Unions have destroyed industry in America and now that all the jobs have moved overseas to allow companies to compete, the unions are targeting government. According to the labor bureau, 7.2 percent of private-sector workers were union members last year, down from 7.6 percent the previous year. That, labor historians said, was the lowest percentage of private-sector workers in unions since 1900. Among government workers, union membership grew to 37.4 percent last year, from 36.8 percent in 2008. http://www.orlandopoliticalpress.com/2010/11/16/oh-sure-the-tsa-is-hated-and -inneffective-now-but-things-will-get-better-when-they-unionize-right/ Editor's Note - There's a reason labor unions have contributed $667 million dollars to the Democrat Party since 1990. And who's at the very top of that list in contributions at $40,281,900? Why, it's the American Federation of Government Employees. And these numbers don't include 2010! For such generosity, the labor unions get favorable treatment to further organize and are a major benefactor in most legislation passed by the current Democrat majority. We saw this again and again with the auto bailouts, the Stimulus Bill, ObamaCare and on and on. Unions have destroyed industry in America and now that all the jobs have moved overseas to allow companies to compete, the unions are targeting government. According to the labor bureau, 7.2 percent of private-sector workers were union members last year, down from 7.6 percent the previous year. That, labor historians said, was the lowest percentage of private-sector workers in unions since 1900. Among government workers, union membership grew to 37.4 percent last year, from 36.8 percent in 2008. Does anyone else see the carrousel at play here? Democrats pump millions of dollars of taxpayer money to unions through favorable legislation and regulation, and through the growing number of government workers paying union dues, who's salaries are also paid by the taxpayers. In return, the unions contribute millions of dollars back to the Democrat Party through campaign donations. It's all a racket, with the politicians and union leaders getting rich in the process. And speaking of rackets, union pensions are little more than a ponzi scheme that cannot possibly sustain itself and when it collapses, taxpayers will be looked upon to foot the bill. Add to all this the growing Communist influence in the leadership of these unions and it's clear the American people are blindly following down the same path as Western Europe. The good news? There's still time to stock up on riot gear and fire fighting equipment. As for the TSA unionizing, with the established track record we'll soon be crossing this country in covered wagons again! Oh Sure, The TSA Is Hated and Inneffective Now, But Things Will Get Better When They Unionize, Right? By: Mark Hemingway <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bios/mark-hemingway.html> Washington Examiner Lost in all the hoopla about TSA's turn-your-head-and-cough security checks and so-called new "porno-scanners" is the news that TSA is about to unionize <http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2010/11/tsa_employees_can_vote _on_unio.html?wprss=federal-eye> : In a significant victory for federal employee unions, the Federal Labor Relations Authority decided Friday that Transportation Security Administration staffers will be allowed to vote on union representation. The decision clears the way for a campaign by the government's two largest labor organizations, the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union, to represent some 50,000 transportation security officers. "It is no secret that the morale of the TSO workforce is terrible as a result of favoritism, a lack of fair and respectful treatment from many managers, poor and unhealthy conditions in some airports, poor training and testing protocols and a poor pay system," said AFGE President John Gage. "The morale problems are documented by the government's own surveys. TSOs need a recognized union voice at work, and the important decision of the FLRA finally sets the process in motion to make that right a reality." When the Homeland Security Department was founded under Bush, the TSA was expressly forbidden from unionizing due to security concerns. TSA effectiveness depends on rapid response to emerging threats. After a British bomb plot was broken up in 2006, TSA overhauled its policies in 12 hours to deal with new concerns about liquid explosives. It's hard to imagine that kind of flexibility under union rules. Then according to DHS' website, in 2007 the newly Democratic Congress cleared the way for unionization <http://www.tsa.gov/press/happenings/911bill_statement.shtm> : "We appreciate the decision by Congress to eliminate the collective bargaining provision for the Transportation Security Administration from the 9/11 bill. This provision would not have advanced our security efforts but we appreciate Congress' bipartisan recognition of the importance of the transportation security officers' role. "TSA will continue to vigorously pursue activities in support of active employee engagement and a participative workforce. All of us agree on the goal of a well-prepared, well-motivated team of officers." Once Democrats took control of the executive branch, they immediately began pushing to unionize the TSA, as the taxpayer is merely a host organism for unions that funnel campaign cash to Democrats. Last December, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., somewhat heroically made a stand on this issue and got DHS Secretary Janet "The system worked" Napolitano to admit that she supports unionization despite safety concerns <http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/testimony/testimony_1259938923345.shtm> : Sen. DeMint: My question to you is not whether or not you've seen it work at a state or local level, but the whole point of homeland security and particularly TSA is the security of our - of the passengers, and if - in the beginning - and our debate - and every previous administrator at TSA has said that collective bargaining is not consistent with the flexibility and the need to change. You were telling us that you're going to collectively bargain, even though there's apparently no reason to protect workers. There's not any reason to standardize various work requirements. Why do we need to bring collective bargaining into this process when we see TSA making the improvements that it needs to make our passengers more secure? Sec. Napolitano: Well, thank you, senator, for noting the improvements of our - of TSA and the employee workforce we have there, but again, I go back to the basic point that I do not think security and collective bargaining are mutually exclusive, nor do I think that collective bargaining cannot be accomplished by an agency, such as TSA, should the workers desire to be organized in such a fashion. Sen. DeMint: Okay. Thank you for answering my question. Read more at the Washington Examiner: <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/oh-sur e-the-tsa-is-hated-and-inneffective-now-but-things-will-get-better-when-they -unionize-right-108245164.html#ixzz15S48PKwB> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/oh-sure -the-tsa-is-hated-and-inneffective-now-but-things-will-get-better-when-they- unionize-right-108245164.html#ixzz15S48PKwB [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [email protected]. -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [email protected] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: [email protected] Subscribe: [email protected] Unsubscribe: [email protected] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
