President Obama called Wisconsin Governor Scott Walkers’ plan to balance the state budget an assault on unions. Now his Labor Secretary, Hilda Solice, has joined the fray and accused Republican governors of violating the rights of workers.
Solis, speaking at the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) Winter Meeting, accosted Walker and Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) for their efforts to reform collective bargaining rights for public workers in their states.
“We know that many states are facing tough budget decisions. We know there’s room for shared sacrifice,” Solis said. “But the governors in Wisconsin and Ohio aren’t just asking workers to tighten their belts, they’re asking them to give up their uniquely American rights as workers.”
(She also recently met with AFL-CIO boss Richard Trumka. What a surprise!)
What about the rights of the majority of us who aren’t in public employee unions? Finally a few governors are standing up for us, after so much time, and these people are trashing them for it. The union bosses use workers’ dues to get Democrat politicians elected. Those politicians are supposed to represent the taxpaying public, but instead they go along with the unions, promising them more and more benefits that are unsustainable. If these governors don’t do something about it now, any small concessions the unions give will be taken back the next time a Democrat takes office. It’s a corrupt racket that needs to come to an end. But at least we know whose side the White House is on. And it ain’t ours.
Tags: Hilda Solis, obama, public employee unions, rights
Wrong. If non-union shops didn’t have to compete with union shops for the best workers NO ONE would offer livable salaries or benefits. I’ve only rarely worked in a union shop, yet I know the unions are responsible for my good pay and benefits. If you can’t see that, you aren’t looking.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The difference you’re missing, Kiera, is between PUBLIC sector unions and PRIVAte sector unions. We’re only speaking of public sector unions here. Those that depend on public funds (taxes, fees) to pay for them. Private sector unions may be arguably responsible for positive things but that was long before the public sector was privileged to unionize. Public sector unions are where we have a beef.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The difference you’re missing, Kiera Fischer, is between PUBLIC sector unions and PRIVATE sector unions. We’re only speaking of public sector unions here. Those that depend on public funds (taxes, fees) to pay for them. Private sector unions may be arguably responsible for positive things but that was long before the public sector was privileged to unionize. Public sector unions are where we have a beef because the tax payer does not have an unbiased voice in the negotiations. The officials supposedly bargaining on our behalf haven’t the need to keep costs low as a private company does. They also are beholden to the unions who help fund their campaigns.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Good point, Wrella. Even FDR was against public sector unions. There is no profit to share as there is in the private sector. The only difference today is that this administration has decided to use taxpayer funds to bail out companies like GM and Chrysler, who made bad decisions, and their unions. The investors, many retirees who don’t have taxpayer funded pensions to fall back on, were shafted in the process. I don’t see anyone out there protesting on their behalf.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0