Canadian labour unions take membership dues ($$$) to fund anti-Afghanistan agenda
- Thread starter Zell_Dietrich
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
It seems to me that a lot of these "full-time" union leaders have failled political aspirations and are now using their position and funding not for workplace issues, but to further their political causes. If I paid union dues I would be incensed! INCENSED!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I think I said it before, there is very little we can do from the outside of the union to stop them. It is up to members inside of the union to stand up and stop their leaders from hijacking the union's funds for non union related business. I seems to me that they are inappropriately spending funds that were compelled from members for a specific purpose.
If I were to collect money for a housing co-op to create a fund to replace the roof in case of sever damage, and then went and spent that money to further my own political views, I would be in breach of trust. Union dues are to be used for union business, for example: to create a strike fund. By spending money on things outside of the union's intrest they are weakening the unions bargaining power. Now if you're in the union and disagree with the fundamental assertions in the anti-war campaign, then you need to remember that your union is using your money to support views that you don't agree with. Democracy in action. ;D
I like the new title for this thread - much better
If I were to collect money for a housing co-op to create a fund to replace the roof in case of sever damage, and then went and spent that money to further my own political views, I would be in breach of trust. Union dues are to be used for union business, for example: to create a strike fund. By spending money on things outside of the union's intrest they are weakening the unions bargaining power. Now if you're in the union and disagree with the fundamental assertions in the anti-war campaign, then you need to remember that your union is using your money to support views that you don't agree with. Democracy in action. ;D
I like the new title for this thread - much better
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
The problem is quite simple most union members don't pay attention to what goes on unless there is a direct effect on them ie money / benefits. The radicals get in and soon run the place. The members of all unions need to take a hard look at who is in charge and what they are doing and not let there $50 bucks a month get wasted. I am happy to say that not all unions are behind this CEP is not a sponsor.
- Reaction score
- 15,146
- Points
- 1,160
Sent
To whom it my concern
I have been a long term civil servant and am also an ex-soldier. I have been recently made aware that the Canadian Labour Congress is supporting a campaign by the Canadian Peace Alliance (CPA) to denounce our Armed forces taking part in the UN backed mission in Afghanistan. As a member of PSAC I will be extremely upset and pissed off if any of my union funds are used to support this group, they do not represent my views nor the views of many of my co-workers.
I also noticed a large number of Islamic groups will be attending and supporting the CPA. As I am a Muslim convert, I am well aware of the agenda of radical and fundamentalist Islamic movement and they promote a theology of hate, anti-women, anti-union and restriction of freedom of religion. Many of the same groups supporting the CPA also supported Sharia law, which is oppressive and discriminates against woman. How is it that the CLC can be comfortable standing besides such narrow minded people?
Canadian soldiers & civilian personal in Afghanistan are working hard and risking everything to make life better for the average Afghan, it is not an easy task or pretty, but the Afghan people deserve a chance to have a better life. I would be ashamed if I knew my union had stabbed fellow Canadians in the back while they are risking their lives in Afghanistan. If PSAC has given any support to the CPA, I expect you to withdraw it immediately.
To whom it my concern
I have been a long term civil servant and am also an ex-soldier. I have been recently made aware that the Canadian Labour Congress is supporting a campaign by the Canadian Peace Alliance (CPA) to denounce our Armed forces taking part in the UN backed mission in Afghanistan. As a member of PSAC I will be extremely upset and pissed off if any of my union funds are used to support this group, they do not represent my views nor the views of many of my co-workers.
I also noticed a large number of Islamic groups will be attending and supporting the CPA. As I am a Muslim convert, I am well aware of the agenda of radical and fundamentalist Islamic movement and they promote a theology of hate, anti-women, anti-union and restriction of freedom of religion. Many of the same groups supporting the CPA also supported Sharia law, which is oppressive and discriminates against woman. How is it that the CLC can be comfortable standing besides such narrow minded people?
Canadian soldiers & civilian personal in Afghanistan are working hard and risking everything to make life better for the average Afghan, it is not an easy task or pretty, but the Afghan people deserve a chance to have a better life. I would be ashamed if I knew my union had stabbed fellow Canadians in the back while they are risking their lives in Afghanistan. If PSAC has given any support to the CPA, I expect you to withdraw it immediately.
George Wallace
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 223
- Points
- 710
Well phrased Colin.
NL_engineer
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
alfie said:
It is a bit more complicated then that. These are the National Unions not the Locals making these purchases. The Locals usually (but some times the National does) control the strike fund, and other funds (usually investments readily convertible to cash), and pay a dues to the National. In some cases the dues go to the National, and they give the Locals there part. In this case the Nationals are spending it, and it is more then likely in there charter, that money can be spent on political purposes, ie. the NDP, or under a different wording, sponsoring, etc.
If you are a union member, and want to try to stop this.
