Via Big Government, here’s a damning video explaining the wasteful contract created by New York/New Jersey Police Union officials, which mandates that officers collect overtime pay even after they’ve been suspended for misconduct:

Of course, the Police/Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill threatens to spread this and other wasteful union boss instituted work rules to states and counties who have no desire to hamstring their public safety employees with union monopoly bargaining. If Big Labor gets their way on Capitol Hill, this video is a frightening portent of things to come. 

The Obama Administration hasn’t been shy about paying back the union bosses, but it has been shy about answering basic questions about its collusion with Big Labor.

So while Monday’s report in Politico shouldn’t shock anyone, it is telling:

President Barack Obama’s political director failed to disclose that he was slated to receive a nearly $40,000 payout from a large labor union while he was working in the White House.

Patrick Gaspard, who served as the political director for the Service Employees International Union local 1199, received $37,071.46 in “carried over leave and vacation” from the union in 2009, but he did not disclose the agreement to receive the payment on his financial disclosure forms filed with the White House.

…
Gaspard spent nine years at 1199 SEIU, a major labor union in New York. Gaspard also worked for Obama’s campaign, and later worked for the transition team, where he earned $11,500, according to the financial disclosure form he filed this year. He was pulling a salary from SEIU until Jan. 16, 2009, shortly before Obama was inaugurated.

From political director of an affiliate of the SEIU to political director of President Obama. Where did one job stop and the other begin?

The July/August 2010 issue of Foundation Action is now available for download as a PDF. This is the Foundation’s official bimonthly publication that provides an excellent overview of hard-hitting legal actions being taken by Foundation attorneys every day to combat forced unionism.

This issue’s top story details Delta Air Lines employees’ legal challenge to Obama Administration appointees’ scheme to push railway and airline  workers into forced union ranks.

Also in this issue:

• Union Bosses Illegally Threaten Workers with Termination
• Avoid Stock Market Uncertainty with a Charitable Gift Annuity
• Workers Take Stand Against Teamster Union Boss Intimidation
• The Detroit News: Michigan Will Benefit with Workplace Choice

In addition to to reading Foundation Action online, you can sign up to receive a free subscription by mail here.

Here’s a must-read editorial from National Review on Big Labor’s Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill:

Lacking the evolutionary finesse that keeps most parasites from killing their host organisms, the American labor movement has driven the private firms that once employed its members offshore or into bankruptcy. Consequently, the only growth market remaining for the union movement is government: More union members today are employed by government than by the private sector. The union bosses, being neither blind nor stupid, see the advantages of sitting on both sides of the negotiating table, and their influence on politics has been predictably baleful. Unfortunately for those who would curtail their influence, they enjoy a steady stream of cash, expropriated from the paychecks of their members, and a ready supply of foot soldiers available for get-out-the-vote and rent-a-mob duties.

That’s a problem for conservatives. One of the more dynamic Republican leaders in the country, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, is battening down his political hatches for the hurricane of union abuse headed his way in response to his sober efforts to get his state’s finances in order. It is going to be ugly, with the unions employing the same tactics they used to derail the governorship of Arnold Schwarzenegger. So why in the name of Barry Goldwater would a single Republican, much less a half-dozen senators, support extending the influence of the people who made New Jersey New Jersey? The Senate Republicans supporting the bill include not only the usual practitioners of Me-Tooism — the Maine ladies, Lisa Murkowski — but also Scott Brown of Massachusetts and New Hampshire’s Judd Gregg. (What, no Lindsey Graham?) It would be cheaper and better for the country if these Republicans would just go ahead and make a direct donation to the Democratic National Committee, an act to which supporting this bill is equivalent. If Sen. Mike Johanns really wants to turn Lincoln, Neb., into Trenton on the Prairie, let him confine his efforts to his own state and leave the other 49 to go their own way.

Click here to read the whole thing. For more editorials opposing this terrible piece of legislation, check out our earlier blog post on the groundswell of public opposition to expanding Big Labor’s control over public safety employees.

National Right to Work President Mark Mix discusses the consequences of the Police/Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill on Richmond, Virginia’s Jimmy Barrett Show. Click here to listen or use the embedded player below:

As always, you can also listen to the Foundation’s podcast via iTunes or manually subscribe to the feed.  

From the Washington Post on down, magazines and newspapers across the country are editorializing against the Police and Firefighters Monopoly Bargaining Bill, a Big Labor power grab that would shove thousands of public safety employees into union collectives and usurp state and local laws across the country.

