LaborPains.org

There have been several times when I’ve discussed the alternate means of implementing some of the key tenets of the Employee Free Choice Act, like HERE and HERE. It’s just nice to have the President blatantly confirm this agenda in his speech to the AFL-CIO.  Basic story? EFCA will be a challenge in the lame duck session, but no worries, we’ve got other ways of making it happen. From the Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Obama reiterated that the administration will put its weight behind it. “We are going to keep on fighting to pass the Employee Free Choice Act,” he told the 54 executive council members and others in the room. “We also know what and who is standing in the way of progress,” he said, adding that it will be “tough” to get the bill through the Senate and will take time to reverse the impact of “at least eight years in which there was a profound animosity toward the notion of unions.”

Mr. Obama also reminded the labor officials of the ways in which the administration has already supported unions, in part by wielding executive powers for actions that don’t require legislation.

“There’s a reason why we nominated people to the National Mediation Board that would ensure that folks in the rail and air” industries can organize, said Mr. Obama, referring to the board’s overhaul in May of a decades-old rule that had made it harder for airline and railway workers to unionize. He also cited the Democrats he nominated to the National Labor Relations Board to “restore some balance” to the group, which supervises union elections and referees disputes between private-sector employers and employees.

As cities across California and moreover, the entire state face financial obligations they can’t meet, the city of LA was on the cusp of reducing costs when the SEIU stepped in to bully another union.

Heaven forbid that the city of LA should be able to reign in employment costs and that another union be able to accept a deal the SEIU isn’t happy with.

According the the LA Times:

“Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and his top budget advisers thought they negotiated a labor contract last week that would begin to address the steadily rising cost of employee healthcare benefits. But that deal, reached with the 4,800-member Engineers and Architects Assn., has come under attack from members of another civilian employee union, which contends that the agreement contains “unprecedented and dangerous” concessions and should be rejected.

With the Engineers and Architects voting on the tentative agreement this week, organizers with Service Employees International Union Local 721 have begun warning that the proposed pact is part of a larger effort to “divide and conquer” the city’s civilian employee groups.”

The head of the beleaguered union says that behind the SEIU’s interest in the deal is their ongoing attempts to raid his union. So much for the “new directions” under Mary Kay Henry:

“Any move by one union to interfere with the negotiations of another union will ultimately backfire,” Szabo said, “because the city is likely to impose these healthcare provisions and more on those who opt out of the deal.” Michael Davies, interim executive director of the Engineers and Architects, said the Service Employees International Union is opposing the deal as part of its push to raid his union’s membership. Last fall, nearly 2,000 workers from his organization moved to the SEIU.

The SEIU and UNITE-HERE have settled up. Made peace. Cut ties.

According to the press release from the SEIU:

“The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Workers United and UNITE HERE today announced a settlement agreement on behalf of the unions’ members and elected leadership that will bring to a close the protracted dispute between the unions. [...]

The agreement provides clarity and resolution to a divisive issue in labor, and at the same time, enables each union the opportunity to increase its focus and resources on addressing the larger problems faced by members and workers who have no union.”

The equally generous statement (with a side of smarmy) John Wilhelm:

I am pleased to report we have reached a binding agreement with SEIU that brings an end to nearly two years of hostilities. I credit new SEIU President Mary Kay Henry for personally devoting her energy to making this agreement.  For the sake of workers and the labor movement, I hope that this is the first step in making SEIU the great Union it can be under her leadership. [...]

And it restores to UNITE HERE the bulk of the financial assets that have been tied up in federal court, including the Manhattan real estate. UNITE HERE and SEIU agreed to seek approval from federal regulators to transfer ownership of the Amalgamated Bank to SEIU-affiliated Workers United.

The Amalgamated Bank, which UNITE brought to the table so willingly six years ago when merging with HERE was probably the grand prize in this labor war, and the SEIU won. Some would say that acquiring it was the goal along. Just ask Bruce Raynor, who according to Mary Kay Henry was integrally involved in the negotiations.

Almost one month ago to the day, it was announced that Andy Stern had joined the staff of Siga Technologies Inc. He wasn’t done yet. It was announced today that Mr. Stern will be gracing the good people of Georgetown with his…research.  According to the school:

The past president of one of the largest unions in North America will join the Georgetown Public Policy Institute (GPPI) as a senior research fellow beginning Aug. 1.  GPPI announced the appointment of former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) President Andy Stern to the position, for which he will conduct and coordinate research efforts on a number of social policy issues, including wage reform, labor policy, and retirement security.

And the answer to your burning question? No, Andy Stern will ever turn in his purple for the blue and grey.

Everybody does it. When you work for the government and your personal interests or background (or even future employment opportunities) conflict with your ability to do your job, you have to recuse yourself. End of story.

