The undersigned groups would like your company to publicly oppose Governor Walker’s efforts to virtually eliminate collective bargaining for public employees in Wisconsin. While we appreciate that you may need some time to consider this request, we ask for your response by March 17. In the event that you do not respond to this request by that date, we will assume that you stand with Governor Walker and against the teachers, nurses, police officers, fire fighters, and other dedicated public employees who serve our communities.

In the event that you cannot support this effort to save collective bargaining, please be advised that the undersigned will publicly and formally boycott the goods and services provided by your company. However, if you join us, we will do everything in our power to publicly celebrate your partnership in the fight to preserve the right of public employees to be heard at the bargaining table. Wisconsin’s public employee unions serve to protect and promote equality and fairness in the workplace. We hope you will stand with us and publicly share that ideal.

This particular letter was sent by the executive director of the police officer’s union, president of the fire fighter’s union, as well as other union heads. The threat also implies that the services rendered by these public employees may also be affected by the business’ decision. Can there be any doubt that should a business who refused to publicly support the unions catch fire, that the fire fighters may just take their time getting there? That the police may fail to solve a crime perpetrated against this business?

The fact is, these unions are acting like criminals who offer to “protect” a business in exchange for money. They should, therefore, be treated as such and be cut off at the knees. These unions should be decertified as quickly as possible. The heads of these unions should be prosecuted to fullest extent of the law and be sentenced to substantial jail time.

Failure to prosecute will only encourage these thugs to continue to use criminal tactics to intimidate the populace and increase the violence. Swift prosecution and sentencing may, on the other hand, may end the unions’ reign of terror.

In response, when this legislation came up for a vote in the State Senate, 14 Democrats ran across the border to Illinois, denying the Senate a quorum and therefore preventing the vote. After two weeks of back and forth arguing across the state line, Republicans in the Senate finally stripped the bill of all budgetary provisions, while leaving in the provisions stripping the unions of their bargaining power, which allowed them to take a vote without the Democrats present. Shortly thereafter the State Assembly quickly passed the new bill and sent it to the Governor for signature.

Now, if you know anything about unions, especially public sector unions, you know what their first response was: they started a protest at the state capital building. Now had this protest lasted a day or two and then subsided, there wouldn’t have been any problems. However, as is usually the case with these types of events, the unions called in their thugs to start pushing people around and threatening anyone who dared disagree with their position.  A sympathetic press core portrayed the protesters as people who were being railroaded by the State out of their retirement and health care benefits; rarely did they show the signs comparing Walker to Hitler or the union thugs hitting people with protest signs. In fact, the press, with the exception of Fox News, failed to report on any of the union’s thuggery during the protest.

So, just to remind you about the type of people these union thugs are, you need to read this:

From: XXXX
Sent: Wed 3/9/2011 9:18 PM
To: Sen.Kapanke; Sen.Darling; Sen.Cowles; Sen.Ellis; Sen.Fitzgerald; Sen.Galloway; Sen.Grothman; Sen.Harsdorf; Sen.Hopper; Sen.Kedzie; Sen.Lasee; Sen.Lazich; Sen.Leibham; Sen.Moulton; Sen.Olsen
Subject: Atten: Death threat!!!! Bomb!!!!

Please put your things in order because you will be killed and your familes will also be killed due to your actions in the last 8 weeks. Please explain to them that this is because if we get rid of you and your families then it will save the rights of 300,000 people and also be able to close the deficit that you have created. I hope you have a good time in hell. Read below for more information on possible scenarios in which you will die.

A couple of things to keep in mind here: Most of the people who were protesting were teachers, so the person responsible for this more than likely is in daily contact with school children. We can’t tell for sure, because the name was withheld. Also, when you read the entire thing, you realize that these animals are perfectly fine with injuring or killing innocent people to achieve their political ends. There is a word for that:

World English Dictionary
terrorist
— n
a. a person who employs terror or terrorism, esp as a political weapon
b. ( as modifier ): terrorist tactics

Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition 2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 Cite This Source

What was it that Obama was saying recently about bullying? I think Aleister at American Glob got it right when he said Liberals don’t like guns, but they sure do like death threats.

