According to an editorial in a recent edition of The Wall Street Journal, a number of union pensions are in the red. That bad news must be causing unionized workers a great deal of anxiety, especially during the current economic recession, when so many workers are losing their jobs.
The SEIU’s National Industry Pension Fund, covering more than 100,000 members, is now in “critical status,” which means that it lacks the necessary capital to pay 100% of benefits. Federal government officials have stated that the Fund has only 74.4% of the necessary assets to meet its obligation to pay those benefits.
And the list goes on: Thirteen plans operated by the Teamsters have a mere 59.3%. The Journal states that seven locals at the United Brotherhood of Carpenters …are at 67%.
While all of that is bad news for rank and file members of those and other similarly afflicted unions, union officers have nothing to worry about. The pension plan for officers and employees at the SEIU, for example, was funded at 102.2% as of 2007. In addition, the officers and employees get an annual 3% cost of living increase, while its members do not. There are many such disparities.
The dramatic reduction in union pension funds is just one reason why unions are aggressively attempting to organize new members and collect their dues. And it is why the unions are putting pressure on congress to pass the Employee Free Choice Act as soon as possible.
Increased union membership will mean increased labor costs, increased unemployment, and a worsening recession. But the pensions for union officers will, no doubt, remain intact.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
ON THE WATERFRONT: THE SEQUEL
Waterfronts, from New York to California, have a long history of union difficulties. And now, according to an editorial in The Wall Street Journal, the Mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa (a former union organizer), is urging congress and the Obama administration to change federal law so that the Teamsters Union will be able to organize independent truckers who work in the Port of Los Angeles.
The mayor wants the federal law changed so that harbor trucking companies will be banned from contracting with independent drivers. Instead, he wants the Port to permit “employee drivers” to operate in the Port, because those drivers are eligible for membership in the Teamsters.
Federal law, however, does not now permit state and local authorities to make their own laws regarding ports, for that would defeat the purpose of having uniform regulations throughout the land. If the mayor’s proposal became law, truckers in one port would not be allowed into another port. The resulting chaos would ruin interstate commerce.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has found that the mayor’s intended change would violate the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, and so an injunction was issued. As a result, the mayor wants Washington to change the law.
Should that happen, the Teamsters would have incredible leverage to affect wages, benefits, and the price of shipped goods. No doubt, the result would be a huge spike in labor and consumer costs. In such an environment, if the Teamsters did not get what they want, they could call strikes and shut down one port after another.
This is another example of how the Democrats are working to increase the power of unions at the expense of everyone else.
The mayor wants the federal law changed so that harbor trucking companies will be banned from contracting with independent drivers. Instead, he wants the Port to permit “employee drivers” to operate in the Port, because those drivers are eligible for membership in the Teamsters.
Federal law, however, does not now permit state and local authorities to make their own laws regarding ports, for that would defeat the purpose of having uniform regulations throughout the land. If the mayor’s proposal became law, truckers in one port would not be allowed into another port. The resulting chaos would ruin interstate commerce.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has found that the mayor’s intended change would violate the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, and so an injunction was issued. As a result, the mayor wants Washington to change the law.
Should that happen, the Teamsters would have incredible leverage to affect wages, benefits, and the price of shipped goods. No doubt, the result would be a huge spike in labor and consumer costs. In such an environment, if the Teamsters did not get what they want, they could call strikes and shut down one port after another.
This is another example of how the Democrats are working to increase the power of unions at the expense of everyone else.
Friday, September 11, 2009
GALLUP SURVEY FINDS UNION SUPPORT DROPPING
According to Gallup’s 2009 Work and Education Survey, more than half of all U.S. citizens disapprove of the role of unions. The percentage of those who do approve of unions has dropped from 59% a year ago to 48% now, “an all time low,” according to Gallup which started asking if people approved of disapproved of unions in 1936. That year, 72% of citizens approved of unions and 20% disapproved. The tables have dramatically turned against unions.
Gallup also noted that the perception that unions hurt companies has risen form 39% in 2006 to 46% in 2009. In addition, more than half of all citizens now agree that unions hurt the entire U. S. economy. That’s a jump from 36% in 2006 to 51% in 2009.
Such a low opinion of unions should give Congress pause before voting to pass the so-called Employee Free Choice Act, which should be renamed the Freedom to Hurt America Act!
Gallup also noted that the perception that unions hurt companies has risen form 39% in 2006 to 46% in 2009. In addition, more than half of all citizens now agree that unions hurt the entire U. S. economy. That’s a jump from 36% in 2006 to 51% in 2009.
Such a low opinion of unions should give Congress pause before voting to pass the so-called Employee Free Choice Act, which should be renamed the Freedom to Hurt America Act!
Thursday, September 3, 2009
OBAMA'S PRO-UNION STRATEGY
In addition to supporting the Employee Free Choice Act, President Obama has more than signaled his unwavering support for a pro-union agenda. It began when he not only tossed out a series of executive orders signed by President George W. Bush, but it was emphasized by his issuing new executive orders that favor organized labor. Those include creating union friendly agreements for federally funded construction projects and insisting that federal agencies post workers’ rights notices in all workplaces. Such notices inform workers of their right to strike, to file law suits, and to bring complaints to the National Labor Relations Board. In addition, one of the president’s executive orders bans any company that receives federal funds from using those funds to educate workers about the negative effects of unionization.
Earlier, we expressed our disappointment when President Obama nominated Wilma Liebman as chair of the National Labor Relations Board, for she has a record of favoring unions over management.
In keeping with the spirit of that appointment, the president plans to nominate two attorneys who also have a record of favoring unions over the interests of management. They are Randy Babbit to run the Federal Aviation Administration and Jordan Barab to go to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Mr. Babbit is expected to sign a pro-union agreement with the Air Traffic Controllers Association, which would make former President Reagan turn over in his grave. It was President Reagan, after all, who fired the controllers in the 1980s for going out on strike and endangering the lives of air travelers. As if that were not sufficiently indicative of President Obama’s pro-union thrust, he has named Joe Szabo to head the Federal Railroad Administration. Mr. Szabo had been the legislative director of the United Transportation Union in Illinois.
We can expect many more such appointments in the coming months, and the overall effect will be to make America less competitive and productive in a global economy in which many other countries are not hampered by the excesses of bureaucratic rules and regulations that are in conflict with free market economies.
Earlier, we expressed our disappointment when President Obama nominated Wilma Liebman as chair of the National Labor Relations Board, for she has a record of favoring unions over management.
In keeping with the spirit of that appointment, the president plans to nominate two attorneys who also have a record of favoring unions over the interests of management. They are Randy Babbit to run the Federal Aviation Administration and Jordan Barab to go to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Mr. Babbit is expected to sign a pro-union agreement with the Air Traffic Controllers Association, which would make former President Reagan turn over in his grave. It was President Reagan, after all, who fired the controllers in the 1980s for going out on strike and endangering the lives of air travelers. As if that were not sufficiently indicative of President Obama’s pro-union thrust, he has named Joe Szabo to head the Federal Railroad Administration. Mr. Szabo had been the legislative director of the United Transportation Union in Illinois.
We can expect many more such appointments in the coming months, and the overall effect will be to make America less competitive and productive in a global economy in which many other countries are not hampered by the excesses of bureaucratic rules and regulations that are in conflict with free market economies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)