Rating: 
Summary: Good discussion on the influence Big Unions have on politics
Review: Most of Western Civilization is based on political organizations having some kind of representation. Our leaders are supposed to represent us; they get voted out of office when they don't. "Betrayal" documents how there is little accountability in American labor unions today. This book shows how a big part of the problem is legally unions don't have to report how the labor leader spend the union dues, so often union members no clue as to how the dues are being spent. In many ways the union leaders are like kings; there is no accountability and they get to do most anything they want, while claiming to look out for the rights of the union members.
This was a very informative book. For example recently the NEA has more paid political operatives, 1800 operatives, than the national Republican and Democratic committees combined. Another interesting thing was the change of the character of labor unions. Back in the 1950's about 35% of the American labor force was unionized, but now only 8.2% of the private-sector employees are unionized. In the 1950s only 5% of union members worked for the government, and now it is about 46%. Original labor unions claimed to protect the rights of those on the lowest rung of the labor force. Now labor unions are more and more focused on middle classs government employees.
A major theme of the book is just how closely the unions are working with the Democratic Party. The authors make the contrast that any money from a businessman is a voluntary donation, while labor leaders extract dues from union members and spend the money on causes that often the rank and file are opposed to and object to. One survey found that 80% of union members are opposed having money taken out of their paychecks and spent on politics.
There are many interesting observations and information about how unions work today, and the problems caused by unions. One chapter covers how public employee unions have put the public in danger covered several examples; one was when prison workers went strike and allowed 200 prisoners to escape, putting the public at great risk. Another chapter focused on the NEA & AFT and how they are concerned about protecting their power, and have done little to improve education in America. There was a chapter on how many unions have ties with organized crime, for because unions have to report very little, organized crime is attracted to trying to take over unions.
Starting with the title it is clear the authors are concerned with how unions abuse their power. The authors do a good job of showing why the reader should also be concerned. If you have any interested in the state of unions in America, and their influence in politics, this is a worthwhile book to read.
Rating:
Summary: Unions, Dems, organized crime, government, and terrorists
Review: No, those five categories aren't equivalent. But they do overlap a lot, and after reading this book you may have trouble telling them apart.
The fact -- and it is a fact -- that unions have caused much more harm than they've cured won't be a surprise to anyone who has a practical grasp of economics. The right to bargain collectively does have some small effect, but there's probably never been a union in history that strictly limited itself to collective bargaining. (For example, unions consistently make their strikes more effective than they deserve to be by forcibly preventing 'scabs' from replacing them at the jobs they won't do. Otherwise, most 'strikes' would just be fancy ways to get fired and replaced.)
Moreover, the economic benefits that unions allegedly secure are actually achieved by the businesses themselves -- who would, and do, make them available voluntarily anyway, because businesses compete for employees even more surely than for customers. If a union ever gets employees a better deal than an employer was offering, the strong presumption is that the 'better deal' is significantly less economically feasible.
What may be news to many is the _degree_ to which unions have departed from their ostensible purpose. According to Linda Chavez and Daniel Gray (and their numerous, well-documented sources), Big Labor has gotten _way_ more out of hand than 'big business' ever has. And in the process, it's become probably the single most powerful political, economic, and criminal/terrorist force behind what used to be the socialist wing, and is now the mainstream, of the Democratic Party.
Don't take my word for it; read the book. Listen, for example, to union bosses themselves argue, quite publicly, that violence against 'scabs' is justified because voluntarily doing a job that someone else won't do is itself somehow a form of 'violence'. Read the true stories of people who have been the victims of union-led beatings and even sniper attacks on the basis of such a twisted morality. (Then remember that these wackjobs are strong political supporters of the Democratic Party, and think hard about that party's claim to represent the American common man better than the GOP does.)
The chapter on the National Education Association is in some ways the most fascinating. (The NEA didn't begin life as a union, but the IRS has classified it as one for over two decades now.) Consider this argument: 'If our government-monopoly schools perform poorly, let's give them more money, and if they perform well, let's give them less money. Then they'll have plenty of incentive to improve.' If that logic sounds backwards to you, you've just understood what, in a nutshell, is wrong with the entire U.S. educational system -- and thereby demonstrated that you're smarter, in that respect, than everybody who voluntarily joins a teachers' union. You'll understand in _much_ greater detail after you read Chavez's and Gray's chapter on the NEA. (And you'll also understand why Ann Coulter opened her 28 July 2004 column as follows: 'The traditional greeting at the Democratic National Convention is, "Where do you teach?"')
Chavez and Gray document all this and more -- including unions' ties to organized crime and their undertaking of (uniformly far-left) political activity far beyond the scope of their representation in collective bargaining (and for that matter with no regard for the actual political views of their members). There's also a catchall chapter explaining the ill economic effects of unionization in general and documenting the fact that 'right-to-work' states enjoy better economic health than forced-unionism states.
Even people who have long known of the dangers posed by unions will profit immensely from this exposé of American Big Labor.
