In 2017, Will You Be an Enemy of the State?

Hopefully, a critical reader of this title will think this is unduly alarmist.

Consider, however, this New Year greeting from our new president:

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump  3h3 hours ago

Happy New Year to all, including to my many enemies and those who have fought me and lost so badly they just don't know what to do. Love!

A president who views dissenters and opponents as enemies is a danger because he can marshal the nation’s law enforcement authority to intimidate or silence dissent.

President Trump would do well to embrace this wisdom: You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. Winston Churchill

Biggest Loss of 2016? Civility

Two years ago, Chancellor Phyllis Wise took a stand against a Twitter-crazed academic whose tweets were more than polemical— they personally degraded American Jewish students, connecting all of them with what he described as a murderous regime. 

The media often characterized his tweets as “political” and “anti-Israel,” and they were that. But the media often missed the point that his tweets also degraded students simply by connecting their faith to a far-away war in Gaza and Israel. Salaita understood that Netanyahu was raised and educated in the U.S. (he holds two degrees from MIT)—and he blindly accused current American Jewish students of being indoctrinated to follow the current prime minister’s path. In Salaita’s awful words, these students were future IDF (Israel Defense Force) “murderers.”

In the winter that preceded the Salaita affair, Chancellor Wise was subjected to vicious tweets by UIUC students who compared her to North Korea’s despot, Kim Jun Eun, because she ordered the campus to remain open in the midst of a severe “polar vortex” event. She had no choice but to make this decision. She did not order students or faculty to go to class—only that the campus could not shut down and stop vital services.

In 2016, we learned that these campus Twitter-storms were really the tip of a growing iceberg.

We— America, and the rest of the Internet-connected world— have entered the age of personal degradation; vicious stereotyping; “debates” that deeply insult war heroes, women, the disabled, Mexicans, Muslims … the list is too long and familiar to recount; extreme and existential threats; intolerance; racial superiority; and so on.

Chancellor Wise was derided by some for clinging to what her detractors said was an outdated and repressive code of civility.

I wonder how many of her critics realize in 2016— now that they (we) have been verbally brutalized by a dangerous American autocrat and intolerant followers— that Chancellor Wise was right about civility: If we cannot set a baseline for civil discourse, we cannot maintain our democratic society.  
This is not "PC"-- it is the tone and vocabulary of a democracy.

Today, the loudest, meanest, nastiest, outrageously deceitful, cutting voices drown out reason, facts, analysis, ambiguity, introspection.

We lost much in 2016-- much more than an election.

Union Miners: Canaries in Our Workplaces

Between 1990 and 1999, there were only 31 cases of progressive massive fibrosis identified nationwide. This is the disease also known as Black Lung. During this time, the United Mine Workers were a declining force, but still a strong presence in Appalachian mines. They bargained for—and enforced— mine safety.

Now comes a report, issued last Thursday by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, showing that 60 current or former coal miners — all patients of a single radiologist — were diagnosed with the most severe form of black lung between January 2015 and last August.

Nearly all the miners, who had progressive massive fibrosis, were from Pike, Floyd, Letcher and Knott counties.

This upsurge occurred as the mine workers union has lost nearly all its influence.

Black lung is caused from breathing dust churned up during coal mining. The torturous disease chokes off a person’s ability to breathe and often leads to premature death.

Congress approved a law in 1969 that set limits on miners’ exposure to breathable dust. Companies are required to use ventilation and other measures to keep down dust in mines.

Look for Donald Trump to “make America great” by reversing this safety regulation.

The miner in the picture was photographed last year during his terminal stages of Black Lung. He has since died.

Can Rockettes Refuse to Dance for Trump Inauguration?

The Rockettes have received confusing messages about their obligation to perform for the Trump inauguration. As the New York Times reports, the management of the dance troupe informed their employees, “If you are full time, you are obligated.”

Later, union officials said they reached an agreement with the company that would allow all employees, even full-time dancers, to opt out of the inauguration.

But this doesn’t mean they’ll be continued as employees. They can be replaced for engaging in a “quickie strike” under U.S. labor law.

