F. Vincent Vernuccio

Union Pension Bailout Bill Would Burden Employers and Taxpayers

Rep. Earl PomeroyWithin the last year and a half, the federal government has provided hundreds of billions of dollars to prop up otherwise failing corporations and financial intermediaries. This mating of economics and politics, inevitably steeped in favoritism, justifiably has earned denunciations from many sources, including National Legal and Policy Center. Labor unions also have been among the critics. Yet their leaders and supporters in Congress habitually put high principle aside when their own hides need bailing out. Case in point: a bill introduced in late October by Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D. (see photo), the Preserve Benefits and Jobs Act of 2009 (H.R. 3936). This legislation would enlist taxpayers to support troubled union-sponsored multiemployer pension plans and impose major burdens upon employers. It's another example of how interest-group politics benefits the relative few at the expense of the great many.

Employee Free Choice Act Is Coercive Even Without Card Check

Miller and Harkin support EFCAThe Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), as Union Corruption Update has noted repeatedly, is a misnamed piece of federal legislation. Its sole ulterior purpose is an expansion of union power at the expense of dissenting employees and employers. And despite the fact that supporters appear willing to strip the measure of its highly controversial "card check" component, the bill (H.R. 1409, S. 560) remains coercive in intent. That's because its less-heralded binding arbitration provision remains. And arbitration, as supporters envision things, would authorize the federal government to write (or rewrite) employment contracts from scratch.

Syndicate content