Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Unions’

Union President Drops Trump Bombshell… Democrats’ Worst Fears Are Coming True

Reported By Benjamin Arie | March 11, 2018 at 9:34am

URL of the original posting site:

Unions have been seen as the foundation of Democrat election victories for decades. The loyalty of those workers to vote blue has been taken for granted by liberal politicians since at least the 1960’s… but that could now be changing.

Donald Trump’s tariff proposals have generated serious controversy, with some critics calling them “protectionism.” The economic soundness of the president’s plan is still up for debate, but as a political move it might have been genius.

A major union has just revealed that they’re warming to Trump, and their traditionally blue votes could be switching to red very soon. During a Thursday interview with the decidedly anti-Trump MSNBC network, the president of United Steelworkers had shockingly positive words to say about Trump and his tariff plan.

“Gerard praised Trump for making it clear he is going to ‘tackle trade deficits’ which he called a ‘wealth transfer’ because they are ‘taking good jobs away,’” reported Real Clear Politics.

“It’s going to make it very hard for our members to ignore what he just did and what makes me sad is we’ve been trying to get Democrats to this for more than 30 years,” Gerard told MSNBC host Chuck Todd.

That statement could be huge: United Steelworkers is the largest industrial labor union in the entire country, with close to a million members. The union also has close connections to other groups, including AFL-CIO, a powerful lobbying and voting bloc. It’s worth noting that not only did the president of one of America’s largest unions essentially endorse Trump, but he also slammed Democrats for their failed promises in the same breath.

“The president has made it really clear that he’s going to tackle the trade deficits,” Gerard explained. “It is unacceptable that America would have an $800 billion trade deficit but when you subtract services, roughly $600 billion annual trade deficit.”

Gerard almost seemed to be repeating Trump’s own talking points. “That’s a wealth transfer and you can’t argue that those trade deficits are creating good jobs,” he stated. “Those trade deficits are taking good jobs away.”

The union boss again slammed Democrats — something that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago — and again voiced his trust in Trump.

“All we’re asking for is a level playing field and with the president has done is send a signal that he’s going to help us get a level playing field,” Gerard said.

“And we gave the Republicans and we gave the Democrats — we’ve given every government since before Clinton hope that they would do something.”

Those words echoed a similar sentiment from another voter group that has traditionally gone Democrat: Immigration advocates. Just yesterday, we reported that Dreamers are starting to call out the left for years of promises and no progress. Sound familiar?

While the media is busy slamming President Trump and calling his supporters crazy, actual Americans are seeing the positives from his first year in office. They’re receiving bonuses and promotions from the tax cut, and signs of an optimistic economy that is ready to explode.

The jury is still out on Trump’s specific tariff plans, but one thing is certain: Democrats may be in for a surprise in the 2018 and 2020 elections.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

waving flagJob Killer

Minimum Wage Lesson: Union That Campaigned for It Wants Exemption

waving flagPosted on May 28, 2015Mark Horne


The union officials who demanded no exceptions to the Los Angeles minimum wage hike are now giving us a minimum wage lesson by asking for an exception.

Minimum wage increases don’t increase unemployment, they argue. Or, rather, they assert. There is no argument.

But then suddenly the truth comes out when the very people arguing that a higher minimum wage must be inflicted on all businesses without exception suddenly demand an exception in order to increase union employment.

From the Los Angeles Times: “L.A. labor leaders seek minimum wage exemption for firms with union workers.” yourgreed

Labor leaders, who were among the strongest supporters of the citywide minimum wage increase approved last week by the Los Angeles City Council, are advocating last-minute changes to the law that could create an exemption for companies with unionized workforces.

The push to include an exception to the mandated wage increase for companies that let their employees collectively bargain was the latest unexpected detour as the city nears approval of its landmark legislation to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2020.Picture5

For much of the past eight months, labor activists have argued against special considerations for business owners, such as restaurateurs, who said they would have trouble complying with the mandated pay increase.

