Divided SEIU Pays for Vicious Attacks on Gay Politician

It appears that SEIU cannot make up its mind. SEIU Local 1000 supports a liberal, gay Democrat city councilman; while SEIU Local 1021 spent tens of thousands of dollars funding a vicious campaign against the councilman. The attacks were so incendiary that the councilman’s Democrat primary opponent distanced herself from the union. What is going on here, and is this a proper use of union funds?

Read more HERE.

 

It appears that SEIU cannot make up its mind. SEIU Local 1000 supports a liberal, gay Democrat city councilman; while SEIU Local 1021 spent tens of thousands of dollars funding a vicious campaign against the councilman. The attacks were so incendiary that the councilman’s Democrat primary opponent distanced herself from the union. What is going […]

Thugs: SEIU Threatens Lawsuit to Kill Story about Its Response to Sexual Misconduct

A labor reporter, who had previously written dozens of articles for the Guardian, wrote an article about the disgraceful response of SEIU’s leadership to sexual misconduct allegations. Due to SEIU’s legal threats, the Guardian spiked the article. Nonetheless, the reporter published the article anyway on his labor news website; you can read the article that SEIU tried to suppress HERE.

A labor reporter, who had previously written dozens of articles for the Guardian, wrote an article about the disgraceful response of SEIU’s leadership to sexual misconduct allegations. Due to SEIU’s legal threats, the Guardian spiked the article. Nonetheless, the reporter published the article anyway on his labor news website; you can read the article that […]

SEIU’s Sexual Harassment Problem

SEIU has a serious problem with sexual harassment; and, apparently, it has very little interest in cleaning it up. A new website has been launched to highlight the allegations. Check it out HERE.

SEIU has a serious problem with sexual harassment; and, apparently, it has very little interest in cleaning it up. A new website has been launched to highlight the allegations. Check it out HERE.

SEIU Dues Spent to Fight Sexual Harassment Allegations

Is this an appropriate use of SEIU members’ money?

Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan [D-Chicago] has spent nearly $900,000 defending his political machine against federal sexual harassment and retaliation claims, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. On Dec. 3 his $275,000 settlement with the plaintiff, Alaina Hampton, became public. Hampton had accused former Madigan employee Kevin Quinn of bombarding her with unwanted texts seeking a romantic relationship.

But that money doesn’t solely come out of Madigan’s pocket. Instead, he’s paying for the settlement plus $600,000 in legal fees through his election committee, Friends of Michael J. Madigan.

That committee is heavily funded by government unions… Together, SEIU Healthcare’s and SEIU Illinois Council’s political action committees funneled $113,200 to Friends of Michael J. Madigan and an additional $334,600 to other Madigan committees in October.

Read more HERE.

Is this an appropriate use of SEIU members’ money? Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan [D-Chicago] has spent nearly $900,000 defending his political machine against federal sexual harassment and retaliation claims, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. On Dec. 3 his $275,000 settlement with the plaintiff, Alaina Hampton, became public. Hampton had accused former Madigan employee […]

Communists Honor SEIU Official

The Connecticut Communist Party has once again honored an SEIU official. Last month, the communists presented the People’s World Amistad Award to Eva Bermudez Zimmerman, the organizing director for SEIU Local 2001. Just two years earlier, the communists had honored another SEIU official.

The Connecticut Communist Party has once again honored an SEIU official. Last month, the communists presented the People’s World Amistad Award to Eva Bermudez Zimmerman, the organizing director for SEIU Local 2001. Just two years earlier, the communists had honored another SEIU official.

SEIU Members Quitting Union

Since Right to Work was enacted in Michigan, SEIU Local 517M has lost over 20% of its members.

 

Since Right to Work was enacted in Michigan, SEIU Local 517M has lost over 20% of its members.  

The Out-of-Touch Union Agenda

Because President Trump’s economic policies are helping to bring down unemployment rates to levels not seen in decades and wages are finally starting to rise appreciably, one might expect that Big Labor might be inclined to try to get along with Trump; instead, unions spent heavily to elect Congressional Democrats. Furthermore, this heavy support for Democrats is in spite of the fact that about 40 percent of union household members vote Republican. With the new Democrat majority in the House, unions hope to thwart much of President Trump’s agenda while advancing a leftist agenda on economics and health care.

One of the first acts of the new Congress will be electing a new House Speaker. Although Nancy Pelosi is very unpopular and managed to lose her large majority after just four years as Speaker, union bosses have lined up to support her once again. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the United Farm Workers, the Communications Workers of America, and AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka have endorsed her; and  several union leaders, including leaders from the American Federation of Government Employees, the United Auto Workers, and the National Association of Letter Carriers, signed a letter to Pelosi which read, in part, “We can think of no one better suited to be speaker at this critical moment in history.”

