You are hereWhy won't the media cover the widespread extortion by Alaska's labor union bosses?
Why won't the media cover the widespread extortion by Alaska's labor union bosses?
By Dan Fagan
Publisher
The Alaska Standard
I made the case on my radio show yesterday that some current day labor union bosses are no different from the thugs that ran unions in old times. When some current labor union bosses buy politicians legally and then use those elected leaders to extort money from hard working Alaskans, how's that any different from the old labor union bosses who also extorted money? The methods are different but extortion is still extortion.
To hear my argument, click on the audio link below.
Mr. Odonnell raises good points. There's nothing wrong with labor unions exercising their right to associate and bargain collectively to improve their member's employment situation. He is also correct - to a point - that organized labor unions have improved living standards and work conditions even for those who don't belong to a collective bargaining unit and we shouldn't assume that all labor unions are a problem nor attack all practices of any labor union simply because we think that some of what they do is wrong.
I don't fault Mr. Odonnell for interpreting Mr. Fagan's comments as a general attack on organized labor associations, but I think that he heard more than what was said and therefore missed points that are well worth considering.
I might be doing the same, but I appreciated Mr. Fagan's perspective that viewing ourselves as victims rather than rising to the occasion is counterproductive. Many craft unions in the Fairbanks area that seemed to suffer from the 'victim mindset' several decades ago seem to have taken a different approach and are now offering a level of service to both their members and the employers with whom they contract that might be worth the premium price they command. This is all well and good.
The problem arises when any individual or group tries to work through the government to impose an advantage that works in their favor rather than competing openly in the market on an equal footing with others. This is especially objectionable when they both encourage the government to spend more of the public's money and restrict open competition for the resulting contracts.
I realize that we don't live in a perfect world, but Mr. Fagan's observation that the union's influence over government contracting practices has degenerated into what amounts to 'thuggery' is accurate and should be of concern to all of us.
Mr. Odonnell's observation that oil industry contractors and some other companies that do business with the state haven't been 'lily white' in this regard must be heeded as well.
The 'Anti-Corruption Act', a question that will be on the August primary election ballot address the problem of exerting inappropriate influence over the government contracting process. It doesn't prohibit anyone from competing for those contracts, but it does create a clear separation between those who receive and those who might approve the contracts.
You can learn more about 'The Anti-Corruption Act' by visiting " www.akcorruption.com/akblog/ " or by joining 'Clean Team Alaska', the group promoting the act on Facebook.
Dan It is very clear to me that you don't care for unions, but the way you equate IBEW and its dealing with all unions is well not logical. Yes for the record I am a Union member but not the IBEW , but I recognize sophistery when I see it and as usual that is what you are spinning. First, it is labor union that have given the American worker every single right they have whether they are union members or not, 40 hr work week, paid holidays, miniumum wage etc. Everyone has ridden on theie coat tails
You seem to miss the point that Union members make more than their counterparts and enjoy better benefits which raise the satndards for everyone. The esteemed representative from Michigan recently quoted Abe Lincoln, " you can't make a weak man stronger by making a strong man weaker. You are so fond of the free market yet you have disadainn for middel class americans negotiating for fair terms. So if we uppity Union thugs would only be willing to lower our standards coporate america will do right by us? PLEASE Have you been paying attention to what is happening around america and the middle class.
Unions are just middle class americans negotiating the same fiscal certainty that you want big oil to have. All we are is an extension of the free market we are going out and getting the best deal we can for ourselves just like corparations do. Conservative or liberal doesnt matter but tolump us all in together because one union got a sweetheart deal is a weak argument.
is just that. To get the best labor deal from a corporation is a fine balancing act to keep a free market company successful and to maintain a fiscal certainty to guarantee job security. Without that your job will no longer be. As for public service jobs your union activity distroys the fiscal certainty of home owners, through taxes, this affects the health of the familys and the city. You are not an extension of the free market. If there is no competing union to challenge city labor contracts you name your price. Union bosses contribute to only democrat polititicans this is a form of extortion and as you can see is out of control. You are no longer competing in the FREE market place. The proof is the free market system cannot compete with the cities payroll and benefit packages.
Free market did I miss something here you honestly believe we have a free market? Lets see, Reagan bilaed out Chrysler in 80 or 81, we had the whold savings and loan debalce in the late 80s, farm subsidies, road buliding for logging companies on the tax payers dime, now we have contractors with no bidding doing the same work as the military for far more money. We have agin bailed out Detroit and now wall Street. Where is this free enterpise and free market. No sir the only thing that is free is the baility of coporate America to take your tax money.
