Trump Signs Orders Cracking Down on Federal Workers' Unions

[UglyCasanova]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...utive-orders-cracking-down-on-employee-unions

President Donald Trump signed executive orders restricting the activities of unions that represent many of the U.S. government’s 2.1 million employees, the White House said.

One of the three orders signed on Friday limits the amount of official time federal employees can spend on union duties to no more than 25 percent. It also requires the federal government to start charging union members rent for using space in federal buildings, to stop paying employees for the cost of lobbying the federal government, and to more aggressively negotiate union contracts.



I’m on both sides of the fence on this one. I hate the idea of EO's so there’s that. And I do support unions in theory and think they’ve done a lot of good for workers over the years. But I also think they help foster inefficient workplaces, especially in the public sector where’s there’s no incentive to become more efficient.

 

[Greenman]

It sounds perfectly logical to me. I'm sure someone will be along to tell me why I'm crazy/stupid/uninformed shortly.

 

[ch33zw1z]

More executive orders, just like Trump promised on the campaign trail, where he appluaded Obama's use of them repeatedly.

 

[Jhhnn]

It sounds perfectly logical to me. I'm sure someone will be along to tell me why I'm crazy/stupid/uninformed shortly.

Yes, Trump is the champion of the little guy... He is their voice, remember? I'm sure all those little guys in the federal govt are just thrilled for him to fuck over their union representation.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Sometimes that’s necessary though

 

[Jhhnn]

Sometimes that’s necessary though

Especially when billionaire tax cuts blow a giant hole in the budget. Now it's time to beat the cash out of the little people, one way or another.

 

[ivwshane]

Especially when billionaire tax cuts blow a giant hole in the budget. Now it's time to beat the cash out of the little people, one way or another.

That's the frustrating part about this. Had trump and Republicans passed a lean budget, not done ridiculous tax cuts, and now did this, I'd be perfectly ok with this. However, as you pointed out, he's nearly beating up on the little guys.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's the frustrating part about this. Had trump and Republicans passed a lean budget, not done ridiculous tax cuts, and now did this, I'd be perfectly ok with this. However, as you pointed out, he's nearly beating up on the little guys.

The forced decline of Unions correlates nicely with declining middle class share of national income since 1980. Feel the freedumb.

 

[Greenman]

Yes, Trump is the champion of the little guy... He is their voice, remember? I'm sure all those little guys in the federal govt are just thrilled for him to fuck over their union representation.

One of the three orders signed on Friday limits the amount of official time federal employees can spend on union duties to no more than 25 percent. It also requires the federal government to start charging union members rent for using space in federal buildings, to stop paying employees for the cost of lobbying the federal government.
Why should my tax dollars be used to pay a federal employee for union duties? Shouldn't the union be paying that person since he's acting as their employee? Why should the union get free rent anywhere? And why on earth should union employees be paid for lobbying the federal government? This isn't union busting, this isn't "fucking over the little guy", this is making an organization with two million due paying members pay their own bills. This was a good call, and should have been done years ago.

 

[Jhhnn]

One of the three orders signed on Friday limits the amount of official time federal employees can spend on union duties to no more than 25 percent. It also requires the federal government to start charging union members rent for using space in federal buildings, to stop paying employees for the cost of lobbying the federal government.
Why should my tax dollars be used to pay a federal employee for union duties? Shouldn't the union be paying that person since he's acting as their employee? Why should the union get free rent anywhere? And why on earth should union employees be paid for lobbying the federal government? This isn't union busting, this isn't "fucking over the little guy", this is making an organization with two million due paying members pay their own bills. This was a good call, and should have been done years ago.

It's all specifically aimed at weakening Unions' ability to act on behalf of their members. And you ain't seen nuthin' yet.

 

[Greenman]

It's all specifically aimed at weakening Unions' ability to act on behalf of their members. And you ain't seen nuthin' yet.

I disagree. It's aimed at making them pay their own bills.

