North Carolina Remains Least Unionized State In The Nation

North Carolina Is The Nation's Least-Unionized State


Two N.C. Labor leaders said Tuesday they support Charlotte's bid for the 2012 Democratic National Convention - despite one union's call for the party to bypass the city.

UNITE HERE, a union representing hotel workers, this month asked the Democratic National Committee to rule out Charlotte and Cleveland because they lack unionized hotels.

Among the four convention finalists, it said, only St. Louis and Minneapolis fit the bill.

But some union leaders from North Carolina say they'd welcome the convention.

"We believe it will be a tremendous economic boost not only for the Charlotte metro area but for the entire state," said James Andrews, president of the state's AFL-CIO. "We believe there will be jobs for our workers and others."

The DNC is expected to announce a convention site around the end of the year. While factors such as the quality of venues and even politics are expected to be paramount considerations, the labor issue has hovered over the choice just as it did with earlier conventions.

A St. Louis TV station reported this month that its city enjoys an advantage over Charlotte because it has hotels with unionized workers. Organized labor is a major part of the Democratic base and financial support.

North Carolina is the nation's least-unionized state, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Only 3.5 percent of the state's work force is unionized.

The last two cities that hosted Democratic conventions had labor issues of their own.

In Boston, site of the 2004 gathering, a police union there threatened to picket the convention until a deal was worked out. And in 2008 Denver won its bid despite labor concerns, including protests over the lack of unions at downtown hotels.

At least one Denver hotel was unionized before the convention and labor won other concessions.

Charlotte convention backers says they're not worried about concerns over organized labor or by the rap that the city lacks sufficient hotel rooms.

Organizers say the city has the 15,000 hotel rooms the party required within 30 minutes of uptown and access to at least another 15,000.

"We feel like our bid is strong the way it is," said Will Miller, acting executive director of "Charlotte in 2012."

"And we've made it clear from the beginning that should this become an issue, we are happy to meet with folks to work through those issues, just like they did in Denver."

Claude Gray, president of Teamsters Local 391 in Greensboro, wrote DNC Chairman Tim Kaine earlier this year in support of Charlotte's bid. He said the Teamsters represent about 4,000 drivers in the Charlotte area who would benefit from the influx of convention-goers.

Dana Cope, executive director of the 55,000-member State Employees Association, said his union hasn't taken a stand on the convention. He's talked to Charlotte leaders about creating a more labor-friendly environment.

"We can always address it like we did in Denver," he said, "so that gives me a lot of hope that we can still land it in Charlotte."





Unions To 2012 DNC: Shun These Cities: Charlotte & Cleveland


A Union representing Hotel Workers has asked the Democratic National Committee to rule out two of its four convention-site finalists, Cleveland and Charlotte, N.C., because they lack sufficient unionized hotel facilities.

"Among the DNC's four finalist cities, only St. Louis and Minneapolis" have the capacity to "house a large portion of the delegates and other guests ... in unionized hotels," John Wilhelm, president of the international UNITE HERE union of hotel and textile workers, wrote in a letter to DNC Chairman Tim Kaine.

"Therefore, one of those two cities should be the DNC's choice for 2012. Unfortunately, Charlotte and Cleveland do not fit the bill, and they should be removed from the list."

Though the letter was dated Oct. 6, it wasn't publicized until this week, when the union's Minneapolis local, eager to enhance its city's chances, issued a press release on the subject.

"We're just very interested in having the convention here on a number of levels, and for the international it's a priority that it be in a union city," said Wade Luneberg, secretary-treasurer and political director of UNITE HERE Local 17 in Minneapolis. "We think it's important to differentiate between the four [finalist] cities and see that Minneapolis and St. Louis rise to the top."

Charlotte, N.C., has no unionized hotels, and its convention center's employees are not union members, according to Wilhelm's letter. Cleveland has some union hotels, but only a handful in the downtown area and about 10 in the larger region; they belong to a competing union, Workers United.

UNITE HERE under Wilhelm split with former President Bruce Raynor in a bitter and protracted battle that ended last year with Raynor leaving and founding Workers United.

Workers United, which has affiliated with the Service Employees International Union, says it has 150,000 members, while UNITE HERE, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, claims 265,000.

A subcommittee of the DNC visited potential convention sites over the summer to evaluate their logistical suitability and advise the committee on their findings. A decision is expected in late 2010 or early 2011.

Democratic sources familiar with the decision-making process say Charlotte and St. Louis are the current front-runners, with Charlotte at a slight disadvantage because of its small overall hotel room stock.

Political considerations — including last week's election results — are expected to play a major role in the decision-making process. The defeat of a Democratic governor in Ohio may have hurt Cleveland's chances, while Minneapolis could be helped if Minnesota's Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Mark Dayton, hangs on to win. He currently leads in the count in a race that is likely to go to a recount.

The Minneapolis area has at least 20 union hotels totaling 5,300 rooms, with more than 2,000 workers, Wilhelm's letter notes. St. Louis, the letter says, has 10 union hotels with more than 3,000 rooms. Both cities' sports arenas and convention centers are unionized as well.

"Employees at union hotels are far more likely than employees in non-union hotels to get the sort of basic fair treatment for which the Democratic Party stands — good wages, affordable health benefits, stable long-term positions, and respect and a voice on the job," Wilhelm wrote. "For these reasons, those employees are more likely to provide delegates and guests with better service as well."

UNITE HERE official Pilar Weiss said the DNC was receptive to the union's concerns. "It's early on," she said. "We're having a dialogue with them."

A spokesman for the DNC, Hari Sevugan, said, "As always, we are looking at a number of factors and will have an announcement in the coming months."






Unions Charge North Carolina Violating NAFTA Labor Rules


More than 50 Labor Organizations in Mexico, the United States and Canada, together representing several million workers, charged North Carolina and the United States with Violating Labor rules established under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

The complaint charges that 650,000 public employees in North Carolina are illegally denied the right to Collective Bargaining, a violation of Labor protections guaranteed by the North American Agreement for Labor Cooperation (NAALC), the labor side agreement to NAFTA. It was formally filed on October 17 in Mexico by the Frente Autentico del Trabajo (FAT – the Authentic Labor Front.)

Frustration with the lack of collective bargaining and effective voice on the job has led to increasing protests by North Carolina public employees. The most dramatic recent instance was a strike by Raleigh sanitation workers on September 13 and 14.