It’s commonly practiced; we could even say it’s ethical. Well, leave it to NLRB board member and union favorite Craig Becker to break with “tradition” and weigh in on cases involving the SEIU. See, it’s perfectly legal to weigh in on the goings-on of a particular local affiliated with the union that you worked for at a national level. And ne’er the two shall meet.

Back in February, here’s what was said during the hearing with the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on February 2, 2010, according to Bloomberg:

“Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona said he hoped Becker would recuse himself if confirmed from any case involving the SEIU, a labor union that spent $80 million to help elect Obama. Becker said he would recuse himself from such cases for two years if confirmed.”

You are more than welcome to listen to the entire hearing HERE to find the exact moment and the exact quote, but I’d say the promise is pretty clear.

Here’s the rub. Since February, Becker has apparantly changed his mind:

Craig Becker, former general counsel for the SEIU, was a controversial appointee to start with, owing to his radical and anti-democratic views on union power. But surely, Badertscher’s lawyers thought, he’d recuse himself from a case involving the SEIU. Becker refused to do so. In fact, he was part of a three-member panel that reviewed the SEIU/Pomona Valley case, and he has made it clear that he intends to continue involving himself in cases involving his former employer.

“There are 13 or 14 cases in which we’ve sought recusal for Craig Becker,” says Patrick Semmens, legal information director for the National Right to Work Foundation (NRWF), which represented Badertscher.

Sandwiched in the middle of a bit of NAFTA-hating, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka took the time remind everyone, anyone, who would listen that EFCA is still around. From the Wall Street Journal:

“Mr. Trumka said union leaders did discuss the proposed Employee Free Choice Act with Vice President Biden. The measure is a union-backed bill that would make it easier for unions to organize workers for collective bargaining. The bill is stalled in Congress, opposed by Republicans, conservative Democrats and business groups. Mr. Trumka said Mr. Biden assured labor leaders Wednesday that he and the White House were still committed to the legislation.”

I remember Richard Trumka’s battle cry last month at the UAW conference:

“We won’t quit until the EFCA becomes the law of the land and everyone who wants a union can have a union,” Trumka said.

Or a month before that in The Hill:

“The union leader was bullish on its chances of passage, saying there will be a vote on the bill this year and it will pass.”

Perhaps Mr. Trumka has alarm on his phone that reminds him to bring it up at scheduled intervals?  Like “Note to self: Harp on EFCA today. Be positive and aggressive. Smile.”

You can file this under “Good Luck With That.” After what the Washington Post calls “18 months of floundering” (ouch), the AFL-CIO, SEIU, and labor et al. are looking to the Right for help going further Left:

If imitation is the highest form of flattery, the “tea party” movement must be honored. In an effort to replicate the tea party’s success, 170 liberal and civil rights groups are forming a coalition that they hope will match the movement’s political energy and influence. They promise to “counter the tea party narrative” and help the progressive movement find its voice again after 18 months of foundering.

The large-scale attempt at liberal unity, dubbed “One Nation,” will try to revive themes that energized the progressive grass roots two years ago. In a repurposing of Barack Obama’s former campaign slogan, organizers are demanding “all the change” they voted for — a poke at the White House. [...]

The groups involved represent the core of the first-time voters who backed Obama, including the National Council of La Raza, the Service Employees International Union, the NAACP, the AFL-CIO, and the United States Student Association. (The effort is separate from the Democratic Party’s plan to spend $50 million trying to reach those same voters.) Their aha! moment happened after the health-care overhaul passed this spring.

If you are wondering where unions fall in President Obama’s hierarchy of people he needs to stay in contact with and phone calls he needs to return:

The night before Barack Obama became President of the United States he made two phone calls to a man named, Tom Balanoff. Balanoff is the President of SEIU (Service Employees Int’l Union) Local 1 in Chicago. Obama’s first call to Balanoff went unanswered because his number came up as “blocked” on Balanoff’s cell phone. Balanoff was in the middle of a fancy dinner with the former SEIU Int’l President, Andy Stern, at Shaw’s Crab House in downtown Chicago. When Balanoff listened to the voicemail, this is what he heard: “Tom, this is Barack. Give me a call.”

Later that night, Tom Balanoff was filling his car up with gas when he spoke to Barack Obama. Obama told Balanoff he had “two criteria” for the person who would replace him in the US Senate, after Obama got elected President. Today in court, Tom Balanoff testified Obama explained his “two criteria” this way: “One, they must be good for citizens of Illinois and two, the person had to be able to be reelected” (in 2010). Balanoff says, Obama told him there were a “number of good candidates” but Obama said he did not want to get involved in the process. Balanoff says Obama brought up the name of his close friend and campaign advisor, Valerie Jarrett.