|
|
|
|
 |
CFEC Blog
|
 |
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Aug 26, 2010 12:08 |
|
|
| San Diego County PLA-Ban to Go Before Voters in November |
We now have a letter for our measure to ban PLAs in San Diego County and it is fitting: Proposition A. As we continue marching on with our freedom message state-wide our big fight is now this November ballot measure going before voters in America's 5th largest county!
Big Labor must have already seen the polling and realize they are going to be beat as badly as they were in Chula Vista and Oceanside judging by the incoherent, poorly written, error filled argument they submitted to the County Register and which will be the reason voters read as to why they should vote "No." Yikes. Even more incredibly of the three people they had sign off on the letter would you be shocked to learn they are all union bosses? Considering the fact Big Labor Reaches New Low in a new poll you would think they could have found an IRS agent or congressman to put their names on the ballot language instead.
The coalition created to pass Prop. A have set up a budget of $1 million, or a little more than we spent to pass the Chula Vista and Oceanside measures. If you want to help us meet this goal then please contact us today at alicia.pivirotto@gmail.com.
Help us to keep the freedom train rolling and stay tuned for much more information on this important effort!
Big Labor's Incoherent Argument: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B1AiK1T1owXKNGE5ZmJhNWQtN2QwOS00MTViLThjMWQtMjE3YmJlMzgxZTM5&hl=en&authkey=CMe21-0O&pli=1
Big Labor Reaches New Low Poll: http://www.gallup.com/poll/142007/Americans-Approval-Labor-Unions-Remains-Near-Record-Low.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=USA
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Aug 18, 2010 12:08 |
|
|
| PLA Fact Check 8: Union Pensions Going Bankrupt is Why PLAs are Needed |
In our continuing coverage of one of the chief reasons why PLA proponents need PLAs we have this editorial from yesterday's Wall Street Journal. As with just about everything union bosses touch the "multi-employer pension plans" that exist to cover union retirees are facing catastrophe everywhere. So what happens when you fail to fund your pension plans properly instead putting that money into terrible investments, inflated wages, and other fiscally irresponsible endeavors? You ask your big labor stooges who control Congress and the White House to bail you out and stick taxpayers with the bill.
PLAs are needed because unions need non-union donations made to their bankrupt pension plans, monies the unions know the non-union workers will never get back. This theft is remarkable on two levels, one being that it is even considered and the other being it is needed in the first place. To cover for their rotten governance and leadership union bosses must now rely on schemes like PLAs to cover for their malfeasance. Fitting.
_________________________________________________________________________
Wall Street Journal Editorial
August 16, 2010
Congress is gone for August-heaven be praised-but that hasn't stopped unions from quietly mobilizing to push through a big new priority this fall: a pension bailout. Big Labor is going Code Red on the issue, in the face of a looming accounting change that would force companies to confront the Ponzi-style nature of multi-employer pension plans.
We wrote in June about this class of some 1,500 union-run retirement vehicles, in which companies across an entire industry pay into a single pension pool. Hundreds of these multi-employer pools are badly underfunded, thanks to years of labor funneling money into new pay and benefits, rather than into the funds for retirees.
The big problem with these plans is that when one company in the pool goes out of business, the other companies remain on the hook for the cost of the plan. These spiraling liabilities inspired Pennsylvania Senator and Big Labor favorite Bob Casey to introduce legislation to cordon off "orphaned" pensions-those for which an employer has stopped contributing or withdrawn from the plan-and drop them on the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
The PBGC is already significantly underfunded and taxpayers are its ultimate backstop. Yet the Casey bailout could dump as much as $165 billion in new liabilities on the PBGC, while multi-employer plans would get a clean bill of health. What a deal.
This cause has taken on new political urgency, and no less than Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin has endorsed the bill. The reason for the rush is new rules that may soon be issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), the green-eyeshade outfit that dictates how companies keep their books. Those proposed rules would expose the multi-employer time bomb.
Here's why. In 1980 an amendment to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act established the principle that any company in a multi-employer plan had a right to assume that other members would pay in perpetuity. Those that did not, and left the plan, were required to pay a "withdrawal penalty" to make the plan whole. This is fine in theory, though in reality these penalties have rarely covered the true cost of withdrawal, which means liabilities for remaining companies have continued to grow.