Next year, Congress will be voting on the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which Trump recently finished negotiating. Union leaders know that the USMCA is better for American auto workers and dairy workers than the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has been. Nonetheless, union officials have been hesitant to endorse the trade deal – likely because of partisanship.

One union priority for the new Congress will be hiking the minimum wage to $15, which is more than double the current federal minimum wage. Apparently, unions do not care that large minimum wage increases kill jobs. For example, minimum wage hikes were expected to kill over 260,000 jobs this year alone. While most large corporations would be able to adapt, perhaps by offshoring jobs or replacing workers with machines, many mom-and-pop operations would not be so lucky. In addition, a one-size-fits-all policy makes little sense when costs of living vary so greatly.

Another item on the union agenda is expanding government control of health care – despite the fact that the federal government has great difficulty providing adequate care to our nation’s veterans. Unfazed by the government’s poor record, Bonnie Castillo, the Executive Director of National Nurses United (NNU), said, “NNU will work the growing House Medicare for All caucus to press for action on Medicare for All.”

One potential piece of the Trump agenda that might be able to garner union support is infrastructure spending. Some unions, particularly those in the construction and manufacturing industries, might be willing to set aside their partisanship long enough to help ensure that their members have jobs, but even that is not a sure bet.

Unions like to pretend that they want to get tough on China and bring jobs home that have been sent abroad; but when we finally elect a President committed to doing those things, unions line up to oppose him. For the good of workers, and the good of the country, union leaders should set aside their partisanship and work with Trump. Of course, we have not seen much of that in the past two years, and it is unlikely to occur in the new year. That is why those workers who believe that their unions spend too much time and money on liberal politics need to band together and throw their union bosses out of office replacing them with more responsive, pragmatic leaders.

Because President Trump’s economic policies are helping to bring down unemployment rates to levels not seen in decades and wages are finally starting to rise appreciably, one might expect that Big Labor might be inclined to try to get along with Trump; instead, unions spent heavily to elect Congressional Democrats. Furthermore, this heavy support for […]

Unions Disrespected Members and Heavily Funded Democrats

Labor unions once again spent heavily during the 2018 election cycle, contributing nearly $135 million; unsurprisingly, the overwhelming majority of union political spending was to help Democrats, liberal causes, and liberal organizations. In other words, many unions again ignored the fact that about 40 percent of union household members, including many union members, vote Republican.

Overall, Democrat candidates and organizations collected more than five times as much money from unions as Republicans and Republican organizations did, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics. Of the top 20 recipients of labor money, 18 were Democrats. The top five recipients of political contributions from unions were the following:

  • Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) was unions’ favorite candidate of the cycle; she received over $370,000 from unions.
  • Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) also received over $370,000 from unions.
  • Rep. Conor Lamb (D-PA) received over $310,000 from unions. The labor sector was his fifth largest source of campaign contributions.
  • Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-IN) also received over $310,000 from unions.
  • Matt Cartwright (D-PA) received nearly $310,000 from unions. The labor sector was his third largest source of campaign contributions.

While these five labor union favorites received especially strong financial support, run-of-the-mill Democrats also received significantly more union support than their Republican counterparts. For example, the average House Democrat received contributions of more than $130,000 from unions, and the average Senate Democrat received contributions of more than $115,000 from unions. Meanwhile, the average House Republican received contributions of less than $35,000 from unions. Senate Republicans fared even worse: the average Senate Republican received contributions of a little more than $10,000 from unions.

The five unions that spent the most on political contributions during the 2018 cycle were the following:

  • The Carpenters and Joiners Union made political contributions of more than $17.7 million. Nearly 80 percent of the union’s contributions to candidates and parties went to Democrats, and 100 percent of its contributions to outside spending groups went to liberal organizations.
  • The National Education Association (NEA) made contributions of nearly $17.4 million. Over 87 percent of the NEA’s contributions to candidates and parties went to Democrats, and 100 percent of its contributions to outside spending groups went to liberal organizations.
  • The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) made contributions of more than $11.5 million. Nearly 99 percent of AFSCME’s contributions to candidates and parties went to Democrats, and 100 percent of its contributions to outside spending groups went to liberal organizations.
  • The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) made contributions of more than $9.1 million. Nearly 99 percent of the AFT’s contributions to candidates and parties also went to Democrats, and 100 percent of its contributions to outside spending groups went to liberal organizations.
  • The Laborers Union made contributions of more than $8.5 million. Over 79 percent of the union’s contributions to candidates and parties also went to Democrats, and over 99 percent of its contributions to outside spending groups went to liberal organizations.