The complaint was filed at the request of UE Local 150, the North Carolina Public Service Workers Union. UE 150 represents public sector workers across the state, including municipal employees in Raleigh, Charlotte, Chapel Hill, Durham and Rocky Mount, and state employees at numerous facilities of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the University of North Carolina (UNC) system and the Department of Administration.

UE Local 150 President Angaza Laughinghouse expressed the local’s gratitude for the showing of international support. “We are very pleased at this showing of solidarity with North Carolina public employees by unions from across the three NAFTA countries. This shows that North Carolina’s continued denial of basic worker rights is an international disgrace, and it must be corrected.”

The NAALC requires the United States, Mexico and Canada to provide for “high labor standards” in their laws, and lists freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining among its core principles. These rights are also required by the conventions of the International Labor Organization (ILO), the labor arm of the United Nations (UN.) But North Carolina’s General Statute 95-98 prohibits collective bargaining by state and local government employees, a clear and direct violation of international law. The NAALC and other international agreements also require standards of due process for workers, protection of health and safety on the job, and protection against employment discrimination. The labor groups charge that North Carolina, in denying its workers the right to negotiate contracts, denies them these protections as well.

Mexico and Canada are North Carolina’s largest international trading partners. North Carolina’s combined annual exports to Canada and Mexico total $6.5 billion.

The FAT filed the charge in Mexico City with the National Administrative Office (NAO) within Mexico’s federal ministry of labor. Under NAFTA’s terms, the U.S., Canada and Mexico each established an NAO to act on complaints of violations of the NAALC. The petitioners are asking the Mexican NAO to investigate North Carolina’s labor rights violations, and issue a report and recommendations for action. The actions requested by the labor organizations include North Carolina immediately ceasing to enforce, and moving to repeal General Statute 95-98, replacing it with legislation that will guarantee public sector workers the rights to organize, bargain collectively, and full freedom of association.

Benedicto Martinez Orozco, national coordinator of the FAT, described his organization’s reasons for acting. “I traveled to NC and was shocked at the level of discrimination and that a country that places such importance on democracy does not permit public sector workers in North Carolina to bargain collectively. We are filing this complaint to support workers in the US.

UE entered into a “Strategic Organizing Alliance” with the FAT in 1992. The two organizations exchange information and assist each other in organizing campaigns and in struggles to protect and expand workers’ rights in both countries. They organize visits by rank-and-file workers to each others’ countries to increase understanding and solidarity between Mexican and U.S. workers.

United Steelworkers President Leo W. Gerard said, “The Steelworkers are proud to join with the UE and democratic and independent unions in Mexico to challenge violations of what few international standards exist for preventing unions in the United States from exercising the most basic rights to organize and bargain collectively.”

UE filed the first complaint under NAALC in 1994, after the Mexican government allowed General Electric to commit massive labor law violations in crushing a FAT organizing campaign at a GE plant in Juarez.

The filing of the current complaint was simultaneously announced to the media on Tuesday, October 17 in Mexico, Canada and the United States. The following organizations participated in the complaint:

* Alianza de Tranviarios de México
* Asociación Sindical de Trabajadores del Instituto de Vivienda
* Canadian Association of Labour Lawyers
* Canadian Auto Workers Union (CAW)
* Canadian Labour Congress
* Centrale des syndicats du Québec (CSQ)
* Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE)
* Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada
* Confédération des syndicats nacionaux (CSN)
* Coordinadora Sindical Independiente
* Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC), AFL-CIO
* Federación de Liberación Social
* Federación Estatal de Sindicatos Auténticos de Guanajuato (FESAG)
* Fédération des infirmieres et infirmiers du Québec (FIIQ)
* Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec (FTQ)
* Federación Metropolitana de Trabajadores
* Frente Mecánico de Trabajadores y Empleados del Comercio en General, Oficinas Particulares, Bodegas y Tiendas Comerciales del D.F.
* International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers’ Unions (ICEM)
* International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW)
* Labor Council for Latin American Advancement
* Public Service International (PSI)
* Sindicato de Trabajadores de Casas Comerciales, Oficinas y Expendios, Similares y Conexos del Distrito Federal
* Sindicato Democrático de Trabajadores de Pesca y Acuacultura de la SAGARPA
* Sindicato del Heroico Cuerpo de Bomberos del Distrito Federal
* Sindicato “Flores Magón” de Trabajadores de la Fábrica Hulera Industrial Leonesa, S.A. de C.V.
* Sindicato Industrial de Trabajadores Textiles y Similares “Belisario Domínguez”.
* Sindicato de Trabajadores Académicos de la Universidad Autónoma Chapingo
* Sindicato de Trabajadores del Instituto Nacional de Capacitación del Sector Agropecuario
* Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Industria Metálica, Acero, Hierro, Conexos y Similares
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educación para Adultos (SNTEA)
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Elevadores Otis
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Industria de la Costura, Confección, Vestido, Similares y Conexos “Diecinueve de Septiembre”
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Industria del Hierro y el Acero, Productos Derivados, Similares y Conexos de la República Mexicana
* Sindicato de Trabajadores del Transporte en General, Similares y Conexos de la República Mexicana
* Sindicato de Trabajadores de Metlife
* Syndicat de la fonction publique du Québec (SFPQ)
* Sindicato Nacional de Empleados y Trabajadores de Nacional Monte de Piedad
* Unión Nacional de Trabajadores (UNT)
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Azucarales y Derivados “Chema Martínez”
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de General Tire de México, S.A. de C.V.
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Impulsora Mexicana de Telecomunicaciones
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores del Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática
* Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Telecomm Telégrafos
* Sindicato Nacional Único y Democrático de los Trabajadores del Banco Nacional de Comercio Exterior
* Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Universidad Iberoamericana
* Sindicato Único de Trabajadores de Calzado Sandak (Calpulalpan)
* Sindicato Único de Trabajadores del Gobierno del Distrito Federal
* Sindicato Único de Trabajadores de la Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México
* Sindicato Único Nacional de Trabajadores de Nacional Financiera
* UNITE HERE
* United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of America (UE)
* United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW)
* United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial & Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO/CLC (USW)







Smithfield Workers Say "Yes" To Hog-Plant Union


Workers at the world's largest hog processing plant, Smithfield Packing Co. in Bladen County, have voted for a union to represent them at one of the state's largest industrial sites, totals released Thursday night showed.

The tally was 2,041 to 1,879 in favor of the United Food and Commercial Workers.

About 4,600 of Smithfield's 5,000 employees in the tiny town of Tar Heel were eligible to vote over two days of balloting overseen by the National Labor Relations Board.

“From the beginning, our goal was to give employees the opportunity to vote on this issue in a fair, secret-ballot election. This has now been accomplished, and we will abide by the results of the election. We respect the decision and look forward to working with the union to negotiate a fair labor contract for our employees,” said Tim Schellpeper, president of Smithfield Packing.

The UFCW has been trying since the plant opened 16 years ago to win the right to represent the Tar Heel workers. This time, the selling points of improved working conditions and better wages convinced enough workers to vote in favor of the union.

“We have a union now. Amen. Hallelujah,” said Letia Spivey, a Smithfield worker. “I feel like tonight’s vote went wonderful. Everything is swell. We are very happy people at Smithfield."

Ronnie Ann Simmons, a veteran of 13 years at the plant said, "We are thrilled. This moment has been a long time coming. We stuck together, and now we have a say on the job."

The election comes as part of a settlement to a racketeering lawsuit the company filed against the union last year.

“We will be entering negotiations with another union as we have done at many of our other facilities. And we will continue to operate, moving forward as a company, hoping to continue to provide good jobs and high-quality products,” said Dennis Pittman, Smithfield Packing spokesman.

Workers with whom WRAL News spoke who did not support the union said they were concerned about bringing in a union during tough economic times. They said they were worried the union's demands could put the company out of business.

Employees at eight of Smithfield’s 13 plants are unionized.

The Tar Heel plant processes up to 32,000 live hogs a day into plate-ready pork.


View Larger Map


Sources: McClatchy Newspapers, Politico, UE News, WRAL, Youtube, Google Maps

Unions Producing Candidates For 2010 Elections: AFLCIO

Program By New Jersey Union Grooms Candidates


Ballots cast throughout New Jersey on Tuesday will list hundreds of candidates, their parties and the offices they seek. But for 53 candidates, the ballots will not say one of the most important things they have in common: union-approved.

These people running for town councilman, mayor, county freeholder and other posts are graduates of a state A.F.L.-C.I.O. program to recruit, train and support candidates for public office who are union members and support pro-union policies.

The program, which costs the federation about $250,000 a year to run, has groomed more than 160 current officeholders — the overwhelming majority of them Democrats — including 8 members of the Legislature, 12 county freeholders, 18 mayors and a county clerk.

Many of these elected officials are not just members but leaders in their unions, like Stephen M. Sweeney, the president of the State Senate and a paid organizer for the ironworkers’ union, and Senator Donald Norcross, an electrician who is the president of the Southern New Jersey Central Labor Council of the A.F.L.-C.I.O.

Union members are involved in political campaigns in every state and are often the ground troops for time-intensive tasks like walking precincts and making phone calls. But experts say that organized labor in other states has not been as focused on or as good at training its own members to run for office rather than work for other candidates. Similar boot-camp programs have been tried elsewhere, but none compare in size or success to New Jersey’s, which began in 1997 and has grown steadily.

“The concept was to take our members and apprentice them in the field of politics, just as we apprentice them in their own crafts,” said Charles Wowkanech, the president of the state A.F.L.-C.I.O. “We started with zoning boards, school boards, councils, then mayor, freeholder, and then senators and assemblyman.”

“Corporate America is very good at electing their people,” Mr. Wowkanech said. “If it’s good for them, why can’t it be good for us?”

In New Jersey, five members of the Legislature are employees of their labor unions — Mr. Sweeney, Mr. Norcross and three Assembly Democrats: Thomas P. Giblin, the business manager of an engineers’ local; Joseph V. Egan, also a business manager of an electrical workers’ local; and Wayne P. DeAngelo, the assistant business manager of another electrical workers’ local. A 2007 study by the National Conference of State Legislatures found just nine lawmakers who worked for unions in the rest of the country.

New Jersey has many more legislators who are union members, including one current shop steward, Assemblyman Nelson T. Albano of the United Food and Commercial Workers, and several former stewards or union officers.

At a Democratic campaign rally on Tuesday at the V.F.W. post in Saddle Brook, many of those scooping pasta from the buffet table were union members. Two of the candidates they were trying to help were members of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and graduates of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. program: James M. Carroll, a Bergen County freeholder running for re-election, and Joseph Setticase, a Saddle Brook councilman running for mayor.

“Without my union and the support of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., I wouldn’t be here,” Mr. Carroll said.

Even labor’s political opponents expressed admiration for the effort. “The political parties supposedly try to do the same thing, to groom candidates from the grass roots, but the A.F.L.-C.I.O. does it more effectively,” said Richard J. LaRossa, a Republican former state senator who leads a conservative policy group, Solutions for New Jersey.

Mr. LaRossa and other critics contend that the unions’ electoral success contributes to the high cost of government in New Jersey, a core issue in a state where Gov. Chris Christie, a Republican, has clashed with labor and lawmakers over salaries, pensions, staffing and overlapping layers of government. “The labor agenda is pay more, build more, hire more, spend more,” Mr. LaRossa said.

Labor leaders, though, pointed out that most of the elected officials came from private-sector unions, particularly in the building trades — the electrical workers are especially well-represented — that are not always aligned with government-employee unions. Mr. Sweeney, for example, has had a rocky relationship with the New Jersey Education Association, the main teachers’ union, which is the governor’s favorite foil.

Still, the A.F.L.-C.I.O. program has been crucial in recent union victories in Trenton, including a law allowing government agencies to require even nonunion contractors to adhere to the terms of union contracts; one mandating paid family leave for many private-sector workers; and a “card check” provision making it possible for employees to unionize without elections.

“When I’m dealing with the public’s money, I’m going to make sure the public is treated fairly,” said Mr. Sweeney, who is also the leader of the Gloucester County Board of Freeholders. “Getting over on somebody like me is a lot more difficult than getting over on somebody who doesn’t know labor and doesn’t know contracts.”

He conceded, however, that “when I was the chair of the labor committee, it was hard to be objective.”

To qualify for the state A.F.L.-C.I.O.’s program, candidates must first have the backing of their own union locals and their counties’ central labor councils. They attend a free two-day session at Rutgers University, with classes taught by politicians and political consultants; Representative Frank Pallone Jr., a lawyer and a longtime labor ally, is often one of the instructors.

Dominick Stampone, the mayor of Haledon, in Passaic County, who belongs to the American Federation of Teachers, said: “They talked about fund-raising, campaign finance reporting, dealing with the media, addressing a room, crafting your message, and also about the core values we believe in, like affordable health care and living wage requirements. They really covered all the bases.”

