NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label UAW. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UAW. Show all posts

16 October 2024

SOME POSITIVE OBSERVATIONS FROM SEN BERNIE SANDERS WHILE CAMPAIGNING FOR KAMALA HARRIS & TIM WALZ 15OKT24


 THANK GOD for Sen Bernie Sanders and the work he is doing  for the Harris-Walz campaign! PLEASE volunteer for the campaign or donate whatever you can to the campaign and talk to your family and friends about voting for Kamala Harris & Tim Walz and the rest of the Democratic candidates on your ballot on 5 NOVEMBER 2024!!!

I spent the last few days on the campaign trail for Kamala, Tim, and progressive candidates in the Midwest. It was a helluva trip. In four days we visited Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan. A lot of large crowds and good energy.

Some observations.

On Friday, October 11 we began our campaign swing with a stop in Belvedere, Illinois before a fired up, standing room only crowd of UAW union workers. I was there with UAW President Shawn Fain, one of the outstanding progressive union leaders in America. As you’ll remember, last year the UAW went on strike against the Big 3 automakers and won an excellent contract. Now, Stellantis, one of the Big 3, is trying to renege on the commitment they made in that contract to re-open their plant in Belvedere and put thousands of their employees back to work. Our message at that meeting to Stellantis was simple. End corporate greed. Keep your promise. Re-open the plant.

Belvidere, IllinoisBelvidere, Illinois

Later in the afternoon we flew into Dubuque, Iowa for another rally with union workers. In Dubuque, the John Deere company is continuing to lay off workers as they transfer production lines from the United States to Mexico where they hire workers at one-sixth of the wages they pay here. Like Stellantis, John Deere is making strong profits and giving their CEO a huge compensation package. Our demand to John Deere was straightforward. Stop outsourcing good paying American jobs.

Dubuque, IowaDubuque, Iowa

We finished the day with an evening get-out-the vote rally in St. Paul, Minnesota. The many hundreds of people there were quite clear and quite loud. We’re not going back! Kamala for President.

St. Paul, MinnesotaSt. Paul, Minnesota

On Saturday we did two very well-attended rallies in rural Wisconsin. The day event was in Superior and the evening event was in Baraboo. My message at both events was: (a) we cannot have a pathological liar as President. Donald Trump is unfit to lead the country. That’s not just my opinion. That’s what Republicans Mike Pence, Dick Cheney, and Mitt Romney believe. (b) The progressive agenda is not radical. It’s what the American people overwhelmingly want. We must fight to create an economy and government that works for all, and not just the billionaire class.

Superior, WisconsinSuperior, Wisconsin

Baraboo, WisconsinBaraboo, Wisconsin

On Sunday we continued our campaigning in rural areas. This time in Michigan. We started the day in Traverse City and ended with a large rally in Marquette. The folks at these rallies, young, old, and in-between, understand that the issues in this campaign are crystal clear. Women must be able to control their own bodies, not politicians. Climate change is real, not a “hoax.” Health care is a human right, not a privilege. We need to address the housing crisis which exists in virtually every area of the country.

Traverse City, MichiganTraverse City, Michigan

Marquette, MichiganMarquette, Michigan

On Monday we ended our campaign swing with a couple of events in Milwaukee. First, I spoke at an Alliance for Retired Americans event. While we don’t discuss it much, many seniors in America are struggling. In fact, 25 percent of seniors are trying to survive on $15,000 or less. They can’t afford prescription drugs, health care or other basic necessities. Sadly, the U.S. has the highest rate of senior poverty of almost any wealthy nation. The seniors there were appreciative that Kamala intends to expand Medicare to cover home health care, hearing aids, and vision care.

The last event of this trip was with former Lt. Governor Mandela Barnes and the Working Families Party of Wisconsin. The Working Families Party is doing an outstanding job in Wisconsin and around the country in organizing the working poor - Black, White, Latino, Asian - to stand up for their rights. What we heard at this meeting was distressing, but not surprising. We heard from low-income workers unable to afford to go to a doctor or get the dental care they need. People working 2 or 3 jobs at $14 an hour. Seniors in debt, and unable to pay it off because of high interest rates. Not a happy situation in the wealthiest country on earth.

On Monday night I was on a plane back to Burlington.

Thank you all for making these campaign events possible. Let’s continue to work hard and do everything we can to elect Kamala and Tim and create the kind of country we know we can become.

In solidarity,

Bernie




👋 Before you go... 👋

Bernie recently wrote a best-selling book entitled, "It’s OK To Be Angry About Capitalism." It’s a good book. It’s an important book. It deals with issues that too few people are discussing. And if you make a contribution of ANY amount today, we'll send you a copy, and use the proceeds to continue campaigning across the country ahead of November's elections.

Please use this link to make a contribution — $27 or whatever you can afford today — and we'll get you a copy of Bernie's new book It's Ok To Be Angry About Capitalism.