So the entire campaign was a pretense. Now that the law is about to be enforced, we suddenly find out that labor leaders want unions carved out of the protections. But if the reason for a minimum wage law was to protect workers from low wages, then why should unions get permission to reverse that protection and allow them to be exploited again?

“With a collective bargaining agreement, a business owner and the employees negotiate an agreement that works for them both. The agreement allows each party to prioritize what is important to them,” Hicks said in a statement. “This provision gives the parties the option, the freedom, to negotiate that agreement. And that is a good thing.”Bull

But if having options and freedom is so great, then why not give it to everyone? After all, if people would prefer the union to negotiating by themselves they can always join the union. So if people don’t want the union, why shouldn’t they have the freedom to make their own “bargaining agreement” with a business owner?

What is going on? Very simple: This was never a campaign to raise the pay for all workers to fifteen dollars an hour as far as the union leaders were concerned. That was always a deception. This entire campaign was a way for them to give unions leverage to make more businesses hire and negotiate with union members in a collective bargaining situation. The union leaders knew all along that forcing wages higher would lead to unemployment. But their plan was to give the unions the capacity to underbid non-union workers in L.A. They want non-union workers to be unemployed and allow union workers to work for less than the minimum wage.

So not only do we see that Liberals believe that higher minimum wage laws lead to greater unemployment, but we also see that they were counting on it.

freedom combo 2

The Democrats’ War on Workers



Democrats like to accuse Republicans of waging “war” on women and on “immigrants” and anybody else they need to lie to in order to solidify their base.  They get away with it only because the major media are nearly 100% in the tank for Democrats.  In the real world, it is actually Democrats who are waging war, and the war they’re waging is on the same base they lie to with a regularity that would put X-Lax out of business.

The Democratic party has been waging a war on workers, especially lower income workers, for decades.  They’ve gotten away with it because nobody – Republicans are you listening – has had the courage to point it out to those workers.  The tide may be changing on that, but that doesn’t mean the war is won, it just means the Democrats are doubling down.

obamamoney1There are two major issues that are at the forefront of the Democrats’ War on Workers.  So-called immigration reform and forced unionization of public employees.

With respect to “immigration reform,” which is in fact amnesty for 15 million plus illegal aliens currently in the US and another 30 to 40 million who will come in due to the chain immigration rules Democrats and Republican amnesty sell-outs like John McCain insist on, will depress wages at the low end of the scale because this flood of illegal aliens is made up almost entirely of uneducated, unskilled workers whose command of the English language is marginal at best.  The highest rates of unemployment are already low income workers and adding 15 to 45 million more potential low income job seekers will do nothing but depress wages.

The Reason Foundation cites twelve reasons why amnesty will hurt the most vulnerable among us.  The highlights include:

It will cost trillions, depleting resources.

According to The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector, the cost for amnesty is at least $6.3 trillion.  Most of this cost is absorbed in Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, education, welfare benefits, and social services like police…

Amnesty will depress wages

The majority of the 33 million new immigrants that would benefit from amnesty would be low-skilled labor. The Congressional Budget Office stated that wages would decrease over ten years. Mass immigration is already hurting many low-skilled laborers, The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights stated that both legal and illegal immigration accounts for forty percent of the 18-point percent decline for African American employment levels.

Employment will decrease amongst low-skill domestic labor

The addition of 33 million new permanent job seekers would increase the already strained native work force.  According to the Center for Immigration Studies, “the native-born population increased by 16.4 million from 2000 to 2013, yet the number of natives actually holding a job was 1.3 million lower in 2013 than 2000.”

Get the idea?  Please follow the link to The Reason Foundation, it’s an eye base

With respect to forced unionization, Democrats around the country have spent decades building the strength of public employee unions.  The reason is simple.  Employees are required to join the union, required to pay dues which are automatically deducted from their wages, and the unions are the number one funding source for the Democratic Party.Next election in the bag

We’ve seen some dramatic reversals on that score over the past few years.  Both Michigan and Wisconsin, states with a long history of labor union activism, have both become right-to-work states and unions have lost the majority of their members in both states.  Secondly, the recent Supreme Court decision – Harris v. Quinn – from Illinois that struck down the requirement that low paid home healthcare workers be union members has put a huge dent in union membership.  California, of course, is moving to counter the effect of that decision and continue to prop up unions at the expense of low wage workers.

