Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Where does President Obama stand on unions?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 04:37 PM
Original message
Where does President Obama stand on unions?
Edited on Fri Feb-25-11 04:38 PM by ProSense
First weeks in office:

Obama Reverses Bush Executive Orders, Creates Middle Class Task Force

Obama Overturns Bush Exec. Order on Project Labor Agreements

President Obama

<...>

I also believe that we have to reverse many of the policies towards organized labor that we've seen these last eight years, policies with which I've sharply disagreed. I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem, to me it's part of the solution. (Applause.) We need to level the playing field for workers and the unions that represent their interests, because we know that you cannot have a strong middle class without a strong labor movement. We know that strong, vibrant, growing unions can exist side by side with strong, vibrant and growing businesses. This isn't a either/or proposition between the interests of workers and the interests of shareholders. That's the old argument. The new argument is that the American economy is not and has never been a zero-sum game. When workers are prospering, they buy products that make businesses prosper. We can be competitive and lean and mean and still create a situation where workers are thriving in this country.

So I'm going to be signing three executive orders designed to ensure that federal contracts serve taxpayers efficiently and effectively. One of these orders is going to prevent taxpayer dollars from going to reimburse federal contractors who spend money trying to influence the formation of unions. We will also require that federal contractors inform their employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Federal labor laws encourage collective bargaining, and employees should know their rights to avoid disruption of federal contracts.

<...>


The President could say this:

<...>

So let us never forget: much of what we take for granted -- the 40-hour work week, the minimum wage, health insurance, paid leave, pensions, Social Security, Medicare -- they all bear the union label. (Applause.) It was the American worker -- men and women just like you -- who returned from World War II to make our economy the envy of the world. It was labor that helped build the largest middle class in history. Even if you're not a union member, every American owes something to America's labor movement. (Applause.)

<...>


Or this:

<...>

Number two -- I believe this with every fiber of my being: America cannot have a strong, growing economy without a strong, growing middle class, and the chance for everybody, no matter how humble their beginnings, to join that middle class -- (applause) -- a middle class built on the idea that if you work hard, if you live up to your responsibilities, then you can get ahead; that you can enjoy some basic guarantees in life. A good job that pays a good wage. Health care that will be there when you get sick. (Applause.) A secure retirement even if you’re not rich. (Applause.) An education that will give your children a better life than we had. (Applause.) These are simple ideas. These are American ideas. These are union ideas. That’s what we’re fighting for. (Applause.)

<...>

Whenever times have seemed at their worst, Americans have been at their best. That’s when we roll up our sleeves. That’s when we remember we rise or fall together –- as one nation and as one people. (Applause.) That’s the spirit that started the labor movement, the idea that alone, we may be weak. Divided, we may fall. But we are united, we are strong. That’s why they call them unions. That’s why we call this the United States of America. (Applause.)

<...>


Or this:

"Some of what I've heard coming out of Wisconsin, where you're just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain generally seems like more of an assault on unions. And I think it's very important for us to understand that public employees, they're our neighbors, they're our friends. These are folks who are teachers and they're firefighters and they're social workers and they're police officers.

"They make a lot of sacrifices and make a big contribution. And I think it's important not to vilify them or to suggest that somehow all these budget problems are due to public employees."


It's pretty clear where President Obama stands on unions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. Just curious -- Is that the same "task force" that is now chaired by Mr. GE Emmelt?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. No, that
would be this task force, which includes union leaders Joseph Hansen and Richard Trumka.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Okay sorry -- Hard to keep track of all these task forces
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. Some facts seem to conveniently fall through the cracks around here. nt
Edited on Fri Feb-25-11 05:14 PM by AtomicKitten
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. Where does he stand on public union collective bargaining?
Federal employees can't bargain over wages and benefits. Obama unilaterally ordered a wage freeze. He did not discuss this with any union as you do in collective bargaining. Why? Why no executive order establishing collective bargaining over wages and benefits for federal workers? Isn't that what is being fought for in Wisconsin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Here,
doesn't apply (PDF):

<...>

Impact on Collective Bargaining Agreements

The pay freeze policy in the Presidential memorandum may not, as a matter of Federal sector labor law, apply to any increase that is required by a collective bargaining agreement that has already been executed and is in effect as of the date of the Presidential memorandum. Each agency should consider the policy contained in the Presidential memorandum and consult with agency counsel to determine the agency’s position in any collective bargaining that may occur going forward.

<...>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. A deflected answer.
Federal employees can't bargain over wages and benefits. Obama didn't start that but he has done nothing to remedy it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. No
not "deflected."

You said: "Obama unilaterally ordered a wage freeze. He did not discuss this with any union as you do in collective bargaining."

They're excluded.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #11
23. They are not excluded going forward.
They have no bargaining rights over wages and benefits. That was my main point and you know it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Actually
Edited on Fri Feb-25-11 06:16 PM by ProSense
you reiterated your main point: "Federal employees can't bargain over wages and benefits. Obama didn't start that but he has done nothing to remedy it. "

Moving the goal post once again from your original point about the freeze.

