The Urban Grind

One of Obama’s core constituent groups, the labor unions literally went ape in Lansing Michigan when the right to work law was passed. I mean, Heaven forbid a worker should have the choice of either being in a union or begin unemployed…

Such is the thuggery of labor unions. Their main purpose is to squeeze as much money as possible from employers for their people to do as little possible. At the slightest threat to their employee monopoly their true nature as hoodlums and criminals is exposed.

Obama traveled to Michigan yesterday to support the unions’ protest against the laws, which would allow most workers to decline union membership. Currently, many workers in Michigan are forced to join unions as a condition of employment. Republicans sought to change the law to make the state more competitive. Right-to-work states typically enjoy faster economic growth, higher job creation and lower unemployment rates.

Fellow Democrat Doug Geiss, a state legislator, had vowed earlier that “there will be blood” if the legislation passed; he failed to apologize, merely stating that he supported “nonviolence” in union protests. No Democrat or union representative, as of this writing, has apologized for the violence that took place today in Lansing.
In the past, conservatives have been held to account for random acts of violence that were entirely unrelated to anything they had said or done. In January 2011, for example, Gov. Sarah Palin was held responsible by media commentators for Jared Loughner’s crazed shooting spree in Arizona, merely because she previously used a political map with targets on it, indicating places where she focused her efforts in the 2010 elections.

In this case, the connection with Obama is direct. He went to Michigan to encourage the unions and oppose the state government; the unions turned out to protest and attacked those who had come to support the right-to-work legislation. In addition to the assault on Crowder, union members tore down a tent that had been pitched by Americans for Prosperity; Breitbart News’ Lee Stranahan captured the union members’ attack as the tent collapsed, with people inside, as union marshals looked on.

Update:
Steven Crowder has issued an ultimatum to the union thugs.

His name is Douglas Geiss, he’s a Democrat, and he was in such snit over Michigan’s right to work law that he threatened violence on the House floor.

No doubt his union goon constituents will happily follow through and get violent.

Rather than doing the job they were elected to do, Indiana’s Democrats fled the state rather than voting. They know they don’t have enough votes to prevent Indiana from becoming a right to work state. So rather than voting according to their beliefs, they high tailed it out of the state like spoiled children.

A final vote on the measure, which would ban union contracts from requiring nonunion members to pay fees for representation, had been expected on Tuesday in the House, which Republicans dominate 60 to 40. But with scores of union members and supporters filling the Statehouse halls in Indianapolis in protest, most Democrats refused to turn up for floor sessions — not once but twice on Tuesday afternoon.

The absences, only the latest in a series of absences and fierce partisan debate over the issue during the state’s legislative session, meant Republicans did not have enough members on the floor to do business; 67 representatives are required.

{snip}

Republicans say the right to work legislation would allow workers who do not wish to support unions not to be forced to and would entice new businesses to move to Indiana, which would be the first state in more than a decade to approve such a provision. Democrats say the measure, more common in states outside the traditional Midwestern manufacturing belt, would weaken unions and lead to lower pay and benefits for workers.

Get ready for the union goons and the dirty smelly hippies to take over the Statehouse and leave a huge mess.

Kudos to the Wisconsin Supreme Court for standing up to the labor unions and their filthy, smelly goons, who made a mess of the capitol building. What that means is no more collective bargaining for govermnent workers unions, and also that these same government workers will have to pay a little more towards their benefits.

MADISON, Wis. — A divided Wisconsin Supreme Court handed Republican Gov. Scott Walker a major victory Tuesday, ruling that a polarizing union law that strips most public employees of their collective bargaining rights could take effect.

In a 4-3 decision that included a blistering dissent, the court ruled that Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi overstepped her authority when she declared the law void. She sided with a lawsuit that claimed Republicans didn’t provide proper public notice of a meeting that helped get the original legislation approved.

Of course these unions won’t go gently into the good night. Rather than tighten their belts in tough economic times like all other Americans are doing, they’ll launch an avalanche of lawuits in order to keep on milking the Wisonsin taxpayers like cows, which they view as their G-d given right.