Rating:
Summary: A terrific documentation of Union abuses
Review: The original objectives for creation and existence of labor unions were to protect members' economic welfare and assure fair treatment from rapacious employers. This book describes how those goals have increasingly been betrayed by union managers.
Almost all the money that Unions get, over $17 billion per year, comes from dues and fees paid by workers in organizations that have been Unionized. These payments are compulsory for both Union members and non-members: they can keep their job only if they pay up. The money collected, originally intended to pay for contract negotiations and other services beneficial to members, is entirely untaxed. In fact, it is largely unaccounted for, and its uses unreported. These conditions are ideal for abuse; and abused they are. Because payments are compulsory and spending is unaccounted, Union managers have no incentive to consult their members about how that money is spent, nor to care about their wishes. And they don't; instead they spend the money to increase their own power and promote their political views.
Part of this abuse, the book explains, appears as outright corruption and criminality. Examples include the money embezzlements by various Union bosses, such as Barbara Bullock and Pat Tornillo. The reliable and easily controlled source of money from compulsory dues and fees has inevitably attracted organized crime, which has sunk its teeth into several Unions and is exerting a large influence on their activities. Another form of abuse is the [collection of] coersive tactics used to force employers into submission. Most people have read about the actual or attempted killings orchestrated by Union bosses and carried out by Union thugs. Some of the tactics used are not only illegal, but put the general public in danger from crime, emergencies, etc.
Like any organism whose main goal is its own power and growth, Unions feed their appetite for power by doing everything they can to increase their food supply. In this case the food supply is the dues/fees paying workers in Union-controlled organizations. Since the private-sector has increasingly been rejecting Union membership, the Unions have turned to forcing Unionization on the public sector: federal and state organizations. The bigger this sector, the larger the money harvest. This helps explain why Union contributions have been almost 100% to the Democratic Party, which is generally in favor of big government. The contributions have been so great, in fact, that the Democratic Party is not just beholden to the Unions, but is largely controlled by them. The detailed descriptions in the book are eye-opening. This is due in part to the fact that both the Unions and the Democratic Party, and some of the Media, have tried to hide the inter-dependency from the general public. That the size of the problem is substantial can be seen from the fact that the number of Union political lobbyists exceeds the number in both the major political parties combined.
But even this is not the whole story. The present day Union top brass is far from politically neutral. The original Union leadership was strongly anti-Communist and pro-American. Now, in contrast, head of the AFL/CIO John Sweeney proclaims myself a proud member of Democratic Socialists of America, and an official of the AFSCME, Brenda Stokeley, claims "we are fighting for socialism". Far-left causes are therefore actively being funded and supported by dues/fees-paying workers who may disagree with these causes, but who are not given a choice to withhold support. Indeed, 40% of Union members vote Republican, and 80% of all members don't want any of their Union-collected money going to politics. These member preferences are ignored by Union management. It is not easy to see how the Democratic Party can extricate itself enough from corrosive Union influence to start again representing a majority of reasonable US citizens. The book's last chapter suggests steps to address this problem.
"Betrayal" also explains why politically-engineered agreements between government and Unions, which specify that contracts be awarded to Union shops, increase costs to the general taxpaying public as a whole and not just to workers in Union-controlled organizations. The inflated, uncompetitive contract costs are passed on to individual and business taxpayers, who have to endure higher tax rates. Additionally, because of the much decreased competition, the Union-mediated job may be of lower quality than might have been performed by a competing firm. The anti-competitiveness and higher effective tax rates are an inducement to businesses to move to different states that are less Union-controlled. Statistics show that Right-to-Work States, in which Unions cannot have workers fired for refusing to pay union dues, consistently have better average living conditions and faster rates of business growth.
The book provides many other examples showing how Union management, or a thieving Union official, is much more concerned with its own hold on power than with either the public's or the Union's own members' desires and economic welfare.
The sources for all the facts cited in the book are given in 32 pages of notes, so they can all be checked. The first author, Linda Chavez, was a labor union official and clearly seems to know what she's talking about.
The beginning part is suppositional, to grab attention, but is nevertheless accurate. The remainder of the book contains a wealth of documented information. "Betrayal" is, for those willing to see, a valuable portrayal of the many things that are seriously wrong with the present structure of labor unions. It also has the beginning of a recipe for making unions, once a useful, indeed an essential counter-balancing force to employers' transgressions, become once again respectable agents working _for_ the members of the labor force, not irrespective of them and at their expense.
Rating: 
Summary: So far out of touch, it is frightening.
Review: This book is a poorly researched, droning diatribe against unions, concluding that somehow these organizations have too much power in our society. Yet, the facts are that the labor movement, which is ironically in serious decline, built the middle class (why else do UPS drivers and their free loading brethren at Fed Ex enjoy decent wages and benefits) and that any serious student of history will acknowledge that the only way we will close the huge and growing disparity between haves and have nots in this country is by the resurrection of the labor movement.
