Tag: unions

Are Unions And Public Schools Violating Election Laws/Ethics?

The Easton Gazette received an email regarding the political activities of the Worcester County Public Schools. The email included this letter from a resident of the county.

The letter alleges that the school placed or allowed campaign material connected to a candidate for county commissioner to be placed into teachers’ school mailboxes within Worcester County Public Schools. The materials allegedly urge teachers to support certain candidates including this candidate and others and also have instructions for changing party affiliation.

As the letter states, this action could possibly pressure public school employees to feel that they must support a candidate who was once a system employee. Also, public schools, along with other public institutions, are supposed to remain politically neutral. Certainly, public materials and time should not be spent on political campaigns. One of the documents references a “building rep” which most likely refers to a “union” rep.

Again, these are allegations. However, they do bring up some important questions.

What is the law in Maryland regarding using school communications to promote candidates?

Maryland law prohibits teachers’ unions and any other group from using public school communication systems to promote or oppose political candidates, because doing so constitutes political activity using government resources, which is barred under both state ethics rules as well as federal tax rules for labor organizations such as teacher’s unions

Keep reading

CT AFL-CIO President Warns AI Could Be The ‘Nail In The Coffin’ For Democrats 

Organized labor has found its next target: artificial intelligence. 

At a June 1 trade roundtable hosted by U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro in New Haven, Connecticut labor leaders warned that AI threatens workers and demands new government “guardrails.” But the discussion revealed something beyond concern: unions want a hand in writing the rules for how employers use it. 

The event, held at the Manufacturing and Technical Community Hub (MATCH), brought together DeLauro, Wisconsin Congressman Mark Pocan, Connecticut labor leaders, manufacturers, state economic development officials and Public Citizen, a progressive advocacy group. The official topic was trade policy. Before long, the conversation shifted to artificial intelligence. 

Connecticut AFL-CIO President Ed Hawthorne framed the issue in pointed terms.

“If the Democratic Party does not get out ahead of AI, it’s when the Democratic Party dies,” he said. “It’ll be the nail in the coffin, because we are the party of the workers, and if we are going to just sit back and let the tech industry and their money buy elections and not push back on that, we will no longer be the party of the workers, and that’s when we lose.”

Hawthorne also described AI as “the new NAFTA,” a warning that artificial intelligence could displace workers in ways similar to past trade disruptions. Those concerns are not baseless. AI will disrupt labor markets. Some jobs will disappear, others will change, and new occupations will emerge. Few serious observers believe the economy will be left untouched. 

But Hawthorne’s sharpest warning was political rather than economic. He was not simply saying AI could eliminate jobs. He was saying that if Democrats fail to satisfy organized labor’s demands on AI, they forfeit their claim to be the party of workers. That is a different kind of argument, and worth noting as such. 

The real question is how policymakers respond. At the roundtable, the answer increasingly centered on one word: “guardrails.” 

Participants repeatedly called for guardrails around AI and automation. In practice, that meant stronger worker input requirements, advance notice when AI is used in employment decisions, human oversight, appeal rights, bias testing and an expanded government role in governing how AI systems are introduced in the workplace. 

Some of that is defensible. Few Americans want hiring decisions or workplace discipline delegated to opaque systems with no accountability. Protections against deceptive deepfakes and discriminatory bias deserve serious consideration. But the discussion ranged well beyond basic safeguards. It sounded less like a targeted debate over genuine AI risks and more like organized labor ensuring no major workplace technology advances without union-approved conditions attached. 

Keep reading

Oregon’s Union Crackdown Spreads

The state of Oregon passed a law last year that should outrage every American who believes in the First Amendment.

Not because it bans speech outright. Not because it targets a newspaper or a broadcaster. Because it targets a letter. An email. A text message. A conversation telling public employees they have a constitutional right to opt out of their union.

That’s what Oregon made illegal.

The Freedom Foundation has been communicating with public employees for years. We do it because back in 2018 the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in Janus v. AFSCME that every government employee has a constitutional right to decline union membership and dues — a right workers will never find out about if they’re waiting for their union to inform them of it.