For you to sirt thereand whine about taxes in this community is rediculous we have the lowest tax burden of any city in the NATION its a fact. You talk about the health of the city, how healthy is a city with no public servants? And by the way get your facts stait my Union gives to both parties and the AFL-CIO backed Don Young last time. Many of the people I work with took pay cuts to serve so I find your retoric a bit insulting.
Do you really want the lowest bidder responding to your house in a emergency or highly trained well compensated individuals. For the record Garbage men make more per hour than I do.
How about my private employer who is always after me to "voluntarily" donate to the political candidates that support his business? As I remember, VECO did something similar but got caught. Both Labor and Business have their bad apples and we should try and root all of them out.
is VECO in buisness? NO. or will Anchorage change its name? The point is private companys come and go, cities don't. You should donate if you want to help your company grow. You need to do the opposite to make a city grow. LOW TAXES is good for us.
Mrhole maybe you are unware we have the lowest taxes in the nation for any city period. Low taxes are good till they hurt your cities ability to provide BASIC services. Taxes sir buy you civilization, roads, schools, police etc. If you have no desire for taxes move to a area off the grid. Every day I hear Dan on his show rail against taxes, ACES hurt the oil industry? Exxon and BP have had the largest profits in ther history ever, are they hurt by a mere 1 and one half percent. The cruise ship tax adds a paltry $50 to a $7000 cruise to regualte polluters. It is so rediculous I paid $500 in the Bahamas. Taxes in our state are ridiculously low.
I do know that my taxes support "cicilization" But I do not like throwing money in the hole either. Such as the highest education cost with the lowest scores. Now that is a hole. The point you do not get is that if WE get to keep our money then WE can spend that money to support our cities private employers who create jobs that gives this city life. I can also support the charities I see fit. If the socialist government, as I see it, taxes my extra income, then I loose some of my freedom for a failing program. Hell I could even loose my home if on a fixed income. So what that we have the lowest taxes in America, if I have lived here my entire life these taxes seem pretty damn high to me. Maybe not to you who are from somewhere else that is so screwed up you decieded to move here to screw it up. Thanks!
Happytime;
I agree with you that we need to root out the bad apples rather than focusing on general groups. An even better approach would be to apply an 'herbicide' that might prevent the apples from going bad in the first place. The 'Anti-Corruption Act', which is a question that will be on the August state primary election ballot, accomplishes just that.
It will make it clear to elected officials and to people considering supporting those officials that using the government for personal gain or group advantage rather than the public interest is unacceptable and won't be tolerated.
You can learn more about The Anti-Corruption Act and 'Clean Team Alaska', the group supporting the act, at www.akcorruption.com or or by joining the group on Facebook.
I apologize in advance for the length of this post, but I don't know how to express myself more succinctly:
I agree with you that government agreements requiring an individual to sign up and pay money to any organization or individual amounts to Extortion. I also agree that is exactly what is going on vis-a-vis labor union contributions to political candidates who then proceed to approve laws and contracts that give unions an advantage over the rest of us. The unions, of course, don't see it that way and won't back down until they recognize the error of their way or are forced to by the rest of us who aren't able take advantage of the situation that they have created.
Their position is very similar to the plantation owners of early America, or any person who seeks advantage from the government. Logically, it really isn't even any different from the thought process necessary to become the leader of any organized crime network. The difference is that those whom we recognize as leaders of organized crime networks enforce their own wishes as opposed to turning to a third party to enforce their wishes for them. Ironically, crime that isn't recognized as such is a greater threat to society than that which is recognized.
It is our human nature to first justify an action in our own mind then convince others of the propriety of our action. As you point out, the first step is to view one's self as a victim of some other person, you must then convince yourself that you are at least 'less evil' than someone else. It takes considerable mental effort at times to avoid this trap.
Nevertheless, we must recognize the flaw of assuming that we are less equal and rise to the occasion rather than ask for protection. Our passive acceptance of what is evil is what allows evil to grow.
I don't want to get too 'metaphysical' about this, but it is our responsibility to restore justice if we see a problem - not the media's or the perpetrator's. They simply don't see what their doing as incorrect and in a very real way 'don't understand what we're talking about.' We can only solve this impasse by focusing as specifically as we can on the problem to be resolved rather than the perpetrators.
You have expressed what I believe to be true as clearly as anyone I've heard recently, and I thank you for that. But I would appreciate you directing me to the specific law or contract to which you refer so I am better able to help you resolve this problem and restore justice. An internet link or some other direction would be fine as I don't expect you to do all of the work, but I live in Fairbanks and am not familiar with the details.
Thank you,
Mike Prax