Tag: unions (page 4)

The failure of proposal 2 in November's election drove home the fact that Michigan is ready to become the 24th Right To work state.  The millions in big labor money spent to even further violate the civil rights of Michigan workers was not successful, and brought the issue out into a broader theater of debate.  The Freedom to Work organization (disclosure: I am a member) was joined by political heavyweights Dick Devos and Ron Weiser who are now calling for action on this important piece of Michigan's future.

"MIRS News reports former Michigan Republican Party chairman Ron Weiser and 2006 GOP gubernatorial nominee Dick DeVos are putting the pressure on in the Senate, where Majority Leader Randy Richardville doesn't want to take it up."

And labor leadership is freaking out. Kyle Olson, writes:

"Now the union is wringing its hands over a rumored Right to Work proposal that may be introduced and debated in the state legislature during the lame duck session.

On Tuesday, the union pressed the panic button and issued a screed to its members via email:

"With just a few weeks left in the Legislative session, right-wing politicians in Lansing are looking to exact political revenge against union members by ramming through dangerous bills that will harm school employees, middle-class families and children throughout Michigan.

"Their reckless agenda includes: ...

 ... "These extremist legislators must be stopped immediately. The Working Michigan coalition is holding events across our state tonight and tomorrow night to help mobilize union members and supporters in the effort to fight back."

It's hard to feel sorry for this group of tin-horned gangsters. They were in a good position and they got too greedy.

But we best not consider this a done deal until the guv's pen is to paper.

Your legislator needs your strength. Call them. praise them for their support of this basic civil right. Write them. Encourage them to act quickly and decisively. Call your friends and encourage them to do the same.  Watch the video below the fold to get a better understanding of why.

Update [2012-11-30 10:51:19 by JGillman]: As a bonus, here are a couple who REALLY want you to call them and offer support of Freedom to work. (H/T Jack Hoogendyk)

I guess its THAT serious.

It has to do with transparency.  Its hard to hold folks accountable without it.  The Michigan Press Association and Mackinac Center issued a Joint Statement today. According to the press release:

If passed with a "yes" vote, these organizations argue, stipulations in government collective bargaining agreements would trump the Freedom of Information Act, among other laws. The Freedom of Information Act guarantees that public documents remain available to public scrutiny, subject to some limitations.

They are always so upfront with the truth.

CPMC just cut loose with their latest ad titled "Dangerous," featuring metro Detroit police officer Terry Fortuna exposing the truth about Proposal 2.  The state's Attorney General and law enforcement leaders from across Michigan have been educating residents about the devastating effect Proposal 2 would have on 170 laws that voters, parents, Sheriffs and police count on to protect Michiganders.

Officer Fortuna says:

"I'm pro-union, its just that I'm not pro Proposal 2.  They are trying to sell this as collective bargaining, but collective bargaining is already protected by federal law.  You don't have to know anything about Proposal 2 except that its dangerous.  Vote NO on Proposal 2."

According to Proposal 2's own language, the proposed constitutional amendment would give union contracts veto power over state laws, by "invalidat(ing) existing or future state or local laws" and will "override state laws that regulate...conditions of employment to the extent that those laws conflict with collective bargaining agreements," giving government union contracts veto power over the laws that keep Michigan kids and families safe.

AG Schuette found that this language would invalidate over 170 different laws and reforms, including many that keep Michigan kids safe at school like laws establishing minimum safety training standards for bus drivers and empowering school districts to immediately remove teachers from the classroom who have been caught under the influence or selling drugs at school.

The Michigan Education Association, the state's largest teachers union and one of the most prominent financial backers of Proposal 2, concurred with Schuette's findings earlier this year when they issued a confidential legal memo that claimed passage of Proposal 2 would "immediately" overturn the law that gives public schools the right to immediately remove teachers caught selling drugs in the classroom or under the influence of drugs or alcohol at school, among others.

Putting the dot on the 'i', the Bay City teachers union wrote a $40,000 check to the ballot committee behind Proposal 2 shortly after receiving an internal legal memo from the Michigan Education Association. (MEA) The memo that claimed Prop 2 would reinstate controversial Bay City contract provisions that prevent the school district from firing teachers caught selling drugs or under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the classroom, according to campaign finance reports.

The Bay City Education Association wrote the $40,000 check, one of the single largest contributions by any local teachers union in the state, to the "Protect Our Jobs" ballot committee on May 23rd, only a month after an MEA circulated legal memo declaring Proposal 2 would overturn the law identified in the local union's contract that barred provisions requiring a teacher to be caught drunk five times or under the influence of drugs three times before being fired.

The same contract had provisions where a teacher could be caught selling drugs on school property in some circumstances not once, but twice before the teacher could be terminated. (Contract pages 92-93.)

"The more parents learn about Proposal 2 the less they like it," said Nick De Leeuw, Spokesman for Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution. "The possible consequences in Bay City prove that Proposal 2 is not just bad policy, it is not worth the risk to Michigan children."

Lawmakers and the governor teamed in 2011 to enact Public Act 103, which legally overturned the kind of shocking contract provisions found in the Bay City teachers' contract but the contract itself explicitly states (contract page 87) that should Public Act 103 be struck down, the protections for teachers who abuse drugs and alcohol on school property or sell drugs in class would go back into effect.

According to an internal memo from the MEA's Legal Department (see attachment) delivered to the Bay City teachers union only weeks before their massive contribution, passage of Proposal 2 would "immediately" overturn Public Act 103.  The MEA is also one of Proposal 2's most prominent financial backers.

The MEA's leaked memo states in part: "The new prohibited bargaining topics created by 2011 PA 103 and included in Section 15(3) of PERA would NO LONGER exist. This law currently prohibits bargaining over...Teacher discipline policies..."