 

[sandorski]

Germany has the best "Union" model. Mandate Labour representatives into the highest levels of Management. Not sure how it works in the Public sector, but it works well in the Private.

 

[senseamp]

Glad I don't work for the government under the Trump regime.

 

[1prophet]

It's all specifically aimed at weakening Unions' ability to act on behalf of their members. And you ain't seen nuthin' yet.

Actually your many years late and many dollars short, unions power declined started going down hill when Reagan came in and fired the air traffic controllers and later on gave amnesty to the illegals our social justice warriors love so much not out of the goodness of his heart but to bust unions and lower wages on the lower economic end,

then the Corporate Clintons pushed through NAFTA by strong-arming the Democrat controlled congress and their union backers to pass NAFTA, and since then the democrat party has gone full corporate behind the scenes while paying lip service to the union working class while the union leadership continually defend them because they have been brainwashed to believe the only other option is that evil union busting republican,

And today our new tech liberal billionaire overlords openly despise unions while being on the correct side of every anti-Trump liberal talking point social justice issue while screwing over the working class.


Jeff Bezos Screws Over Workers At Amazon. Now He Wants To Do The Same At The Washington Post.

WASHINGTON ― Like most of the industry titans in the world of big tech, Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos is no fan of labor unions. Since 1994, he’s fended away every effort by Amazon warehouse workers to unionize.

But when Bezos purchased The Washington Post in 2013, he inherited more than 1,200 workers unionized with the Washington-Baltimore News Guild. That union now claims that Bezos and Washington Post management are trying to gut protections and benefits for workers in the latest contract negotiations.

“Under the Bezos ownership, we fear a fundamental transformation is under way at the Post — one that is occurring in many other workplaces around the country, leading to economic insecurity for working people as though we are disposable or interchangeable elements in a machine,” the union bargaining committee wrote in a memo sent to Post employees on Oct. 6.

According to the memo, management wants to end the paper’s long-standing practice of across-the-board percentage annual pay raises to create an “unprecedented” merit pay system and cut severance benefits. It also refuses to increase the 401(k) match from 1 percent.

The merit system would potentially freeze even inflation adjusted increases in pay for some employees for up to 30 months while others could get up to a 4 percent increase. Management has also proposed to cut severance pay and require any employee who accepts severance to waive their legal rights. When you do away with routine raises only the superstar reporters will wind up getting them. This would leave copy editors, video editors and others who are not the face of the paper on the losing end and increase inequality within the company.

Management has also offered a fallback proposal that will give employees a $600 payment in the first year and then an $8 raise per week in the second year.

This proposal comes with the added threat of an even worse proposal if the union does not agree to the current terms by Nov. 1, the bargaining committee said it its memo.

The bargaining committee has called management’s proposal a “terrible, short-sighted, morale-destroying proposal” that would “deliver real pain to many employees and transform a team enterprise into a collection of salary winners and losers.” The Post declined to comment for this article.

It isn’t as though money is tight for the Post. Profits and revenue are up, and digital subscriptions have tripled. The paper has hired a huge amount of talent, and its reporters have broken numerous major stories about the Trump administration. Even if the paper weren’t profitable it is backed by one of the three wealthiest people in the world. Bezos is worth an almost unfathomable $84 billion.

This is just the latest spat between Bezos and the Post union. During the first contract negotiations back in 2014, Bezos and management cut employee retirement benefits.

WASHINGTON ― Like most of the industry titans in the world of big tech, Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos is no fan of labor unions. Since 1994, he’s fended away every effort by Amazon warehouse workers to unionize.

But when Bezos purchased The Washington Post in 2013, he inherited more than 1,200 workers unionized with the Washington-Baltimore News Guild. That union now claims that Bezos and Washington Post management are trying to gut protections and benefits for workers in the latest contract negotiations.