Someone else, most likely the Freedom Foundation, has to do it for them.

Oregon’s HB 3789, which took effect Jan. 1, was written specifically to shut down our outreach activities in that state — and potentially others. Egged on by their union puppet masters, lawmakers in that state approved legislation threatening heavy financial penalties for what the law describes as impersonating a labor union.

Keep reading

Labor group cancels Cesar Chavez events over ‘profoundly shocking’ new allegations

Cesar Chavez has been lauded by Mexican-Americans as an iconic labor leader who fought for farmworkers’ rights in the 1960s, but his legacy may be marred by growing allegations of “profoundly shocking” behavior.

Several celebrations of Cesar Chavez Day, which is observed March 31, have been canceled across the country by the United Farm Workers, an organization Chavez co-founded.

The union said in a letter Tuesday that the claims against Chavez were “incompatible” with the organization’s values.

“Some of the reports are family issues, and not our story to tell or our place to comment on,” the group said. “Far more troubling are allegations involving abuse of young women or minors. Allegations that very young women or girls may have been victimized are crushing. We have not received any direct reports, and we do not have any firsthand knowledge of these allegations.”

Keep reading

Bernie’s Favorite Muzzle

 coalition of union leaders, activists, and Sen. Bernie Sanders lined up behind a new National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruling that hands organized labor a powerful tool to choke employer speech.

A coalition claiming to defend workers now cheers a rule that punishes open debate, while turning into a broad crackdown.

When power centers agree that silence protects influence better than persuasion, a strange kind of unity is created.

This rule targets employer comments that unions portray as intimidating, even when there’s no existing threat. Critics argue that union organizers want a shield, not fairness; a shield also prevents workers from getting more information before voting on representation.

When the commission last invited comment on this topic in August, TVTech reported, “a large number of filings from unions, consumer groups, civil rights groups, church groups, liberal organizations, free speech advocates and others have come out strongly opposed to any change to the current 39% ownership cap.” Indeed, reading the list of commentators reveals a “who’s who” of the irrelevant and Trump-hating.

The unions, for instance, include the National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians and the News Guild. The Writers Guild of America, which also opposes the reforms, recently attacked President Trump for a supposed “un-American … unprecedented, authoritarian assault” on the First Amendment, complete with the line: “We don’t have a king, we have a president.” These are the advocates of maintaining the caps on media ownership by Nexstar, Sinclair, and others.

Sanders and his activist teammates frame the rules as a defense of muh democracy, but they miss the mark. Society gains strength when open conversation guides judgment. People deserve reasons, arguments, and evidence. What they don’t need is a speech referee from Washington.

Employers, claims the NLRB, gain an advantage during tense campaigns, but they ignore reality. Union drives often come with large activist networks, political figures, and national media support.

More often than not, employers stand alone. When regulators move to silence only one side, influence goes to the faction with the loudest megaphone and friendliest headlines. Power like that grows fast and hides behind moral language to mask raw ambition.

Advocacy groups celebrated the ruling, portraying it as a win for working families. Supporters said employees must feel safe when organizing. Nobody fair is against safety, yet free societies weaken when leaders claim that words hurt as badly as violence. hat trick opens the door to censorship, as seen in campus battles over speakers and in online fights over viewpoints, and it also appears in labor laws, following the left’s pattern of punishing words that challenge outcomes they prefer.

The ruling might also affect industries struggling with labor shortages. Communication might stop with those employers who fear investigations. Silence breeds resentment and rumors, blinding workers who want a complete picture before they vote.

Union votes shape pay, schedules, and long-term job security, while gag rules block valuable context, especially when informed consent raises concerns about dignity. When company leaders celebrate a clampdown on speech, they highlight how little they regard dignity.

Political winds push movements like these. Sanders backs the decision because organized labor is a key pillar of his agenda, while activists see a chance to lock in gains during a favorable climate, and union leaders smell blood in the water.