New TV Ad: Local Teachers Union Contract Reveals Proposal 2 Hurts Michigan Kids

 Protecting Michigan Taxpayers, a broad-based coalition working to educate parents and voters about the dangerous effects Proposal 2 would have on students, parents and taxpayers today released a new statewide television commercial titled "Hurts," highlighting dangerous provisions in Michigan teachers union contracts that the Michigan Education Association (MEA) says would go into effect upon passage of Proposal 2.

"According to a leaked memo from the Michigan Education Association, the state's largest teachers union, Proposal 2 would overturn common sense state laws that help keep our kids safe at school," said Jared Rodriguez, Spokesman for Protecting Michigan Taxpayers.  "And the local teachers union contract in Bay City says that Proposal 2 would give five strikes to teachers under the influence of alcohol at school, three strikes to teachers under the influence of drugs in the classroom and two strikes to teachers caught selling drugs at school.  The MEA is right that Proposal 2 will overturn school reform laws - unfortunately it will hurt Michigan kids!"

According to Proposal 2's own language, under the proposal Michigan parents, voters and lawmakers would be permanently prohibited from "limit(ing) the right to collectively bargain for wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment." The MEA and the teachers union contract in Bay City claim this language would overturn common sense legal restrictions that prevent teachers caught under the influence of drugs and alcohol from remaining in the classroom.

Studies also indicate Proposal 2 would cost families at least $1.6 billion tax dollars a year.

"Hurts" can also be viewed online at http://youtu.be/8Ke-QTNvUMY.

Organizations from across the state are working together to defeat Proposal 2 including organizations representing school boards, school principals, school superintendents, the Michigan Sheriff's Association, small business groups, chambers of commerce and taxpayer organizations.

High-dollar political donors associated with Michigan's labor movement are encouraged and instructed on how to hide limitless, undisclosed campaign contributions in secret slush funds, according to a leaked letter and PowerPoint presentation being distributed by Andrew Nickelhoff, the union lawyer behind Proposal 2 and 4.

The leaked private letter and PowerPoint stands in stark contrast to hypocritical public statements from supporters of Proposal 2, Nickelhoff's employers, who have insincerely and hypocritically called other organizations "shadowy."

"The scheme by Proposal 2 and 4's attorney to solicit secret, undisclosed campaign contributions is another example of Prop 2 supporter's continuing pattern of deception and hypocisy," said Nick De Leeuw, Spokesman for Citizens Protecting Michigan's Constitution.  "Nickelhoff infamously told voters they'd simply have to "guess" what his deceptive ballot proposal would do; now he is caught instructing donors how to hide their contributions."

In a letter dated May 9 and distributed to potential donors, Nickelhoff solicited and outlined in detail how high-dollar donors could contribute potentially millions of dollars to a secret slush fund without ever disclosing their identity.

Using the "Keep home care safe" canard, these rotten thieves are literally asking for permission from Michigan voters to steal from those who can least afford it.  They are asking voters to endorse a harder life for the handicapped, the unfortunate, and looking to kick them when they are down. A yes vote would be akin to removing the wheels from a paraplegic's chair.

Under Jennifer Granholm, they (the unions and her administration) did it, and Snyder's failure to FIRE former head of community health Olga Dazzo right away gave these reprobates the courage to keep this farce alive through court action.  In the meantime families of those afflicted with debilitating conditions must suffer a little longer. The mass fraud her administration perpetrated, ought to have seen our former governor and her toadie lt. behind bars.

Its that bad.

Just imagine, life is clicking along fine, then something happens to a family member. Something that takes their ability to provide for themselves, or even perform the most rudimentary tasks.  A decision is made to either institutionalize them, (at great cost to the taxpayer typically) OR a career is suspended, and a job is given up by a family member to personally handle the situation.

We have made the decision as a state that we will provide that safety net, as it meets the definition of truly needy. IF we are going to provide assistance, that is an appropriate use. The better alternative for taxpayers is chosen.  Keeping folks in their homes is by far less expensive, and offers the afflicted a dignity seldom found in the institutional environment. As family members take on those responsibilities, it quite obviously comes at a cost.  A stipend is provided by the state to pay those family members for the loss of income they incur.

Then someone walks in the door and steals the silverware.

From Lansing, we are hearing that Chicago-style teacher strikes could be heading to local school districts across Michigan if union leaders behind the deceptive Proposal 2 successfully hijack Michigan's constitution this November.  According to a leaked internal memo from the state's largest teachers union, the Michigan Education Association (MEA), passage of Proposal 2 would overturn the Michigan law that creates penalties for striking teachers, paving the way for Chicago-style teacher strikes in Michigan school districts.

Teachers in Chicago yesterday walked out of their classrooms after rejecting a 16 percent pay increase, outraging parents and kicking nearly 400,000 students out of their schools and onto the streets.

While teacher strikes are technically "illegal" in Michigan, Michigan's Public Employee Relations Act (PERA) establishes the only legal penalty for teachers who walk out on their classrooms; a fine equal to one day's pay for each school day spent on strike.

In 1994 the Michigan legislature enacted Public Act 112 which amended the Public Employee Relations Act (PERA) to prohibit union bosses from removing these penalties for striking teachers during labor negotiations.

According to a leaked internal memo from the MEA (linked above), upon passage of Proposal 2:

"The prohibited bargaining topics created by 1994 PA 112 and included in Section 15(3) of PERA would NO LONGER exist (including)... Any compensation or additional work assignment intended to reimburse an employee for or to allow an employee to recover any monetary penalty imposed under PERA."