Forced Union Dues and 'Card Check' for Public Workers
Mammoth tax hikes for all while union bosses reap millions
Senate Vote Possible this Week
County and municipalities budgets will be dealt a huge financial blow if forced to pay salaries of union bosses that will bankrupt local coffers.
Looming on the horizon is the Police and Firefighter Monopoly Bargaining Bill (S. 3194).
This is the first step in forcing ALL state and local public employees under Big labor's thumb.
In California, the city of Vallejo went bankrupt after nearly 75% of its budget was spent on UNIONIZED police and firefighters. Now with a $26 billion state budget deficit, the out-of-control union bosses are threatening strikes rather than taking blame for the problems and shouldering needed cuts.
In other states where union bosses have been granted monoply bargaining privileges over public sector workers similar problems are seen.
The Mayor of Lancaster, Pennsylvannia states struggling cities are 'handcuffed' by public sector monoply bargaining.
If Big Labor's allies ram the Police and Firefighter Monoply Bargaining bill into law, this kind of dysfunction will affect all municipalities.
This bill will force:
*state and local governments already experiencing severe budget shortfalls to pay the salaries and perks of union bosses.
In the Post Office alone, taxpayers have been forced to fund over 1.75 million hours of union organizing.
*small communities that depend on volunteer police and firefighters for their safety will be forced to do without them.
Or these communities will have to deal with mammoth tax hikes to pay for union boss-controlled public safety workers.
The Police and Firefighter Monoply Bargaining Bill will do nothing to stop crime or make our communities safer.
On the contrary, forcing police and firefighters under the control of power-mad union bosses tend to drive many of the best men and women out of their jobs.
Local and state public officials even if so inclined to stand up to the federal government, will be able to do little.
Under the provisions of S. 3194, regardless of state and local officials, every police officer and firefighter will be handed over to union boss control. If municipalities refuse to go along, the Federal Government will step in and turn over first responders to Big Labor.
As with all labor negoiations, there is the possibility of a break down and the resulting strike.
This legislation will pit honest taxpayers against the very dedicated people that protect the populace.
Police may be ordered to strike leaving communities unprotected.
Union militants may set up picket lines around fire stations.
This is dangerous legislation.
Union members will also be subject to 'card check' which seeks to abolish the secret ballot while intimidating prospective members with home visits. No one should be subject to strong armed tactics or intimidation in their home. Employees deserve a secret ballot without pressure from union thugs that scrutinize the vote.
NO one wins and everyone loses.
Please speak out against this dangerous bill which may come to a vote within days. If passed the Police and Firefighter Bargaining Bill (S.3194) could force America's public safety workers under union boss control.
Tell our Senators to vote NO on S.3194.
Senator Mikulski in D.C. (202) 224-4654
Salisbury (410) 546-7711
Senator Cardin in D.C. (202)224-4524
Salisbury (410) 546-4250
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Does anyone really think these 2 are going against UNION PEOPLE?
ReplyDeleteMikulski and Cardin are jokes. Unfortunately the eastern shore and western ,Md. have no power when it comes to elections. The extremely rich of Montgomery and P.G. county and the ghetto also known as Balt. City control this one party stae. We will end up in the same financial state as California in the very near future.
ReplyDeleteJoe this post is very inaccurate. Whoever posted this really needs to read the bill.
ReplyDeleteThe bill does not put control of anything under union bosses. All this bill does is require state, local, or municipal governments to recognize union memebership, IF the police or fire organizations wish or vote for this, and allow police or fire organizations collective barganing rights. It's innacurate that the government is paying for union bosses. They are not. The union members are the ones who pay their salaries. This is part of their union dues, which come out of the pay of the respective members. The State, County or City does not pay this, the members do.
Also, there are some exceptions to this bill, such as municipalities with a population under 5000, or police or fire organizations with under 50 members.
Right now, most police and fire agencies are at the mercy of their respective governments as far as budget concerns. Most respectively are salary and benefits. The "you'll take what we give you and you have so say otherwise" is very unfair at the very least.
In private industry, you reserve the opportunity to negotiate with the company as far as your pay and benefits. In most government agencies, you do not.
Successful businesses understand this is an important process in attracting and retaining quality employees. Less successful agencies usually employ the "take it or leave" approach. This results in a high turnover rate of employees. This same problem exists with government agencies. Those who negotiate and work with their employees seem to do a better job of recruiting and keeping the best qualified.