Mr. Stampone completed the program last year when he was running unsuccessfully for county freeholder.

Once the school is over, the A.F.L.-C.I.O. gives novice candidates advice while they are running, pays for mailings to support them and arranges for volunteers to work on their campaigns.

Mr. Wowkanech of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. said the program began at a time when “organized labor was finding it very difficult to move its agenda, and all we were doing was testifying against the agenda that business and industry wanted.”

In the years since, even as labor has increased its presence in elective office in New Jersey, union membership in the state has declined. Last year, 19.9 percent of the state’s work force was union-represented (compared with 13.6 percent nationally), down from 21.7 percent in 2000 (14.9 percent nationally). New Jersey ranks fifth in unionization; No. 1 is New York, at 27.2 percent.


View Larger Map


Sources: AFLCIO, NY Times, Wikipedia, Google Maps

Obama & Labor Unions Strike Health Care Tax Deal

White House Scores Key Labor Deal


The White House on Thursday cut a deal with its closest labor allies to blunt the impact of a new tax on high-cost insurance policies — and blunt their protests against the health reform plan.

Democrats couldn’t eliminate the tax on union members’ high-cost insurance policies altogether but did put off the effective date until 2018, but only for labor agreements and state and local government workers.

And that seems sure to open up Democrats to charges that it took yet another behind-closed-doors bargaining session with a powerful interest group to close the deal on health reform.

But for a day at least, the White House could claim a significant victory on the road toward passing a health care reform bill, with a deal that averts a standoff on one of the most contentious issues standing in the way of a final compromise.

Other major issues remain under discussion, but according to an official familiar with the talks, negotiators have been sending proposals to the Congressional Budget Office for cost estimates — a sign that lawmakers are close to a deal on other pieces of the tax package. Key lawmakers are set to return to the White House Thursday night for more talks.

President Barack Obama traveled to the Hill on Thursday to speak to House Democrats and sought to rally House members by invoking reform’s historical potential. But his remarks also had a I-know-this-is-tough quality that reflects reform’s unpopularity with voters.

“Now, believe me, I know how big a lift this has been,” Obama said. “But I also know what happens once we get this done, once we sign this bill into law. The American people will suddenly learn that this bill does things they like and doesn’t do things that people have been trying to say it does. Their worst fears will prove groundless, and the American people’s hope for a fair shake from their insurance companies for quality, affordable health care they need will finally be realized.”

The deal focused on a provision that would levy an excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans. Many labor union members have bargained over the years for such benefits in lieu of pay hikes and didn’t want to bear the brunt of the tax.

Major changes to the legislation include a modest increase in the threshold for taxation to $24,000 a year for family coverage, inserting adjustments for older workers and women and entirely exempting dental and vision plans for all Americans, starting in 2015.

A broad spectrum of union presidents announced their support for the reduced excise tax on a conference call with reporters Thursday afternoon, bringing a major Democratic constituency into line and helping to quell potential problems on the left in the House.

“We will endorse it, and we’ll do that proudly,” said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka of the health care bill, assuming it stays true to negotiations. “We’ve been at this for 60 years, and we are extremely proud of the constructive role that labor’s played in advancing health care reform.”

The call, led by Trumka, included some of the labor leaders who fought hardest against the excise tax that remains in the legislation, such as Gerald McEntee of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and Larry Cohen of the Communications Workers of America.

“I didn’t have any tremendous hopes for real success in this, but I was proven wrong,” said McEntee of the bill.

White House officials and labor leaders defended the agreement against a fresh round of Republican criticism that the bill was weighed down with special-interest deals and was a targeted attempt to mollify a key constituency. They sought to highlight aspects of the deal that would benefit more than just union members, including the higher threshold at which the tax would kick in and the exemption for dental and vision plans.

“It is fairly telling that opponents of reform are criticizing a transition period for workers and are silent about a similar transition period for their friends — the insurers,” said White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer. He was referring to the phase-in of the reforms and taxes affecting insurers and other industry groups between 2011 and 2018.

The changes slice $60 billion off the $150 billion the tax was expected to raise, Trumka said. He also defended the special exemption for union plans, saying that most of the changes labor had won would apply to all workers.

House Democrats peppered union leaders with questions about the deal at a closed-door session in the Capitol complex Thursday.

“My concern is that this [threshold] isn’t high enough to pass muster,” said one Democratic member who has been regularly briefed by House leaders on the White House negotiations. Asked whether the Democratic Caucus would reject the deal, the member said: “It’s possible.”

Connecticut Rep. Joe Courtney, who has led opposition to the excise tax, said after reviewing details of the deal: “It reflects a more intelligent direction, ... but I really am reserving judgment.”

The deal might also raise eyebrows in the Senate. Earlier Thursday, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) sent Reid a letter asking that all “sweetener” provisions be struck from final legislation — a reference to agreements with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and others to help secure their votes.

“These ‘sweeteners’ are unjustifiable and only detract from our collective goal of putting America’s health care system on a better and more sustainable path,” Feingold wrote. “Several provisions were included in the health reform bill that create, rather than diminish, inequity. ... Simply put, they are intended to provide an undeserved windfall to specific states.”

Feingold’s letter became easy fodder for Republicans seeking to use the right words to attack the union bargain.

“Sen. Feingold says it well — that they should strike the unwarranted measures that win the support of certain members and special interests,” said Don Stewart, spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. “It’s emblematic of the whole debate, so it’s not a surprise. They’re not trying to get the support of the American people; they’re trying to get the support of the union lobbyists.”

To help make up for the lost revenue, Democrats are targeting at least two industries that already put up contributions to health reform’s bottom line. The hospital industry has been asked to offer an additional $15 billion in concessions on top of a $155 billion deal last summer with the White House, according to one source.

And the pharmaceutical industry has agreed to provide an extra $10 billion to its already negotiated $80 billion deal over 10 years.

Democrats are also negotiating further adjustments to the Medicare payroll tax rate, which was already increased under the Senate bill. Lawmakers and the White House are looking to apply the tax to investment income for high-income earners.

Maintaining the excise tax, which health care economists say can help control spiraling health care costs, was a top priority for Obama. But it has been fiercely opposed by top labor leaders and rank-and-file House Democrats.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the push to send a final bill to CBO by Friday wasn’t because of political pressure generated by the Massachusetts Senate race, where Republican Scott Brown has said he would be the 41st vote to scuttle health reform if elected.

