Labor unions pressure Wall Street on ending secret ballots for unionization

Ben Smith of Politico documents far-from-subtle attempts of Big Labor to intimidate Wall Street money managers into dropping their opposition to the Orwellian-named Employee Free Choice Act,  that would end secret ballots in unionization elections.

The labor movement is taking square aim at Wall Street with a new tool in its fight to pass the Employee Free Choice Act: the hundreds of billions of dollars in pension funds it manages for union workers and retirees, some of it held by the same firms that are fighting the provision known as "card check."

"Has your company made any public statements in support or opposition to EFCA?" asks one of nine pointed questions in a polite, detailed four-page questionnaire.

"If 'Yes,' please explain."

To paraphrase: "Nice little investment fund you've got there. Be a shame if anything happened to it."

Pension funds are accompanied by a fiduciary duty. Their custodians must invest them in the financial best interests of the owners, the pension holders. Of course, if you presume that the federal government will bail out any shortfall, then it makes sense to use them for political blackmail.

Once again the basic question: do unions serve the interests of their members, or the interests of the union bosses?
Hat tip: Jack Kemp
Ben Smith of Politico documents far-from-subtle attempts of Big Labor to intimidate Wall Street money managers into dropping their opposition to the Orwellian-named Employee Free Choice Act,  that would end secret ballots in unionization elections.

The labor movement is taking square aim at Wall Street with a new tool in its fight to pass the Employee Free Choice Act: the hundreds of billions of dollars in pension funds it manages for union workers and retirees, some of it held by the same firms that are fighting the provision known as "card check."

"Has your company made any public statements in support or opposition to EFCA?" asks one of nine pointed questions in a polite, detailed four-page questionnaire.

"If 'Yes,' please explain."

To paraphrase: "Nice little investment fund you've got there. Be a shame if anything happened to it."

Pension funds are accompanied by a fiduciary duty. Their custodians must invest them in the financial best interests of the owners, the pension holders. Of course, if you presume that the federal government will bail out any shortfall, then it makes sense to use them for political blackmail.

Once again the basic question: do unions serve the interests of their members, or the interests of the union bosses?
Hat tip: Jack Kemp