Sunday, December 2, 2012

In the recent election, Michigan voters overwhelmingly rejected an attempt by union bosses to "turn back the clock" on Gov. Rick Snyder's reforms.
Pushed primarily by UAW President Bob King, Prop. 2 would have rolled back many of the reforms that Snyder has signed into law effecting government workers' collective bargaining agreements, and prevented the legislature from putting any restrictions or limitations on future government-union collective bargaining agreements.
Voters saw Prop. 2 for what it was: A power grab by greedy union bosses.
Now we have an opportunity to continue moving forward with giving individual workers the freedom to choose whether they want to join a union and pay dues or not. Without a right-to-work law, workers in Michigan can be forced to financially support a union as a condition of employment.
Unions accomplished much for blue-collar workers decades ago, but have now become detrimental to job creation in heavily unionized areas as more and more businesses and jobs move to right-to-work states to avoid the excessive demands and labor costs associated with forced unionization.
Neither workers nor taxpayers should be fooled by the divisive rhetoric that will be shouted by the union bosses and their foot soldiers as the effort to pass right to work in Michigan moves forward

Sunday, November 18, 2012



The following link is proof positive that Rick Snyder is on record as saying "I would sign it..." (RTW legislation) if it crossed his desk.  Now that Mr. Snyder is the Governor, he is more coy and evasive, but the fact remains; Snyder favors Right to Work and said so on the record during his campaign!


I submit that the time is now to introduce and pass Right-to-Work legislation and send it to the Governor's desk !


http://youtu.be/xIikLENpg4s

Saturday, August 18, 2012

I am posting the Wikipedia description of the Taft-Hartley Act for clarification of "Right-to-Work" law.
Some folks apparently are under the misunderstanding that RTW law "outlaws" unions or bans union membership. Not true! Right-to-Work law simply allows each individual to decide whether or not they want to financially support a union.

The Taft–Hartley Act
Prior to the passage of the Taft–Hartley Act by Congress over President Harry S. Truman's veto in 1947, unions and employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act could lawfully agree to a closed shop, in which employees at unionized workplaces must be members of the union as a condition of employment. Under the law in effect before the Taft-Hartley amendments, an employee who ceased being a member of the union for whatever reason, from failure to pay dues to expulsion from the union as an internal disciplinary punishment, could also be fired even if the employee did not violate any of the employer's rules.
The Taft–Hartley Act outlawed the closed shop. The union shop rule, which required all new employees to join the union after a minimum period after their hire, is also illegal.[1] As such, it is illegal for any employer to force an employee to join a union.
A similar arrangement to the union shop is the agency shop, under which employees must pay the equivalent of union dues, but need not formally join such union.
Section 14(b) of the Taft–Hartley Act goes further and authorizes individual states (but not local governments, such as cities or counties) to outlaw the union shop and agency shop for employees working in their jurisdictions. Under the open shop rule, an employee cannot be compelled to join or pay the equivalent of dues to a union, nor can the employee be fired if he joins the union. In other words, the employee has the right to work, regardless of whether or not he is a member or financial contributor to such a union.
The Federal Government operates under open shop rules nationwide, though many of its employees are represented by unions. Unions that represent professional athletes have written contracts that include exclusive representation provisions (for example in the National Football League),[2] but their application is limited to "wherever and whenever legal," as the Supreme Court has clearly held that the application of a Right to Work law is determined by the employee's "predominant job situs."[3] Hence, players on professional sports teams in states with Right to Work laws are protected by those laws, and cannot be required to pay any portion of union dues as a condition of continued employment.[4]

Sunday, July 29, 2012

ALERT!: Union Boss Power Grab, Nov. 6th!