“No. The fact that CBO takes so much time is really more the issue,” she said. “When we’re ready to send something, we will. We’d like to do it as soon as possible, as soon as it’s ready. Most of this legislation CBO has seen.

“There are no real surprises in here because the makings of the reconciliation have been in the public domain, in our case for months, in the Senate’s case for several weeks, so much of that has been crafted,” Pelosi said.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said finishing by Friday was the goal. “That’s been the goal. But it’s a goal, it’s not a deadline,” he said.


Sources: Politico

AFL-CIO Threatens To Abandon Dems Over Weak Health Care Bill

AFL-CIO: Senate Health Care Bill "Inadequate"


Following emergency meetings yesterday to discuss the Senate health care bill, labor has finally weighed in.

After the Service Employees International Union issued a challenge to President Obama and lawmakers earlier today, the AFL-CIO has now released a statement calling the post-Lieberman-defection Senate bill "inadequate."

"The absolute refusal of Republicans in the Senate to support health care reform and the hijacking of the bill by defenders of the insurance industry have brought us a Senate bill that is inadequate: It is too kind to the insurance industry," AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said in a statement just released this afternoon.

"The House bill is the model for genuine health care reform. Working people cannot accept anything less than real reform," Trumka said.

So labor has denounced the Senate bill, saying it will fight for changes. The AFL-CIO perhaps went a bit further than SEIU, in that it stated it "cannot accept" anything less than "real reform"--which is an indirect way of saying it "cannot accept" the Senate bill.

Labor is clearly displeased. It has, however, eschewed the tack of Howard Dean: it hasn't phrased its complaints as a call for Democrats to vote against the current bill.

See Trumka's full statement below:

The labor movement has been fighting for health care for nearly 100 years and we are not about to stop fighting now, when it really matters.

But for this health care bill to be worthy of the support of working men and women, substantial changes must be made. The AFL-CIO intends to fight on behalf of all working families to make those changes and win health care reform that is deserving of the name.

The absolute refusal of Republicans in the Senate to support health care reform and the hijacking of the bill by defenders of the insurance industry have brought us a Senate bill that is inadequate: It is too kind to the insurance industry.

Genuine health care reform must bring down health costs, hold insurance companies accountable, assure that Americans can get the health care they need and be financed fairly.

• That's why we are championing a public health insurance option: It is the way to break the stranglehold of the insurance industry over consumers that has led to double digit premium increases virtually every year.

• Employers must pay their fair share.

• And the benefits of hard-working Americans cannot be taxed to pay for health care reform--that's no way to rein in insurance companies and it's the wrong way to pay for health care reform.

Those are the changes for which we will be fighting in the coming days.

The Senate bill does some good things: It will provide health insurance to 30 million more Americans and provide subsidies to low income individuals and families. Benefits will have to meet minimum standards and insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions or impose lifetime or unreasonable annual limits. The bill also includes some relief for plans with early retirees as well as delivery system reforms that may lead to lower costs over the long haul. And Senate leaders have made a commitment to close the Medicare prescription drugs donut hole which is so costly to seniors.

But because it bends toward the insurance industry, the Senate bill will not check costs in the short term, and its financing asks working people and the country to pay the price, even as benefits are cut.

The House bill is the model for genuine health care reform. Working people cannot accept anything less than real reform.







Nation's Largest Union: Change Health Care Bill Or Else


The nation's largest union group said Thursday that it will not support the Democratic health-care bill unless "substantial changes" are made to the current Senate version.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said in a statement to reporters that without a public option for insurance coverage or an employer mandate - and with a tax on high-end insurance plans that some union members get - the health care legislation supported by Senate Democrats falls far short of meeting his group's standards.

"[For] this health care bill to be worthy of the support of working men and women, substantial changes must be made," said Trumka. "The AFL-CIO intends to fight on behalf of all working families to make those changes and win health care reform that is deserving of the name."

The remarks are a strong indication that the coalition of pro-health-care-reform groups has begun to fray. Earlier in the day, Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern penned a letter to his fellow union members in which he called out President Barack Obama for abandoning his own principles of reform.

"President Obama must remember his own words from the campaign. His call of 'Yes We Can' was not just to us, not just to the millions of people who voted for him, but to himself. We all stood shoulder to shoulder with the President during his hard fought campaign. And, we will continue to stand with him but he must fight for the reform we all know is possible," Stern wrote.

"Our challenge to you, to the President, to the Senate and to the House of Representatives is to fight," Stern continued. "Now, more than ever, all of us must stand up, remember what health insurance reform is all about, and fight like hell to deliver real and meaningful reform to the American people."

Stern, like Trumka, called for Democrats to make changes to the legislation as the process moves forward. And his rebuke of Obama - a staunch personal ally - was a telling sign of the growing frustration within the labor movement.

Both labor leaders were particularly incensed over the concessions made by the Senate's Democratic leadership to Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.), the 60th member of their caucus. "The public option is declared impossible. Americans cannot purchase Medicare at an earlier age. The health insurance reform effort we have needed for a century is at risk," Stern wrote.

Officials at both unions met late into the night on Wednesday in emergency sessions to discuss the Senate bill. Aides say the conversations were lengthy and, at times, emotional. The labor community, while privately angry with the White House and Democrats in Congress, still needs the support of these lawmakers on other legislative priorities. Meanwhile, having poured millions into advertisement and man-hours in order to get health care passed, they have watched in horror as the principles they worked for were abandoned in a matter of days.

Officials are also aware of how much would be lost by simply scrapping the bill altogether. Stern noted that under the Senate's bill 30 million additional people would be covered, pre-existing conditions would no longer be an excuse to deny coverage, and people who get sick would no longer lose their insurance. Trumka, likewise, pointed to "good things" in the Senate bill, including the fact that "insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions or impose lifetime or unreasonable annual limits."



View Larger Map


Sources: The Atlantic.com, Huffington Post, AFL-CIO, Wikipedia, Youtube, Google Maps

Labor Unions Angry At Obama Over Job Growth & Economy

For Labor, there's always next year


It’s not been the year that labor had hoped for when it helped Democrats seize control of both Congress and the White House in 2008.

The top labor legislative priority, a measure easing union organizing rules, hasn’t seen so much as a committee vote after negotiations over modified language took a back seat to passage of health care reform.

Some members have grown frustrated with President Barack Obama’s decision to push health care as his first domestic priority, rather than focusing on economic recovery.

