SEIU Watch: The continued revolt against Big Labor’s home invasion
On October 5, I reported on the parental backlash against the SEIU-led campaign to drag Illinois home health care workers into the union fold. Mom Pam Harris, whose grass-roots activism has inspired folks across the country, continues to spread the word about the state Democratic machine and the unions’ underhanded tactics. The local Fox affiliate in Chicago followed up with a report today. Watch it:
Reader Ron e-mails:
Thanks for your focus on SEIU in the state of Illinois. Here in WA State SEIU has used its money and the Initiative process to gain collective bargaining agreement with the executive branch for all “long term care providers”. This definition includes parents of offspring with developmental disabilities and those we hire to help with the daily challenges. Those we hire are not career path providers but young people with good hearts, flexible schedules allowing 4-10 hrs a week to help – help that is greatly appreciated.
SEIU has managed to increase training requirement from 28 hrs to 72 order to work. The current curriculum is irrelevant for those providing services to the “dd” population and the cost will now balloon to $42M to for training. SEIU’s ultimate goal is to control the training – revenue/profit center and become through a union hall the controlling source for care providers.
I’m a parent of a 27 yr old with profound “did” and appalled at breadth and depth of SEIU’s influence at our State capitol – over politicians and public policy. They organized here in early 2000′s and have rapidly “taken over”. There has been no noticeable evidence of political backbone at the legislative or executive level to restrain SEIU’s meddling. With that said I predict continue growth of their base and influence which will exacerbate the current burden they impose on our family and misdirects scarce state resources for self serving purposes masqueraded as necessary benefits to their members and the people they serve – the aging and “dd communities”.
Enough for now! Please continue to follow their path and give voice to help pierce their slogans, reveal the real stories, expose the weak kneed “polls”, and speak to the heart of the matter – this union gains a foot hold by making initial gains for the under paid under served worker but thereafter it garners power, influence, and money that accrues to the upper ranks while perpetuating the charade being a worker’s union.
Reader Martha e-mails:
Dear Ms. Malkin,
I want to congratulate you on the excellent reporting and thank you for continuing to expose what SEIU is doing. As a mother of a 28 yr. old severely developmentally disabled son who lives at home, in Washington state, I know what SEIU has done here. There are 2 things that have directly affected us as caregivers for our son in the past 2 yrs. One is the deceptive initiative last Nov. that 70% of the voters passed, which increased training requirements for caregivers applying for a contract with the state beginning 2010. Parents would need to complete 12 hrs. of training which was originally only 6 hrs. ALL other caregivers, (part-time, sibling, other relative, career) would have to complete 75 hrs., which was originally only 28, in order to be contracted with the state. We fought this for several yrs. in bill form, and the persistence of the union won when they presented it to the people under the guise, “don’t you want your grandmother to have the best trained caregiver”, and not attaching a cost to the state, to the initiative. The Seattle Times was against the initiative, as was every other paper in the state, and after the initiative passed, the Times editorial read “Misguided Compassion”.
The last legislative session was another blow when SEIU managed at the last minute to get a bill proposed, (the same bill was proposed early in the session and didn’t make it out of committee, then it was slipped into the budget writing and removed), which mandated that ALL family caregivers could NOT work through an agency and must return to working directly with the state as individual providers. We fought, and the bill was passed with an amendment stating that if you were older than the client you could remain with the agency as your employer. That saved parents and older siblings from transitioning from agencies. Our agency is non-union. Forcing us back to the state automatically puts us back in the union. After the governor had signed the budget, which had this amended bill in it, WA state DSHS decided that the bill might be age discriminatory and decided to dismiss the amendment and order ALL family members out of agencies. That is where we are today. So SEIU is not just after enrollment, they are after training requirement money as well. Being an agency employee, the state reimburses the agency and the agency pays the caregiver, meant I could get medical insurance for my sons as well as myself. Being a “state employee” (which they claim I am not, I am an independent contractor, and my disabled son is my employer) I can only get insurance for myself, no dependents. This state is run by the union and their power scares me. It greatly angers me as a taxpayer as well as a family caregiver.
Please convey my admiration to Pam Harris for speaking up while there is still time to vote. I wish Washington could go back to that point. SEIU will destroy state budgets and cause families trying to take care of their loved one more hardship.
Please keep this topic in the news to remind voters, and keep up the good work.
Reader Tom in California e-mails:
Hi Michelle,
FYI – we have an autistic daughter that we receive some in-home support money from the state (California) for the work we do to keep her at home as opposed to putting her in a group home (which would really cost the state $$$). We get about $300 per month. Every month there is a deduction of $12.00 for the SEIU. It really frosts me that those thugs get the money and we have absolutely no say – we never signed up for the union and would never if we were asked.
Love your site – keep up the good fight.