The situation is reminiscent of the longshore workers boycott of Soviet cargo ships after the USSR invaded Afghanistan. Workers refused to unload and load ships in transit to the USSR. Like the Rockettes, their motivation was to engage in a political boycott by using a work stoppage. The Supreme Court ruled that this action was unlawful. The case is  Longshoremen v. Allied Int'l, Inc., 456 U.S. 212 (1982).

Merry Christmas to Trump's Union-Represented Workers

I pass along a news story shared by my student, Jake. Donald Trump has quietly settled two simmering disputes with his workers. These were announced with much less fanfare than the Carrier story. 

In the holiday spirit, let's be grateful for small victories.

Quoting below from the New York Times:

One of the two labor agreements provides a union contract to workers at the Trump International Hotel Las Vegas, whose union the hotel had previously refused to bargain with. The second agreement eases a hurdle to unionization at a recently opened Trump hotel in Washington.

The agreements reduce the probability that the National Labor Relations Board, which protects the labor rights of private-sector employees, will be called on to adjudicate disputes between workers and the Trump Organization. That possibility raised the prospect of a conflict of interest if Mr. Trump were to retain a stake in his business.

Anti-Semitic “Troll Storm” in Montana

Last Friday, a white supremacist website posted a call for a “troll storm” against Jewish people in Whitefish, Montana. The call to action describes Jews as a “vicious, evil race of hate-filled psychopaths.”

This was added:

“Are y’all ready for an old fashioned Troll Storm?

Because AYO – it’s that time, fam.

And as always: NO VIOLENCE OR THREATS OF VIOLENCE OR ANYTHING EVEN CLOSE TO THAT.

Just make your opinions known. Tell them you are sickened by their Jew agenda to attack and harm the mother of someone whom they disagree with.

“I hate everybody the same, so I’ll never be racist.” Research Update on Hate in Union Elections

I am almost finished assembling a database of union election cases where an employer or union used inflammatory racial appeals.

Yesterday, I came across a case from 1961 that affords me (and maybe you) perspective as to where America stands today on the timeline of race relations. 

This is from the judge who ruled that the employer violated the rights of workers, and interfered with the election, by playing the race card during the company’s anti-union campaign. I now quote:

There are large areas and many localities in this country where those of Anglo-Saxon stock regard themselves as an elite segment of society with the same arrogance and as little reason as Hitler so regarded Nordics. I cannot read into Guthrie’s statement that he would hire a “nigger, cajun, wop or whatnot” an expression of dedication to principles of democracy or fair employment practices. It was, rather, a direct threat that the employees would suffer enforced association with persons of supposedly inferior origins if they accepted the Union and the falsity of the premise does not negate the threat.

The photo is President-elect Trump with Farron Tilly, an avowed white supremacist who, while interviewed at a Fayetteville, NC rally for Trump, said that he blamed the lack of work on immigrants and added, “I hate everybody the same, so I’ll never be racist.”

Oy! For Chanukah, Maybe Shop for Bargains at the Online Jewish Baseball Museum? What Could It Hurt?

Fewer than one-tenth of 1% of pro baseball players are, and have been, Jewish. That’s why the Jewish Baseball Museum can only be visited online. Besides, why spend so much money on bricks and mortar when there is a better (and, shall we say “less expensive”) alternative?

Today, we briefly explore in the inglorious career of Sam Nachem.

For starters, recall that the name “Nachem” is the same as “Nachum,” the beggar in Fiddler on the Roof.

But why should that take away anything from Sam Nachem’s astoundingly minor accomplishments?  

To paraphrase and re-contextualize Nachum the Beggar, “Just because I haven’t amounted to anything in life, why should you?”

Here is the charming, uplifting, surprising, and delightful bio of Sam Nachem, of blessed memory (1915-2004):

“Subway Sam” Nahem was a Sephardic Jew whose parents emigrated from Syria. He was raised in a Syrian Jewish enclave on the Lower East Side of Manhattan where his first language was Arabic. He made the Brooklyn College baseball team (he was also quarterback of the football team) and was discovered by Casey Stengel, then the Dodgers’ manager, while pitching batting practice at Ebbets Field in 1935. Stengel got in the cage and tried to hit off him, but couldn’t get the ball out of the infield.