 With Michigan’s November ballot almost certain to have an initiative on it that would amend the state constitution if approved, it is imperative that voters understand what is true regarding Right-to-Work and the “Union Boss Ballot Initiative”.
 First of all, the ballot initiative that the union bosses sponsored would do so many things that there is currently a challenge by a coalition of business groups being considered in the courts that would remove it from the ballot for being too broad. But should it survive the court challenge and make it onto the November ballot it would roll back several of the very effective reforms that Governor Snyder has signed into law since taking office, reforms that have generated a budget surplus in the state and turned Michigan’s fiscal ship around.
 Some of these reforms have restricted or altered benefits that had been collectively bargained for by government workers, primarily teachers, but were bankrupting municipalities and school districts around the state. The legislature sent Governor Snyder this “common-sense” legislation and he signed it into law and now these reforms benefit all of Michigan’s tax-payers, including the 83% of workers who do not belong to a union.  These reforms, combined with the prospect of the legislature in Lansing possibly introducing “Right-to-Work” legislation in the state, prompted the union bosses to launch their power grab to not only roll back Governor Snyder’s reforms effecting as many as 80 different laws on the books, it would amend our state constitution to “pre-emptively” ban Right-to-Work legislation from ever being passed in the state.
Regarding the specific issue of Right-to-Work; RTW law does not ban or eliminate collective bargaining as the union bosses would like you to believe. What Right-to-Work law does do, is give each individual worker the choice; Do they want to join a union and pay dues, or not? That’s all, it does not prevent unions from organizing workers, it would not prevent workers from forming or joining a union, and it does not alter the collective bargaining process. What “Freedom-to-Work” would do is allow workers to “decide for themselves”, rather than being forced to financially support a union. “Technically” it’s true that a worker at a union shop can resign from the union and give up his right to vote in union elections, but he is still required to pay “Agency fees” which can be up to 95.5% of union dues. That is what Michigan-Freedom-to-Work is fighting against; forcing workers to pay financial support to a third party as a condition of employment, under threat of being fired.  Voters should understand that collective bargaining is not at risk, RTW laws do allow collective bargaining and unionization, they simply give each individual the right to decide whether to join.
Vote NO! on the "Union-Boss-Ballot-Inititiative" Nov. 6th!

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Union bosses want to bleed state taxpayers dry.


We are at a turning point in Michigan. Over the last 15 months, Governor Snyder has led the effort, along with the support of the legislature, to “re-invent Michigan” by making our state more attractive to businesses. Most of our elected representatives in Lansing know that we must become more competitive and create an environment that helps attract jobs to our state by reducing government regulations, and by simplifying and reducing business taxes. They understand that our economy depends on it. But now the union bosses have decided to try to roll back many of the gains that the Governor and the legislature have made over the last 15 months. Union bosses are trying to push through a drastic change to the Michigan State Constitution that would prevent our elected officials from ever passing laws that limit government union contracts. The union bosses want the power to dictate not only the work rules, wage scale, and the benefits that employees receive, they also want to be able to compel all employees of a company or business to pay dues which they can then use to fund left-wing political causes.
In the private sector, the cost is passed on to the customer, but in the case of government unions it is the taxpayer who foots the bill. We need only look at the cities of Detroit, Flint, Benton Harbor and Ecorse to see the result when government unions become too powerful. In Detroit there are over 40 different union bargaining units. Over 40! And many of them have refused to make the necessary concessions to keep Detroit solvent, even as Governor Snyder has given them every opportunity to before he is forced to name an Emergency Financial Manager.
The union bosses response to our legislators attempts to rein in government unions; They want to make union contracts and their unreasonable demands “untouchable” by the democratically elected Legislature in Lansing. The union bosses are leading a petition drive to gather signatures for a ballot initiative to change our constitution and roll back dozens of pieces of legislation, including the much needed Emergency Manager Law that could be the last hope for cities like Detroit. The union backed-ballot initiative would prevent our elected officials from limiting their power in any way. It is unbelievable that greedy union bosses think that the voters of the state of Michigan would “hand them the keys” to our state’s economy, and say “go ahead, do for the rest of Michigan what you have done for Detroit, Flint and Pontiac … drive the state’s economy into the ditch, like the excessive union demands have done in numerous cities across the state”. And not only would this proposed union control lock in costs in government, they will also make unions more inclined to make unreasonable demands of businesses in the private sector, causing many businesses to avoid Michigan, and driving existing businesses out of our state and over the border into Indiana or Ohio where they are limiting the power of unions to dictate costs to businesses. We can’t afford to derail Michigan’s fragile recovery.
This blatant power-grab by the union bosses would be a death sentence for Michigan’s economy if it were allowed to become part of our state constitution. The legislature, our democratically-elected representatives, would be at the mercy of greedy, power hungry union bosses. Our state would be virtually powerless to limit the cost of government employees as it continues to spiral out of control. And in the private sector, with the prospect of Freedom-to-Work legislation eliminated, union demands would further increase labor costs in our state at a time when we should be lowering them and creating an environment more attractive to businesses.
We must assume that the union bosses will be able to mobilize their minions and collect the required number of signatures, and that this attempt to change our constitution will appear on the November ballot. In that event, it is imperative that every taxpayer realize the consequences of what giving the union bosses control of our state would mean; The union bosses want to do for the entire state of Michigan what they have done for the City of Detroit.

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Michigan workers need "Freedom to Work"

I am now acting as a spokesperson for "Michigan Freedom to Work", as well as being a member of Terry Bowman's organization "Union conservatives". These fine organizations are supported by workers who want to be able to work wherever they choose and not be forced to pay union dues against their will.
Pretty simple right ? But the union bosses don't want to give up their control over your money. They need your money to continue to fund their left-wing political agenda.Individual workers should not be forced to pay union dues when they don't agree with the political agenda of the union, period.

Friday, February 10, 2012