And those feelings only intensified as the unemployment rate rose and automakers and other labor-dominated industries took debilitating blows during the economic downturn.

Now, labor leaders are trying to defeat a Senate proposal to raise money for health care reform by taxing so-called Cadillac health insurance packages, which could apply to some union members.

Gerald McEntee, the president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, recently applauded Senate Democratic leaders for working to produce a reform bill but insisted there be “no taxes on middle-class health plans” in it.

To be sure, health care reform has been a goal of union leaders for a long time, and they are still working with Congress to win passage. But labor’s top priority — passage of the Employee Free Choice Act — was in trouble almost the moment the Democrats were sworn in, stalled by the unexpectedly long effort to fill their filibuster-proof Senate roster.

First, labor advocates had to wait until the contested Senate race in Minnesota was settled and Democrat Al Franken was seated. Then the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) caused further delay.

Backers of the bill are hoping it will re-emerge as a congressional priority once health care moves from center stage. But even then, it’s unclear whether Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) has been able to hash out language acceptable to the moderates and conservatives in his caucus — a task made all the more difficult by the looming midterm elections.

Still, labor advocates remain hopeful.

“The Employee Free Choice Act fell victim to the same thing a lot of legislation did: to the health care debate,” said Josh Goldstein of American Rights at Work.

As the White House and Congress prepare to shift their focus to job creation and the economy, Goldstein said, the labor bill may have a more natural place in the debate.

The act, which aims to make it more difficult for management to interfere with union-organizing elections, “plays into the broader debate because it raises the question about what kind of jobs we are creating — good-paying jobs that can’t be outsourced,” said Goldstein.

All this is not to say that labor hasn’t seen any rewards from the new administration.

Obama’s pro-labor appointments are shifting the balance of power away from long-held management advantages.

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis has revoked and eroded several policies that were opposed by union leaders, including Bush-era disclosures of labor union spending.

The National Mediation Board, which oversees airline and railroad worker unions, is currently taking comment on a rule change that could significantly ease the ability of workers in those industries to unionize.

Expected early next year, the ruling could have real-time impact. The Northwest and Delta airline merger last year brought together a mix of workers, with some Northwest employees unionized and some Delta workers not unionized. The Association of Flight Attendants is holding off until the mediation board acts to organize a vote that could unite the merged work force of flight attendants under one contract in the new Delta structure.

The proposed rule change affects how the unionizing votes are counted. For 75 years, transportation workers, unlike others, have had to win the votes of a majority of the work force in order to unionize. Under the new rule, the workers could organize if they won a majority of the votes cast, even if the number of workers voting didn’t represent a majority of the entire work force.

Historically, the higher standard has been justified because of the critical nature of the transportation infrastructure in interstate commerce. Rail and airline unions also are required to negotiate longer contracts, another condition aimed at limiting disruptions in the free flow of people and products on those systems.

The Transportation Trades Department of the AFL-CIO, which is seeking the ruling, argues that the higher bar is unfair and imposes a standard on unions that is higher than that for electing U.S. senators.

“There are tens of thousands of airline and rail employees that would like a fair and unfettered chance to choose if they’d like a union,” said Ed Wytkind, president of the Transportation Trades Department, which includes 32 unions.

“This is no longer the 1930s or the 1950s. The employers just want to keep everything the way it is because it works really well for them,” he added.

Katie Packer, executive director of the Workforce Fairness Institute, argues the system is working as intended and shouldn’t be changed.

“These people are responsible for keeping things moving in our economy, [which] makes [them] different than a hotel worker,” she said.

If a hotel union stages a work slowdown or a strike, “then somebody’s hotel room doesn’t get cleaned,” she added. “If that happens in the airline industry, the entire airline system could come to a halt for a period of time.”

Opponents of the rule change are also challenging the process the mediation board is employing to make the change.

In 1987, the last time the board dug into the issue, it held an evidentiary hearing that included testimony and the cross-examination of witnesses. The board had competing petitions then: one to change the voting process and another to make it easier to decertify a union.

The board ultimately rejected both. In a similar showdown last year, the board declined to address the issue but said, if it did, it would follow a similarly formal review of the arguments.

This time, the two Democratic members of the three-person board — including Obama appointee Linda Puchala, a former labor leader and board mediator — decided to hold a public hearing and accept written testimony rather than hold an evidentiary hearing.

The decision prompted a strong objection from the board’s lone Republican and a threat from the airline industry.

“The board’s dramatic and unexplained abandonment of its prior procedural and substantive standards in order to push through an ill-advised rule change in a manifestly politicized manner simply means that once the political winds change — and the board’s composition changes with them — organized labor will pay the price,” with a return to the higher voting standard and new rules to make it easier for workers to kick a union out, warned Bob Siegel, an attorney for the Air Transport Association, an airline trade association.

But Wytkind dismisses the criticism. “This is a shift in policy that is long overdue and the other side just doesn’t like, and they are throwing grenades,” he said.


Sources: Politico, AFL-CIO, Facebook

Pres. Obama Is Fired Up! Says "Yes" To Public Option...Urges Congress To Pass HC Reform Now!

MSNBC----


Pres. Obama: Public option should be part of Reform

(In a speech delivered to the AFL-CIO in Ohio, President Obama discussed the need for health care reform and explains that he believes a public option could bring down the cost of care.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Pres. Obama is fired up and seeking to regain control of the Health Care Reform fight.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(As he prepares for his most challenging month yet, President Barack Obama took Labor Day to give himself, and some of his most vocal supporters, a campaign-style pep talk.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

President Barack Obama insisted Monday "the time is now" for Health Care Reform as he geared up for a major address to Congress this week aimed at getting his top domestic policy priority back on track.

Taking his case for a healthcare overhaul to America's economically hard-hit heartland, Obama sought to seize back the initiative on the divisive issue after losing ground to critics during a turbulent summer.

"It's time to do what's right for America's working families, to put aside the partisanship, to come together as a nation, to pass health insurance reform now -- this year," Obama told a wildly cheering crowd at a Labor Day picnic held by the AFL-CIO union coalition in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Preview of prime time speech

Obama's holiday visit to the Midwest was a preview of a prime time speech he will deliver to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday when he will lay out his proposed revamp of the healthcare system to wary lawmakers and a skeptical public.

With his poll numbers down from once-lofty heights, Obama's effort to reclaim control of the debate is seen as a key test of his leadership that could define his young presidency.