Nachem attended law school at St. John’s [it figures] during the offseason, but played minor league ball during the summer and gradually worked his way up to the majors.

Nahem made his major league debut with the Brooklyn Robins (Dodgers) on October 2, 1938, winning his first major league game against the Phillies, while collecting two hits and driving in a run. He was shellacked in spring training the following season and relegated to pitching batting practice. 
When a sportswriter asked him what good he was doing the team, he replied, “I am now in the egregiously anonymous position of pitching batting practice to the batting practice pitchers.”

He returned to the majors as a relief pitcher for the St. Louis Cardinals in 1941, but was traded to the Philadelphia Phillies after the season (did the Cardinals trade for a Philadelphia lawyer in this deal?). 
He enlisted in the U.S. Army in 1942 and did not return to the big leagues until 1948, when he appeared in 28 games for the Phillies.

In 1945, Nahem led the racially integrated Overseas Invasion Service Expedition all-stars to victory over an all-white 71st Infantry Division team stocked with professionals in a game played at the same Nuremburg stadium in which Hitler held his most infamous rallies.

He retired after the 1948 season and went to work as a union organizer, which was very much in line with his Communist political leanings. 

During his playing days he was considered something of an oddball because he loved to read Shakespeare and Balzac (sometimes in the dugout), and he enjoyed discussing such subjects as torts and evidence. Nahem was the uncle of former major leaguer Al Silvera.

Minnesota Football Boycott and the Future of U.S. Labor Unions

The Minnesota football team is boycotting its university by not participating in practice. Their goal is to reinstate players whom they believe the university has unjustly suspended in a sexual assault case.

This action speaks volumes about the future of the American labor movement. But how?

The incoming Congress and President will likely push for a national right-to-work law. This will hurt unions in their ability collect dues. But that’s just a start.

The Department of Labor will harass labor leaders for financial filings (already required but likely to intensify, and with greater penalties).

Public sector unions will face threats to their existence (see Wisconsin for an example).

Davis-Bacon, a law that requires union wages to be paid on federally funded jobs, will be repealed or scaled back.

States are enacting harsh antiunion laws. In late November, Michigan’s House of Representatives passed a bill that criminalizes union protests.

What do these developments have to do with Minnesota’s football team? First, recall that Northwestern University football players sought to unionize. The NLRB ruled that it has no jurisdiction over NCAA athletics (a good call). Now, if  college football were subject to the National Labor Relations Act, college football players could only strike for wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment. They would also have a no strike clause. Instead of walking out, they would be required to file a grievance and go to arbitration.

If they boycotted a football game, the university would take them to court and seek an injunction to enforce the terms of their labor agreement.  The court would almost surely order an injunction. If players violated the order, they would be subject to fines and imprisonment.

But that’s not how things will play out at Minnesota. The players have much more leverage by NOT having collective bargaining. They can boycott. They can cause cancellation of a bowl game. And after they do all that, they can do more damage—for example, agree in concert not to meet and greet incoming recruits.
And consider the secondary boycott, a very potent union weapon that was outlawed in 1947 by the Taft-Hartley Act. Minnesota could take its cause to the football championship and get other teams to boycott. That would be enjoined by a court under collective bargaining-- but not so in the unregulated environment for college football. 

I made these and similar arguments in my article, “How a ‘Labor Dispute’ Would Help the NCAA” (University of Chicago Law Review, 2014, https://lawreview.uchicago.edu/page/how-%E2%80%9Clabor-dispute%E2%80%9D-would-help-ncaa).

Now, back to the U.S. labor movement.

Collective bargaining is going to become very expensive and with few benefits for some unions, especially those who have little bargaining power. They will increasingly forsake collective bargaining and its strictures for the type of disruptive activities that are going on with Minnesota football. Want evidence? Look at the Fight for $15, which features quickie strikes by fast food workers, generally to good effect for their cause.