The fact is that existing collective bargaining agreements are excluded from the freeze. There is advice on what actions to take going forward.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #24
41. For some reason you exclude my first sentence.
Even though you quoted it. Why doesn't Obama allow collective bargaining over wages and benefits?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #5
25. He told us where he stands on that last week:
"Some of what I've heard coming out of Wisconsin, where they're just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain generally, seems like more of an assault on unions. And I think it’s very important for us to understand that public employees, they’re our neighbors, they’re our friends. These are folks who are teachers and they’re firefighters and they’re social workers and they’re police officers. They make a lot of sacrifices and make a big contribution. And I think it’s important not to vilify them or to suggest that somehow all these budget problems are due to public employees.”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #25
32. Actually, he doesn't take a stand in that statement
Not a positive or negative one, anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. Oh, puleeeze! The whole statement is in support of public union collective bargaining! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
former9thward Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-26-11 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #33
46. Why doesn't he support it at the federal level?
Federal workers can't bargain over wages and benefits. They are set by the Executive branch and Congress. No bargaining allowed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dixiegrrrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
6. Who is exempt from the Federal Contractors requirement:
ie: Executive Order 13496, requires federal contractors to post a notice regarding employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act, among other things.

Who is covered by the posting requirement?
Prime contracts under $100,000 and subcontracts under $10,000 are not covered by the notice requirements.
In addition, government contracts resulting from solicitations issued before June 21, 2010 are exempt

http://www.palaborandemploymentblog.com/2010/06/articles/unions/new-employee-rights-poster-issued-for-federal-contractors/

So, any contractor getting taxpayer money before June 21 2010 is exempt?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:01 PM
Response to Original message
7. "I'll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself"
Edited on Fri Feb-25-11 05:02 PM by MannyGoldstein
Here's another you forgot:

"And understand this: If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain when I'm in the White House, I'll put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself, I'll walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. Oopsie
Do not interject truth into a righteous spin. God forbid we use Obama's own words to hold him to account.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-26-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #20
44. where exactly is the picket line? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-26-11 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #44
47. Where exactly is the integrity of this president?
Edited on Sat Feb-26-11 02:31 PM by MissDeeds
Democrats have always stood for the unions - Obama, not so much.

Nice attempt to divert fault. Fail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-26-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. no diverting, mostly just pointing out he has not broken his promise since there is no picket n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #7
27. He messed up there. That would call for action and not
just a lot of words and meetings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doc03 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
10. On the fence n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
great white snark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Oh, you made a funny despite the facts to the contrary!
Good for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doc03 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Facts to the contrary? Like yesterday he was having a meeting
with top CEOs on what taxes and regulations need cut. Not a f----g word about the union busting going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. So why be quiet now? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
great white snark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. So now you want "purty speeches?" (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. I'm really not into all the eloquent speeches - but union leaders have been...
...asking for some stronger words of support. What's the problem?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
speltwon Donating Member (699 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I'd like to see some "fierce advocacy"
Edited on Fri Feb-25-11 05:44 PM by speltwon
Obama can't don't much in regards to state law, but he CAN voice support for labor. And I hope he will be more vocal. Disclosure: proud union member here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. "Fierce advocacy" is the perfect way to put it - doesn't have to be a speech. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. fierce advocacy from Obama? now that is funny nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanBrady Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. +1 He is incapable of fiercely advocating for anything except the rich and powerful
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Isn't that phrase
Edited on Fri Feb-25-11 06:05 PM by ProSense
associated with the President's actions related to LGBT issues, specifically to DADT and DOMA. The actions that he was chastised as never going to take?

Obama signs DADT repeal before big, emotional crowd

ACLU: President Obama Says Discriminatory "Defense Of Marriage Act" Is Unconstitutional

Fierce advocate 2, Detractors 0



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. Fierce: adj. / marked by unrestrained zeal or vehemence
Waiting two years to address a problem is hardly fierce.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Well,
saying he'll never do it was still wrong.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-03-11 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #28
50. It was a true and fair statement until very, very recently.
Yet we get harangued routinely for daring to mention those two years of inactivity.

So it goes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:42 PM
Response to Original message
29. It's pretty clear what Obama says about unions.
What he does is hire a goon like arne to trash and attack unions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Yep - actions speak louder than words.
Edited on Fri Feb-25-11 06:51 PM by progressoid
edit: and sometimes in-action speaks even louder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. He also
hired Hilda Solis, who met with Trumka and other union leaders yesterday:

"Thursday, February 24 2011
10:45 am The Vice President and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis meet with President of the AFL-CIO Richard Trumka and presidents of AFL-CIO labor organizations "



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. Ooooh, a meeting.
Bush met with Union leaders too. It's what happens (or doesn't happen) because of the meetings that is important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #34
40. So you want a statement and
you're mocking a meeting?

It gets to the point where it's obvious people only want one thing: to keep complaining.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-26-11 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. Are you being deliberately obtuse?
I'm mocking the idea that a meeting means something substantial has occurred.

People have meetings all the time. Sometimes it yields positive results. Sometimes it yields negative results. Sometimes it's just coffee and a Danish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-26-11 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. "I'm mocking the idea that a meeting means something substantial has occurred. "
As opposed to the substantial impact of a statement?

"People have meetings all the time. Sometimes it yields positive results. Sometimes it yields negative results. Sometimes it's just coffee and a Danish."

Speaking of "being deliberately obtuse?"


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #31
38. Whew. I guess we all know how valuable meetings are.
Got the minutes? How about a summary of the outcomes? Any action from this meeting?

Keep trying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
35. He passed tax cuts for the rich instead of EFCA. Tell him to get his *ss to WI!
Edited on Fri Feb-25-11 07:31 PM by grahamhgreen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krawhitham Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. IT IS A STATE ISSUE
No way it helps Him, Democrats, or the situation if he shows up
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. It's a NATIONAL issue - it helps everyone (except Republicans). (LINKS)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-25-11 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. Hey. That's gov. scotty's line. You stole it.
So if it doesn't benefit Obama himself or the DLC, who cares what happens? That's some dynamic and principled leadership you got there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-26-11 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
43. Kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-03-11 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
49. It's always nice to have the facts on Obama supporters' side.
Bookmarked.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC