BUCKNACKT'S SORDID TAWDRY BLOG We should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive & well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate, bier or wein in hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WHOO-HOO, WHAT A RIDE!!!!!!"
Showing posts with label AFL-CIO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AFL-CIO. Show all posts
02 February 2017
06 April 2013
Obama Budget Proposal Cuts Are 'Unconscionable,' Says AFL-CIO & What's the 'Chained CPI,' Why It's Bad for Social Security and Why the White House Shouldn't Be Touting It (VIDEO) 6&4APR13
MORE of the political backlash from the Progressive and Labor communities. Pres Obama may plan on sticking to his proposal, but the Democrats in Congress will pay if they go along with his plan. There is no way people are going to volunteer for and donate to Democrats up for reelection if these politicians give in and vote for the chained cpi proposal or any cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. We, the Bold Progressives, labor activist, and the people of faith who got Pres Obama reelected will prevail in this battle. He has till Wednesday to come up with a better plan. A few articles on this from HuffPost......
Follow Robert Reich on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RBReich
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/chained-cpi_b_3016471.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications
WASHINGTON -- President Obama hasn't formally proposed his "compromise" budget plan yet, but the White House can already see cracks forming among its trusted progressive coalition over cutbacks to cherished safety net programs.
On Saturday, organized labor quickly made good on its promise to oppose a White House budget that includes cuts to Social Security and Medicare, with the AFL-CIO labor federation ripping the president's expected proposal with unusually tough language in an email blast to activists.
The email (below) came with the subject heading, "Obama's really bad idea."
"From all reports I’ve seen, President Obama is going to propose a budget plan next week that is unprecedented for a Democratic president," said the email from Damon Silvers, the AFL-CIO's policy director. "It will propose a cut to Social Security benefits for seniors, veterans and people with disabilities."
"It is unconscionable to ask seniors, people with disabilities and veterans who are barely making it to be squeezed even tighter at a time when corporations and the wealthiest 2% are not paying their fair share of taxes, despite soaring profits."
That the AFL-CIO would oppose such a budget comes as no big surprise -- the federation has been saying as much since the day after Obama's election victory over Mitt Romney. But the fact that one of the president's strongest allies is preemptively calling his proposal "unconscionable" hints at some of the withering criticism Obama can expect to come from his left flank.
The president will propose his budget on Wednesday. As HuffPost has reported, it is likely to include a proposal to readjust the way the cost of living is calculated for Social Security beneficiaries. Known as "chained CPI," the switch will effectively reduce payments over time. The budget is also expected to include additional means testing for Medicare.
The budget would trim the deficit by an estimated $1.8 trillion over a decade, with $600 billion in savings coming from revenue and $1.2 trillion coming from domestic program and entitlement cuts, according to the New York Times.
While the inclusion of chained CPI and other cuts strengthen the possibility of a "grand bargain" over the budget, many to Obama's left seem to be questioning the prudence of starting negotiations so close to the middle. Count the AFL-CIO among them.
In his email, Silvers steered activists to a petition and urged them to "tell President Obama: No 'chained CPI and no cuts to Medicare, Medicaid or other cuts to Social Security benefits. Period.'
Read the email in full:
From all reports I’ve seen, President Obama is going to propose a budget plan next week that is unprecedented for a Democratic president. It will propose a cut to Social Security benefits for seniors, veterans and people with disabilities.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/06/obama-budget-proposal-cut_n_3029598.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotificationsIt appears the proposed cut will take the form of “chained” CPI—a discredited way of calculating annual cost-of-living increases that does not keep up with actual costs, eating into benefits.But there’s more. The president’s budget proposal also would require middle-class seniors—people who make $47,000 a year and more—to pay higher Medicare premiums.These cuts are bad policy. And the only way we’re going to stop them is if President Obama and all members of Congress hear that we’re not going to tolerate them. Sign our petition to the president NOW.It is unconscionable to ask seniors, people with disabilities and veterans who are barely making it to be squeezed even tighter at a time when corporations and the wealthiest 2% are not paying their fair share of taxes, despite soaring profits.It’s bad policy to make cuts that will weaken our economic recovery.And it’s wrong, at a time of record income inequality and stagnant wages, to make the gap even worse by undercutting the retirement security of working- and middle-class Americans.The majority of Americans oppose cuts to our country’s most important family protection programs. It’s time to make some noise about it.We need to invest in America's working families, not pull the rug out from under them. That starts with repealing the sequester and making corporations and the richest 2% pay their fair share. And that should never, ever include cuts to benefits that millions of working families rely on.Tell President Obama: No “chained” CPI and no cuts to Medicare, Medicaid or other cuts to Social Security benefits. Period.:In Solidarity,Damon Silvers
Director of Policy, AFL-CIO
What's the 'Chained CPI,' Why It's Bad for Social Security and Why the White House Shouldn't Be Touting It (VIDEO)
The White House and prominent Democrats are talking about reducing future Social Security payments by using a formula for adjusting for inflation that's stingier than the current one. It'scalled the "Chained CPI." I did this video so you can understand it -- and understand why it's so wrongheaded.
Even Social Security's current inflation adjustment understates the true impact of inflation on the elderly. That's because they spend 20 to 40 percent of their incomes on health care, and health-care costs have been rising faster than inflation. So why adopt a new inflation adjustment that's even stingier than the current one?
Social Security benefits are already meager for most recipients. The median income of Americans over 65 is less than $20,000 a year. Nearly 70 percent of them depend on Social Security for more than half of this. The average Social Security benefit is less than $15,000 a year.
