Obama, Democrats Losing Labor Union Support? Why?

[FrenchieCat]

Here's the Huffpo Story dated today in advance of Labor day celebration
Obama, Democrats Losing Labor Union Support.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/04/obama-democrats-labor-unions_n_948319.html?ref=email_share

So can someone tell me why? :shrug:
Cause here's what I found that they didn't...


Labor Board Eases Path To Unions For Health Care Workers
08/30/11
WASHINGTON -- With the departure of the chairwoman of the National Labor Relations Board this past weekend, the board has been issuing a slew of last-minute rulings destined to please labor groups while irritating business interests and anti-union Republicans. Among the latest: a ruling made public on Tuesday that overturns a Bush-era decision and will likely make it easier for health care workers to unionize.

In the case, known as Specialty Healthcare, the board ruled that a group of nursing assistants at a facility in Mobile, Ala., could form their own bargaining unit without other types of nursing home staff, from maintenance workers to dietary aides. It's a decision that could greatly simplify the unionization process and, as HuffPost has previously reported, could have a huge impact on the growing and largely non-unionized nursing home industry.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/30/labor-board-unions-health-care-workers_n_942485.html


NLRB Proposes Removing ‘Unnecessary Barriers’ to Union Votes
06/22/11
Companies would have less time and opportunity to block unions under a proposed U.S. rule that would speed voting in labor elections.

The proposed rule issued today by the National Labor Relations Board, an agency that investigates unfair labor practices, would bring changes sought by unions, such as faster hearing deadlines and streamlined procedures.

The push for quicker elections is a victory for unions after defeats at the hands of Republican governors seeking to curb public-employee unions. It’s also a sign of the NLRB’s pro- labor bent since President Barack Obama’s appointees have become a majority, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
http://www.treasuryandrisk.com/2011/06/22/nlrb-proposes-removing-unnecessary-barriers-to-uni


How the Obama administration is Using Executive Power to Support Union Goals:What The NLRB’s Recent Complaint Reveals
04/25/11
http://pajamasmedia.com/ronradosh/2011/04/25/how-the-obama-administration-is-using-executive-power-to-support-union-goalswhat-the-nlrbs-recent-complaint-reveals/?singlepage=true



Screeners Under Obama May Give Federal Unions Biggest Vote Win in Years
03/09/11
A collective-bargaining vote by airport security workers that starts today may give federal employee groups their biggest victory in years, even as public workers in some states struggle to keep their union status.

The country’s two largest federal-employee unions are competing to represent the 44,000 screeners who can cast their ballots through April 19. The effort, which Senate Republicans failed to stop last month, may raise Transportation Security Administration costs if workers push through changes such as increased staffing.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-09/screeners-under-obama-may-give-federal-unions-main-win-in-years.html

Obama Gives Unions A Big Victory In Unionizing Air Travel Workers
05/11/10
WASHINGTON (AP) — Labor unions will have an easier time organizing workers at airline and railroad companies after the Obama administration on Monday changed a 76-year-old rule on union elections.

The change is a victory for unions that have struggled to reverse years of decline in membership. And it’s the most significant initiative so far in a string of White House moves intended to help organized labor.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/obama-gives-unions-a-big-victory-in-unionizing-air-travel-workers/





WHILE THE OPPOSITION DOES ITS THING!

Bill Introduced to Reverse President Obama's Executive Order on Project Labor Agreements
http://www.laborrelationstoday.com/2011/02/articles/executive-orders/bill-introduced-to-reverse-president-obamas-executive-order-on-project-labor-agreements/

----------------------------
What I’d like folks to envision in the meantime is what would happen if progressives woke up the morning of November 7th, and reality hit that the President-elect is not Barack Obama?

Sure, some on the Left would feel vindicated to witness Barack Obama defeated, believing that they had won the battle of “principles” they’d waged for four years to show President Obama their disappointment in him. They would inevitably blame him for their choice not to donate, not to work, and/or simply not to have voted.
<>
How will you feel when the new President nominates partisan cabinet members like Phil Gramm for Treasury, Jeb Bush for the Justice Department, John Kasich for the Office of Management and Budget, Scott Walker for Labor Secretary, Paul Ryan for Health and Human Services, Rudy Giuliani as Secretary of State, John McCain as Secretary of Defense, and Newt Gingrich as UN Ambassador? Sure, it may not be those particular ideologues in those exact positions; in fact, it could be worse still. Keep that in mind.

How will you feel when the new President gets a chance to replace Justice Kennedy, or worse yet, Justices Breyer and Ginsberg? What about all of the other judicial nominees that the new President will get to choose?