{snip}

Walker claimed that the law, which also requires public employees to pay more for their health care and pensions, was needed to help address the state’s $3.6 billion budget shortfall and give local governments enough flexibility on labor costs to deal with deep cuts to state aid. Democrats saw it as an attack on public employee unions, which usually back their party’s candidates.

Walker, in a one-sentence statement Tuesday, said “the Supreme Court’s ruling provides our state the opportunity to move forward together and focus on getting Wisconsin working again.”

Now all that’s left is for Governor Scott Walker to sign it into law, which he plans on doing as soon as possible.

In a nutshell, this measure would do the following:

In addition to ending most collective bargaining, the wide-ranging measure would help close a budget gap in the current fiscal year, require public employees to pay more for pensions and health insurance, give Walker broad authority over health care programs for the poor, and turn 37 civil service jobs into political appointments. But unlike an earlier version, the bill passed by the Assembly wouldn’t authorize the sale of state power plants or a $165 million refinancing of state debt.

For those of you in Wisconsin, please make a note of the four RINO’s who sided with the Democrats:

All Democrats voted against the bill and were joined by four Republicans – Dean Kaufert of Neenah, Lee Nerison of Westby, Travis Tranel of Cuba City and Richard Spanbauer of Oshkosh. All other Republicans and the body’s lone independent, Bob Ziegelbauer of Manitowoc, voted for the bill.

Now if only the Republicans in others states would follow the lead of their colleagues in Wisconsin, America would be in much better shape. And who knows? Maybe Obama will have more trouble getting re-elected in 2012 as a result.

The idiot RINO in question is Rep. Joe Knollenberg from Michigan. Here’s a video of him saying that the money for the bailouts of the auto industry doesn’t belong to taxpayers. Where does he think that money comes from? The tooth fairy? And if this bailout gets approved, all that money will be used for is the worker and retiree benefits, thanks to the unions. Here’s an old post from Barking-Moonbat which shows how the UAW transformed General Motors from a profit making business to a giant welfare tit for its workers and retirees.

# Union retirees from GM get to keep their medical benefits, free of charge, until they die

# GM reported its largest loss in history last quarter .. $1.1 Billion

# The cost of providing this health care to union workers adds $1,100 to $1,500 to the cost of each car.

# GM spends more per car for health care than it does for steel for that car.

# GM spends more per car for health care than it does for advertising for that car.

# The United Auto Workers (UAW) union refuses to budge off of its sweet deal.

I don’t want my tax dollars to prop up a giant welfare operation. Anway, here’s the video:

It turns out that union head could face jail time over this strike.

I would love to see that, but I don’t think it will ever happen. And unfortunately, I don’t think the union will cough up the one million dollars a day in fines either.

It would be great if all New Yorkers could boycott the subways and busses, but that’s just not practical in this city. First off, keeping a car in Manhattan will run you AT LEAST $200 a month in parking garage fees. Also, the traffic would be 5 million times worse than it is now if people just drove or took taxis. I’m just wondering if it’s possible for New Yorkers to get together and sue the TWU. My friend Mary believes that if someone dies, gets sick, loses money or suffers some form of emotional distress over this, they should have every right to sue. And I just did a Google search about suing labor unions. All that came up was stuff on the unions launching lawsuits. Why can’t it be the other way around as well?

Toussaint apologized to New Yorkers for the inconvenience but said the strike was provoked. He also said the union was talking to mediators and would consider returning to work if transit authorities withdrew a contentious pension proposal.

——–

In its final offer before talks collapsed, the MTA raised its wage offer and withdrew a proposal to raise the retirement age for new hires to 62 from 55. But it also presented a new proposal to make new hires contribute 6 percent of salary to pension funds, a demand that the union rejected out of hand.

“If the pension demands … come off the table, that would go a long way to us resuming the negotiations and resolving the strike issue,” Toussaint said at a news conference.

Why how awful for those poor abused transit workers/slaves! Imagine the horror of having to contribute to your own pension fund!

If they’re so unhappy with the working conditions, let them get off their marxist asses and find another job with comparable benefits! Holding the city hostage like is extortion.

