LaborPains.org

A news report tells the story of a union member who was roughed-up by Teamsters while protesting then-president Clinton. Adding further insult to injury, some Teamsters filed suit against the plaintiff and were apparently helped—and even encouraged—by Governor Rendell: 

A union staffer’s 2002 court declaration asserted that current governor and former Philadelphia mayor Ed Rendell (D) encouraged Teamsters to pursue assault charges against a nonviolent protester, The Bulletin has learned.

Testimony Mr. Rendell offered earlier that year differed markedly from the account. The differing versions emerge from the saga of assault victim Don Adams’s arduous legal battles.

After the Teamsters agreed in March to settle his almost decade-long civil action, Mr. Adams found the justice he received welcome, if incomplete. 

John Powell has the story from Alabama:

“…the employees attempted to return to their jobs Tuesday morning. Wise officials said Steelworkers union employees were being intimidated at the employee entrance to the plant by employees who are still on strike.”

“Wise officials also reported, however, that a former employee, who was demonstrating in the picket line, dived onto the hood of a vehicle that was entering the plant.” 

Some striking nurses (that is, nurses on strike) in West Virginia are alleging that a union rep there had his car torched. There’s no evidence that it was related to events at hand, but that hasn’t stopped a breathless, righteous statement from the union. And we agree: it’s not OK to use violence or intimidation to win a labor dispute.

But it’s awfully funny to be hearing this from the union leaders’ side.

Remember that SEIU-backed group called ACORN, which supposedly wasn’t really tied to voter fraud (even though troubling incidents have popped up in more than a dozen states)? You can add another state to your play-at-home Rotten Acorn map. Here’s the latest out of Washington State:

Prosecutors in King County are looking at possible criminal charges related to a voter-registration drive in 2006, echoing the controversy that erupted after voting irregularities in the razor-close gubernatorial election of 2004.

Acting prosecutor Dan Satterberg is reviewing 1,829 voter-registration forms turned in last year by people working for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a national activist group.

This is a huge embarrassment to the union bosses who fund the group, which is why so many are doing their darndest to say “this is not the fraud you’re looking for.” C’mon, get real.

If you read this blog even occasionally, you’re aware of the lows some anti-corporate campaigns can hit. Even labor aficionados know that. Today’s installment comes, not surprisingly, from Service Employees International Union organizers. They’re taking aim at JP Morgan Chase, which has not yet handed its janitors over for union membership. So, the union guys seem to be thinking, we need to get some dirt on this company. Or, hey, why not some trash?!*

From blogger “Some Yahoo” comes coarse language, but a good point:

The Janitor’s union wants JPMorgan Chase to unionize. They refused, due to the fact that being a union shop means shoveling out gobs of money for nothing productive. End of story, right?

Wrong. Now the SEIU is making obviously bogus smear videos in an attempt to bludgeon Chase into submission. Look, a**holes, if you can’t win an argument with the truth, then shut up and go home!

If past is prologue, the trash stunt isn’t the lowest they will go.

*Anyone around the labor field long enough knows that union organizers have dumpster diving in their arsenal when attacking a company, or when trying to figure out which employees may be sympathetic to an organizing drive.

CNNMoney.com reports that the Teamsters union has put Coca-Cola and its largest bottler (Coca-Cola Enterprises, or CCE) “on notice” after CCE announced it would be cutting some of its unionized jobs to save money.

But the International Brotherhood of Teamsters isn’t speaking from what you’d call the moral high ground. Click here to read the settlement the union signed during its Overnite unionization campaign — and what the union agreed it wouldn’t do.

And if you don’t have time to read the whole thing, don’t fret. Through the magic of the Stephen Colbert “On Notice Generator”, we’ve put the Teamsters “on notice” ourselves, listing only those tactics sworn off by the union in its Overnite settlement.

As we’ve been saying for more than a year, the card check organizing process preferred by union bosses is rife with intimidation — and misinformation. The latest comes from Minnesota, where a daycare worker says SEIU lied to get authorization cards signed. The union officials then turned around with the signed cards to offer a false show of support. Diana Friemann’s letter to the Post-Bulletin alleges:

Members of the Service Employee International Union are attempting to pass a bill called the “Employee Free Choice Act.” This bill would force employers to recognize the “card check process.”

The majority of day-care providers in Minnesota were manipulated into signing cards for the union by being told that if we signed, we would “get more information about the union.” The reality is that by signing, we are giving our support to the union and taking away our voting rights by the societies to which many belong.

These societies are our voices in the Legislature. The manipulative behaviors of the union have tricked many of us. The union is trying to use these cards to show our “support” for their agenda in the Legislature. Their agenda is to gain money for themselves, not to better the child-care industry. I encourage all members of Congress not to support the Employee Free Choice Act.

If the union has the support of day-care providers, we want a fair vote like all Americans deserve, not a card check. In the state of Illinois, only 10 percent of providers who signed cards are union members; 90 percent who signed cards are not union members.

Add that to UNITE HERE’s increasingly visible ethical lapses in card check organizing and people are starting to get a better idea of what’s in store for working Americans if labor leaders can successfully buy political support for the Employee Free Choice Act.

SEIU officials caught the world off-guard when they marched down to Houston and badgered their way into representing 5,000 janitors. Not that the drive was very successful, as it netted an unimpressive contract including a clause allowing employers to pay non-union wages whenever the cleaning firm competes against a non-union employer (which is pretty much anytime). Nonetheless, SEIU is taking its power-play tactics down the road to San Antonio, where the union’s attempt to force through a law making it easier to win expensive contracts for city employees (making the cost of government higher and higher). Public opinion is decidedly against the union bosses’ ploy.

Yesterday’s San Antonio Express-News carried an editorial succinctly summing up the issue: “The whole exercise is unnecessary and boils down to a power grab by the SEIU.” And a columnist offered the insights of a transplanted Californian all too experienced with SEIU’s tactics. Recounting the Houston experience, the columnist concludes:

The newcomer from California said he believes the consequences for San Antonians will ultimately include “expensive and to-hell-with-you” city government.

Not to mention office takeovers, blocked streets and memorable visits from bellicose out-of-town SEIU bosses with little to lose and a whole lot of Alamo City lucre to gain.