Of the 20 unions with the largest political expenditures, only two made any serious efforts to be bipartisan in their contributions: the National Air Traffic Controllers Association and the Air Line Pilots Association. Those two unions both gave more than 40 percent of their total political contributions to Republicans.

For years, unions have disrespected the views of many of their members to fund Democrats and liberal causes, and they continue to do so. In the future, perhaps the Janus decision will lead to changes in the causes and candidates that public sector unions support. Either way, there is a need for more union activists to take over their unions, in both the public and the private sector, and make them more responsive to their members; and there is a need for more Right to Work legislation to allow all workers to stop funding organizations and viewpoints they oppose.

Labor unions once again spent heavily during the 2018 election cycle, contributing nearly $135 million; unsurprisingly, the overwhelming majority of union political spending was to help Democrats, liberal causes, and liberal organizations. In other words, many unions again ignored the fact that about 40 percent of union household members, including many union members, vote Republican. […]

Home Care Workers Support Trump Regulation

For years, some blue states have been automatically deducting union dues from the checks of Medicaid home care providers. Many of these caregivers are relatives or friends of the person they care for and did not wish to join a union. The main beneficiary of this dues skim is the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Under Obama, a rule was implemented to authorize this scheme. Last month, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed a rule that would rescind the Obama-Era regulation.

If the proposed rule takes effect, only deductions specifically permitted by law, such as court-ordered wage garnishments or child support payments, will be allowed. Of course, any caregivers who wish to join or remain in a union will still be able to do so; they will just need to make arrangements to pay their dues.

Although it might seem to be an obscure or unimportant issue, there is a lot at stake here. For example, it has been estimated that SEIU collects $200 million a year by skimming dues from 500,000 caregivers. As part of the rule-making process, CMS requested comments on the proposed rule, and over 6,000 comments were submitted during the month-long comment period. Among those thousands of comments were these from Medicaid home care providers, which help to show the significance of the matter.

Linda from Oregon wrote, “I am a caregiver for a Medicaid client…..I support [the proposed rule]. The union is against everything I stand for in my life…I want out…”

A Californian wrote, “I am a care giver for a Medicaid client and in strong support of [the proposed rule]… The federal law is the only protection I have against the SEIU union and collaborative state political intervention. “

A commenter from Washington wrote the following:

I support [the proposed rule]. I am a caregiver for a Medicaid client, and my experience with SEIU 775 has been negative. The US Supreme Court’s Harris v. Quinn established in 2014 that caregivers serving Medicaid clients could not be required to financially support a labor union. Ever since, SEIU 775 and the state of Washington have worked to keep [caregivers] paying union dues whether they want to or not.

Another Washingtonian wrote the following:

I strongly support [the proposed rule]!

I am a caregiver for a Medicare client and have had horrible experiences with SEIU 775. I do not wish to be a union member yet this union forces itself onto people… I discovered the union was having union dues withheld from my paycheck when I was a non-member. I had to jump through a lot of hoops to get that resolved. Also, when training, the union representative shows up and spends 45 minutes to an hour pitching to everyone like they are required to sign into the union. Many of these trainees do not speak or understand English language very well and end-up signing into the union without really understanding. This practice needs to stop.

Finally, Kris from Minnesota submitted the following comment:

SEIU is taking advantage of modestly paid [caregivers] who do belong to the union, by skimming 3% of their pay up to $948.00 a year from Medicaid…

I am urging you to stop this corruption by ending the ability of the State of Minnesota to deduct union dues for the SEIU from my daughters benefit.

Medicaid is being used to fund political agendas in Minnesota and hurt families like mine… That has to stop.

CMS will now consider the comments it received and decide whether to proceed to a final rule. Given SEIU’s shameful treatment of home care providers, CMS should implement the proposed rule and protect caregivers’ Medicaid checks as soon as possible.

For years, some blue states have been automatically deducting union dues from the checks of Medicaid home care providers. Many of these caregivers are relatives or friends of the person they care for and did not wish to join a union. The main beneficiary of this dues skim is the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). […]

Union Oversight Improvements Needed

Oversight of our nation’s unions’ financial activities are conducted by the Labor Department’s Office of Labor Management Standards. Americans for Limited Government Foundation recently released this report on improvements that should be made to ensure that appropriate oversight is restored after eight years of neglect.

Oversight of our nation’s unions’ financial activities are conducted by the Labor Department’s Office of Labor Management Standards. Americans for Limited Government Foundation recently released this report on improvements that should be made to ensure that appropriate oversight is restored after eight years of neglect.