Besides, Social Security isn't in serious trouble. The Social Security trust fund is flush for at least two decades. If we want to ensure it's there beyond that, there's an easy fix -- just lift the ceiling on income subject to Social Security taxes, which is now $113,700.
Why are Democrats even suggesting the inflation adjustment be reduced? Republicans aren't asking for it. Not even Paul Ryan's draconian budget includes it.
Democrats invented Social Security and have been protecting it for almost 80 years. They shouldn't be leading the charge against it.
ROBERT B. REICH, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage," now available in paperback. He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
Follow Robert Reich on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RBReich
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/chained-cpi_b_3016471.html?utm_source=Alert-blogger&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Email%2BNotifications
28 March 2013
Fix your job 27MAR13
IF you're like me you haven't had a raise in many years while the cost of everything has increased substantially and the profit margin of your employer has increased benefiting only upper management. I am thankful I kept my job during the recession but resent the way economic instability has been used by employers to keep employees "in line" through subtle rumblings and rumors circulated throughout the workplace. The sense of underlying stress, insecurity and uncertainty coupled with income stagnation is not healthy for the company and it's employees. Working America seeks to educate and empower employees, take their survey, at the least it is a chance to vent about your job without fear of reprisal...And if you are interested check out
Wealth Inequality in America & A TED Talk on Income Inequality by Nick Hanauer & Bill Maher on The Wealth Gap in America and the World (VIDEOS) 17MAI&20NOV12 & 3DEZ11 http://bucknacktssordidtawdryblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/wealth-inequality-in-america-video.html
What if when you had a question or a concern about your workplace, you could go somewhere and get answers? With fixmyjob.com, a new site from our friends at Working America, every worker will have a resource to get more information or privately raise concerns. But for fixmyjob.com to be successful, we need to know more about people who work. Can you take a few minutes to answer some quick questions about your current job, or the last job you had? It shouldn’t take long to fill out the survey, but your answers will help us shape fixmyjob.com to make it as useful as possible for workers seeking help. You’re not alone, and we want to know how best we can help you. Fill out the quick survey now to share your story of work and to make sure fixmyjob.com becomes a powerful tool to support workers: go.aflcio.org/fix-my-job In Solidarity, Nicole --- Nicole Aro Digital Director, AFL-CIO |
20 October 2012
Pa. ads create confusion and fear on voter ID, voting rights advocates say 19OKT12
IT is always people claiming to love this country so much who are behind the attempts to take away civil liberties and civil rights....just like the attempt to deny people their right to vote in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Texas, Wisconsin and too many other states across the country, and the ongoing campaigns of lies, misinformation and deception concerning voter ID requirements. This from the Washington Post....
By Bill Turque
Despite an Oct. 2 ruling
by a Pennsylvania judge putting the state’s new voter ID law on hold, a
series of misleading ads and announcements is sowing confusion and fear
among residents with just two weeks until Election Day, civil rights
and union leaders contend.
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson ruled that election officials can still ask voters for photo identification but cannot require it. Simpson called the photo ID requirement reasonable and non-discriminatory but said there was not enough time before the Nov. 6 election to ensure that voters who lacked it were not disenfranchised by the change in the law.
That critical detail in Simpson’s opinion — that photo ID is not required in this election — has been lost in much of the $5 million advertising campaign by the Pennsylvania Department of State, voters rights advocates charge. On buses, an ad displays a photo ID with “SHOW IT” in big block lettering. In smaller type, it says photo ID is not mandatory. Moreover, state officials acknowledge that it was not until Tuesday, a full two weeks after the court opinion, that the last of the pre-decision billboards announcing photo ID as a requirement came down.
Confusion was compounded when PECO, the Philadelphia power company, sent a newsletter to 840,000 customers in its October billing with an announcement that voters must have a valid photo ID. A company spokesman said that the bills started going out a couple of days before the court decision and that an updated announcement is on its Web site. He said the information will be corrected in the November billing, which will be mailed Oct. 28.
Irwin Aronson, an attorney for the AFL-CIO’s Lawyers Coordinating Committee, a group of 2,000 volunteer labor attorneys working on elections rights issues in key states, said that the act of poll workers asking for photo ID could suppress the vote in some communities.
“We’re very concerned,” he said, adding that poll workers, who are not required by the state to undergo training, may not be fully versed on the court decision, which could slow lines and ultimately discourage people from voting.
Late Friday, the Advancement Project, a civil rights organization, filed a petition asking Simpson to order Pennsylvania officials to cease advertising and distributing information about the photo ID requirement.
Courts this year have struck down or weakened measures passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures to tighten voting rules or limit early balloting. Judges have rejected new ID laws in Wisconsin and Texas, and the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by Ohio officials of a ruling that opened the door for all voters to cast ballots on the weekend before Election Day.
Wendy Weiser, a lawyer at the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan think tank at New York University’s law school, said that while courts have played “a critical role” in restoring voter rights, the recently resolved legal fights have left a residual uncertainty.
In a conference call with reporters Thursday, AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Arlene Holt Baker announced that the labor organization would do targeted mailings and place robocalls to 100,000 union households in Pennsylvania, emphasizing that photo ID is not compulsory.
“We cannot let tactics like this stand,” Holt Baker said.
Ron Ruman, a spokesman for Secretary of State Carol Aichele (R), said the bus ads are faithful to Simpson’s ruling, which says that education and outreach on the transition to photo ID should continue. “That’s the direction we took from his ruling,” he said.
