-CIO has planned to ‘Occupy’ the conference and protest the greed of the wealthy 1%. The union has organized an official joint event between member and Occupy DC to protest the conservative activist.

There have also been reports that the AFL-CIO has booked rooms for Occupiers at the Marriott hotel, allowing them to bypass security measures at the door. This is extra nice of the union considering Occupiers recently lost their home in McPherson Square. The AFL-CIO has also helped Occupy DC by  storing their belongings at its headquarters in advance of the National Park Service’s enforcement actions.

With workshops like “Return of Big Labor: What Can We Learn from Wisconsin & Ohio,” and “Taking back Wall Street: The Tea Party vs. Occupy Wall Street,” it’s obvious why unions would want to disrupt the conference, but how just how far will they go?

On Sunday, the Center for Union Facts (CUF) aired a high-profile television ad in Washington, D.C. promoting the Employee Rights Act (ERA) during the Super Bowl. The ad airs as labor law reforms are being advanced from Minnesota to Indiana, where Governor Mitch Daniels enacted legislation that was fast-tracked to prevent disruptive union-organized protests and threats to “Occupy” the Super Bowl.

“An overwhelming number of employees in private sector unions have never had a say in whether or not to join the union they’re in,” said CUF Executive Director Rick Berman.

Under current law, employees are grandfathered into an archaic system where mandatory dues are automatically deducted from their paychecks, some of which are passed along to politicians the employee may not support. In fact, fewer than 10 percent of employees in private sector unions have actually voted to join their union.

Did You See It?! Group Airs Super Bowl Ad Promoting the Employee Rights Act

Center for Union Facts Amps Up $10 Million Nationwide Campaign

Washington, D.C. – Sunday, the Center for Union Facts (CUF) aired a high-profile television ad in Washington, D.C. promoting the Employee Rights Act (ERA) during the Super Bowl. The ad airs as labor law reforms are being advanced from Minnesota to Indiana, where Governor Mitch Daniels enacted legislation fast-tracked to prevent disruptive union-organized protests and threats to “Occupy” the Super Bowl.

The ad depicts a group of union members complaining about the dues coming out of their paychecks, and trying to figure out whom among them actually voted for the union. It turns out, the ad reveals, that none of the workers currently subjected to the union’s rules had actually voted for the union.

“An overwhelming number of employees in private sector unions have never had a say in whether or not to join the union they’re in,” said CUF Executive Director Rick Berman.

In addition to requiring secret ballot elections for unionization and recertification, the ERA guarantees paycheck protection. Current labor law allows unions to trap workers as cash cows, using their dues to fund the campaigns of elected officials who ensure the scheme remains legal. Meanwhile, less than 10 percent of employees in private sector unions have actually voted to join their union.

In addition to airing the ad, CUF is educating the public with the launch of www.EmployeeRightsAct.com and the release of the results of a poll conducted by ORC International on CUF’s behalf. The poll shows strong support in both union and non-union households for measures in the bill, sponsored by U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and U.S. Rep. Tim Scott (R-SC). Eighty-three percent of union households, for example, agreed that workers should have the right to an election every three years to determine if they still want union representation.

To see the polling data or speak with a CUF representative, you can reach Michael Moroney at 202-463-7106 or by email at Moroney@unionfacts.com. To view the ad, visit www.EmployeeRightsAct.com.

The Center for Union Facts is a non-profit organization supported by foundations, businesses, union members, and the general public. We are dedicated to showing Americans the facts about today’s union leadership.

# # #

Gov. Mitch Daniels signed right-to-work legislation into law yesterday, solidifying Indiana as the 23^rd right-to-work state. Once Democrats in the House ended their boycott and gave Republicans a quorum, it was smooth sailing. Despite the noisy protestors, the Senate passed the legislation Wednesday and Daniels signed it almost immediately. The Band-Aid approach was hoped to quiet the protestors before the Super Bowl on February 5. The tactic could be working, since an AFL-CIO spokesman confirmed that no large protests are planned for Sunday.

Much to the dismay of Big Labor, Indiana’s success has sparked hopeful chatter in several other states. The victory marked the first time a right-to-work law has passed in more than a decade and the first time in traditionally union heavy “rust-belt” states.

Michigan is a state many are watching for signs of right-to-work support, even though Gov. Rick Snyder has called it too divisive. Michigan State Sen. Colbeck showed his support for the legislation saying, “It’s good for Indiana and bad for [non-right-to-work neighbor] Michigan, but at least some of our working youths will have shorter drives now when they come back to visit Michigan for the holidays.” House Speaker Jase Bolger also supports a right-to-work debate declaring it isn’t something that should be feared or run from.