Remember a little while back, when Republicans were scolded by the Left for their lack of civility? One look at this protest rally will show you how much “civility” those on the Left have. Signs comparing Wisconsin Governor Walker to Hitler are all over the place.

Looking at these signs makes me wonder: What would these morons do if they really were confronted by Hitler or his ilk? Well, for one thing, they wouldn’t be protesting; they’d be rounded up and gassed within 24 hours.

What about all those children they supposedly care about? Well, seems that these union thugs, and they are thugs, simply left them behind while they went to Madison to bleat with their union brethren. These people are going to negotiate themselves right out of their paychecks if they keep going like this. The small concessions they are being asked to make will allow the State to keep from having to lay off anyone.

At my job, I pay the difference in premiums between the lowest-cost health care plan and the plan I elect to have (for me), and then the entire premium for my wife. Until very recently, any money that went into my 401(k) plan came straight from my check; starting this year the Firm I work for will start a 50% matching contribution at the end of each year. Currently, these idiots pay 1% of the cost of their health care plan; the State is asking them to increase this to 5%. Also, these union thugs currently contribute 5% to their pension plan; the State is asking them to increase this to 12% (well below the national average). Finally, remember that the average teacher salary in Wisconsin is $78,000 per year for 180 days of work.

What really has the teacher’s union upset is that the State wants to reduce the role the union has in collective bargaining on new contracts. If the union can no longer hold the taxpayers of Wisconsin hostage every few years to squeeze as much money as they can out of them, the union won’t be able to forcibly confiscate union “dues” to give to the Democrat Party every election cycle.

As is always the case with liberals, it all comes down to money, which is to say power. The unions are afraid that if Wisconsin becomes a “Right to Work” state, a lot of other states will do the same, draining them of money, power, and influence. Look for the unions to dispatch their purple-shirted SEIU thug brigades to Madison in the near future, if they haven’t done so already. Then the violence will start, and all the while both Andy Stern and Obama will be laughing and high-fiving each other as they watch the mobs grow more and more violent.

“Look for the Union label.” It isn’t hard to find; just look at anything in the White House.

NEW YORK (AP) – A potential strike by CBS news writers imperils the last debate among Democratic presidential contenders before voting is to begin.

In a statement Wednesday, Hillary Rodham Clinton said she would not cross a picket line to participate in the debate, scheduled Dec. 10 in Los Angeles. Most of the other candidates quickly followed.

CBS is to broadcast the debate, which is co-sponsored by the Democratic National Committee.

Point 1: It’s a debate; what do they need writers for? Oh yeah, that’s right: its a Democrat debate. They need writers to create favorable questions for the planted Democrat operatives, posing as undecided voters, to ask Hillary. Silly question; never mind.

Point 2: Can you believe that the Democrats think that bowing down to the labor unions is more important than debating important political issues for the enlightenment of the voting public? In a word: YES.

CHICAGO – Do bloggers need their own Norma Rae?

In a move that might make some people scratch their heads, a loosely formed coalition of left-leaning bloggers are trying to band together to form a labor union they hope will help them receive health insurance, conduct collective bargaining or even set professional standards.

The effort is an extension of the blogosphere’s growing power and presence, especially within the political realm, and for many, evokes memories of the early labor organization of freelance writers in the early 1980s.

Organizers hope a bloggers’ labor group will not only showcase the growing professionalism of the Web-based writers, but also the importance of their roles in candidates’ campaigns.

“I think people have just gotten to the point where people outside the blogosphere understand the value of what it is that we do on the progressive side,” said Susie Madrak, the author of Suburban Guerilla blog, who is active in the union campaign. “And I think they feel a little more entitled to ask for something now.”

