With more provisions of Obamacare sent to kick in this year, some unions are growing concerned about a law that they once supported. From the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323854904578260313912570432.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet):

Union leaders say many of the law's requirements will drive up the costs for their health-care plans and make unionized workers less competitive. Among other things, the law eliminates the caps on medical benefits and prescription drugs used as cost-containment measures in many health-care plans. It also allows children to stay on their parents' plans until they turn 26.
To offset that, the nation's largest labor groups want their lower-paid members to be able to get federal insurance subsidies while remaining on their plans. In the law, these subsidies were designed only for low-income workers without employer coverage as a way to help them buy private insurance....
John Wilhelm, chairman of Unite Here Health, the insurance plan for 260,000 union workers at places including hotels, casinos and airports, recalls standing next to Barack Obama at a rally in Nevada when he was a 2008 presidential candidate.
"I heard him say, 'If you like your health plan, you can keep it,' " Mr. Wilhelm recalled. Mr. Wilhelm said he expects the administration will craft a solution so that employer health-care plans won't be hurt. "If I'm wrong, and the president does not intend to keep his word, I would have severe second thoughts about the law."


More... (http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/14530/unions_anxious_about_obamacare_coal_company_sues_whistleblower_boeing_strik/)

"I heard him say, 'If you like your health plan, you can keep it,' " Mr. Wilhelm recalled. Mr. Wilhelm said he expects the administration will craft a solution so that employer health-care plans won't be hurt. "If I'm wrong, and the president does not intend to keep his word, I would have severe second thoughts about the law."

'Buyers remorse', Mr Wilhelm? So what ya gonna do now, huh? What will it take for the unions to take a walk on the Dems? Or at the very least to demand quid pro quo for union support, no more credit, no more resting on long past laurels, specific legislation for specific support. I suspect that the latter stance would essentially effect the former result as the Dems would not play, not honestly. Don't think we can reasonably expect labor to unilaterally divorce itself from the Dems while no other access to politics is available but one damn thing will lead to another....Given current circumstances it is possible for labor to "get a spine", a prerequisite for walking upright.

'Buyers remorse', Mr Wilhelm? So what ya gonna do now, huh? What will it take for the unions to take a walk on the Dems? Or at the very least to demand quid pro quo for union support, no more credit, no more resting on long past laurels, specific legislation for specific support. I suspect that the latter stance would essentially effect the former result as the Dems would not play, not honestly. Don't think we can reasonably expect labor to unilaterally divorce itself from the Dems while no other access to politics is available but one damn thing will lead to another....Given current circumstances it is possible for labor to "get a spine", a prerequisite for walking upright.

Even they aren't *that* blinded. Obamacare is a bailout for big insurance and somebody's gotta pay through the nose for that..somebody other than the rich who have already declared that they're not paying for anything from now on.

the rich who have already declared that they're not paying for anything from now on.

This might be what triggers the political crisis you spoke of in the other thread. The average American worker is getting poorer and poorer and is being asked to pay for more and more societal expense. There will have to be a tipping point in this situation, somewhere.

This piece by Parwenti in MLT http://mltoday.com/subject-areas/social-and-economic-conditions/a-terrible-normality-1596-2.html could also have been written directly about the systemic production of poverty. The question is how long can this (or will this) be allowed to continue?

This might be what triggers the political crisis you spoke of in the other thread. The average American worker is getting poorer and poorer and is being asked to pay for more and more societal expense. There will have to be a tipping point in this situation, somewhere.


Of course ya never know 'til after the fact. Social Security gotta be the potential near-term flashpoint, whether it is or not is pretty much up to the gang in DC, if they finesse this it could be Health Care redux. A bit of ham-handedness and we might have a ball game. It's a weak position to be in when ya got no functional left. And if it ain't Social Security then I don't know that I'm gonna see it, can't imagine what it would take if not that.

AFSCME President Slams Pat Quinn, Michael Nutter As 'Turncoats' Who Must 'Pay'

WASHINGTON -- One of the top labor leaders in the country ripped into two prominent Democratic lawmakers Monday morning, calling them "turncoats" and unfavorably comparing them to high-profile anti-union Republicans.

Speaking at the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees' Legislative Conference in Washington, D.C., AFSCME President Lee Saunders devoted a large portion of his address to Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter and Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, promising political retribution for the tough-on-labor policies both Democrats have imposed.