Tom
In occupied San Jose
And tipster C. in Illinois e-mails a piece of SEIU-promoting propaganda (click here for PDF):
This was emailed to me from several families in Illinois who are livid at receiving this letter and wondering how an organization from Michigan has become involved in their personal lives.
I have been “gagged” as an employee of a provider and ask that you keep me anonymous in forwarding you this information.
My personal opinion is that this is an absolute tradegy for the individuals with disabilities and families who have been inundated by power hungry-all I care about is collecting union dues-money-grabbers who care nothing about individuals with disabilities.
As Mark Mix of the National Right to Work Committee warned last month, what the SEIU and its Big Labor competitors are doing in the states, Obamacare will do nationwide.
***
Related: Doug Ross provides you a handy guide to all the union puppet masters.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama Chief of Staff: No More Compromise on Contraceptive Mandate
February 12, 2012 04:26 PM by Doug Powers
114 Comments
Choosing Life and Beating the Odds
February 11, 2012 11:50 AM by Doug Powers
32 Comments
Obama’s fraudulent abortion mandate “accommodation” Updated: Prez condemns “cynical” opposition
February 10, 2012 10:05 AM by Michelle Malkin
245 Comments‘To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit’
February 10, 2012 09:06 AM by Michelle Malkin
199 CommentsOn Capitol Hill today: Union members testify against forced dues racket
February 8, 2012 09:44 AM by Michelle Malkin
36 CommentsSheila Jackson Lee: Privatizing TSA Screeners Would Be Asking for Another 9/11
February 7, 2012 11:07 PM by Doug Powers
72 Comments
Former Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage
February 7, 2012 03:40 PM by Doug Powers
75 Comments
How to Make a Liberal Politician Stand Up Against Intrusive Government
February 6, 2012 04:28 PM by Doug Powers
95 Comments
Categories: Health care,SEIU,Unions
Redstate
» Morning Briefing for February 14, 2012Betsys Page
» Cruising the WebPundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"Sister Toldjah
» Obama’s new budget is a bad joke
Up pretty early Michele.
We need to get RICO investigations going on SEIU & ACORN.
SEIU & ACORN are criminal enterprises.
Pay attention to the video at 4:01~4:10.
Is there any legal standing to deduct the “dues” payments from state taxes owed at years end? They withheld it without consent.
bribing your politicians is way easier and cheaper than going door to door and seeking to try to convince you to do something. CROOKED POLITICIANS WITH AGENDAS ARE THE PROBLEM. FIX THAT WITH A VOTE.
This is OK, our state is already in the hole financially, what’s a few more dollars to their political cronies. You know this is important, much more important that the textbook funding program that they completely cut from the state budget. Heaven forbid we should educate our kids. Actually, combining the two makes perfect sense.
Isn’t it amazing that to get coverage of these stories you have to look here or to local news media (if you’re lucky) and not the national press? But Fox News is an enemy of the state and an arm of the Republican Party, according to the White House, which is 100 percent on the side of those crooks running SEIU. We know the president’s sympathies, don’t we? This is a look into the future, if health care passes and can’t be dismantled. I believe the corrupt-o-crats are going to pass this, with the worst possible impact on the country, and there’s literally nothing we can do until January 2011 at the earliest, assuming we can get a conservative win in the Congress next year. I’m not optimistic. Our best conservative strategists need to be thinking about how to undo an entitlement, as tough as that is.
Get organized and pay attenion. To long, the American voter has cast their vote and not really understood what was on the table, we left that to the knowledgeable politicians. It is well past time to get involved and follow what our governments are doing. If we do not pay attention we will get more Franks, Dodds, Riens, government health care and vanishing jobs.
Vote out all incumbents now…it is the only way the currently elected scum will realize that you are the boss.
Let the new toadies understand that you want investigations into fraud and racketeering. We, the people, must take control.
Michelle,
You might also check into how the WSFE managed to ensure that Gov Gregoire, in WA ST, received enough votes (after two recounts, lost military ballots and more votes than voters in King County)to edge out Dino Rossi. To pay back the WSFE, Gregoire allowed the WSFE to become the collective bargainer for all state employees. Now all state employees must join the union and pay dues, not join and still pay a partial due or refuse to pay and face termination (all this in a right to work state).
Compassion? These SEIU people do not care a tick about anyone or anything—only their own loathesome, spotty behinds and $$.
They are one of the many demon hordes running around in this country now.
Fox needs to get hold of this issue because it’s not receiving nearly the attention it deserves. From those WA e-mails, it sounds as if this effort is a decade old or so.
Time to shine the light so that it doesn’t spread to other states and, indead, can be turned back in the blue states.
Gotta watch that camel’s nose all the time don’t you?
SEIU scares me – no ifs ands buts.