War drums are beating all over the country as Big Labor gears up for the fight to stay relevant in the American political landscape. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka began expanding his political operation last summer with a super PAC for the purposes of funding multi-cycle, issue advocacy as well as get-out-the-vote efforts. The new super PAC, “Workers’ Voices”, has announced its small, yet respectable haul with $3.7 million raised, and $3 million cash on hand.

The battle may be coming to a head in California, where labor organizations are fighting tooth and nail to protect their source of revenue. If a new ballot initiative passes this November, unions would need to get written permission from their members each year to use dues for political purposes.

“This could change the balance of power long after the governor’s taxes are expired,” said Thad Kousser, a political-science professor at UC San Diego. “Defeating this has got to be the top goal of labor. If they don’t, they could become almost extinct in California politics.”

At this point, unions are desperately looking for a win. Today, as thousands of protesters packed hallways and shouted their disapproval, the Indiana Senate voted 28-22 to pass a right to work bill. The bill will now go to Gov. Mitch Daniels for his signature.

On a national level, there is legislation with a similar provision. The Employee Rights Act, sponsored by U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and U.S. Representative Tim Scott (R-SC) contains a measure that would give employees the right to require unions to get their approval before dues money is spent on behalf of political parties or political candidates.

It should be noted; exit polling from 2010 by shows that 42 percent of union households voted for Republican candidates, yet more than 93 percent of union political support went to Democratic candidates. There is a serious disconnect between Big Labor’s political agenda and the personal ideology of its members.

While the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has always maintained the façade of being neutral, the emboldened new chair has decided to let his true colors show by publicly disclosing a very pro-union agenda. Despite heavy opposition from business groups and Republicans, Mark Peirce, NLRB chairman, will push for new rules that would make it easier to organize new members.

“I knew this was going to happen,” said Rep. Trey Gowdy, (R-SC) , a member of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. “The NLRB has lost all pretense of objectivity in my judgment.”

In what seems like a complete invasion of privacy, Pearce wants to implement new rules requiring businesses to hand over lists of employee phone numbers and emails to union leaders prior to an election. Pierce also hopes to speed up the process for holding a vote to unionize after signatures are collected.

“If they’re going to go forward on that basis, I think that removes any pretense at all that they are not in the back pocket of the union movement,” said Randel Johnson, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s vice president on labor issues.

Pearce says he wants the NLRB to become “a household word” for all workers, not just those affiliated with organized labor. If he continues down his path of hyper-partisan politics and power grabs, he might just get what he’s wishing for. However, most households probably won’t be talking about the agency in a positive light.

Teacher unions around the country are taking the gloves off and aggressively attacking officials trying to reform the education system by reigning in costs and holding educators accountable through teacher evaluations.

While good teachers have nothing to fear – and may even receive a bonus – unions are standing up for bad teachers by making sure that they don’t have to undergo any scrutiny whatsoever.

Up North, Massachusetts’s largest teachers union plans to circumvent the democratic process and go to the courts. The Massachusetts Teachers Association has filed a lawsuit against the state for allowing a ballot initiative that may breakup the union’s monopoly, making a teacher’s performance, rather than years of service, the primary factor in deciding who should be laid off.

In the Empire State, United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew has rescinded his invitation to New York City education officials for training sessions on the new teacher evaluation system. This has only increased tensions between the union and Mayor Michael Bloomberg in the city’s effort to hold bad teachers accountable.

A proposed constitutional amendment in Missouri would prohibit tenure for teachers in that state. Under the amendment, districts would be required to use local performance standards for employment decisions that consider student performance, a notion that supporters argue would improve education. Under the proposal, school districts receiving public funding could not enter into new contracts with teachers for a period lasting more than three years.

The Louisiana Federation of Teachers and Louisiana Association of Educators both blasted Gov. Bobby Jindal’s proposal to expand the school voucher system and significantly change how teacher pay increases and tenure are applied.

“The coalition of the status quo will always say we need more time and more money,” Jindal’s communication director Kyle Plotkin said. “When we’re wasting almost a billion dollars on failing public schools, we don’t have any more time to waste.”

There is no reason for unions to protect bad teachers at the expense of good ones, other than maintaining an overinflated base from which to collect dues. Maybe if bad teachers focused more on teaching, rather than keeping their jobs through arcane labor agreements, unions wouldn’t be in this predicament.