November 15, 2005
Solidarity Forever
Today's The Olympian reports:
More than 700 state workers could lose their jobs if they do not cooperate with their unions and agree to pay for their representation.
Over 50,000 government employees are now required to pay union dues as a condition of keeping their jobs.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 15, 2005
09:51 AM | Email This
1. Everything you need to know about unions is revealed in the compulsory dues model. I think another word for it is extortion.
2. It's no wonder that Union Leaders and Jesse Jackson are such good friends. They both employ the same techniques. Skakedown and Extortion.
The Unions may be able to get away with this for a little longer, but declining numbers country wide show the real story. Unions will go away, as will their extortion, and one of the key pillars of the Democrat base will be gone.
3. Companies need unions when management gets stuck on stupid.
This explains why we still see large union representation in government jobs, while their numbers in private corporations continue to decrease year after year.
4. Incredible!
"More than 700 state workers could lose their jobs if they do not cooperate with their unions and agree to pay for their representation."
Yet another word that the lefties are re-defining. The lefties really like treating everyone like children - You will obey or else! But they do like nice compliant sheeple. It is funny how they suddenly do not like their slogans of the 60s - "Question authority" etc. Some animals are more equal than others...
Can you imagine if companies said that they require "HR Dues" so that HR can properly represent and provide services to the employees. The unions would agree that union employees that do not "cooperate" should be terminated. NOT
5. I hope that someone is advising them that according to the NLRA, they are not required to join the union and pay full dues. They are only required to pay an agency fee that equals their share of what the union can prove is its costs of collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment.
The agency fee should be less than the full dues amount which as we all know is used to pay for lobby, electoral politics, etc.
The unions are suppose to inform everyone that they are not required to join and are only required to pay for its actitities as a bargaining agent. In my experience this never happens, or they simple post a sheet on the bulletin board with a lot of fine print and consider that to be the same.
6. Nothing like a union to drive any place of business into the ground with mediocrity. If there weren't unions, management wouldn't get "stuck on stupid".
7. Gee, isn't this what the Dems like to do when someone doesn't agree with them!!
8. I think the specific workers being referenced are the personal care providers for disabled people, who are considered state employees. They unionized becuase they wanted benefits. However, I think there's got to be more than 700 of them. I know becuase I am a parental personal care provider for my own son, who is disabled. I refused to join their union because they lobby against my political persuasion, and they said too bad, you have to pay the dues anyway. And I believe the rate is the same for me as it is for union members. During our wrangling, I asked them who makes the political contributin decisions, and was told "a committee". Asked if the union members decided on committee members, or had any input into the decision making process, and was told no, they don't. They were actually Not Very Nice about me not joining.
9. Democrats won't need unions pretty soon since they moveon, etc. and they have discovered internet financing to the whacked out ones.
10. The State is the largest employer in the state. Those employees have to pay Union dues.
Unions make campaign donations.
This isn't rocket science.
Can anyone tell me of any significant contract awarded by the State to a non-Union firm?
11. How nice!!
Do we expect anything less from the mob (unions)??
My girlfriend is presently embroiled in dispute over a (long overdue) pay increase, and when it was supposed to be applied. Supposedly, due to some agreement the union entered into with the state, and signed more than a month after her pay increase, the state is now saying it gave her the raise too soon, and wants the overpayment paid back, in full, immediately.
I thought unions were there to protect employees, and to shield them from "undue hardship" caused by their employer(s)? [/sarc off]
12. I was talking to my neighbor here in Oly a few weeks ago. The "unionization" of his job resulted in a 2% net pay cut.
13. The numbers are too big here for "I didn't know." You gotta wonder how this will play out.
Massive walk offs in protest?
Strikes have been the method used by unions to break employers...now perhaps employees will use the same method to break a union.
One can only hope for poetic justice.
14. My wife is an RN at UW Medical, and I am not sure if this thing includes my wife because she did not join the nurse's union when she started there in February this year.
Does anyone know how to find out if someone is in this 700 or so list? Please post as comment or email me using the email address from C. Oh.
15. Strikes are unlikely, and if the employees don't agree to pay at least the agency fee they will be terminated. The unions will be sure to do publicize it so that the employees look like the villains.
The main problem that I see with what is happening is that the unions negotiated this contract with the state, but only the union membership was allowed to ratify the contract requiring union membership. Like taxation without representation, the employees are now being forced to pay for something they had no chance to vote on.
16. Hey TG, what is wrong with that. It is the way of WA government With Sims and Logan we have that in KC. Admittedly in KC they give us the impression we get to vote on it.
17. Government unions are eunch's, they get the union dues and have nothing to do
18. Unions have become the crab grass on the economic lawn of life.
19. The union in this case is the one that put up the money for the recount that put the former Attorney Generial in the Governor's Mansion.
The representation fee that is required is only about $10 less than the full dues. You don't get a vote if you elect to just pay the representation fee.
The 700 employees are from all of the various State agencies. They are protesting the under-handed way the Union got the majority of the votes when the new contract was negotiated. The majority of the people did not even know that the voting was taking place because the voting places were places other than the state buildings. They made it as inconvenient as possible and required people that did know about it to take leave to go vote. Needless to say, there was a very low voter turnout.