For perspective, think about the NFL lockout in 2011. Who went to court to enforce the rules surrounding the National Labor Relations Act? Roger Goodell and the NFL. Who folded the union and said they were done with collective bargaining? The football players/employees who concluded they had much more to gain outside of collective bargaining than taking concessions at the bargaining table.

Collective bargaining is great for employers. It’s bad for employees. And some employees have better options outside of negotiating labor agreements.

Were Disney Workers Slipped a Mickey?

If you’ve been to Disney World, you may have noticed the presence of many employees who had name tags indicating the nation from which they came. The employees my family and I encountered were sometimes associated with an international theme, especially at Epcot.

We never saw technology workers—but a group of Disney tech workers filed suit earlier this week alleging that Disney discriminated against their American nationality.

They allege that Disney laid-off 250 American workers in 2014 and replaced them with H-1B visa workers from India (here are three year visas). They also allege that their severance packages were contingent on training their replacements.

Disney called the lawsuit "nonsense" and said "we will defend it vigorously." The company gave workers three months' notice about the layoffs and opportunities to apply for other jobs. About 100 of the workers were re-hired into different roles.

The case is Perrero v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S. Inc.

Bipartisan Electors Ask James Clapper: Release Facts on Outside Interference in U.S. Election

Open Letter to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper:

We are Electors who were selected by the voters of our states to represent them in the Electoral College on December 19, 2016. We intend to discharge our duties as Electors by ensuring that we select a candidate for president who, as our Founding Fathers envisioned, would be “endowed with the requisite qualifications.” As Electors, we also believe that deliberation is at the heart of democracy itself, not an empty or formalistic task. We do not understand our sole function to be to convene in mid-December, several weeks after Election Day, and summarily cast our votes. To the contrary, the Constitution envisions the Electoral College as a deliberative body that plays a critical role in our system of government — ensuring that the American people elect a president who is constitutionally qualified and fit to serve. Accordingly, to fulfill our role as Electors, we seek an informed and unrestrained opportunity to fulfill our constitutional role leading up to December 19th — that is, the ability to investigate, discuss, and deliberate with our colleagues about whom to vote for in the Electoral College.

We further emphasize Alexander Hamilton’s assertion in Federalist Paper #68 that a core purpose of the Electoral College was to prevent a “desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.” The United States intelligence community has now concluded with “high confidence” that a foreign power, namely Russia, acted covertly to interfere in the presidential campaign with the intent of promoting Donald Trump’s candidacy. During the campaign Russia actively attempted to influence the election outcome through cyber attacks on our political institutions and a comprehensive propaganda campaign coordinated through Wikileaks and other outlets.

Allegations that Donald Trump was receiving assistance from a hostile foreign power to win the election began months before Election Day. When presented with information that the Russian government was interfering in the election through the course of the campaign, both in private briefings and public assessment, Donald Trump rejected it, refused to condemn it, and continued to accept their help. Donald Trump even made a direct plea to the Russian government to interfere further in the election in a press conference on July 27, saying, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”

According to reports in the Washington Post, New York Times, and other outlets, the United States intelligence community has now concluded definitively that the Russian interference was performed to help Donald Trump get elected, yet even today Mr. Trump is refusing to accept that finding. In response to the reports, the Trump transition office instead released a statement which called into question the validity of United States intelligence findings, and declared the election over despite the Electoral College not yet casting its votes. Trump’s willingness to disregard conclusions made by the intelligence community and his continuing defense of Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin demand close scrutiny and deliberation from the Electoral College.

Separate from Mr. Trump’s own denials of Russian involvement in the election, the confirmed communication between Trump’s aides and those associated with the Russian election interference activity raise serious concerns that must be addressed before we cast our votes. Trump-confidant Roger Stone confirmed during the campaign that he was engaged in back-channel communications with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, responsible for releasing much of the Russian-hacked Democratic communications, and indicated that he was aware of the hacked content prior to its release. Trump foreign policy advisor Carter Page reportedly visited Moscow in July of this year, just prior to the release of hacked DNC communications, during which it was believed he met with the Putin aide in charge of Russian intelligence on the U.S. election. Page returned to Moscow this week where he claimed to be meeting with Russian business and thought leaders.

In addition to Donald Trump and his aides’ conduct, revelations about their further involvement with the Russian government over the course of the campaign demand further investigation, as well as full disclosure of findings from any ongoing or closed investigative efforts:

• Russian government officials revealed that they had maintained contact with the Trump campaign during the election, and stated that they were familiar with most of the individuals associated with Mr. Trump.
• Media inquiries into whether the FBI was investigating Donald Trump’s July plea for Russian interference in the election resulted in a “Glomar response” neither confirming nor denying the existence of an investigation, rather than the more typical response of denying the request outright.
• U.S. intelligence officials reportedly probed Trump foreign policy advisor Carter Page in regard to travel to his Moscow during the campaign.
• The FBI reportedly began an inquiry into Trump associates following reports of a multi-million dollar business relationship with pro-Putin figures in Ukraine and Russia, and reports of an effort to sway American public opinion in favor of Ukraine’s pro-Putin government.
• Michael Flynn, Trump campaign aide and the announced incoming National Security Advisor, traveled to Russia in December of 2015 for a gala event celebrating RT, a state-controlled propaganda network, at which he was seated next to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The Electors require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations. We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States.

Additionally, the Electors will separately require from Donald Trump conclusive evidence that he and his staff and advisors did not accept Russian interference, or otherwise collaborate during the campaign, and conclusive disavowal and repudiation of such collaboration and interference going forward.

We hope that the information and actions described in this letter will be provided in an expeditious manner, so that we can fulfill our constitutional duty as Electors.

Signed,

Christine Pelosi (CA)

Micheal Baca (CO)

Anita Bonds (DC)

Courtney Watson (MD)

Dudley Dudley (NH)

Bev Hollingworth (NH)

Terie Norelli (NH)

Carol Shea-Porter (NH)

Clay Pell (RI)

Chris Suprun (TX)

RIP, Dr. Kenny Hechler, Dead at 102

If you’re feeling a bit down or anxious or hopeless, consider one of life’s greatest optimists, Dr. Kenny Hechler.

Dr. Hechler (Ph.D., Columbia University) taught history at Columbia and Princeton, but came to West Virgina to resume his teaching career at Marshall University. Eventually, he ran successfully for state offices.

His causes? End strip mining. End mining-off the tops of Appalachian mountains. Clean up fraud and corruption in Mingo County. He marched in Selma, Alabama with Martin Luther King Jr. 

And yet he was often voted into office in West Virginia.

At age 96, he ran for the U.S. Senate in a state where environmental causes are in tension with hard times in the coalfields. He knew he’d lose—but he ran so that opponents of mountaintop removal mining could register their opposition. More than 16,000 voters supported him in the Democratic primary. Here he is, driving at age 96!

At the age of 101, he joined a Climate Ground Zero protest and crossed onto Massey Energy property, but the police refused to arrest him. A month later at another protest, he succeeded in being one of 32 people taken into custody.

Trump’s Campaign Promise: Employers Pay 6 Weeks Per Year for Maternity Leave

Donald & Ivanka Trump’s campaign promised the following:

PROPOSAL: The Trump plan will guarantee six weeks of paid maternity leave by amending the existing unemployment insurance (UI) that companies are required to carry. The benefit would apply only when employers don't offer paid maternity leave, and would be paid for by offsetting reductions in the program so that taxes are not raised. This enhancement will triple the average paid leave received by new mothers. 

Source: Donald Trump for President website, here.

This proposal is strikingly at odds with the new labor secretary, who believes there’s already too much regulation and cost mandated by the federal government. Here is what Andy Puzder said in a recent Wall Street Journal article (quoting in red text):

In a statement, Mr. Trump said Mr. Puzder “will fight to make American workers safer and more prosperous,” and also “save small businesses from the crushing burdens of unnecessary regulations that are stunting job growth and suppressing wages.”

The Trump promise would cost employers $1,740 per employee who takes paid leave (figure assumes pay at minimum wage rate of $7.25/hour).

Compare to the 2016 Obamacare mandate for health insurance by employers who opt out of paying insurance, according to Cigna: “$2,160 per full-time employee (minus first 30) applies if one full-time employee receives federal premium subsidy for marketplace coverage.”

Michigan Bill Criminalizes Labor Protests—Mimics China

If you believe that America is a free country, please read on. This past week, the Republican-controlled House voted to stiffen fines for labor picketing. Michigan already has laws that prohibit intimidation and violence. And more. 

Currently, it’s a misdemeanor for strikers or demonstrators to hinder or prevent the pursuit of lawful work. Violators can get jail time and a $500 fine.

The legislation sent to the Senate would raise the fine to $1,000 per day. Unions and organizations sponsoring a picket would be fined $10,000 per day.

The issue is whether a protest can block a road or block an entrance. If that is so important, why limit the bill to labor protests? Why not all protests— for example, aggressive picketing by anti-abortion groups?

Michigan is moving in the direction of China, a Communist nation that heavily restricts labor rights. The AFL-CIO (still a legal labor group in the U.S.) reports on Chinese labor in these terms (and I quote):

China does not yet meet international labor law standards.  Workers cannot freely choose their collective bargaining representatives and lack laws requiring employers to collectively bargain with employees.  Most workers in China’s factories, mines, mills, warehouses, docks and transport hubs still have little or no say in selecting their union representatives, and no means, short of stopping work, to bring recalcitrant employers into direct negotiations over industrial grievances. 

Workers do not have the right to organize in trade unions of their choice….   The lack of proper representation is reflected in the number of protests and labor disputes that have been rising over the years…. For too long, the wages of Chinese workers have been suppressed due to the lack of freedom of association. Wages would be higher and rising faster if the Chinese government secured the fundamental freedoms of association and collective bargaining for its citizens. The AFL-CIO will continue to work with allies to raise these critical issues with the Chinese and American governments and fight for the freedom of Chinese workers to exercise their basic human rights.

****

When labor protests are criminalized, this not only limits speech—it also sets a precedent for other protests to be criminalized. 

Trump’s Purge of Scientists at the Department of Energy: Ignorance Triumphs over Science

President-elect Trump's transition team is requiring Energy Department employees to answer 74 questions that appear to have two aims: (1) identify which scientists work on climate change issues, particularly projects related to the social costs of carbon (e.g., flood and sea-level projections); and (2) punish scientists who are professionally active and successful.

Question 70 asks: “Can you provide a list of all peer-reviewed publications by lab staff in the past three years?” 

Question 71: “Can you provide a list of current professional society memberships?”

Given the anti-climate change nominee for the EPA (a different but related agency), the aim here appears to be to run off scientists.

This is part of a broader societal trend that takes a hostile view of science, universities, professors, experts, journalists and teachers who value knowledge over myth, reason over fear, and facts over lies.

High Hitler and Drug-Addicted Trump Supporters

Business Insider recently reported on data analysis that showed that Donald Trump’s strongest support came from counties with the highest rates of overdose death rates. Check the research, here. 

Now comes this interesting connection to Nazi Germany. The connection to which I refer is the delusional role that drugs play in mass politics.
For readers who might miss the story, the New York Times has a lengthy report today on Norman Ohler’s new book, “Blitzed: Drugs in Nazi Germany.” The book took five years to research.

Here are key quotes from the NYT article:

The most vivid portrait of abuse and withdrawal in “Blitzed” is that of Hitler, who for years was regularly injected by his personal physician with powerful opiates, like Eukodal, a brand of oxycodone once praised by William S. Burroughs as “truly awful.” For a few undoubtedly euphoric months, Hitler was also getting swabs of high-grade cocaine, a sedation and stimulation combo that Mr. Ohler likens to a “classic speedball.”

….

Red, white and blue tubes of pills, sold under the trade name Pervitin, caught the attention of a doctor at the Academy of Military Medicine in Berlin, who would oversee the logistics of ferrying millions of pills to troops. Hopped-up soldiers would sprint tirelessly through the Ardennes at the onset of war, an adrenalized performance that left Winston Churchill “dumbfounded,” as he wrote in his memoirs. A German general would later gloat that his men had stayed awake for 17 straight days.