“Under the Bezos ownership, we fear a fundamental transformation is under way at the Post — one that is occurring in many other workplaces around the country, leading to economic insecurity for working people as though we are disposable or interchangeable elements in a machine,” the union bargaining committee wrote in a memo sent to Post employees on Oct. 6.

According to the memo, management wants to end the paper’s long-standing practice of across-the-board percentage annual pay raises to create an “unprecedented” merit pay system and cut severance benefits. It also refuses to increase the 401(k) match from 1 percent.

The merit system would potentially freeze even inflation adjusted increases in pay for some employees for up to 30 months while others could get up to a 4 percent increase. Management has also proposed to cut severance pay and require any employee who accepts severance to waive their legal rights. When you do away with routine raises only the superstar reporters will wind up getting them. This would leave copy editors, video editors and others who are not the face of the paper on the losing end and increase inequality within the company.

Management has also offered a fallback proposal that will give employees a $600 payment in the first year and then an $8 raise per week in the second year.

This proposal comes with the added threat of an even worse proposal if the union does not agree to the current terms by Nov. 1, the bargaining committee said it its memo.

The bargaining committee has called management’s proposal a “terrible, short-sighted, morale-destroying proposal” that would “deliver real pain to many employees and transform a team enterprise into a collection of salary winners and losers.” The Post declined to comment for this article.

It isn’t as though money is tight for the Post. Profits and revenue are up, and digital subscriptions have tripled. The paper has hired a huge amount of talent, and its reporters have broken numerous major stories about the Trump administration. Even if the paper weren’t profitable it is backed by one of the three wealthiest people in the world. Bezos is worth an almost unfathomable $84 billion.

This is just the latest spat between Bezos and the Post union. During the first contract negotiations back in 2014, Bezos and management cut employee retirement benefits.
n September, Post metro section reporter and union bargaining committee member Freddy Kunkle wrote an op-ed in HuffPost arguing that his paper’s owner was sticking it to his workers. Kunkle argued that Bezos was trying to cover up his attempts to attack the union by touting his charitable giving.


The Post issued a formal warning to Kunkle claiming that he violated the paper’s policy on freelancing. The op-ed, however, was not a freelance piece written as a reporter, but penned from Kunkle’s position as a labor union officer. Union officers are allowed to engage in “concerted activities” in furtherance of the union’s interest. The Washington-Baltimore News Guild filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board in response.

The union has so far rejected management’s proposal and demands management lift its Nov. 1 acceptance deadline.

UPDATE: After this piece published, a Washington Post spokeswoman emailed the HuffPost to ask where the information about stars benefiting from pay systems that solely rely on merit-based judgments for pay raises comes from. The Post could simply look around. Newspapers’ highest paid employees tend to be high-ranking editors and the most well-known writers. At the New York Times, op-ed writers like Tom Friedman are among the employees paid a six-figure salary even though they pen columns — which are sometimes about how they ate too much marijuana or enjoyed seeing Bruce Springsteen in Europe — once or twice a week. These employees are generally the most publicly well-known writers on staff and in a better position to demand higher pay from management. This is a part of the commonly understood superstar effect that occurs when a small number of high performers, whether individuals or corporations, reap all of the profits.

Reporters and economists have noted this effect across industries from sports to music to movies to tech, and even among cities, for decades. Additional studies examining corporate salary systems that provide raises solely based on merit suggest that this practice can increase gender and race-based inequality. The Post already allows pay increases based on merit (or perhaps when they employed Chris Cillizza, based on traffic), which the proposal from management will not change. Instead, their proposal will end routine annual raises for all workers. Efforts to end routine raises are a means of destroying the concept of collective bargaining for a labor union. The whole point of workers joining together in a union is to deliver benefits for all workers, not only the ones who show up on television the most.

