Friday, April 8, 2011

Wait, shouldn't my union dues cover that?

You would think that with the millions and millions of dollars in dues that the public-sector unions extract from their members, they should easily be able to fund a referendum campaign to defeat Senate Bill 5. Right?

Apparently not.
Betting on an expensive referendum drive, opponents of Senate Bill 5 are turning to rank-and-file union members to help cover campaign costs predicted to reach $20 million.

At least three statewide labor organizations - the Ohio Education Association, the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police and the Ohio Association of Professional Fire Fighters - are considering charging members extra fees to fund a ballot effort to repeal a GOP-backed bill signed by Gov. John Kasich last week that would limit collective-bargaining rights for state- and local-government employees.


In an email dated March 22 and obtained by The Dispatch, Ohio Education Association executive director Larry Wicks said teachers and other unionized school personnel might be charged a one-time assessment of $50 to generate more than $5 million to fight Senate Bill 5.
Wait a minute. Why do they need to charge their member extra fees? This NEA boss himself boasted about how much power they have because of all of the glorious dues they collect.

Hundreds of millions of dollars. Where did all that money go, that they need to suck more mandatory money from their members?

Oh wait. Now I remember. j.hart explained part of it quite well. Being a union boss is hard, so you need to pay them really, really well.
  • Joseph Rugola, OAPSE Executive Director: $216,939
  • Gary Martin, OAPSE Associate Director: $200,163
  • Charles Roginski, OAPSE Regional Director: $164,239
  • John Lyall, AFSCME Council 8 President: $155,482
  • Andy Douglas, OCSEA Executive Director: $151,392
  • Harold Mitchell, AFSCME Council 8 First Vice President: $148,265
  • Tom Drabick, OAPSE Director of Legal Department: $144,517
  • Lloyd Rains, OAPSE Regional Director: $140,238
  • R. Sean Grayson, AFSCME Council 8 General Counsel: $130,891
  • Steve Myers, OAPSE Regional Director: $128,741
Also, remember this? Union bosses can't be expected to provide their own transportation like almost everyone else, including their members, do. They work hard laundering the taxpayers money for Democrats campaign war chests, and need super luxorious motorcoaches to carry them around. Why look, they're roughing it again this week at the Westin Columbus.

I wonder how union members feel about being asked to pony up more money to the unions to do what they were supposedly doing with their standard dues.
In an email to Kasich, OEA member Connie Ash complained about the union deducting money from her check to fight Senate Bill 5.

"I am a fiscal conservative and belong to the tea party," Ash wrote. "I am appalled that the OEA feels they can commandeer funds from my paycheck without my approval."
Kasich spokesman Rob Nichols said the OEA's possible $50 member assessment was a "perfect example of what's wrong with this broken system."
If I was forced to be part of a union, I would be wondering why they want to charge me more money, as well.

But that's just me.

Bytor on Twitter


  1. Many years ago I lived in San Diego. At that time the parents had already had enough of the failing schools. California is famous for its "propositions" on the ballot and sure enough a prop was on the ballot to create charter schools. The California teachers association made a special levy on thier members, raised millions and engaged in the worst kind of smear campaign I've seen.

    Needless to say the proposition lost, the liberals in LA and SanFran insured that.

    So this is nothing new. But it is encouraging. I am encouraged by the fact that we are achieving a very important goal here: we must exhaust the financial resources of the unions. They cannot fight all these battles on all these fronts. They have a lot of money, but thier supply isn't infinite. The more money they spend on these special elections the less they have with which to buy the government.

    In addition, the special levy is guaranteed to irk a significant number of members. That's a good thing as "solidarity" is supposed to be a cornerstone of their strength.

  2. I get the conservative woman's objection to having her paycheck siphoned by the unions as any sane person would. So what's wrong with the libturds in the Ohio unions? Do they not see that regardless of how much or how LITTLE they make, the unions will keep on siphoning for their own selfish ends? Is it a defective CurlyFryLightbulb that refuses to go off in their heard?

  3. Haddenuff said "So what's wrong with the libturds in the Ohio unions? ....a defective CurlyFryLightbulb
    that refuses to go off in their head?"

    You mean go "ON" in their head? (<:

    Bulb aside, it's a fair question.

    But the answer is clear. They support their corrupt public unions because those unions have bullied and cajoled lawmakers to cut out a gravy train for Ohio public employees -- all at tax payers expense of course.

    Way back in the last century after getting my doctorate from OSU I took a two-year temp appointment teaching biochemistry at the medical school. Even back then, early 1970's, the retirement plans for Ohio teachers were, by any standard, lucrative.

  4. Another hidden OEA gem is that their employees went on strike in September 2010. If the OEA employees go on strike, aren't they striking against the members of the OEA (the teachers)?

    I guess they didn't get as much as they wanted, so now they are automatically withdrawing $50 from each of the members they struck against last fall.

    By the way, 110 of the 220 OEA employees make over $100,000.

    The OEA is the biggest scam in the state of Ohio if not America.


No profanity, keep it clean.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.