I do have a comment or 2 and it will sound dispassionate, but I just want to learn how things get where they are today.
In the situation where family members are caring for a ‘dd’ child/relative:
1) does the child/relative have to be an adult to qualify for financial assistance e.g. disabled and on state medicaid?
2) several years ago, Missouri was providing financial assistance to families living with/caring for a ‘dd’ child (a minor). I found that interesting as this particular family I know is quite middle class. MO may still be, not sure.
It’s a tough situation for a family to be in. Money from the government comes with strings attached or if nothing else, leaves the family vulnerable to budget cuts when they depend on outside assistance.
As the excellent Sig Ruman (Col. Erhardt) says to the excellent Jack Benny (Ham actor Joseph Tura, disguised as the dead Professor Siletsky):
From: To Be or Not to Be (1942)
(The original, of course.)
Im sorry – but I am having a real hard time feeling much sympathy for welfare recipients who are getting politically bullied.
If we suggested phasing out the payments from the state in the name of a free market these folks would be bringing their pitchforks and torches up our driveways.
Live by government cash, die by government cash.
GladzKravtz: Yes, this is a Medicaid waiver program for adults. All eligible recipients must receive Medicaid. This program, the Home Based Support Services Program, has the same eligibility criteria as institutional placement because the waiver program’s primary purpose is to offer an alternative to institutionalization.
I’m sorry, but I disagree. Some welfare is absolutely needed and justified. That doesn’t mean they should have to be bullied just because they are in an impossible situation and have to accept help.
Marcopolo: It’s ok, Josh doesn’t want your sympathy. And this program is not welfare. The state of Illinois saves thousands of dollars because Josh lives at home and not in an institution.
We applied for Illinois’ Home Based Supports Services Program when Josh turned 18 because he requires long-term care and support. The HBSSP eligibility is the same or equivalent to the criteria for institutional placement because the waiver program’s primary purpose is to offer an alternative to institutionalization.
Permitting family members to become paid caregivers addresses the problem so many states encounter: the scant availability of workers to provide personal care/personal assistance. Relatives also generally know and care about the person and in turn, are familiar to and trusted by the person. This does entail giving up paid employment to provide care, however, and common sense says they should be compensated.
In addition, people with disabilities who have family members as their personal care attendants receive better care, on average, than those whose attendants are unrelated individuals. Recent statistics released by the Department of Justice demonstrate the extreme high rate of nonfatal violent crimes committed against people with disabilities.
Of course, I also provide Josh with “informal” care. He has needs outside my paid time, so this is given without monetary compensation. Informal caregivers provide enormous support and are the backbone of the nation’s long-term care system. At a fundamental level, informal care giving is irreplaceable.
I was part of a Fed + State pilot project wayyy back when, when I first got out of college. The project involved ‘springing’ people from nursing homes to live with a family member or assisted living/foster care. (It ran into a number of problems from uncooperative families, lack of alternate living quarters and stringent financial qualifications, not to mention starting with people already in institutions.
I’m glad to see that so many people want to care for people in their homes and can’t help from thinking that most would have done so without receiving money from the state or placing their adult child in an institution while the caretaker was able bodied.
I have concerns for minor ‘dd’ children receiving state assistance.
It’s a tough issue and plays on one’s heart but I hope families of ‘dd’ folks understand the cost involved. Not having a ‘dd’ child, I don’t know what I’d do for sure. ‘Desperation’ would have a lot to do with my decision to ask for assistance. My great aunt never mentally grew older than 12 yrs. old. She lived well into her 80s with her siblings taking good care of her at home. That remains strong in my mind.
We went through this with my Mother when she became very ill and went in a hospice program. She desperately wanted to stay in her own home as long as possible, plus, it would save a lot of money for the state. So, we managed to do it, with the help of in-home health-care workers who came a couple times a week. The rest of the time, we (her four kids) took turns being with her, cooking for her, washing her clothes, etc. She only had to go into a nursing home for the last four weeks of her life. We DID get hospice help and it was a godsend. But no one from the government interferred with us. I’m sure that will change with the libs in charge. I find their interferrence completly immoral…just the opposite of how they portray themselves!
Isn’t it amazing what these union vermin will do to increase membership, or, more importantly to them, dues income. And Obambi and the Democrats are more than happy to let them, because it means more bribe money for them.
Can we call them unpatriotic now?
Baucus Bill Proposal “Feed Me Seymour”
Wow – that could be a post on DU. This couldn’t:
I too voted for Harry Browne.
I absolutely understand that Josh doesn’t need my sympathy, because as long as I can be forced to cough up the tax money, it’s all good for Josh.
My kids aren’t nearly as deserving of my money as he is. In fact, it’s not really even my money, is it? (The government only allows me to keep some of it, so it must actually be theirs.)
