Political Action Archives  April to June 2009
Teamsters News Link: DEBATE ON HEALTH CARE HITS SNAGS AT THE START WASHINGTON POST (June 18, 2009) The debate over a sweeping overhaul of the nation's health-care system got off to a rocky start in the Senate yesterday as lawmakers delayed action on one key bill and engaged in partisan sniping over another. Senate leaders said they are still on track to put a bill on the floor by midsummer, but some Democrats privately acknowledged that piecing together a measure that will expand coverage to the uninsured without breaking the budget is proving excruciatingly difficult -- particularly if the goal is to pass a bill with Republican support.
"A bipartisan bill takes far more time than not," said Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, which had been expected to unveil a package of reforms by tomorrow and hold a committee vote next week. Amid concerns about cost from Republicans and some Democrats, Baucus said he has agreed "to slow things down" and that committee action could be delayed until after the Fourth of July recess. The Finance Committee package is eagerly awaited, because lawmakers, lobbyists and reform advocates believe that panel has the best chance of producing a measure that can win broad support. Baucus is working closely with Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and other Republicans on the panel to hammer out a plan, along with a proposal to pay for it. That effort hit a snag earlier this week when the Congressional Budget Office attached a $1.6 trillion price tag to a preliminary version -- far more than many senators are prepared to spend. The figure shocked key Democrats, who were scrambling yesterday to make adjustments that would slash the price by more than a third. Among the changes under discussion, according to Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.): tightening eligibility for federal subsidies to purchase insurance, which had been set at 400 percent of the federal poverty level; and potentially requiring businesses to pay more if they decide not to provide insurance coverage to their workers. Committee members also were still struggling with the shape of a government-sponsored insurance plan that would be available to people who could not get coverage elsewhere. Republicans are opposed to any government-run plan, though they are willing to consider Conrad's proposal to form insurance cooperatives run by consumers. The panel also had yet to settle on a financing package, though aides said members are looking at imposing a tax on the health premiums millions of families receive through their employers, with any premiums over $17,000 a year being taxed as income beginning in 2013. Setting the cap that high would generate less revenue than Democrats had hoped for, a Finance Committee aide said, forcing them to revisit an idea they had once flatly rejected: President Obama's proposal to tax high-earning families by limiting the value of their itemized deductions. Emerging from a closed-door meeting of the panel, Baucus vowed that the final bill would clock in at less than $1 trillion over the next decade and that the committee would offer a plan to cover the entire cost. "We'll be ready when we're ready," Baucus said, "but we're not there yet." Delicate deal-making also was going on behind the scenes at the White House, where administration officials were talking to drugmakers about voluntarily expanding prescription-drug benefits for Medicare recipients, a move that could win over skeptical seniors as well as their representatives in Congress, said House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.). "That would be a good selling point for the legislation," Hoyer said, offering an "enhancement" to offset the inevitable "downsides" of reform with which "people are going to be upset." Meanwhile, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee was quickly mired in acrimony as it opened debate on a different plan that represents the hopes of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) -- filling in for the ailing chairman, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) -- immediately came under fire from Republicans, who questioned how they could act on a bill that is not yet complete. The measure has been given only a partial price tag by the Congressional Budget Office, which said its provision for expanding coverage would cost $1 trillion over the next 10 years and cover 16 million additional people -- about a third of the estimated 46 million Americans who do not have insurance today. Pointing to the 600-plus page bill and 388 amendments, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said it would be "a joke if we run through this stack of papers." Despite the rancor and the delay, lawmakers in both parties said they remain hopeful that agreement can be reached to move the issue forward. Conrad called the new timetable "much more realistic" -- and more conducive to producing a better final bill. "Delay is not a bad thing if you are striving for some kind of bipartisan agreement," agreed Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.). Asked whether such a deal seems likely, Roberts smiled and said: "Anything is possible."
Teamsters News Link:
CTV
(June 15, 2009) The International Brotherhood of Teamsters, North America's largest Union, will grow by tens of thousands of members this year despite the current economic downturn, the head of the Union said Tuesday. James P. Hoffa, general president of the Teamsters, has managed to grow the Union in the last couple of years to reach a membership of 1.4 million. The Union added 40,000 members — from bus drivers to mechanics to railway workers — in 2008 alone. Hoffa, the son of former Teamsters general president James R. Hoffa, is in Ottawa this week to attend the Teamsters Canada Convention. According to Hoffa, the bad news coming out of the automotive sector, specifically the significant concessions made by Union members as part of the effort to keep companies such as Chrysler and GM afloat, do not suggest that Unions are losing their influence in North America. "If we get a strong economy and we get a rebound, there's going to be an end to these concessions," Hoffa said Tuesday during an interview with Canada AM. He called the auto industry's troubles "unique" and pointed to the fact that a recent labour deal with parcel carrier UPS did not include any labour concessions by the Company's 250,000 unionized workers. Hoffa said he is hopeful that U.S. President Barack Obama will sign the Employee Free Choice Act, which will restore American workers' rights to choose whether they will join a Union. The Act, which was ignored by former U.S. President George W. Bush, has bipartisan support in Congress. Hoffa said the Union would also like to see changes to the North American Free Trade Agreement that would stop companies from closing shop in Canada and the United States to take advantage of cheaper labour in Mexico. Improved labour laws and a re-worked NAFTA agreement "will really help us revitalize the middle class and organize to help more people enjoy the dream of having a good life," Hoffa said. He said his famous father would be proud of the work he is doing to grow the Union and give millions of workers better working conditions. "We're basically carrying on in his work. All of us are dedicated to the Teamsters Union, as he was," Hoffa said. "So there's a lot of work to be done here, these are challenging times, but I think the Teamsters are up to it."
IBT News:
FedEx is the sole beneficiary of a provision that its lobbyists quietly slipped back into legislation in October 1996, making FedEx Express the only freight and package-delivery company in the United States whose non-FM-certified employees are regulated under the Railway Labor Act governing airlines and railroads. "The real victims here are FedEx's own workers," said Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa. "Fred Smith would rather spend millions of dollars on misleading ad campaigns and high-priced lobbyists than allow workers a real chance to form a union.” Employees performing the same Jobs In the same industry should be covered by the same labor laws. A sorter, loader, unloader, driver and courier working for FedEx Express should fall under the National Labor Relations Act, as they do at every other company in the industry. FedEx Is so used to competing on an uneven playing field that it now views equal treatment as a "bailout." The House last month recognized the need to restore fairness to the freight and package delivery industry, voting overwhelmingly to apply one set of rules to all express delivery companies. ''The real bailout here is the bailout that the federal government and the American people hay' given to FedEx over the past several decades," said Ken Hall, Teamsters International Vice President and Package Division Director. "In an economy where the federal and state governments are hurting for revenue, FedEx has consistently refused to pay taxes for its own employees and has even been investigated by IRS, state attorneys general and state governments. American taxpayers are fed up with large, well-connected corporations exploiting our government for special favors." Teamsters News Link: ORGANIZED LABOR’S MISSED OPPORTUNITY Business Week Online (June 5, 2009) Months after helping put Barack Obama in the White House, organized labor's most important unions are sliding into vicious internecine warfare. The strife has become so intense that the senior Democratic leadership is intervening. The Democrats, under pressure from labor to pass legislation that would make it much easier to unionize workplaces, fear the disputes will further erode support for the controversial issue; they also need union support to help secure popular backing for health-care reform. While the business lobby has so far been surprisingly successful at stalling the unionization bill, known as the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), it will have a tougher time getting its way on labor issues and on health care if the unions bring their quarreling to an end.
At the heart of the dispute is a three-way fight between the Service Employees International (SEIU), the country's second-biggest union, and two factions of Unite Here, until recently one of the fastest-growing unions. The two leaders of Unite Here, Bruce Raynor and John Wilhelm, have fought bitterly over strategy and finances. On May 28, Raynor quit the union and joined 100,000 of his followers who had affiliated in March with the SEIU, which is commanded by Andrew L. Stern. The much larger SEIU might now organize the same workers as Unite Here, and could claim a large share of the troubled union's $400 million in assets. Wilhelm is fighting back. "The unified approach that the labor movement hoped for has been derailed by Andy Stern and SEIU," says Wilhelm. Stern vehemently disputes that notion. "I don't think the labor movement has ever worked more closely on an issue than it has on EFCA," he says. Epic struggles inside Big Labor are nothing new. But this fight—plus another clash involving a breakaway chapter of the SEIU in California — comes at a bad time for the Democratic leadership as it prepares for critical legislative efforts. Democratic senators met on June 3 to discuss possible compromises needed to pass EFCA, also known as card check. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has done a highly effective job of stalling the legislation by pressuring moderate Democrats to withhold their support for the bill in its current form, since it would do away with secret ballots at union-organizing votes. Most Democratic senators want to see a compromise that would keep the secret ballot but otherwise make it easier for unions to organize. Stern says he is open to approaches that would garner the 60 votes needed to overcome a potential filibuster, but Wilhelm accuses him of not consulting adequately with other unions. GRASSROOTS SKILLSThe spectacle of union leaders quarreling openly about a bill they consider a top priority doesn't help the Democrats. Says one party official close to top SEIU leaders: "They could use their money to organize politically instead of fighting other unions." The Democrats need the grassroots skills of the SEIU and other unions to push back against the Chamber's shrewd recruitment of business owners to oppose the EFCA. Prominent Democrats and other labor leaders are now getting involved. Sources say Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid met with top union officials to get them to settle their differences. And on May 28, American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten sent a letter to Raynor and Wilhelm, telling them: "This conflict is causing collateral damage…. The longer it continues, the less likely we are to enact a strong Employee Free Choice Act." Stern dismisses the idea that the infighting is derailing labor's progress in Washington. It's a sign of union strength, he argues, that discussions on card check continue. "No other bill could have withstood this kind of opposition and still survived," he says. Still, labor supporters like Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, an advocacy group, are worried. "Any time you have labor fighting, it gives politicians an excuse to buy big business' argument," he says. Stern ripostes that progress is still being made. Labor Secretary Hilda L. Solis and Health & Human Services head Kathleen Sebelius were both championed by the SEIU; White House political director Patrick Gaspard is an SEIU veteran. Obama's appointments to the National Labor Relations Board are expected to vigilantly oversee efforts to form unions and bargain collectively. The next challenge is health care. Labor groups have helped keep a government-funded insurance option — a key union goal — on the table. Union lobbyists have also so far fended off the idea of taxing health-care benefits to fund universal coverage. Some 500 full-time organizers from the SEIU are working to build grassroots support for the union version of health-care reform. Democrats hope a reunified labor movement will do even more.
(June 3, 2009) The United States Legal System deals with the dilemma of how citizens who serve in the Military Service of this Country return to normal society after they have returned home. Teamsters who are in this situation, and their families, should be aware of the law and how it can help them. On May 29, 2009, the IBT Public Services Division sent out a Special News Bulletin on this subject. It is reprinted below: DRIVING THE RIGHTS OF TEAMSTER MEMBERS IN THE MILITARYThe Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) is the federal law that protects employees who serve or have served in the uniformed services. USERRA affects initial employment, as well as reemployment and retention of Teamster members working for public and private employers. It applies to those who have served in the National Guard and Reserve, and active components of the Armed Forces upon release from active duty. Please review the USERRA Resource Guide (warning for those with slow connections--this is a large pdf download!) for further information. You may also wish to consult the special web site which has been made available by the U.S. Department of Defense, that addresses issues involving leave, pay, seniority and other conditions of employment: www.esgr.mil. Teamsters News Link: Mexican drivers, currently banned from operating on U.S. highways outside a 25-mile zone near the southern border, might be making a U-turn and heading back north.
That's the word from Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. The former Illinois congressman says he's been actively lobbying up to 30 former colleagues in the House of Representatives to craft a program that satisfies this country's commitment to the North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA) as well as highway safety. “I hope we can have a Mexican program reinstated,” LaHood told a gathering at the National Press Club. “This is part of NAFTA; this is part of something we need to do. “We've put together a very good proposal. It's being vetted by Congress.” Under NAFTA passed in 1993, the U.S. is required to open its border to both Canadian and Mexican carriers who meet this country's trucking standards. The Canadian border is open; the Mexican border is not. Yielding to pressure from the Teamsters union (who fear loss of jobs) and safety advocates (who fear unsafe Mexican trucks), a small pilot program allowing Mexican-domiciled trucks to deliver freight in this country was yanked last year in an overwhelming vote by the House, who gave a resounding “no” to Mexican trucks. Mexico reacted to what it viewed as discrimination by enacting stiff tariffs on as many as 90 products from the U.S., including some agricultural products. Farm interests complained to the Obama administration, which has been working with Congress to craft a proposal that satisfies the Mexican government as well as U.S. labor and safety interests. LaHood says he is optimistic the House could agree to a modified Mexican truck proposal by summer. The trucking industry is taking a wait-and-see approach. “The secretary is saying he will make the new cross-border trucking plan public soon, and that Congress will approve it relatively quickly,'' American Trucking Associations spokesman Clayton Boyce says. “It remains to be seen how he will reverse the opposition of Congress to cross-border trucking, but he hinted that the Mexican government's punitive tariffs on U.S. agriculture are doing the job.” If there is one thing the lone Republican in the Obama administration seems good at, it's lobbying his former House colleagues. The folksy Republican from Peoria, Ill., is the first to admit he doesn't know much about the nuts-and-bolts of transportation. During his Press Club speech, he openly admitted he had no idea that YRC Worldwide, the nation's largest trucking company, was in deep financial difficulty. Except for the Mexican truck issue, LaHood also steered away from commenting on anything vaguely controversial. But if you want an old Washington hand to steer a testy issue (like Mexican trucks) through Congress, LaHood is very much the man to see. He's a blend of another former Chicago pol, Samuel K. Skinner (the first Bush DOT secretary) and Casey Stengel, the legendary late baseball manager and master of doublespeak. And to top it off, LaHood is pals with Rahm Emmanuel, another former Illinois House member who graduated to President Barack Obama's chief of staff. So besides overseeing the auto industry bailout, investigating plane crashes, increasing the mileage standards of cars and working on reauthorization bills covering highways and aviation, this transportation secretary also is the man with deep pockets. Under President Obama's $789 billion stimulus bill — formally called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — LaHood is the point person for distribution of $48.1 billion for highway, road, bridge and airport construction and repairs. Nearly one-third of that — $13 billion — already has been awarded, LaHood says. “When it comes to rolling out the money, we're actually ahead of schedule,” LaHood says. LaHood says the highway portion of the stimulus package is flowing at a rate of $4 billion a month — nearly twice as fast as traditional highway dollars are spent by Washington. “Let me repeat that — we're sending money out the door nearly twice as fast as we normally do,” LaHood emphasizes. He says more than 3,600 highway, road, bridge and airport projects are in progress. The Federal Highway Administration has obligated more than $11 billion; Federal Aviation Administration has spent more than $1 billion on over 300 airport construction projects; Federal Trans Administration similarly has awarded $1.1 billion. High-speed rail is getting an $8 billion infusion for the first time. A large chunk of $1.5 billion in discretionary spending will go to ports to upgrade their intermodal connections, he says. Surprisingly, LaHood says, Washington is spending money wisely. “Bids on many stimulus projects continue to come in well below estimates,” he says. “That means more funds will be available for more transportation projects.” Transparency is big with LaHood. He mentioned a DOT Web site to track funding with an interactive map to discover which transportation projects are being funded for how much and where. It's at www.dot.gov/recovery and click on “Interactive Map.” Teamsters News Link:TRADE AND HARD TIMES  New York Times
(May 26, 2009) Foreign trade has been a potent force for good over more than half a century. It propelled Japan's emergence from the ashes of World War II and helped it become an industrial powerhouse. It is the cornerstone of development strategies from China to Brazil. It is what links countries all over the world in a network of production that underpins global prosperity. Today, trade is collapsing, one more casualty of the global financial crisis. That is especially bad news for countries that are dependent on trade for economic growth, including many developing nations that had nothing to do with the financial mess. Exports from the United States declined 30 percent and imports 34 percent in the first quarter of the year from the previous three months. Imports into countries that use the euro from outside the area were down 21 percent compared with the first quarter of last year. At this rate, the World Trade Organization's dire projection in March that global trade would decline 9 percent this year will soon start to look outright boastful. The drop in trade is spreading economic weakness across the world, as one country's drop in imports translates into a fall in exports, and production, in another. Japan, whose economy depends heavily on sales to the United States, saw exports plunge 45.5 percent in March compared with March of 2008. In the first quarter, its economy contracted 15.2 percent at an annual rate, the worst performance since 1955. Exports from China and Brazil both fell 20 percent in the first quarter, compared with the year before. Mexico — linked tightly to the United States market through Nafta — saw exports collapse almost 29 percent while the Mexican economy contracted 21.5 percent at an annual rate, more than three times the rate of decline in the United States. The main forces clobbering trade seem to be the fall in demand and investment that started in the United States and Europe, and the seizing up of trade finance, which funds up to 90 percent of the world's merchandise trade, worth some $16 trillion. The impact has been magnified by the far-flung nature of multinational companies' production networks — where a factory in one country makes parts that are used by a plant in another country. As demand for their products has declined, the pain has moved across countries up the chain of production. The thawing of credit markets has helped resuscitate trade finance some. Governments of the 20 biggest economies agreed to nudge it along, ensuring $250 billion of trade finance would be available over the next two years. They should keep those pledges, and they may have to do more. Protectionism also remains a serious danger. With voters insisting that politicians protect their own, many countries have already imposed new restrictions on imports. So far they have been relatively modest. But as unemployment continues to rise, the temptation — and the pressure — will grow. Earlier this year, the Global Monitoring Report by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund noted that “a pattern is beginning to emerge of increases in import licensing, import tariffs and surcharges, and trade remedies to support industries facing difficulties early on in the crisis.” Of particular concern are attempts by governments — including in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Switzerland — to ensure that banks bailed out by taxpayers favor domestic borrowers. While the Obama administration has not imposed similar requirements, there is pressure from Congress and the public to make American banks that receive TARP money lend primarily, if not exclusively, to American borrowers. That would be a mistake. One of the sure ways to prolong the global recession is to create even more barriers to global trade.
Change to Win Report:
(May 25, 2009) WASHINGTON, DC – While testifying recently before the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections regarding stronger Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) enforcement, Change to Win Health and Safety Coordinator Eric Frumin called for stronger criminal sanctions for ignoring safety hazards that lead to a worker’s death or serious injury. Frumin singled out Waste Management, Inc., the industrial laundry giant Cintas Corporation, steel pipe manufacturer McWane, Inc., and BP North America as examples of employers whose failure to fix known hazards led to fatalities. The stepson of a Florida Waste Management mechanic who was gruesomely killed on the job testified as well. Jesus Rojas told the Subcommittee that his stepfather Raul Figueroa was nearly cut in half by a malfunctioning hydraulic arm on a garbage truck –- and that the company attempted to backdate safety records after the incident. OSHA had cited Waste Management repeatedly, at locations throughout the country, for serious hazards. The House Subcommittee held the hearing to examine a March 31, 2009 report by the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Labor regarding lapses under OSHA’s Enhanced Enforcement Program. In addition to stronger criminal penalties, Frumin called for more comprehensive corporate-wide reporting of hazards, expanded OSHA investigatory capability, more national OSHA alerts on companies with “high severity” hazards, and enhanced corporate follow up. “Companies like Waste Management should not be allowed to cut corners and compromise safety. They need to provide enough staff to make sure workers are safe on the job,” Rojas said during a powerful address to the Committee. “They need to be punished when they backdate safety records to cover up flaws in their safety procedures.” Cintas worker Eleazar Torres-Gomez was killed in 2007 in the company’s Tulsa, Oklahoma laundry after being pulled into a 300 degree dryer by an unguarded conveyor. OSHA cited the company’s Long Island facility for the same violations in 2005. Internal memos made public by the Wall Street Journal show that Cintas upper-management was aware that this lack of guarding could be fatal. Frumin also called on Congress to pass the Corporate Injury, Illness, and Fatality Reporting Act introduced by Rep. Phil Hare, D-Ill., recently. “OSHA needs to know where corporate leaders are hiding the evidence of mismanagement,” said Frumin. “The EEP still lacks the proper focus on multiple, severe workplace hazards and violations, and needs further strengthening.” “Enforcement after workers die is not really enforcement at all. We need real change,” continued Frumin. “That is the change America voted for last year, and we are more than willing to work with Congress, with responsible employers, and with others to see that American workers receive that change.” ABOUT CHANGE TO WINChange to Win is a six million member partnership of seven unions founded in 2005 to represent workers in the industries and occupations of the 21st century economy. Change to Win committed to restoring the American Dream for a new generation of workers — wages that can support a family, affordable health care, a secure retirement, and the opportunity for the future. Links to the seven affiliated Change to Win unions’ websites follow, in case you would like more information about them individually: International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Service Employees International Union, UNITE HERE, United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Laborers' International Union of North America, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America and United Farm Workers of America.
Teamsters News Link:
“There may be areas of compromise to get this bill done,” Obama said today at a town hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “That's what we're working on.” Right now, he said, “there aren't enough votes in the Senate to get it passed.” Obama reiterated support for the so-called card check legislation, formally known as Employee Free Choice Act. A key opponent, Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, suggested in Washington that a deal on the measure may be possible. The bill, which would allow workers to form a union when a majority signs cards requesting one rather than through a secret-ballot election, is a top priority for the unions that backed Obama and other Democratic candidates in the election. Business groups are opposed. Labor officials say they are encouraged by Specter's suggestion that a compromise may be in the works. Specter, who maintained opposition to the current bill last month when he switched from the Republican Party to the Democratic Party, told the Associated Press that “prospects are pretty good” for negotiations to craft a bill that he could support. UNIONS ‘ENCOURAGED'“We are encouraged that Specter acknowledged the current broken labor system and Pennsylvania workers will continue to make the case to him for why we need the Employee Free Choice Act,” said Eddie Vale, spokesman for the AFL-CIO, the country's largest federation of unions. The bill's opponents, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say it would strip workers' right to a secret-ballot vote and potentially expose employees who don't want a union to intimidation from labor officials. Unions contend that anti-union management take advantage of a lengthy election process to wage a campaign against workers who want to organize. The bill calls for tougher penalties on employers who intimidate workers who try to organize and provides for government arbitration should management and employees fail to agree on a first labor contract. Specter has said he's against the “card check” and arbitration provisions, though supports alternatives, such as speeding up the voting process. BILL OPPONENTSThe Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest business lobbying group, had vowed to spend $20 million this year to kill the card-check bill. Companies such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. also are fighting the measure. It has been opposition from some Democrats that has severely undercut prospects for passage. Several senators who previously backed the measure, including Democrat Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, have cited the recession as a reason they can't support it now. Senator Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat who is the bill's chief sponsor, said last week the card-check part of the legislation would probably have to be dropped to win passage of the remaining provisions. Earlier this week, Vice President Joe Biden told union members that the economy can't truly revive without strengthening organized labor and he urged lawmakers to pass the legislation.
Teamsters News Link:
Specter and potential Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., are key to obtaining the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster, said Justus Fortado, staff representative for the Service Employees International Union local 73 in Illinois and Indiana.
If enacted, the act will affect local businesses where employees might be trying to unionize. "If you just ask around Champaign you'll hear about people trying to organize in health care and hotel industry," said Helena Worthen, professor in Labor and Employment Relations. Fortado said a Champaign Meijer employee called him about information on union organizing. "No sooner than people even started buzzing about unions there the managers called them into the back for a mandatory meeting," he said. A call to Meijer requesting comment was not returned. Fortado said these mandatory meetings often entail implicit threats of job termination and are a common technique to counter unionization. Worthen said a poll conducted about a year ago indicated 60 percent of American workers would like to be represented by a union — compared with 12 percent represented, including the public sector. "That's a lot of people. Why aren't they in a union? The reason why is because people get fired for trying," she said. The Employee Free Choice Act would counteract this problem by placing penalties on employers who fire employees demonstrating support for unions. "This is basically the same law that we've always had, but it's got teeth in it," Worthen said, referring to the 1935 National Labor Relations Act. The act would allow employees to choose between public and private ballots when voting on unionization. The private option is card checking, which allows employees to sign a card with the union forming if at least 51 percent voted in favor. The act would place the option of using a "secret ballot election" in the hands of employees as opposed to employers, Worthen said. In the Illinois public sector, employees can already choose which type of ballot they want to use. Worthen said the transparency provided by the card check election is why there have not been serious labor disputes. Many elected officials disagree and see the act as opening workers up to coercion by employers and union leaders. "The right to a secret ballot is a sacred right in this country," said Phil Bloomer, press secretary for Rep. Tim Johnson, R-Ill., who voted against the act. Bloomer, a former union official for the Communications Workers of America, said card check coercion was never a problem. "I think it would be a much greater problem if everyone declared themselves openly," he said. Worthen said the debate over which type of ballot to use distracts from the fact that the secret ballots are not being eliminated, but put into the hands of employees. She said employees who are fired for unionizing rely on openness as protection. "If you are in a workplace and you try to form a union and you get fired, the only defense you've got is that the employer knew you were forming a union," she said. "These days people have to demonstrate to the employer, they don't try to hide it."
Teamsters News Link:
Maxwell will be replaced by the organization's current board chairman David Bonior and deputy director Kimberly Freeman. American Rights at Work is the leading labor coalition pushing Congress to enact the Employee Free Choice Act, a measure that would make it easier for workers to join labor unions. The legislation suffered a setback earlier this year when several senators who voted for it in the past reversed course and said they would oppose it this year. However, labor believes that it can still prevail. Support for the legislation “is as strong as ever,” said Bonior, a former senior House Democrat. Although Maxwell had spent much of her time advocating for the Employee Free Choice Act, she was not a registered lobbyist. Therefore, she was not precluded from serving in the administration by Mr. Obama's tough anti-lobbyist employment policy. Those rules have caused concern among lobbyist for corporations and nonprofits alike who have been disqualified from working for the Obama administration. Much of the work of American Rights at Work involved television advertisements. The group retains one registered lobbyist. Labor opponents called Maxwell's appointment “unfortunate.” Justin Wilson, the managing director of the industry-backed Center for Union Facts, said this is the “latest example of the outsized influence labor leaders hold over President Obama and the Department of Labor.”
Teamsters News Link:
Austin, who wouldn't provide specifics, heads up Local 235 of the Graphic Communications Conference of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which represents workers in the printing and graphic arts industry, including commercial printers, specialty printers, corrugated box manufacturers and envelope-makers. He listed organizing efforts in Liberty, Clinton and Blue Springs in the past five years that had strong initial support from workers but fizzled under current rules. Operating under rules proposed in the EFCA would have created a much different labor picture in the Midwest. “I'm a strong believer in the labor movement,” said Austin, who got involved in 1966 and has been a full-time union officer for 22 years. “This EFCA is long, long overdue.” The legislation, now before Congress, would allow union certification if a majority of employees in a workplace sign up, speed the negotiation of first contracts with the threat of binding arbitration and stiffen penalties for employers that exceed limits in resisting organization. Printing is just one local industry that could see a jump in efforts to organize should Congress pass the EFCA. Other likely candidates include the service and entertainment sectors, health care, manufacturing and even emerging green industries. Bridgette Williams, president of the Greater Kansas City AFL-CIO, said hotel workers probably would try to organize if the act were passed. The area's one union hotel — Argosy Casino Hotel & Spa in Riverside — was the site for a state AFL-CIO convention in September, but it doesn't have the capacity for larger regional, national and international events, Williams said. “There are no union hotels in Kansas City, which is a significant revenue loss to this area,” she said. Several organization campaigns in the health care sector have been thwarted but would make significant gains under the EFCA, she said. Robyn Hoffman, a senior nurse at Centerpoint Medical Center in Independence, said the EFCA could have provided just the antidote to drawn-out efforts to negotiate a contract. In November 2007, nurses voted 167-103, with 66 abstaining, to join Nurses United Local 5126, an affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers. Ongoing efforts to get a contract have lasted nearly a year and a half; on April 23-24, nurses were scheduled to vote on whether to decertify the union. Hoffman, a member of the negotiating team, estimated that she's put 1,000 volunteer hours into the effort in the past year and a half. “If the EFCA had been in place, we'd already have a contract,” she said. “Instead, we're facing all this stress.” The legislation would help future organizers, she said. And if the nurses' effort at Centerpoint survives the decertification vote, it could help them get their first contract. Dealers at Argosy attempted to organize more than a year ago. About 65 percent had approved organization in the signup; the effort lost 118-68 at an election nearly two months later, said Rick Klingenberg, who worked with the dealers. “Organizing right now in Kansas City is pretty rough,” said Klingenberg, vice president of United Auto Workers Local 710. Industries that have been successful at resisting unionization would be likely targets if the EFCA passed, said Donna Ginther, director of the Center for Economic & Business Analysis at the University of Kansas. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. ranks at the top of that list, she said. Efforts also probably would spread to construction jobs, many of which are filled by immigrants who have been hesitant to vocally support a union. Judy Ancel, director of the University of Missouri-Kansas City's Institute for Labor Studies, added the finance and banking industry, insurance companies and Sprint Nextel Corp. to the list of potential organizing targets. However, Ginther said, the economy could mute the effect of organization efforts. “This is a really terrible time to think about unions,” Ginther said. “The economy is so soft right now that I don't think employees are thinking about getting concessions from an employer — I think they're thinking about whether they're going to keep their jobs.” And as the globalization and deregulation of the past quarter-century have weighed on U.S. companies' profits, union formation has shifted to the public sector, she said. As of 2006, union members made up 7.4 percent of the private-sector work force and 36 percent in the public sector. Ancel disagreed that the economy would harm organization efforts. “In the 1930s, when the economy was far worse, workers began organizing because they simply couldn't survive,” she said.
U.S. TRADE CHIEF RON KIRK SAYS OBAMA WILL PUSH AHEAD ON PACTS New York Times (April 24, 2009) In his first policy speech, the top United States trade official said Thursday that President Obama would work to revive global trade talks and complete three bilateral accords as part of an aggressive trade agenda.
The administration plans “a new paradigm” on trade, the trade representative, Ron Kirk, told an audience at Georgetown University. “We're looking at everything,” he said. Rejecting fears of a turn to protectionism or a softening of support for free trade, Mr. Kirk said: “Now is not the time to turn inward. Now is not the time to be timid. Now is the time to revive global trade.” Mr. Kirk vowed to press ahead on three bilateral trade agreements negotiated by the Bush administration. He said there was strong bipartisan support in Congress for an agreement with Panama — suggesting that its completion might come first — but that the administration was also working to advance the somewhat more controversial pacts with Colombia and South Korea. Mr. Obama had criticized Colombia during his presidential campaign because of violence there against labor activists. But his administration has pointed to progress there since then. On the accord with Seoul, United States auto manufacturers question whether it would adequately open South Korea's auto market. Mr. Kirk also said Thursday that he would consult with fellow World Trade Organization members about “proactive, positive options” for reviving the Doha round of global trade negotiations, which broke down in July over differences between advanced and developing countries on agriculture. Frank Vargo, vice president for international affairs of the National Association of Manufacturers, welcomed Mr. Kirk's specificity in saying that fast-developing countries — like China, Brazil and India, though he did not name them — needed to show a willingness to work toward a Doha compromise. Mr. Kirk, he said, “makes it plain that the less-developing countries are going to have to step up to the plate and do more.” Mr. Vargo's group supports that approach. He said he was heartened by the sense that “the U.S. is going to be exercising strong leadership” on Doha. Despite deep skepticism about prospects for reviving Doha, Mr. Vargo said that the global economic crisis might change that. Countries like Brazil, India and China should realize, he said, that “if the world turns protectionist, it'll be against them. They need a successful Doha round.” But Mr. Kirk promised strong support for trade with the poorer developing countries. He also said he would rigorously enforce trade agreements and help protect American workers who lose jobs because of trade. His promise to increase export efforts by small- and medium-size American companies represented a first from a United States trade representative, Mr. Vargo said. Mr. Kirk earned a reputation as a free trade advocate in Dallas, where he joined other political leaders in calling in 2000 for permanently normalizing trade relations with China, which Congress voted the following year to do. But his specific views on current trade issues are not yet well known. The president is being tugged in competing directions by pro-trade forces in both parties and by labor and environmental advocates, largely on the Democratic side. “Their dilemma is, no matter what they do they're going to get hit by a fairly significant number of people,” said William A. Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council. But as a former trade official in the Clinton administration, he suggested the best approach was simply to chart a course and move ahead. Some of Mr. Obama's campaign talk has also raised concerns among trade supporters. Tapping into antitrade feelings in critical states during the campaign, he had criticized the North American Free Trade Agreement. But American exports have fallen 16 percent during the current economic crisis, as Mr. Kirk noted, and Mr. Obama has joined world leaders in cautioning against protectionism.
Teamsters News Link:
He alluded to the Sermon on the Mount to describe the stronger, more fair economy he envisions: "There is a parable at the end of the Sermon on the Mount that tells the story of two men," he said. "The first built his house on a pile of sand, and it was destroyed as soon as the storm hit. But the second is known as the wise man, for when '...the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house...it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.' We cannot rebuild this economy on the same pile of sand. We must build our house upon a rock." The speech is important for what it reveals about Obama's understanding of the task ahead — building a new economy out of the ashes of our failed one. But real and grounded concerns about the administration's bank bailout plan remain. As Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz wrote recently in a New York Times op-ed the Obama administration's plan is "far worse than nationalization: it is ersatz capitalism, the privatizing of gains and the socializing of losses...the kind of Rube Goldberg device that Wall Street loves — clever, complex and nontransparent, allowing huge transfers of wealth to the financial markets...." Other good thinkers share this view, including Paul Krugman, Simon Johnson, William Greider and Robert Reich. While Obama's speech lays out some strong principles for a new foundation, the administration's financial team remains unwilling to understand that we're not just going through a financial crisis or a panic, but the failure of a whole model of banking. We are living amid the blowback of an overgrown financial sector that did more harm than good. As The Nation has argued we need a new banking system — smaller and more diverse and responsible to the public interest. Creating this new system is where public resources should be committed, not to saving banks that are "too big to fail". We should create public banks and non-profit savings and lending cooperatives to serve as an important check on private commercial banks. We need to make banks the servants — not the masters — of our economy. Only when we do that will a new regulatory framework do what's needed; it would be a mistake to simply re-regulate the shadow banking system which got us into this mess. If this realization begins to sink in through the failure of the current plan — and Obama's commitment to pragmatism and experimentation suggests he might be willing to move to Plan B with sufficient pressure from mobilized citizens and thinkers who envision a different model than the Summers/Geithner approach — then we're on the road to laying the foundation, the rock, for a new economy. But creating that new economy will require what Obama himself might call "tough choices" — and some different "pillars" from the ones he outlined today. We need affordable health care; pensions above social security; and sustained public investment in areas vital to high wages in a global economy — affordable colleges, world-class public schools, and a 21st century infrastructure. We need to restructure — not just re-regulate — the financial sector so that banking is once again a "boring" occupation devoted to making loans to the real economy, not peddling exotic and (as we now know) toxic instruments. We need to break-up and restructure major banks that are on life support and "too big to fail." And we need to fight for the Employee Free Choice Act — so that workers are able to organize and bargain collectively, and the middle class is rebuilt and strengthened. The mother of all fights lies ahead — beyond the first 100 days — as lobbies mobilize to halt the reforms needed to rebuild and reconstruct a new economy of shared prosperity. The drug and insurance companies, the business lobby, multinationals that seek to retain tax havens — they will all warn ominously of massive job losses, failed businesses, and much suffering for each and every needed reform offered. Despite the flaws of the bank bailout, President Obama has signaled that we can work toward a new economy. But it will require a massive mobilization of citizens. We've had thirty years of the markets-know-best-and-are-self-correcting, government get out of the way, let CEOs rule, maximize executive profits--dogma. The catastrophic results are in. Now begins the fight to rebuild a balanced economy in which government is on the side of the people, corporations are held accountable, and workers are empowered. Long-term challenges should be seized, not ignored--lest we remain on shifting sands. Teamsters News Link:
Truckers, deckhands and others requiring access to secure areas at ports paid $132 apiece for the high-tech ID cards that have their fingerprints embedded in them. But the Homeland Security Department, which is overseeing the program, says it still lacks fingerprint readers that can be used reliably in harsh weather. A senior lawmaker and a labor official say readers should have been installed at the nation's seaports to prevent people from using fake IDs. Congress ordered the cards in late 2002 based on concerns that terrorists might try to blow up busy seaports or smuggle bombs, weapons or operatives into the country inside cargo containers. Homeland Security was supposed to issue orders this month requiring ports to install card-reading machines, under a 2006 law. The order will not be issued until late 2010 and it may exempt low-risk ports from having card readers, Coast Guard Cmdr. Dave Murk said.
"Most people would say it's real dumb to have security cards that rely so much on technology and yet you fail to provide a reader for the card," said House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss. "That was not the intent of the program." Chuck Mack of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters said, "It's grossly unfair to spend that kind of money and not have the readers in place." Maurine Fanguy, head of the ID program, said the cards improve security even without the fingerprint scanners, because they are issued after workers' criminal history and immigration status are checked. The cards, which have holograms and microprinting that can be read only with magnification, are hard to forge, Fanguy said. Port workers previously used driver's licenses or port ID cards. "This is a much more secure credential," Fanguy said. About 1 million port workers and 200,000 mariners have received the cards. Homeland Security had proposed in 2006 that ports be required to install readers, but decided to delay the idea when business groups said more time was needed to make sure the readers work. "If this equipment fails, especially at a busy port, that's going to have the effect of shutting down commerce," said Aaron Ellis, spokesman for the American Association of Port Authorities. Installing card readers could cost $1 billion, Ellis said. Card-reader testing will begin soon at seven sites, including ports in Los Angeles and New York. Christopher Koch of the World Shipping Council said the gradual approach to new ID cards and readers has "avoided major disruptions" at ports.
Teamsters News Link:
(April 8, 2009) At an April 6 meeting in Arkansas, Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) clarified her position on the Employee Free Choice Act (S. 560, H.R. 1409), stating that she cannot support the bill in its current form but would consider compromise legislation. “While I may not have been clear about my position in the past, I am stating today that I cannot support Employee Free Choice Act in its current form and I can't support efforts to bring it to Senate consideration in its current form,” Lincoln said in response to a question following a speech to the Little Rock Political Animals Club. “I will consider alternatives that have the support of both business and labor,” according to a statement of her remarks provided to BNA by an aide of the senator. EFCA, introduced in the Senate March 10 (45 DLR AA-1, 3/11/09), would amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish a procedure where the National Labor Relations Board would certify a union as the bargaining representative of employees if a majority of employees of the unit signs valid union authorization cards. The legislation would allow unions to continue to petition for NLRB-supervised secret ballot elections, if they choose, once 30 percent of the workers have signed union authorization cards. Under EFCA, parties that are unable to reach a first contract within 90 days of collective bargaining could refer the dispute to mediation by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. If FMCS is unable to bring the parties to agreement within 30 days, the dispute then would be referred to binding arbitration. In addition, the bill would provide for increased penalties for labor law violations by employers. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), who in 2007 voted to allow debate on the bill, formally announced his opposition to the measure March 24, dealing unions a significant blow in their efforts to advance the bill in the Senate (55 DLR AA-1, 3/25/09). Democratic supporters of EFCA had initially counted on Lincoln's support of the bill, but she has remained “on the fence” about the issue. Several other Senate Democrats also have expressed varying concerns with EFCA. Sens. Thomas Carper (D-Del.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), and Mark Udall (D-Colo.) have all expressed some concerns with the bill. A Senate aide told BNA April 3 that Democratic supporters of EFCA are likely to begin drafting compromise language because support for the original bill has eroded over the past several weeks (63 DLR A-14, 4/6/09). The aide declined to specify what would be included in the potential compromise. LINCOLN SAYS EFCA ‘DIVIDING US’In her remarks at the Arkansas gathering, Lincoln said that her legislative priorities are focused on getting “Arkansas and our nation back on track economically,” via “job creation, health care reform, energy reform, investment in public education and tax cuts for middle class working families.” “Even though the Employee Free Choice Act is not on this priority list, it is receiving a lot of attention in the news and is the focus of many of my conversations with constituents on both sides of the issue,” she said. “I consider both the labor and the business communities to be my friends,” Lincoln said. “However, now that we need all hands on deck, including business and labor, to get our economy moving again, this issue is dividing us,” she said. AFL-CIO MOVING FORWARD WITH GRASSROOTS EFFORTSAn AFL-CIO spokesman told BNA April 7 that Lincoln's statement relates to altering EFCA more than abandoning the core tenets of the bill, and said that the federation will continue with a series of grassroots events in support of EFCA. “This is political science 101. A bill is introduced and then Congress works through the process of committees, amendments, and debates and most of the time the final bill is different from when it started,” Eddie Vale, AFL-CIO spokesman, said. During the congressional recess, more than 300 events are planned across the country to mobilize support for EFCA, Vale said. “This massive grassroots mobilization shows that working people really want and need passage of real labor law reform in 2009,” AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said in an April 7 statement. “Without workers' freedom to bargain for better wages and benefits, our economy can't be rebuilt for everyone.” Vale said that AFL-CIO is “continuing to talk to senators to build 60 votes” for a bill that stays true to the three main principles of the current EFCA legislation. Those principles include workers having the choice to form a union and bargain free from intimidation, an end to delays so that “companies can't just stall to stop workers' choice,” and penalties for violating the law,” Vale said. BUSINESS GROUPS REMAIN OPPOSED TO EFCAKeith Smith, director of employment and labor policy at the National Association of Manufacturers, told BNA April 7 that NAM “appreciates Sen. Lincoln making a careful review of the bill” and recognizing that EFCA “won't result in economic growth.” While EFCA is “far from dead,” there is “growing bipartisan opposition” to the bill, Smith said. Smith said that NAM is opposed to EFCA entirely, and would not support a compromise bill because “EFCA is fundamentally flawed legislation” that would bring “catastrophic harm to manufacturing employers.” Meanwhile, on April 6 five minority business associations launched a campaign to oppose EFCA, including the National Black Chamber of Commerce; the National Association of Black Hotel Owners, Operators and Developers; the Asian American Hotel Owners Association; the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and the Latino Coalition. EFCA, if enacted, “will kill thousands of enterprises and lay off workers like no recession could,” Harry C. Alford, president of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, said in an April 6 statement. “And denying workers the right to secret ballot elections is undemocratic, plain and simple.” Andy Ingraham of the National Association of Black Hotel Owners agreed, calling EFCA the “most important piece of legislation that can have a negative impact on African American hotel ownership.” Teamsters News Link: PELOSI SEES MEXICAN TRUCK PROGRAM’S REVIVAL AS UNLIKELY
(April 6, 2009) House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) cast doubt Friday on the possibility that Congress would revive a program that allows Mexican truckers to operate in the U.S. Congress killed the program last month, prompting Mexico to hike tariffs on about 90 U.S. imports including produce, red wine and consumer goods. "I don't see a change coming," Pelosi said Friday in a roundtable discussion with regional reporters. "The president may have some other views, and we'll see what he has to say about it. But I don't see any change." The White House has tried to end the trade dispute by assigning Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood to design a program that meets North American Free Trade Agreement regulations but is palatable to lawmakers. U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said Friday that the administration has assured Mexico it will try to resolve the dispute "sooner rather than later." But Kirk wasn't sure there was a way to persuade Mexico to drop the tariffs, short of Congress lifting the restrictions. The Teamsters union and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association told LaHood this week that they remain opposed to Mexican trucks transporting goods on U.S. highways, citing concerns about safety and a lack of regulation in Mexico. "They will continue to find hurdles because they are philosophically opposed to NAFTA and because they are opposed to competition from Mexican drivers with our own drivers," said Janet Kavinoky, director of transportation infrastructure for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who attended a meeting with LaHood this week. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association says Mexico should improve the data it keeps on accidents and citations for its truckers. It also says U.S. truckers won't go south of the border now because of drug-related violence in Mexico. "The idea this trade agreement is reciprocal in any way, shape or form is lunacy," said Todd Spencer, executive vice president of the independent drivers association, which represents U.S. professional truckers. "U.S. trucks aren't safe south of the border, and Mexico can't assure anything in that area." Kirk, a former Dallas mayor, said that Mexico had the right to retaliate under NAFTA rules. He said Congress ignored the "quiet objections" of his office and the White House when it killed the program. Mexico levied the highest tariff on imported grapes, which mostly come from California, the home state of Pelosi and many other powerful Democrats in Congress. The duties target about $2.4 billion worth of U.S. exports. "The reality is that we have to make sure that whatever restraints that we put on trade are rules-based, are science-based and, to the degree that we can, are not just driven by emotional or just purely political factors," Kirk said.
Teamsters News Link:
Although Carper supports bringing the bill to the floor for debate, the senator would not support final passage of the bill if the card check language remained, according to a Carper aide. In a statement, Carper explained his opposition to the card check provisions. “I do have some reservations about the section of the bill that provides for card check elections,” Carper said. “Card check elections are not a reliable way to determine the true wishes of employees, while the secret ballot method remains the fairest way to determine whether the employees in a workplace truly want to be represented by a union. Nonetheless, because of the vital importance of this issue to so many Americans, I believe this bill deserves to come to the floor of the Senate for debate.” Carper's aide said the senator's position on this issue has been the same for several years and that each year the Senate leadership asks him to reconsider his stance. The portion of the bill Carper objects to would amend the National Labor Relations Act to establish a procedure where the National Labor Relations Board would certify a union as the bargaining representative of employees if a majority of employees of the unit signs valid union authorization cards. The proposed legislation also would allow unions to continue to petition for NLRB-supervised secret ballot elections, if they choose, once 30 percent of the workers have signed union authorization cards. Carper is an active supporter, however, of EFCA's provisions dealing with increased fines for employers who unlawfully fire employees involved in organizing or other union activity. The legislation also would amend the NLRA to provide triple back pay to employees who are unlawfully discharged or discriminated against while involved in union activities during an organizing campaign or in the period leading up to a first contract. And civil penalties of up to $20,000 per violation could be imposed if an employer is found to have willfully or repeatedly violated employees' rights during an organizing campaign or while bargaining for a first contract. Under the measure, the NLRB could seek injunctive relief in federal court when there is reasonable cause to believe that the employer has discharged or discriminated against employees, made threats to discharge or discriminate, or interfered with employee rights to organize or negotiate a first contract. The measure also would allow parties that are unable to reach a first contract within 90 days of collective bargaining to refer the dispute to mediation by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. If the FMCS is unable to bring the parties to agreement within 30 days, the dispute then would be referred to binding arbitration. In addition, the bill would provide for increased penalties for labor law violations by employers. List of 'Fence-Riders' Grows Since SpecterCarper joins the growing list of Democratic senators considered “soft” on the issue and not fully supportive of the bill as written. The list includes Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), and Mark Udall (D-Colo.). These senators became more vocal on their positions after Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) announced his opposition and likely dashed Democrats' hopes of reaching the crucial 60-vote threshold they will need to move the bill through the Senate (55 DLR AA-1, 3/25/09). Republican lawmakers and business groups strongly oppose the legislation, calling the bill a job-killing assault on the democratic right to a secret ballot election. Democratic lawmakers and union groups say they believe the legislation is necessary to level the playing field for union organizers and boost the economy as low-wage workers would see increased pay and benefits as the direct result of an increase in union representation. EFCA Effect on African AmericansMeanwhile, national civil rights leaders April 2 held a media conference call urging EFCA passage as a means to increase the income of African American workers. Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR) President Wade Henderson hosted the press call with NAACP President Benjamin Jealous, Executive Director of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation Melanie L. Campbell, and Steven Pitts, University of California Berkeley Labor Center economist. “The Employee Free Choice Act will empower African Americans and all Americans to join and organize unions; to bargain for better pay, benefits and career opportunities; and to take their place in the great American middle class,“ Henderson said. Henderson told reporters that African American union-represented workers earn 28 percent more than their nonunion counterparts. He said that African Americans represented by unions are about 16 percent more likely to have health insurance than nonunion workers. Pitts observed that African American families have experienced “weak income growth” from 1973 to 2007. “While this country in general — and the black community in particular — face a severe economic crisis, one long-term source of this crisis is the inadequate spending power on the part of working families,“ Pitts said. ”We must use this time as a chance to fix the economy so that it works for working families.” The bill was introduced in Congress March 10 (45 DLR AA-1, 3/11/09). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TEAMSTERS CANADA BACKGROUND
Ken Hall, Teamsters International Vice President and Package Division Director, noted that “American taxpayers are fed up with large, well-connected corporations exploiting our government for special favors."
John
Helena Worthen, a Labor professor at the University of Illinois, earned a Ph.D. in Literacy and Policy, Organization and Management at the University of California Berkeley in 1997. She got a Master of Arts in Education at the UCB in 1993, a Master of Landscape Architecture at the UCB in 1975, a Master of Arts in English at Stanford University in 1974, and a Bachelor of Arts in English at Harvard University in 1965.