Here's a couple of perfect examples, let's look at two local police agencies. For years, the Wicomico Sheriff's Office had a horribly high turnover rate. Why, low pay and terrible benefits. Eventually the county recognized this problem and did something to address it. They raised the pay of Deputies. Now, the turnover rate at the Sheriff's Office is probably one of the lowest in the state. Now, lets examine the Salisbury Police Department. For as long as I can remember, this agency had a high turnover rate, why, low pay and inadequate benefits. The City has yet to adequately address this issue, guess what; the agency maintains it's high turnover rate.
The old business concept of you get what you pay for runs true for government, as well as the private industry.
" It's innacurate that the government is paying for union bosses. They are not. The union members are the ones who pay their salaries. This is part of their union dues, which come out of the pay of the respective members. The State, County or City does not pay this, the members do."
ReplyDeleteYou left out one very important fact. The citizens pay for everything in the form of taxes. Paying more means more taxes. Unions should not be allowed to control workers who work for the people.
As for getting what you pay for, how do you explain that Wicomico County was not capable of identifying 15 employees that were not needed throughout their entire workforce and had to employ a consultant to decide?
If you are a Government employee that is not happy about not being in a Union, move over. There are a lot of good people that would welcome the opportunity to take over your job.
Another fact is that, Maryland Law Enforcement Officers can not strike it is against Maryland Law. If this bumps up Maryland Law Enforcment officers salaraies/disability/retirement benefits to match their counterparts in other states, then I vote yes.
ReplyDelete"If this bumps up Maryland Law Enforcment officers salaraies/disability/retirement benefits to match their counterparts in other states, then I vote yes. "
ReplyDeleteNothing against your profession but WHY should taxpayers pay you more simply because OTHER areas pay more? In fact, why does MD have so MANY overlapping Law Enforcement organizations? Get rid of some of the overlap and maybe higher pay is warranted. There are simply too many people in the private sector out of work now to even consider such an ideal without a return in savings to them in the form of lower taxes.
Unreal.... Wicomico can't find 15 "not needed" employees and has to hire a consultant to do so.
Again Joe thanks for the update but this post is false on many levels. The fact remains Wicomico County still can not give its primary law enforcement the same benefits as Worcetser, Salisbury City, Fruitland, Dorchester, Talbot, Caroline, and the list goes on. We all know that finance has been mismanaged for twenty years in Wicomico County. Who is the common denominator in this. Well Matt Craemer for one. The past councils. It is a total sham and has been.
ReplyDeleteThe people of this county desrve better and so do the men and women of the Sheriff's Office. Maryland just passed Senate Bill 1123 supporting this very type of legislation. Why because it is needed. This county has a major crime problem, the city is worse. Quality men and women have to be retained or the system fails.
I vote yes to anything that betters Fire, Polce, Education.73% of the vote said yes to this type of legislation three years ago in this county. I know I will remember in November who stood silent and defied my vote. I have noticed some politicians in the 11th hour jumping on the band wagon.
73% its a no brainer. I can not believe the elected idiots that crapped down th neck of these voters. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.
hopefully they will be there for us when we need them..no union guarantees that to anyone
ReplyDeleteTrue, the Wicomico county sheriffs office deserves better retirement/disability benefits. True, the Salisbuty Police officers deserve the same pay scale currently enjoyed by the Wicomico County Sheriffs Office. Perhaps the Sheriffs Dept would be willing to adapt its current pay scale to that which the Salisbury Police officers have and then possibly have an opportunity to enroll in LEOPS for a better retirement/disability program.
ReplyDeleteThe Wicomico County Sheriffs Office was very fortunate to have pay parity with the Maryland State Police.
The Salisbury Police Dept was very fortunate to have enrolled in LEOPS.
One agency gets the money now-one gets the money later.
In fairness, if the Wicomico County Sheriffs Office is entitled to LEOPS, then the Salisbury Police Officers are certainly entitled the same wages currently enjoyed by Wicomico County Deputies.
Ok. You've got State, County, and City police protecting Salisbury. Ask the taxpayers for a raise and tell us which overlapping police organization will be cut.
ReplyDeleteNo Government employee should be getting a raise when those Governments are not staying within budgets and jobs in the private sector are bleeding.
Arguing for or against union representation may be interesting, but it misses the point! The real question should be: are police and firefighters to have, or not to have, the right to a secret ballot in deciding for or against a union? If they vote for it, fine. If they vote against it, fine. But they should have the right to vote in secret just as we all have in other elections. There should be no opportunity for anyone to be pressured to vote one way or the other. Our system requires the right to a seccret ballot.
ReplyDeleteText of the bill:
ReplyDeletehttp://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3194:
one section prohibits strikes and lockouts.
I'm a generally libertarian person, but your description of the provisions of the bill seems to be weaved from thin air.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-3194
Anonymous at 3:40pm is correct in that this ought stipulate a secret ballot though.