I wish Mr O'Brien well. Perhaps the current administration will get around to caring about the working class, someday. His first hint of trouble may have been Don's inaugural, when the billionaire tech bro's received the prime seating...one doesn't need to wonder why:). We've since had the BBB, the signature economic policy achievement of the "new" right. But ouch, it was a massive transfer of wealth from workin stiffs to the plutocrats... We have Don pocketing billions in crypto corruption while deregulating the industry and dropping charges against its criminals. And of course we have the unending culture war diversions that are Don's specialty. So much whining and grievance, so little time. It's so much easier to prattle on about a troubled trans kid in Oakland who got 3rd place in the local track meet, or the brown guy workin third trick at the meat packing plant, than it is to do the hard work of addressing the real challenges working people face. Maybe Mr O'Brien needs to play Don's pay-to-play game-if he can afford to pony up a 747 or a golf course in Vietnam? Don will never change, his entire life is a grift. Remember his tax returns? The ones where he paid no taxes for years while claiming dubious breaks? He's a classic flimflam man.
Mr O'Brien would do well to heed the advice of Maya Angelou-"When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time".
I hope Trump urges Congress to move faster and pass the Faster Labor Contracts Act. This is only fair. It sounds like corporations can put off negotiating until they feel like it, and who knows when that is. A union vote should mean something, and this bill will help do that.
I myself worked in a union, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, for nine years before being promoted to the front office (I later went to college). Unions are good. They work on your behalf, and if you feel that something on the factory floor goes against the contract, you can talk to your shop steward about it.
You have to work hard, though, but that's good. We had medical insurance and yearly raises. Just knowing you belonged to a union made you feel good. It gave you pride.
The bill does only apply to private sector, but there is no reason employers in the public sector should be allowed to refuse to bargain with a certified labor union.
The problem is capture of especially state and local government by employee unions, which FDR saw as unsurmountable conflict of interest -- and he was right.
Having dealt with labor unions both in Europe, Africa and the US -- on both sides, despite them often being quite different across regions, I have become mostly disillusioned with them. They are small not only due to being unpopular with employers but also a significant section of workers. Unions themselves need to be reformed too! Eg in this bill some basic changes should be added
- labor unions should be subject to more frequent re-certification with strong protection during re-votes and the competition amongst unions to serve as representation should be much stronger
- should be subject to anti-trust restrictions similar to corporations, e.g. cannot have a monopoly over labor supply in any one activity or geography; the longshoreman's union is an example of a predatory union. No cross-strikes in unrelated activities
- limit union due expenditures and allowed uses (SEC for unions)
- end most public unions, who already elect the officials they negotiate with but enforce their will on the taxpayer. At a minimum strongly limit tenure requirements in contracts in favor of skill protection and allow natural degree of turnover, and spending in local elections (or give matching funds to other canidates)
I googled to see the status of this bill, and apparently it’s still stuck in Congress. After it’s introduction, there’s been no further action.
There are several recent articles concerning the importance of this bill, including this one by Sean O’Brien, so people know the urgency of it. But no action.
Maybe Trump can squeeze this in before going after another enemy, and get Congress to pass it.
Unions lead to bankrupt states. Every state that has strong union representation is broke. Since all you know is the union way you have no concept of what it has done to the fiscal nature of your state. And politicians are going to support the bill not because it will do any good for the workers it is because they believe they have unions in their back pockets who are going to go to the state legislator governor people in congress and the like and throw money at their campaigns. Every state that is flourishing fiscally does not have strong union ties and it should be kept that way.
Feb. 9, 2021 "National Study Says So-called “Right to Work” States Have Worse Economic, Health, Social, and Civic Outcomes"
“For years, anti-union zealots have presented so-called ‘right-to-work’ laws as a panacea to growing the economy,” said study co-author Frank Manzo IV. “Yet surveys of CEOs say ‘right-to-work’ has little effect on business relocation decisions, and the data shows that so-called ‘right-to-work’ states are performing substantially worse than their peers on wages, growth, poverty, and other core economic outcomes.”
“Beyond the core economic indicators, the data also correlates free collective-bargaining states—or states with stronger union security agreements—with better quality of life outcomes both inside and outside of the workplace,” said study co-author, PMCR Director, and University of Illinois Professor Dr. Robert Bruno. “When workers have a stronger voice to bargain for better wages, benefits, training, and safety measures, it produces long-term dividends in the form of enhanced productivity, improved community health, and higher civic participation. A rising tide lifts all boats.”
If Hawley and Booker agree on something its gotta be bipartisan. Sounds good to me too.
