File Under "N"...

...For "No S**t Sherlock"...

Unions representing government workers are gaining

Unions representing government workers are expanding while organized labor has been shedding private sector members over the past half-century.

A majority of union members today now have ties to a government entity, at the federal, state or local levels.

Roughly 1-in-3 public sector workers is a union member, compared with about 1-in-15 for the private sector workforce last year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Overall, 11.3 percent of wage and salary workers in the United States are unionized, down from a peak of 35 percent during the mid-1950s in the strong post-World War II recovery.

So, basically, union membership is five-fold higher among the ranks of government employees. You know, the ones that shouldn't need to be union? I mean, we are told over and over, ad nauseum, about how unions came about because eeeeeevil big business was exploiting workers and how that forming unions was the only way to stop that from happening, right?

Do they mean to insinuate that, absent the power of the union, the Federal government would start exploiting their workers?

Honestly, can anyone explain this to me? Other than self-perpetuation, what, exactly, does a union comprised of Federal employees offer to its members? Other than making them basically impossible to fire, demote, or otherwise discipline for anything short of capital murder, that is. Look, unions had their place in history. There may even be some modicum of use for them in unskilled labor pools (very doubtful, but a case could be made).

But when you're talking about, by and large, professional people working for the Federal government? It is positively mind-boggling to believe that, without the unions, that the government would take advantage of the employees, it really is. With the myriad of rules, regulations, and other hoops that government agencies have to go through to do *anything*, it's highly doubtful that "exploit those that work for us" is anywhere near the top ten worries...

Why would they take advantage of those they can already fleece?

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

Now HERE'S A Kick In The Teeth...

U.S. government says it lost $11.2 billion on GM bailout

The U.S. government lost $11.2 billion on its bailout of General Motors Co (GM.N), more than the $10.3 billion the Treasury Department estimated when it sold its remaining GM shares in December, according to a government report released on Wednesday.

The $11.2 billion loss includes a write-off in March of the government's remaining $826 million investment in "old" GM, the quarterly report by a Treasury watchdog said.

$11.2 billion dollar loss. Let me bust out my calculator here. Assuming a yearly salary of $50,000, that means the loss alone could have paid the salaries of 224,000 people. According to General Motors, they has 212,000 employees.

So, basically, we would have SAVED money if the federal government had simply written a check for $50K to every single GM employee and then shuttered the damn buildings. If you factor in the $50 billion that was spent to save GM, we could have cut everyone a check for $200K - or paid them $50K a year for four years. Any of which would have been a gross misuse of taxpayer funds, mind you.

"But Jay!" you shriek. "GM was too big to fail!" You know something? If you need $50 billion from the government just to stay afloat - and you still can't handle a simple recall? Maybe we're thwarting natural selection by allowing your company to continue to exist? Ah, but then how would the union thugs get their kickback if the company had been allowed to expire?

I take it back - even if I did hit the lottery, I won't buy anything from GM...

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

You Sure You Want To Go Through With This?

APNewsBreak: Union says Los Angeles airport workers were poorly prepared to deal with shooting

A union report says thousands of workers at Los Angeles International Airport didn't know what to do when a gunman opened fire last year in a terminal.

The SEIU United Service Workers West report obtained Friday by The Associated Press says sky caps, wheelchair attendants and others weren't prepared for an evacuation and were hampered by poor communication.

Really? They were poorly prepared to deal with a workplace shooting? You *do* realize that workplace shootings aren't exactly a new thing, right? I distinctly remember the slew of post office shootings in the 1980s; I'm certain that they weren't the first in a line of workplace violence. Heck, Charles Whitman climbed the clocktower in 1966. It's rather hard to say that workplace violence is a new thing.

And in the "How Can A Union Help?" section, here's the number one function of a union, according to the SEIU:

# 1 - Working together, union members have the strength to win better wages, affordable health care, a secure retirement, and safer workplaces.

[emphasis mine]

Got that? The NUMBER ONE function of a union is to promote a safer workplace. Yet here's the SEIU claiming that union workers were unprepared on how to deal with a workplace shooter, despite decades of evidence that it could happen. And they're using this shooting to  agitate for more training now - but no one's asking why this wasn't a part of training already. Schools have been running scenarios since at least 1999 and Columbine. Yet no one has thought to train the workers at airports how to deal with workplace violence?

And wait just a minute. Wasn't there a shooting at LAX a few years ago? Oh, wait, yes there was. So, more than a decade before the most recent shooting, there was a shooting at the same airport, and yet no training program was put in place? No one from the union was agitating for a safer workplace through better training in 2002? Despite a previous shooting, there was no plan for evacuation or communication at the airport? I find that hard to believe.

Or is this simply the union clawing for some - any - semblance of relevance in the modern age?

That is all.

Another dispatch from...

(image courtesy of Robb Allen)