By Clinton E. Crackel, Co-Founder and Chairman, Nuclear Fuels Reprocessing Coalition

Clinton E. Crackel

September 19, 2021 - Having been a dues-paying member of the APWU and AFGE, I can appreciate the value of labor unions, and the advantages and strength of collective bargaining. Since the onset of the industrial revolution, trade unions have played a critical role in ensuring the health and safety of rank-and-file employees in the workplace, and to ensure a decent standard of living for the blue-collar-class in not only this country, but in many nations throughout the world. The unions also played a significant role in the creation of a middle-class society.

Several months ago, I predicted the leftist-controlled Congress would implement legislation to outlaw right-to-work laws in the states that have them to strengthen the power and influence of trade unions. However, the unions should be aware that if their leftist comrades in Washington D.C. are successful in transforming our constitutional republic into a federal socialist republic (communist state), expect collective bargaining to be outlawed. 

I hope you don’t object to me using the term ‘comrade’ instead of contacts or colleagues because that is the standard form of greeting in communist nations. So, get used to it if they succeed.

As of this time, 26 states and two commonwealths have right-to-work laws. That’s twice the number of states and commonwealths (minus Washington, D.C.) that permit non-citizens to vote illegally. Also, in Janus v. AFSCME, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 27, 2018, ruled in favor of the plaintiff that the application of public sector union dues to non-members is a violation of the First Amendment.

The fact is many unions have seen a steady decline in membership over the past few years and resent having to represent non-union dues paying employees who aren’t members of the union in resolving complaints normally against management despite a negotiated agreement to do so. Perhaps, if the unions made more of a concerted effort to represent non-union employees, and were successful in reaching satisfactory negotiated settlements, they might entice more non-members to join.

In a collective political system such as communism, blue collar workers will lose their status as members of the middle class because the middle class will most likely be eliminated altogether. Then only two classes will remain – working class (non-party members) and upper class (party members). Granted, national and regional union officers would probably be welcomed into the upper class ranks and serve on the national politburo.

One issue of the PRO Act I take exception to is its intent to restrict employer influence in unionization processes. I suppose several complaints were voiced by union officials to their respective congressional comrades that such practices must be prohibited because they force employees to attend meetings to listen to management’s views against unionizing.

What a crock of bull! Anyone gullible enough to believe this issue is so far removed from the reality of the workplace mentality and probably never had to work in such an environment.

If I was working in a hot, dusty shop, and the company P.A. announced a mandatory meeting with corporate management, I would try to leave the shop as early as possible, hoping to get a seat at the rear of the auditorium or other meeting location, in the darkest spot I could find and out of the line of sight of the speakers. I would most likely still be getting paid for attending without having to do any work, and chances are the meeting place atmosphere would be comfortable, and even refreshments would be served, including snacks. If so, I couldn’t care less if management was hammering the union at that point. Plus, if some of my coworkers could ask a lot of questions or prolong the presentation as much as possible, so much the better because I would still be getting paid without having to be in the hot, dusty shop.

Many of the legislators who backed that portion of the Act probably come from well-to-do families, never had to work menial jobs in school, attended prestigious universities to be educated in political science, and were engrained with Marxist, anti-American theory by leftist professors.

The Pro Act wants to ban arbitration agreements making it easier for workers to bring claims to court to be vindicated. Arbitration can be advantageous to both parties without either party having to pay exorbitant legal fees to go through the court system.

I retired from FEMA Region V in Chicago. In that environment there was virtually no legal vindication for being wrongfully punished and consistently denied promotion opportunities because of prevailing cronyism, neither through the federal court system nor through arbitration. For that matter, as a rule, employment attorneys didn’t want to represent aggrieved employees in legal actions even though they might admit the employee had a good case.

The PRO Act also wants to change the independent contractor test, allowing more workers to be classified as employees and participate in collect bargaining. That is really a foolish notion considering the nationwide increase in employing of tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of unskilled, mostly Spanish speaking illegal immigrants over American citizens in such areas as construction, agribusiness, manufacturing, and the service sector.

From my perspective, as a rule, most of them work as common laborers for less than standard pay and no benefits. They don’t have identification cards and rely on coworkers who have IDs to purchase such items as alcohol and tobacco. About the only advantage to not having a valid ID is that they can illegally vote in twelve states, two commonwealths and Washington D.C., where IDs are not required to be presented to verify fraudulent voter identification certifications, and wherever ballot harvesting is permitted.

If they can’t prove who they are, how can formal employment contracts be generated? What about not being able to pay taxes because there is no proof of employment? That also means their pay is not traceable because they only get paid in cash, most likely from non-traceable funds.

That would prove to be a financial godsend to prime contractors and subcontractors working on national infrastructure improvement projects, especially if a prime contractor’s parent company is owned by the likes of the Chinese Communist Party. That could clear the path for many elected and appointed officials in the federal, state, and local governments, numerous corporate executives, and even officials of the participating unions to rake in potentially millions of dollars illegally and personally from the taxpayer-funded projects. The unions could also reach unofficial agreements with key government and corporate officials to deduct union dues from the illegal immigrant laborers without the consent of the laborers out of fear of being reported to ICE and deported.

For that matter, a wronged illegal immigrant laborer couldn’t file a complaint or seek legal recourse because there would be no record of employment or proof of identity. That individual couldn’t even rely on witnesses because anyone requested to provide a witness statement would most likely be a coworker in a similar status in fear of losing employment if a statement was provided.

Such mistreatment of the laborers might even convince them to start voting for Republicans.

Therefore, I strongly urge the U.S. Senate to reject the PRO Act in its entirety because many of the senators with financial ties to the likes of foreign-owned parent corporations, or to the various prime contractors and/or subcontractors may be forfeiting too much personally if the Act is passed, and a massive funding bill for our planned national infrastructure improvements program is approved.