GET THE BOOK

 

Paid for by Friends of Bernie Sanders

(not the billionaires)

PO BOX 391, Burlington, VT 05402

You can  sign up to receive fewer emails. We hope you'll stay, because emails are such an important part of how we organize and how we raise money. In fact, there is no single greater source for our campaign's fundraising than emails like this one. And that's important, because no one person, not even Bernie Sanders, can take on the billionaire class alone.

Before you go about the rest of your day, help power our fight against the billionaire class by making a contribution today.


25 February 2014

Virginia state senator explains 'host' status of pregnant women & Woman in debunked Obamacare horror story finally speaks ... to Fox News & Daily Kos Recommended 24&25FEB14

steve martin st sen r VA is another of those hypocritical right wing tea-baggers who is pro life until a child is born and then votes against all the programs that will give a child a quality life if they need the help. These people make me sick, their rhetoric is repulsive and disgusting. Equally disgusting is how julie boonstra has agreed to be part of the gop / tea-bagger campaign of lies and deception against Obamacare while she herself benefits from the program while battling cancer. What a bitch! From Daily Kos.....
Hunter

Positive pregnancy test
Congratulations, you're now a "host."
Where do they find these people.
A pregnant woman is just a "host" that should not have the right to end her pregnancy, Virginia State Sen. Steve Martin (R) wrote in a Facebook rant defending his anti-abortion views. [...] "I don't expect to be in the room or will I do anything to prevent you from obtaining a contraceptive," Martin wrote. "However, once a child does exist in your womb, I'm not going to assume a right to kill it just because the child's host (some refer to them as mothers) doesn't want it."
Martin is a personhood advocate, meaning the "host" loses her personhood the minute the sperm and the egg hook up. Sucks to be you, host. If you're in Virginia, Martin is one of the people in charge of your laws, which is (directly) why Virginia dreams up things like mandatory ultrasound laws and (indirectly) a partial explanation for why Ken Cuccinelli was not seen, among Virginia Republicans, as hopelessly nuts. We got rid of one Cuccinelli, but they've got spares. They practically clone the bastards.

Originally posted to Hunter on Mon Feb 24, 2014 at 11:45 AM PST.

Also republished by Virginia Kos, Daily Kos, and Feminism, Pro-Feminism, Womanism: Feminist Issues, Ideas, & Activism

Mon Feb 24, 2014 at 08:19 AM PST

Woman in debunked Obamacare horror story finally speaks ... to Fox News


The subject of the latest debunked Obamacare horror story is finally talking, and of course it's to Fox News. Julie Boonstra is a Michigan resident with leukemia, and she appeared in an Americans For Prosperity ad against Democratic Senate candidate Rep. Gary Peters, saying that Obamacare made her cancer treatment unaffordable because of out of pocket spending. Subsequent fact checking, though, found that her monthly premium payments were essentially cut in half, and the limits the law imposes on out of pocket expenses means that at worse, she'd break even between those costs and her premium saving. The ad also implied she lost access to her doctor, though fact checking determined that her doctor is included in the plan she picked on the exchange. So with no real basis to the story she presented in the ad, how does Boonstra respond? The only way she can, the way Republicans always go, playing the victim.
"They're not scaring me. Cancer scares me," she said. "I battle cancer every day. They're not going to intimidate me." [...] "Under my old policy, I knew what I could afford every single month because I wasn't hit with extra charges. Now I don't know what I have to pay month to month," she said. "Leukemia tests are extremely expensive."
Just to set the record straight, pointing out factual inconsistencies is not intimidation. No one is saying that Boonstra isn't experiencing real angst over having to change health insurance in the middle of her fight with cancer. No one is diminishing her fight with cancer, they're just pointing out some basic truths which show that her story just doesn't add up. And as Brian Beutler points out, if the Koch brothers achieved what they're trying to with this and other ads—repeal—then she would really become a victim. The protections she now has under this law—to never be kicked off her health insurance plan, to never have to worry about having health coverage because of her leukemia, having her annual out of pocket expenses limited, and never having to worry about reaching an annual or lifetime cap where her coverage is just cut off—would be gone if the campaign she's participating in succeeds. Which is, yes, insane.
If Boonstra is a victim, she's the willing victim of the Koch brothers and AFP who would ultimately throw her to the wolves. But if she hates the law that much, fine, whatever. What she's doing, though, jeopardizes every other cancer patient in the nation.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Mon Feb 24, 2014 at 08:19 AM PST.

Also republished by Daily Kos

Daily Kos Recommended

Make change happen. Log in or sign up for Daily Kos, the nation's largest progressive community.

