Tony Tepsic – 12/30/12

This page was last updated on December 31, 2012.

Decertifying union will cost workers; Tony Tepsic; Beaver County Times; December 30, 2012. An editor’s note asserts, “The writer is president of USW Local 1212.”

The only previous Tepsic letter I know of was entitled “Specter’s decision lets down workers.”

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“I have been following the recent events at Almatis Inc. in Leetsdale and the workers’ decision to decertify their affiliation with the USW.”

[RWC] I don’t know any of the specifics in this case so I’ll stick with general points. Please read my paper “Labor Unions.”

The primary business of today’s labor unions is advocacy for leftist politicians and lobbying for leftist policies/programs. According to their Department of Labor LM-2 forms, USW management (Leo Gerard, a foreign national, is International President) spent over $6 million in 2010 on “Political Activities and Lobbying” and AFL-CIO management spent over $29.6 million in 2010 on “Political Activities and Lobbying.” Representing employees is simply a fund-raising chore labor union management must endure to provide funds for its lobbying and political activities. Heck, AFL-CIO CEO Richard Trumka conceded as much when he said, “I got into the labor movement not because I wanted to negotiate wages. I got into the labor movement because I saw it as a vehicle to do massive social change to improve the lots of people.”

“I must say how concerned I am with the decision made by my fellow steelworkers. I can repeat the often stated benefits of working in a union shop, such as higher wages, better health insurance, higher likelihood of having a pension and a safer work place. But I emphasize my concern about their future without a union. They received a 55-cents-an-hour raise, more time off for vacation and a raise in their pension. Just what do they think they will get in the future? Do you honestly think Almatis will honor your existing contract?”

[RWC] If labor unions are such a great deal for employees, why do only 6.9% of private-sector employees belong to one?

“One worker was quoted as saying ‘not having to pay union dues now, I just gave myself another raise.’ At what cost did he get this extra raise? When the company gives an employee with less seniority a promotion, a raise or a vacation over him, who will stand up for him? When unsafe working conditions are not rectified, who will help him? About that raise, when is he going to get another one?”

[RWC] While I have no problem with using seniority in a tie-breaker situation, shouldn’t the employee more valuable to the business get the “promotion, … raise or … vacation” regardless of seniority? In any case, since the employer is the guy paying the compensation, shouldn’t he set the rules?

As for “unsafe working conditions,” isn’t that the job of OSHA and the PA Department of Labor and Industry?

“The facts are as follows: the average current USW dues structure is 1.45 percent or $1.45 per $100. On an average pay at $20 per hour, 80 hours equals $23.20 of union dues. Yes, you got a raise. But in the end how much is it going to cost you?”

[RWC] As for labor union management “standing up” for anyone, don’t hold your breath waiting unless it has to do with keeping the dues flowing. The management of the United Steelworkers of America union, along with nine steel companies, was slapped with a federal consent decree in 1974 to address “discriminatory hiring, promotion, assignment, and wage policies directed against women and minorities.” More recently, in 2003 the EEOC charged AK Steel – Butler with racial bias. The EEOC charged “that the steelmaker condoned offensive language and graffiti and the open display of nooses, swastikas and Ku Klux Klan videos at its plant in Butler.” If the charges were valid, what was union (Butler-Armco Independent Union at the time) management doing? Shouldn’t union management have filed grievances on behalf of the offended employees long before employees had to involve the EEOC? If the offending employees were union members, couldn’t union management have handled the problem internally?