Alright, let’s look at this proposal a little deeper. These bloggers want a labor union so that they can get health care. Health care, no matter who provides it, costs a lot of money. Most of these bloggers do what they do with little or no compensation. So where, exactly, will this union get the funds to offer a health plan for its members? The only source of income for the proposed labor union would presumably be member dues, and since these people receive little compensation, how could they afford the dues that would have to be charged in order to provide health care?

Next, they want a labor union so that they will have collective bargaining rights. Who, exactly, will they be bargaining with? Most bloggers do what they do from home, answering to no one but themselves. Are they going to try to negotiate with themselves for better hours or working conditions? What happens if hey decide to strike? Will they walk a picket line in front of their home?

Thankfully, there are some people who understand how stupid this idea is:

“The reason I like blogging is that it’s very anarchistic. I can do whatever I want whenever I want, and oh my God, you’re not going to tell me what to do,” said Curt Hopkins, the founder of the Committee to Protect Bloggers.

“The blogosphere is such a weird term and such a weird idea. It’s anyone who wants to do it,” Hopkins said. “There’s absolutely no commonality there. How will they find a commonality to go on? I think it’s doomed to failure on any sort of large scale.”

However, this has not stopped the labor unions from jumping at the chance to to increase their ranks:

While bloggers work to organize their own labor movement, their growing numbers are already being courted by some unions.

“Bloggers are on our radar screen right now for approaching and recruiting into the union,” said Gerry Colby, president of the National Writers Union, a local of the United Auto Workers. “We’re trying to develop strategies to reach bloggers and encourage them to join.”

Other than being a new source of revenue for Union bosses, I have no idea what the bloggers could bring to the union.

If you think about all of this for awhile, it does make sense. Liberal bloggers are the ones who are seeking unionization. These bloggers sit at home and post to their blogs and comment on their friends’ blogs all day, but almost none of them earn any money doing this. As is normal for liberals, they believe that their efforts are worthy of some sort of compensation, but they can’t derive that compensation through the free market. So, they decide to organize a union and then they will use the union to demand various and sundry benefits from whomever they can.

The only problem is, they don’t really have anyone to make these demands of. As a blogger, they work for themselves mostly. There is no corporate office to go after, no “deep pockets” to plunder. However, blogger Susie Madrak has an idea where some of the money should come from:

Just got off the phone with another reporter. I told her no, I wasn’t specifically trying to get bloggers to join a union but rather, I was looking at any and all vehicles through which bloggers could affiliate and thus get affordable health insurance. No, there really wasn’t anyone we could bargain with about wages and working conditions, and yes, I did think we deserved support as opposed to someone who blogs about, say, model trains, because after all, we raised lots and lots of money for Democrats last year and targeted it into key races – namely, that our strength was in making local races national, and sending financial support their way.

I said my primary goal was finding a way to help bloggers who needed it without compromising their independence because after all, independence is what makes us credible.

Oh, I just can’t wait to see what she actually writes.

First, I’m glad that she realizes some of the absurdities of proposing a union for bloggers. It seems her big goal is to get health insurance for bloggers, and she thinks that liberal political bloggers deserve support because they raise money for Democrat candidates. She doesn’t say it outright, but this seems to hint that some of the money for this health insurance would come from the Democrat Party. She also says that she doesn’t want to compromise their “independence,” but if they’re getting money and support from the Democrat Party just exactly how independent can they be?

All in all, I don’t think this idea has a snowball’s chance in hell of becoming reality, but it may be fun to watch them try to make it fly. If a union does manage to emerge, I predict that it will suffer the same fate as Air America, and for most of the same reasons.

The picketers marching in a circle in front of a downtown Washington office building chanting about low wages do not seem fully focused on their message.

Many have arrived with large suitcases or bags holding their belongings, which they keep in sight. Several are smoking cigarettes. One works a crossword puzzle. Another bangs a tambourine, while several drum on large white buckets. Some of the men walking the line call out to passing women, “Hey, baby.” A few picketers gyrate and dance while chanting: “What do we want? Fair wages. When do we want them? Now.”

