Please HELP ME make this letter work, unedited to the editor (proof with me 4 mistakes updated)

[Omaha Steve]

My response to these two letters with links.

*Union impact declines*
In response to Al Mumm’s June 16 letter on corporate greed, there is
enough greed to go around for all, and today there is more than just the
corporate hand in the candy jar.
I believe unions may have been a benefit to the work force a long time
ago. But for some time now, unions have lost their way.
Unions once could deliver high wages and benefits to workers and make
strong demands on employers. But times have changed, and the status quo
does not work in a global economy with competition and accountability.
Unions must remember that their members are employees, not the employer.
Unions can’t blame corporations alone. Both unions and corporations have
had candy for years.
Unions should just be happy they still have government candy handouts.
There soon may be a day when consumers, taxpayers and competition take
that candy from the baby.
And that’s OK, because too much candy is not good for anyone.
* Brian M. Cupps,* / Omaha/


*Unions don’t lobby?*
Al Mumm again tilts at windmills in his June 16 letter. This time, he
actually made me chortle, accusing “corporate America” of lobbying for
its interests.
Ha! So unions don’t do this?
Before Mr. Mumm points his accusing finger at corporate America, let’s
discuss the closed shop that forces workers to pay union dues and
political contributions despite the will of its members. Don’t forget
the corrupt union leaders, the strong-arm organizing tactics and the
resulting collapse of the labor movement. Remember the old adage,
“People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”
Additionally, if illegal immigration is such a job problem, perhaps
unions should use their lobbying dollars to support curbs on illegal
immigration. But I suspect they don’t know how to contribute to
conservative political campaigns. As an alternative, why not convince
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to reverse her stand on illegal- immigration
issues?
And tax dollars to support the underemployed? While Republicans recently
have wantonly spent money like drunken sailors, at least they haven’t
increased taxes, as the Democrats have proposed.
* Peter Lahti,* / Omaha/





Opinions should be based on fact not fiction

Unions and their members fought and died for child labor laws, Social Security, safety,
good pay, pensions, benefits,... Get my point?

Let me use two publicly traded competitors. UPS is union and making a
profit. (1) Fed Ex pays a union wage and benefits to keep the unions
out, but it is losing money. (2) Take a bow, my brothers and sisters in
the Teamsters. Bad management often blames unions for it's woes.

Nebraska has been a right to work state since 1946 (3). No person shall
be denied employment because of membership in or affiliation with, or
resignation or expulsion from a labor organization.

Yes unions lobby on all working family issues. *AFL-CIO's first-quarter
lobbying reached $540,000 on issues from executive pay to mortgages. (4)*

Yes we are employees. We are responsible for most of sweat that makes
the profits a company makes. The chief executive of a Standard & Poor's
500 company made, on average, $14.2 million in total compensation in
2007 (5) What does a single parent or average Joe get at these companies?

On corruption. Did you forget already about Ken Lay or perhaps Tom
Delay? (6) Former Congressman Delay qualifies as a corrupt leader!

Texas District Judge Joe Hart (Austin) ruled last week that a political
action committee (PAC) established by US House of Representatives
Majority Leader Tom DeLay was guilty of failing to report $600,000 in
contributions, primarily from corporations. Since 1905, Texas law has
explicitly prohibited corporate or union donations to political campaigns.

Unions showed power at the polls on super Tuesday. (7)

Union members turned out in big numbers in yesterday’s Super Tuesday 23-state primary election. According to exit polls in California, union households made up 32 percent of the vote in the nation’s most populous state. Union voters made up 33 percent of the vote in Connecticut, 30 percent in Delaware, 38 percent in Illinois, 27 percent in Massachusetts, 27 percent in Missouri, 35 percent in New Jersey and 40 percent in New York.