Overhauling the troubled $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system, by cutting costs and expanding coverage to the estimated 46 million Americans without health insurance, is Obama's top domestic initiative.

But Obama's fellow Democrats who control Congress have struggled to craft a reform bill and most Republicans have fought it.

The debate is now reaching a make-or-break point.

After a summer of sometimes bitter words, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said on Sunday that the president will "draw some lines in the sand" in his speech on Wednesday.

Improve quality and bring down costs

Obama's top aides said he still wants a government insurance option in healthcare legislation but they left room for a compromise that could disappoint his liberal backers.

Weighing in on issue in Cincinnati, Obama said, "I continue to believe that a public option within the basket of insurance choices would help improve quality and bring down costs."

Despite polls showing Americans increasingly concerned about his healthcare strategy, Obama's reform message appeared to resonate with union members, who gave him an enthusiastic reception at Cincinnati's Coney Island Park.

Signs that read "Health care can't wait" dotted the crowd of several thousand people. Labor was a key base of support for Obama in his campaign for the presidency.

"In every debate there comes a time to decide, a time to act," Obama said. "That time is now.

With government spending and deficits soaring as the Obama administration fights the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and inherited wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, critics say the healthcare reforms under consideration are too costly.

A key question is whether Obama is ready to drop his support for the "public option" -- a government insurance plan designed to compete with private insurance companies that has been a major feature of a proposed $1 trillion overhaul.

Trying to bridge the gap

The insurance industry strongly opposes the public option and has spent millions of dollars lobbying against it, while conservative commentators have fanned fears of a government takeover of healthcare akin to socialism.

A group of moderate Democratic and Republican senators -- known as the "Gang of Six"-- have been engaged in closed-door negotiations searching for a way to avoid to bridge the gap.

Congress reconvenes Tuesday after a monthlong recess, with no sign the healthcare fight will abate any time soon.

A CBS News poll last week said most Americans found the healthcare proposals discussed in Congress confusing and thought Obama had not clearly explained his plans.

Obama coupled his visit to Ohio, an industrial state especially hurt by recession, with the formal announcement he has named Ron Bloom, senior adviser to his auto task force, to lead an effort to revitalize America's manufacturing sector.

Bloom, a prominent figure in the labor movement before joining the administration, appeared with Obama in Cincinnati.

Obama also declared Monday that modern benefits like paid leave, minimum wage and Social Security "all bear the union label," as he appealed to unions to help him win the health care fight in Congress.

"It was labor that helped build the largest middle class in history. So, even if you're not a union member, every American owes something to America's labor movement," said Obama, whose run for the presidency was energized in no small part by unions.

Recovery Plan is working

Obama asserted that "our recovery plan is working," but repeated that he won't be satisfied until jobs are much more plentiful.

Shortly after taking the oath, Obama confronted a rapidly deteriorating economy, a clogged credit system, failing or ailing banks and a a shaky stock market. He used his speech here to tick off a host of steps the administration has taken to steady the economy, and he made a special pitch for the health care overhaul he has pushed.

"We have never been this close," Obama said. "We have never had this broad an agreement on what needs to be done." He accused vested interests of trying to thwart it.

For their part, some elements within the labor movement have indicated frustration with Obama, who traveled to Cincinnati to speak to a state AFL-CIO gathering, because some key items such as legislation making it easier for people to join unions has languished in Congress. To vigorous cheers, Obama made a pitch for the bill in his speech. He also noted that the first bill he signed into law was one guaranteeing equal pay for equal work.

Obama spent a good deal of his time extolling the virtues of the union movement.

"We remember that the rights and benefits we enjoy today were not simply handed out to America's working men and women. They had to be won," he said.

"They had to be fought for, by men and women of courage and conviction, from the factory floors of the Industrial Revolution to the shopping aisles of today's superstores. They stood up and spoke out to demand a fair shake, an honest day's pay for an honest day's work," he said. "Many risked their lives. Some gave their lives. Some made it a cause of their lives -- like Sen. Ted Kennedy, who we remember today."

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis accompanied Obama to Ohio, and the pair appeared in front of a large American flag, nine smaller ones and red, white and blue bunting. Local union organizers handed out 10,000 tickets for access to the area where Obama was to speak. The event was moved indoors to a music pavilion because of threatened thunderstorms.

At one point before Obama spoke, some in the crowd broke into chants of "Fired up" and "Ready to Go."

The crowd gave Obama a standing ovation and cheered loudly as he came on stage. Many remained standing as he spoke, applauding and hollering throughout.



View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, Wikipedia, Google Maps

Pres. Obama Seeks To Regain AFL-CIO Members' Trust (Public Option)...Ron Bloom As Manufacturing Czar

NY Times----


Pace of Change Under Obama Frustrates Unions

(Labor Unions are pushing for Public Option too. MSNBC reports.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

For eight years under George W. Bush, union officials barely set foot inside the White House. But 10 days after President Obama took office, the nation’s most powerful labor leaders mingled in the Blue Room, moments after the new president, a man they helped put there, signed a string of executive orders undoing Mr. Bush’s policies.

The mood was euphoric. “He walked in with the biggest smile,” James P. Hoffa, president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, said of Mr. Obama, “saying, ‘Welcome back to your White House.’ ”

Today that euphoria is giving way to a mixture of frustration and unease, as union leaders are growing concerned that the Obama White House has not delivered as much as they had expected. Some criticize him for not pushing hard enough or moving fast enough on their issues, while others blame the deep recession and Republican opposition for his failure to do more.

Mr. Obama has delayed a push for the unions’ No. 1 legislative priority, a measure to make it easier for workers to organize. He faces potential conflict with unions on trade, and on how fast to push for immigration reform. And on health care, friction between labor and the White House is suddenly spilling out into the open.

In response, Mr. Obama is renewing his courtship of the labor movement, whose members worked as foot soldiers in his campaign and spent August doggedly defending his health plan at town-hall-style meetings across the country. On Monday, the president will mark Labor Day by speaking at an A.F.L.-C.I.O. picnic in Cincinnati. During his visit, he is expected to name Ron Bloom, who heads the president’s automotive task force, to a second role in the administration as manufacturing czar. The next week, Mr. Obama will address the A.F.L.-C.I.O. convention in Pittsburgh.

“He gets an A for effort, and an incomplete for results,” the incoming president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., Richard L. Trumka.