Although their placards identify the picketers as being with the Mid-Atlantic Regional Council of Carpenters, they are not union members.

They’re hired feet, or, as the union calls them, temporary workers, paid $8 an hour to picket. Many were recruited from homeless shelters or transitional houses. Several have recently been released from prison. Others are between jobs.

“It’s about the cash,” said Tina Shaw, 44, who lives in a House of Ruth women’s shelter and has walked the line at various sites. “We’re against low wages, but I’m here for the cash.”

Carpenters locals across the country are outsourcing their picket lines, hiring the homeless, students, retirees and day laborers to get their message across. Larry Hujo, a spokesman for the Indiana-Kentucky Regional Council of Carpenters, calls it a “shift in the paradigm” of picketing.

Political groups also are tapping into local homeless shelters for temps.

I remember when I was a kid in Illinois, we would drive by these huge manufacturing plants, and at the front gates were always union members picketing about something (usually wages and benefits). It was like it was their job to picket; they were always there, rain or shine. However, what made me laugh at them, and ultimately pay little or no attention to them, was the fact that they were all usually sitting down in lawn chairs, sometimes under a giant umbrella to shade them from the sun or rain, radio playing in the background, drinking beverages, playing cards, and letting their picket signs lean up against their chairs. I just couldn’t reconcile the fact that these guys were just sitting around all day doing nothing while complaining about not getting paid high enough wages, all the while living it up on fresh sandwiches and beverages, no doubt provided by the Union. There was no apparent anger or passion; just a bunch of guys who looked too bored to do anything like protest. I guess my total impression was that these guys didn’t seem to care enough about whatever it was they were mad about to even walk the picket line or chant any slogans, and if they didn’t really give a darn why should I?

Luckily, even some Union people realize the irony of all of this:

Supporters of the practice consider it a creative tactic in an era of declining union membership and clout. But critics say the reliance on nonunion members — who are paid $1 above minimum wage and receive no benefits — diminishes the impact and undercuts a principle established over decades of union struggles.

“If I was a member of the general public, and I asked someone picketing why they were there, and they said they don’t work for the union and they were just hired to stand there, that wouldn’t create a very positive impression on me, nor would it create a very sympathetic position,” said Wayne Ranick, spokesman for the United Steelworkers of America.

Union supporters, of course have their own ideas about why they are doing this. However, they are keeping that information to themselves as they evade interviews and requests for comment. However, one Union official said this:

Hujo said the Indiana-Kentucky council has been hiring homeless people, retirees and college students as picketers for about two years.

Carpenters unions in Indianapolis, Atlanta, Baltimore, Miami, San Diego and Columbus, Ohio, also hire picketers, including the homeless, largely because the union members are busy working and aren’t able to leave job sites, he said.

“People say it’s not normal,” Hujo said. “But this is a quality-of-life issue. This is not a union versus nonunion issue.”

So, let’s look at this one step at a time:

1. Union wants businesses to hire more Union labor, so they decide to strike;
2. However, when it is time to picket and protest, Union doesn’t have enough members to picket because they’re all working;
3. Union membership has been declining for decades, yet they still have enough money to pay homeless people to picket for them.

Sounds to me like there is enough work to go around for everyone. So, if there is plenty of work to go around, why is the Union doing all of this? Easy: it wants to force everyone who works in certain trades, like drywall or other building jobs, to join the Union so it can deduct dues from more people to sustain itself perpetually. All Unions care about these days is sucking as much cash out of their members’ wallets to give to liberal politicians for election campaigns.

I have to admit, though, that I am a little surprised. I thought that Union people would be a lot more aggressive with the picketing, since the whole issue revolves around money.

By a By a 241-185 vote Thursday, the House passed a bill to modify the National Labor Relations Act to allow employees to bypass a secret ballot election and instead unionize by gathering “check cards” with signatures from a majority of employees in the workplace.