Two years ago, however, the Legislature and Gov. Jerry Brown began to merge IHSS [In-Home Supportive Services caregivers] with other social services and shift the negotiation of union contracts for aides – who are selected by care recipients and usually family members – to a new statewide “authority.”Show me the Union Dues

As that county-by-county shift occurs, IHSS will become, in effect, a state program with nearly 400,000 employees. While IHSS unions like the shift to state bargaining, it’s creating a new and semi-adversarial relationship between them and the state.

The just-concluded legislative session provided some clues to that evolving relationship.

When, for example, President Barack Obama’s administration declared that IHSS workers were entitled to overtime pay, Brown attempted to limit them to 40-hour weeks to limit costs, but eventually settled for a lesser restriction.

When the Legislature was passing a so-called “domestic worker bill of rights,” laying out working conditions for housekeepers, babysitters and other home helpers, it exempted IHSS workers from its protections – a kind of do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do attitude.Laid Off

[…]The bill, ostensibly a budget cleanup measure, contains a curious provision giving union representatives the right – at public expense – to talk to new workers about union membership for “up to 30 minutes.”


Well, it may have had something to do with a U.S. Supreme Court decision in an Illinois case that IHSS workers cannot be compelled to pay union “agency shop” dues because they are not truly public workers, since they are chosen by their clients.Union-Bosses

IHSS workers are paid, in most cases, only slightly more than minimum wages, so union dues can be a major bite and many might opt out of paying them under the Supreme Court’s decree.yourgreed

Republican governors in both Michigan and Wisconsin fought the unions and won major victories for the workers in their states as well as state taxpayers.  Both governors inherited huge deficits from outgoing Democrats.  Both Michigan and Wisconsin now have budget surpluses just four years later and, in large part, the reason for those surpluses is moving to being right-to-work states.

It’s long past time for states to stand up for their most vulnerable workers and the best way to do this is to fight amnesty and fight for the right-to-work.  Where do your Representatives and Senators stand?  Where do your State representatives and candidates for statewide office stand?  It’s time to hold the politicians accountable.Resist AmnestyArticle collective closing


Union Households Not Happy with Their Union Bosses

Complete Message


Unions, especially public employee unions, are quite rightfully taking a beating lately.

Scott Walker drove a stake through the heart of public employee unions in Wisconsin and survived a viscous onslaught from Democrats and their union owners in the process.

The UAW got their clock cleaned in Chattanooga, TN in a union election at Volkswagen plant, a plant where the management was not only not hostile to the union, but welcomed them and worked with them to organize their workers.  Then the recent SCOTUS decision that held that public employee unions like SEIU and AFSCME could not organize home health care workers.

The bottom line isn’t going unnoticed, although it is going unpublicized.  For example, in Wisconsin, every school district that complied with Act 10, the legislation curtailing public employee union contracts, no tax increases were necessary to fund schools and districts that had been facing huge deficits were suddenly facing balanced budgets or surpluses.

A number of districts in very liberal cities signed contract extensions with their teachers unions to avoid Act 10.

In every one of those districts teachers were laid off and taxes were either increased or budgets slashed in other areas to pay for teacher benefits.

This week, a new wrinkle got publicized although we had to stumble across it as opposed to hearing about it on a major news outlet.  Not even FoxNews reported it.  The Oregon Catalyst reported the follow good news for tax payers and bad news for union bosses.

Because of a deal struck by Governor John Kitzhaber, Oregonians won’t have the opportunity to end forced union dues in the public sector this year. However, a just-released public opinion poll makes it clear that if the Public Employee Choice Act had been on this November’s ballot, most voters likely would have supported it.

The poll, conducted for National Employee Freedom Week (August 10-16) asked adults across America:

“Should employees have the right to decide, without force or penalty, whether to join or leave a labor union?”