Josh doesn’t want sympathy, but rest assured that’s the card that wins him the funding. Country teetering on bankruptcy? Not a concern to him, even though these are the exact programs are driving it. The Constitution doesn’t provide for specific welfare? That’s only for other programs we oppose – not this one though, because it makes us feel good to support Josh. He’s one of us, you know.
Here’s my deal – government should not be in the business of redistributing wealth, because there are no saints. No matter how sympathetic the intention, the underlying principle of wealth redistribution attracts so much corruption, not to mention takes away economic freedom, the negatives always end up outweighing the positives.
Medicare and government funded medical programs provide the best examples of that. But while we’re pretending to be for small government while supporting these monstrosities, we deserve to lose elections.
Sorry, Josh, but your Mom is a welfare queen. I’m betting you get SSDI too, right? This is just a little somethin-somethin on the side?
Ya’ll can and apparently do feel good thinking that we’re helping the poor, but the overwhelming social and economic evidence is that in the long-term these programs cause astronomical amounts of damage to American values, and they are breeding grounds for corruption and government growth. This story only touches on that point.
How in the world we can crab that the GOP hasn’t cut back a single entitlement, when we clearly don’t even want them to? Or do we really just want them to take away somebody else’s slice of the pie? That’s laughable!
There’s no doubt that it’s all complicated, and government is very, very adept at serving their own self-interests. Making sure that little subsets of us are quite dependent on the hands that feed us is a blatant part of that game.
I know it’s unpopular, and it won’t win elections, but I’m ideologically pure. I can’t help it. It’s just who I am. If Josh’s Mom lived next door, I’d be the neighbor who helped her cut the grass, fix the roof and paint the garage. But all that would stop the first time she told me she was entitled to it.
I say put the bankruptcy on the backs of the social liberals, where it belongs.
I’m not sure where your bitterness is coming from. But surely you know that there are some people in every society who NEED HELP. I’m not talking about deadbeats or welfare crooks. But there is a part of society that needs special help. Can you at least acknowledge that? I don’t believe in redistribution either. And I am a staunch conservative, as you know from reading my posts. But you are coming across as extremely harsh when perhaps a little more understanding is in order. Why is that?
Agreed. And herein lies the dilemma: he’s right on all points. I think what is lacking is compassion.
This is where I’ve always said the Liberal goes wrong (and it’s trite but so very true)–I believe as a Christian that I have a moral obligation as an individual to help the Josh’s (or, in my case, my niece with Down Syndrome) but I do not believe that moral obligation on me (as family first) and then my community means that I can compel that charitable help by force of law.
The Liberal hears that (at least the truly well-intentioned ones) and thinks, “Oh no! If we leave it up to ‘anybody’ that means NOBODY will help the helpless so we MUST ENSURE help by forcing others via the law” and if you disagree with the Liberal, you are heartless and bitter.
I still believe in the old way: assistance to those who are truly in need of our help by means of charity. That solves the problem without erring on the side of heartlessness or government coercion.
If you have ANY doubt about this, take a peek at the benefits/wages package the UAW has beaten out of the (not-so)Big 3 automakers in the US. While certainly not the only cause, the unions are a major cause of the straits the auto makers found themselves in long before the latest economic burp.
As the labor unions intertwine with government the result is COMMUNISM.
And this is EXACTLY what many politicians and union bosses want. Make no mistake, this is the OLD school approach to a communist takeover.
The problem with the argument above (marco, happy, and joshsmom) is that everyone is right (generally…ignoring ad hominems). The government should not be involved at all. Some people really do need help.
In a perfect world, all this would be taken care of by VOLUNTARY donations because people would see a need and fulfill it. Unfortunately, an imperfect world causes imperfect solutions.
Marco Polo: We pay more than $1400/month for private medical insurance for Josh. No Medicaid. We keep Josh at home for myriad reasons and as a result refuse to let the state provide daily, around the clock care. We believe strongly in personal responsibility in the Harris home. We do not bring in enough money to cover all of Josh’s expenses. I wish we did. Before Josh turned 18, he was not eligible for any assistance. Knowing what I know now about the corruption of government, I’m really not sure what we will do once I fight SEIU from coming into my home.
I don’t think I can find enough charitable help to meet Josh’s needs. Josh applied for and was deemed eligible to access funding to pay for service facilitation (the State’s cut), personal support services, therapy, training and adult day care. Only a portion is paid to me. And I pay taxes on what I get. The total monthly allotment cannot exceed 3x SSI.
I am fighting the corruption and government growth that this program is breeding. That’s my focus. And that’s what I need help to do. I was stupid and naïve. Now, I know better. Your points are all well taken. Can you tell me how to stop what I believe to be a good program from being decimated by a corrupt Governor and the slimy SEIU?