The bill, called the “Employee Free Choice Act of 2007,” would be the most significant change in the law since 1947, labor experts say. It would also impose stiffer penalties on employers who violate union protections under the law, and force contract negotiations into binding arbitration if the employer fails to agree on a contract with a newly formed union within 90 days.

So, instead of making their decision in the privacy and safety of the voting booth, employees will be forced to stand before union organizers who have a vested interest in how they vote and make their decision publicly. How safe would any employee who wished to vote against the union feel if the union organizer was one of those 300 pound thugs that seem to show up every time there is a strike? You know, the ones who use baseball bats to smash the cars of people who decide they need their paycheck and cross the picket line? The ones who call people in the middle of the night and threaten to harm wives, children, and other family members?

But not everyone believes the check card option is free of its own exploitation by union leaders. Jen Jason, a former organizer for UNITE-HERE union in Florida, told Congress in February that she was a witness to “disgraceful practices” on the part of union organizers, particularly in regard to the check card process.

She said after four years of going to potential union members’ homes and persuading them to sign check cards in favor of union membership, she felt she and other organizers had devised expedient but unethical ways to get signatures, often by pressing key emotional buttons with employees.

Typically, workers she approached had no idea a union effort was even underway in their workplace, and they made for easy targets, she told the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions of the House Education and Labor Committee.

“Frankly, it isn’t difficult to agitate someone in a short period of time, work them to the point where they are feeling very upset, tell them that I have the solution, and that if they simply sign a card, the union will solve all their problems,” said Jason.

“I know many workers who later, upon reflection, knew that they had been manipulated and asked for their card to be returned to them,” she added. “The union’s strategy, of course, was never to return or destroy such cards, but to include them in the official count towards the majority.”

Emotional manipulation is the nice way that union organizers get you to vote them in. This is what the National Center for Policy Analysis says:

Union violence is a bigger problem in this country than most people realize, say observers. This is result of current federal law, which largely exempts unions from responsibility for violent behavior.

• Some 9,000 attacks against workers by their colleagues have been documented in recent decades.
• New York’s Daily News strike in 1990 saw 500 instances of striker violence.
• Recently, during the strike by the Teamsters Union against United Parcel Service, colleagues stabbed a driver with an ice pick.

The Supreme Court has held that the 1946 Hobbs Act, designed to stop violence related to labor disputes, didn’t apply to efforts aimed at achieving “legitimate union objectives.” Thus the FBI cannot investigate, nor the U.S. Department of Justice prosecute, such crimes — while local prosecutors lack jurisdiction in labor-related disputes covered by federal law.

Union backers say that the purpose of this legislation is to prevent employers from keeping employees who want to unionize from doing so. That sounds all good and everything, but the truth of the matter is:

• Union membership has been declining for years. Only about 10% to 12% of the American workforce is currently unionized.
• Each and every union, without exception, spends union dues making contributions to Democrat political campaigns and causes, without the approval of its members.
• The Democrats have considered the unions a political base for years, and would do anything to make them happy.

The simple fact is, the Democrats are doing anything they can to regain their political power. The Democrats in the House feel that if they can get this passed and signed into law, their political base will grow as union membership grows.

I’ve always felt that in the beginning, unions were a good idea. Before the unions started, workers were being taken advantage of and were forced to work under terrible conditions. Unions were formed to fix that, and they did. Problem is, with their reason for existence eliminated by mandated federal regulations regarding working conditions (think OSHA), union leaders had to find a reason to continue collecting dues money from the workers. So, the unions morphed into a political wing of the Democrat Party. Union leaders raised and donated millions of dollars as well a delivering votes for Democrats across the country, and in return Democrats generally supported every union proposal that came down the line. Its a cozy little relationship that everyone in the country knows exists.

