Saturday, December 26, 2009

Compulsory Unionism Hits the Self-Employed in MI

Read an interesting WSJ editorial about an unbelievable new scheme in Michigan that forces compulsory union membership on self-employed child care providers to "essentially throw a cash lifeline to unions like the UAW, which are hemorrhaging members."


At 12/26/2009 10:45 AM, Blogger Cloudesley Shovell said...

Just further proof that unions exist to collect dues.

Unions will first and foremost work to (1) collect dues, (2) protect the interests of the union leadership, and (3) protect the interests of the most senior union members.

In doing (2) and (3), unions will often (and possibly invariably) throw the "rank and file" under the bus.

Thus, unions are not much different that government. Just replace "rank and file" with "taxpayer".

At 12/26/2009 11:50 AM, Anonymous gettingrational said...

The UAW/Feds now owns part of GM. The state of Michigan subsidizes child care. The next step would be for the legislature to configure a budget shortfall for child care subsidies. The logical outcome would be a Feds/UAW takeover of home based child care business ownership because of the lack of state funding.

At 12/26/2009 1:47 PM, Blogger Cabodog said...

Hmmm... idea was hatched in California, then Michigan. Two states with stellar anti-business attitudes and now suffering because of it.

At 12/26/2009 8:58 PM, Blogger Dave said...

A perfect example of Jerry Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy:

Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people. First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers are scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.

At 12/27/2009 12:44 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If a sole proprietor is a public employee because some of their customers receive government subsidies for the service the proprietor gives, does that make a contractor whose customer gets tax credits for the work a public employee? Is Lockheed a government subsidiary?

At 12/27/2009 8:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Join me, friends, in continuing to stock up on lead for the coming unrest...

At 12/27/2009 11:02 AM, Blogger W.E. Heasley said...

Jennifer Granholm-onomics! Jennifer is trying for a record 100% unemployment.

At 12/27/2009 4:20 PM, Blogger Ron H. said...

This is really sad. Proof positive that SEIU puts purely political interests first, not the welfare of it's members.

This type of dis-incentive could cause many day care providers to accept fewer customers who get public assistance, the very people who need it most.

Although this is not called a tax, it is one except in name. remember, when you tax something, you get less of it.

At 12/27/2009 4:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just as long as they're licensed.

Does this mean that Granholm will be forcing Michigan moms into the union as well?

At 12/27/2009 8:38 PM, Anonymous morganovich said...

it horrifies me to imagine how this logic could be applied to other industries.

shall we include hospitals that treat medicare and medicaid patients?

how about supermarkets that take food stamps?

green tech companies that live on government subsidies?

if allowed to stand, this will be an ugly, ugly precedent.

At 12/28/2009 6:34 PM, Anonymous Odin said...

Here is what labor unions and leftist politics did to Detroit:

Detroit in RUINS! (Crowder goes Ghetto)

It also shows what kind of house you get for the low, low prices you keep raving about.

At 12/29/2009 2:04 PM, Anonymous union thug said...

This is not a new program. Ironically it was started during the Bush admin. and involves some federal money. I suggest these unhappy daycare providers stop accepting children that come with subsidies. That's a free market approach for all you union haters.
Workers best defense against mis- behaving employers is a strong labor movement; whether you belong to a union or not.

At 1/01/2010 8:37 PM, Anonymous Tiffany Posey said...

Mark, I would remain naturally skeptical that we know enough of the facts of this situation in order to draw our own conclusions.

The piece in the WSJ is not an editorial. It's an opinion piece written by the folks who are involved in a lawsuit on this matter. As such, it is naturally biased to their point of view.


Post a Comment

<< Home