Union leadership = the 1%'ers

[billc]

A great article that looks at the fat cat union leaders who live off the hard work of their membership...

http://biggovernment.com/chartsock/2011/11/03/the-real-class-war-jimmy-hoffa-ohio-union-bosses-wont-lower-dues-to-help-workers/

In Ohio, as union bosses have embraced Occupy Wall Street’s (OWS) class war between the “99 percent” and the “1 percent,” it has becomes increasingly difficult not to ask an obvious question:
Aren’t union bosses basically the 1 percent?

I asked one teacher how, being an Occupy demonstrator and opponent of Ohio labor reforms, she justified the $210,000 annual salary of Larry Wicks, executive director of the

Ohio Education Association (OEA), of which she is a dues-paying member. She paused for thought–understandably, since that fact would seem to justify class warfare against the “rich” Mr. Wicks. Ultimately, she concurred with my criticism, and even condemned her very own OEA.
Other Ohio teachers are even less hesitant to criticize their union. One teacher (who wished to remain anonymous for her own safety) shared that she had requested a waiver to opt out of paying the union’s political assessments, to which the response was, “We’ll get back to you.” They didn’t.
Recently, fifteen teachers filed a class-action suit in the U.S. District Court in Columbus, claiming the OEA had illegally refused to provide the teachers with independently-audited financial statements disclosing how fees were being appropriated.

It is understandable why Hoffa would prefer tax hikes on the “rich people” as opposed to cutting his own union-dues-funded salary, inasmuch as his close friend, President Obama, whom he described as his army leader, provided a special exemption for unions from the ObamaCare excise tax on Cadillac health insurance plans. Spread the wealth around–but not Hoffa’s.
What is not understandable is why Hoffa would bemoan the Wall Street bailouts and demand the prosecution of Wall Street CEOs whom he feels caused the collapse, when his own union demanded a $165 billion pension bailout over a collapse he created.
It seems an elementarily simple request, asking union bosses who demand “shared sacrifice”–while decrying the modest amounts requested by taxpayers in helping to pay union members’ benefits–to share in the sacrifice to help those they are “protecting.”

 

[Big Don]

[h=2]Union leadership = the 1%'ers[/h]

No ****, Sherlock. What was your first clue?