Get the books from the National (they will have to declare the expense one way or another)
Look in the Nationals charter for anything related to spending and try to find this
(If political spending is allowed, get your Local reprehensive to bring it up at the next National AGM, and try to get other Locals on side)
HDE said:Getting out "hundreds of people" in the Greater Toronto Area, population of about 4 million, isn't exactly a rousing show of support :. Most of us "lefties" in organized labour skipped, which really does make it all the sweeter ;D
Few union members support the CLC position on Afghanistan. I just wish the news media would separate union from its members when talk about supporting this kind of nonsense. There are a lot of former CF working in the public service and this is one of the topics that they would never actually ask our opinion on as it would be solidly behind the troops.
you read their position http://canadianlabour.ca/index.php/Opinion_Editorials/Who_Are_We_Defending and it provides you a frightening insight into the bury your head in the sand approach to politics. The very reasons they want the troops out are the very same issues they so strongly condemn. Makes absolutely no sense for unions to take positions of equality and women's rights and then to turn over the Afghan people to the fatal outcomes they condemn?
NL_engineer
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
MCG, the problem is they have no control over it unless they vote their union out of the CLC (not that easy).
- Reaction score
- 15,146
- Points
- 1,160
George Wallace said:
Yep, still awaiting a reply :
most unions in my opinion ( the provincial or federal leadership that is ) spend so much time on social issues to mask their inability and lack of work on defending contract rights for their workers.
Stopping the spending is not easy. Barring getting resolutions passed stating that union money can only be spent in the defense of a contract, it is an impossible task. No union goes to its members and clearly asks for motions from the floor at conventions for an itemized spending list. Most larger unions have its members who attend their conventions pass a motion endorsing a vaguely worded action plan. The action plan is mostly about defending their contract rights but also mention something fluffy about supporting CLC and other social issues. Once that action plan passes at their conventions they have blindly endorsed the money to be spent on stuff like this without any input.
The problems with unions are not the workers or local stewards who fight for nothing more then workers rights. What is needed is a Federal law dictating that Union dues can ONLY be used by unions in actions to defend, enforce, or establish contracts ( i.e the real reason unions began and what they need to get back into ), and anything else must be clearly voted for by the membership at large.
I know for our local we do get a portion of the dues rebated back to us, but any penny spent over a few hundred bucks and even a single penny spent on anything other then the running of the local has to be approved by the local membership in clear detail.
I sent Layton an email which was not responded to in which I asked him "What was the NDP plan once the troops left?" What exactly is their plan when the Taliban retake the country? And to what effect will asking Please, stop further violence? Seems no one on that side is willing to admit they have no plan other then wanting us to ditch and run. I could probably stomach listing to their opinion if they actually had one. Currently they are without an education position with an actual action plan. All they have is a one liner statement hoping to capitalize on the voters who don't understand the reasons our troops are there. Sadly the funding to keep this misinformation and blind head in the sand politics moving forward is mostly coming from Blue Collar union workers dues. Not to repeat myself but no motion against this stands a hope in hell of getting passed at a union convention. The only real way to ensure funding only goes to approved areas is a new Federal Law dictating that unions dues are just that - funds to run the union as a union and only that.
Stopping the spending is not easy. Barring getting resolutions passed stating that union money can only be spent in the defense of a contract, it is an impossible task. No union goes to its members and clearly asks for motions from the floor at conventions for an itemized spending list. Most larger unions have its members who attend their conventions pass a motion endorsing a vaguely worded action plan. The action plan is mostly about defending their contract rights but also mention something fluffy about supporting CLC and other social issues. Once that action plan passes at their conventions they have blindly endorsed the money to be spent on stuff like this without any input.
The problems with unions are not the workers or local stewards who fight for nothing more then workers rights. What is needed is a Federal law dictating that Union dues can ONLY be used by unions in actions to defend, enforce, or establish contracts ( i.e the real reason unions began and what they need to get back into ), and anything else must be clearly voted for by the membership at large.
I know for our local we do get a portion of the dues rebated back to us, but any penny spent over a few hundred bucks and even a single penny spent on anything other then the running of the local has to be approved by the local membership in clear detail.
I sent Layton an email which was not responded to in which I asked him "What was the NDP plan once the troops left?" What exactly is their plan when the Taliban retake the country? And to what effect will asking Please, stop further violence? Seems no one on that side is willing to admit they have no plan other then wanting us to ditch and run. I could probably stomach listing to their opinion if they actually had one. Currently they are without an education position with an actual action plan. All they have is a one liner statement hoping to capitalize on the voters who don't understand the reasons our troops are there. Sadly the funding to keep this misinformation and blind head in the sand politics moving forward is mostly coming from Blue Collar union workers dues. Not to repeat myself but no motion against this stands a hope in hell of getting passed at a union convention. The only real way to ensure funding only goes to approved areas is a new Federal Law dictating that unions dues are just that - funds to run the union as a union and only that.
NL_engineer
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Do you think that your pay would be like it is with out unions? Rember our pay increases come from what is awarded to the public service, and they get it through there union bargaining with the government.Infanteer said:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Right you are. Unions are the only reason for the high standard of living in this country.
But even though unions are able to negotiate higher wages for the workers (well, for members anyway), the market is still able to steal those gains back through inflation. What is really needed is some sort of Political Bureau to set prices as well.
Only then can the capitalist truly be beaten.
But even though unions are able to negotiate higher wages for the workers (well, for members anyway), the market is still able to steal those gains back through inflation. What is really needed is some sort of Political Bureau to set prices as well.
Only then can the capitalist truly be beaten.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 10,192
- Points
- 1,040
Ah...wage and price controls...the heart yearns for such an era of gelded gilded poverty prosperity.