Here’s Right to Work President Mark Mix in the Richmond Times Dispatch:

With Reid and his Big Labor allies in Congress in full payback mode, Sen. Jim Webb’s and Sen. Mark Warner’s votes could easily determine the fate of Virginia’s public safety workers.

If passed, the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill could turn over police and firefighters of local governments to union-boss control by federal mandate. It overrides the laws of at least 25 states, including states like Virginia that have a complete ban on granting union officials bargaining privileges for public-sector employees.

The Virginian-Pilot also editorialized against the bill:

After retreating from one misguided intrusion into labor law, congressional Democrats are mustering another clumsy campaign to appease their union donors.

Much like the failed card-check legislation, the latest initiative is an unnecessary federal interference with employment matters. If adopted, the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act would require state and local governments to engage in collective bargaining with police officers, deputies, firefighters and emergency medical workers over wages and work conditions.

As did the Charleston Daily Mail:

Really, members of Congress are shameless sometimes. Unions are huge contributors to Democratic campaign coffers, and they expect favors in return.

This is one that members of Congress should not grant. There is absolutely no justification for the federal government overcalling state-developed law on collective bargaining.

The Denver Post:

Reid’s measure would require that public safety workers be given collective bargaining rights without voter approval. The Colorado Municipal League, which opposes the measure, points out that the federal mandate would instantly affect thousands of employees and Colorado taxpayers at every level.

We agree. Brushing away the current structure not only tramples on local control, it could result in higher budgets at a time tax revenue is down and local governments are struggling.

The National League of Cities also opposes this legislation, as it would override the laws of 19 states other than Colorado. NLC lobbyist Neil Bomberg tells us the measure could arrive in the form of an amendment to small-business legislation or as a free-standing bill on the Senate floor next week.

And the Las Vegas Review-Journal:

While a boon to unions, this law would seriously damage our federalist system by taking away a large measure of local control over police and firefighters unions and lead to higher costs to local governments and taxpayers, costs that neither will be able to affect at the ballot box. 

And some related commentary from National Review:

Organized labor — increasingly dominated by public-sector workers — sees this as compensation for the failure of their card-check effort. The losers in this scenario will be taxpayers.

We can only hope that elected officials take note of the near-unanimous level of public opposition to this terrible idea.

UPDATE: Yet more editorials against the Police/Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill from the San Francisco Examiner, Watertown Daily Times, Charleston Post and Courier, Newport Daily Press, and the Silver City Sun-News.

Many Freedom@Work readers are already following the latest Big Labor offensive on Capitol Hill. Under the guise of protecting our first responders, pro-forced unionism politicians are attempting to ram home the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill.

This legislation would force states to adopt monopoly union bargaining for all police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical technicians. Not only would this bill push unwilling public safety employees into Big Labor’s forced dues-paying ranks, it would also usurp the right of state and local governments to determine if their employees unionize.

In fact, this power grab is so egregious that even the often pro-Big Labor Washington Post has taken notice. Here’s the Post’s blistering editorial against the bill:

What this bill would do is impose a permanent, one-size-fits-all federal solution in an area — public-sector labor relations — that has traditionally been left to the states, and where state flexibility is probably more necessary than ever. The imposition on Virginia would be dramatic, of course, but even union-friendly Maryland, which lets each county decide whether and how to bargain with its employees, might find itself in costly, time-consuming contention with the feds. Farther afield, Colorado’s "fire protection districts," special units of government dedicated to providing that service, would face costly collective bargaining even where firefighters and management are working harmoniously without it.

We share the bill sponsors’ esteem for first responders. They should be adequately, even generously, compensated. Still, many outsized pensions now threatening state and local governments were awarded by politicians to curry favor with public-safety unions. To be sure, the bill includes acompromise provision assuring states that they don’t have to bargain over pensions. But it hardly matters. The bill further empowers an already strong lobby that could use its additional clout to pressure state legislators to allow pension-bargaining anyway — or to enact such benefits by statute. This bill is a bad idea whose time, we hope, has still not come.

Read the whole thing here. And remember, if Big Labor sympathizers at the Washington Post are astounded by this unpopular bill, imagine how bad it must be for the rest of us. 

It will come as no surprise to those following the Obama Administration’s labor policy that another  executive order threatens to advance union bosses’ interests at the expense of employers and employees alike. Executive Order 13494 implements a blatant double-standard for federal contractors who are subjected to union organizing drives. The order prohibits contractors from using any federal money to inform employees about the facts of union organizing.

