Tag Archives: jobs

Union Above Public Welfare

Posted on by
Reply

The Daily Caller, in a weekend article, reported [emphasis added]

In a two-page Oct 29 contract, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) local 1049 demanded union dues, pay hikes and benefit contributions from Florida electric utilities before its workers would be permitted to help reconnect power to Long Island communities.  The demand came as Hurricane Sandy was bearing down on the Northeastern United States, stranding tens of millions without electricity.

That…contract…was sent to Florida’s nonunion power companies; it can be found at the above link and here.  Below are some of the eleven different financial “demands” the local required as a precondition to allowing these volunteer, and non-union, workers to help the Long Islanders devastated by Sandy.  Never mind the welfare of those residents.  They’re just useful hostages for the collection of the union’s vig.

  • UTILITY shall contribute 22 ½ % of each employee’s gross salary into the “IBEW Local 1049 Craft Annuity Fund”
  • UTILITY shall contribute 3% of each employee’s gross salary into the “IBEW Local 1049 Craft Division Skill Improvement Fund”
  • UTILITY shall contribute 3% of each employee’s gross salary to the local collection agent for the “National Electrical Benefit Fund”
  • UTILITY shall contribute 0.5% of each employee’s gross salary to the “National Electrical Industry Fund.”
  • UTILITY shall contribute 1% of each employee’s gross salary to the “Northeastern Joint Apprenticeship and Training Trust.”

Notice that—just these money grabs alone would have forced the UTILITY(s) to pay into union coffers nearly 30% of these volunteers’ (post-raise) pay, beyond that pay itself.  Taking into account all the money demands,

TheDC calculated that for a nonunion crew foreman normally earning $40 per hour in Florida, the mandated higher wages [also demanded in the “contract”] plus union contributions and dues would force a utility to pay $67.74 per hour for each worker completing power restoration tasks in New York.

For work performed on weekends or after 4:00 pm on weekdays, that overall rate would jump to $70.38.

All so these Florida volunteers could have the privilege of being Good Samaritans and trying to help out fellow Americans in their hour of need.

Florida Municipal Electric Association Executive Director Brent Moline said

The word we were getting all week was that New York was short by hundreds of [electric] linemen.  Well, okay.  We’ve got them.  Florida is two days away, so you need a head start.

No thanks, said the IBEW.  Only union workers are needed.

Moline added,

[I]t was only in New York where the union had to give their blessing.  It just made me sick that you’ve got people who have no power and you hear about a lot of people dying.

Finally, one of thirteen clauses in the “contract” specified its overall period of effect—29 Oct to 29 Nov.  Eleven of the clauses dealt with money for the union.  There wasn’t even anything in document about work conditions, worker safety, and so on.  Just that money for the union.

Only after the hue and cry did the union say it had withdrawn the demand letter.

Isn’t this display of union greed, using the citizens of Long Island as hostages for the collection, reason enough to pass a right to work law in New York?  Governor Cuomo (D)?  President of the Senate Duffy (D)?  Speaker of the Assembly Silver (D)?

As and aside, if this is what the IBEW charges its local UTILITYs, no wonder LIPA’s electricity rates are so high (the lowest non-Household Assistance rate Long Islanders pay—water and home heating by other means than electricity and assuming no more than 250 KWh of use in a month—is 51.9¢/KWh, which compares with 10¢/KWh where I live in northern Texas—and I heat, and air condition, my home with electricity, for which LIPA would charge a higher price).

Unemployment

Posted on by
Reply

The last Labor stat on the unemployment rate is out, and as usual, there are some interesting underlying numbers, also, as reported by Jeff Cox of CNBC.

First, the headline number: overall unemployment rose to 7.9% in October.  It’s important to note that due to problems related to the impact of Sandy, New Jersey and DC data are not included in this estimate; BLS says they estimated these missing data.