The 2008 budget spends more to watch unions (7% of the population) than it does on all that work safety per capita. (8)


The Bush budget also targets unions and union members. Holt Baker called for blocking budget funding for programs that

harass, intimidate and persecute unions and union activists who seek to engage in the lawful pursuit of representative duties. Despite its cuts in programs protecting workers, the Bush administration continues to seek funding increases in its FY 2009 budget for programs that audit, investigate and prosecute unions. (9)

On immigration, 75% of my ancestors came to the US in search of religious freedom or to make a better living in the land of opportunity. Lady Liberty greeted most of them. Why should the US deny others the same chance? Unless your FULL BLOODED Native Indian by birth, your kind of a hypocrite.

(10)
“Irish immigrants often crowded into subdivided homes that were intended for single families, living in tiny, cramped spaces. Cellars, attics and make-do spaces in alleys became home. Not only were many immigrants unable to afford better housing, but the mud huts in which many had lived in had lowered their expectations. Irish immigrants often entered the workforce at the bottom of the occupational ladder and took on the menial and dangerous jobs that were often avoided by other workers. West Virginia coal operators fired union laborers and gave the jobs to Irish Immigrant workers because, “ coal company owned them.”

About the underemployed. Why not repeal the tax breaks given to the ultra rich by President Bush? Restoration of a tax on them doesn't effect 94% of us that are much less fortunate.

In closing. "Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

President Eisenhower November 8, 1954


Happy Labor Day.

Steven L Dawes




1
http://investor.shareholder.com/ups/news/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=317875
*June 23, 2008 —* UPS (NYSE:UPS) today announced it expects earnings per
diluted share for the second quarter within a range of $0.83-to-$0.88
compared to the $0.97-to $1.04 per share the company originally anticipated.

2 http://ir.fedex.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=316904

MEMPHIS, Tenn., June 18, 2008 ... FedEx Corp. (NYSE: FDX) today reported
a loss of $0.78 per diluted share for the fourth quarter ended May 31,
compared to earnings of $1.96 per diluted share a year ago. The
quarter's results include the previously announced charge of $891
million ($696 million, net of tax, or $2.22 per diluted share) related
predominately to one-time, non-cash asset impairment charges. These
charges were associated with the decision to minimize the use of the
Kinko's trade name and a reduction in the value of the goodwill
resulting from the Kinko's acquisition. Last year's fourth quarter
included a $0.06 per diluted share net benefit from a settlement with
Airbus related to the A380 aircraft order cancellation. Excluding these
items, earnings were $1.45 per diluted share in the fourth quarter
compared to $1.90 per diluted share a year ago.

"Record high fuel prices and the weak U.S. economy dampened volume
growth and substantially affected our bottom line," said Frederick W.
Smith, FedEx Corp. chairman, president and chief executive officer.
"Despite the challenging conditions, our team members continue their
outstanding performance in support of our customers, as service levels
and morale remain high. We will continue to reduce expenses to match
volume and revenue expectations."

3 http://www.nrtw.org/c/nertwlaw.htm
*Sec. 13. Labor organizations; no denial of employment; closed shop not
permitted.* No person shall be denied employment because of membership
in or affiliation with, or resignation or expulsion from a labor
organization or because of refusal to join or affiliate with a labor
organization; nor shall any individual or corporation or association of
any kind enter into any contract, written or oral, to exclude persons
from employment because of membership in or nonmembership in a labor
organization. (Adopted at General Election November 5, 1946; effective
December 11, 1946.)

4
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/apwire/5274238cef03feb1dcc49e7e035ecc44.htm
June 13, 2008: 03:03 PM EST

NEW YORK (Associated Press) - The AFL-CIO, the nation's largest
federation of labor unions, spent $540,000 in the first quarter to lobby
on issues ranging from executive salaries to mortgage reform, according
to a disclosure report.

Executive compensation is a top issue for the union, which supports
legislation that would require publicly traded companies to submit
executive pay plans to a nonbinding annual shareholder vote.

The union also lobbied on a short-term moratorium on home foreclosures,
better protection of employees and retirees in bankruptcy, immigration
and visas, global warming, patent reform and oversight of the Securities
and Exchange Commission.