Incentives align around tighter control. America enters a strange era when silence counts as progress and dissent signals danger.

Free nations handle arguments, not legal penalties. Anyone believing persuasion beats coercion should reject a rule like this.

Keep reading

Gavin Newsom Just Gave California’s 800,000 Uber and Lyft Drivers a One-Way Ticket to the Unemployment Line

California Governor Gavin Newsom just gave his state’s Uber and Lyft drivers a one way ticket to the unemployment line.

Newsom signed a landmark agreement on Friday that would allow Uber and Lyft drivers to form a union.

The Democrat said at a press conference that the unionization deal will offer ride-hailing drivers a “voice, to give them choice, give them dignity and a say about their future.”

“I say that because it needs to be said: I’m not naive about how people are feeling about their future,” he explained.

California has become the second state in the nation, after Massachusetts, to allow Uber and Lyft drivers to unite at an industry level to negotiate for higher pay and benefits, such as health coverage.

The arrangement was finalized in August through talks between Democratic lawmakers in Sacramento, SEIU union officials, and representatives from Uber and Lyft.

The measure, known as AB 1340, was introduced by Assemblymembers Buffy Wicks and Marc Berman and sponsored by SEIU California.

It establishes rules that allow app-based drivers to bargain collectively for improved wages and access to employee-style benefits, including health insurance.

Yet sadly, it does not take a genius to work out that all Newsom is condemning the state’s 800,000 Uber and Lyft drivers to losing their jobs altogether.

Companies such as Uber and Lyft are already aggressively driving down the wages earned by their drivers as part of their efforts to become profitable.

The decline in wages is also linked to the exploding popularity of ride-sharing as a profession, in many cases embraced by immigrants and people who are searching for more permanent work.

Nowadays, most long-time drivers reminisce about the “glory days” when they could earn a respectable living from their work.

Keep reading

Blatant Lawlessness: Connecticut’s Department Of Labor And Union Leaders Betray Union Workers & Taxpayers

That question looms large in Connecticut where Department of Labor (CT DOL) commissioner Danté Bartolomeo has openly acknowledged ignoring a statute designed to protect union members.  

At issue is Connecticut General Statutes Sec. 31-77. This 1959 law requires unions to file verified annual financial reports, make them available to members, and submit them to the CT DOL for safekeeping and possible audit. It was enacted to deter corruption, protect workers’ dues, and hold union leaders accountable. The law also protects taxpayers, who subsidize union activities through paid union leave, administrative costs associated with dues collection, grants, and other state-supported benefits.  

For years, however, CT DOL has simply refused to enforce it.  

Commissioner’s Contradictions  

In an August 2025 letter to Senators Rob Sampson and Stephen Harding, Commissioner Bartolomeo acknowledged the statute but dismissed it as “redundant” because unions already file IRS Form 990s. She further complained that compliance is “burdensome” and rarely requested.  

This rationale is indefensible. Commissioners are not empowered to decide which laws are worth enforcing. The General Assembly writes the laws; the executive branch is obligated to carry them out. If Bartolomeo truly believed she had discretion to ignore Sec. 31-77, she would never have asked lawmakers last session for “technical changes.” That request alone proves she knows the law is binding — she has simply chosen not to comply.  

Keep reading

Teachers’ Union Chief Randi Weingarten Questioned Over Scandalous Spending Including $100,000 Limo Bill

On Thursday, the Education and Workforce Committee sent a letter to American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten demanding answers and accountability after details surfaced regarding the union chief’s excessive and potentially improper spending on luxury travel.

The letter, from Education and Workforce Chairman Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee Chairman Rick Allen (R-GA) demands details from Weingarten regarding public records that show that, since September of 2023, the partisan Democrat cheerleader spent $100,000 on private limousine services.

Walberg and Allen write, “The Committee has received reports describing first-class travel, family-related expenses, and large vendor payments that appear unrelated to legitimate representational activities.”