Nationwide, 82.9 percent of respondents answered Yes. Of the 500 respondents in Oregon, a resounding 84 percent answered Yes.*

Union-BossesThis poll may be surprising to some, but not to us here at CurmudgeonCentral! because we’ve followed the results of right to work legislation, most recently in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin Teachers Union and AFSCME, the two major public employee unions lost up to 75% of their membership and millions of dollars in dues.  The biggest losers in the lost dues was the Democratic Party, because their largest donors are unions.

It’s time for conservatives to take heart and start working toward granting the right to work in states where unions still hold the workforce – and the taxpayers – captive.  Given the alternative, workers would prefer to spend the outrageous amounts collected by their unions and given to Democrats on their families than on their union bosses lavish lifestyles.



In the Unions pocketArticle collective closing


Third-World Detroit… A Glimpse of America’s Future


Enter to win the Family Gun Package Giveaway!

Cloward PivenIt seems the current occupant of the White House is determined to solidify his title as the “Worst President Ever”, as he is in the process of creating a crisis of mass proportions along the U.S. southern border. Throngs of illegal immigrants, most of whom are minors, are pouring over the border in search of the rainbows and unicorns that Barack Obama, Harry Reid and other demon spawn in Washington have promised. The reality that is greeting them however, involves being warehoused in cesspools of disease and hunger.  In fact, the situation has become so dire, that it is now being compared to Hurricane Katrina, and Rep. Darryl Issa (R-CA) worries that many children will lose their lives trying to get here.

As thousands flood our borders daily, seeking amnesty and free handouts, they need only look at a certain city within these United States to realize what liberal promises are worth. If you want to see a lib squirm, mention the word “Detroit.” Detroit was one of the most prosperous cities in the country in the 1950s, when America’s auto industry was at its prime, but fat cat union bosses killed the goose that laid the golden egg with their desire for handouts and special favors at the expense of the industry that kept the city alive.

Detroit’s economic collapse has resulted in bankruptcy to the tune of $18 billion, as jobs and taxpayers flee the area. Even impoverished Tijuana, Mexico, had a lower unemployment rate at the end of 2012, at 7.4%, than Detroit at 10.2%. Now, languishing in blight, bankruptcy, and despair, this once-great city is no longer of any interest to Obama or his fellow Democrats. After all, if they have the votes of Detroit’s population sewn up, and it’s been run by Democrats since 1962, why put forth the resources?

8An article in Crain’s Detroit Business points out that, while politicians are busy hand-wringing over young illegals, the infant mortality rate in Detroit is higher than some third world countries, including Mexico. In fact, infant mortality is the leading cause of death for children in Detroit, with violence coming in second, but when jobs are scarce so is prenatal care. These children are American citizens, but they have no political capital to the “progressive” elites, the way foreign children seeking amnesty do. In addition, overall life expectancy in Detroit is the lowest of the top 25 most populous metropolitan areas. When there is no “hope”, longevity loses its luster anyway.

This is what happens when people become accustomed to suckling at the government teat. “Progressives” of both parties are nothing but dependency pushers, and they are no better than street corner heroin dealers. They serve their own purposes and they cherish the power that dependency provides.

The time is now for the pushback. The Eric Cantor dismissal was a good start. There has been speculation that his desire to reach an amnesty agreement with Obama is what did him in. There has been further speculation that any hope for an immigration deal this year leaves with him. Don’t count on it. The momentum is on the side of “We The People”, but now is NOT the time to retreat.

This country is teetering dangerously close to the point of no return. The flood of illegals at our borders may very well help Barack Obama “fundamentally transform” America into a place where every major city mirrors Detroit. The bitter irony is that the illegal immigrants now invading our country may soon discover that the great “promised land” they once dreamed about looks very much like the tattered mess they left behind.

For a great analysis on how Detroit went from being a beacon of industry to being brought to its knees, check out Ben Howe’s documentary (NEXT), Bankrupt – How Cronyism and Corruption Brought Down Detroit. Follow him on Twitter, @BenHowe.