As for the billboards, Ruman said the department contacted its media buyer on the day of the ruling to ask for removal. “Unfortunately, it ended up being about two weeks,” he said.
Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson ruled that election officials can still ask voters for photo identification but cannot require it. Simpson called the photo ID requirement reasonable and non-discriminatory but said there was not enough time before the Nov. 6 election to ensure that voters who lacked it were not disenfranchised by the change in the law.
That critical detail in Simpson’s opinion — that photo ID is not required in this election — has been lost in much of the $5 million advertising campaign by the Pennsylvania Department of State, voters rights advocates charge. On buses, an ad displays a photo ID with “SHOW IT” in big block lettering. In smaller type, it says photo ID is not mandatory. Moreover, state officials acknowledge that it was not until Tuesday, a full two weeks after the court opinion, that the last of the pre-decision billboards announcing photo ID as a requirement came down.
Confusion was compounded when PECO, the Philadelphia power company, sent a newsletter to 840,000 customers in its October billing with an announcement that voters must have a valid photo ID. A company spokesman said that the bills started going out a couple of days before the court decision and that an updated announcement is on its Web site. He said the information will be corrected in the November billing, which will be mailed Oct. 28.
Irwin Aronson, an attorney for the AFL-CIO’s Lawyers Coordinating Committee, a group of 2,000 volunteer labor attorneys working on elections rights issues in key states, said that the act of poll workers asking for photo ID could suppress the vote in some communities.
“We’re very concerned,” he said, adding that poll workers, who are not required by the state to undergo training, may not be fully versed on the court decision, which could slow lines and ultimately discourage people from voting.
Late Friday, the Advancement Project, a civil rights organization, filed a petition asking Simpson to order Pennsylvania officials to cease advertising and distributing information about the photo ID requirement.
Courts this year have struck down or weakened measures passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures to tighten voting rules or limit early balloting. Judges have rejected new ID laws in Wisconsin and Texas, and the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by Ohio officials of a ruling that opened the door for all voters to cast ballots on the weekend before Election Day.
Wendy Weiser, a lawyer at the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan think tank at New York University’s law school, said that while courts have played “a critical role” in restoring voter rights, the recently resolved legal fights have left a residual uncertainty.
In a conference call with reporters Thursday, AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Arlene Holt Baker announced that the labor organization would do targeted mailings and place robocalls to 100,000 union households in Pennsylvania, emphasizing that photo ID is not compulsory.
“We cannot let tactics like this stand,” Holt Baker said.
Ron Ruman, a spokesman for Secretary of State Carol Aichele (R), said the bus ads are faithful to Simpson’s ruling, which says that education and outreach on the transition to photo ID should continue. “That’s the direction we took from his ruling,” he said.
As for the billboards, Ruman said the department contacted its media buyer on the day of the ruling to ask for removal. “Unfortunately, it ended up being about two weeks,” he said.
25 August 2011
AFL-CIO's Trumka Outlines New Strategy 24AUG11
THE focus on local politics by the fire fighters union is a smart move, one that other unions would do well to copy. That is the strategy tea-baggers like fotze michelle bachmann used in their climb to power. Local organizations are more likely to influence the electorate and gain favorable results, and their influence then grows through the local, state and then national government. It is time to turn the tea-baggers tactics on them, time to stop being on the defensive all the time and take the initiative away from the tea-baggers and the extremist in the gop and return power to the people. It will take time to take back our country, but persistence will yield results and the destructive policies of the gop and tea-baggers can be stopped. From HuffPost....
WASHINGTON -- Faced with hostility from Democrats and Republicans alike, as well as scant hope that his organizational objectives can be accomplished, one of the most powerful union officials in the country is pledging to fundamentally revamp the way his outfit conducts political business.
In an interview with The Huffington Post, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka called the current climate "absolutely" the worst he has seen during the course of his 40-year career in organized labor. His 11-million-plus federation has been forced to adjust, he said, and is making a concerted push to expand their campaign operation so the organization can better pressure lawmakers while in office, and not just on the campaign trail.
"In the past we've spent a significant amount of resources on candidates and party structures, and the day after election, workers were no stronger then they were the day before," Trumka said, during a sit down at his Washington D.C. office slightly more than a week ago.
"What we are now focused on is doing a couple of things differently," Trumka said. "In the past, we would build our structure six to eight months before the election," he added. "Now we're not going to do that. We're going to focus our resources on building a structure that has total fidelity towards America's working people, both union and non-union working people. We'll do it 12 months a year, so they'll be able to transition from electoral politics, to advocacy, to accountability with no effort. And it will continue to build greater strength for workers after the election and in between elections."
The comments from the AFL-CIO chief provide a detailed outline of the vision he has in store for a tinkered -- but still-powerful -- campaign apparatus. To execute that vision, the union federation is outfitting itself with some new tools, including a super PAC that will allow it to raise unlimited funds from corporations, individuals and other unions.
The AFL-CIO doesn't just plan to extend its political engagement, but to hyper-localize it as well.
"One of the most important aspects of the labor movement, which is different then for other entities, is that we have an enormous network of local community workers who are responsible for talking to people after their election," one top union official said. "The experience of the last six years should teach progressives a great deal about the difference between elected people who say the right thing in their candidate questionnaires and the people who are there voting for workers, voting for jobs and advocating our positions."
"There was a perception in the progressive community in January 2009 that things had gotten pretty good," the official, who requested anonymity, added. "But we didn't have an infrastructure in place to say we need a bigger stimulus, or we need to be concerned about jobs or we need to have a different national agenda."
For Trumka too, the issue of post-election follow-through has now taken on paramount importance. While he said he wouldn't "draw lines in the sand" in terms of what future debt reduction recommendations the AFL-CIO would support, he did make it clear that there were certain promises he expected labor-endorsed lawmakers to uphold, certainly when the topics turned to Social Security and Medicare.
"How do you tell someone like my dad, who retired the day he was 62, that he has to work to 67? It would have been a death sentence for him," said Trumka. "He couldn't have worked to 67 -- he was completely disabled of black lung. So what do you tell then? You tell them that they ought to be able to retire at a lower range."
President Obama, who was endorsed by the AFL-CIO in the 2008 elections, proposed raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 during debt ceiling negotiations, and he seems likely to embrace the idea again when he makes his recommendations to the congressional supercommittee tasked with finding $1.5 trillion in additional debt reduction.
Trumka remains an administration ally who will, it appears, be in the president's corner during the reelection campaign.
"Barack Obama's a friend," he said, "and when you place him in the context of those who are running against him right now, he is a giant."
But the past disappointments -- including the non-movement on the Employee Free Choice Act and the public health insurance option, the renewal of the Bush tax cuts and the consistent push for free trade deals -- are impossible to ignore, even with the president speaking out recently in defense of collective bargaining and public sector unions.
More than a dozen trade unions plan to sit out the 2012 Democratic National Convention because it's being held in North Carolina, a right to work state. The International Association of Fire Fighters has closed their federal PAC, convinced they can get a bigger bang for their buck on the local level. And even Trumka, in an interview that was largely respectful if not appreciative, let his frustrations show.
"I think the President made a strategic mistake when he abandoned talking about the jobs crisis and job creation and focused completely on the politically manufactured debt crisis," he said when asked for a review of the administration's economic record. "You have one very obvious way to make a dent in the deficit crisis, which is to get people back to work."
"But you don't have anyone actually talking about jobs," Trumka said. "And when you bring it up to people at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, their almost universal response is we have a Congress that won't do it. So what do you do? You do what leaders do, you lead."
WASHINGTON -- Faced with hostility from Democrats and Republicans alike, as well as scant hope that his organizational objectives can be accomplished, one of the most powerful union officials in the country is pledging to fundamentally revamp the way his outfit conducts political business.
In an interview with The Huffington Post, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka called the current climate "absolutely" the worst he has seen during the course of his 40-year career in organized labor. His 11-million-plus federation has been forced to adjust, he said, and is making a concerted push to expand their campaign operation so the organization can better pressure lawmakers while in office, and not just on the campaign trail.
"In the past we've spent a significant amount of resources on candidates and party structures, and the day after election, workers were no stronger then they were the day before," Trumka said, during a sit down at his Washington D.C. office slightly more than a week ago.
"What we are now focused on is doing a couple of things differently," Trumka said. "In the past, we would build our structure six to eight months before the election," he added. "Now we're not going to do that. We're going to focus our resources on building a structure that has total fidelity towards America's working people, both union and non-union working people. We'll do it 12 months a year, so they'll be able to transition from electoral politics, to advocacy, to accountability with no effort. And it will continue to build greater strength for workers after the election and in between elections."
The comments from the AFL-CIO chief provide a detailed outline of the vision he has in store for a tinkered -- but still-powerful -- campaign apparatus. To execute that vision, the union federation is outfitting itself with some new tools, including a super PAC that will allow it to raise unlimited funds from corporations, individuals and other unions.
The AFL-CIO doesn't just plan to extend its political engagement, but to hyper-localize it as well.
"One of the most important aspects of the labor movement, which is different then for other entities, is that we have an enormous network of local community workers who are responsible for talking to people after their election," one top union official said. "The experience of the last six years should teach progressives a great deal about the difference between elected people who say the right thing in their candidate questionnaires and the people who are there voting for workers, voting for jobs and advocating our positions."
"There was a perception in the progressive community in January 2009 that things had gotten pretty good," the official, who requested anonymity, added. "But we didn't have an infrastructure in place to say we need a bigger stimulus, or we need to be concerned about jobs or we need to have a different national agenda."
For Trumka too, the issue of post-election follow-through has now taken on paramount importance. While he said he wouldn't "draw lines in the sand" in terms of what future debt reduction recommendations the AFL-CIO would support, he did make it clear that there were certain promises he expected labor-endorsed lawmakers to uphold, certainly when the topics turned to Social Security and Medicare.
"How do you tell someone like my dad, who retired the day he was 62, that he has to work to 67? It would have been a death sentence for him," said Trumka. "He couldn't have worked to 67 -- he was completely disabled of black lung. So what do you tell then? You tell them that they ought to be able to retire at a lower range."
President Obama, who was endorsed by the AFL-CIO in the 2008 elections, proposed raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 during debt ceiling negotiations, and he seems likely to embrace the idea again when he makes his recommendations to the congressional supercommittee tasked with finding $1.5 trillion in additional debt reduction.
Trumka remains an administration ally who will, it appears, be in the president's corner during the reelection campaign.
"Barack Obama's a friend," he said, "and when you place him in the context of those who are running against him right now, he is a giant."
But the past disappointments -- including the non-movement on the Employee Free Choice Act and the public health insurance option, the renewal of the Bush tax cuts and the consistent push for free trade deals -- are impossible to ignore, even with the president speaking out recently in defense of collective bargaining and public sector unions.
More than a dozen trade unions plan to sit out the 2012 Democratic National Convention because it's being held in North Carolina, a right to work state. The International Association of Fire Fighters has closed their federal PAC, convinced they can get a bigger bang for their buck on the local level. And even Trumka, in an interview that was largely respectful if not appreciative, let his frustrations show.
"I think the President made a strategic mistake when he abandoned talking about the jobs crisis and job creation and focused completely on the politically manufactured debt crisis," he said when asked for a review of the administration's economic record. "You have one very obvious way to make a dent in the deficit crisis, which is to get people back to work."
"But you don't have anyone actually talking about jobs," Trumka said. "And when you bring it up to people at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, their almost universal response is we have a Congress that won't do it. So what do you do? You do what leaders do, you lead."
15 May 2011
In 'Survival' Mode, Union Lashes Out At Democrats 11MAI11
THIS is a warning shot to the Democratic Party, and is a threat not without merit. It reflects the disgust of the left wing base of the party with the constant caving in to repiglican and tea-bagger demands that end up hurting the poor, the working class and the middle class. This constant giving in and kow-towing to the repiglicans and tea-baggers also sends the wrong message to the American electorate. Passing the opposition's legislation in order to get something passed, or to keep the government open raises the question of any difference between to two parties and who they are actually representing. The Democrats have less then a year to prove to the American people they are the party that is in fact representing our best interest. The budget negotiations over raising the deficit cap will provide the answer, and if it is just more "compromise" then I think the Democratic Party will find itself short of cash and campaign workers for the 2012 elections.
There's new tension in the marriage of organized labor and the Democratic Party.
Unions were already angry that Democrats in Congress haven't done more for them. And now, as Republican-controlled state legislatures take aim at labor's bargaining and political power, some union leaders say national Democrats aren't showing enough solidarity.
'Weak Friends, Or Worse'
In a little publicized but bluntly phrased speech last month, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka gave some union lawyers a dire prediction of what's ahead for organized labor.
He said the Republican assaults on unions amount to "true existential challenges," and that labor needs to demand accountability from its allies, including "Democrats who have been weak friends, or worse."
The AFL-CIO itself isn't ready to take any dramatic steps, but one public employees union is.
Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, says his union is going to stop giving contributions to federal candidates and federal party committees "for an indefinite period of time."
He says national Democrats don't stand up against the Republicans' anti-union offensive. "It's orchestrated, it's centralized, it's very disciplined," he says.
Now, Schaitberger says, the firefighters union will direct its money and energy to the states, "where we are engaged in survival."
Taking A Stand
If other unions were to follow the firefighters, congressional Democrats would be in a tough spot.
In 2010, unions gave $65 million to congressional candidates and party committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Of that money, 94 percent went to Democrats.
This year, though, Republicans in Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio have passed laws undercutting union bargaining power. A database at the National Council of State Legislatures lists more than 200 similar bills proposed by Republicans in 35 states.
Labor fights back with protests and ads. A TV spot by the firefighters union in Oklahoma says: "We're there when you need us. Now we need you. Tell politicians to do what's right."
So far, the International Association of Fire Fighters is alone in shutting out the national Democrats. But other unions share the deep frustration.
"You know, once in a while, you have to take a clear stand," says Matt McKinnon, political director for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. He says members of his union are still angry that Democrats didn't pass a stronger health care bill.
But "whether we punish all Democrats over that," he says, "I don't think so."
Nowhere Else To Go?
For their part, the Democratic Party and its candidates may seem to look at unions as having bottomless pockets. But Democratic fundraiser Michael Fraioli says that's just not true.
"They have a lot of money," he says. "But as much as they have, they still have to target it."
Last year, Republican challengers took out half of Fraioli's clients in the House. But now, when asked if unions will close their checkbooks to Democrats, Fraioli says no. He predicts that the rift will heal as the 2012 races heat up.
In fact, the biggest union of all — the National Education Association — is already moving toward endorsing President Obama. And Fraioli is not the only boycott skeptic.
"Sometimes, individual unions do follow through with those threats," says Taylor Dark, a political scientist at California State University in Los Angeles. But, he says, the alienated unions usually don't stay away too long.
"Because in our two-party system, they really don't have anywhere else to go."
Enlarge Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images President Obama pats AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka on the back before speaking at the AFL-CIO Executive Council Meeting in Washington last August. Trumka said recently that unions need to start demanding accountability from their allies.
Unions were already angry that Democrats in Congress haven't done more for them. And now, as Republican-controlled state legislatures take aim at labor's bargaining and political power, some union leaders say national Democrats aren't showing enough solidarity.
'Weak Friends, Or Worse'
In a little publicized but bluntly phrased speech last month, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka gave some union lawyers a dire prediction of what's ahead for organized labor.
He said the Republican assaults on unions amount to "true existential challenges," and that labor needs to demand accountability from its allies, including "Democrats who have been weak friends, or worse."
The AFL-CIO itself isn't ready to take any dramatic steps, but one public employees union is.
Harold Schaitberger, president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, says his union is going to stop giving contributions to federal candidates and federal party committees "for an indefinite period of time."
He says national Democrats don't stand up against the Republicans' anti-union offensive. "It's orchestrated, it's centralized, it's very disciplined," he says.
Now, Schaitberger says, the firefighters union will direct its money and energy to the states, "where we are engaged in survival."
Taking A Stand
If other unions were to follow the firefighters, congressional Democrats would be in a tough spot.
In 2010, unions gave $65 million to congressional candidates and party committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Of that money, 94 percent went to Democrats.
