What unions do today
Don Quixote on Aug 06 2011 at 9:36 am | Filed under: Uncategorized
We had a discussion the other day about unions. They were useful 100 years ago, in promoting child labor laws and the like. But what are they up to today? Here’s an example, from Michelle Malkin’s book, Culture of Corruption:
“But the most glaring example of the Obama culture of corruption, and the clearest evidence that Hope and Change are hazardous to your personal well-being and welfare, can be found in the $60 billion White House payoff to Big Labor in exchange for its support for Obama’s federal health care takeover plan. In mid-January 2010, the White House convened backdoor meetings with Democratic leaders, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern, and United Auto Workers President Ron Gettlefinger. Outside the view of C-SPAN cameras, which Obama had so ostentatiously, repeatedly, and falsely promised to install at every health care policy negotiation, the special interest groups cut a deal to exempt union members from a massive 40 percent excise tax on high priced health insurance premiums.
“The excise tax kicks in for everybody else in 2013. While the law squeezes middle-class taxpayers, employers, investors, and drug makers to subsidize expanded government health care, the Big Labor Cadillac tax exemption gives union members who belong to any health plan that is part of a collective-bargaining agreement immunity until 2018. State and local government employees who belong to unions will also be spared. As the Wall Street Journal editorial board put it succinctly: ‘The 87% of Americans who don’t belong to a union will now foot the bill for a $60 billion giveaway to those who do.’
“And you can bet the union lobbyists will spend the next eight years lobbying to ensure that the ‘temporary’ exemption never ends.”
Arguably, the unions are doing what they are supposed to do — getting the best deal they can for their members. But it’s certainly not the best deal for America. And fighting for special tax breaks for union members at the expense of everyone else hardly is far, far removed from fighting for child labor laws, now isn’t it?
Related posts:
Email This Post To A Friend
6 Responses to “What unions do today”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Don Quixote: The excise tax kicks in for everybody else in 2013.
The excise tax for so-called Cadillac (employer-provided, high-value) health plans kicks in in 2018 for everybody; executive or worker.
I’m not well informed in this area, Zach. What is considered non-Cadillac and when does the tax kick in for non-Cadillac plans? I suspect, without knowing for sure, that the point is that the deal made all collectively bargained health plans, and all those for state and local employees, Cadillac plans, regardless of the nature of the plan. Can anybody enlighten me on this?
Leaving aside the specifics of the deal that was worked out, it still illustrates the point. All of the legitimate goals of unions, such as child labor laws, have long since been achieved. Now, on the political stage, unions are just another special interest group. And, in their dealing with management, they are often a monopoly negotiating from a position more powerful than the management they are negotiating with.
Notice that the Big Labor cadillac exemption is due to expire well after Obama has left office. Another example of kicking the can down the road.
This is basically what unions do. They lure you in, talking about it is going to be a mutual learning deal. And then…
http://www.zideo.nl/playzideo/6b344b576d567878
Criticisms of these plans generally center around the fact that small or nonexistent co-pays, deductibles, or caps encourage the overuse of medical care, driving the cost up for the uninsured or those on other plans, necessitating a Cadillac tax.
A study published in Health Affairs in December 2009 found that high-cost health plans do not provide unusually rich benefits to enrollees. The researchers found that only 3.7% of the variation in the cost of family coverage in employer-sponsored health plans is attributable to differences in the actuarial value of benefits. Only 6.1% of the variation is attributable to the combination of benefit design and plan type (e.g., PPO, HMO, etc.). The employer’s industry and regional variations in health care costs explain part of the variation, but most is unexplained. The researchers conclude “…that analysts should not equate high-cost plans with Cadillac plans, but that in fact other factors—industry and cost of medical inputs—are as important in predicting whether a plan is a high-cost plan. Without appropriate adjustments, a simple cap may exacerbate rather than ameliorate current inequities.”[5]
Interesting idea, reduce health care costs by taxing health insurance, pharmaceuticals and high-cost diagnostic equipment. And here, logic dictates the sumptuary taxes inhibit use by raising the final cost with arbitrary taxes. But as we see from the Wikipedia (you know the supporters police this heavily) that the so-called Cadillac plans aren’t actually rich in benefits but rather reflect high risks. I do like the logic though, if your health insurance costs are high, the government will tack on a 40% price hike to help you out. I guess that is Lefty logic
Now, just a thought, could the union concern over this cadillac tax be because like the teachers’ union in Wisconsin they union runs the healthcare plan and have been jacking up rates to fleece the tax payers? I refer you to this sentence from the excerpt above “The employer’s industry and regional variations in health care costs explain part of the variation, but most is unexplained.” Unexplained or willfully blind to?
Wis. Teachers’ High Health-Care Costs Helping Fill Union Friends’ Pockets – By Katrina Trinko – The Corner – National Review Online
We should keep in mind that the union contribution to child labor laws was self serving. It was predicated on removing children who were paid less from competition with union labor. Just as minimum wage laws were enacted to remove the advantage women had since they were paid lower wages and the “prevailing wage” laws were enacted to shut out the competition of Southern contractors with their cheaper laborers (mostly african-American) from competing for federal contracts in DC undercutting high union wage demands.
I would also not be surprised to find the job killing “living wage” movement is also designed to support high priced union labor. It would certainly explain why ACORN while campaigning for “living wage” law was found to not be paying their workers even the mandated minimum wage. There excuse, it cost to much and they couldn’t afford the minimum wage and continue their campaign.