How will you feel when the new President decides to nominate folks over at the FCC who would vote against Net Neutrality? How mad would you be if the Internet became less of a factor for free speech, and more of a factor for message manipulation and propaganda?
<>
As importantly, how will you feel that you didn’t do everything possible to assist in the 2012 re-election campaign because you rationalized that there was nothing good you could say about President Barack Obama, or you conveniently convinced yourself that someone else would handle your share (or so you assumed)? How will you justify protest then, or even be angry knowing that you always had a choice and yet you chose to do less than you could do?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=762403&mesg_id=762728

[TheWraith]

1. It's almost as if HuffPost publishes inflammatory things in order to draw attention.

No wait, it's EXACTLY like that. Not to mention they have a vested interest in stirring shit between unions and their allies, since the unions have been hitting back at HP for their appalling labor practices.

[FrenchieCat]

2. What will Unions get if they don't want to support Democrats or Obama......

Cause I'm thinking they won't be around long after that...
and I think that's exactly what Republicans want.

This is kind of like Unions doing what's against their best interest....
something we accuse GOP morans of doing.

[CakeGrrl]

8. HuffPo has become another one of the carny barkers.

Who's blaring the "OBAMA CAVES" announcements on their front page in the biggest typeface?

Goes along with the rest of their tabloid teaser-style headlines.

[rug]

3. An unemployed worker cannot eat a press release.

Duh.

[demwing]

4. No. No one can tell you why.

you wont hear it.

You put in a link to the HP article, where Trumka laid it out with great clarity. In addition, the discussion has been waged on DU MULTIPLE times.

And yet you start this thread with your shoulders shrugged, "not getting it."

It's a waste of time.

At this point, its not even about Obama winning or losing. It's clear that most of us are screwed either way. It's time to primary the man, and toss him off the ticket. He either doesn't care, or like you, in the face of so much explanatory information, he just doesn't get it. Time to move on.

[ibegurpard]

13. exactly

[Peacetrain]

14. Not happening.. not in this lifetime or the next

[Claudia Jones]

5. Labor losing the support of Democrats. Why?

That is the question we should be asking.

[TheWraith]

7. Maybe because the media likes inflammatory, bullshit headlines.

Just like Trumka's long, nuanced interview was completely bullshitified and spun in the headline as "OBAMA SUPPORTS THE TEA PARTY, NOT REAL AMERICANS!" Even though he never said that.

[Claudia Jones]

9. that doesn't follow

How would inflammatory headlines lead Democratic party politicians to not support Labor?

[LiberalFighter]

6. Take your pick

1) They don't know what the Obama admin has done for the interests of labor or working people.

2) They want to stir controversy on baseless claims.


They can get away for the most part if it is 2 as most people don't know what happens in every agency within an administration.

[Major Hogwash]

10. I can tell that you're not a member of a union.

Because there are 3 things that you can't talk about while working within a union --

1. Religion, because it usually starts fights
2. Politics, because it usually starts fights
3. How much you hate the shop steward, no matter how big of a prick he is, because he is the guy who will ultimately determine who gets cut in a layoff.

Unions are not just composed of Democrats.
Churches aren't either.
So, if you look at working within a union the same way you would look at attending church, you would have a better understanding of how people function in a union.

[ClassWarrior]

11. Hmmm... What explains this?

Fake Political Crises and Real Economic Crises - A Call for Leadership and for Action
AFL-CIO Executive Council Statement
Washington, DC
August 03, 2011

...Today, we must fight against the destructive ideas in play in Washington and in our state capitals. That is why the labor movement's voice is clear—we oppose any cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits—no matter where they come from and that includes the Oval Office. We need a tax code that asks the rich to pay their fair share. We oppose corporate tax reform that is merely "revenue neutral" amid calls for "shared sacrifice." We oppose the Korea, Panama and the Colombia free trade agreements. And we will fight with every means we have against those who would take away the right to vote through a new generation of poll taxes and literacy tests.

But we cannot build a future by watering down bad ideas—or even by stopping them. Working people demand a politics of real solutions. Of good jobs—on the scale needed to make a difference. Of investment in our future—in our infrastructure, our health, our schools, our people. Of fair taxes and fair trade. And, most of all, a future where working people have a voice in our republic, in the workplace and the voting booth.

America wants to work, and we need a political system that will deliver on that urgent imperative. Today, real solutions are at hand, and in the months ahead, we are going to fight for them...

http://www.aflcio.org/mediacenter/prsptm/08032011.cfm

NGU.

[NorthCarolina]

16. Oh, let me guess...

Common sense?

[Peacetrain]

12. Trumpka is treading thin ice with me for a while now..

I am retired AFL-CIO affiliate.. and Trumpka has been playing favorites in amongst the union members and its affiliates. He has to remember he is representing more than just mines as a lawyer..If he thinks he is going to court favor with the republicans by pulling labor in an offshoot, he has another thing coming.


For some unholy reason, there are those in the blogoshpere and other areas thinking they are looking tough.

If Obama had not saved the private sector job arena.. there would be no car companies, no car jobs and 1 in 7 employed in the US can trace back to a healthy car company.

Soooooo, if you can figure it out, let me know..

[secondwind]

15. Hoffa was on TV today, saying they are squarely behind this President.