As plan obligations climb, and a mediocre stock market has reduced fund assets, more companies are running for the exits. Most notably, UPS was willing pay a remarkable $6.1 billion in 2007 to flee its plan. FASB's new rules are likely to acknowledge this new corporate reality, and they would in effect require companies to assume that they must pay the withdrawal penalty, and therefore to include that liability on either an income statement or balance sheet.
Ouch. Many companies have withdrawal liabilities that exceed their assets, and the result would be a painful reckoning. The accounting changes would also embarrass Big Labor, exposing its pension promises as bankrupt and perhaps leading to wholesale reform of multi-employer plans. One labor law firm, Groom Law Group, sent out an SOS in July, announcing its intention to form a group to fight the FASB rules, which it noted would put unions under "increased pressure at the bargaining table to decrease contributions and cut benefits." Anything but that.
Thus the election year urgency to pass the Casey bill. If Democrats could shift orphan company pensions to the taxpayer, the liabilities for the remaining companies would fall dramatically, and the multi-employer scheme could continue. Unions and employers could keep promising current workers fabulous pay and benefits, without which they have little chance of stemming their continuing decline in membership.
The losers? Those would be existing retirees in multi-employer plans, who were also promised such benefits but whose pensions would now be dumped on the feds. Even under Mr. Casey's bill, payouts to current retirees would be limited to $21,000 a year-a fraction of what workers expected to receive.
If this all sounds like it could never pass, keep in mind this is the most willful Congress in modern history. Congress just completed paying off the teachers unions with $10 billion, and unions will put enormous pressure on Democrats to pass the pension bailout before they lose their huge majorities.
Many companies with multi-employer plans such as the trucking firm YRC Worldwide (organized by the Teamsters) are joining the union lobby effort, and more than a few Republicans could go along. The outrageous all too often becomes the inevitable with this Congress, and it will again unless taxpayers raise a ruckus. |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Aug 11, 2010 12:08 |
|
|
| The Face (And Temperament) of PLA Proponents |
Once in a while we here at CFEC come across well-meaning folks who simply ask why can't we get along with or work with Big Labor special interests who push PLAs. Here is a peek into the mindset of PLA proponents that we hope ends once and for all any such thinking.
Richard Slawson is the head union boss of the Los Angeles/Orange County Building and Construction Trades Council. Slawson is old school and will be retiring soon to be replaced by someone equally strident and intolerant we are sure. The only real question is will his replacement be as equally insane?
You don't work with people this imbalanced and angry, you defeat them.
Read Richard Slawson's latest rant by going to: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B1AiK1T1owXKYmM2ZWEwNzMtYmZkMS00Mzk4LWE3OTUtZWNlYzk2YTgyMmVj&hl=en&authkey=COz_1KEE |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Aug 11, 2010 12:08 |
|
|
| Think Twice Before Signing a PLA |
Compliments of ABC of California's Kevin Dayton, attached is a template two-page, Think Twice Before You Sign that Project Labor Agreement, about the risks and costs of signing Project Labor Agreements. It comes with a supplemental attachment of primary source documents.
This document has not been reviewed by lawyers and specifically states that it shall not be construed as legal advice. If contractors want more technical or legal information, the document specifically urges the reader to contact an attorney for more information.
A valuable piece that anyone who is considering signing a PLA needs to read!
Think Twice Before You Sign That PLA: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B1AiK1T1owXKN2VjZGFkZWUtN2VmOC00M2VkLTg0YzQtZDY4ZmFhY2QzZjAx&hl=en&authkey=CKKUyf8I
Think Twice Supplement: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B1AiK1T1owXKMmVmYzA3ODgtYmY4ZS00NTAxLTg5NzUtYzNkZmI2ZDczMjcw&hl=en&authkey=CMLQ7IsF |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Jul 16, 2010 12:07 |
|
|
| PLA Fact Check 7: |
CFEC's PLA Fact Check has reported in the past on how impossible it is for unions to guarantee "local hires" with a PLA. They cannot guarantee it because of the way, by law, unions are set up. Union hiring-halls are set up to dispatch workers based on seniority regardless of where they come from. If a "boomer" or "traveler" from San Diego travels to Las Vegas to get work and has greater experience then the local guys, he gets the work. This story out of the Las Vegas Review Journal shows how this system works and how local union bosses often abuse it when it fits their political agenda.
Project Labor Agreements can never guarantee "local hire" because it is illegal, period. Remember this the next time a County Supervisor (that's you Salud) or a school board member pretends that it can.