“I think that’s an exaggeration,” Mr. Ohler said, “but meth was crucial to that campaign.”

….

“Historians have tried to explain Hitler’s tremors that started in 1945 by saying that he suffered from Parkinson’s,” Mr. Ohler said. “I wouldn’t rule it out, but there’s no proof of it. I think Hitler was suffering from cold turkey.”

Mr. Ohler believes that Hitler’s drug consumption prolonged the war, by enabling his delusions.

Trump’s Labor (Porn Ad) Secretary Offers Worse Pension than McDonald’s, Jack-in-the-Box

Andy Pudzer is Trump’s pick for Secretary of Labor. He is the CEO of the parent company for Hardee’s/Carl’s—the group that somehow managed to transform fast food into a porn film experience.

His treatment of low-wage workers is on a par with his exploitation of women.

Background: Obama’s Department of Labor implemented a rule (not an executive order, meaning that it went through a formal notice and comment process regulated by law) to protect workers from employer pension plans that charge excessive management fees. These are 401(k) plans, where workers are investing their earnings in tax-deferred retirement accounts. They’re the kind of plans that Paul Ryan wants to convert from government guaranteed Social Security.

The rule requires retirement advisers to put their clients' interests ahead of their own by eliminating conflicts of interest that can lead some brokers to recommend investments that will get them a higher commission or fee.

The 401(k) plans he offers his own employees implies, however, that he opposes the new rule.

Brightscope Inc, a research company that rates 401k plans, says that CKE plans are less generous than fast food competitors. For example, CKE does not match even a dollar that a low-wage worker manages to put away in the plan.

Making matters worse, CKE plans charge high investment fees.

....

(Below are ads run by CKE.)

Plea to Trump: If You Want to Be Everyone’s Next President, Tweet Support for Brandon Marshall

Naked racism is alive and robust in America. Click on this letter (photo) sent to Brandon Marshall, linebacker for the Denver Broncos. 

Here’s hoping that in between tweets that are meant to intimidate a local labor leader, our next president takes 30 seconds to call out this racism and reject it.

Holiday Greetings! Different Messages from UIUC and UNC

I am proud to have been educated by two great public universities, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

Within an hour, each sent me a mass email with a holiday greeting.

Both messages are wonderful—and each differs more than I expected. 

I have a favorite. Do you? Feel free to share your thoughts with me.

Click here for Illinois  and click here for Carolina

Remember the Pink Star: Traditionalist Worker Party, Part I

Part I of my digest of the “Traditionalist Worker Party”— an American hate group that uses super slick propaganda and high-pitched dog whistles— focuses on this party’s antigay theme, captured in this beguiling “plank”:

2.5 TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE

The definition of marriage is to be determined by clergy and local tradition. No community is to be forced to accept another community’s definition of marriage. Priests and pastors, not activist judges and federal politicians, will be empowered to define and defend the institution of marriage.

The more sinister side of the party’s plank is revealed in the party’s poster (below), featuring an Aryanesque image of a reproductively young white man and white woman in a romantic embrace—all the better to add to the pure “folk” through white procreation.

This is reminiscent of Hitler’s sublimated war against gays and lesbians, who suffered the same fate as Jews. The main difference in treatment was the color of the star applied to these groups designated for extermination—yellow for Jews, pink for gays and lesbians.

RIP, Prof. Bosco Tjan

The end of each semester brings news of student suicides, and also murder of professors.

Yesterday, Prof. Bosco Tjan, a professor at the University of Southern California, was fatally stabbed on campus. Prof. Tjan was an expert in the adaptations people make when suffering central vision loss. Police have identified his assailant as a student.

What Is a “Church Plan”? Supreme Court to Decide

Wherever you live in the U.S., your health care and hospital systems are likely to have a church-affiliated provider. If so, it is probably a vast organization with thousands of employees. These organizations are non-profits that adhere to religious tenets for treating the poor. At the same time, they are also sophisticated business organizations.

Many, if not all, sponsor retirement plans.