Although this might sound relatively unobjectionable, the new directive reveals itself as a payoff to Big Labor by allowing contractors to write off expenses related to union monopoly bargaining, including company subsidies for union shop stewards and union committees.

This order creates a huge financial incentive for contractors to roll over to coercive union organizing drives, safe in the knowledge that they’ll be able to pass on many union-related expenses to the government (we the people). Meanwhile, employer efforts to truthfully inform employees about the downsides of unionization cannot be reimbursed under this discriminatory directive. In other words, this policy effectively forces taxpayers to subsidize union activities. 

Naturally, the National Right to Work Foundation has filed formal comments with the Administration opposing this latest Big Labor-friendly directive. Unfortunately, this executive order is yet another example of the Obama White House’s fealty to Big Labor bosses, who helped ensure its loyalty by investing hundreds of millions of dollars to elect Obama in 2008.

In the wake of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) boss Andy Stern’s retirement, SEIU Executive Vice President Mary Kay Henry was ushered in as the new chief of the notoriously corrupt and predatory union hierarchy.

Despite the mainstream media’s portrayal of Henry’s coronation as a change in the way SEIU union organizers coerce workers into dues-paying union ranks through intimidation or political deal-making, nothing could be further from the truth.

From National Right to Work’s contribution to BigGovernment.com:

Don’t let the cheery atmosphere surrounding her anointment ease concerns about her nor the SEIU and its agenda; because for her, ObamaCare and its potential for 21.1 million forced unionism conscripts are just the beginning steps for SEIU’s steady march towards domination of U.S. labor markets.

Mary Kay Henry’s intentions to further radicalize the labor movement and the American economy are clearer than Stern’s vision. With the hundreds of millions of union dues and fees flowing into SEIU’s treasury, she has the financial fuel needed to fund her ambitious desires…

Mary Kay Henry has been credited with most of SEIU’s membership growth for more than a decade; however, that growth did not come from the grassroots; it was top down.

From 1996-2007, SEIU claimed 900,000 “new members” and Mary Kay Henry’s healthcare division provided almost all its growth…

In 2006, Mary Kay Henry laid her plan on the table:

More central power is needed, said Henry. “We believe the American labor movement needs to move beyond voluntarism [joining voluntarily?] … SEIU aims to increase the union rate of health care workers from its current 20 percent to 50 percent.[iii]

SEIU’s game plan is simple and reminiscent of the 1950s: create the allusion that it has the power to subjugate employers by region and couple it with SEIU’s willingness to ignore election rules to intimidate and control almost every elected and appointed Democrat in the United States. If the plan works, SEIU organizations gain control of workers in an entire region of the country.

After creating mega-locals, SEIU begins to sign-up smaller workplaces and move these units into the appropriate mega-local conflating contracts into its master contract for the region.

In the end, SEIU’s mega-local contract spans across numerous states and worksites making it virtually impossible for individual workers to mount a successful decertification or deauthorization NLRB election.

(Emphasis in original)

To view the National Right to Work Committee’s latest video, "SEIU’s Mary Kay Henry: Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss"click here or you can watch it below:

In a political culture in which most politicians fear Big Labor’s massive forced dues electioneering machine, it’s refreshing to see an elected official articulately and passionately condemn compulsory unionism.  That’s just what New Jersey Governor Chris Christie did last week at a town hall meeting.

In the video below, listen to Gov. Christie explain the evil of forcing teachers to pay union fees (roughly 85 percent of full union dues) just to exercise their right to refrain from union membership. 

New Jersey employees have the limited right — secured by National Right to Work Foundation-won cases at the US Supreme Court — to pay only the portion of the fees that union bosses can prove is spent on bargaining and contract administration.  

In Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977), the Court ruled that compulsory dues for politics violates the First Amendment.  In Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson (1986), the Court agreed with Foundation attorneys and unanimously held that union officials must provide employees with an independently verified breakdown of the union’s expenditures and that employees must have the opportunity to challenge the calculation of their forced fees.

Unfortunately, Christie stops short of calling for the Garden State to pass a Right to Work law, which would make union association 100 percent voluntary.  But he’s right on when he explains that the teacher union officials are motivated by "the accumulation and exercise of raw political power."  Something to think about as Congress considers rewriting states’ employment laws by federal fiat.