While labor leaders, including the current A.F.L.-C.I.O. president, John J. Sweeney, say they remain extremely supportive of the president — especially his handling of the economic crisis — Mr. Trumka set off an uproar last week when he warned that unions would not support a health care bill that lacks a government-backed insurance plan. It was a shot across the bow to the White House, which is weighing whether to compromise on the so-called public option.

Another top union leader, Gerald W. McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, cautioned that if Mr. Obama abandons the public option, “it will be harder to gin our people up on other issues.” Mr. McEntee said he had noticed a shift in sentiment even since July, when 14 union leaders spent 45 minutes in the White House Roosevelt Room with the president and top aides like David Axelrod.

“He said, ‘You’ve stood shoulder to shoulder with me’ — and I’m paraphrasing here — ‘I want you there, and I’m going to fight for you,’ ” Mr. McEntee said. “When we left, I think we were all on maybe not cloud nine, but cloud four. I shook hands with all the staff, Axelrod was there. This was the person we elected; this was our president with a voice. It felt good.” And now? Mr. McEntee paused. “Well,” he said, “not as good.”

Blue-collar workers have long been a little bit suspicious of Mr. Obama, who has never quite been able to demonstrate that he is one of them. Still, they stood strongly behind him once he became the Democratic presidential nominee, contributing money, running phone banks and knocking on doors in critical swing states like Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

The two main labor federations, the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and Change to Win, said unions and their political action committees had spent nearly $450 million in the presidential race. The addition of Joseph R. Biden Jr. to the ticket as Mr. Obama’s running mate helped with his union bona fides. So did the endorsement of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts.

Today, Mr. Biden continues to play an important role as a link between the unions and the president. But Mr. Kennedy’s death is a significant loss, one that may force Mr. Obama to work that much harder to win union support for any health care compromise he might make, said Geoff Garin, a Democratic strategist.

“Ted Kennedy was an incredibly important Good Housekeeping seal of approval, and if he lent his prestige to whatever compromise Obama felt he had to make, that would mean an awful lot to people in the labor movement,” Mr. Garin said. Mr. Obama, he added, must “persuade labor unions and others that his commitment is to getting it right in the interest of the average working person.”

He may have an easier time with some than others. Mr. Hoffa, for instance, said the public option was not a make-or-break provision for him; he is open to legislation containing a “a trigger” to create a public plan if private efforts to expand coverage fail. Mr. McEntee, by contrast, dismissed the trigger idea as “not a real public option.”

Dennis Rivera, the point man on health care for the Service Employees International Union, said simply that unions would have to be flexible. “Politics is the art of the possible,” he said, adding that Mr. Obama’s “heart is in the right place.”

Still, there are tensions between unions and the White House on matters beyond health care. Trade is an especially contentious issue; unions are irked that Mr. Obama has backed away from his campaign pledge to reopen the North American Free Trade Agreement. And the United Steelworkers, which represents tire workers, is pressing Mr. Obama to punish China now that the United States International Trade Commission has ruled that China is hurting American manufacturers by inundating the market with cheap tires.

Union leaders have also been patient with Mr. Obama, both on immigration (they want legislation offering a path to citizenship for an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants) and the Employee Free Choice Act, the bill to make organizing easier. In the July White House meeting, Mr. Obama made a strong pitch that health care should come first.

Labor leaders were willing to accept that strategy, said David E. Bonior, a former Michigan congressman who is the chairman of the National Labor Coordinating Committee, an umbrella group. But with Mr. Obama planning a major speech before Congress this week to lay out his priorities in a health bill, Mr. Bonior said, union members want reassurance that he will stick his neck out for their priorities.

“They don’t want him to leave it up to seven or eight committee chairmen,” Mr. Bonior said. “They want him to be the leader and to fight for this stuff.”



View Larger Map


Sources: NY Times, MSNBC, Wikipedia, Google Maps

Nation's Largest Labor Union (AFL-CIO) Insist On Public Option Too

AFL-CIO: Public Option is a must

(Labor Unions are pushing for Public Option too. MSNBC reports.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Politico’s Alex Burns talks about whether President Barack Obama will drop public option to regain more momentum on the Health Care Reform battle.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

From NBC's Mark Murray:

Speaking with reporters today, leaders of the AFL-CIO argued that any final health-care legislation must contain the so-called Public Option to compete with private insurers, and that any Democrats who stand in the way won't receive its support.

"It is an absolute must," said AFL Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka, who likely will become the organization's next president when it gathers two weeks from now in Pittsburgh. "We won't support the bill if it doesn't have a public option in it."

Trumka also implied that members of Congress, including Democrats, who don't back health-care legislation with a public option risk losing the labor group's support -- something he mentioned yesterday when he said, "Today, more than ever, we need to be a labor movement that stands by our friends, punishes its enemies, and challenges those who, well, can’t seem to decide which side they’re on."

Today's remarks came at an event where the AFL-CIO released a poll, conducted by the Democratic firm Hart Research, showing the plight of younger workers (those 18-34) in this economy.

Per the poll, just 31% of these workers said they earned enough money to pay their bills and put some money aside; an additional 31% said they didn't have health insurance; and 51% said they had no retirement plan (pension/401k) at work.

The survey, said outgoing AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, "shows just how broken our economy is for young people and what is at stake if we don't fix it."


Nancy Pelosi: No Public Option, No Bill

As the White House signals that it is willing to move forward on a health reform plan without a public option, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) sent a strong message Thursday evening: not so fast.

In her strongest statement yet, Pelosi said that any bill "without a strong public option will not pass the House":

“Any real change requires the inclusion of a strong public option to promote competition and bring down costs,” Pelosi said. “If a vigorous public option is not included, it would be a major victory for the health insurance industry.”

Pelosi’s remarks come less than one week before President Barack Obama delivers an address to a joint session of Congress as part of a re-launched campaign effort to sell his health care reform bill to both lawmakers and the public. White House aides have said the president will use the speech to offer more detail than he has so far about what sort of bill he'd like to reach his desk.

“President Obama has said that a public option will keep the insurance companies honest. If someone has a better idea for promoting competition and reducing health care costs, they should put it on the table,” Pelosi said. “But for the past month, opponents of health insurance reform have demonstrated that they are afraid of the facts. They have only offered distortions, distractions and misrepresentations to try to kill this historic legislation.”

“A bill without a strong public option will not pass the House,” Pelosi said. “Eliminating the public option would be a major victory for the insurance companies who have rationed care, increased premiums and denied coverage.”




View Larger Map

Sources: First Read, MSNBC, Politico, AFL-CIO, Today Show, Wikipedia, Google Maps