Related NPR Stories
Why Unions Matter To Democrats: It's Not Just Money
The real strength in the alliance, say analysts, is the political manpower that unions provide. Union Battles: A 'National Campaign' Against Labor? Feb. 26, 2011
Labor Unions Fight For Their Right To Influence Feb. 23, 2011
Labor fights back with protests and ads. A TV spot by the firefighters union in Oklahoma says: "We're there when you need us. Now we need you. Tell politicians to do what's right."
So far, the International Association of Fire Fighters is alone in shutting out the national Democrats. But other unions share the deep frustration.
"You know, once in a while, you have to take a clear stand," says Matt McKinnon, political director for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. He says members of his union are still angry that Democrats didn't pass a stronger health care bill.
But "whether we punish all Democrats over that," he says, "I don't think so."
Nowhere Else To Go?
For their part, the Democratic Party and its candidates may seem to look at unions as having bottomless pockets. But Democratic fundraiser Michael Fraioli says that's just not true.
"They have a lot of money," he says. "But as much as they have, they still have to target it."
Last year, Republican challengers took out half of Fraioli's clients in the House. But now, when asked if unions will close their checkbooks to Democrats, Fraioli says no. He predicts that the rift will heal as the 2012 races heat up.
In fact, the biggest union of all — the National Education Association — is already moving toward endorsing President Obama. And Fraioli is not the only boycott skeptic.
"Sometimes, individual unions do follow through with those threats," says Taylor Dark, a political scientist at California State University in Los Angeles. But, he says, the alienated unions usually don't stay away too long.
"Because in our two-party system, they really don't have anywhere else to go."
21 April 2011
Executive Pay Skyrockets 23 Percent In 2010, Top 299 CEOs Get $3.4 Billion 19APR11
SEE THE PREVIOUS POST ON THIS BLOG 'GUIDE TO CORPORATE FREELOADERS' POSTED 21APR11 AND KEEP IT IN MIND WHILE READING THIS FROM HUFFPOST....
WASHINGTON -- CEOs at 299 U.S. companies earned a staggering $3.4 billion combined in executive compensation in 2010, a new study by the nation’s largest labor union found.
Nearly 190 of those chief executives got a pay raise compared to their 2009 levels, the AFL-CIO noted in a report presented to reporters on Tuesday. The total amount of compensation represented a 23 percent increase from the prior year. In all, the sum of the salaries earned by those 299 CEOs equalled the combined average earnings of more than 100,000 workers in their respective companies.
The figures, which are part of the union federation’s annual Executive PayWatch -- a searchable database examining publicly available payment information from S&P 500 Companies -- reflect what AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka called a culture of “runaway CEO pay.” The numbers were presented as part of a larger pitch for Congress and the President to clamp down on executive compensation and protect the gains made on this front in the financial regulatory reform bill passed last year.
“The game is pretty rigged when it comes to the directors,” said Trumka. “It is getting a little better because the spotlight that we have been trying to shine on this for 15 years is starting to get a littler brighter now. We are having a moderating effect. But I think if the spotlight were to go away the game would go right back to what it was before."
A request for comment from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which lobbies on behalf of business interests, was not immediately returned.
Under the financial regulatory reform bill, commonly known as Dodd-Frank, shareholders of publicly traded companies are given a say-on-pay vote on executive compensation. While the votes are not binding, union officials view them as a vehicle for spotlighting -- or at least embarrassing -- executives who earn vastly disproportionate wages compared to the rest of their work force.
Among those CEOs highlighted in the AFL-CIO’s presentation were Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman (who was awarded salary, stock and other benefits totaling $84.5 million during just nine months of 2010), Occidental Petroleum CEO Ray Irani (who was paid more than $76 million in compensation) and Abercrombie and Fitch CEO Michael Jeffries (who earned more than $36 million). According to the AFL-CIO report, the average pay of the 299 CEOs would cover the salaries of more than 700 minimum-wage workers.
“The levels of pay that we are seeing today are simply unacceptable,” said Brandon Rees, Deputy Director of the AFL-CIO's Office of Investment.
Outrage over an imbalance in compensation levels is nothing new for the union federation. The 12 million-member AFL-CIO has been putting out Executive PayWatch studies since 1997. Since then, compensation for CEOs has soared dramatically.
At various points, different remedies to curb rising CEO pay have been proposed, including advocating that companies that receive federal funds should be subject to actual caps on executive salaries. Now, however, proponents of limiting CEO pay have scaled back their ambitions, pushing transparency and the subsequent public shame as key remedies.
“This is a particularly important time for shareholders and anybody who wants to hold CEO’s accountable, because the regulations are being written right now… and [companies] are doing everything they can to try and dilute those regulations," said Trumka. "[Any] spotlight that can be put on them right now and their efforts to try to dilute the law and go back to business as usual for Wall Street is very, very helpful.”
UPDATE: J.P. Fielder, a spokesman for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, sends over the following reaction to the AFL-CIO's push to tackle CEO pay.
Source: AFL-CIO analysis of pay data from 299 companies, provided by salary.com.
WASHINGTON -- CEOs at 299 U.S. companies earned a staggering $3.4 billion combined in executive compensation in 2010, a new study by the nation’s largest labor union found.
Nearly 190 of those chief executives got a pay raise compared to their 2009 levels, the AFL-CIO noted in a report presented to reporters on Tuesday. The total amount of compensation represented a 23 percent increase from the prior year. In all, the sum of the salaries earned by those 299 CEOs equalled the combined average earnings of more than 100,000 workers in their respective companies.