Thanks for all you do,
The Daily Kos team

 http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/24/1280038/-Virginia-State-Sen-explains-host-status-of-pregnant-women?detail=email 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/24/1279971/-Subject-of-debunked-Obamacare-horror-story-finally-speaks-to-Fox-News?detail=email 

 

14 February 2014

BREAKING: Workers threatened; Chattanooga Times Free Press: “'Outrageous' GOP threats on VW union vote” & As Volkswagen workers vote, Tennessee senator ramps up anti-union talk & Why Unions Matter: The Numbers 14&13FEB14&5AUG11

VW has made it clear they are not opposed to workers at their Tennessee factory unionizing. They have said they are used to working with unions in Germany and do not expect a problem if their Tennessee workers vote to join the UAW. But Tennessee's repiglican and tea-bagger politicians have a problem with it, because if these workers unionize then maybe more will, and these additional workers will demand from their employers, many of them wealthy multi-national corporations with executive pay packages that are grossly obscene, a living wage and other benefits. The article from Mother Jones shows how unions even increase the pay scale of nearby business that aren't unionized. This terrifies the corporate America. These politicians are showing who they actually represent, the rich and powerful, the 1%. They are waging class warfare on the workers of Tennessee, and the voters should remember that on election day this November. Sign the petition calling on Tennessee's gop & tea-bagger politicians to stop their threats against the workers of their state and to support their right to unionize if they so choose....


How angry would you be if a company wanted to add jobs in your community, but your own elected officials told them to go to Mexico instead?

That's exactly the situation playing out this week in Tennessee, where Volkswagen factory employees are voting RIGHT NOW on whether to unionize. On the eve of that vote, GOP legislators threatened to scuttle future factory expansions if workers choose to unionize.

These Republican threats are outrageous and unprecedented - please add your name to demand that Tennessee Republicans end their intimidation campaign.

Keep in mind, Volkswagen itself wants to give its workers a voice at this plant. They also want to expand their Tennessee operations to build a new product line.

Tennessee's Republican legislators are the ones trying to force Volkswagen to move the new work to their other plant in Mexico.

Stop the Intimidation: Sign our petition telling Tennessee Republicans to stop threatening workers!

Thank you for helping to stop this outrageous abuse of power at the expense of working families.

Sincerely,

Michael Sargeant
Executive Director
Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee

P.S. Tennessee Republicans' threats against Volkswagen could be illegal under federal labor law - demand an end to the threats today.

As Volkswagen workers vote, Tennessee senator ramps up anti-union talk

WASHINGTON/CHATTANOOGA, Tennessee Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:49pm EST

U.S. Senator Bob Corker speaks to the media in Chattanooga, Tennessee February 11, 2014. REUTERS-Bernie Woodall
The Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga ,Tennessee, is shown December 1, 2011. REUTERS-Billy Weeks
1 of 2. U.S. Senator Bob Corker speaks to the media in Chattanooga, Tennessee February 11, 2014.
Credit: Reuters/Bernie Woodall

Related Topics

(Reuters) - One of Tennessee's two U.S. senators ramped up his anti-union rhetoric on Thursday in an attempt to sway workers at Volkswagen AG's Chattanooga plant who are voting this week on representation by the United Auto Workers.
Republican Senator Bob Corker told Reuters on Thursday that he is "very certain that if the UAW is voted down," the automaker will announce new investment in the plant "in the next couple weeks."
Corker's latest remarks contradicted an earlier statement by Frank Fischer, chief executive of VW Chattanooga, that there was "no connection" between the vote at its three-year-old Tennessee plant and a looming decision on whether VW will build a new crossover vehicle there.
Volkswagen headquarters in Germany declined further comment and referred to Fischer's statement.
The dueling statements injected further uncertainty into the outcome of the three-day election, whose implications extend far beyond Chattanooga. If the vote, which ends on Friday evening, favors the UAW, it would galvanize a union that has been bleeding members over the years.
On Wednesday, Corker escalated what has been a seesaw battle between union and anti-union forces, saying he had been "assured" that if workers at the factory reject the UAW, the company would reward the plant with a new product to build.
Corker on Thursday issued a second statement, saying his information is better than that of Fischer, the top-ranked VW official at Chattanooga.
"After all these years and my involvement with Volkswagen, I would not have made the statement I made yesterday without being confident it was true and factual," said Corker, a former Chattanooga mayor who helped negotiate the VW plant deal.
In his interview with Reuters, however, Corker would not disclose the source of his information. It was not immediately clear how much of an impact his comments would have on the secret ballot, which remains too close to call.
The UAW's bid to represent VW's 1,550 hourly workers has faced fierce resistance from Tennessee politicians and national conservative groups. Corker has long opposed the union, which he says hurts economic and job growth in Tennessee, a claim that UAW officials dispute.
A defeat could scuttle the 400,000-member union's latest attempt to stem a decades-long decline in membership, revenue and influence. It would reinforce the widely held notion that the UAW is unable to overcome the region's deep antipathy toward organized labor.
If the union wins, VW would institute a German-style works council, with members elected by plant employees, to make key decisions about how the facility is run. The UAW would bargain over wages and benefits, but cede to the council traditional bargaining prerogatives such as work rules and training.
VW has been publicly neutral on the vote. But when the German automaker last week announced an agreement with the UAW to coordinate their messages to workers, the union received a significant boost it has not had in previous, unsuccessful organizing efforts in the South.
Voter turnout was reported to be heavy on Wednesday but snow on Thursday could affect how many vote, according to both pro- and anti-UAW workers.
The plant produces the mid-size Passat sedan from Monday through Thursdays and is normally closed on Fridays.
Earlier this week, Tennessee Republican lawmakers said if the UAW was voted into the Chattanooga plant, Volkswagen could lose millions of dollars in state incentives. In order to entice Volkswagen to build its new U.S. plant in Corker's hometown of Chattanooga, the state gave it about $580 million in incentives.
Corker was instrumental in lobbying Volkswagen to put the plant, which opened in 2011, in Chattanooga. Early meetings with Volkswagen officials from Germany were held at his home.
(Additional reporting by Ben Klayman in Detroit; editing by Ross Colvin and Matthew Lewis)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/13/us-autos-vw-tennessee-idUSBREA1C10Y20140213 