The underlying numbers:

  • 171,000 new jobs
  • the number of those employed part-time who would rather work full-time and those discouraged and so dropped out decreased to 14.6%
  • labor force participation rate, which consists of those working or looking for jobs (which includes the above underemployed), edged higher to 63.8%

But it wasn’t all even as “good” as those tepid numbers.  From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

  • black unemployment rose to 14.3%—nearly twice the national average
  • Hispanic unemployment rose to 10%—25% above the national average
  • unemployment duration rose to 40.2 weeks
  • average work week showed no change
  • average hourly earnings for private nonfarm employees dropped by 1¢
  • number of unemployed rose by 170,000

Cox notes this, also:

President Barack Obama has touted the more than 4 million jobs created [sic] since the 2009 economic nadir, though the number is much lower—less than 200,000—when compared to the jobs lost.

As someone once said, this isn’t what a recovery looks like.

A Do-Nothing Senate

Posted on by
Reply

Recall the mandate to move to the right of center that our Congress received in the 2010 elections, when the people transferred 63 seats in the House of Representative and 6 in the Senate from the Democrats to the Republicans—a majority of those transfers to Tea Party Republicans, hence the mandate to move to the right.  Despite that outcome, though, the Senate remained under the control of the Democrats.  What has the Senate done in response to those instructions from its bosses?  The figure below, from The Wall Street Journal, tells the tale of the Progressives’ insubordination.

This illustrates the work the House has done these last two years in response to those instructions and the (not insignificant) numbers of House Democrats who actively supported that work.

On top of this dereliction, the Senate has refused to do its own work:

[T]he Senate failed to pass any budget in 2012. Or 2011. Or 2010. …more than 1,200 days.

And

The Senate also failed in 2010 and 2012 to pass a single appropriations bill.  …that hadn’t happened before in the 150-year history of the current spending process.  This year the Senate even failed to enact a national defense authorization bill, which almost never happens.

Senate Progressives have announced that they’ll continue their refusal to perform in 2013 [emphasis in original]:

Chuck Schumer (D, NY) warned that Democrats will stop any attempt at bipartisan tax reform next year, calling the idea “obsolete.”

We can’t afford even two more years of this Progressive refusal to perform, much less four more years of an incumbent President’s arrogance.

Lies of the Democrats, Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

This is Part 2 of my series on the lies told by Democrats during the present administration’s term in office.  As I said earlier, I’m not concerned with his broken campaign promises so much as I am with the dishonesty while in office.

In this post, I’ll mention a few more economic lies.

The Democrats insist that their “Stimulus” spending and their diversion of part of the TARP funding “saved the American automobile manufacturing industry,” the latter itself of questionable legality, given the legislated purpose of the TARP funding.

This is nonsense.  In fact, only two car companies were at risk out of the seven major car companies that comprised, and still comprise, the American automobile manufacturing industry.  Those seven?  In no particular order, they are Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Toyota, Nissan, GM, and Chrysler.  But wait, you say, Ford, GM, and Chrysler are the only American car manufacturers; the other four are foreign—and two of those three were threatened with bankruptcy.  How is saving those two not saving the American automobile manufacturing industry?

The fact is, none of those seven car manufacturers manufacture anything in the US, including the American three.  All seven of those companies do have major plant complexes in the US whose function is to produce cars for sale in the US.  That production, though, is limited to final assembly.  Every plant, for every car manufacturer, imports all of their cars’ parts—chassis, body panels, engines, batteries, even tires and wheels—from other countries: Mexico, Taiwan, the People’s Republic of China, India, wherever the costs of parts production is lowest.  Thus, every automobile manufacturer in that American industry is on an even footing with every other auto manufacturer: they all do final assembly (and only final assembly), of imported parts, in the US, for sale to American customers.  Those seven, not only the American three, are the American automobile manufacturing industry.

Now, of those two car companies that were saved, what was the nature of the rescue?  Normal bankruptcy procedures were bypassed, and the Obama administration forced senior creditors to the back of the line—the funds went first to the auto manufacturing unions (vis., the United Auto Workers and the Canadian Auto Workers Unions), while those senior creditors wound up getting nothing.  This stood bankruptcy law and order of precedence for creditors on their collective head.

