Recently Politico reported on a new Big Labor tactic to help pass the latest union boss power grab, the woefully misnamed Employee Free Choice Act (more accurately called the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill).  Politico acquired a revealing letter and accompanying survey sent by Teamsters Local 507 in Cleveland to Wall Street fund managers:

"Has your company made any public statements in support or opposition to EFCA?" asks one of nine pointed questions in a polite, detailed four-page questionnaire.

"If 'Yes,' please explain."

The cover letter, signed by the local's Secretary-Treasurer and President, makes the union's purpose even more clear:

As a trustee, I have an obligation to determine whether our fund's asset managers are engaged in partisan political activity that could adversely affect our fund, its participants, and beneficiaries.  I therefore request that you complete the enclosed Asset Manger [sic] Survey to disclose your firm's political spending and activity with regard to this important issue and return it to me with in the next couple of weeks.

Apparently they don't actually know what being a trustee of a pension fund entails.  They have a fiduciary duty to ensure the financial health of the union members' pension fund.  But here, these union bosses are putting politics, lobbying, and their desire to crush more workers under the thumb of forced unionism ahead of their fiduciary duty.

The Teamsters Local 507 union bosses -- likely as part of a wider strategy of the Change to Win union cartel -- want to know whether a company managing their pension funds has in any way opposed the job-killing, freedom-crushing Card Check Forced Unionism bill, by taking a public position, supporting certain politicians, or having any kind of relationship with various organizations, including the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which they list by name.

The National Right to Work Foundation is a charitable, nonprofit organization which provides free legal aid to the victims of compulsory unionism, including victims of card check intimidation.  Foundation attorneys are bracing for the cries for help from countless workers who will face ugly intimidation and violence if the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill becomes law, thereby making the less-abusive secret ballot election for union certification a dead letter.

In early December, the Department of Labor issued a request for information regarding Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Associations (VEBAs). VEBAs are health and welfare trust funds set up by employers and union officials using "voluntary" contributions from workers.

Unfortunately, lack of oversight and an influx of money frequently encourages union corruption, so the National Right to Work Foundation submitted comments (.pdf) warning the DoL about the dangers of giving union bosses a blank check.

As the Foundation's comments point out, VEBAs should not be surpervised solely by the union hierarchy, but rather should involve employer oversight. Not only would handing over a massive trust fund to union bosses violate the Labor Management Relations Act, which prohibits employers from giving union bosses "any money or other thing of value," it also further encourages union corruption and mismanagement.

In one notable Foundation case, union bosses had the gall to finance a new luxurious union headquarters building with funds diverted from employees' VEBA. This expenditure was euphemistically termed an "investment" by the the VEBA's trustees, who were evidently more concerned with helping the union bosses than bringing workers a good return on their money.

The Foundation's experience with worker-funded VEBAs makes one thing clear: corrupt union bosses should not exercise sole control.

Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal had a great editorial up on the hypocrisy of SEIU leadership. Andy Stern and his cronies are more intent than ever on blackmailing unwilling companies into forcing SEIU "representation" on their employees through a series of vicious corporate campaigns:

SEIU President Andy Stern is the drama king of Big Labor, and Thursday's publicity blitz will feature all of his signature choreography: Rallies in 18 states and even overseas, in which thousands of union activists will march against companies and politicians they don't like. Themes include "Buyout Monsters On the Loose" and "The War on Greed." To listen to Mr. Stern, this is about getting Congress to close tax "loopholes" for private equity firms, while funding national health care and "middle class" tax cuts.

That's a sideshow. The real targets are private equity firms such as Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Carlyle Group, which own companies that have resisted SEIU attempts to organize their workers. Mr. Stern wants to pound these firms with bad publicity and political retribution until they break.

What's worse, it turns out that the SEIU's activism is apparently being funded illegally. Just today, Foundation president Mark Mix requested a Department of Justice investigation into new SEIU directives allowing Andy Stern to impose financial penalties on any local affiliate that doesn't meet mandatory political fundraising targets. Not only that, but local unions may be forced to pay the SEIU's fines with money collected from nonmember employees' compulsory agency fees. We hope that the DoJ and the Department of Labor will move quickly to investigate this apparent criminal activity (the Foundation's press release is available here).

Given the SEIU's checkered past, these new developments aren't particularly surprising. But aggressive union activism does have a cost. Devoting untold sums of money to intimidating employers evidently comes at the expense of the union's so-called "representation":

Mr. Stern's "middle class" spin would be more believable if the SEIU did more for its own members, especially their pensions. Public records based on the SEIU's own filings show that the SEIU National Industry Pension plan – which covers some 101,000 workers – was only 75% funded in 2006. Put another way, the plan had only three-fourths of the money it needs to meet its retirement obligations. And the national chapter is only the start. Some 13 local SEIU pension plans in 2006 were less than 80% funded; several didn't reach 65%.

Some of this might be the result of poor investment performance, but the main problem is that the SEIU hasn't negotiated adequate employer contributions to the plans.

The SEIU's top brass, on the other hand, is guaranteed generous compensation funded by employees' mandatory dues-payments. Too bad the workers they're supposed to be representing don't receive similar benefits:

On the other hand, SEIU leaders are highly attentive to their own pension funding. A separate fund run by the national union, this one covering the benefits of SEIU officers, was 103% funded in 2006. The top SEIU guns are set for their golden years.

Read the whole sordid tale here.