But our so called liberal democrats have no problem calling for a boycott of a state that tries to tell you what bathroom you can use but when it comes to the constant erosion of workers rights by our new silicon valley tech liberals, crickets.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Actually your many years late and many dollars short, unions power declined started going down hill when Reagan came in and fired the air traffic controllers and later on gave amnesty to the illegals our social justice warriors love so much not out of the goodness of his heart but to bust unions and lower wages on the lower economic end,

then the Corporate Clintons pushed through NAFTA by strong-arming the Democrat controlled congress and their union backers to pass NAFTA, and since then the democrat party has gone full corporate behind the scenes while paying lip service to the union working class while the union leadership continually defend them because they have been brainwashed to believe the only other option is that evil union busting republican,

And today our new tech liberal billionaire overlords openly despise unions while being on the correct side of every anti-Trump liberal talking point social justice issue while screwing over the working class.


Jeff Bezos Screws Over Workers At Amazon. Now He Wants To Do The Same At The Washington Post.







But our so called liberal democrats have no problem calling for a boycott of a state that tries to tell you what bathroom you can use but when it comes to the constant erosion of workers rights by our new silicon valley tech liberals, crickets.

Needs 3 or 4 YouTube videos for emphasis. I give it 6/10.

 

[cytg111]

Unions is the only way for the common working force to create a two way feedback loop with the top. United stand, divided fall. Trump fucking over the little guy? NOOOOOOOOOO you dont say... cause a 20% tax cut to the top is just not enough. People in chains to set this right. Right?

 

[Puffnstuff]

I fully expect for R's under Trump's direction to continue tearing down worker protections to appease their rich base.

 

[ivwshane]

Actually your many years late and many dollars short, unions power declined started going down hill when Reagan came in and fired the air traffic controllers and later on gave amnesty to the illegals our social justice warriors love so much not out of the goodness of his heart but to bust unions and lower wages on the lower economic end,

then the Corporate Clintons pushed through NAFTA by strong-arming the Democrat controlled congress and their union backers to pass NAFTA, and since then the democrat party has gone full corporate behind the scenes while paying lip service to the union working class while the union leadership continually defend them because they have been brainwashed to believe the only other option is that evil union busting republican,

And today our new tech liberal billionaire overlords openly despise unions while being on the correct side of every anti-Trump liberal talking point social justice issue while screwing over the working class.


Jeff Bezos Screws Over Workers At Amazon. Now He Wants To Do The Same At The Washington Post.







But our so called liberal democrats have no problem calling for a boycott of a state that tries to tell you what bathroom you can use but when it comes to the constant erosion of workers rights by our new silicon valley tech liberals, crickets.

Why bother with the facts when you can use bold font and red writing to make your points?! With those techniques you can make up all the shit you want!

 

[pcgeek11]

It's all specifically aimed at weakening Unions' ability to act on behalf of their members. And you ain't seen nuthin' yet.

Wow that is quite some stretch you have there.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Wow that is quite some stretch you have there.

Not really, the people stretching are the ones who thought Trump was going to be FOR workers rights.

 

[pcgeek11]

Not really, the people stretching are the ones who thought Trump was going to be FOR workers rights.

Union |= Worker

I don't see how any of those takes away workers rights.

Limits the amount of official time federal employees can spend on union duties to no more than 25 percent.

It also requires the federal government to start charging union members rent for using space in federal buildings.

Stop paying employees for the cost of lobbying the federal government.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Union |= Worker

Really, that's all you got. You know exactly what I'm talking about.

If you're trying to say Trump is going to do something that protects workers rights, lol....yea right.

Edit: in response to your edit. When you whittle away at the unions role, you will, in the end, impact the workers....that's the trickle down bruh.

The irony of this being done through EO is just too great. It's like Trump can't get anyone to cooperate.

 

[pcgeek11]

He isn't doing anything that takes away their rights.

 

[cytg111]

He isn't doing anything that takes away their rights.

Is he making it harder for them to unionize?

 

[pcgeek11]

Is he making it harder for them to unionize?

Government workers already have a union. So no. He is making them pay their own way however.