The AFL-CIO lobbied on several defense-related matters, including a $35
billion tanker-refueling contract awarded to European Aeronautic Defence
and Space Co. and U.S.-based partner Northrop Grumman Corp. Boeing Co.
is protesting the award with support from unions because of the
potential loss of American jobs.

The Government Accountability Office is scheduled to rule on Boeing's
protest by June 19.

The AFL-CIO is composed of 56 national and international unions,
including the Air Line Pilots Association, Communications Workers of
America and United Mine Workers of America.

Besides Congress, the union lobbied the SEC, the departments of State,
Treasury and Defense, and other agencies in the first three months of
the year, according to the report filed April 21 with the House clerk's
office. Top of page
<http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/apwire/5274238cef03feb1dcc49e7e035ecc44.htm#TOP>

5 http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/
The chief executive of a Standard & Poor's 500 company made, on average,
$14.2 million in total compensation in 2007, according to preliminary
data from The Corporate Library. Problems with executive compensation
came to a head in 2007 with large severance packages given to CEOs of
companies at the center of the mortgage crisis. The International
Monetary Fund estimates that the financial turmoil set off by the
collapse of the mortgage market could total nearly $1 trillion. Yet,
chief executive officers of the firms most responsible for causing the
crisis collected hundreds of millions of dollars in pay last year. This
highlights the need for further reform to protect companies and their
investors.

6 http://uspolitics.about.com/b/2005/06/01/judge-rules-in-delay-pac-case.htm

7 http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/02/06/super-t-super-union-turnout/

8 http://www.walletpop.com/2008/06/06/government-spends-more-to-watch-unions-than-employers-do/
President Bush wants $58 million for the Office of Labor Management Standards. It protects union workers from financial funny business by unions, unfair union elections and unions that violate certain worker rights, like free speech. That works out to $2,500 per union. Unions definitely need regulation and oversight to keep them honest, just like any other organization. But $2,500 worth? It's hard to imagine any government -- federal, state or local -- blowing that much money per institution they regulate.

By contrast, EPI points out, Bush wants only $158 million for the Wage and Hour Division, which enforces child labor laws, overtime rules and the Family and Medical Leave Act, among other labor standards. They're looking out for 150 million workers versus the 13 million under the protection of the OLMS. But the government only wants to spend $26 per employer. Over the whole Bush presidency, Bush has increased funding on the union oversight office by 9%, but cut funding on employer oversight by 21%. If you're a worker, which one are you more worried about?

Also http://blog.aflcio.org/2007/12/21/bush-forces-cuts-in-workplace-safety-and-health-budgets/
Peg Seminario, the AFL-CIO’s safety and health director, notes that in the recently passed omnibus budget bill, Congress cut the budget of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Overall funding for fiscal 2008 is $486 million, about $1 million less than last year. Even though the budget was cut, funding for federal enforcement was increased.

9 http://blog.aflcio.org/2008/03/13/economy-tanking-bush-says-cut-job-funds-worker-programs/

10 http://laborrightsblog.typepad.com/international_labor_right/2008/03/no-irish-need-a.html#more

[TeamsterDem]

1. Hope this helps

The first guy says that unions "once could deliver high wages and benefits to workers." Evidently that "once" is now -> http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm which describes that union members made on average $863 while non-union workers made $663, or an approximate union premium of 23%. And since he's the one who pointed out that "unions must remember that their members are the employees," then it would appear the members are reaping an approximate benefit of 23% relating to their wages. In addition, if unions should simply be "happy" with their government contracts that would appear to be at variance with his own statement that union members are employees - employees who work in both the public and private sector. Therefore, seeking to represent workers in the private sector is by his own definition of who unions represent a necessary element.

The second guy says that the "closed shop that forces workers to pay union dues and
political contributions despite the will of its members." The problem is that all union shops - closed or open - are inherent byproducts of the "will" of those workers considering that to be unionized a firm must've had an NLRB election in which the majority of the workers expressed their desire to be in the union; that is inherently the will; their will to be in the union (and thus pay dues) has already been expressed. The political contributions argument is BS, point him to Beck v. CWA as evidence of that.