Trouble is, not everyone who is a member of a union is a Democrat. That’s because in a union shop, you can’t get a job unless you join the union. It doesn’t matter if you agree with their aims or not, you have to join. Therefore, their are a lot of Republicans and Libertarians in unions against their will who are being forced to donate portions of their salary (called dues) to Democrat candidates and causes. Currently, they have no say in how the union doles out membership dues to political causes. Union leaders at the top decide for everyone in the back of a smoke-filled room at Union headquarters.

The good news is, this will have to be passed by the Senate before it can go anywhere, and Republicans in the Senate have already said they will stop the bill from passing. Of course, the Democrats will probably tack it on to some other bill to try to sneak it through, but let’s wait and see if they have the guts to do it.

Ken Pool is making good money. On weekdays, he shows up at 7 a.m. at Ford Motor Co.’s Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, signs in, and then starts working — on a crossword puzzle. Pool hates the monotony, but the pay is good: more than $31 an hour, plus benefits.

“We just go in and play crossword puzzles, watch videos that someone brings in or read the newspaper,” he says. “Otherwise, I’ve just sat.”

Pool is one of more than 12,000 American autoworkers who, instead of installing windshields or bending sheet metal, spend their days counting the hours in a jobs bank set up by Detroit automakers and Delphi Corp. as part of an extraordinary job security agreement with the United Auto Workers union.

The jobs bank programs were the price the industry paid in the 1980s to win UAW support for controversial efforts to boost productivity through increased automation and more flexible manufacturing.

Yes, you read that right — automakers pay workers who have been replaced by automation up to $31.00 per hour to sit and do nothing. Is it any wonder why American car manufacturers can’t compete with Japan, Korea, or Germany?

General Motors Corp. has roughly 5,000 workers in its jobs bank. Delphi has about 4,000 in its version of the same program. Some 2,100 workers are in DaimlerChrysler AG’s Chrysler Group’s job security program. Ford had 1,275 in its jobs bank as of Sept. 25. The pending closure of Ford’s assembly plant in Loraine, Ohio, could add significantly to that total. Those numbers could swell in coming years as GM and Ford prepare to close more plants.

Detroit automakers declined to discuss the programs in detail or say exactly how much they are spending, but the four-year labor contracts they signed with the UAW in 2003 established contribution caps that give a good idea of the size of the expense.

According to those documents, GM agreed to contribute up to $2.1 billion over four years. DaimlerChrysler set aside $451 million for its program, along with another $50 million for salaried employees covered under the contract. Ford, which also maintained responsibility for Visteon Corp.’s UAW employees, agreed to contribute $944 million.

Delphi pledged to contribute $630 million. In August, however, Delphi Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Robert S. “Steve” Miller said the company spent more than $100 million on its jobs bank program in the second quarter alone.

“Can we keep losing $400 million a year paying for workers in the jobs bank and $400 million a year on operations? No, we cannot deal with that indefinitely,” Miller said in a recent interview with The Detroit News. “We can’t wait until 2007.”

These guys are talking about billions of dollars paid to people who contribute nothing to the company. How stupid were the automakers’ negotiators when they drew up this contract with the UAW? I mean, this goes against all logic and good sense. Is it any wonder that cars which used to sell for $8,000.00 or $9,000.00 now sell for $20,000.00?

Under this contract, the problem will only get worse when US Automakers start closing plants around the country in the next year or two. In fact, I wonder why they bother to close the plants at all, given that they will have to continue to pay the workers at the same hourly rate with the same benefits. At least with the plants open, they’re getting some value for their money.

It’s quite apparent to me, at least, that in order to get their financial houses in order, the US Automakers are going to have to bring this job bank scam to a close, and the sooner the better. If it were me, I’d file bankruptcy and use the Court to get rid of this program and any others which are nothing but money pits. It won’t be easy, as anything which threatens the amount of dues the Unions receive is fought tooth and nail. Also, not all workers are upset about sitting around getting paid for doing nothing:

As for Costilla and his colleagues, they are getting ready to go back to work at GM’s new Delta Township plant. Costilla acknowledges that many of the union members are not looking forward to going back to work at the factory.