Why Unions Matter: The Numbers

| Fri Aug. 5, 2011 1:55 AM GMT
A few months ago I wrote a piece for the magazine arguing that the decline in unionization over the past three decades has been a key factor in the decline of the American left over the same period. But it's a hard case to prove because there are so many moving parts to it. So I was intrigued earlier this week when my colleague Josh Harkinson linked to a new study that attempts to quantify the effects of unionization on income inequality using a rigorous regression analysis of census data.
The study comes from Bruce Western and Jake Rosenfeld and was published this month in the American Sociological Review. The authors use a model that accounts for both individual membership in unions as well as overall unionization rates in specific industries and regions. It also controls for education, age, race, ethnicity, and gender, which allows them to estimate the effect of unionization both between groups (e.g., the evolution of income inequality between high school dropouts and high school grads) and within groups (e.g., the evolution of income inequality within the entire subset of high school grads).
Once their model was in place, Western and Rosenfeld could manipulate their variables to estimate what income inequality would look like if union density had remained at its 1973 level. So what did they find? Answer: Among men, if you account only for the effect of individual membership in unions, it would be about a fifth lower, which agrees pretty well with previous estimates. But if you also account for the effect of unions on surrounding nonunion employers (who often raised wages to compete with union employers and to avert the threat of unionization in their own workplace), the effect is larger: Unionization at 1973 levels would decrease income inequality by a full third. You can see this in the chart below. For intragroup differences (which account for nearly the entire effect of unionization) the top line shows the actual rise of income inequality since 1973, while the red line is a prediction of what it would look like if union density were still at 1973 levels:

The effect of unionization on women is less dramatic because women were never unionized at the same rate as men. For them, increasing returns to education are a bigger factor in rising income inequality than deunionization. For men, however, deunionization has had a huge impact: "The decline of the US labor movement has added as much to men's wage inequality as has the relative increase in pay for college graduates," the authors say.
Western and Rosenfeld's explanation for this is similar to Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson's in Winner-Take-All Politics, last year's best book on modern political economy. Roughly speaking, there's a direct economic effect of unionization on wages, but there's also an effect of unions on the political system that indirectly affects wages. Western and Rosenfeld put it like this:
[Our] analysis suggests that unions helped shape the allocation of wages not just for their members, but across the labor market. The decline of US labor and the associated increase in wage inequality signaled the deterioration of the labor market as a political institution.…The de-politicization of the US labor market appears self-reinforcing: as organized labor’s political power dissipates, economic interests in the labor market are dispersed and policymakers have fewer incentives to strengthen unions or otherwise equalize economic rewards.
…[Prior to 1973,] unions offered an alternative to an unbridled market logic, and this institutional alternative employed over a third of all male private sector workers. The social experience of organized labor bled into nonunion sectors, contributing to greater equality overall. As unions declined, not only did the logic of the market encroach on what had been the union sector, but the logic of the market deepened in the nonunion sector, too, contributing to the rise in wage inequality.
In other words, deunionization has allowed income inequality to rise partly because unions are negotiating wages for fewer people than they used to, and partly because unions no longer have the power to force the political system to pay attention to the needs of the middle class. But if income inequality has to be reduced in order for middle class wages to grow—and it does—and if robust middle class wages are a key driver of the liberal project—and they are—then we're all in big trouble. Mass unionization is gone, and it's not coming back. This means we still need something to take its place, and we still don't have it. Until we do, the progressive movement will continue to tread water.
 http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/08/unions-and-wages