"Ironworkers Local in Las Vegas in Big Trouble-Forced to Pay Fine" can be viewed by going to: http://www.lvrj.com/business/ironworkers-union-settles-dispute-over--traveling--93839809.html
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Jul 14, 2010 12:07 |
|
|
| Teacher Union Members Boo and Hiss CFEC & Parents. Vote to Place Tax Increase on Ballot. |
One sometimes needs to be reminded first hand just why our public education system is in the condition it is on these days (hint: it's not a lack of money). For myself and some other parents and taxpayers such an instance occurred last night at the San Diego Unified School District Board of Education meeting (see video below). Last night the SDUSD school board took up the question of whether, in the middle of an economic downturn, San Diego businesses, homeowners, and renters, should have more money taken out of their pockets in the form of a parcel tax and handed over to a school board that has demonstrated it is unworthy and incapable of using that money wisely.
Walking into the board room last night was like walking into a lion's den. The room was packed with teacher union members wearing red (fitting) t-shirts holding signs proclaiming their support for higher taxes. Sprinkled around the room were those of us who had come to question why it is a board that has demonstrated such a striking disregard for the taxpayers to date has the gall to ask taxpayers for even more. Those of us who did speak against the parcel tax were roundly booed and hissed at (one lady was actually laughed at) by those entrusted to "educate" our young. It was truly a revolting and shocking experience to see "professionals" act like this. When one female speaker was booed, hissed, and laughed at I felt compelled to walk over to two of the women closest to me who were engaging in this behavior and whisper to them that they should act like the professionals they were supposed to be. I only realized later that one of these union members was none other than Camille Zombro, the San Diego Education Association President! I realized it when she later turned to me and challenged me to "step outside!" All I can say is that if my children acted like these "professionals" they'd be grounded for a week after being talked to about how to act in public. Ms. Zombro continued to out-do herself when, during her public comments, she labeled anyone opposing this tax increase "tax cynics" and "teacher haters." You read that right. What is most remarkable about the actions of these people is how the media failed to cover it. Ignoring it only enables such thuggish behavior in the future.
When I spoke I told the board that there were two questions that needed to be asked and answered tonight: Is a parcel tax needed and is this a board that can be trusted to spend the money wisely? The former was up for discussion but I told them the latter question was an emphatic "NO," and that this board could not be trusted with anymore taxpayer money. I explained to the board that their disregard for taxpayer dollars was best demonstrated by the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) that three of them foisted upon the community last year. I explained what it had cost them to date and ended by offering them two options: Move forward with the parcel tax and lose or pull it from consideration, work on showing their fidelity was to students and taxpayers verses union bosses, and then we can talk. In the end, however, the board voted 4-0 to place the tax increase on the November ballot.
We look forward to working with concerned citizens and taxpayers to see that this board is sent a clear message which is that the waste, fraud, and abuse they give their imprimatur to on a daily basis is no longer acceptable.
This circus was covered by NBC, Channel 10, the Voice of San Diego, and the Union Tribune.
To see how the union members responded to those questioning their orthodoxy please watch this video and ask yourselves: "Are these people teaching my kids?"
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aBDmWcVCy0) |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Jul 13, 2010 12:07 |
|
|
| Breaking News: San Diego County Supervisors Vote to Place PLA-Ban on Ballot! |
Minutes ago I was told to "F@#! Off" by the head of the San Diego-Imperial County Building and Construction Trades Council. This must mean something good happened for taxpayers and workers.
Which is exactly what happened. In the words of County Supervisor Dianne Jacob the Board of Supervisors, in a 4-1 vote, agreed to "put the people in charge" and "give voters a voice" when it comes to the odious practice of Project Labor Agreements (PLAs). So in November the citizens of San Diego County will have a chance to agree with the growing chorus of voters all over the state, which is that PLAs have NO place in a modern and enlightened society.
Placed on the agenda by Supervisor Bill Horn and supported by Supervisors Jacob, Slater-Price, and Roberts, this initiative will, once passed by voters, codify into the county charter the premise that no worker can be forced to join a union as a condition of employment on any county funded construction project.
On February 23rd, 2010 the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance prohibiting the County from requiring Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) on County construction projects. Since that time, the voters of Chula Vista have passed Proposition G and the voters of Oceanside have passed Proposition K. Both measures prohibit these cities from imposing PLAs on publicly-funded construction projects.