Problem where he lives now17Article collective closing




Seven Minimum Wage Facts That Have Democrats Worried

With the midterm elections just over 300 days away, nervous Democrats reeling from the Obamacare debacle are hoping a big push to raise the minimum wage will be the silver bullet that will spare them from the historic losses they suffered in 2010.

Democrats and unions are busy working to get minimum wage initiatives on state ballots in the hopes of creating an electoral “minimum wage magnet” to attract low-income, minority, and union voters to the polls.

Seven minimum wage facts, however, may diminish Democrats’ high hopes.

1. Just 2.8% of American workers earn at or below the minimum wage.

The U.S. Department of Labor says 1.6 million people make the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. Another 2 million earn below that rate, such as restaurant servers who make tips in addition to a lower base hourly wage which, according to U.S. News and World Report, “in many cases actually puts them   significantly above the minimum wage in reality, if not officially.” That means in a nation of 317 million people, just 3.6 million (1.1%) make at or below the minimum wage. As a share of the U.S. workforce, just 2.8% of people working make minimum wage.

2. Half of all minimum wage workers are 16 to 24 years old.

According to the Department of Labor, “minimum wage workers tend to be young,” and “about half of those paid the Federal minimum wage or less” are below age 25. Many of these are students working while in school or teenagers with part-time or summer jobs. That means half of the people most affected by a minimum wage hike are among those least likely to show up at the polls to vote, especially in a midterm election year. Indeed, minimum wage workers who are 16 and 17 years old are not even legally eligible to vote.

3.  Labor workers already make well above the minimum wage.

Democrats and unions hoping labor workers will be energized by a minimum wage bump will be sad to know that laborers in every single sector of what the government calls “production and nonsupervisory employees”—like manufacturing, construction, mining, retail, transportation, etc.—already earn well above the minimum wage. In fact, in November 2013, the government reported that the average hourly labor wage across all industries was $20.31—a figure nearly three times the federal minimum wage. And as the unions themselves boast, a union member’s annual salary is already $10,400 higher than a non-union worker.

4. Even those who support minimum wage hikes concede it could kill jobs.

Many economists and conservatives point to the body of economic literature that shows minimum wage increases kill jobs and simply encourage companies to pass along the added cost in the form of higher prices. But even ardent supporters like socialist Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant, who recently helped pass a $15 minimum wage in the SeaTac, Washington, concede the move could spawn job losses. “There may be a few jobs lost here and there, but the fact is, if we don’t fight for this, then the race to the bottom will continue,” said Sawant.

5. Minorities and the poor are hit hardest by the minimum wage. 

Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman famously noted that “the most anti-black law on the books of this land is the minimum wage law.” Higher wages mean employers seek higher, more skilled workers. That, said Friedman, puts those with disproportionately less education and experience at a significant disadvantage when looking to put their foot on the first rung of the employment ladder.

6. Even progressives concede the minimum wage is no panacea for America’s economic woes.

President Barack Obama’s former chairwoman of the Council of Economic Economic Advisers Christina Romer says, “economic analysis raises questions about whether a higher minimum wage will achieve better outcomes for the economy and reduce poverty.” As a result, says Romer, “most economists prefer other ways to help low-income families.” Similarly, progressive Daily Beast writer Jamelle Bouie says while he supporters the move, “the minimum wage is a Band-Aid for wage stagnation and income inequality” and “doesn’t make up for our sluggish economy and weak labor market.”

7. 21 states already have minimum wages that are higher than the federal $7.25/hr rate.

Just last week, 13 states boosted their minimum wage rates above the federal minimum wage rate of $7.25/hr. That means 21 states now already have minimum wages that exceed the federal rate.

For these reasons and more, Republicans see Democrats’ minimum wage tactic as a desperate attempt to run from the Obama record.

“If I had a dollar for every time Democrats thought their issue of the week was going to be their pathway to victory, I would have enough money to pay taxpayers back all the money that was wasted on the broken Obamacare website,” said Republican Congressional Campaign Committee spokeswoman Andrea Bozek.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: