Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Vaporizing PUBLIC Employee Unions

Ray-Gun

Hasta La Vista!!!

" Wisconsin is not broke. " ~ Some Rich Fat Guy ~

Whatever rich fat guy, but who asked you anyway. The election is over. You lose, we win.

~ By: Larry Walker, Jr. ~

While state and local government employee unions (aka. public unions) clutch desperately to what they falsely perceive to be a God-given right to organize, pro football players are planning to de-unionize. You see, the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA) has legal options under federal law, while state and local government workers have none. Public workers exist to serve the public, and are compensated from tax dollars, not from profits earned in the private sector.

“The National Labor Relations Act or Wagner Act (P.L. 74-198, 49 Stat. 449, codified as amended at 29 U.S.C. § 151–169) is a 1935 United States federal law that limits the means with which employers may react to workers in the private sector who create labor unions, engage in collective bargaining, and take part in strikes and other forms of concerted activity in support of their demands. The Act does not apply to workers who are covered by the Railway Labor Act, agricultural employees, domestic employees, supervisors, federal, state or local government workers, independent contractors and some close relatives of individual employers.”

As for NFL players, decertifying the union means firing the NFLPA as their bargaining agent, which will prevent NFL owners from locking out the players when the existing collective bargaining agreement expires. Any lockout at that point would be a violation of federal antitrust law. Decertifying will also allow individual players to sue the NFL and their respective teams. The tactic has worked before, resulting in NFL players gaining free agent rights.

On the other hand, state and local government servants in Wisconsin and other states don't have this option or any others. You see, public servants are not covered by federal labor relations laws. They have only been allowed to unionize under state laws granting them make-believe rights. In reality, all it would take to completely do away with public employee unions is a determined state house majority, duly elected by a base of overburdened taxpayers. And that's where things stand. Hasta la vista!

AFTER HAVING DONE ALL STAND! ~ Eph 6:10-20

BTW: The word fat was directed at Moore in the sense of his reasoning being "practically nonexistent" (i.e. a fat chance).

Related:

Union Label Owned by China

Public Union Membership in Numbers

2 comments:
  1. Nice!
    Isaiah 59:17 (Breastplate of Justice)

    Justice-Based Leadership

    Under Capital Homesteading, unions could expand their role in a free market system by educating and expanding their membership to include all citizen-shareholders. Ownership unions would enhance the property rights of all shareholders by enhancing management accountability and transparency, and protecting against unjust executive compensation schemes. (Gov. Walker leadership by example might suggest cutting your benefit programs and those of Wisc. legislative body - that would bring those 'rascals' Democrats back to the floor)

    Larry Walker Jr. ; Michael Moore, if he reads these points and then our books, should get a deeper understanding of why America’s basic industries and now the states are going down the tube and ending up in countries where foreign wage slaves can take the jobs of unemployed American wage slaves. Michael Moore can not only help in our goal to democratize future ownership of the 12 regional Feds but also begin advocating the workers themselves organize to persuade their leaders to transform labor unions into “ownership unions.”

    Did you call me fat? - Guy c. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that present day union leaders are more interested in collecting dues, and redistributing them to Democratic politicians, than in fairness.

    I doubt that Mr. Moore could help in this cause, or any for that matter. He looks like he could use some help himself, especially in the logic department.

    Fat? No I didn't... it was directed to Moore in the sense of his reasoning being "practically nonexistent" (i.e. a fat chance).

    ReplyDelete