“The majority of us would rather stay here doing what we’re doing,” he said.

“You’re not on the line, chasing a car.”

Maybe if this guy had to go out there and find a job to support his family, he’d have a different attitude about all of this.

Government workers in the state of Washington are being hit with a tough choice — if they want to keep their jobs, they have to join the union or pay a hefty union fee.

“I don’t like being forced. I don’t like being told either join the union or I lose my job,” said state employee Sharon Mathews.

The Personnel Reform Act passed in 2002 gives managers more flexibility in hiring, firing and outsourcing. It also allowed the workers union to bargain directly with the governor on provisions of their contracts. After taking office this year, Democratic Gov. Christine Gregoire gave state workers a raise and then gave the union the power to have any worker fired who didn’t either join or fork over a representation fee of up to $45 per month.

So now all state employees are forced to pay the union either membership dues or a monthly representation fee. If they don’t want to, they will lose their job.

In her inaugural speech given on January 12, 2005, Gov. Gregoire said this:

I will ask a lot of state employees because I intend to pay them fairly, and because I respect and admire them.

Question: How does forcing state employees to fork over a portion of their hard-earned paycheck to union thugs show respect or admiration? Answer: It doesn’t. Rather, it shows how far she is willing to go to provide money to the special interests that got her elected.

Question: How does raising state employee’s salaries, and then forcing them to pay union dues or representation fees which probably negate or come close to negating this raise show your intentions to pay them fairly? Answer: It doesn’t. It shows your utter disdain for the intellect of the people who work for the State of Washington.

I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised after the way the election was run and managed.

CHICAGO (AP) – The AFL-CIO succumbed to division Sunday, with its largest union deciding to bolt the 50-year-old federation and three others poised to do so in a dispute over how to reverse organized labor’s long slide.
The four unions, representing nearly one-third of the AFL-CIO’s 13 million members, announced Sunday they would boycott the federation’s convention that begins Monday. They are part of the Coalition to Win, a group of seven unions vowing to reform the labor movement – outside the AFL-CIO if necessary.
The Service Employees International Union, with 1.8 million members, plans to announce Monday that it is leaving the AFL-CIO, said several labor officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss the developments.

The Teamsters union also was on the verge of disaffiliating, and would likely to be the first to follow SEIU’s lead, the officials said. Two other boycotting unions were likely to leave the federation: United Food and Commercial Workers and UNITE HERE, a group of textile and hotel workers.

This is indeed good news, as it may lead to the end of artificially high wages, which will in turn lead to lower prices and more competition. It can also lead to more hiring, which will really help the economy. Also, here is another silver lining in all of this:

A divided labor movement worries Democratic leaders who rely on the AFL-CIO’s money and manpower on Election Day.
“Anything that sidetracks us from our goals … is not healthy,” said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., chairman of the House campaign committee. In the 2004 campaign, unions ran nearly 260 phone banks and mailed out at least 30 million pieces of political literature in 16 states, mostly on behalf of Democrats.
Experts said the split might deepen labor’s woes.
“Employer opposition to organizing might increase and I think that political opponents might feel emboldened, because they would see it as a sign of weakness,” said Gary Chaison, industrial relations professor at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.
Others said competition might be good for the labor movement.

A lot of money is walking out of the AFL-CIO’s political war chests, which is probably a good thing for a lot of the workers who had no control over who the unions gave their money to. When you have a system that forces people to join something in order to be able to work, and pay dues for the privilege, you’re going to have a lot of unhappy campers when the Union’s chosen politicians loose elections.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Unions started out as a good idea. Back in the day, they helped truly abused workers to be treated fairly by their employers. Those days, however, are long gone as the Unions seem to exist now for the sole purpose of extracting money from the paychecks of their members and funneling it directly to the Democratic Party. Remember, those members have absolutely no say as to who gets their money; the Union management makes those decisions with little or no input from the people who are actually paying the dues.

Time to sit back, get a nice cool drink, and watch the spectacle unfold.