Clinton Called It A Crisis.
Jan. 25, 2005 11:40 PM
Iraq: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc?
Mar. 2, 2005 3:25 PM
The Babe Theory Of Political Movements.
Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM
The Political Circle Of Life.
Apr. 1, 2005 10:05 AM
The Attack On Henry Saad.
May 13, 2005 4:38 PM
Media Bias On Social Security.
May 16, 2005 2:18 PM
Bill Moyers, Persecuted Victim.
May 17, 2005 6:35 AM
Galloway: Baathist, Stalinist Hero.
May 17, 2005 11:32 AM
Ronnie Earle, Partisan Hack.
May 19, 2005 2:55 PM
Chris Bell, For Governor?
May 25, 2005 3:55 PM
Angela Merkel, Germany's Thatcher?
May 26, 2005 8:59 PM
Lukashenko: King of Belarus.
May 29, 2005 1:01 PM
S.S. Reform Dead? Not So Fast!
May 31, 2005 5:15 AM
Hillary Clinton In 2008? No Chance.
June 2, 2005 4:34 PM
Want your site to appear here? Link WILLisms.com and send some traffic over.
Social Security Reform Thursday.
June 2, 2005
Wednesday Caption Contest.
June 1, 2005
The Carnival Of Classiness.
May 31, 2005
May 30, 2005
Powered by Movable Type 3.121
Site Design by Sekimori
WILLisms.com June Book of the Month (certified classy):
The WILLisms.com Gift Shop:
Looking Hard For The Union Label.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) recently released its statistics on union membership in 2004. It was not pretty for the labor unions.
John Carlisle, writing in The American Spectator takes on why union membership has fallen so precipitously in the U.S.
"...12.5 percent of workers, including both the private sector and government, were enrolled in unions in 2004, down from 12.9 percent in 2003. For the private sector alone the number declined from 8.2 percent to 7.9 percent. This represents a dramatic drop from labor's peak in 1956, when 35 percent of private-sector workers belonged to unions."
Carlisle argues that there are two major reasons why union membership has fallen so dramatically:
1. "Misuse of members' dues for political activism"
"Unions take in at least $17 billion annually, which mainly comes from the compulsory dues culled from the paychecks of more than 12 million workers. But only about 20 percent of dues are used for collective bargaining -- which is the top priority of rank-and-file workers. As a result, unions are able to lavish hundreds of millions of dollars on politicians.
So what? Shouldn't unions be able to lobby, just like corporations?
Sure, but as Carlisle points out:
"There would be nothing wrong with such political spending if it expressed the wishes of labor's rank-and-file. But all too often, it does not. Usually, 35 to 40 percent of union members vote Republican. And even many Democratic union members do not approve of their dues going to political activities. When the AFL-CIO launched a $35 million campaign in 1996 to buy ads for Democratic congressional candidates, a Luntz Research poll showed that 62 percent of union members opposed the plan."
Is it any wonder that union membership is falling off?
Posted by Will Franklin · 14 February 2005 02:35 PM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Looking Hard For The Union Label.:
» Arnold Plays Hardball With California Liberals. from WILLisms.com
Tracked on February 14, 2005 04:01 PM
Post a comment