Completely right direction
I wish Mr O'Brien well. Perhaps the current administration will get around to caring about the working class, someday. His first hint of trouble may have been Don's inaugural, when the billionaire tech bro's received the prime seating...one doesn't need to wonder why:). We've since had the BBB, the signature economic policy achievement of the "new" right. But ouch, it was a massive transfer of wealth from workin stiffs to the plutocrats... We have Don pocketing billions in crypto corruption while deregulating the industry and dropping charges against its criminals. And of course we have the unending culture war diversions that are Don's specialty. So much whining and grievance, so little time. It's so much easier to prattle on about a troubled trans kid in Oakland who got 3rd place in the local track meet, or the brown guy workin third trick at the meat packing plant, than it is to do the hard work of addressing the real challenges working people face. Maybe Mr O'Brien needs to play Don's pay-to-play game-if he can afford to pony up a 747 or a golf course in Vietnam? Don will never change, his entire life is a grift. Remember his tax returns? The ones where he paid no taxes for years while claiming dubious breaks? He's a classic flimflam man.
Mr O'Brien would do well to heed the advice of Maya Angelou-"When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time".
I hope Trump urges Congress to move faster and pass the Faster Labor Contracts Act. This is only fair. It sounds like corporations can put off negotiating until they feel like it, and who knows when that is. A union vote should mean something, and this bill will help do that.
I myself worked in a union, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, for nine years before being promoted to the front office (I later went to college). Unions are good. They work on your behalf, and if you feel that something on the factory floor goes against the contract, you can talk to your shop steward about it.
You have to work hard, though, but that's good. We had medical insurance and yearly raises. Just knowing you belonged to a union made you feel good. It gave you pride.
OK if it is for private sector unions only. It would be a disaster if applied to public sector unions. Just channeling FDR here.
The bill does only apply to private sector, but there is no reason employers in the public sector should be allowed to refuse to bargain with a certified labor union.
FDR thought otherwise
FDR is infallible?
No but time has proved him right about that. The teacher unions especially are stinking up the whole labor movement.
There is no reason for a public employer to refuse to negotiate in good faith with a certified labor organization.
The problem is capture of especially state and local government by employee unions, which FDR saw as unsurmountable conflict of interest -- and he was right.
Having dealt with labor unions both in Europe, Africa and the US -- on both sides, despite them often being quite different across regions, I have become mostly disillusioned with them. They are small not only due to being unpopular with employers but also a significant section of workers. Unions themselves need to be reformed too! Eg in this bill some basic changes should be added
- labor unions should be subject to more frequent re-certification with strong protection during re-votes and the competition amongst unions to serve as representation should be much stronger
- should be subject to anti-trust restrictions similar to corporations, e.g. cannot have a monopoly over labor supply in any one activity or geography; the longshoreman's union is an example of a predatory union. No cross-strikes in unrelated activities
- limit union due expenditures and allowed uses (SEC for unions)
- end most public unions, who already elect the officials they negotiate with but enforce their will on the taxpayer. At a minimum strongly limit tenure requirements in contracts in favor of skill protection and allow natural degree of turnover, and spending in local elections (or give matching funds to other canidates)
I googled to see the status of this bill, and apparently it’s still stuck in Congress. After it’s introduction, there’s been no further action.
There are several recent articles concerning the importance of this bill, including this one by Sean O’Brien, so people know the urgency of it. But no action.
Maybe Trump can squeeze this in before going after another enemy, and get Congress to pass it.
Unions lead to bankrupt states. Every state that has strong union representation is broke. Since all you know is the union way you have no concept of what it has done to the fiscal nature of your state. And politicians are going to support the bill not because it will do any good for the workers it is because they believe they have unions in their back pockets who are going to go to the state legislator governor people in congress and the like and throw money at their campaigns. Every state that is flourishing fiscally does not have strong union ties and it should be kept that way.
Here's another view on that:
Feb. 9, 2021 "National Study Says So-called “Right to Work” States Have Worse Economic, Health, Social, and Civic Outcomes"
“For years, anti-union zealots have presented so-called ‘right-to-work’ laws as a panacea to growing the economy,” said study co-author Frank Manzo IV. “Yet surveys of CEOs say ‘right-to-work’ has little effect on business relocation decisions, and the data shows that so-called ‘right-to-work’ states are performing substantially worse than their peers on wages, growth, poverty, and other core economic outcomes.”
“Beyond the core economic indicators, the data also correlates free collective-bargaining states—or states with stronger union security agreements—with better quality of life outcomes both inside and outside of the workplace,” said study co-author, PMCR Director, and University of Illinois Professor Dr. Robert Bruno. “When workers have a stronger voice to bargain for better wages, benefits, training, and safety measures, it produces long-term dividends in the form of enhanced productivity, improved community health, and higher civic participation. A rising tide lifts all boats.”
https://illinoisupdate.com/2021/02/09/national-study-says-so-called-right-to-work-states-have-worse-economic-health-social-and-civic-outcomes/