The remarks, delivered at a private gathering and sent over by a labor source, are below:


I am sick and tired of the fair-weather Democrats. They date us, take us to the prom, marry us, and then divorce us right after the honeymoon. I am sick and tired of the so-called friends who commend us when they’re running for election, but condemn us after they’ve won. I am sick and tired of the politicians who stand with us behind closed doors, but kick us to the curb in front of the cameras. I'm here to tell you that's bullshit and we’re not gonna take it anymore.

Many of you know some of the people I’m talking about. Mayor Michael Nutter in Philadelphia. Governor Pat Quinn in Illinois. We’ve come to expect union-busting, anti-worker tactics from ultra-conservatives like Scott Walker and John Kasich. But now, everybody’s on the bandwagon.

Look at Nutter. AFSCME members in Philadelphia haven’t had a contract in four years, and Sister Baylor knows it. What does the mayor do? He goes to the Republican-controlled Pennsylvania Supreme Court to get a legal decision that would let him shove his contract down our throats. He’s no different from Governor Snyder in Michigan, who went to his state’s Supreme Court to get legal cover for cutting school employees’ pay. Different political parties, same political games.

Look at Governor Quinn. He has waged a relentless war on state employees – slashing pensions, driving down incomes and wiping out jobs. Last year he took the unprecedented step of terminating our contract. He is the first and only Illinois governor, Republican or Democrat, to take such a blatantly aggressive action.

I have had enough of these turncoats, and it’s time to make them pay.

Hostilities between organized labor and some of the nation's most prominent, state-based Democrats are hardly a new phenomenon. Before Quinn and Nutter rankled AFSCME, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo did the same with unions in his state.

But the swipes in Saunders' speech are notably sharp -- especially the ominous pledge to "make them pay" -- and they illustrate the extent to which these hostilities are no longer confined to closed-door budget fights. With states and cities feeling the pinch, lawmakers have been going after organized labor with greater frequency, altering pension plans to be less generous, changing retirement age laws, or, in several cases, targeting collective bargaining rights.


UPDATE: 1:30 p.m. -- Brooke Anderson, Quinn's press secretary, referred The Huffington Post to an op-ed the governor wrote in late September, in which he framed his policies as necessary for restoring the state's fiscal footing and eliminating duplicitous or wasteful programs.

"Bellicose rhetoric is not going to address Illinois’ financial challenges," Anderson added in an emailed statement. "The governor respects the collective bargaining process and the right to organize. He’s been a lifelong ally of the labor community, leading the state’s largest capital construction program in history to put thousands of workers back on the job. He has long championed increasing the minimum wage and protecting workers’ rights.

"Governor Quinn inherited massive financial challenges from decades of mismanagement by previous governors and legislatures. He did not create these challenges, but he is committed to addressing them," the statement continued. "In these difficult economic times, trade unions have made concessions. Auto unions have made concessions. And the union of government employees will have to understand the importance of making concessions to acknowledge the fact that the current path of credit downgrades and debt is unsustainable."

Meanwhile, Nutter's press secretary Mark McDonald sent over the following email, pushing back on Saunders' attack and laying blame for the standoff in Philadelphia at the feet of the local union.

First, Mayor Nutter is a strong supporter of unions, their rights to bargain and engage in collective action. But at the same time, he also is mindful of the cost of government and has sought through efficiencies and new methods to bring high quality service to Philadelphians. The reality is that pensions and healthcare costs are consuming more and more city resources that would otherwise be spent on quality services or returned to the taxpayers’ pockets.

[snip]

Mayor Nutter believes in collective bargaining. And that’s why he’s seeking an end to this impasse. In fact, it’s the Union that has refused to come to agreement. All they say is NO.

Indeed, the City has repeatedly offered enhancements to its contract proposal, adding a second year of pay raise and more health care funding and reducing the number of furlough days being sought from 30 to 15. And in the upcoming Five Year Plan, the City has no immediate plan to actually employ furloughs, which will only be used in the context of a real fiscal crisis.

[snip]

Name calling and efforts to vilify elected officials point out the poverty of the Union’s bargaining position. They are happy to talk about more raises but they don’t want to help the City establish a more sustainable budget in the years to come. They prefer hobbling future administrations with only one tool to use in a recession – layoffs. Mayor Nutter says that furloughs save jobs in the long run.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/11/afscme-pat-quinn-michael-nutter_n_2662879.html

Well, suppose that's a start, but talk is cheap. What you guys gonna do in 2014?

And it is to be noted that Mr Nutter's comments were at a private gathering, when is he going to shout it from the rooftops?