The figures, which are part of the union federation’s annual Executive PayWatch -- a searchable database examining publicly available payment information from S&P 500 Companies -- reflect what AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka called a culture of “runaway CEO pay.” The numbers were presented as part of a larger pitch for Congress and the President to clamp down on executive compensation and protect the gains made on this front in the financial regulatory reform bill passed last year.
“The game is pretty rigged when it comes to the directors,” said Trumka. “It is getting a little better because the spotlight that we have been trying to shine on this for 15 years is starting to get a littler brighter now. We are having a moderating effect. But I think if the spotlight were to go away the game would go right back to what it was before."
A request for comment from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which lobbies on behalf of business interests, was not immediately returned.
Under the financial regulatory reform bill, commonly known as Dodd-Frank, shareholders of publicly traded companies are given a say-on-pay vote on executive compensation. While the votes are not binding, union officials view them as a vehicle for spotlighting -- or at least embarrassing -- executives who earn vastly disproportionate wages compared to the rest of their work force.
Among those CEOs highlighted in the AFL-CIO’s presentation were Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman (who was awarded salary, stock and other benefits totaling $84.5 million during just nine months of 2010), Occidental Petroleum CEO Ray Irani (who was paid more than $76 million in compensation) and Abercrombie and Fitch CEO Michael Jeffries (who earned more than $36 million). According to the AFL-CIO report, the average pay of the 299 CEOs would cover the salaries of more than 700 minimum-wage workers.
“The levels of pay that we are seeing today are simply unacceptable,” said Brandon Rees, Deputy Director of the AFL-CIO's Office of Investment.
Outrage over an imbalance in compensation levels is nothing new for the union federation. The 12 million-member AFL-CIO has been putting out Executive PayWatch studies since 1997. Since then, compensation for CEOs has soared dramatically.
At various points, different remedies to curb rising CEO pay have been proposed, including advocating that companies that receive federal funds should be subject to actual caps on executive salaries. Now, however, proponents of limiting CEO pay have scaled back their ambitions, pushing transparency and the subsequent public shame as key remedies.
“This is a particularly important time for shareholders and anybody who wants to hold CEO’s accountable, because the regulations are being written right now… and [companies] are doing everything they can to try and dilute those regulations," said Trumka. "[Any] spotlight that can be put on them right now and their efforts to try to dilute the law and go back to business as usual for Wall Street is very, very helpful.”
UPDATE: J.P. Fielder, a spokesman for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, sends over the following reaction to the AFL-CIO's push to tackle CEO pay.
The Chamber feels that corporate executives’ compensation should be based on a balance of individual accomplishment, corporate performance, adherence to risk management, and compliance with laws and regulations, with a focus on shareholder value. The government should not pick winners and losers.
2011 EXECUTIVE PAYWATCH
| 2010 Average CEO Pay at S&P 500 Companies | |
|---|---|
| Salary | $1,093,989 |
| Bonus | $251,413 |
| Stock Awards | $3,833,052 |
| Option Awards | $2,384,871 |
| Nonequity Incentive Plan Compensation | $2,397,152 |
| Pension and Deferred Compensation Earnings | $1,182,057 |
| All Other Compensation | $215,911 |
| TOTAL | $11,358,445 |
According to the Federal Reserve, U.S. corporations held a record $1.93 trillion in cash on their balance sheets in 2010. But they are not investing to expand their companies, grow the real economy or create good middle-class jobs. Corporate CEOs are literally hoarding their company’s cash—except when it comes to their own paychecks.
In 2010, Standard & Poor's 500 Index company CEOs received, on average, $11.4 million in total compensation— a 23 percent increase in one year.[1] Based on 299 companies’ most recent pay data for 2010, their combined total CEO pay of $3.4 billion could support 102,325 median workers’ jobs.[2]
Fortunately, the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act contains new tools to help limit runaway CEO pay. Shareholders now have a “say-on-pay” vote on executive compensation, and companies must disclose the ratio of CEO-to-worker pay at each company.
Trends in CEO Pay
Learn how CEO pay is being reformed by the Wall Street Reform Act.
Case Studies
Read examples of CEO pay abuses that shareholders should oppose.
CEO Pay Database
Find CEO compensation data for some of the country’s largest companies.
Pay Disparity Ratio
Learn about the new disclosure requirement that is giving CEOs conniptions.
What You Can Do
Tell Congress that you oppose repeal of Dodd-Frank and the pay disparity ratio.
In 2010, Standard & Poor's 500 Index company CEOs received, on average, $11.4 million in total compensation— a 23 percent increase in one year.[1] Based on 299 companies’ most recent pay data for 2010, their combined total CEO pay of $3.4 billion could support 102,325 median workers’ jobs.[2]
Fortunately, the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act contains new tools to help limit runaway CEO pay. Shareholders now have a “say-on-pay” vote on executive compensation, and companies must disclose the ratio of CEO-to-worker pay at each company.
Trends in CEO Pay
Learn how CEO pay is being reformed by the Wall Street Reform Act.
Case Studies
Read examples of CEO pay abuses that shareholders should oppose.
CEO Pay Database
Find CEO compensation data for some of the country’s largest companies.
Pay Disparity Ratio
Learn about the new disclosure requirement that is giving CEOs conniptions.
What You Can Do
Tell Congress that you oppose repeal of Dodd-Frank and the pay disparity ratio.
18 March 2011
Vice President Biden Fires Up Union Activists: Organized Labor Keeps 'Barbarians From The Gate' (AUDIO)
TELL it like it is Joe!!!
WASHINGTON -- Vice President Biden gave the Obama administration's most forceful statement of solidarity with organized labor in its current battles around the nation on Thursday, encouraging activists to continue fighting for workers' rights.
"You guys built the middle class," said Biden in a virtual town hall conversation hosted by the AFL-CIO. "I would just emphasize what Hilda [Solis] said and say it slightly different: We don't see the value of collective bargaining, we see the absolute positive necessity of collective bargaining. Let's get something straight: The only people who have the capacity -- organizational capacity and muscle -- to keep, as they say, the barbarians from the gate, is organized labor. And make no mistake about it, the guys on the other team get it. They know if they cripple labor, the gate is open, man. The gate is wide open. And we know that too."
The e-mail announcement for the call went out to labor activists, including members of the growing advocacy group Working America, and it pitched the call as a conversation with 100,000 supporters about "Republican assaults on collective bargaining in at least a dozen states." AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis joined Biden on the call, where listeners were also allowed to ask questions (although Biden had to leave before that portion).
Biden's comments underscored the importance of labor not only in terms of workers' rights but also politically. He acknowledged the role that unions played in helping launch his political career, and he noted his personal identification with the activists as someone who grew up in the Rust Belt in Scranton, Penn.
"I've got to state the obvious," he said. "There's an old expression: 'You go home with them that brung you to the dance.' You guys all brought me to the dance 36 years ago in Delaware as a United States senator. You've been with me, and I've stayed with you."
Both Biden and Solis used the opportunity to promote what the Obama administration has done for this valuable constituency, such as restoring a level "playing field" at the Labor Department and the National Labor Relations Board upon taking office.
"Now look, I'm sure a lot of you out there saying, 'Gosh, why hasn't the President, why hasn't the Vice President -- why haven't they stopped these guys in the states? Why haven't we been able to do this?' Look folks. We are flat committed," Biden assured the listeners, bringing up the jobs created and retained by the Recovery Act -- many of which were for public workers such as teachers and firefighters.
"Now look. Here's the irony of all this. I find this ridiculous," said Biden later in the call, becoming increasingly passionate. "The very philosophy, the very conservative people who got us in this ditch, who created -- through their greed -- this orgy of focusing on the super wealthy and Wall Street without regulations, the very people who drove us into this ditch, are now the people using you guys as the scapegoats. This is what you call blaming the victim. The people of the neighborhoods we all grew up in and you guys live in, organized labor, they're the very people getting killed right now by this economy. And the audacity these guys that come along and say, 'Hey, this is the fault of collective bargaining' -- that is malarkey."
"I'm available, I'm here, I'm working with you, I wish I could be even more effective than we've been, but this is only the beginning of the fight," he ended.
LISTEN:
WASHINGTON -- Vice President Biden gave the Obama administration's most forceful statement of solidarity with organized labor in its current battles around the nation on Thursday, encouraging activists to continue fighting for workers' rights.
"You guys built the middle class," said Biden in a virtual town hall conversation hosted by the AFL-CIO. "I would just emphasize what Hilda [Solis] said and say it slightly different: We don't see the value of collective bargaining, we see the absolute positive necessity of collective bargaining. Let's get something straight: The only people who have the capacity -- organizational capacity and muscle -- to keep, as they say, the barbarians from the gate, is organized labor. And make no mistake about it, the guys on the other team get it. They know if they cripple labor, the gate is open, man. The gate is wide open. And we know that too."
The e-mail announcement for the call went out to labor activists, including members of the growing advocacy group Working America, and it pitched the call as a conversation with 100,000 supporters about "Republican assaults on collective bargaining in at least a dozen states." AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis joined Biden on the call, where listeners were also allowed to ask questions (although Biden had to leave before that portion).
Biden's comments underscored the importance of labor not only in terms of workers' rights but also politically. He acknowledged the role that unions played in helping launch his political career, and he noted his personal identification with the activists as someone who grew up in the Rust Belt in Scranton, Penn.
"I've got to state the obvious," he said. "There's an old expression: 'You go home with them that brung you to the dance.' You guys all brought me to the dance 36 years ago in Delaware as a United States senator. You've been with me, and I've stayed with you."
Both Biden and Solis used the opportunity to promote what the Obama administration has done for this valuable constituency, such as restoring a level "playing field" at the Labor Department and the National Labor Relations Board upon taking office.
"Now look, I'm sure a lot of you out there saying, 'Gosh, why hasn't the President, why hasn't the Vice President -- why haven't they stopped these guys in the states? Why haven't we been able to do this?' Look folks. We are flat committed," Biden assured the listeners, bringing up the jobs created and retained by the Recovery Act -- many of which were for public workers such as teachers and firefighters.
"Now look. Here's the irony of all this. I find this ridiculous," said Biden later in the call, becoming increasingly passionate. "The very philosophy, the very conservative people who got us in this ditch, who created -- through their greed -- this orgy of focusing on the super wealthy and Wall Street without regulations, the very people who drove us into this ditch, are now the people using you guys as the scapegoats. This is what you call blaming the victim. The people of the neighborhoods we all grew up in and you guys live in, organized labor, they're the very people getting killed right now by this economy. And the audacity these guys that come along and say, 'Hey, this is the fault of collective bargaining' -- that is malarkey."
"I'm available, I'm here, I'm working with you, I wish I could be even more effective than we've been, but this is only the beginning of the fight," he ended.
LISTEN:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)