The private sector retirement law known as ERISA exempts “church plans.” It’s clear that Congress did not want to burden a church, synagogue, mosque, and other places of worship with a complicated and potentially expensive retirement law.

But do these large health care systems qualify as “church plans”?

Illinois-based Advocate Healthcare Network, New Jersey’s Saint Peter’s Healthcare System, and Dignity Health in California say they qualify as "church plans." 

Federal appeals courts disagree.
Now, the Supreme Court will decide. My hunch, based on recent rulings, is that the Court will say these are "church plans."

This is a big issue that could affect the public. The employees who are suing allege that their retirement funds do not meet federal contribution minimums (plans must be funded at 90% of the benefits they have promised, though the law gives employers freedom to decide what benefits-- if at all--they will provide).
If their plans go bankrupt, they would be a burden to other employers and also taxpayers. 

However, if the workers prevail, the health care systems will likely need to make massive contributions to make up for deficits. 

That has potential to add to everyone’s health care costs, or, if the entities go bankrupt, to strain the limited resources for health care.

See the picture above: If these plans are “church groups,” why aren’t they living up to the promises they made to their thousands of employees? Federal law didn't require them to make these promises-- they did so to be competitive in their labor market. St. Peter's, when you say you are treating people better for life, does this include your employees?

Recalling the 1990s: Wall Street Journal Hailed NAFTA; Unions Predicted American Decline

By chance, I was at a state labor conference the day that the U.S. Senate passed the NAFTA treaty. The mood was grim.

Twenty-three years later, let’s see what the Wall Street Journal said about NAFTA. The Journal’s lead editorial writer was Robert Bartley. A supporter of NAFTA, he said, "I think the nation-state is finished." 

Bartley favored the free flow of goods and labor across borders. He favored high rates of immigration to the United States. 

Bartley spoke favorably about Mexican President, Vicente Fox’s speech that declared that “NAFTA should evolve into something like the European Union, with open borders for not only goods and investment but also people.” 

In his July 2, 2001 Wall Street Journal editorial, Bartley said, “during the immigration debate of 1984 we suggested an ultimate goal to guide passing policies— a constitutional amendment: 'There shall be open borders.'"

Here is a brief summary of a contrary view authored by labor scholar Kate Bronfenbrenner in her 1996 study, “Final Report: The Effects of Plant Closing or Threat of Plant Closing on the Right of Workers to Organize.”

The study concludes that NAFTA has created a climate that has emboldened employers to more aggressively threaten to close, or actually close their plants to avoid unionization. The only way to create the kind of climate envisioned by the original drafters of the NLRA, where workers can organize free from coercion, threats, and intimidation, would be through a significant expansion of both worker and union rights and employer penalties in the organizing process both through substantive reform to U.S. labor laws and by amendments to the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation.

Breitbart to Boycott Kellogg’s: Special KKK?

Breakfast has become an area for Americans to disagree. Kellogg’s has pulled its advertising from Breitbart. On its main website, it touts its commitment to environmental matters (https://www.kelloggs.com/en_US/who-we-are/environmental-initatives.html). Breitbart notes that the Kellogg Foundation “has funded a long list of liberal ideas, causes, and programs, including a virtual Who’s Who of leftwing organizations and causes: … the American Civil Liberties Union; Children’s Defense Fund; Earth Island Institute; Environmental Defense Fund; Friends of the Earth; Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund; Ms. Foundation for Women; NAACP; …”  

Here’s Bretbart’s solicitation to sign its boycott petition:

Breitbart news is the largest platform for pro-family content anywhere on the Internet. We advocate for traditional American values, perhaps most important among them is freedom of speech. For Kellogg’s, an iconic American brand, to blacklist Breitbart News in order to placate left-wing totalitarians is a disgraceful act of cowardice…. Boycotting mainstream American ideas is an act of discrimination and intense prejudice. If you serve Kellogg’s products to your family, you are serving up bigotry at your breakfast table.

….

Note to Breitbart: The kids in the picture below didn’t get their bigotry from Tony the Tiger.

I’m looking forward to buying more Kellogg’s products.

They’re GRRRRREAT!