Finally, Chavez never clearly articulates the grave social ills that unions have caused. The Savings and Loan Crisis? Enron? Worldcom? Lower wages? Less people covered by health insurance? Higher taxes? Immoral behavior? Corrupt America? Give me a break. If anything, unions curb corporate power and if there is one given in today's world it is that corporations need to be curbed.
Linda Chavez, I think, is uncomfortable about her betrayal of unions. She obviously makes a great deal more money working for corporate and right wing think tanks than she once did working with unions; now, she needs to justify her decision to opt for greed and the powerful. That is her choice but let us not be dragged into her own battle of conscience.
Rating:
Summary: Very informative book
Review: This book is a well-written account of the considerable influence unions have on the US political system. Unfortunatly for American workers - this influence is spent lining the pockets of union bosses. Linda Chavez once again comes through with an important book that will shake up the status quo.
Rating: 
Summary: Very Redundant
Review: This sounds like one woman with a very large grudge. Yes, labour owns the Democrats and big biz owns the Republicans. No surprise there. How many different, (and same) ways can you say the same thing?
Rating:
Summary: What do communism, labor unions & terrorism have in common?
Review: What do communism, labor unions and terrorism have in common?
A few other reviewers have said things so well, I don't know what I can add, but I will say that two things in this book really stood out for me: one, today's labor unions and their tactics are based on communist principles (the president of the AFL-CIO is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America), including the espousal of violence to achieve their ends; two, labor unions are largely responsible for destroying our education system. The proof of both is in this book.
Here is a quote from "The Principles of Communism," by Frederick Engels, in which he discusses measures to eliminate private property and urge the revolution toward communism: "...Organization of labor of proletarians on publicly owned land, in factories and workshops, with competition among the workers being abolished and with the factory owners, in so far as they still exist, being obliged to pay the same high wages as those paid by the state."
And here is a quote from Betrayal (page 98): "...While private-sector union membership is in rapid decline, state and local politicians beholden to labor can force even nonunion employers to hire only union workers. A good example of this is the Project Labor Agreement (PLA), a scheme to use government power to give jobs exclusively to unionized workers. PLAs, which have been used in all fifty states and the District of Columbia, require that government construction work go exclusively to companies that are already unionized or that agree to recognize unions as the exclusive bargaining agent for all employees on the job, to use the union hiring hall to obtain workers, to pay prevailing union wages and benefits..."
In other words, a form of price fixing-an illegal practice in any other instance. So much for private enterprise and the free market. An interesting fact to remember is that those states in which employees are forced to be members of unions have higher costs of living, higher taxes, and lower economic growth rates. As citizens, we all suffer the abuses of "Big Labor."
Also from "The Principles of Communism" regarding education: "...Education of all children, from the moment they can leave their mother's care, in national establishments at national cost...."
I think we all know how fundamentally flawed the United States public school system is and how little influence parents truly have. What I didn't know but learned in Betrayal is how powerful the NEA is in maintaining mediocrity in our schools, even while pursuing ever-more liberal causes not related to education while demanding ever-increasing amounts of money. We're often told that the problem with education is the fact that our schools are underfunded, and the NEA knows that our knee-jerk reaction as concerned parents is to want our children to have the best we can afford and that money can buy. So of course we throw money (in the form of tax dollars) at the problem and expect it to get better. However, some schools-even failing, dangerous schools like those in Camden, New Jersey or Washington, D.C.-spend, per student, more than what many private schools charge in tuition. So the truth remains that while public education funding has increased by billions, our money isn't buying what it should-a first-rate education that should be competitive with and comparable to that offered by most private schools.
Ms. Chavez isn't the only one to decry the abuses of the NEA. Visit the website of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation www.effwa.org and read their pamphlet (in which teachers speak out), called Barrier to Learning: How the National Education Association Prevents Students and Teachers From Achieving Academic and Professional Excellence.
And the incidents of terrorism? Consider this:
--(1986) A hotel fire in San Juan, Puerto Rico kills ninety-seven people and wounds 150 others. The cause? Arson. Arsonists were labor union members of Teamsters Union Local 901.
--(1999) A truck driver for Overnite Transportation is wounded by sniper fire while driving along Interstate 240 near Memphis. The sniper? A member of the Teamsters Union.
--(1990) During the strike at the New York Daily News, union members torched a newspaper delivery truck (the driver barely escaped), created homemade bombs, and threatened to harm or kill newsstand owners if they dared to stock the Daily News. Union members wearing ski masks and armed with baseball bats, guns, and other weapons ambushed a truck taking replacement workers to the Daily News.
Incidents like this continue because of loopholes in the laws that essentially allow law enforcement officials to look the other way when terrorist tactics are used in the pursuit of achieving union ends.
You'll find this and so much more in Betrayal. By the time I finished this book, I did feel betrayed. I was furious and ready to do something to end the cycle of corruption. In the last chapter of this book, Ms. Chavez suggests ways citizens can do just that.
|