Support for these measures in the second and third largest cities in the region demonstrates the public's desire to be given the chance to ensure fair and open competition in contracting for future generations.
This is great news with much more to follow as the concept of open competition rolls on!
|
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Jun 09, 2010 12:06 |
|
|
| VICTORY! Historic PLA Bans Passed by voters in TWO California Cities! |
Last night history was made thanks to the hard work of a few and the common sense of many California voters. In the City of Chula Vista, just south of San Diego, where billions of dollars in future work are at stake, voters overwhelming endorsed Proposition G which bans the implementation of any "agreement" that forces workers to have to be union as a condition of employment. As of this email the measure was being endorsed by more than 56% of voters! All of this despite hundreds of thousands of dollars spent by big labor bosses who were humiliatingly forced into lying, stealing yard signs, and having to sacrifice whatever honor they had left to try and defeat this non-discrimination measure.
At the same time, in northern San Diego County City of Oceanside voters also handed freedom a victory where Proposition K was overwhelmingly passed. This measure, which explicitly bans PLAs, also makes Oceanside a charter city free of many of the state mandates that are ruining so many of our cities. It also explicitly bans unions from taking money from their workers paychecks without their permission and gets rid of prevailing wage.
Special recognition is due to Associated Builders and Contractors of San Diego who took the lead on these two efforts and to Bill Baber who, as ABC-SD's Government Affairs Director, led the campaigns to victory. WELL DONE! Kudos as well to all the volunteers, staff, donors, community leaders who would not be cowed by big labors threats and stood by us, and of course to the voters who resoundingly rejected cynicism, deceit, and discrimination and affirmed everyone's right to work and their right to associate with whom they wish, without government interference.
A nightmare night for big labor bosses but a wondrous night for everyone else, including union workers who so often are left to suffer the results of their leaders' destructive habits.
Next up come November is California's second largest city: San Diego! |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| May 13, 2010 12:05 |
|
|
| PLA Fact Check 6: Unions Equal Quality? Union Built and Financed Building Must be Torn Down. |
In our continuing coverage of PLA fallacies we have come across another one that demonstrates just how ignorant the one is that claims "PLAs equal value and quality" because they are built union. A few weeks ago we brought you the story of the building that makes up part of the massive City Centre project in Las Vegas that had to be closed off from use due to its' poor workmanship. City Centre was of course union-only.
Today's news article comes from Seattle and is about the 9-year-old Belltown high-rise in downtown Seattle that was financed by the Carpenter's Union and built union-only. It is too flawed to fix and must be demolished. (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011585964_apartments12m.html)
Question: If this type of shoddy workmanship had been the result of a merit-shop-only job what would big labor bosses be proclaiming from the highest mountain top? Yeah. The point here is not to say union is bad and merit shop is good or vice versa, but that the arrogance and pretentiousness of union bosses who seem to really believe in their own superiority is as ignorant as it is factually wrong.
"Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall."
Proverbs 16:18 |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Eric Christen |
| Apr 29, 2010 12:04 |
|
|
| DeMaio Unveils |
Like the National Debt Clock, the Managed Competition Clock Will Tally Time Elapsed and Taxpayer Savings Lost Due To Union Efforts to Block Proposition C
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, April 29, 2010
San Diego City Councilmember Carl DeMaio today took a page from the National Debt Clock movement as he launched the San Diego "Managed Competition Clock."
The Managed Competition Clock has been posted online at a number of websites, including http://reformsandiego.com/money-clock/.
The Managed Competition Clock shows city taxpayers how long the unions have blocked implementation of Managed Competition - and how much in potential cost savings have been lost.
"The city faces a massive budget crisis and could save millions each year through Managed Competition - a reform specifically authorized by San Diego voters more than three and a half years ago," commented DeMaio. "The Managed Competition Clock will show San Diegans how much potential taxpayer savings have been lost due to the stall tactics and lawsuits filed by the labor unions."
At the very same moment as DeMaio released the "Managed Competition Clock" publicly, the City of San Diego was forced into an administrative law courtroom in Los Angeles over the municipal labor unions' three-and-a-half year campaign to thwart any implementation of voter-mandated Managed Competition reforms in the City of San Diego.
DeMaio is encouraging all San Diegans to post the clock to their social media pages and websites. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
