Friday, July 31, 2009

Attempt to Forcibly Unionize UW Academic Staff Begins

So the push begins…

Several unions affiliated with American Federation of Teachers-Wisconsin have begun a push to expand their membership by absorbing some 4,000 of the UW System’s academic staff into their units.

They plan to file unit clarification petitions to assign employees into existing unions - rather than giving these workers the chance to vote.

The newly passed state budget does give faculty and academic staff the right to be represented by a union if they choose. In those cases, unions would have to spend time and money on organizing campaigns and then have to win votes by targeted employees. Unit clarification petitions are a different process.

[...]

“We have recently learned that WPEC or other AFT representatives may be approaching UW staff members to discuss unit clarification, asking people to describe the nature of their duties,” Crist wrote in his e-mail.

“Approaching you for this purpose in the workplace while on work time is unacceptable.  You have no obligation to speak to union representatives while on work time.

Good for UW to oppose this.  Consider the fundamental unfairness of what the Democrats put in the budget.  If the union can “clarify” their jobs, then the staff can be forced into the union against their wills and then the union will extort dues out of their paychecks.  I thought unions were about a group of workers banding together to gain clout over management?  If the academic staff doesn’t want to vote to unionize, then why force them?

Oh yeah… the dues… much of which ends up in the coffers of Democratic politicians who, in turn, put crap like this into the budget to benefit the unions.

(8) Comments
Posted by Owen at 1705 hrs
Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

  1. Owen - the article clearly states that the budget allows them to be organized, and the intention was to do this by a vote. The article also clearly states that the union is intending to seek the unit clarification process, but it is unclear whether this would be successful. Your assumption that the Dems did this on purpose runs at odds with the facts presented.

    You also need to brush up on the law. Union dues cannot end up in the campaign coffers of candidates for local, state or federal office under any circumstance.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 31, 2009 at 2218 hrs


  2. Now this is a far more better idea. This way I can live longer! Thanks!

    Resveratrol

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 01, 2009 at 0116 hrs


  3. Really a educative and informative post, the post is good in all regards,I am glad to read this post

    Resveratrol

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 01, 2009 at 0125 hrs


  4. the article clearly states that the budget allows them to be organized, and the intention was to do this by a vote.

    But it also allowed them to be unionized by the unit clarification process - without a vote. 

    The article also clearly states that the union is intending to seek the unit clarification process, but it is unclear whether this would be successful.

    True.  When did I say they would be successful?  I even praised UW for fighting it.  I don’t see where we are in disagreement here. 

    Your assumption that the Dems did this on purpose runs at odds with the facts presented.

    Do you mean to say that the Dems unintentionally put the “unit clarification” language in the budget?  Did they slip and write “unit clarification” when they meant to write “tax cut?”  Of course it was intentional. 

    You also need to brush up on the law. Union dues cannot end up in the campaign coffers of candidates for local, state or federal office under any circumstance.

    You got me there.  I should have said that the dues will be used to fund advertising campaigns and GOTV efforts designed to benefit Democrats.

    Posted by Owen on August 01, 2009 at 0843 hrs


  5. I’d be curious to what concessions a union for college profs would request?

    10 hours of work per week instead of 15?
    Two year sabbaticals instead of nine months?
    Reduced class sizes and more assistants to grade papers and tests?
    Salaries above the curve for equivalence with their corresponding profession?

    There are few professions due less respect than the average college professor…

    Those who can’t do, teach….

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 01, 2009 at 1314 hrs


  6. The President of the AFT is Bryan Kennedy…yes, that Bryan Kennedy..the one who st***, oops, “used” campaign donations to pay for his morgage and private expenses and called it an action in support of the middle class.  The article was in the MJS.

    Yeah, Bryan Kennedy would neeeeever do that!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 02, 2009 at 1738 hrs


  7. Lets hope this has a positive outcome. But I dont see how a forced union is going happen.

    Posted by Acai Berry on August 11, 2009 at 1049 hrs


  8. Hmmm….maybe they will vote themselves out of a job, like Mercury Marine.  Thank you AFT

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on August 29, 2009 at 0952 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.