LaborPains.org

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.

The right-to-work battle is heating up in Indiana, and labor unions look desperate. So desperate in fact, that union leaders are contemplating disrupting the Super Bowl, which will be played in the Lucas Oil Stadium.

The Associated Press reports that around 50 Indiana labor leaders met this week for the AFL-CIO’s “labor Table” to discuss a strategy. With all eyes on Indiana on February 5, Big Labor wants to cash in on the free publicity and use the opportunity to bash right to work efforts in the state. The Teamsters are considering blocking the streets around the NFL village with truckers willing to risk arrest for their cause, and other union members could flood the streets marching in protest.

NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said they don’t expect the game to be disrupted, likely because the unions representing stagehands, carpenters, electricians and painters have a no-strike agreement with the board that runs the Indianapolis Convention Center. But other unions key to the overall success of the super bowl, such as hotel employees do not fall under the no-strike agreement.

It is clear from the hostile attitude of one Teamster organizer saying, “You can tell them we’ll take the Super Bowl and shove it,” that the good of the community might not be Big Labor’s number one interest. With Republicans in the state House and Senate hoping to vote on right-to-work legislation in the upcoming weeks, the half-time show might not be the only controversy at this year’s Super Bowl.

Driven by opposition to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s proposal passed last year that effectively ended collective bargaining rights for nearly all public sector workers, unions have been extremely active in the state’s campaign to force a recall election. In a recent statement, the AFL-CIO praised the Wisconsin union members for collecting over a million signatures throughout the last two months.

However, not all of the action will be in Wisconsin. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has a bold plan to overhaul pensions for future city- and state-government workers. The New York chapter of the AFL-CIO is mobilizing its 2.5 million union members to oppose the plan.

“How they can be against adjusting future benefits just boggles my mind,” Cuomo told the New York Post. “It’s just unbelievable to me.”

The AFL-CIO is making waves on a national level as well. On Wednesday, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka slammed the White House jobs council’s latest report. As one of the two union leaders on the council, Trumka said the body is too narrow to provide recommendations to President Obama that are balanced between the interests of business and labor.

For a group that just launched a new ad campaign touting how “work connects us all” the AFL-CIO sure doesn’t seem to work well with others.

The GOP presidential primary debates have had their highs and their lows this cycle. In one of the bizarre debate moments, candidates were asked whether or not states should be allowed to ban contraceptives. This discussion went on for nearly a half an hour.

Last night, during the Fox News Presidential Primary Debate, Texas Gov. Rick Perry channeled South Carolinians anger at the Obama administration and attacked the NLRB for their assault on Boeing for daring to open a new production line in a right to work state.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney also slammed Obama for the stance he took in the NLRB’s dispute with Boeing, releasing a new round of radio ads and commercials.

Although most of the candidates on the Republican slate support right to work laws, none have come out in support of the Employee Rights Act yet. The legislation, sponsored by U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and U.S. Representative Tim Scott (R-SC), contains measures to protect employees and give them a democratic voice in unionization.

Take action! Click here and ask CNN to discuss the Employee Rights Act during Thursday night’s GOP presidential primary debate.

Last Wednesday Hostess Brands Inc., maker of sweet snacks including Twinkies, Ho Hos and Ding Dongs, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection to settle its unsecured debts, primarily weighed down by its heavily unionized workforce.

Debts beholden for ingredients like flour, sweeteners and cocoa pale in comparison to the exorbitant amounts owed to union health and pension funds. The top unsecured creditor on the list is the Bakery & Confectionery Union & Industry International Pension Fund, owed $944.16 million. In fact, 16 of the top 40 unsecured claims belong to union benefit funds.

Hostess operates in 48 states and has approximately 19,000 unionized employees, 7,500 of which are represented by the Teamsters Union. Furthering Hostesses problems surviving in the market, the Company has 372 separate labor agreements, while most of its competitors are not unionized.

This is not Hostess’s first time dealing with bankruptcy. In 2004, the company formerly known as Interstate Bakeries went bankrupt and re-emerged as Hostess Brands in 2009.

Back in November of 2011, Labor Pains told readers not to hold their breath for a 23^rd right to work state. This is why.

Close to a year after Indiana House Senate Democrats fled the state to protest Republican plans to curtail union rights, the legislators have employed a similar tactic to stall new right to work legislation by once again refused to show up last week.

While Indiana House Republicans have the votes to pass the measure, the House does not have the quorum it needs to conduct business without the Democrats in attendance.  If the House Democrats return, the legislature’s Republicans are expected to pass the measure without difficulty, holding a 60-40 majority in the House and a supermajority of 37-13 in the Senate.

In its last session, the Indiana legislature passed an anti-bolting statute, allowing daily fines of $1,000 to be assessed on members who are absent for three or more consecutive days without an excuse. Although these have yet to be imposed, the fines can be levied at the discretion of Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma.

One indication of the anti-bolting statute’s effectiveness is the recently scheduled vote on amendments to the bill, in which House Democrats are expected to attend this week.

Under the right to work legislation that Republicans are working to pass, employees at unionized private companies would not be required to pay dues to the union. If the bill passes, Indiana would become the first right to work state in what’s considered to be the nation’s traditional manufacturing belt.

Gov. Mitch Daniels, along with other supporters, argues that the bill would attract more jobs to Indiana–a state hit with 9 percent unemployment.

Given the likelihood that the bill will clear the House and Senate, Indiana workers may be able to breathe a little easier.