“If substantiated, these allegations reveal a troubling lack of accountability within AFT leadership. It is the Committee’s responsibility to conduct oversight to protect union members. As such, the Committee seeks to ascertain the truth of these allegations and whether the alleged conduct may warrant reform of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA).”

“The magnitude of recent AFT officer reimbursements raises questions about the adequacy of your current treasury oversight practices. AFT’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Form LM-2 shows that you received $42,105 in additional disbursements on top of your $457,769 gross salary (which, notably, is more than six times the average teacher salary of $72,030).”

Keep reading

Union Chiefs, Jayapal, Pledge ‘Solidarity’ with Illegals, not Americans

Progressive union leaders are ditching ordinary Americans as they embrace illegal migrants in Los Angeles, just eight months after voters elected a president who declared his solidarity with ordinary Americans.

“In the labor movement, we were built on this word, and that word is ‘Solidarity,’” union leader Liz Shuler announced Monday at a raucous rally on Capitol Hill, adding:

Solidarity is what our brother David Huerta was showing up for last Friday, when he stood up for [illegal] immigrant workers in his community [Los Angeles] and when he was legally exercising his constitutional rights … That’s why I’m here, bringing the voices of 15 million working people in the AFL-CIO standing strong together to … end these unjust ICE raids right now! Ahora! [Today]

The arrested migrants “are our neighbors, our co-workers, these are people who are looking for a better life and are contributing to our economy,” Shuler told HuffPost.

But Americans’ wages are forced down when migrants can cross the border into Americans’ workplaces, just as strike breakers cross a picket line by striking workers at a workplace.

David Huerta is the head of the SEIU-United Service Workers West, which includes many illegal migrants. He was arrested during Friday’s chaotic blockade of a federal building in Los Angeles and faces several years in jail. He said in a Friday statement:

Hard-working people, and members of our family and our community, are being treated like criminals. We all collectively have to object to this madness because this is not justice. This is injustice.

Keep reading

The DOGE-ed Agency Whose Employees Lived ‘Like Kings’

A new report claims that an agency that Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency just shuttered was on a satirical level of corruption, living like wealthy aristocrats off taxpayer funds.

Trump ordered seven federal agencies either to be downsized or to be eliminated altogether last week, and The Daily Wire accuses one, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), of being particularly egregious in its unconstitutional and unconscionable waste. Supposedly, FMCS is an “independent agency” that mediates between businesses and unions, with a workforce of 230, of which 60 supposedly worked in a massive D.C. office building (when they showed up to work at all).

FMCS official George Cohen ordered champagne, $200 coasters, and his wife’s oil paintings using agency money. Why should Hunter Biden be the only “artist” surviving off corrupt handouts? The paintings were of agency employees “like they were reigning kings or something,” one employee put it. And $2,402 was spent just on retouching the painting of one who was the acting agency head for a brief period only. As small as the agency is and as vague as its relationship to the president and the executive are, the agency has long operated as if it had no oversight, Luke Rosiak said on The Daily Wire.

[FMCS] occupied a nine-story office tower on D.C.’s K Street for only 60 employees, many of whom actually worked from home, prior to the pandemic. Its managers had luxury suites with full bathrooms; one manager would often be “in the shower” when she was needed, while another used her bathroom as a cigarette lounge. FMCS recorded its director [Scot Beckenbaugh] as being on a years-long business trip to D.C. so he could have all of his meals and living expenses covered by taxpayers, simply for showing up to the office.

Rosiak explained that in a year of research, he found numerous shocking instances of FMCS corruption and fraud, from hiring practices to credit cards to contracting to vacations on the taxpayer dime. What he did not understand after all that research is why the agency ever existed to begin with.

“Let me give you the honest truth: A lot of FMCS employees don’t do a hell of a lot, including myself,” one employee confessed to Rosiak. “Personally, the reason that I’ve stayed is that I just don’t feel like working that hard, plus the location on K Street is great, plus we all have these oversized offices with windows, plus management doesn’t seem to care if we stay out at lunch a long time. Can you blame me?” We the People sure can.

Keep reading