The reason I have not written about this up until now is that I didn’t think the union would actually go through with this. But they have. And never mind that it’s about 25 degrees outside, and that most New Yorkers rely on the subways since the majority don’t own cars.

In terms of their demands, they want an 8 percent raise over the next three years, and they don’t want the retirement age raised to 62 from 55, which it is now. How terrible for them! Usually when employers give their employees raises, it’s due to performance, and the fact that by doing a good job, the employee is directly, or indirectly bringing in more revenue for the company. But not so for the city workers. It’s not like the trains are running quicker and more often. No, it’s all about their wants — gimme gimme gimme. Anway, if they are so unhappy with their working conditions, why don’t they look for another job? That’s how it’s done (rightly) in the private sector and I don’t understand why city employees should be allowed to get away with holding the entire city hostage.

The charming Evan Coyne Maloney, whom I had the pleasure of briefly meeting at the Pajamas Media press launch and subsequent party, has an excellent post on the transit strike. He writes:

I do not understand why unions aren’t considered illegal cartels. If I wanted to become a subway train driver, I could not do so without first joining the union, whether I wanted to pay the union dues or not. What’s the difference between that and being forced to pay protection money to the mafia? In either case, the mob or the union “protects” me (or my job), whether I want the protection or not.

Similarly, if a group of merchants got together to decide that they’re going to sell gasoline at $10 a gallon, it would be considered illegal collusion, and the merchants would be prosecuted. So why can individuals band together to fix prices for labor? They are in effect merchants of their work, and they’re colluding, via the union, to subvert the free market and set artificially high prices for what they are selling. And they are now effectively extorting the entire City of New York in order to ensure the perpetuation of their monopoly on the transit labor market.

Right you are, Evan!

Fellow NYC blogger Chad, of Cake or Death also gives the Transit Workers Union a piece of his mind here, and to a lesser degree, here as well.

GOP and the City has a quick breakdown of the TWU’s demands, as well a summary of the starting salaries of these workers, compared to police officers. He has also linked to a blog run by a transit employee, and has included some choice words that New Yorkers have for the strikers in the comment section.

Luckily, a New York State Justice has just slapped the Transit Workers Union with a 1 million dollar a day fine for breaking a state law that says public employees are not allowed to strike. Good!

I guess I agree with Karol, who says that the one good thing to come out of this strike is that people will see the unions for what they really are.

Things are not looking good for GM.

DETROIT (Reuters) – General Motors Corp. said on Monday it would cut 30,000 North American manufacturing jobs and close a dozen plants as it struggles to compete with fast-growing rivals led by Toyota Motor Corp.

The cuts affect about a quarter of the North American factory work force at GM and are the deepest since it eliminated 21 plants and 74,000 jobs over four years beginning in December 1991.

It’s not surprising at all. This is what happens when companies become, essentially welfare providers, as opposed to manufacturing and selling their products.

Keep in mind the following:

* Union retirees from GM get to keep their medical benefits, free of charge, until they die

* GM spends more per car for health care than it does for advertising for that car.

(via BMEWS)

This sounds exactly like Taggart Transcontinental and the 20th Century Motor Corp. in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.

That’s what some members of California labor unions believe. That’s why they are up in arms over Proposition 75.

Mr. Glass is fighting Proposition 75, an initiative that goes before California voters on Nov. 8. It would bar public employee unions from making financial contributions to political candidates or causes without its members’ annual consent to do so.
——–
“Unions all over the country have an investment in this fight because they know that if they can no longer raise money for Democratic candidates and causes, there is no other group on the left that can amass the kind of political war chests that Republicans raise,” says Elizabeth Garrett, a law professor at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, who tracks state initiatives.

Typical victim mentality. In other words, if they don?t collect that money by force, they?ll have nothing. It?s kind of like saying that unless we keep punitively taxing those big bad ?rich? people, poor people will be dying en masse, of starvation.

Here?s a novel suggestion for the union big wigs. How about doing a better job of promoting the Democratic party to your members so that they?ll *want* to give you money?

But that won’t happen, especially when looting is so much easier.