20. Actually, the reduced amount that you pay for becoming a non-union member can be substantial. I am a non-member of the WEA and I am expecting between $200 and $300 each year based on past years. Contact the Evergreen Freedom Foundation or the National Right To Work Foundation for more details.
You pay the dues up front and then apply for your rebate at the end of the year.
21. Calvin A, check for yourself here. http://wfse.org/?zone=/unionactive/view_page.cfm&page=Fair20Share
The cost to be a full member is a maximum of $55.00 per month. Union representation is $45.49. You do the math.
22. Har.. I would have thought that WA would have been leading the parade on this. Instead CA beat them by a couple of years. I've already been an unwilling victim of this type of deal in CA. Of course they seem to be a bit smarter about it. They would never actually put themself into a position to have to FIRE someone for this. CA just takes it out of your check without asking. Why lose the money?
BTW. My 'opt out' rate in CA is around 92%.. so full membership is not that much more. I'm sure that is why they set that rate that high.
23. The unions are just anxious for more political spending money. They lie right to your face when you question them about their political expenditures and so far I haven't come across a single union person who will pony up the independently audited report of their expenses. You are supposed to be happy with just a general pie chart. In a previous job I was forced to be a member of AFSCME and the union rep told me with a straight face that only $12/year went for political causes. Union rep was not pleased when I pointed out that AFSCME was one of the top contributors to Democratic party, but based on AFSCME own membership numbers it came up to way more than $12 per person per year. And the rep didn't even know that the audited report was supposed to be legally available to any who asked for it. Grrrrr!!
24. Oh.. this is what Prop 75 in CA was all about... but the Unions spent 100 million dollars to defeat it. Of course to recoup that money... they are planning on raising union dues. More Union thuggery!
25. It should be noted that State Employees are not required to join the union and pay dues. No, but they are however still required to pay a significant amount for being non-union members, or else, they can be terminated. This is in spite of the fact that was not a condition of their employment and the fact that many did not even get a chance on this last minute swith-a-roo. The unions threw this in right before the votes and after voting had closed at offices outside of Olympia. You think KC's voting methods are screwed up. Take a look at how the unions were voted upon.
TC
26. I hate answering my own question, but for anyone who's employed by UW such as my wife, I am writing about what I found.
It looks like there are a number of bargaining units that do not belong to the two unions that are doing the thuggary, namely, the Teamsters and the Washington Federation of State Employees (WFSE).
My wife, an RN at UW Medical, is represented by WSNA (Washington State Nurses Association?) UW Medical Center. There are other units with various abbreviations such as SEIU and UAW, but then there are a number of people represented by WFSE.
At least, I am relieved that my wife isn't affected by this, but it is probably a matter of time before her bargaining unit will eventually become affected by something like this.
27. Public employees should be allowed a union contract or civil service protection, not both.
Unions should be required to re-certify every year. Nothing like accountability to cure arrogance.
28. It's not just the state unions that are participating in this kind of extortion. My first job out of college was unionized and after dealing for two years with that nonsense, I swore I would neve take another job that required union membership. When I got my job at Boeing, it was not a requirement to join SPEEA. If it was, I wouldn't have taken the job!
Then the SPEEA strike of 2000 came along, and even though I wasn't a member of the union, I joined my co-workers and went out on strike.
My reward? In the last hours of negotiations that ended the strike, the union managed to get the company to accept union membership be required for all employees covered under the contract. Since I wasn't a member, I couldn't vote on this. In exchange for supporting the union, I received mandatory union dues with threat of termination if I refused to pay them.
I became a beck objector, which is basically the term to describe what others in this thread have already mentioned. I have to pay the "administration" fee for the union. Union dues are about $25/month. I pay about $22/month. Not much of a savings, plus union dues are automatically deducted out of employees' paychecks. Beck objectors cannot take advantage of this "convenience". I have to write a check once a quarter to pay my "dues".
From what I learned in my MBA classes about union representation, it takes a grassroot effort of the union membership to get the "closed shop" done away with. Since most of my fellow co-workers are "old school" and tend to think SPEEA is the greatest thing since sliced bread, my chances of getting this reversed are pretty slim. Hence, I'm getting into management!
29. SO VOTE THE PEOPLE DOING IT OUT.
Those union leaders are *elected*. They're there because you let them be. Crimony.
30. Two thoughts,
Why is the public sector union membership growing? Could it be the elected officials the unions help are soooo oppressive???
Another thought, why not make the reps and sens in olympia pay dues as well??? Aren't they state employees??
31. You're upset about what! You honestly think think that some people should get a free ride and not pay their fair share for the work that the union does on their behalf. Sounds like a great deal, sign me up. So, the union representing me negotiates wages, working conditions, represents me in disputes with employers, and lobbies government agencies and politicians for me giving me and everyone else who does my job a voice on the job, but I don't have to pay for it? Maybe everyone except for me should pay taxes. Sure the government does things for all of the people within its borders, but I didn't choose to live in a country with a government, so I shouldn't pay. Makes sense, right? Unions bring democracy, due process, and the rule of law to the place where it matters most. Where we work. The union movement and their allies created the middle class in this country.
32. Why is the public sector union membership growing? Could it be that the public sector can't get away with breaking the law as easily as the private sector does? Maybe threatening to move to China works better in the manufacuring industry. It's hard to outsource city hall.