And the bailout of the two American car companies went so well that one of them—Chrysler—is now an Italian car company.

When Greed Meets Tinker Bell

Posted on by
Reply

State pension funds are another time bomb of malaise (to the tune of a $1.4 trillion shortfall) waiting to explode, and Rhode Island provides an example of the difficulty we each, in our own state, face in defusing it.

Rhode Island passed a massive overhaul (as such things go; they have a long way, yet, before they’ve completely cured their problem) of their state retirement system last year, including such unheard-ofs as raising the retirement age, suspending pension increases for several years, and generating a hybrid retirement plan that combines traditional pensions with 401(k)-like accounts.  Rhode Island’s General Treasurer, Gina Raimondo, says that this reform will save Rhode Islanders $4 billion over the next 20 years (compared to a 2013 budget that proposes spending $8 billion in that year alone, small potatoes, indeed, but a critical start).  This minor reform also seeks to redress astonishing conditions that include 58 percent of retired teachers and 48 percent of state retirees receiving more in their pensions than in their final years of work.

But it’s too much change for some.  The public “service” unions (service: you service me) object: it’s somehow wrong for their members to be responsible for their own retirement funding.  Even a little bit.  Instead, these public “service” unions protest that it’s all unfair.  Rhode Island is reneging on promises to workers, they say.  Bob Walsh, Executive Director of the National Education Association of Rhode Island, goes so far as to insist

What they did was illegal.  We’re deep into a real assault on labor.  It worries me that people who purport themselves as Democrats do this.

Never mind that there’s nothing at all illegal about these changes.  It’s a well-established principle in American jurisprudence that when the conditions extant when a contract was agreed (stipulating arguendo that the agreement was made in good faith by all parties) no longer exist, or have so radically changed that the terms can no longer be met, the contract can be abrogated and either a new one negotiated or the parties involved go their separate ways.  In extreme cases, this is what bankruptcy achieves; although, when the conditions have changed as radically as these have, bankruptcy isn’t necessary.

Never mind, also, these are promises that couldn’t be kept in any event, and both the state government and the public “service” unions at the time knew they could not be kept.  Or they blindly believed real hard in government’s ability to keep collecting funds from…somewhere.  Tinker Bell is alive and well in Public Service Land.

Never mind, finally, that this public “service” union greed at the expense of taxpayers makes “labor” a valid target.

One tear-jerker that the unions are trotting out is this:

North Providence retiree Jamie Reilly left her job as a secretary at age 50 [remember that raising of the retirement age?], thinking her 30 years of state employment would mean good benefits during her later years.  But now she said she may be forced to re-enter the workforce at age 55 because the state has put off pension increases.

“I counted on that money,” Reilly said….  “You work all your life and you plan, and they take it away from you.”

Worked all her life?  She worked 30 years and wanted to be retired for 40.  Workers in the private sector don’t get it that easy; they work until they’re in their mid-60s—a working life 50% longer.

And this one:

Cranston firefighter Dean Brockway said higher retirement ages mean he will have to work several years longer than he expected, and he wonders how he’ll climb stairs in heavy gear in his 60s.

“Could I do something else? I don’t know,” he said. “A lot of us chose to dedicate our lives to public service because to us it’s an honor.  Could I be a carpenter?  I don’t think so. This is what I do.”

Brockway has a legitimate concern, but it’s no different from the concerns of a private sector employee whose work is primarily physical labor.  But if he’s not going to look for alternatives, if he’s not going to try to retrain into something less physically demanding (certainly no stroll in the park for a middle-aged or older person, but assuredly not impossible), he loses sympathy for his plight, which begins to be self-imposed.  Certainly, there’s no more obligation for Rhode Island’s citizens to indemnify him against the outcomes of his choices than there is for them to indemnify similarly situated private sector employees.

Raimondo understands this in all its practicalities—how affordable are the existing programs:

These problems won’t go away.  The longer you wait, the bigger the problems get.  People looking for easy, short-term solutions. … Well, there are none.

Raimondo doesn’t believe in Tinker Bell.